A supplement to Dr. Hammond's paraphrase and annotations on the New Testament in which his interpretation of many important passages is freely and impartially examin'd, and confirm'd or refuted : and the sacred text further explain'd by new remarks upon every chapter / by Monsieur Le Clerc ; English'd by W. P. ; to which is prefix'd a letter from the author to a friend in England, occasion'd by this translation.

CHAP. I.

Vers. 3. Note a. INstead of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Alexandrian Copy and o∣thers read 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by his own Glory and Vertue, propria gloria & virtute, as the Vulgar Latin also hath it. Which way soever of these we read it, the sense will be the same. Christ, namely, hath called us 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, by the extraordi∣nary

Miracles which he wrought, as Dr. Hammond well observes; and by his Virtue, that is, by his most holy Example, whereby we are as much affected, as by his preaching; nay without which all his preach∣ing would be vain and insignificant. They are mistaken who by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here understand God the Father, because it is to be under∣stood of Christ, who himself called the Apostles and first Disci∣ples; whom he won to himself not only by the excellency of his Do∣ctrin, but by the Miracles he wrought, and the Sanctity of his Life. Besides, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 no where signifies 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, power.

Vers. 4. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] By the Miracles and Vertue of Christ are said to be given unto us great and precious Promises; because they accompanied the Word he preached, and added weight to it; without which it would have had no greater influence upon Men than the Doctrins of Philosophers, which did not work upon many, because there were no Miracles wrought in confirmation of them, and they themselves often contradicted them in their Lives.

Ibid. Note b. I. No one will doubt but that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 often signifies a desire of unlawful fleshly Pleasures, and, if the Discourse be about that, of those which are contrary to nature; but that it may be thought to have those extraordinary significations, the circumstances of the place must require it. Otherwise it may be reasonably thought that word is taken in general for any Desire or Lust whatsoever. The same may be said of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which signifying any cor∣ruption of Manners, does sometimes peculiarly denote what our Au∣thor here supposes to be refer'd to. But I see in this place no circum∣stance which should oblige us to take those words in any other than a general sense. For the Apostle speaks of that amendment of Life to which Christ called all Men; and therefore it is probable that the Corruption through Lust, which is in the World, signifies any sort of Vice which Christ would have us renounce.

II. To corrupt a Youth, where the Discourse is about a Man, and unnatural Lust, signifies what our Author says; but when young Men are said to corrupt a Maid, all we can think is meant by it, is the deflou∣ring her, as in the Passage cited out of Palladius. The corruption which Socrates was accused of, was nothing but a depravation of Manners and Temper, not that peculiar Wickedness which our Author speaks of. This appears from the Apology of Socrates, written by Plato. And in the same sense we must understand the words of the counterfeit Epistle of Heraclitus to Hermodorus, as appears only by the Passive voice used by the false Heraclitus; for such an abuse could not be put upon Heraclitus, who was then well stept in Years. In the pla∣ces

of the New Testament, there is no reason why we should depart from the general signification of Corruption. So that it would have been better if Dr. Hammond had here followed Grotius.

Vers. 5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] Our Author, after Grotius and others, seems to have rightly interpreted 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in his Note on vers. 3. But he did not carefully enough read the place of Euri∣pides in Stobaeus his Florileg. Tit. vii. for the first Verse is produced out of his Bellerophon, the last out of Euripides his Aegeus, and should be divided into two Dimeters, as it is in Grotius his Edition.

Ibid. Note c. Because our learned Author often speaks of this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and the Gnosticks, to whom I have shewn that he refers a great many things without necessity, and in this place sets himself more particularly to explain the original of their Name; it will not be amiss, if I also treat here of that matter in a few words.

I. I cannot deny but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which is a general name for any sort of Knowledg or Learning, is sometimes taken properly for Christian Knowledg, and where the Discourse is about the Mystical sense of Scripture, for the understanding of Mysteries. It is used several times in this sense in the Epistle of Barnabas, as I have thereon observed. But I should not compare the Gift of the Holy Ghost, by which the Minds of the Evangelical Prophets were fitted to understand obscure places of Scripture, with the Jewish Cabbala. For this without any regard had to the literal sense, taken from the proper or metapho∣rical signification of words, and the series and occasion of the Dis∣course, deduces any thing out of any place of Scripture, and relies either upon trivial reasonings to prove what it asserts, or very uncertain Tradition; so that if any deny it, there is no means left to convince them, and those that believe it do so upon insufficient grounds, and may be made to believe any thing, tho never so unreasonable. But the Christian Prophets, who received their Knowledg from the Spirit of Truth, alledged nothing out of Scripture that was not in it, and could not be deduced out of it by Grammatical Reasons. Otherwise Prophecies must have been explained by Prophecies, and the new Prophets attested to by Miracles, to make it believed, that such a thing was contained in the Old Prophets, because they affirmed it to be so, which otherwise no Man could have seen in them; which me∣thod of acting does not seem worthy of the Spirit of God, as I have shewn out of a learned Man on Matt. i.22. I acknowledg that in the Writings of the Apostles, there are several interpretations of places of Scripture more like Cabbalistical than Grammatical ones; but wherever we find them, they are used only as Arguments to con∣vince

the Jews, and in compliance with their Opinions and Practices, not as demonstrations to Persons of different Sentiments.

