"Then said the Jews, forty and six years was this temple in building and wilt thou rear it up in three days?"

I suppose, that the objection to be formed upon this text is to this effect: these words were spoken by the Jews at the first passover of our Saviour's public ministry, and the next after his baptism by John. The temple which the Jews spoke of, was the temple then before their eyes, and which Herod had rebuilt or repaired. But Herod did not make the proposal for rebuilding it till the eighteenth year of his reign, reckoning from the death of Antigonus. Therefore, if the fifteenth of Tiberius's reign, mentioned by St. Luke, be the fifteenth of his proconsular empire, and not of his sole empire after the death of Augustus, this temple could not have been so long as forty-six years in building, at the time these words were spoken.

C

To this I might answer, that an objection taken from Josephus's account of the time when Herod repaired the temple can be of little moment; because in one place he says, that Herod repaired the temple in the fifteenth, and in another the eighteenth yeard of his reign. As the fifteenth year from the death of Antigonus is supposed to be coincident with the eighteenth year from the time in which Herod was declared king of Judea by the senate of Rome; some may be disposed to conclude, that when Josephus says, Herod's proposal to rebuild the temple was made to the Jews in the eighteenth year of his reign, he computes from the time in which Herod was declared king by the Roman senate.

But I do not insist upon this, and am willing to allow, that Herod made the proposal to the Jews of building their temple, in the eighteenth year of his reign from the death of Antigonus.

And I think it is as likely, that the Jews, in these words recorded by St. John, refer to the time of Herod's proposal, as to the time in which he began actually to repair the temple. It is most probable, that Herod made this offer to the Jewish people, when assembled together at one of their great feasts; this therefore would be the most solemn and remarkable epoch of rebuilding the temple, which work undoubtedly he set about as soon afterwards as he could.

And it is very common to say, that men do things, when they propose to do them, or begin to do them. Thus Josephus says in his War of the Jews: In the fifteenth year of his reign he [Herod] repaired the temple itself, and inclosed a spot of ground about it, of double the compass De Bell. lib. i. cap. 21. init. d Ant. lib. xv. cap. 11. init.

with that which surrounded it before: this was done at a ' vast expence, and is a proof of his uncommon magnifi'cence,'e We will allow, that the fifteenth year in this place ought to be corrected by his Antiquities, where he says, that in the eighteenth year of his reign Herod projected [or undertook] the rebuilding of the temple, which was the greatest of all his works." But then it appears from hence, that Herod is said by Josephus in one place to do, what in another he is only said at the same time to purpose or begin.

Supposing that the Jews, in this text of St. John, refer to the time in which Herod made the proposal of rebuilding the temple, we will see how this term of forty-six years will agree with the supposition, that St. Luke's fifteenth year of Tiberius is the fifteenth of his proconsular empire.

If the fifteenth of Tiberius's proconsular empire began the 28th of August, A. U. 778, A. D. 25, (according to Dr. Pagi's opinion,) and if John the Baptist began to preach in November that year, but did not baptize Jesus till after he had preached a year and some months, then the passover at which these words were spoken was the passover A. U. 780, A. D. 27.

Or if the fifteenth of Tiberius's reign began A. U. 779, A. D. 26, and John began then to preach, and Jesus was baptized by him some time before the passover next following, still these words would be spoke by the Jews at the passover A. U. 780, A. D. 27.

The eighteenth year of Herod's reign, from the death of Antigonus, is supposed to have begun some time in A. U. 734. Herod might make his offer to the Jews of rebuilding the temple at the feast of tabernacles in November that year; from November A. U. 734, to the passover, A. U. 780, A. D. 27, is almost forty-five years and a half: at this time therefore the Jews might not improperly say, the temple had been forty-six years in building. The forty-sixth year was then current, and it was to the purpose of the Jews, rather to add to than to diminish the time which had been spent in that work: so that there is no time more suitable to these words of the Jews than the passover A. D. 27, though there is no manner of inconsistence between under

e

Πεντεκαιδεκατῳ γεν έτει της βασιλειας, αυτόν τε τον ναον επεσκευασε, και την περί αυτόν ανετειχισατο χωραν, της εσης διπλασίαν, αμέτροις μεν χρησαμενος τοις αναλώμασιν, ανυπερβλητῳ δε τη πολυτελεία. De Bell. lib. i. cap. 21. init. 1 Τοτε γεν οκτωκαιδεκατε της Ηρωδε βασιλειας εργον - το τυχόν επεβάλετο, τον νεων το θες δι' αυτό Ant. lib. xv. cap. 11. init.

