sently, that they were not bought, till after the Jewish sabbath was ended.

You go on: In the second place, since they delayed it at all, why did they go at two or three in the morning, rather than at some more seasonable time? You should not say, at two or three in the morning. For that is not the time intended by the expositors, with whom you are arguing. You should say, four or five in the morning.' So the evangelist tells us, the women set out early, "at the dawning of the day," that is, between four and five in the morning, according to our way of computation. They could not go sooner with decency. And, if the body was to be embalmed, it was proper to take the first opportunity, and perform it as soon as could be conveniently done after decease. This, I think, accounts for the women's going to the sepulchre, early in the morning, at the time supposed by all commentators in general. They would have anointed the body sooner, if they had not been prevented by the coming in of the Jewish sabbath. That being over, and the spices prepared, they embrace the earliest season for going to the sepulchre.

6

6

Still you say, p. 621, The reader will be pleased to take 'notice, that the time here fixed for the women's first visit to the sepulchre, is capable of direct proof likewise from the words of the text. Matt. xxviii. I, " In the end of the 'sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the 'week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre." According to the Jewish form of the day, the sabbath ended, and the first day of the week be'gan at sun-setting, Lev. xxii. 32. If so, Matthew's description of the time, when the women set out for the sepulchre, fixeth it expressly to the evening, notwithstanding the word "dawn," in our translation, falsely ' protracts it to some hour after midnight, being very im'properly used in this passage. The word in the original is cowoken. Which applied to the Jewish day, signifies simply, that" the day began," without conveying any idea ' of light at all. Contrary, I own, to its primary meaning, ' which doubtless includes the notion of light, gradually increasing in conformity to the commencement of the day among the Greeks, who formed the word, so as to denote 'their own idea. But however contrary to the analogy of the Greek language, this signification of the word expwaKeon may seem, it could have no other in the mouth of a 'Jew, whose days all began at sun-setting. Besides, it has this meaning without dispute, Luke xxiii. 54, where, in

6

6

·

the history of our Lord's burial, it is said: "And that day was the day of the preparation, and the sabbath dawned," ETTEwoke, that is, was about to begin; or, as it is well ren'dered in our version, " drew on." For nobody ever fancied, that Joseph of Arimathea, and Nicodemus, laid Jesus in the sepulchre, when the Jewish sabbath "dawned," in the sense of its becoming light. But the meaning which this Greek word has in Luke, it may have in Matthew, or 'rather must have; as it cannot be imagined that an historian, capable of common accuracy, much less an inspired writer, would say, it dawned toward the first day of the week, nine or ten hours after the first day of the week 'began.'

6

I have made this long quotation that I might set your argument in its full light, and that you might not complain that justice had not been done to it. In answer to all which I say; all know very well, that the Jewish civil day, or vvxOquepov, began at the setting of the sun. But that day was divided into two parts, night and day, by day meaning the natural day, or that part of the civil day which is light. This sense of the word day is very common in scripture. Ps. lxxiv. 16, "The day is thine, the night also is thine." John xi. 9. 10, "Jesus answered; Are there not twelve. hours in the day? If any walk in the day, he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of the world. But if he walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there is no light in him." In Matt. xx. 1-16, is the parable of the labourers hired to work in a vineyard" for a penny a day :" meaning a day of twelve hours, whilst it is light, and a proper season for labour. Luke iv. 42," And when it was day, yevoμevns de quepas, he departed, and went into a desert place." Acts xii. 18, "Now, as soon as it was day, γενομένης δε ήμερας, there was no small stir among the soldiers." Where, as soon as it was day," cannot mean the Jewish civil day, but day light. All which is agreeable to that ancient and original determination of the Deity himself. Gen. i. 5, "And God called the light day, and the darkness he called night."

66

Need I add any more examples? they are easily had : Luke vi. 13," And when it was day, ка ότε εγενετο ήμερα he called unto him his disciples." Acts xxvii. 29, "They cast four anchors out of the ship, and wished for the day," nuovo quepav qeveσbai. Ver. 33, " And while the day was coming on, άχρι δε ε εμελλεν ἡμερα γενεσθαι, Paul besought them all to take meat.' I add no other texts, but that of 2 Peter i. 19," Until the day dawn, and the day-star arise

in your hearts,” έως 8 ημερα διαυγαση, και φωσφορος ανατείλη εν καρδίαις υμων.

That must be the meaning of the text in Matt. xxviii. 1, "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre." With which I suppose to be parallel, Mark xvi. 1, 2, " And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices that they might come and anoint him. And very early in the morning, the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun."

I beg leave to refer you to Grotius. And I intend to transcribe below the observations of Keuchenius, which appear to me to be very material.

I allow your interpretation of Luke xxiii. 54, to be right. But there the word, eneowoke, is used figuratively, and improperly, though elegantly, and significantly enough. I say improperly, for you yourself say, p. 621,That according to its primary meaning, doubtless, the word includes the notion of light gradually increasing.'

However, after all, you say, that this journey of which you are here speaking, though undertaken, was not performed.

