History of the Three Witnesses' Text. and a dungeon, by one of those underlings of Church and King, a Suppression of Vice" Society, or a "Constitutional Association." To return to your correspondent's letter. I regret to perceive that Mr. Taylor is able to give but a poor character of "the Constitution of New Jersey" in which a just and liberal policy has yet advanced no further than to render “ every Protestant sect eligible to offices," as if the distinction of sects, or any question respecting the world to come, had any concern with the proper objects of civil convention; the fair possession and usufruct of the present world's advantages. Nor has your correspondent fully explained the "blasphemylaw" as laid down in "the Mayor's Court of Philadelphia." If the "persons prosecuted" were punished "for interfering with the rights of others," no punishment could have been more just or beneficial, because thus a Jew or a Mahomedan, a Deist or an Atheist, would be equally protected; unless it be maintained, as if dominion were really founded in grace, that Christians only have civil rights. There is, indeed, a glimpse of the antichristian "alliance between Church and State" in Mr. Taylor's concluding paragraph. "The civil power" does not merely protect "the peace" and "the rights" of the civil community, his only proper occupation, but "he as God sitteth in the temple of God," to define and to punish "profane and impious ribaldry." I take this opportunity to remark, that the "translation" quoted by your respectable correspondent, (p. 523,) is probably one of the two mentioned in Lewis's "History of the English Translations of the Bible," (ed. 1739, pp. 196, 197,) as published in 1553. The first he describes is "the quarto edition of Coverdale's Bible, printed at Zurich, (1550,) republished (1553) with the addition of a new title-page." The other is a new "edition of the Great Bible, by the King's printer, Edward Whitchurche, in folio," probably "the last that was printed" in the reign of Edward VI. Your correspondent has not quoted the 8th verse, so that it is uncertain whether, as in the authorized English version, there is the variation from "three are one" to "three agree in 691 one." In the Vulgate, as is well known, this now sufficiently ascertained forgery in the 7th verse does not appear to have been made subservient to the purpose of a Trinity, though, as Sir I. Newton remarks on this verse, in his letter to Le Clerc, it is "now in every one's mouth, and accounted the main text for the business." In that translation, verses 7 and 8, notwithstanding the variation in the Greek, alike end with hi tres unum sunt, evidently referring in each to testimonium. So I observe in Il Nuovo ed Eterno Testamento, printed in Lione, 1551, as translated from the Greek, for the Protestants of Italy, (which I had occasion to mention p. 74,) the close of both verses is thus exactly alike: i quai tre, sono una medesima In the French Testament printed at Mons, by the Jansenists, in 1710, both verses close with "et ces trois sont une même chose." A note, however, to the 7th verse, has "par essence," and to the 8th, " par rapport." In the French Testament printed at Charenton in 1668, the variation in the two verses is fully accommodated to the purpose of a Trinity; ver. 7 ending, "et ces trois-là sont un ;" ver. 8, "et ces trois-là se raportent à un." Such also is the conclusion of the 8th verse in the edition of the Welsteins, 1710, while the 7th verse ends with "et ces trois-là ne sont qu'un." In "Le Nouveau Testament," à Paris, 1764, "avec approbation et privilège du Roi," the Catholic translator closes the 7th verse with "et ces trois ne sont qu'un," adding in a note, "un seul et même Dieu en trois personnes;" while the 8th verse ends exactly like the translation of Mons, with this sense given in a note, "s'unissent pour attester une même vérité." It is to be regretted that Le Clerc had not the magnanimity to omit the heavenly witnesses, in his Nouv. Test., 1703. He renders the 7th verse like the translation of Mons, concluding the 8th with "et ces trois se réduissent à une même chose." In a note he discovers his perfect conviction of the forgery, and, in the following conclusion, his want of the courage to explode it possessed by a much earlier Reformer: "Néanmoins ce passage étant reçu dans nos Bibles, on n'a pas crû devoir l'omettre, comme Luther l'avoit fait dans sa version." It is still more surprising that "Les Pasteurs et les Professeurs de l'Église et de l'Académie de Genève" should, after the further discussions of a century, have sanctioned this forgery, in their" Nouveau Testament" now before me, in the edition à Londres, 1803, reprinted from the Geneva edition, 1802. This is the more extraordinary, as they profess, in a prefatory advertisement, to have availed themselves