γεγονοτος ενιαυτ8, κατασκευασασθαι.

standing the fifteenth of Tiberius, of his proconsular empire, and supposing that these words were spoken at the passover A. D. 28, and then the temple might have been above forty-six years in building.

What has been here said, may be sufficient to show, that St. Luke might compute the reign of Tiberius from the epoch of his proconsular empire; that if he did, Jesus might be said, with great exactness and propriety, to be about thirty years of age at his baptism; and that there is nothing in this supposition, inconsistent with any other notes of time mentioned in the gospels.

g

IV. Another way of solving this difficulty is this. These words of St. Luke," And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age," may be understood with some latitude. Jesus might be thirty two years of age or more at this time; the word about, woe, is often used where a precise exactness is not intended or expected, Matt. xiv. 21," And they that had eaten were about five thousand, ωσει πεντακισα Xio, beside women and children." And the other evangelists, in speaking of this miracle, use the same phrase, Mark vi. 44; Luke ix. 14; John vi. 10; St. Luke says, Acts ii. 41, "And the same day there were added unto them about [we] three thousand souls." And with a like latitude does this phrase seem to be used in many places, as Luke i. 56; xxii. 41; xxiii. 44; John i. 39; Acts v. 36.

It is Kepler's opinion, that round and decimal numbers may be used with great latitude; and that a person may be very truly said to be about thirty years of age, if he be above five and twenty, and under thirty-five; but that, if a person be said to be about eight and twenty, or about two and thirty years of age, it is to be supposed, he is exactly so old, or not above a month or two more or less.h

And indeed many examples of this use of round num

8 Ex nostrâ quidem Chronologiâ, sequitur Christum jam annum xxxii. evasisse cum ad baptismum accessit. Nil tamen in eâ vel absurdi, vel pugnæ aliquid cum Lucâ intelligimus, cum de viro annos duos et triginta nato, cujus ætas dubitanter profertur, non incongrue dici possit, est annorum circiter triginta. Iterum iterumque monemus, ex phrasi Lucæ, Josephi de supremo Herodis anno chronologià damnari nequit. Basnage, Ann. Pol. Ec. Ante Dom. 3. n. vi. vid. etiam ad A. D. 30. num. iv.

b Hic receptus mos est linguis omnibus ut circiter 5000 dicamus quicquid est inter 4500 et 5500. Quare sic etiam in nostro exemplo quicquid est inter 25 et 35, id omne circiter 30 dici potest. Alia esset voculæ ratio, si præfixisset numero non rotundo. Ut si dixisset circiter 28 annos, vel circiter 32 annos. Quæ enim infra decem nominatim exprimuntur, iis apposita vocula circiter raro unum annum solidum in dubio ponat, sed fere menses tantum aut dies aliquot numero paucos et infra quantitatem anni solidi. Keplerus de Anno C. Natali. cap. 12. p. 140, 141.

bers may be found in the best writers, even without the particle woe, about: which of itself seems to be a hint, that the writer does intend to be understood with some latitude.

If we may take St. Luke's words in this manner, there is scarce any need that I should trouble the reader with any calculation, to show the agreement of his numbers with the time of our Saviour's nativity.

The fifteenth of Tiberius's sole empire began A. U. 781, A. D. 28. If Jesus was baptized the 6th January, A. U. 782, A. D. 29, he would be but some months above thirtythree years of age, though he was born so soon as September A. U. 748. And if he was born A. U. 749, then, though his baptism be placed in the beginning of A. U. 783, A. D. 30, still he would be little more than thirty-three years of age.

