' and if consul, that he was not declared first, but only the 'latter (of the two).'

This text then will not help Perizonius. All that can be proved from it is, that pwTos is used very properly where two only are spoken of; if #pwτ in St. Luke be allowed to signify the first or former of two taxings, all that will result from hence is, that St. Luke thought there was another taxing beside this; and that this now made by Cyrenius was the former of the two. No instance of this sort will prove, that the meaning of this passage is, this taxing was before, or prior to, that made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.

The examples from John i. 15, 30, xv. 18, are some of the most proper examples in the whole number; and if they are rightly understood, they are very much to the purpose. But, with submission to these learned men, I think they are taken by them in a wrong sense. They are both much of the same kind; but I choose to consider first of all that alleged from John xv. 18. Ει ὁ κόσμος μας μισει, γινώσκετε ότι εμε πρωτον ὑμων μεμισηκεν• "If the world hate you, know that it hated me before it hated you." Herwaert is much pleased with this example.

If ρwтоv be supposed to be an adverb, then this is not a parallel instance: but indeed, as I take it, it is neither an adverb, nor an adjective, but a noun substantive; or at least, an adjective used substantively; and the latter part of the verse ought to be rendered, Know that it has hated me your chief. The connexion of the words may satisfy us, that this was our Saviour's meaning. His argument is, that men had hated him, who was superior to them; nay, they had hated even his Father; the disciples therefore ought not to be surprised if they hate them also, v. 20, " Remember the words that I said unto you, the servant is not greater than his lord; if they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you." V. 24," But now they have both seen and hated me and my Father." The force of the argument is not, that the world had hated him before it hated them; but he bids them consider, that it hated him who was their master, and whom they allowed to be so. This is the ar

gument made use of in other places with the same view, Matt. x. 24, 25, "The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.-If they have called the master

• Εαν δε και στρατηγων, ότι μη υπατευει· καὶ ὑπατεύων, ότι μη πρωτος, αλλ' isipos avyopeven. Plutarch. de Anim. Tranq. p. 470. c.

P Ille vero S. Joannis xv. 18. locus ad hoc institutum mirifice facit,-Si mundus vos odit, scitote quia me priorem vobis odio habuit.

of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household ?"

6

If it be said, that there was no occasion to subjoin your 'chief' after me,' and that the disciples could consider Jesus no otherwise than as their master; I answer, that it is apparent from the texts already alleged here by me, that this was not our Saviour's style; and that he did not trust so much to his disciples' understandings. When he had occasion to draw any inferences from his superiority, he always expresseth it. John xiii. 14," Ye call me Master, and Lord, and ye say well: for so I am. If I then your Lord and Master have washed your feet, ye ought also to wash one another's feet."

ПpwTos is used several times in the New Testament, in the plural number, for superiority of honour and dignity: Kai τοις πρώτοις της Γαλιλαίας, is not ill rendered in our version, Mark vi. 21," chief estates of Galilee:" yvvaιKWV Tе TWV πрWek olyas," of the chief women not a few," Acts xvii. 4; or, as perhaps the words might be rendered, not a few of the wives of the chief men.

των

It is likewise used in the singular number in the same sense. Και ος εαν θέλῃ εν ύμιν ειναι πρωτος, εστο ὑμων δελος Matt. xx. 27," And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant." There is another unexceptionable instance of this use of the word: Acts xviii. 7, Ev de τοις——ὑπηρχε χωρια των πρωτῳ της νησε "In the same quarters were possessions of the chief man of the Island." Grotius, in his annotations upon this place, has exhibited a Greek inscription found in this very island of Melita, a part of which inscription is thus : Α. Κ. ΚΙΟΣ. ΙΠΠΕΥΣ. ΡΩΜ. HPOTO MEAITAION. L. C. Kius, Roman knight, chief of the Melitenes.

The word is often so used in the septuagint version : #OWTOS TWY TRIAKovтa, chief of the thirty, 1 Chron. xi. 11. Kai Aσap #рWTOS TWV adovτwv, Neb. xii. 46, and in many other places. And in Josephus: Ιεστος ὁ Πιστη παις TрITηS μерidos πрWTOs, Justus the son of Pistus, chief or leader of the third faction in Tiberias. I throw an example or two more from other authors into the margin.