II. I•• is very true that the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sometimes signifies a pro∣found knowledg of the Christian Religion, and so is taken in a good sense, as manifestly appears from Clemens Alexandrinus, who of∣ten so uses that word, both elsewhere, and in Strom. Lib. vi. out of which I shall produce a few words, so much the rather, because from them we may gather the reason why the Apostle here joins Know∣ledg with Faith and Vertue. Now he in pag. 648. speaks thus: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: we dare say (for here is the Faith enlightned with Knowledg) that a true Gnostick knows all things, and understands all things, having a firm comprehension, even of those things whereof we doubt; such as were James, Peter, John, Paul, and the rest of the Apostles. Then he adds, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; for Prophecy is full of knowledg, as having been given by the Lord, and by the Lord again manifested to the Apostles. And is not Knowledg a property of a reasonable Soul, trained up to this, that by Knowledg it may be entitled to Immortality? Afterwards he shews that Action must be preceded by Knowledg; and contends that nothing is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 incomprehensible; which is true, if we speak of things necessary. For whatever it is necessary for us to understand, to attain Salvation, we can undoubt∣edly understand. At length he thus describes a Gnostick: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 —〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: And the Gnostick, of whom I speak, comprehends those things which seem to others to be incomprehensible, believing there is nothing incomprehensible to the Son of God, and therefore nothing which cannot be taught —If any desire the knowledg of many things, he knows what past of old, and conjectures what will be hereafter. A Disciple of Wisdom can discover the deceitfulness of words, and unfold Riddles; he foreknows also Signs and Wonders, and the events of Times and Seasons. So that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is taken for a more exquisite degree of Knowledg, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a Person pro∣foundly knowing. Hence St. Peter exhorts Christians to join to their Faith 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, the highest degree of Knowledg possible.

III. It appears indeed, from the Writings of the Apostles, that

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies such a Knowledg; but I don't know whether it hence follows that the Disciples of Simon were by an Antonomasia, called even at that time Gnosticks, or assumed to themselves that name. There is no place alledged from whence this can be concluded. Besides, I don't know whether all that Epiphanius says of the later Gnosticks be true, much less do I believe him in every thing concerning the Anti∣ent. Epiphanius is not a Person whose affirmation should easily be cre∣dited, where he accuses and inveighs against the antient Hereticks. Yet I do not take upon me to defend the cause of these Men, of whom there are no Records come to our hands: But I leave the matter un∣decided.

IV. It is true indeed that in the Epistle of Barnabas many places of the Old Testament are explained Allegorically, and several Mysteries unfolded, which otherwise no one would have discerned in them. But they are interpretations much more like the Jewish Cabbala, and the greatest part of them undoubtedly vain, if not also false; but yet fit for the Jews of that Age, according to whose Opinions ra∣ther than to Truth, Barnabas reasons. So that I should not account this 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of his, the same with that Christian Knowledg which is so highly extolled by Clemens. I would alledg some examples out of him, but that the Epistle of Barnabas was this last Year M.DC.XCVII, pub∣lished at Amsterdam, with all the Annotations of all Interpreters up∣on it.

V. In many places indeed St. Peter opposes the Errors, which in his time were spread among Christians, and the evil Practices of some Men; but whether those Errors sprang from Simon Magus, and were defended by some particular Sect, who were notorious for their Wick∣edness, is to me uncertain.

Vers. 16. Note e. I. The first circumstance, from which our Au∣thor gathers that the Transfiguration shadowed out the coming of Christ to punish the Jews, and deliver the Christians who dwelt in Pa∣lestine, is altogether vain; because there were at least six days interval between the Discourses he mentions, and the Transfiguration, as will appear by St. Mark Chap. ix.2. if we compare his words with Luke ix.28. It is not likely that Christ spent so many days silently, with∣out teaching his Apostles any thing all that while, or inculcating upon them what he had already said; which if he did, there will be no force in Dr. Hammond's reasoning, which is grounded only upon this, that the forementioned discourses were made by Christ, immediately before his Transfiguration.