All the other notes of time in the gospels are also very easily reconciled with the 15th of Tiberius's sole empire. Pontius Pilate came into Judea before the passover in the 12th year of Tiberius's sole empire, A. U. 779, A. D. 26, as has been shown, and continued there ten years: therefore he was undoubtedly governor of Judea at the commencement of John the Baptist's ministry, and till after our Saviour's crucifixion.

As for those words of the Jews spoken by them at the first passover of our Saviour's ministry, " Forty-six years has this temple been in building :" it is but to suppose that they referred not to the time when Herod made the proposal of repairing the temple in the eighteenth year of his reign, but to the time when in pursuance of that proposal he actually set about the work, after he had got all things in a readiness for it, and it will be easily perceived that these words are agreeable to truth.

I do not presume to determine which of these two solutions is the justest; or whether St. Luke intended the fif

Ab illo enim profectu viribus datis tantum valuit, ut in quadraginta deinde annos tutam pacem haberet. Livius, 1. i. cap. 15. n. 7. This refers to Numa's reign, of which afterwards Livy says:--Romulus, septem et triginta regnavit annos, Numa tres et quadraginta. Ibid. c. 21. When the city of Rome was taken by the Gauls, and the remnant of the people were entering into the Capitol, Livy uses these words: Versa inde adhortationes ad agmen juvenum : quos in Capitolium atque in arcem prosequebantur, commendantes virtuti eorum juventæque urbis per trecentos sexaginta annos omnibus bellis victriCIS,--fortunam. Id. liv. v. cap. 40. Camillus, not long after, in the very same year, in his speech to dissuade them from removing to Veil, says, trecentecimus sexagesimus quintus annus urbis, Quirites, agitur. Ibid. cap. 54 vid. eundem, lib. vi. cap. 28. n. 7. et Joan. Cleric. notas.

teenth of Tiberius's proconsular empire, when he was made colleague with Augustus, or the fifteenth of his sole empire. In order to do this, it would be needful, as I apprehend, to consider the time allotted by the evangelists to the ministry of John the Baptist and our Saviour, the chronology of the Acts of the Apostles, compared with some passages in the epistles, and also the testimonies of the ancient christian writers. As I have not here room for all these premises, it may be best to wave the conclusion. All I shall say at present is, that the supposition that St. Luke intended the former of these two epochs, seems to be very much favoured by the first christians; who generally place the crucifixion of Jesus at the passover of the fifteenth of Tiberius's sole empire, when the two Gemini were consuls of Rome, A. D. 29: and that their testimonies are of great weight with me. I subjoin in the margin a few of them, for the sake of those who may happen to be unacquainted with these

matters.

I apprehend, that each of these is a very good solution of the objection stated at the beginning of this chapter, though I believe many will think, it is there stated by me in a manner very favourable to an objector. Nay, I imagine I have said what is sufficient to satisfy any reasonable person, that there does not lie any objection against any notes of time mentioned by the evangelists from the chronology of other ancient writers. This is sufficient to my present purpose.

I have nothing farther to add here beside this one cbservation.

It is no disparagement to the sacred historians, that we are somewhat at a loss to settle precisely the very year of some of those events which they have related. Many important facts related by the best historians are attended with chronological difficulties: I shall give but one instance, an instance, with which we are nearly concerned. Josephus was a man of a learned education, is a professed writer of

k Hujus [Tiberii] quinto decimo anno imperii passus est Christus.-Quæ passio hujus exterminii intra tempora LXX. hebdomadarum perfecta est sub Tiberio Cæsare, Coss. Rubellio Gemino et Rufio Gemino, mense Martio, temporibus Pascha. Tertul. advers. Jud. cap. 8. Atque exinde usque ad annum quintum decimum Tiberii Cæsaris, quando passus est Christus, numerantur anni sexaginta. Africanus, apud Hieron. Dan. C. ix. Qui fuit sub imperio Tiberii Cæsaris; cujus anno quinto decimo, id est, duobus Geminis consulibus-Judæi Christum cruci affixerant. Lactant. Inst. lib. iv. cap. 10. Extremis temporibus Tiberii Cæsaris, ut scriptum legimus, Dominus noster Jesus Christus a Judæis cruciatus est,-duobus Geminis consulibus. De Mort. Persecut. cap. 2.