of MSS, justly remarking that "à mesure que le texte original a été mieux connu par la comparaison des variantes-les traductions sont devenues plus correctes." They render the conclusions of the 7th and 8th verses exactly according to the translation of Charenton in 1668. It is well known that the earliest printed editions of the Greek Testament entirely omit the heavenly witnesses. Such is the case with one in my possession, printed at Strasburg, "Argentorati, apud Vuolfium Cephalæum, Anno 1524;" described by Dr. Harwood, in his View, (ed. 2, p. 120,) as a very curious edition." account of Turgot's classical taste and literary amusements, may gratify some of your readers. "Un Commerce de Lettres avec M. [Adam] Smith sur les questions les plus importantes pour l'humanité, avec le Docteur Price sur les principes de l'Ordre Social; ou sur les moyens de rendre la révolution de l'Amérique utile à l'Europe et de prévenir les dangers où cette République naissante étoit exposée, avec un Evêque de l'Eglise Anglicane qu'il détournoit du projet singulier d'établir des Moines en Irlande, avec M. Franklin sur les inconvénients des Impôts indirects et les heureux effets d'un Impôt territorial, lui offroit encore une occupation attachante et douce.” Give me leave to add an earnest request to such of your readers as are subscribers to Dr. Priestley's works, that they would favour me with their very early attention to a notice which will appear on the cover of your current number. English Editions of the Bible. The printer, Wolfus Chephalus, in A WRITER in the Monthly Maga a short Latin preface, acknowledges his obligations to his relation, Fabritius Capito (an account of whom forms the first article in Sandius): "Fabritii Capitonis consanguinei mei tum industria tum consilio opitulantibus." A former, and as may be conjectured from the appearance of the writing, a very early possessor of this Greek Testament, has written, where he missed the heavenly witnesses, to whom, probably, he had been familiarized by the Latin Vulgate, "hic desiderata verba quædam." J. T. RUTT. P.S. I shall be obliged to any of your readers who can inform me what Bishop of the English Church, a correspondent of Turgot, was likely to have recommended the introduction of the monastic orders into Ireland, as if reasonably conscious that the Protestant Establishment was an intruder on the worldly goods of that injured island. I learn this extraordinary circumstance from Vie de M. Turgot. Londres," 1786, p. 201. The whole sentence, which follows an zine for the present October makes some sensible observations upon the variations in the different editions of our English Bible. He refers to a pamphlet, printed in 1821, but not sold, entitled " The Expediency of Revising the present Authorized Translation of the Holy Bible, considered in a Letter addressed to the Right Hon. the Earl of Liverpool:" this letter he says is evidently the work of a good Hebrew scholar, and is attributed to an eminent dignitary of the Church of England. He makes the following extract from p. 6,-" A few alterations were made, sub silentio, by Dr. Blayney, I believe, when he revised the printed University copies of our Bible in 1769. For instance, more was substituted for mo or moe, impossible for unpossible, midst for mids, owneth for oweth, jaws for chaws, and alien for aliant. But these are matters of trifling importance, though more perhaps than any corrector of the press, or individual, ought to have done without authority, In an 8vo. edition of our authorized Bible, printed at Cambridge, 1793, in Fund for Support of Unitarian Cause, Madras. stead of, "They brake down the house of Baal, and made it a draught house," the reading is, "They, &c. a draught-horse." In a folio PrayerBook printed 1792, Ps. ii. 9, is a porter's vessel, instead of potter's." The magazine writer is a little confused in his statement, and we are not sure that he means to represent the whole of the above quotation as taken from the Letter to Lord Liverpool. Part may be supplied by himself. He adds, "The following editions of the Bible read "our joy” in 1 John i. 4: London, 4to 1806 Oxford, 8vo. 1803 Cambridge, 8vo. 1784 Cambridge, small 8vo. 1815 Oxford, 8vo. The following editions read " 1796 joy:" SIR, Nov. 23, 1822. AM requested by the Committee of the Unitarian Fund to make the following communication through the Repository, respecting William Roberts and the Unitarian cause at Madras. Some time ago I wrote to him to request he would inform me, what sum would be sufficient for the maintenance of himself and family, in case he were to devote the whole of his time to the charge of the Unitarian interest at Pursewaukum, &c.? In a letter which I lately received from him, he replies, that the sum requisite to procure the necessaries of life and to keep them in