they place it, we shall consider some expressions in the conference with Nicodemus, which is the next in the series of recorded occurrences. Three men named p are cited in the Talmud, the legend relative to whom is detailed by Lightfoot; but this appears rather framed from the history, than existing independently of it. The Jews indeed will coin fictions from the slightest historical documents; and this is in many points at variance with the character of Nicodemus, as one of the Sanhedrin. As to the tradition, that his proper name was not Nicodemus, but Bonai, who is reckoned (in Sanhedrin, f. xliii. §. 1.) among the disciples of Jesus, we cannot but regard it as one of the ineptiæ of the later Jews. Photius, in his Bib liotheca, has preserved (p. 383.) from the works of Chrysippus, Presbyter of Jerusalem, the following singular legend of him: "Ευρον δὲ ἐν τῷδε τῷ βιβλίῳ καὶ τὸν τοῦ Παύλου κατὰ τὸν νόμον διδά σκαλον Γαμαλιήλ, καὶ πιστεύσαντα, καὶ βαπτισθέντα, καὶ Νικόδημον τὸν νυκτερινὴν φίλον, καὶ ἡμερινὸν γεγονότα, καὶ μαρτυρίῳ τελειώθεντα ὃν καὶ ἀνεψιόν γένεσθαι τοῦ Γαμαλιήλ ἡ ἱστορία διδάσκει βαπτίσασθαι δὲ ἑκάτερον ὑπὸ Ἰωάννου καὶ Πέτρου· οὐ μόνον δὲ, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῦ Γαμαλιὴλ παΐδα, "Αβιβος ὄνομα αὐτῷ· τὸν γῆν μακάριον Νικόδημον ἐπεὶ ἐπύποντο Ἰουδαῖοι βαπτίσασθαι, διὰ τοῦτο πληγαῖς πολλαῖς ὑπέβαλον, αἷς στεῤῥῶς ἐναθλήσας, μὲτ' ὀλίγον ἐτελειώθη. The document proceeds to state, that Gamaliel and Abibus were buried in the same Sun, and (on the testimony of one Lucian,) that Nicodemus was deposited in another, at the feet of that which contained the body of the first martyr Stephen. Nicodemus, however, was a common Greek name, as we know from Diodorus Siculus and other writers.

We find him coming to Jesus by night, attesting the conviction of the Jews (oidae) that he was a Divine Teacher, and alleging his miracles, as the reasons of that belief. It has been supposed that may have been his phrase, which occurs frequently in the Old Testament, and was used to express the divine miracles wrought at the Exodus. The Jews had certain indeterminate ideas of regeneration, which they borrowed from the mysteries of the Pagans, as we may see at large in Brücker: they frequently write of a new crea ture, and even ascribe this epithet to Abraham, after his de parture from Ur. But they obscured the doctrine with innumerable fables, which Christ here sedulously corrects. One of

תשובה צריך להתדמות כאילו היום נולד:,their authors indeed says

"It is requisite that the penitent man should be like a child recently born." That such an idea was in some degree connected with the doctrines of the mysteries is evident from both the Persian and Indian Antiquities, for the latter always apply the title

of " twice-born" to the Brahmana. He believed a divine birth, and conceived the Veda to be his gayatri or spiritual mother: he had also sacrifices and rites of regeneration, but these were accompanied with blood. In the same manner we detect this belief in the rites of Cybele; but all these vastly differed from the doctrine exhibited to Nicodemus. Doubtless HE was aware of the term, as applied epithetically to the proselytes, but he understood it not as a doctrine of MORAL obligation, and as proceeding "avwDev." And he was equally at a loss to comprehend the birth datos nai avevμatos: for, as the Jews imagined a child incapable of the reception of the Holy Spirit until the performance of circumcision, how could he conceive its reception in a system which abolished circumcision altogether? The baptismal ceremony in itself could not have been totally new to him; for it was practised in the case of the proselyte, and some parallel to it existed in almost every nation.

66

But we discern an indistinct resemblance to our Saviour's argument (v. 6.) in the Codex Nazaræus, which very possibly may have been borrowed from it, as that book contains several extracts from the Gospels:

RISOAL DOON IS been so o 150on u lioou ouso "That which proceeds from the light, belongs to the light; and that which proceeds from darkness, belongs to darkness." A proverbial expression is quoted at v. 10,

Art thou, indeed, a wise man in Israel?" and the allusion at v. 13 may have been to a fable narrated in Tanchum, the Jerusalem Targum, and Bemidbar Rabba, that when the law concerning the red heifer was revealed, Moses ascended into heaven. So many legends of the ascent of mortals to heaven, on solemn occasions, had been current in different parts of the world, that these likewise may have formed some part of our Saviour's reference.

....

Justin Martyr says of the serpent which Moses raised in the wilderness, (cf. v. 14.) και γενομένου τούτου, τοὺς μὲν ὄφεις ἀποθανεῖν, τὸν δὲ λαὸν ἐκφυγεῖν τὸν θάνατον. Αp. 2. p. 93. Tertullian and Barnabas have idly speculated on the figure of the pole to which the brazen serpent was attached: nor does it follow, as some commentators think, that Nicodemus inferred the cruci fixion from this sentence. Without some express declaration, it was hardly probable that he should have so interpreted the words.

