and yet unavoidably leading his readers into a mistake of more than two years with respect to the conclusion of it; when you shall consider again the strange mistake not of Herod only, (who, however, it is almost certain, was not out of his own dominions at the time, and they were no larger than one of our counties,) but of many other Jews, even so late as the transfiguration, who thought that Jesus might be John risen from the dead, two years after they had both preached in public together: when, besides this, you consider with how much ease the whole business of the Gospel history is comprised within one year, as appears by my Calendar; how little it was that our Lord had to do himself, and how much remained for the apostles to do afterwards, you will be satisfied that more time than I allow would only embarrass and perplex the scheme.

Had unbelievers read the Scriptures with so much attention as to have discovered the objections that I have urged to the received hypothesis, I cannot help thinking they would have represented the history as improbable in many respects.

When these considerations are weighed with the seriousness that they deserve, I think your Lordship will not make the difficulty you have hitherto done of expunging a single word from a place, where many learned critics, who were by no means of my opinion on this subject, were convinced it had no business, and where I think I have almost demonstrated it was not to be found in the time of Irenæus; or of transposing a chapter to a situation in which it is hardly possible not to acknowledge it will make a better connexion than it does where it is now; and that you will not lay the great stress that you now do on general and indefinite expressions.

When your Lordship shall coolly consider all these things, I can hardly help persuading myself that, as we are not disputing for victory, but merely discussing a question of criticism for the sake of finding the truth, you will accede to my opinion, as it appears to me that there is so manifest a preponderancy of argument in favour of it. When I interrogate myself on the subject, I hope I can say with truth, that if your Lordship's arguments had made any impression on me, I should have acknowledged it. I have, on several occasions, avowed a change of opinion both in philosophical and theological subjects; and I think it would have been with real pleasure that I should have owned myself convinced by your Lordship, with respect to this business.

No person, however, can be quite sure of himself, but in the very same circumstances in which he has been tried before; and there are cases in which the strongest arguments and the greatest minds yield to the force of mere prejudice; so little, alas! are we, who boast of a rational nature, uniformly influenced by pure reason.

I think I have now noted every thing in your Lordship's Reply that seemed to require it; and, willingly submitting the whole to the candour of your Lordship and of the public, I remain, with the greatest respect,

My Lord,

Your Lordship's most obedient, humble servant,

JOSEPH PRIESTLEY.*

Birmingham, August 10, 1781.

As it may give some satisfaction to our readers to be informed how this amicable controversy terminated, I have his Lordship's leave to publish part of a letter, with which he favoured me, after the receipt of my third letter, though it was not written with a view to publication :

"REV. SIR,

Dublin, April 19, 1782. "I read your third letter on the duration of Christ's ministry, with the attention to which every thing that comes from you is entitled; and I endeavoured to read it as dispassionately as if it had not been addressed to me. As I had only a few remarks to make on incidental matter, and nothing new to advance on the maiu argument, I did not think it necessary to make a public reply. The subject is fairly before such readers as choose to consider it.

"I thank you for your observations in the eleventh page of that letter. [Supra, p. 207.] Frequent pretenders to miraculous powers did not arise till about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem. I find no instance of what I have hastily asserted, but that Theudas, mentioned Acts v. 36, promised to divide the river

Jordan.

"The transpositions which most favour one part of your hypothesis, are, I think, to be found in the Greek version of Jeremiah; in which the series of the chapters differs very remarkably from that of the Hebrew; and therefore shews that there has been great transposing, either in the translation or the original.

"I have some doubts whether the word devTeponpary, Luke vi. 1, about which commentators so much perplex themselves, be a genuine reading. The text stands very well without it, and Wetstein quotes plausible authority for the omission of it, which is favoured by the parallel places."

An exhibition of so much true candour, is of unspeakably more value than the right decision of any controversy. Whatever our readers may think with respect to the merits of the question in debate, they must rise from their attention to it, with minds impressed in favour of that love of truth, and of that truly Christian temper, with which this controversy (on his Lordship's part at least) was begun, (by the remarks which his Lordship made, in his Harmony of the Gospels, on the duration which I assign to our Saviour's ministry,) has been conducted, and is now closed; though carried on by persons of very different religious persuasions. For my own part, I hope I shall not soon lose the favourable impression that it has made upon my mind. (P.) P. S. to the Third Letter.

LETTERS AND ADDRESSES

VOL. XX.

ΤΟ

The Jews.

1787- -1799.

Of the peculiar Privileges of the Jewish Nation, and the Causes of their Prejudices against Christianity.

CHILDREN of the stock of Abraham, and heirs of the sure promises of God, bear, I intreat you, with the serious. address of a Christian, who reverences your nation, is a believer in the future glory of it, and is a worshipper of the God of your fathers, without admitting any other to share in the rights of divinity with him.

I admire your persevering faith in the promises of God, notwithstanding the most discouraging appearances. In this

These Letters are printed chiefly to be distributed among the Jews; and if there should appear to be any prospect of their answering the end for which they were composed, they will be translated into Hebrew, for the use of learned Jews in all parts of the world, to engage them, if possible, in an amicable discussion of the subject.

It may be proper to observe, that the word Christ, in this work, is used only as a proper name, to denote the founder of the Christian religion, and not as synonymous to Messiah, though it was originally nothing more than a translation of that word into Greek.

Since the first edition of these Letters, I have published Letters to a Philosophi cal Unbeliever, Part II., [Vol. IV. pp. 444—548,] in which I have stated the evidence of the Jewish and Christian religions jointly; and therefore I wish the Jews would give particular attention to them, and consider them as an appendage to these Letters, addressed to themselves. (P.) Advt. 1787.