II. Secondly, what he here says about the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of Christ, and his com∣paring

it with the Exodus of Moses, are mere niceties, as easily rejected as they were invented. I have shewn on Luke ix.31. that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 there signifies a warlike expedition against the obstinate Jews.

Vers. 17. Note f. Our learned Author trifles, when he subtilly dis∣tinguishes the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Majesty or Greatness of Christ, from the Voice that was heard. For that Voice was no small part of the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of Christ, because thereby he was pronounced the Son of God, and commanded to be heard. This is clear from the very order of the Discourse: we were witnesses of his Majesty. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, FOR he re∣ceived from God the Father, Honor and Glory, such a Voice coming to him. By this very Voice, Majesty, Honour and Glory were conferred on Christ. St. Peter says they were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, because in the Transfiguration they had seen some things, and heard others. I had rather with Grotius, after 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 understand 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was, than look here for a Hebraism, were it only for the Particle 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which in such an order of words cannot be joined with an absolute Case.

Vers. 19. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.] In the first place, I would have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here to be understood in the Preterimperfect Tense; as if St. Peter had said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a Candle which shined, that he may be thought to speak of the Time which preceded the Coming of Christ. Secondly, I should render 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, with the Vulgar and Beza, caliginosum, a dark, or obseurum locum, an obscure place, not that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 properly signi∣fies obscure, which primarily signifies dry and nasty; but because Dun∣geons which are nasty, are also dark, therefore 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 here is not nasty, but dark. And the time which preceded the Coming of Christ is fitly called dark, compared with that which succeeded it; as the Knowledg which Men had of Religion under the Old Testament, is aptly resembled to the light of a Candle, in comparison of the Sun of Righteousness Christ Jesus, which being then actually risen, I should render the words of St. Peter thus: Ʋntil the Day dawned, and the morning Star arose in your Hearts. St. Peter here tells the Christians, they did well that they read the Prophets, not as the only Rule of Faith, and a perfect and full Revelation of the Will of God; but as Books which they formerly, when they had nothing more clear and full, made use of with great Advantage, till Christ came and taught them all things. Our Author strains this place in his Para∣phrase, whilst he applies it to the destruction of Jerusalem.

Ibid. Note g. I. It is true that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies the Mind in Scripture, but it is not opposed here to Heaven, than which nothing could have been said more flat; when the thing it self shews, to any one of com∣mon sense, that the morning Star is to be understood in a metaphori∣cal

sense. The morning Star, and the Day here signifie, the Doctrin of the Gospel, compared with the Old Testament; which is said to be risen in our Hearts, when it is not only heard, but sinks down into our Minds, so that we heartily believe it.

II. To incourage the Christians to bear patiently the Persecutions which they suffer'd in Judaea, in expectation that their Persecutors should be destroyed, it had been improper to propose to them the Prophecies of the Old Testament about that matter, which were very obscure; when they had clear ones deliver'd by Christ, recorded in Mat. xxiv. and the parallel places of the other Evangelists.

III. Tho I will not deny but the Day of Christ, and the Day, are used for a time of Vengeance; yet wherever these Phrases occur, we ought not presently to apply them to that time, as our Author too often does. Because he had interpreted some places of the New Testament not unhappily, about some vile Men whom he calls Gnosticks, there is scarce ever any thing said about Impostors, or wicked Men, where he does not think the same Persons to be spoken of. The like fault he com∣mits almost wherever the Discourse is about the Day, or about the com∣ing of Christ, which he strains to the Vengeance taken upon the Jews, overlooking all Circumstances. For tho in his Paraphrase the series of the Discourse seems to have a respect thereto, that is of no moment, because he adds to the words of the Apostles what he pleases. In this place the morning Star and the dawning Day, are the Gospel, until which the Law and the Prophets continued in force, which were like a Candle in the greatest darkness wherein Mankind lay. Afterwards as the light of a Candle is quite obscured by the light of the Sun, they were not of so great use, but yet not to be despised. The Gospel is often compared to Light, as in Mat. iv.16. and John i.5. & seqq. The condition also of the Jews before the Gospel, is compared to dark∣ness in the same places. All which clearly enough shew that the In∣terpretation commonly received, is better than Dr. Hammond's.

Vers. 20. Note h. As 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies the place from whence the Ra∣cers started, not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the Apostle should have said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sending out, and not 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 sending in, if he had had a respect to that Agonistical Exercise. I had rather interpret 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 as it were a loosing of the Tongue or Mouth; for as they are said to have their Tongues tied who cannot speak, so the Mouth or Tongue of those that speak are said to be loosed, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Rob. and Henr. Stephani will supply us with examples to this purpose in their Thesauri. So that the meaning of St. Peter will be this, that the Prophets did not open their Mouths, ora resolvere, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, of their own accord, but by the Will of God.