that harlot who is drunken with the blood of the saints and martyrs of Jesus. But this conclusion is absurd; therefore Mr. Faber's interpretation of the flight of the woman is not the true one. ་༞་ I shall close my paper, and I hope also the controversy. tion then draweth nigh." Consequently the redemption of Israel does not take place till some time after the close of the times of the Gentiles, and the interval is occupied with the signs in the heavens, &c. A wilderness being a symbol of I have only one or two more obbarrenness, unfruitfulness, and observations to offer; and with them scurity; the flight of the woman into the wilderness denotes, that during the 1260 years, the true church should remain in a barren and unproductive state, and in obscurity. At the end of that period, she is to emerge from this state; and that she has begun so to emerge from it, I argue from her history during the last nineteen years. For an answer to the second general head of Mr. Faber's last paper, I beg leave to refer to my papers in the Christian Observer, for March and June, 1808. I shall only now state generally, that by the same argument that Mr. Faber would prove from Luke xxi. 24, that the restoration of Judah is to commence precisely when the 1260 years end; the Jews might prove from Isaiah vi. 11 and 12, that their judicial blindness ceased, as soon as their present captivity began. It might in the same way be proved from Gen. xlix. 10, that Jesus is not Shiloh, for that the sceptre was to depart from Judah, the moment that Shiloh came; whereas it did not depart till about forty years after the crucifixion of Jesus. I need not say, sir, that an argument which leads to such consequences must be false. In fact, from Luke xxi. 24-31, I draw an inference precisely the reverse of Mr. Faber's. It appears to me from that passage, that the signs in the symbolical heavens, which are there mentioned, do intervene between the close of the times of the Gentiles, and the restoration of Judah. For these signs confessedly begin, when the times of the Gentiles end; and our Lord commands the Disciples, when they see these signs, " to look up and up their heads, for their redemp lift The conversion of Judah is every where mentioned in the Scripture, as being the greatest and most joyful event, which is to occur in the history of the church, before the second advent of Christ. Now, sir, Mr. Faber's system leads him to sup-, pose, that the conversion of one great branch of Judah is to be effected before the end of the 1260 years, i. e. while the church is yet in the wilderness, and the witnesses are prophesying in sackcloth, and the saints are under the power of the little horn, and the abomination of desolations is trampling under foot the sanctuary. This is, in my view, contrary to the whole analogy of Scripture; insomuch that were there no other reason for rejecting Mr. Faber's scheme, this one would seem to me a sufficient ground for doing so. Mr. Faber, in your Number for March, pages 142 and 143, undesignedly, represents me, as having advanced an opinion with respect to the holy people mentioned in Dan. xii. 7, which I never advanced, and never held: and he charges me with advancing this opinion to serve a turn. I believe, as well as Mr. Faber, that the holy people mentioned in the above passage are the Jews. I believe that the finishing of all the events of Daniel's last prophecy, and the accomplishing to scatter the power of the holy people will take place, not at the end of the 1260 years, but at the battle of Armageddon; which Mr. Faber places at the conclusion of Daniel's 1290 years. In this view of the passage, I have the support of Mr. Wintle, as quoted by Mr. Fa ber, in his work on the Restoration of Judah. 