dispersed, of which they once formed a part-but, which they no longer recognized. and by which they were either forgotten, or as opportunity offered, were persecuted. Under these circumstances, and considering how few persons can be acquainted with the works which have furnished our au norities, we may hope to stand excused for making a somewhat copious use of Professor Norberg's Version of the Syriac volumes which the reader may see described under the Article JOHN (disciples of), in the Dictionary, vol. i. p. 743. These people are not Christians; they never were Christians; so far, therefore, whatever testimonies they furnish are free from the imputation of "landing us in the testimony of Christians!" as Dr. Chalmers's expression is. Perhaps the reader, when he considers some parts of their evidence will wonder by what process of argument or reasoning they can avoid the demonstration which themselves furnish of the Divine Origin of Christianity; perhaps he may be somewhat embarrassed to account for their existence during the lapse of so many ages. They have seen the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem, the dispersion of the Jewish people, the sufferings of that devoted nation, the universal contempt that has attended them.-That they have not drawn the correct inference from those evident tokens of Divine displeasure, may possibly be owing to their simple apprehension of the superiority of their own persuasion. They have been fully satisfied that in adopting the practices of their fathers they were right; and have little troubled themselves to inquire farther. The case is too common to justify amazement. We ought to add, that better instruction is beyond their power. The Mahometans under whom they exist, cannot give it them. Well-informed Christian evangelists do not visit them. Yet we have Sir W. Ouseley's testimony that, "it is well known, that the Catholic missionaries have converted many of the Christians of Saint John, at Basrah." Walpole, vol. ii. p. 413.

This appears to be very likely: the reader will, however, do well to correct an error into which Sir William has fallen, who has confounded the Sabians, or ancient worshippers of the host of heaven, with these Sabeans, or "as they are often entitled, Christians of St. John." The origin of their name, as reported by themselves, will come first in the order of our extracts.

No. DCX. SABEANS FROM SABO, A NAME OF JOHN THE BAPTIST. IT is remarkable, that the Evangelist Matthew-from whom we might have expected some information on the conception and birth of John the Baptistsays not a word on the subject; but introduces him abruptly-" In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea ;"-while the Evangelist Luke relates the history at length. Matthew knew well that his (Syriac) readers possessed already as much as he could tell them: while Luke was persuaded, that the same inquisitive turn of mind, which led him to examine “all things from the very first," would be gratified by an opportunity of perusing whatever particulars could be collected, concerning a person so extraordinary as John, yet of whom the (Gentile) reader could previously know so little. He says, "There was in the days of Herod the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zachariah, of the course of Abiah, and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth :-and they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren; and they were both well stricken in years."-"The name given to John the Baptist [by the disciples of John] is Abo Sabo Zakrio, from Abo, father; Sabo to grow old together; and Zakrio, from the Hebrew, it is kept in memory [whence Zechariah, memorial of the Lord]. The reason they assign for calling him Sabo, is, because

his father in his old age had this son by his wife Aneschbat [Elizabeth], she being also in her old age." [In fact, they scruple not to say, that she was upwards of one hundred years of age.] The reader will perceive that, compared with this statement, the modest phrase of the Gospel writer is truly commendable. They inform us, farther, that "John was educated at Jerusalem;" which, indeed, he ought to have been, considering the rank and office of his father: on this our Gospels say nothing; and it has, therefore, been thought, from the austerity of his manners, that he had been brought up among the Essenes. This conjecture must now be abandoned; unless it be said, that after receiving in his father's house [compare in the article JOHN, in the Dictionary (vol. i. p. 742.), what is said by Paulinus], and at the temple, the instructions necessary for the priesthood, he had (as Josephus informs us concerning himself) associated with that sect of the Jews which seemed most congenial with his natural disposition. This was nothing uncommon at the time.

St. Matthew describes this "same John as having his raiment of camels' hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins, and his food was locusts and wild honey." He is also described as "neither eating nor drinking"—that is, at the regular and customary times of the day, as then practised among his nation. In expressions still stronger than these is couched the account that he gives of himself;-I continue" fasting when my appetite desires to eat, and thirsting when my body desires to drink. I collect (for food) the simple plants (of the desert). That I may give rest to my eyes, I look around me (that is, I deny myself sleep). My soul is heavy." This severity exceeds what we have hitherto supposed of John; ascetic as we have always thought him.

These expressions may also be taken to imply that John ate nothing that had life, as we know was the practice of some; it will follow, that the ingenious thought of supposing that insect locusts formed part of his food is erroneous, however strongly supported; and the reading of the Ebionites, in their copies of the Gospel of Matthew, or at least, their interpretation, though imputed to them as a crime, iyyxpidas [cakes] for axpídas [locusts], was correct: by "wild honey, that had the taste of manna, as a cake dipped in oil;"-they, probably, referred to the manna of the valley of Ghor, which borders the Dead Sea, east, as Mr. Burckhardt informs us [compare No. DLXI.]. Perhaps Epiphanius has misunderstood (and mis-translated) them, and they intended two things-wild honey, that is, the manna, and cakes.

