ternal proof of its being spurious is, that the passage is inconsistent with the accounts given both by Matthew and John, as well as with other circumstances belonging to the event. Having stated that about the ninth hour of the day on which he was crucified Jesus uttered the cry, "Eli! Eli! lama sabachthani,—that is,-My God! My God! why hast thou forsaken me?"—Matt. chap. 27, v. 46, the evangelist relates,—v. 47.—" On hearing [this], some of the bystanders said,-This man calleth for Elijah. -48. One of them immediately ran, and took a sponge, and having filled it with vinegar, and fixed it on a reed, gave him drink: 49. but the rest said,-Hold! let us see whether Elijah will come to save him. 50. Having again cried with a loud voice, Jesus expired."-It is between verses 49 and 50, that the Vatican manuscript inserts the clause," but another, taking a spear, pierced his side, and there came forth water and blood: "-which clause, short as it is, entirely disagrees both with the immediate context, and with the facts of the case. The bystanders were evidently the Roman soldiers on guard, who knew little of the Hebrew language, but could not have resided long in Palestine without learning something of the great prophet Elijah, and of the expected Messiah of the Jews. Now, after stating that one of these men,—ɛiç ¿§ avt☎v,— on hearing Jesus complain of thirst, (John, chap. 19, v. 28, 29) offered him vinegar, and that the rest—oi 201πoì— desired their comrade not to interfere, but to await the event, what intelligent writer would have introduced another,—äλλos dè,—and that to perform an act in opposition to the wish just before expressed? Besides, the soldiers were not at liberty thus to interfere with the exe

the superiority of the Vatican manuscript, is in reality another example of its injudicious and unwarrantable interference with the original text. See Rev. chap. 8, v. 1-5.—Granville Penn, Annotations, etc., Preface, pp. 32, 33.

cution at their pleasure, and had any of them presumed to do so, it would have been at the risk of his life. When the Jewish authorities were anxious to have the crucified persons dispatched, and their bodies removed before the sabbath began, that is, before six o'clock the same evening, they were under the necessity of applying to the Roman governor, who gave orders accordingly. That he did not issue any other order is manifest; since after giving this, and when he had reason to believe that it had been carried into effect, Pilate was astonished to hear that Jesus was already dead. By the apostle John, a deeply-interested spectator of the whole scene, the sequel is thus described :-"Now in order that the bodies might not remain on the cross during the sabbath-day, as it was [then] the preparation-day, for that sabbath-day was a high day, the Jews requested Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. So the soldiers came, and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Jesus, but on coming to him, as they perceived that he was already dead, they did not break his legs one of the soldiers, however, pierced his side with a spear, and immediately there came forth blood and water." —John, chap. 19, v. 28-34. Nothing can be plainer or more complete than this account. The death of Christ

happened, not in consequence of his having been stabbed to the heart, but from some other cause, immediately after he had received the vinegar. His side was pierced, not while he was alive, but after he was dead, and as the alternative of breaking his legs, an act which the soldiers were otherwise about to perform; implying that until that moment they were not aware of his death, and even then thought it proper, by wounding him with a spear, to ascertain its reality. It is to be regretted that this very clear and unequivocal statement should have been misrepresented by Mr. Penn, no doubt, unintentionally, and

under the influence of an undue partiality for a favorite manuscript. The evangelist's words are as follows,—John, chap. 19, ν. 32.—“ Ηλθον οὖν οἱ στρατιῶται, καὶ τοῦ μὲν πρώτου κατέαξαν τὰ σκέλη, καὶ τοῦ ἄλλου τοῦ συσταυρωθέν τος αὐτῷ : 33. ἐπὶ δὲ τὸν Ἰησοῦν ἐλθόντες, ὡς εἶδον αὐτὸν ἤδη τεθνηκότα, οὐ κατέαξαν αὐτοῦ τὰ σκέλη: 34. ἀλλ' εἷς τῶν στρατιωτῶν λόγχῃ αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευρὰν ἔνυξε, καὶ εὐθὺς ¿§ñλ0ɛv aíμa kaì dwp.—The following is Mr. Penn's translation:-" 32. Then the soldiers came, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him; 33. but, coming to Jesus, they brake not his legs, when they saw that he was already dead; 34. for, one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and immediately came forth blood and water."-Every competent and unprejudiced reader will perceive that the mental substitution in this version of the explanatory particle,-yàp, for, instead of the distinctive one,-åλλà, but-entirely perverts the meaning of the sentence, which is thereby tacitly acknowledged to be incompatible with the corresponding clause, interpolated in Matthew's gospel by the Vatican manuscript. Far, however, from seeing this, Mr. Penn supposes that in the following verses 35-37, John quotes, and thereby confirms the pretended statement of Matthew, as if it were credible that John, who during the whole scene of the crucifixion stood near the foot of the cross, should have suppressed his own testimony, and given in preference that of Matthew, who, if present at all, must have been stationed at a distance, and consequently far less qualified to bear witness on the subject, Luke, chap. 23, v. 49. It must, on the contrary, be evident that John, who through modesty generally speaks of himself anonymously, and in the third person, is here placing on scriptural record that testimony, which as an eye-witness of these momentous events he had from the first orally delivered, and that previously to citing two remarkable