66 "Mr. Lowth" (says Mr. Wintle) "has recounted a number of passages in the prophets, which indicate the restoration of the Jews in the latter days, or when the fourth monarchy shall expire. At this decisive period, or after the 1260 years of the reign of Antichrist, (Popery) and the addition of another short term for the restoration of the Jews, will be the end of these wonders, or marvellous things, inquired after in the last verse." (Wintle on Dan. xii. 7.) Though the reign of Antichrist seems here fixed for 1290 years, which is a term of 30 years more than was mentioned at verse 7, the excess, in the opinion of some, is the time allotted for the collecting of the Jews from their captivity among all nations, or the several countries of their dispersion: and at the close of verse 7, there does seem to be a further period alluded to for this purpose after the time, times and a half, or the 1260 years."-Wintle on Dan. xii. 11. But supposing that I had advanced a manifestly erroneous opinion upon the above passage of Daniel, I do not see how it would follow that I had evidently advanced it" to serve a turn." I am not aware, sir, that in the course of this protracted controversy, I have advanced any opinion with a view to serve a turn. Did my conscience accuse me of having done so, I should think it a matter calling for the exercise of deep repentance towards God; for I assuredly believe, that he who in a scriptural controversy, advances any opinion whatever, to serve a turn, is guilty of trifling both with the word of God, and the interests and safety of his own immortal soul. In all my papers, I have argued in support of an opinion which I believe to be true, because it seems to me to be supported by history, and by the analogy of Scripture. This analogy, in my view of it, necessarily requiring us to place the ter mination of the 1260 years at the April 26, 1811. TALIB, P. S. Since I finished the foregoing paper, I have received some further information upon the subject of the edict of Justinian, and the supposed grant of Phocas, which seems to be quite sufficient to set the question at rest, and to show that the scheme of those interpreters, who date the 1260 years from the era of Phocas, is unsupported by any solid evidence. I. In order to determine the precise meaning of that passage of Justinian's epistle to the Pope, wherein he recognises him to be the head of the church, I quote the following authorities. 1. The introductory sentence of the Pope's answer to the Emperor's epistle, "Gloriosissimo et clementissimo filio Justiniano Augusto Joannes episcopus urbis Romæ. "Inter claras sapientiæ ac mansuetudinis vestræ laudes, Christianissime principum, puriore luce tanquam aliquod sydus irradiat, quod amore fidei, quod charitatis studio edocti ecclesiasticis disciplinis, Romanæ sedis reverentiam conservatis et ei cuncta subjicitis, et ad ejus deducitis unitatem, ad cujus auctorem, hoc est, apostolorum primum, Domino loquente præceptum est, Pasce oves meas; quam esse omnium vere ecclesiarum caput, et patrum regulæ et principum statuta decla raut, et pietatis vestræ reveren dissimi testantur affatus.” It will be recollected that the letter, from which the above is taken, was by Justinian himself published in the volume of the civil law, and that the sentiments contained in it were thus acknowledged and sanctioned by the supreme.legislative authority of the Roman empire. 2. I shall next produce the introductory sentence of an edict of Justinian not yet referred to (being the 9th of his Novelle Constitutiones), which is as follows. "Ut etiam ecclesia Romana centum annorum gaudeat præscriptione. Novella Constit. IX. "Imp. Justin. A. Joanni viro beatiss. ac sanctiss. archiepisc. et patriarchæ veteris Romæ. Præfatio. "Ut legum originem anterior Roma sortita est, ita et summi pontificatus apicem apud eam esse nemo est qui dubitet. Unde et nos necessarium duximus patriam legum, fontem sacerdotii speciali nostri numinis lege illustrare," &c. 3. I refer, in the third place, to an edict of Justinian respecting ecclesiastical titles and privileges, being the 131st of his Novella Constitutiones, which contains the following passage. "Ideoque sancimus sanctissimum senioris Romæ papam, primum esse omnium sacerdotum : beatissimum autem archiepiscopum Constantinopoleos novæ Romæ, secundum habere locum post sanctam apostolicam senioris Romæ sedem: aliis autem omnibus sedibus præponatur." 