To conclude our notice of this discourse, we shall only animadvert on some Hebraisms in the subsequent parts. At verse 17, give has the force of , and the rabbinical writers

symbolize, as at v. 19, piety and wickedness under the terms of light and darkness. The Targum on Hosea iv. 1, makes use of words analogous to those at v. 21; and in the Midrash on Yalcut Simeoni, f. 2. §. 2. p. 2, NDX TV occurs in the same sense: in the Apocalypse, moreover, we observe the phrase mov ↓ɛdos, to which the Talmudical term py corresponds exactly, as by answers to v déva in the same place.

After this, we remark Jesus going into the country of Judea, and "baptizing" converts, whilst John was administering the rite in Ænon, near Salem. But, according to Hebrew idiom, it may not hence be deduced that Jesus HIMSELF administered the rite of baptism; for, it was administered by his command and sanction, and other parts of Scripture prove this phraseology to have been allowed, and of common acceptation. Accordingly, we read elsewhere that "Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples." At this time some of the disciples of John agitated a question περὶ καθαρισμοῦ. This word appears to be the

of the Hebrew writers, under which may be included all the religious washings enjoined, either by Moses or by the oral law. And we may easily imagine the nature of the mos There was a dispute between the disciples of John and the Jews; and it related to the baptism of our Saviour's disciples on the one hand, and that of the Baptist on the other, both of which were probably contrasted with their received . The latter seem to have inferred, that this superseded the baptism of John, or was of greater efficacy: or they might have deemed it a schism from his ordinance. But, as the Jews accounted their immersions and ablutions of a purificatory nature, a still further meaning may be contained in the term xaJágioμos; and it may allude to that baptism of repentance or purification of the heart, which both John and Jesus enforced.

In John's reply to them, he illustrates his remarks by the Jewish ceremony of w, who are mentioned in the Targum on 2 Sam. xiii. 3. Bodenshaz identifies the pixos Tou vio with the agxrgixλvos. Besides these paranymphi, the

or children of the bride-chamber, called in St. Matth. ix. 15, vioi toũ vuuQāvos, were ordinarily present at weddings, who (as Maimonides assures us) were on that account exempted from prayer and from keeping the feast of tabernacles. In more ancient times, the paranymphi were only two-one for the bridegroom, the other for the bride. Selden has treated largely of this practice, and examined most of the documents which relate to it; and Pollux, iii. 41, gives an account of the zagawupin of

* As to the situation of this Salem, cf. Rolandi Palæst. illust.

the Greeks. And this Hebrew custom may be retraced to a great antiquity, for David describes the sun as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, (D) Ps. xix. 6, which was the covered place in which the bridegroom held private intercourse with his bride; and this practice is still observed by some of the German Jews. Since, therefore, the D is mentioned in every rabbinical account of marriages, it is inferible that the whole may be traced to a very early period. The best description of it is in Jahn's Arch, Bibl. ii. §. 179. p. 250-255.

At v. 33, the word opgaviσev is used as implying the greatest possible attestation, from the Jewish habit of interrogating witnesses seven times, after which they were required to confirm their testimony with a seal. Thus among the Greeks we read τὴν μαρτυρίαν ἐπισφραγίζεσθαι, the glossaries interpreting σφραγί Leraι by diaμaptúpeTaι, &c. Seal-rings were, accordingly, of the greatest importance in the East: in the Apocrypha they are frequently introduced; and that of Solomon and others has furnished abundant materials for fable, many particulars of which we detect in the Talmud. The Arabs, in allusion to the

“May

My God ختم الله عواقبه بالخير use of seals, say proverbially

seal his days with happiness!"

The expression & yap ex μérpov, at v. 34, certainly refers to the Jewish ideas of prophetic gradation, of which the Mosaic alone, being, was full and irrestricted. Here the Baptist acknowledges him, as a Prophet, to have been of the highest order; and through the whole speech asserts his own inferiority to him, not only as the Messiah, but as a Jewish Prophet.

THE plaintiff filed his bill in equity to recover tithes claimed to be due to him as Rector of the parish of St. Olave, Hart-street, in the city of London, against the defendant, as occupier of a house in the same parish. And the question which arose in this cause was, whether the plaintiff could legally state his claim as founded upon one, or other, of several titles, in the alternative; or must necessarily rely upon, and state, one title only.

The plaintiff's bill stated, the decree (for which see the statute 37 Hen. VIII. ch. 12.) made on the 24th February, 1545, in pursuance of the act of Parliament for tithes in London, by which it was decreed that the inhabitants of London should pay tithes quarterly, at the rate of 2s. 9d. in the pound. That it had been pretended that the said decree was not duly made, or if made was not enrolled in Chancery, pursuant to the statute, by authority of which it was made. Whereas the plaintiff submitted that no enrollment was necessary for giving it effect, but charged that the decree was duly made and enrolled, and that plaintiff, as Rector, was entitled to receive tithes from the inhabitants after the rate expressed in the decree.

The bill also charged, that in case the said decree should be deemed not to be binding upon the inhabitants, yet that plaintiff was entitled to claim tithes, or dues, or payments in the nature of, or in lieu of, tithes, according to the aforesaid rate, or to some such or the like rate: for that previously to the making of that decree, the inhabitants of London, and the rectors and vicars of the several parishes therein, came to an agreement to stand to such order or decree touching the