decent appearance, would be twelve pagodas, or five pounds a month. Upon this state ment, the Committee, thinking it of great importance to engage his services, have voted thirty pounds for half a year, trusting to be able to repeat the grant by the expiration of that term. Taking into consideration, however, the desirableness, to say the 693 least, of making some provision to- PON a review (too hasty, per UPON haps) of the several texts in which this word occurs, it strikes me that the great Missionary himself never once designated by it, the globe or planet which we inhabit as opposed to heaven, or to any other particular ubi in the universe, but always and only, either mankind generally, or the unenlightened and immoral part of mankind as opposed to the kingdom which he was sent to set up or enlarge upon earth. If my conclusion be the result of misapprehension, some of your correspondents would oblige me by pointing out the particular instances of erroneous interpretation. Should it prove just,-is it, or is it not probable that the apostles invariably used the term in the same sense only? CLERICUS. REVIEW. "Still pleased to praise, yet not afraid to blame."-POPE. ART. I.-A Solution of the Grand Scripture Puzzle, the Genealogy of Jesus; not only evincing the Authenticity of the Tables, but explicitly proving the Story of the Miraculous Conception to be interpolated: with a Treatise on the Fall of Adam; eliciting the Primitive Meaning of the Original Account, and a Prayer to the Deity. By John Gorton. 3rd ed. with Additions. 8vo. pp. 40. Hunter. 1819. HE us commences Twit work beforeface. Then follows a Dialogue between an Indian and a Briton, which opens in the following abrupt and singular manner : "Briton. Since I find, Sir, that you dislike to enter generally into this topic, I will confine myself to one particular question, a question which has long agitated the learned world, and given rise to a good deal of discussion. The subject which I mean to propose, is the Genealogy of Jesus Christ, as it is given by two of his biographers." The Indian is now told that the Messiah was to descend lineally from David, and is directed to peruse the first chapter of Matthew's Gospel with attention, in order to obtain satisfaction on this point. He follows the direction given to him, and is perplexed. He finds that the first seventeen verses of this chapter give a complete genealogy of Jesus; but that, in the remaining part of the chapter, the fact of his descent from David is entirely set aside, and the conception of Mary is represented as a miraculous one, or, in other words, as having taken place without the intervention of a man. He is now instructed to consider the miraculous conception as the fulfil ment of a prediction contained in Isaiah vii. 14-16; but, on turning to the passage, he finds that the first four verses of the following chapter contain a literal and exact account of the accomplishment of this prophecy. The Briton acknowledges the truth of this remark; and, at the Indian's own request, directs him where to find Luke's genealogical table. Nothing can exceed the astonishment of "the poor Indian" on turning to this table. The names he finds to be almost entirely different from those which he had met with in the pedigree given by Matthew; and he is informed that this table " but to the wife of Joseph; that a great 'belongs not to Joseph, deal of pains has been taken to shew that Luke, when he wrote this genealogy, did not know what he was writing; and that, when he registered Joseph's name, he intended to have exclaims the Indian. entered Mary's." "This is strange," part," rejoins the Briton, who has "For my own hitherto appeared under a dubious ly, that I apprehend Luke is perfectly kind of character, "I confess, candidcorrect in his account, and that his expositors are decidedly wrong in their construction of it." Sir," replies the Indian, "but I con"Excuse me, ceive you will have some difficulty in reconciling these two tables." Briton, however, confident as to the The strength of his own argument, proceeds to shew in what manner these two apparently conflicting accounts may be reconciled. In the first place he states that there is not one syllable in any of the gospels to prove that Mary belonged to the tribe of David; and from this circumstance he infers the extreme improbability of the comthen goes on to shew that Matthew's mon opinion upon this subject. He is the genealogy of Joseph's father, and Luke's the genealogy of his mother. "The learned know very well," says he, mary among the Jews, to denominate, "that it was formerly custoson; and, by the same rule, to term on the female side, the grandson the the grandfather the father." "I understand you, Sir," replies the Indian "this exposition renders all plain. I I may so express myself) descended now perceive that Joseph is doubly (if from David: he claims his lineage both from Solomon and Nathan, who were brothers, and the sons of David." But here the Indian starts an objec"He does so," rejoins his companion. this theory does not "produce a sustion, and begs to be informed whether Review.