4. The last authorities I shall bring forward, upon this point, are the opinions of two celebrated civilians. Gothofredus, in his edition of the Corpus Juris, has the following note upon a passage in the epistle of Justinian to the patriarch of Constantinople, which epistle was quoted by me in a former paper, inserted in your number for April, 1810. "Hinc collige errare eos, qui voJant imperatorum Phocam primum pro Gregorio magno pontifice sententiam tulisse contra Johannem patriarchum Constantinopolitanum, quum ex his verbis constet tempore Justiniani primatum summo pontifici donatum fuisse." Gravina, in his work entitled Origines Juris Civilis, has the following passage. "Cum tamen sciamus ipso Justiniano teste qui in novellis veterem Romam sacerdotii fontem appellat, Constantinopolitanum antistitem orientalibus episcopis utcunque prælatum, ipsum tamen simul cum cæteris ecclesiis, Romano paruisse." II. The following is, I believe, an accurate account of the edict of Phocas. At the very time that the emperor Justinian acknowledged the pope to be the head of the church, he, in his epistle to the patriarch of Constantinople, conferred upon that prelate the honorary title of Ecumenical Patriarch. It was some time, however, before the bishops of Constantinople ventured openly to assume the title thus conferred by Justinian; and when at length they did take it up, the circumstance gave great offence to the popes, who left no effort untried to oblige the eastern patriarchs to abandon the title. And at length pope Boniface the Third succeeded so far as to prevail upon Phocas, to compel the bishop of Constantinople to give up the obnoxious title, which was, however, afterwards resumed by the eastern patriarchs.— This seems to be the whole foundation for the opinion which has so currently obtained, of Phocas having declared the pope head of the church. The above account of the transaction between Phocas and Boniface is taken from a French work on Chronology, entitled, " L'Art de verifier les Dates," which is considered to be of the highest authority. Under the year 606, and the article Boniface III. it contains the following passage. "Boniface obtint de l'empereur Phocas ce que les papes Pelage II. et Gregoire le Grand n'avoient pu obtenir de leur tems, savoir que le patriarche de Constantinople ne prendroit plus le titre d'oecumenique.-Autres veulent que Phocas ne suivit en cela que son resentiment contre le patriarche Thomas dont il etoit mecontent.-Quoiqu'il en soit, les évêques de Constantinople reprirent dans la suite ce titre." It thus appears, that there was no grant whatever from the emperor Phocas, conferring upon the pope any new authority or title.-The pope had already been constituted head of the church by Justinian, and all that Phocas did, was to oblige the patriarchs of Constantinople to abandon, for a time, the use of a title which seemed to interfere with the ambitious views of the popes. I am indebted for the greatest part of the information now communicated to you, to a friend; and I take this opportunity of acknowledging the obligation thus conferred upon me. QUOTATIONS FROM THE OLD TESTA- (Continued from p. 286.) ji. 17. THERE is an evident reference in this verse to Isaiah Ivii. 19, but it cannot be regarded as a quotation. iv. 8. " This is not taken from the Septuagint, but probably from some other translation." (Randolph.) The principal variation is one (he gave), for exabes (thou hast received); in which the Septuagint agrees with the Hebrew. -. 26. This is taken from the Septuagint (Ps. iv. 5), where our version of the Hebrew is, "Stand in awe and sin not:" the prayer-book translation from the Vulgate is the same. Y. 31. (See on Matt. xix. 5, 6)." i. 5. Exactly from the Septuagint, which literally translates the Hebrew (2 Sam. vii. 14; 1 Chr. xvii. 13.) The same for substance is found 1 Chr. xxii. 10; xxviii. 6.For the first part of the verse, see on Acts xiii. 33. -. 6. Και προσκυνησάτωσαν αὐτῷ παντες αγγελοι Θε8.— Sept. Ps. xcvii. 7. Ipoσxuvησale auтw Tarles ayyeλo aule. "Worship him all ye his angels." Worship him all ye gods." (English translation.) The exact words here quoted are found in the Sept. Deut. xxxii. 43, but there is nothing answering to them in the Hebrew. Some other additions are made to the same verse, which are not in the Hebrew. -. 