της

Nor do I see, why #pwTos should not be allowed to be used substantively in divers of the places I have produced.

Joseph. in Vit. p. 907. v. 12.

• Τον τεδε παιδα εοντος

πρωτες παρ' εμοι· κ. λ. Herodot. l. i. c. 115. ην δε ανηρ ατος, καὶ ὁ πρωτος αυτων, κ. λ. Ibid. c. 173. Και Επαμινώνδας βοιωταρχων, εν Λεύκτροις ενικησε Λακεδαιμονίες, και των Ρωμαίων [Θηβαίων legit Perizonius] και των *Evwv WTOC EYEVETO. Elian. Var. H. vii. 14.

Princeps in Latin is properly an adjective, and is often so used; at other times it is a substantive. Αυτοκρατωρ is sometimes an adjective; it is also used substantively no one will deny it. Yaros is a word very near parallel with Tрwтоs; is often an adjective, at other times is used substantively, and denotes a consul.

ην

Ύπατος

I come now to the other instance, John i. 15, OVTOS ην ov είπον, ò οπίσω με ερχομενος εμπροσθεν με γεγονεν, ὅτι πρωτος με "This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me." The same words occur again, ver. 30, with little variation; but the last clause ought not, in my opinion, to be rendered," for he was before me," but, "for he is my Prince or Lord.”

What I have already said in favour of this meaning of PwTos in the former instance, may, I presume, make way for admitting it here.

πρωτος

I apprehend John to say; He that follows me, or comes behind me, was always before me, or in my view, for he is my Prince. Εμπροσθεν and οπίσω (unless I am much mis taken) are never used in the New Testament for priority or posteriority of time, nor for superiority or inferiority in respect of dignity, (unless they are so used here in the case of John the Baptist,) but always have a regard to place. "For we must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ,” 2 Cor. v. 10, Εμπροσθεν το βηματος το Χριστό. " I said unto Peter before them all," Gal. ii. 14, Еμжроσ0εv πavForgetting the things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before," Phil. iii. 13, Τα μεν οπισω επιλανθανόμενος, τοις δε εμπροσθεν επεκτεινομενος" ενωπιον and εμπροσθεν are frequently used the one for the other. See Matt. x. 33, Luke xii. 9. It is true, John came before Christ, that is, before his face. He went before him as an officer before a great man; but that is expressed here in οπισω με ερχομενος.

των.

66

But I will not contend about this. Perhaps eμmpоolev pe yeover is not ill rendered in our translation, is preferred 'before me,' though it appears to me an unusual sense of the word.

However, #pwTos μe must nevertheless be understood as I render it. And I learn from Beza,t that others have been of the same opinion before me.

Thus then John says, toward the conclusion of his ministry, "Ye yourselves bear witness, that I [from the begin

Aаßwν Tηy аνтократора арxηv. Dionys. Hal. 1. vii. p. 408. v. 1.

* Quamobrem etiam nonnulli poros e interpretantur Princeps meus: quod mihi penitus insolens videtur. Bez. in loc.

ning] said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him," John iii. 28. Referring to what he had declared at first: "I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord," ch. i. 23. That is, I came not on my own account, but barely as a harbinger that makes way for his Lord. This is the peculiar character of John, under which he was prophesied of, Isa. xl. 3; Mal. iii. 1; iv. 5, and under which he always speaks of himself. And what in the 15th and 30th verses of this 1st chapter of John, is open, He is my prince, is in the 27th verse represented by an expression that denotes the vast superiority of Christ above him; "He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose:" that is, I am so far inferior to him, and am in so low a post under him, that I am not worthy to perform the meanest office about his person: or, in other words, I am a mere harbinger, and he is my Lord. Athenagoras has used this word in this very sense of a prince or chief.

"

I hope it will be no objection against this interpretation, that then the words would not have been was peny, but EOTW for these are all one and the same. I need go no further for proof than these two verses: οὗτος ην όν ειπον in the 15th-in the 30th is ovтos eσtɩ πepɩ où eyw eiñov. So that ην and εστι signify the very same thing, and are used one for the other.

