but in the other Rabbinical writings it is of frequent occurrence. Wetstein; who proceeds to give copious extracts. That the baptism of proselytes was then in use has been satisfactorily proved by Danzius, in a Dissertation inserted in Menschenius, Nov. Test. illustr. e Talmude, p. 233 seq. and 287 seq. Formerly, indeed, the Jews had admitted no proselytes but by circumcision. After their return, however, from the Babylonian captivity, when many Gentiles came over to their religion, to whom lustrations had been in regular use, they introduced the baptism of proselytes, partly because many Gentiles had been already circumcised, partly because they wished to gratify those votaries who were afraid of circumcision, and, finally, to provide a rite by which women might be initiated. (Danz. Michael. Bengel. Kuinoel.) The testimony of the above Rabbinical sages is confirmed by Arrian, Diss. Epict. 2, 9. (cited by Bengel.) where the Jewish proselytes are said to be Beßauuévo. That John should baptize Jews, thus separating them from the rest, and introducing them into a new religion, though without being the Messiah or Elias, might seem likely to have excited more wonder than we find it did. The reason for which may be this: they thought, at the advent of the Messiah, that the face of things would be entirely changed, and especially that the Messiah, or his forerunner, would commence new sacred rites by baptism. Compare John 1, 25. and Luke 3, 7. with this passage. Rosenm. and Kuinoel.

pas

6. ἐξομολογούμενοι τὰς ἁμαρτίας αὐτῶν, confessing (unto God) their sins. This expression was accounted a Hebraism by Vorstius, but classical examples of it are produced by Elsner, and Wetstein, who, in illustration of the subject, has adduced a very apposite citation from Arrian, Exp. Alex. 7, 29: 'Aλλà μεταγνώναι τε, ἐφ ̓ οἷς ἐπλημμέλησεν, μόνῳ οἶδα τῶν πά λαι βασιλέων ̓Αλεξάνδρῳ ὑπὸ γενναιότητος. Οἱ δὲ πολ· λοὶ, εἰ καὶ τι ἔγνωσαν πλημμελήσαντες, οἱ δὲ τῷ προηγορεῖν αὐτοῦ, ὡς καλῶς δὴ πραχθέντος, ἐπικρύψειν οἴονται τὴν

αμαρτίαν, κακῶς γιγνώσκοντες. Μόνη γὰρ ἐμοιγε δοκεῖ ἴασις ἁμαρτίας, ὁμολογεῖν τε ἁμαρτόντα, καὶ δῆλον εἶναι ἐπ' αὐτῷ μεταγινώσκοντα· ὡς τοῖς παθοῦσι τι ἄχαρι οὐ παντὶ χαλεπὰ τὰ παθήματα φαινόμενα, εἰ ὁ δράσας αὐτὸ ξυγχωροίῃ, ὅτι οὐ καλὰ ἔδρασεν. Αὐτῷ τε τινι ἐς τὸ μέλλον ταύτην ἐλπίδα ἀγαθὴν ὑπολειπομένην, μήποτε ἂν παραπλήσιον ἁμαρτεῖν, εἰ τοῖς πρόσθεν πλημμεληθεῖσιν ἀχ δόμενος φαίνοιτο. The confession seems to have been rather general than particular; for to men long immersed in vice, neither would the memory have supplied all the particulars, nor would the time have admitted such particularity; neither also from the bystanding crowd of different sexes and ages, some of whom were hypocrites, would such minute confession have been advisable.

7. Φαρισαίων καὶ Σαδδουκαίων. These, together with the Essenes, composed the three principal Jewish sects, which have been not unaptly compared to the three Grecian ones, the Pythagoreans, the Epicureans, and the Stoics. Their origin is referred to the times after the Babylonian captivity, when Judæa was in the power of the kings of Syria and Egypt. The Jews then imbibed many dogmas, derived from the Pythagorean and Platonic philosophy, especially on the immortality of the soul, the agency and power of spiritual beings.

Of these the Pharisees were so denominated from

, to separate, as being separated and distinguished from others by peculiar sanctity. These anxiously and severely pressed the letter of the law, and even the traditions which had been handed down since the time of its promulgation. They enjoined a most diligent observance of the ritual law, and by such exact observance they maintained that pardon of sins was to be obtained. To these more antient doctrines were added many new opinions, which came to their knowledge while in Chaldea; such as dogmas on spirits, on fate, &c. To all this they added a peculiarity of dress, and whatever could attract public attention. Their opinions on fate, &c.

(which did not materially differ from those held by some religionists of our own days) are thus detailed by Rosenmuller (from Josephus, 18, 1, 3): “Dicebant fato omnia fieri, sed hominis voluntatem non privabant impetu à seipsa pendente, quippe sic Deo placuisse, ut certo temperamento miscerentur in unum fati decretum et ratio humana, si quis velit agere cum vitio aut cum virtute." Vide Joseph. Bell. 1, 5, 2. Antiq. 13, 10, 6. 17, 2, 4. 2, 8, 14 & 18. 1, 3, 4.

The Sadducees thought more freely on Religion and Ethics; hence they set at nought all laws not written in Scripture. It was formerly supposed by theologians that they only admitted the books of Moses; but, as Rosenmuller and Kuinoel observe, it has been recently proved by Staudlin and others, that they did not deny the authority of the other books of the Old Testament; they only maintained their inferiority to the Pentateuch; rejected the novel doctrines of the Pharisees on dæmonology, fate, &c. which, indeed, they altogether abrogated, subjecting all things to human free will. (Vide Joseph. 1, 2, 8, 14.) They did not admit the resurrection of the body; nay, they contended that not even the soul was immortal, holding an opinion not dissimilar to that of the Cabbalists, namely, that all souls were but emanations from that of God, and would return thither. Hence they excluded all idea of rewards after death.