7. πυρός φλογα.—Sept. Ps. είν. 4. πυρ φλεγον. Equally according to the Hebrew. - 8, 9. Exactly from the Septuagint, (Ps. xlv. 7, 8:) except as the article Toy, and 78 is superadded in the first clause. The Septua gint well translates the Hebrew. 10. 12. This is exactly from the Septuagint, (Ps. cii. 25-27) except as the pronoun ou is placed differently. It agrees with the Hebrew, except that is, (" thou shalt fold up.") is substituted for the Hebrew word, translated "thou. shalt change." The Alexandrian ed. has anλages (" thou shalt change.") -. 13. See on Matt. xxii. 44. tion from the Septuagint (Ps. viii. 4-6;) which literally translates the Hebrew. The word, rendered the angels," is in the Hebrew gods" (Elohim.) Τ. 12. Απαγγελώ το όνομα, &c. - Sept. Ps. xxii. 22. Διηγήσομαι το Όνομα, &c. : equally giving the sense of the Hebrew. 13. Eyw εgoμaι TETOIs, &c.-Sept. Is. viii. 17, 18. Ka TETOISES ECOμal, &c. Equally according to the Hebrew. ii. 7-10. This is nearly a quotation from the Septuagint (Ps. XCV. 7—11:) εdonipaσay μs (Heb.): ἐδοκιμασαν. (Sept.) Ta sya μs τεσσαρακονία ετη. Alo πρоowxdiσα, &c. (Heb.); τα έργα με. Ter σαροκανία ετη προσώχθισα, &c. (Sept.) Either of them well translates the Hebrew. (Thus alsó 1519.1 iv. 4. This is an abridgment of the Septuagint, and of the Hebrew, (Gen. ii. 3.) -.7. (See on iii. 7—11.) v. 6. An exact quotation from the Septuagint, (Ps. cx. 4.) and equally agreeing with the Hebrew. vi. 13, 14. Θεός wusos xaf έαυτε, λέγων· Η μην ευλόγων ευλογήσω σε, και πληθύνων πληθύνω σε -Sept. Gen. xxii. 16, 17. As γων, καλ εμαυτε ωμόσα, λέγει Κύριις, Ἡ μην ευλόγων ευλογήσω σε, και πληθύνων πληθύνω το σπέρμα σε The Septuagint literally translates the Hebrew; the Apostle gives, in his own words, the general meaning of it. vii. 17. (See on v. 6.) 3.) The same variation appears repeatedly. EvleλEOW ETTI TOY DIXOY, &c. (Heb.), siadyoqual to DIR Διαθήσομαι το οικον (Sept.); Erojex (Heb.), Aiseμ (Sept.); Aides voues (Heb.), Aidus δωσω νόμες (Sept.), Επιγράψω (Heb.), Γραψω (Sept.); Πλησιον (Heb.), Πολ λιτήν (Sept.); Και των ανομιων αυτων (Heb. not in the Septuagint.) These variations do not, indeed, affect the meaning; but they seem to imply, that the Apostle did not confine himself to the Septuagint. Yet it is evident that he had that translation in his thoughts: because, where that most materially differs from the Hebrew, be exactly quotes it. The Septuagint is, almost throughout, a close translation of the Hebrew: but for the clause rendered in our version," although I was a husband unto them;" the Septuagint reads, και εγώ ήμέλησα αυτών, (" and I disregarded them;") which the Apostle adheres to. Whether the Hebrew was then read differently (as many learned men suppose), or whether he did not think the difference so material as to interrupt his argument on account of it, others must determine. The He brew has the preterite in one place, without the dau conversive, where the Septuagint has the future, which our translation has very properly followed, “ I will put, &c. Πλησιον better accords to the Hebrew, than πολίτην. viii. 5. Όσα γαρ, φησι, ποίησης παια καλα τον τύπον, τον δειχθέντα JOL EV TW Opεl. - Sept. Ex. xxv. 40. Όρα, ποιήσεις κατά τον τύπον τον δεδειγμένον σοι εν τω όρει. Either may be considered as giving a just translation of the flebrew; but the Apostle by no means appears to quote the Septuagint. 8-12. This long quotation, is, in general, made from the Septuagint; though with several verbal differences: Asye mugios (Heb.), xupios (Sept. Jer. xxxi, 31 1κ. 20. Τέτο το αίμα της διαθήκης. *ς ενετείλαίο προς ὑμᾶς ὁ Θεός.—Sept. Ex. xxiv. 8. Ίδε το αίμα της διαθήκης, της διέθετο Κύριος προς ὑμας. The Septuagint is a literal translation of the Hebrew. x. 5-7. This quotation is nearly from the Septuagint, (Ps. xl. 6-8.) -Ευδόκησας (Heb.), Αιτησας (Sept. Rom.), Eras (Sept. Alex); o Osos (Heb.), 'O sosus (Sept.) But both the Septuagint and the quotation vary from the Hebrew, in substituting, Ewa de xalyptiow μoi; instead of the clause rendered in our version, Mine ears hast thou opened." This is not the place for discussing a subject, which has |