I am indeed aware, that some grammarians will except against my notion of #pwTos being a substantive: I will then, for the present, suppose it to be an adjective; but yet I cannot part with the interpretation I have given of either of these texts. The context satisfies me the sense I affix to the words is the true meaning; and I can, if I mistake not, account for it according to the strictest rules of the grammarians. Let then #pwTov, in John xv. 18, be inclusive, and be understood partitively, and vwv will be governed by the ellipsis e; this I suppose will not be contested: but I choose to understand pwTo here exclusively. I think that is the best sense, and then the ellipsis may be рo,

Αυτος ετιν ὁ οπίσω με ερχόμενος, ός εμπροσθεν με γεγονεν· οὗ εγω εκ ειμι αξιος ίνα λύσω αυτό τον ίμαντα τε ὑποδήματος.

V

Προσηκε δε τῳ μεν το πρωτεύειν κατα φύσιν, τῳ δε δορυφερειν τον ΠΡΩΤΟΝ, ὁδοποιειν τε και προανεργειν παν όποσον εμποδων και προσαντες Decet enim hoc secundum naturam principatum habere, illud autem, satellitis vice, principi suo viam facere, et prævio cursu, omnia impedimenta et prærupta tollere. De Resur. p. 50. D. Paris. 1636.

Perizonius says, sect. 24, Apud Græcos hanc vicem præstant præpositiones apo et epi, quarum illa respondet r ante, hæc 7 præ. IIpo is also

Tερi, ε, or whatever else the grammarians like best. IIpwΠρωτ TOS in John i. 15, 30, is evidently exclusive, according to my way of rendering it; and the ue following is governed by an ellipsis of one of the last-mentioned prepositions. This I take to be perfectly agreeable to the rules of the grammarians and thus, in one place, Jesus tells his disciples, that he was chief above them; and in the other, John the Baptist says, that Jesus was prince or chief above him. And now I have Beza on my side, with reference to John i. 15, for though he would not allow, that pwтos μe is my * x prince,' yet he says, after a very careful examination, he is convinced, it expresses the vast excellence and superiority of Christ above John. I am not singular therefore in supposing, that this text does not express directly and simply priority of time, but only virtually and consequentially, as it is implied and comprehended in the superior dignity of which it is a part.

6

There is another pwn in the New Testament, which has been understood by some in the same sense in which these learned men have taken the two former instances, though it is not alleged by them. Matt. xxvi. 17, Mark xvi. 12, "Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread." This was the fourteenth day of the month but it is argued here, that the fifteenth day was the first day of the feast of unleavened bread; for Josephus says, that the sixteenth day of the month was the second day of the feast; and the words of the law agree herewith. "And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the Lord. And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast. Seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten," Numb. xxviii. 16, 17. See Exod. xii. 18. The fourteenth day therefore was the day of the passover: the feast of unleavened bread was distinct from it, and lasted seven days from the fourteenth at night; the fifteenth day of the month was the first of unleavened bread. Therefore when the evangelists, speaking of the fourteenth day, say, it was пршτη тwν аğνμwv, they

used to denote preference and pre-eminence, both simply and in composition. Simply: Και ούτος ποιμην αποδεικνυται διανοιας, τύφον προ αληθειας ασπαζομένης, και προ το είναι το δοκείν αποδεχόμενης. Philo. p. 193. D. vid. et p. 194. D. In composition: in προετως, προτιμαω, &c.

* Cæterum hoc loco diligentius expenso, quam antea.-Declarat igitur præstantiam, sed Christo peculiarem, et ipsi propriam: nempe quasi diceret Joannes: Qui me sequitur, quasi magistrum præeuntem discipulus quispiam, mihi antepositus est, idque optimo jure, quia infinitis modis est præstantior; quamvis ante docere cœperim quam ille sese mundo patefecerit. In loc.

* Τη δε δευτερα των αζύμων (ήμερα έκτη δ' εςιν αυτη και δεκατη.) Antiq. lib. iii. cap. x. p. 124. v. 20.