Though this note has already extended to a considerable length, I cannot refrain from laying before my learned and reflecting readers two extracts from the copious collectanea of Wetstein:

"Sectæ Pharisæorum addicta fuit plebs et mulierculæ cum Sadducæis vero faciebant principes, nobiles atque divites. Unde satis patet, non rei evidentia permotos ad hanc vel illam sectam se contulisse sed prout cuique commodum erat. Mulierculæ, meticulosæ et superstitiosæ delectabantur ceremoniis; plebs etiam quidlibet potius sibi imponi

patiebatur, quàm ut legem Dei naturalem et moralem servaret, putabatque id præstando, quòd non debebat, à præstatione debiti redimere se posse. Divites contra et nobiles, ut eo securius in hâc vitâ voluptatibus indulgerent, et dominatione abuterentur, omni futurarum pœnarum metu, qui ipsis molestus fuisset, cupidè semet exsolvisse videntur.

"Notamus autem Josephum sectæ Pharisæorum sese addixisse.

"Unde justa oritur suspicio, ubi Pharisæorum humanitatem et clementiam laudat, Sadducæorum verò asperitatem atque sævitiam vituperat, Sadducæis iniquiorem fuisse." B. 2, 8, 14.

"Cum enim Sadducæi optimatibus, Pharisæi plebeis studerent, consequens erat, ut plebs a nobilitate contemneretur, nobilitas vero plebi esset exosa; quæ res non magis optimatibus quam plebi vitio vertenda erat. Porro fieri poterat, ut dissensus Sadducæorum inter se justas haberet rationes: conspiratio vero plebis seditiosa et tumultuosa esset. Clementiam denique non alio exemplo probat, quàm quòd reis Majestatis parcendum esse suaserunt, cui indulgentiæ ceu Reipublicæ noxia severitas necessaria rectè à Sadducæis prælata fuisse videtur. Cæterum non mitissimos fuisse Pharisæos, inde etiam patet, quod Alexander rex moriens illos non aliâ viâ placari posse credidit, quàm si regina cadaver ipsius Pharisæis traderet, illisque potestatem faceret, illi, sepulturæ honore privato, illudendi, sive aliam quamcunque injuriam ex iracundia inferendi. 13, 15, 5. & 16, 2. Et quid humani exspectari poterat ab hominibus, qui, teste Josephó, ad Stoicos quàm proximè accedebant?"

7. ἐρχομένους ἐπὶ τὸ βάπτισμα αὐτοῦ. The sense is well expressed by the Persic and Syriac versionscoming in order that they might be baptized. So Luc. 3, 7. βαπτισθῆναι ὑπ' αὐτοῦ. Examples of this sense of erì are given by Wets. and Krebs.

7. JevíÝμaτα èxiÒvv, Viperarum progenies. Comp. 12, 34. 23, 33. Soph. Trach. 1106. dens èxions

Opéμpa. Vide Phil. Jud. 2, 570, 24. Donat. ad Terent. Ern. 5, 1, 9. Flor. 4, 12. Demosth. adv. Aristog. 1. ὅταν συκοφάντην καὶ ἔχιν τὴν φύσιν ἄνθρωπον fonte. (Wets.) Vide Soph. Antiq. 530. stood by Vater rather of malice than craftiness.

Ex. is under

7. TÍS ÚTÉDEIŽEV ; vi. docere. The word occurs in this sense in the later Greek writers and the Septuagint. It is strange that the antient interpreters should have taken the sentence to indicate praise. It rather expresses surprise; namely, to see persons of such dissimilar opinions and characters, Sadducees and Pharisees, men of the world and votaries of pleasure, mixed with precise formalists, not to say hypocrites, unite in confessing their sins, in making declarations of repentance, and vows of reformation.

Wets. compares Galat. 3, 1. and Virgil. Georg. 4, 445. Nam quis te-nostras Jussit adire domos.

7. ἀπὸ τὴς μελλούσης ὀργῆς. The word o. must here be taken, by metonymy, for punishment; of which see many examples in Schleusn. Lex. in v. 9, 3.

Euthymius refers this either to the destruction of Jerusalem, &c. or the wrath and punishment of God, to be revealed at the day of judgment.

Wetst. understands the former, and compares Luc. 21, 13. and 1 Macc. 1, 64; Theophylact and Macknight the latter, whose distinction between ἔσται and μέλλει ἔσεσθαι is frivolous.

8. TоIŃσαTE Kаρroùs. Bring forth fruits. This is said to be a Hebraism; as y is so used in Genes. 1, 11. and elsewhere. Yet examples from the Classical writers (though, indeed, not of the best age) are produced by Georgius, Schwartz, and Wetstein. The sense is, If you really repent, shew forth not merely the leaves of profession, but the fruits of performance, as resulting from a true repentance. Not only cease to do evil, but learn to do well. Of Wetstein's Classical examples, the only apposite ones are the following: Plutarch 2, 1117, c. où év TOI TO θεράπευμα τοῦτο ἔσχε καρπὸν ἄξιον, οὐ γὰρ ἀνηγορεύθη