6

You proceed therefore at p. 622, 623, For these reasons 'I think it probable, that the two Marys attempted to visit the sepulchre, in the end of the Jewish sabbath, or about the setting of the sun, on our Saturday evening. I say, ' attempted to visit the sepulchre, because it does not appear that they actually went thither. While they were going, there was a great earthquake. This earthquake, I suppose, frightened the women to such a degree, that they immediately turned back. Or their return may have been ' rendered necessary by a storm, if this earthquake was at⚫tended with a storm-The guards, it is true, remained at

6

6

b Matt. xxviii. 1. Τη επιφώσκεση εις μιαν σαββάτων, &c. Bene monuit vir illustris H. Grotius, phrasim hanc passim de solis luce usurpari. Ad quam sententiam adstruendam non possum nou producere insignem locum, qui occurrit Neh. viii. 3. ubi Esras in libro legis fertur legisse a luce usque ad medium diei.' Quod LXX. Senes hoc modo vertunt: Kai avɛyvw eV AνTY ATTO TYS ώρας τε διαφωτισαι τον ήλιον έως ἡμισες της ημερας. Unde liquet, Interpretes hos per lucem,' non nisi solis lucem' vel ortum' intellexisse. Conf. lxx. ad Job xxxi. 16. Et sane non diluculum, sed 'solis' potius ortum,' hac locutione designari, ex re ipsâ manifestum est. Dicitur enim Esras coram populo legisse,a luce.' Quod non tam facile a primâ lucis apparitione, quam a solis ortu factum fuisse, percipi potest. Quapropter arbitror, phrasim hanc idem fere significare, quod apud Marcum cap. xvi. 2. λιαν πρωϊ, της μιας σαβ βατων ανατείλαντος τε ήλιο. Pet. Keuchen. in Ν. Τ. p. 157.

the sepulchre all the while. But there was a great difference between the tempers of the persons

That these women did not go, you argue in this manner, in the notes, at p. 624, It is true,' Matthew says, 'that the 66 women came to see the sepulchre." But the word \0e, which he makes use of, does not imply that they arrived at the sepulchre. All, who understand the Greek, know that exoe signifies to go, as well as to come. See Mark

'vii. 31; Luke ii. 44, in the original.'

Well, let us look into Mark vii. 31. "And again, departing from the coasts of Tyre and Sidon, he came unto the sea of Galilee, through the midst of the coasts of Decapolis." But how is this to your purpose? Translate he went, instead of he came; still he actually arrived at the place here spoken of, the "sea of Galilee." He did not attempt only, but he went.

"a

Again, Luke ii. 44," But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went, nov, a day's journey." Allowing that to be the right reading, still Joseph and Mary did actually go" a day's journey," and not attempt it only. So it must be here also. "At the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came, [or went] Mary Magdalene, and the other Mary, to see the sepulchre." They did go. Consequently, the journey ' attempted, but not performed,' at the setting of the sun, is a fiction, without any foundation; for St. Matthew speaks of a journey, or visit to the sepulchre, which these women actually made, early in the morning. Which visit shall be observed by and by, as related by the evangelists.

For the present, I stay a while, to make some reflections. For, sir, I cannot forbear to complain of you, and expostulate with you. Is this to do honour to the sacred history? In support of this fictitious journey, attempted, but not 'performed,' you have made many suppositions, without any authority from the evangelists. I shall observe some of them as distinctly as I can, in so perplexed an argument as yours is.

Supp. 1. You say, From John xix. 42, it would appear 'that the friends of Jesus intended to carry him somewhere ' else,' p. 620.

Supp. 2. You suppose that the women knew this. Your words, in the same page, are: The women knowing this, had reason to think that Joseph would remove the body as soon as the sabbath was ended.'

Where is your authority for these suppositions? If the friends of Jesus intended to carry him somewhere else, and

the women knew this, that intention would have manifested itself when the women came to the sepulchre, and missed the body; or when John and Peter came thither, and likewise found not the body. If they had before known, that such a removal was intended by any of their own number, or by Joseph, they would not have been in such surprise at not finding the body, as they were. Some of them would presently have said: The body indeed is gone. But we need not be very uneasy about it. Undoubtedly Joseph has removed it to some other place, and taken good care of it. Let us therefore go to him and inquire. But no such speeches as these drop from any of them. When Mary Magdalene had been at the sepulchre, and saw the stone to be taken away, and the body not within: "she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and the other disciple whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them; They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre. And we know not where they have laid him," John xx. 1, 2. She did not suppose that to have been done by friends, but by strangers, whom she knew nothing of. And Peter, as related by St. Luke, xxiv. 12," ran to the sepulchre, and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed wondering in himself at that which was come to pass."

Nevertheless this notion of the intention of Joseph, or the disciples, to remove the body elsewhere, has taken such possession of your mind, that in your argument to support the early attempted journey, you impute to the women an apprehension, that the body had been removed even during the sabbath, and before it ended. For you say, p. 621, ' It is much more probable that by appointment of the rest, ' and in conformity to their own inclinations, the two set out 'for the sepulchre on Saturday evening, according to our form of the day, perhaps, at about six or seven at night.' And, p. 620, Accordingly, having bought the spices, they 'judged it proper to send two of their number, to see if Jesus was still in the sepulchre, and if not, to inquire of the gardener where he was laid.' And at the top of 621, you ask, What reason can be assigned for the women's not going to see the sepulchre, as soon as the Jewish sabbath was ended, that is, on Saturday, immediately after 'sun-setting, when they had more than an hour's twilight to carry them thither? And at the bottom of p. 622, you suppose this visit was attempted, In the end of the Jewish

6

p.

And just before, at the top of p. 620, you say, 'The women went to "see the sepulchre," (Sewpnoai,) to see if the stone was still at the door, be⚫ cause by that they could know whether the body was within.'