other words, that it progressively descended from an internal to an external state. Now this progression, as every one acquainted with the language of correspondence knows, is not actually signified by the notice, "And Cain said to Abel," but by the words which he said to him, "Let us go out into the field." How then came Swedenborg to give such an interpretation? How, but by an influence from above, which connected the words which he saw in his Bible with those which ought to follow them, and therefore suggested an explanation applicable to the whole? Yet this influence could not operate more distinctly, because he was without the proper vessels for its reception, which could only be afforded by the absent words: hence the abruptness and seeming want of applicability in his explanation, the suitableness of which can only be seen when the integrity of the passage is restored.

Altogether, then, we trust that this must be admitted as another indisputable example of error in the received text of the Hebrew Word: as also, of the, care of Divine Providence in so wonderfully providing the means for its restoration: and further, of the fact, that the Word itself, considered absolutely, is preserved entire, notwithstanding the blemishes that have unavoidably crept into the individual copies.

In our last, when mentioning the enumeration by the Masorites of the verses of the different books of the Old Testament, we made this statement: "In Joshua, the greater number of Hebrew copies, both printed and manuscript, have 658 verses: but some copies and editions have only 656: this is pronounced by the Masorah to be the true number: but we shall see presently, that we have here a striking instance that their decisions were sometimes governed by gross stupidity." To substantiate this charge, we will produce, as our next example, the case to which it refers.

In the English Bible, the twenty-first chapter of Joshua contains forty-five verses: but according to the Masorites and the principal Rabbins, the thirty-sixth and thirty-seventh verses have no business there: notwithstanding which decision, they are found in a great number of manuscripts, in the first printed editions, and in most of the subsequent ones: but they are omitted in all those that follow strictly the Masoretic decisions. Van der Hooght, who had studied the Jewish writers till he had thoroughly

imbibed their views, gives this account of the matter in the preface to his Bible: "At Joshua, ch. xxi. 35, we have inserted in the margin, after the example of Athias, this note: In some copies, here follow two verses, beginning, And out of the tribe of Reuben,' &c. but they have been inserted by mistake, and ought not to be retained,' &c. We have added this note that every one might see, on comparing this Bible with those published in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, in which the two verses are retained, that they are an interpolation taken from 1 Chron. vi. 78, 79, and not sanctioned by the Bibles of Bomberg, Buxtorf, &c. who also note, that these verses are not found in any ancient correct copies. Moreover, the Rabbins of the Synagogue of Amsterdam, after serious deliberation, directed these verses to be omitted in Athias's Bible, and prove the omission to be right by the authority of R. Dav. Kimchi, who says respecting them: I have not seen those two verses in any correct ancient copy: -and I have heard the same from Rabbi Haaj, of blessed memory.' It is thus proved, that in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, [when Kimchi flourished,] these verses were not in the text of any correct copy; nor yet, before the age of Kimchi, in the time of Rabbi Haaj. On this authority, we have added a note to the margin of the thirty-fifth verse, stating that the Masorah must here be followed, which enumerates in Joshua, not 658 verses, but only 656; and observing, that they are wanting in three ancient correct manuscripts [which have been collated]. To these five reasons may be added, as a sixth, that it appears evident that they are not recognised by the Paraphrase of Jonathan, made in the age of Augustus." Thus coolly is the matter decided by this Editor and the Rabbins: as if the verses were quite unconnected with the rest of the chapter, and the question of their omission or rejection was in no way dependent upon reason, but rested entirely upon authority. It is to be observed, too, that the Rabbins Kimchi and Haaj, whose authority is deemed so weighty, do not say, absolutely, that there were, in their times, no ancient copies which contained the verses, but no correct ancient copies. But what was, with them, the criterion of correctness? Their following the decisions of the Masorites: but the Masorites had decided against these verses: all the copies which contained them would therefore be pronounced incorrect; though, here, the incorrectness unquestionably lies with those

which omit them. There were, however, as Gussetius observes*, copies which contain the verses far more ancient than those which Kimchi had examined; as is evinced by their being found in the Septuagint, and, it appears, all the other ancient versions. But the anomalous reading is pretended to be sanctioned by tradition; and, as the same author adds, the word tradition carries an inresistible charm in the ears of a Rabbi, especially if the story affirmed upon the credit of tradition savours of mystery, and is repugnant to common sense. Whether this is too severe a censure, let the reader judge, after he has examined the bearing of evident reason in the case before us.