prophecies of the Old Testament respecting them, he accurately describes the occurrences by which they were simultaneously fulfilled,-John, chap. 19, v. 35. "He that bears [this] testimony saw [the fact], and his testimony is true, and he is sure that he relates what is true, that ye also may believe: 36. for these things happened in fulfilment of the Scripture,-Not one of his bones shall be broken:-37. and again another Scripture saith,―They shall look on him whom they pierced." *—Other objections might be urged against the allegation that the spearwound was inflicted on the body of Christ while he was yet alive, such as the immediate effusion of blood and water, and the loud and distinct exclamation,-"[All] is accomplished: Father! into thy hands I commit my spirit," neither of which could on this supposition have taken place; but those already adduced will probably be deemed sufficient.

The opinion that the death of Christ was accelerated by supernatural agency originated with some of the early Christian writers; that which ascribes its speedy occurrence to an extraordinary degree of debility, either constitutional or superinduced, is chiefly confined to a small number of modern theologians; and, as will now be shown, is equally untenable with the former, being not only destitute of proof, but positively contradicted by the well-known facts of the case. Both as a priest and as a victim, it was necessary that Christ should possess a human nature absolutely pure and perfect. This perfect nature was accordingly provided by a special interposition of the Holy Spirit, in the manner related by the evangelist Luke; and from such a source it is evident that nothing feeble, vitiated, or defective could have proceeded.†

* Granville Penn, Annotations, etc.; pp. 286, 287.

Levit. chap. 21, v. 16-24; chap. 22, v. 17-25;-John, chap. 1, v. 29, 36;-Heb. chap. 7, v. 23-28; chap. 9, v. 13, 14; chap. 10, v. 1-14; -1 Peter, chap. 1, v. 18, 19, etc.

As a child, Jesus rapidly grew in wisdom, and in stature, and in favor with God and man; and at the early age of twelve years exhibited a degree of energy and intelligence, which astonished the doctors of the law with whom he conversed in the temple. The subsequent course of his life corresponded to its commencement. Until the age of thirty he chiefly resided in the country, where his occupations, although humble and laborious, were well adapted to promote health and strength. During the three or four years of his personal ministry nothing of a contrary kind occurred. He now took much mental as well as bodily exercise, mingled freely with all classes of society, was often engaged in public speaking, and made frequent journeys on foot; but, under the guardianship of a special providence, appears never to have suffered the slightest. accident or indisposition. The notion of his having been weakened and emaciated by continual watchings and fastings is worthy of the monkish writers by whom it was first suggested, but utterly at variance with the evangelical narrative. Whatever might in this respect have been the practice of John the Baptist, who was sent to announce the divine judgments impending over a guilty nation, the Son of Man came, as he himself declares, eating and drinking; his first miracle was performed at a marriage-feast, for the purpose of furnishing a liberal supply of excellent wine; and on all occasions, he readily accepted the hospitalities both of his friends and his enemies. Even his disciples could not fast while he was with them; and the malicious aspersion thrown against him of being a gluttonous man and a wine-bibber, false as it was, served to prove that he did not profess to lead a life of abstinence and mortification. His last sufferings befell him when in the flower of his age, at the period of his greatest vigor and maturity. Those in the garden of Gethsemane, although intense, were of short duration, and he was super