11th.

Five MSS. read an for D," and there shall be desolation no more." But the text may stand.

13th. One antient MS. reads pm in the singular, which is more agreeable to the context; and thirty T, with the preposition, which is more usual after this verb.

18th. If we retain the second, though there are very good reasons to the contrary, see Bishop Newcome, we must supply Dan n'n' after Dy, as in the former verse; " and there shall be no rain upon them, there shall be the calamity," &c.

,עליהם יהיה הגשם

20th.

The versions read 1, "and the pots in the house of Jehovah shall be," &c. and this is most probably the true reading,

MALACHI.

C. i. 14th. To complete the sense we should read, as in Lev. xxii. 19, n; "But cursed be the deceiver, who hath a perfect male in his flock," &c. The Syr. seems to supply the word. See Walton's

;תמים זכר

version.

C. ii. 3d. -Whether we read, with Bishop Newcome, according to the Sept., or, with the present text, y, though the former is more pertinent, as alluding to Aaron and his sons, we should read it in the participle benon. Perhaps, for " we should read 98, "and a curse shall take you away.”

5th.

Perhaps, for

we should read

; "my covenant of life and peace was with him, and I gave them unto him for reverence,

and he feared me, and he was dismayed for my name's sake;" i.e. he was afraid to offend me, lest he should forfeit the promised blessings of life and peace; a conduct directly opposite to that of the Levitical order, in the times of the prophet. Bishop Newcome has omitted the word ', but assigns no reason for it.

6th.

should be here rendered, in integrity, and may relate to the true worship of God, as equity may relate to his neighbour.

10th. Twenty-three MSS. read 18, which is more eligible.

ויעל בבית

11th. From the circumstances of the context, and the reading of one MS. I am induced to think, that the text might originally be "and went up to the house of a strange god;" which is favoured by the Sept. και επιτήδευσεν είς θεὸς αλλοτρίες ; for, what does the marriage of a daughter of a strange god refer to ? The Syr. and Ar. read differently also.

12th. - If we compare the several versions, we shall have reason to conclude that they read very differently, and the various explanations given of the present text make the genuineness of it dubious, (see Poole's Synopsis, Bishop Lowth, Newcome, &c.) and are not altogether satisfactory instead, therefore, of, might we venture to read

y, and, reading was, with Houbigant, translate the words thus : "Jehovah will cut off the man that doeth this for ever from the tents of Jacob, and from bringing an offering unto Jehovah, the God of Hosts?" The change of the letters is very small, and might be easily made by transcribers, as many certainly have been.

13th.

Whether we read n', or 'N, with the Sept. I think we should read 182 for '*; "he will still refuse to regard the offering,

and

and to receive it with good will from your hands;" as probably nnphi is put for П, the infinitive with the feminine termination.

15th. It is a very difficult matter to recover the true reading and construction of these words, but, from considering the several versions and critical remarks, I would offer the following:

לא אחד עשה שאר ורוח אלוה - מה האחר מבקשי זרע לכם - ונשמרתם ברוחכם ובאשת נעוריכם אל תבגדו :

"Did not God make one flesh and spirit? Why do ye seek a strange seed for yourselves? But, take heed to your spirit, and deal not unfaithfully with the wife of your youth." Though I have partly adopted Bishop Newcome's transposition, at the beginning of the verse, I do not see any authority for it from any MS. Two MSS. read 12, which is likewise authorised by the next verse; for 8, see Capellus, in Poole's Synopsis,

but there is the God of ; ואיה I would read או איה For

Judgement?" See Jeremiah, ii. 28.

C. iii. 1st. Two MSS. read be, which is preferable.

2d. — Two MSS. read ; see Ps. Iv. 23.

7th. I think we should read ; unless we read hi

"Have ye not from the days of your fathers?" &c.

9th. - Instead of should we not read ?

.11 .See Job, v ? קדרים should we not read קורנית For

18th.

? ורשע and ואשר should we not read לרשע and לאשר For

See Gen. i. 4. Bishop Newcome justifies the text, from other instances and from Noldius. But, if the for the 1 was idiomatic, one would think it would have occurred still more frequently; and I cannot help thinking, that what are mere errors of transcribers are sometimes considered as idioms.

A

A

SERMON

ON

JEREMIAH,

C. xviii. 14,

INTENDED FOR A VISITATION.

Or shall the cold JEREM. Xviii. 14.

Will a man leave the snow of Lebanon, which cometh from the rock of the field? flowing waters, that come from another place, be forsaken?

THE HE integrity and perfection of the Holy Scriptures, in their original language, has been maintained and contended for by persons of directly opposite and contrary sentiments, and from motives entirely repugnant to each other. Some, out of the strictest regard and reverence to them, as the words of eternal life, have been inclined to imagine, that, as they were originally given by divine inspiration, it is impossible that one tittle of them should fail; and that it is a kind of blasphemy to suppose that God has not been as careful in preserving, as in delivering, the sacred oracles of truth. Others, again, having observed not only many improprieties but even contradictions in some parts of the Hebrew bible, have taken advantage of this opinion, strenuously maintaining the genuineness of its present state, in order to depreciate and invalidate the authority of the whole.

But as this supposition of the integrity of the Hebrew text, among the former class of men, proceeds from an unwarranted zeal, and is without any foundation, (witness the authority of the MSS.) so the conclusion, which the latter would deduce from it, of course falls to the ground. For, though it must be granted, on the part of religion, that, through the mistakes and oversights, we might add also the wilful corruptions,* of transcribers, errors have crept into the sacred writings, otherwise God must of necessity be made the author of contradictions, the infidel cannot deny but that these errors are of such a nature, as by no means to be prejudicial to any fundamental doctrines of faith or practice.

*See Kennicott's Gen. Dissert.

Notwithstanding,