On this page
co £ dir iglyv the Prdfessor endeavours to establish the fact b y induction ; a mode of reasoning , which , in many instances , is perfectly legitimate , and which is here purs tied with considerable ingenuity and force . From
several particular propositions he deduces that general proposition which he sets out with enuntiating : by steps he arrives at the final conclusion , 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 . For this purpose , the learned Prelate attempts to connect the catalogue of the Hebrew Scriptures , which Jeroin has driven in his Proloerus
galeatus , with the account which Josephus has given of those Scriptures , In his treatise against Apion . Jerom , like Josephus , divides them into three classes , which he calls , the Law the Prophets , and the Hagiographa . He has further enumerated the several
books of which each class consisted : and it appears from this enumeration , that the books which were then contained in the Hebrew Bible , were the same books which are now contained in it . In regard to the first class ,
or the Pentaieuch , the enumeration made respectively by Josephus and by Jerom , is , beyond dispute , the same . The only difficulty which attends the comparison of their accounts , is that which relates to the two other classes .
Yet , if we take those two classes together , both writers agree as to the total number of the books comprised in them : and the sole difference consists in the partition * of the books between the two classes . Now , as we know that the Jews have been
gradually augmenting the number of books in the third class , by a proportionate diminution of the number in the second , we need not wonder if the third class , which in the first
century contained only four books , contained nine at the end of the fojurth century , and that the books of the second class had been proportionally reduced from thirteen to eight .
JoWe > employ this word , in preference to Btehop M . 's repartition , which is a French , and not an English , noun .
sefphus himself , in a i ^ eH-knoVra j > aa » sage of his treatise against Apion though he has not enumerated the seventeen books which composed the two last classes , has given a descri ption of those books ; and this descri ption exactly corresponds with the
inference deduced from a comparison of his account with Jerom's . To the third class the book of Proverbs , and the book of Ecclesiastes , as well as the book of Psalms , have been referred by the Jews of every age : to the same class Jerom , in his
catalogue of the Hebrew Scriptures , has referred the book of Job and Solomon ' s Song ; though it be probable that by Josephus they were somewhat differently arranged . Nor is it a solid objection against the accuracy of this reasoning , that later Jews have referred to the third class various
books , which are here referred to the second class of Josephus ; the removal of such books from the class in which they were originally placed being well explained by history . The Margaret Professor's conclusions are , that the Hebrew Scriptures which received the sanction of our
Saviour were the same Hebrew Scriptures which were known to Josephus ; that they contained the same books which were enumerated by Jerom , and still constitute our Hebrew Bibles ; and that the authority of the
Old Testament , according to the canon of the English church , though not according to the canon of the church of Rome , rests upon a basis which cannot be shaken . We
recommend his argument to the careful attention of students in theology and in logic . ( 31--50 . ) Of his thirty-fourth lecture the object is to establish the integrity of the Hebrew Bible , to shew that the
books which compose it have descended to the present age without material alteration . With this view , fee divides his inquiries into two periods ; the one extending from the time of Moses to that of our Saviour , th £
other extending from the time of our Saviour to this day . Here he mates a very fair and judicious use of several historical facts : nor , III any p * ° j his reasoning , is he more successful than in his proofs that the JeWs > fo * not Mtfdlly ; corrupted their Scnptures . As a specimen of his nu * fler
5 $ f Review ' . —Bishop df Peterborough * * JHvimiy Lectures * .
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Oct. 2, 1823, page 596, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1789/page/36/