The chapter in which these verses are contained, gives an account of the cities, in all the twelve tribes, assigned for the dwellings of the Levites. There were three families of the Levites, descended from the three sons of Levi, Kohath, Gershon, and Merari: but as the high priest, Aaron, was a descendant of Kohath, that family was subdivided into two branches, called the children of Aaron and the rest of the children of Kohath. Thus all the Levites were formed into four divisions, each of which had an allotment of cities for their dwellings out of three of the tribes of Israel. The first seven verses of the chapter mention the names of the tribes from whom each of the four divisions received their allotment, with the number of the cities conceded to each division: and the bulk of the remainder of the chapter, from the ninth verse to the forty-first, particularizes all the cities by name, mentions how many were given out of each tribe, sums up the number assigned to each division of the Levites, and finally states the gross total. Here then is a numbering more to be depended upon than the numberings of the Masorites, and by which any reader of the Bible may here ascertain the correctness of the text. Would not every one, should he, on counting the cities of which the number is stated, find that they did not make the amount, conclude the copy to be incorrect? "No," say the Rabbins: " our doctors have determined to the contrary: four and four make twelve upon occasion, you may depend upon it: and if this appears to you a mystery, that is the very thing that was intended."-Ecce signum :

The allotment of the descendants of Merari is described as follows; precisely in the same form as those of the other families,

in all which the number of the cities mentioned agrees with the amount assigned: Ver. 34. "And unto the families of the children of Merari, the rest of the Levites; Out of the tribe of Zebulun, Jokneam with her suburbs, and Kartah with her suburbs, (35) Dimnah with her suburbs, Nahalal with her suburbs; four cities: (36) And out of the tribe of Reuben, Bezer with her suburbs, and Jahazah with her suburbs, (37) Kedemoth with her suburbs, and Mephaath with her suburbs; four cities: (38) And out of the tribe of Gad, Ramoth in Gilead with her suburbs, to be a city of refuge for the slayer, and Mahanaim with her suburbs, (39) Heshbon with her suburbs, Jazer with her suburbs; four cities in all. (40) So all the cities for the children of Merari by their families, which were remaining of the families of the Levites, were by their lot twelve cities." Here, then including the disputed verses, which we have printed in Italics, are three series of four cities each, which are stated at the conclusion to make twelve. In the seventh verse, also, the same three tribes are mentioned as furnishing the allotment for the family of Merari, and the same number of the cities furnished is summarily given; thus: "The children of Merari by their families had out of the tribe of Reuben, and out of the tribe of Gad, and out of the tribe of Zebulan, twelve cities." And the sum of the cities given to all the families is thus cast up in the forty-first verse: "All the cities of the Levites within the possession of the children of Israel were forty and eight cities with their suburbs:" being exactly the number which are enumerated singly, if the disputed verses are allowed to stand. Who then can dream for a moment that they ought to be expunged? The absurdity is too great even for an ordinary Jew: None but those who had completely beclouded their faculty of common discernment by a familiarity with the farrago of outrages against reason which constitutes the bulk of Rabbinical learning, could digest so monstrous an idea: and hence so many of the copies retain the two verses, and they are only omitted in those which pretend to be the standards of purity.

As the chasm made in the letter by the omission of these verses is so palpable, doubtless the interruption of the series of the spiritual sense is equally glaring; but upon this it must be quite unnecessary to enlarge.

It must also be needless, we think, further to multiply examples

of the want of infallibility in the Jewish conservators of the sacred text. Not, however, to leave too unfavourable an impression respecting them, we would observe, that instances of errors so considerable as the above, are not numerous. And though their mode of deciding upon various readings, excluding entirely the exercise of the rational faculty, appears now very futile, yet it no doubt was the best that the state of the human mind in former ages admitted. Had their reason, or even that of Christians, been allowed to interfere, the copies would have been far more depraved. Their mode evidently was, to decide every thing by authority: such copies as had a reputation for correctness, they assumed, right or wrong, to be so: and they were at great pains to make all future ones conform to these standards. If the measures they took for this purpose tended to perpetuate the errors already introduced, they must also have had a great influence in preventing the accumulation of new ones: and thus there is little doubt, that although the Jewish Masoretic text is by no means immaculate, it is purer, taken as a whole, than any that has descended to us through other channels. Yet it is also, unquestionably, of Divine Providence, that many copies of the Hebrew Scriptures have been preserved, which, though made by Jews, have not been exactly pruned to the Masoretic standard; and also, that so many ancient translations remain, which afford the means, to a great extent, of judging of the state of the original text, at different periods, to more than 2000 years ago. Altogether then, it may be fairly presumed, that among all the documents thus providentially eserved, the Word in its Integrity exists, and that the light which will reign in the New Church will eventually restore integrity to individual copies.

In our next we intend to shew, that Swedenborg has decidedly sanctioned the opinion that the received text of the Scriptures is not free from errors, by departing from it himself, in one or two instances, and adopting a various reading: we also propose to shew, that in the only instance in which he expressly speaks of various readings, he does not claim, but rather disclaims, any supernatural power of judging of them: and we shall then consider the general question in reference to the Word of the New Testament.

EDITORS.