as it existed at Jerusalem in the time of our Saviour. The Hebrew Scriptures divided into three classes. Antiquity of this division. The first class always termed the Law; and the second class the Prophets. The books of the third class, which at first had no distinguishing title, were afterwards called in Hebrew Chetubim, in Greek Hagiographa. Our Saviour in appealing to the Hebrew Scriptures observed the three-fold division of them. Comparison of his appeal with those of Philo and Josephus. According to the Jewish reckoning, the three classes contained twenty-two books; whereas the canonical books of the Old Testament, as arranged in our Bibles, amount to thirty-nine. Explanation of the manner, in which the Jews made the books of the Old Testament amount to twentytwo: whence it follows, that the books, which constituted the Hebrew Bible in the time of our Saviour, agreed, as to their real number, with the books which now constitute our Hebrew Bibles. ..... Page 17 LECTURE XXXIII. Object of this Lecture to prove that the Hebrew Scrip- But Page posed the Hebrew Scriptures in the first century cannot now be obtained. The fact still capable of proof from induction. Mode of conducting that proof. The chief object is to connect the catalogue of the Hebrew Scriptures, which Jerom has given in his Prologus galeatus, with the account which Josephus has given of the Hebrew Scriptures, in his treatise against Apion. When we have connected Jerom's catalogue with the account of Josephus, we may connect the Hebrew Scriptures as they existed in the time of our Saviour, with the Hebrew Scriptures as they exist at present. In other words it will follow, that the Canon of the Old Testament, as it existed at Jerusalem in the time of our Saviour, was the same Canon, as that which is now represented by our Hebrew Bibles. Mode of connecting the catalogue of Jerom with the account of Josephus; whence it appears, that the Hebrew Scriptures in the time of Josephus, contained the same books, which they contained in the time of Jerom. This inference is confirmed by additional evidence drawn from Josephus himself. The Hebrew Scriptures to which our Saviour appealed, were the same Hebrew Scriptures, to which Josephus appealed. The Hebrew Scriptures enumerated by Jerom in his Prologus galeatus, contained the same books, which are now contained in our Hebrew Bibles. The final conclusion therefore is, that the Hebrew Canon in the time of our Saviour was the same Hebrew Canon which is now represented by our Hebrew Bibles; and that we have his sanction for every canonical book of the Old Testament 31 LECTURE XXXIV. Our inquiries into the Integrity of the Hebrew Scriptures may be divided into two periods, the one extending from the time of Moses to that of our Saviour, the other from the time of our Saviour to the present age. In the former period we may collect historical notices, concerning the care which was taken by the Jews for the preservation of the Hebrew Scriptures. In the latter period we must endeavour to repel the charge, which has been laid to the Jews, of having wilfully corrupted the Hebrew Scriptures; and further to shew that the utmost caution has been used to prevent accidental mistakes. The preservation of the Pentateuch or the Book of the Law, a matter of special importance to the Jews. Care taken in this respect by Moses himself. Remarks on the Temple-copy of the Law. Whether this copy was preserved, when the Temple was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. Preservation of THE LAW (whether the Temple-copy or not) during the Babylonish captivity, and production of it by Ezra, when the Temple was rebuilt. On the preservation of the other books, which were written before the Babylonish captivity. Collection made by Ezra and Nehemiah, of the books which were written before, during, and after the Babylonish captivity. The books so collected formed the Canon of the Hebrew Scriptures, and were preserved in the Temple till the destruction of it by Titus. The Hebrew Scriptures, which received the sanction of our Saviour, received his sanction, as they then existed. Page No charge of previous corruption alleged against the Scribes and Pharisees. The question examined whether the Jews have subsequently corrupted the Hebrew Scriptures. Obstacles to the execution of such an attempt, even if the Jews had been inclined to make it. On the extreme caution, which has been employed by the Jews, to prevent even accidental mistakes. Remarks on certain alterations and additions, which are neither wilful corruptions, nor accidental mistakes. clusion Recapitulation and con Page 51 LECTURE XXXI. THE authenticity and credibility of the New Testament having been established in the last eight Lectures, I now proceed to the authenticity and credibility of the Old Testament. It is true, that in this arrangement the order of time is inverted. But whatever rules may be observed in the position of historical facts, we are not restricted by similar rules, in our modes of reasoning on those facts. When we undertake to establish the authority of different records, the question, which of them shall be first submitted to examination may depend on circumstances unconnected with priority of composition: and that arrangement must always be preferred, which enables us to conduct our proofs in the most satisfactory manner. If then the authority of a later record can be established without a previous inquiry into the authority of a former record, and the authority of the later record will assist us in establishing the authority of A |