It is remarkable, that in the Syriac books hitherto translated, the history of the opposition between Herod and John does not appear. Some other tracts may contain additional illustrations of the cause of Herod's enmity, and of Herodias's violence. It is proper, therefore, merely to remark here, that the disciples of John annually commemorate his decapitation, and make a public ceremony of execrating the memory of the tyrant who slew him:-" Our most excellent leader was on this day slain by command of Herod, and his cruelty-well he deserves to be consumed (by fire). O God hear us!"

No. DCXI. FORMATION OF THE SABEANS AS A SECT OR BODY. THE permanence of the sect of Sabeans, or disciples of John the Baptist, throws great light on many parts of the Gospel history. That they existed as a body, during the life of John, is clear from the Evangelists; also, that they were very numerous; that they continued associated after their master's death, might be inferred from various considerations, which are now confirmed beyond what formerly would have been deemed correct application of the laws of inference. It is likely that, had this sect been totally extinct, Josephus would have omitted the

character he gives their master (Antiq. xviii. 5.)-" Herod slew John called the Baptist-who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God; and so to come to baptism for that the washing [baptism] would be acceptable to him, so that they made use of it, not in order to the remission of some sins, but for the purification of the body supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified before hand by righteousness." Epiphanius Scholasticus [about A. D. 510.], in his Latin version of this passage, has a remarkable addition, "and to unite together in one body by Baptism"-et per Baptismum in unum coire-which seems to imply that this writer had some authority for concluding that John himself formed them into a sect. He adds, also, that John taught that "Baptism should be looked upon as a seal of all the virtues together; and, after a sort, a faithful guardian to them:" Omniumque pariter virtutum velut signaculum et custodia quædam fidelis habeatur.

When, therefore, we read (Acts xviii. 25.) of Apollos, as knowing only the baptism of John, we are not obliged to consider him as an old disciple of the Baptist; he might be not only a young man, but a young convert; and might, therefore, accept more gratefully the instructions of Aquila and Priscilla. The same may be said concerning the twelve men (chap. xix. 3.) who had been baptized with John's baptism only; some of them might be elder, and some younger. But the most considerable evidences of the continuance and prevalence of this sect are the introductions to the Epistle and the Gospel of John, the favoured disciple of Jesus, which will engage our attention in their place.

No. DCXII. ORIGIN OF JOHN'S BAPTISM.

JOHN was distinguished as the Baptist;-under this character all the points of his history are the most striking.

If it be true, that "he spent the first years of his life in his father's house, where he learned the law;" and that he was educated at Jerusalem, as his disciples affirm; it becomes a self-evident conclusion, that he was fully informed on the Baptismal ritual of the Mosaic Institutions. He well understood, for instance, the mode of purification from defilement by the dead; he knew that the patient was commanded to wash himself [or herself] thoroughly; and afterwards to receive an affusion of the water into which were mixed the ashes of the red heifer, the cause and origin of all the cleansing virtue of the sacred fluid:-this action was the proper Baptism.

Notwithstanding this, and though firmly persuaded of the Divine appointment of that ordinance, yet he pleads a commission to baptize with water only. The emblematical but efficacious ashes he omits. Well, therefore, might the priests find a difficulty in acknowledging a practice so contrary to the ritual of Moses to be "from heaven." Yet John, like Moses, preserved a distinction between the self-ablution of the recipient, and the official affusion of the administrator. The first was performed in a river, or stream: the second took place afterwards on its banks. "As the shepherd his flock, so do I put men into the Jordan," says John, "and taking up my crook, I pronounce over them the name of the Life."-Thus he had baptized thousands, and tens of thousands-but, among those who came to his Baptism, one distinguished Personage claims an undivided attention.

No. DCXIII. BAPTISM OF JESUS BY JOHN.

UNDOUBTEDLY, there was an assemblage of splendours attendant on the Baptism of Jesus Christ, which marked that event with peculiar and wonderful

effulgence and dignity.

Our own Gospels say, that-when Jesus applied for baptism, John, at first, declined the office;-that straightway when Jesus was come up out of the water, consequently, while he was in the act of being baptized, and praying, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Ghost descended, hovering like a dove, and remained on him; also, that a voice from heaven declared his advent, and pronounced his dignity. This descent of the Holy Ghost was, probably, the glorious Shechinah, or splendour peculiar to Deity. "He saw it," says Matthew, leaving somewhat uncertain by the use of the pronoun, who this he was. The Ebionites read in their copies-" The Holy Spirit of God in the form of a dove, descended and came towards him; and a voice from Heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in thee have I been well pleased; this day have I begotten thee: and immediately a great light shone round about the place. John, having seen it, saith unto him, Who art thou, Lord?... and falling down before him he said, Í pray thee, Lord, baptize thou me." This great light was so notorious as well as conspicuous, that some did not scruple to say, in their copies of the Gospels, that the river Jordan and its banks all around seemed to be on fire. But these are trifles, compared with what the Baptists report: they affirm that "when the Jordan saw the Messenger of Life approaching with John, and the great splendour which accompanied him, the water retired and left the shore dry." Nor was this all; "for the very fishes of the stream, and the birds on both its banks, burst out into song, saying, 'Blessed be thou, Messenger of Life! and blessed be the place from which thou art come! and so also, praise for ever to the distinguished place at which thou art arrived!' When John heard the voice of the fishes expressing their affection, and the songs of the birds from both banks of the stream, on the approach of the Messenger of Life with him to the river, he said to him, Thou art the Man in whose name I baptize with the baptism of Life!"