-Gorton on the Genealogy of Jesus. picion that Joseph was the natural Father of Jesus." The Briton acknowledges the validity of this objection; and proceeds to shew that, if the genealogical tables exhibited in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke are correct, the account of the miraculous conception must necessarily be a fabrication, but that if, on the other hand, Joseph was nothing more than the reputed father of Jesus, the Messiah could not have been a lineal descendant of David. The conclusion of the whole matter is, that, in the age in which Jesus lived, "no doubt was entertained of his being the legitimate son of Joseph, and that the evangelists and apostles held this opinion, and no other." The next division of this curious pamphlet contains some "Further Observations on the Genealogy of Jesus Christ." The first remark of importance here relates to the total dissimilarity of the names in the two genealogies, with the exception of Safathiel, Zorobabel and Eliakim; and the consequent impossibility of reconciling them on any other supposition than that advanced in the course of the dialogue. The coincidence, as far as regards the above names, is accounted for by supposing that there might have been individuals of these names on both sides. To prove that Luke's table does not refer to the mother of Jesus, but to his father, the author ingeniously remarks that "the name of Joseph (a favourite family appellation) is not less than four times recorded," and hence infers "that the evangelist in assigning it to the father of Jesus, (his more than putative, his real father,) has placed it to the account of the right owner." We are next referred to a curious inscription found by Mr. Wood at Palmyra, of which the following Latin version is given from "Harmer's Observations," Senatus populusque Alialamenem, Pani filium, Mocimi nepotem, Æranis pronepotem, Mathæ abnepotem, et Eranem patrem ejus, viros pios et patriæ amicos, et omni modo placentes patriæ patriisque diis, honoris gratia. Anno 450, Mense Aprili." Here "the difficulty is that Eranes is called the father of Alialamenes, who is himself called the son of Panus, just in the same manner as St. Matthew tells us, that Jacob begat Joseph; and St. Luke calls Joseph, the son of Heli." 695 This difficulty the author considers as fully explained by supposing that Eranes is the true father of Alialamenes, and Panus, his maternal grandfather. The two genealogical tables of Jesus, printed at full length, bring this part of the work to a close. "A Treatise on the Fall of Adam" follows next in succession, in which the author boasts that he has elicited the primitive meaning of the original account. To this "Treatise" is subjoined "a Prayer" for the extension of more enlightened views on subjects connected with religion, and this prayer seems to have formed the original conclusion to the work. It is evidently the production of a pious but singularly constituted mind. The Treatise on Adam's Fall contains many curious and excellent observations; but as our attention was attracted to the work by the theory advanced respecting the genealogy of Jesus, and as this, in fact, constitutes by far the most original and valuable part of the pamphlet, we must content ourselves with referring our readers to the book itself for information on other subjects, and proceed to "an Address to the Clergy of every Denomination relative to the Genealogy of Jesus," which appears to have been stitched up only with the later editions. In this "Address" the author endeavours to draw the attention of his readers once more to the importance of the subject which he has made it his principal object to illustrate. We shall quote from it one or two short passages for the satisfaction of our readers, and then close the hasty sketch which we have been induced to take of this ingenious and singular publication. "The introductory verse alone' to St. Matthew's genealogy of Jesus 'tended in a great measure to convince me that Joseph was the undoubted parent of Jesus; for I would wish to be informed, how the word generation' can be interpreted, if he had been his putative father only, and had no act of generation been achieved on his part. Nor is this all; for had Joseph been a relative of such little estimation, would this evangelist have thought it worth his while to have far depreciated his own character as a bitaken such pains, or would he have so ographer, to enumerate as he has certainly done, the ancestors of Joseph (which were of the regal line) for the |