The reader will, probably, wonder by what force of fascination the people in whose books such a passage is found-(and it occurs more than once, in these homilies) should retain their enmity to Christianity. What, then, will he say, when made acquainted with their testimony to other miracles attending the power of Jesus Christ. Not to enlarge, we merely copy Norberg's Index (omitting the pages referred to), under the word JESCHU MESCHIO, that is, Jesus the Christ." He was in himself lord of the earth from which Adam was expelled, although in most lowly appearance, and clad in the nature of man-he walked on the water—he ascended to heaven by a ladder-he obscured the sun-he gave life to the deadhe manifested himself in fire-he claimed divine honours-who also, that he might be inaugurated to his worshippers, he perverted the baptism of John-under the advent of the genius Anusch, when Pilate was governor, he was executed-so also, his body was slain-his soul became the occasion of superstition." Elsewhere (vol. i. p. 56.) occurs this passage, "he was clothed with fire, also he shewed prodigies in fire. His name was Amunil (Emanuel). He called himself Jesus the Giver of Life."

Here we have a tolerable epitome of the history of Christ-and in the pages to which it is the Index, "A direct testimony to the miracles of the New Testament from the mouth of a heathen."-The very thing Dr. Chalmers could not venture to expect. True it is, these people intermix perversions with their evidence; yet enough remains to shew, that they derived these incidents from authorities satisfactory to themselves: no leader of their party, no chief intending singularity, could possibly invent-or could possibly adopt-these particulars, unless impelled by irresistible conviction of their truth. They evidently are not modern: neither are they derived from western (Greek) authorities.

We are to consider these Galileans as resident chiefly east of the Jordan; as little, or nothing, versed in the Greek language. Most of these particulars are found in the Gospel of Matthew, yet some are not; as, the ascension of Christ, which Matthew omits; and if by their reference to a ladder, they alluded to such a passage as John i. 31. that also they must have obtained from elsewhere than from Matthew. The manifestation of himself in fire, probably refers to the transfiguration of Jesus, Matt. xvii. 2.—his name Amunil, to Matt. i. 23.—his perversion of the baptism of John, to Matt. xxviii. 19. We are not aware that in the Gospel of Matthew Jesus calls himself, "the Giver of Life;" but in the sixth chapter of John the phrase occurs repeatedly. Nevertheless, it is not likely that the Syrians could be familiar with the Gospel of John (in its present form), a work published so far off as Ephesus, and written in a foreign language. And this may be said, in passing, in behalf of various sects of Syriac Christians, also, that they did not so properly reject the Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John, as they were strangers to them, because they were not Syriac compositions. However, the probability is, that there were many memoirs, or partial, or imperfect histories, of Jesus, extant in the early days of the Gospel, composed from no unworthy motives; and in more extensive circulation than we at this distance of time, and favoured as we are, with a complete history in the four Gospels, know how to allow.

No. DCXIV. ON THE TERM "GENERATION" AS USED BY

ST. MATTHEW.

THAT it is not without reason the learned have ascribed a Syriac origin to the Gospel of Matthew, has been fully proved by writers of great reputation; it certainly receives countenance from the similarity of the facts acknowledged in the Syrian books with those of the Evangelist; but there remains an argument that closely approaches a demonstration. In Nos. cc. cccxxx. the reader may see a conjecture that the term Generation is used by this writer, not to denote a natural descent, from father to son, but to express a period of time. This certainly does not resemble a mode of computation that would be adopted by an original author, writing in Greek; though we have something like it in the first book of the Iliad, where speaking of the age of Nestor, the poet says,

And Theocritus (Idyll xii.) has the phrase yeveals dinkoσinoiy," two hundred Generations," which, taking the Generation at thirty years, would make six thousand years. But these are rare instances; and merely shew that this manner of estimating time, placing also a certain estimate for an uncertain, was not unknown to the Greeks. Compare also Lycophron's Cassandra, verse 1437.]

Among the Syrians it appears to have been customary: at least, it occurs in several places in these writings, as Norberg, vol. i. p. 51, 53. also p. 95. where we read, "After the lapse of twenty-five Generations, the world was visited by water, and the sons of men by the progress of this water were exiled from the body. except Nuh, the man, and Nuraito, his wife, also Schum, Jamin, and Jafet, sons of that Nuh; who were delivered from death by water, and by whom the world was restored. From Schurbai and Scharbabil to the Generation of Nuh were fifteen Generations. . . But from Nuh and the ark until Ibrahim, who had