datory, to be typical or prophetical of || to any church on earth, or any number Jesus Christ, his sufferings, atonement, of churches or of Christians, whether mediation and kingdom; and they es- decided by a majority of votes, or by teem it a gross perversion of these unanimous voices. Neither do they think psalms and prophecies to apply them to themselves authorized, as a Christian the experiences of private Christians. church, to enquire into each other's poIn proof of this, they not only urge the litical opinions, any more than to exa words of the apostle, that no prophecy mine into each other's notions of philois of any private interpretation, but they sophy. They both recommend and pracinsist that the whole of the quotations tise, as a Christian duty, submission to from the ancient prophecies in the New lawful authority; but they do not think Testament, and particularly those from that a man by becoming a Christian, or the Psalms, are expressly applied to joining their society, is under any obliChrist. In this opinion many other gation by the rules of the Gospel to reclasses of protestants agree with them.nounce his right of private judgment -5. Of the absolute all-superintending upon matters of public or private imsovereignty of the Almighty, the Be-portance. Upon all such subjects they reans entertain the highest idea, as well as of the uninterrupted exertion thereof over all his works, in heaven, earth, and hell, however unsearchable by his creatures. A God without election, they argue, or choice in all his works, is a God without existence, a mere idol, a nonentity. And to deny God's election, purpose, and express will in all his works is to make him inferior to ourselves.

As to their practice and discipline, they consider infant baptism as a divine ordinance, instituted in the room of circumcision; and think it absurd to suppose that infants, who all agree are admissible to the kingdom of God in heaven, should, nevertheless, be incapable of being admitted into his visible church on earth. They commemorate the Lord's supper generally once a month; but as the words of the institution fix no particular period, they sometimes celebrate it oftener, and sometimes at more distant periods, as it may suit their general convenience. They meet every Lord's day for the purpose of preaching, praying, and exhorting to love and good works. With regard to admission and exclusion of members, their method is very simple: when any person, after hearing the Berean doctrines, professes his belief and assurance of the truths of the Gospel, and desires to be admitted into their communion, he is cheerfully received upon his profession, whatever || may have been his former manner of life. But if such a one should afterwards draw back from his good profession or practice, they first admonish him, and, if that has no effect, they leave him to himself. They do not think that they have any power to deliver a backsliding brother to Satan; that text, and other similar passages, such as, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven," &c. they consider as restricted to the apostles, and to the inspired testimony alone, and not to be extended

allow each other to think and act as each may see it his duty; and they require nothing more of the members than a uniform and steady profession of the apostolic faith, and a suitable walk and conversation.

It is said that their doctrine has found converts in various places of Scotland, England, and America; and that they have congregations in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Paisley, Stirling, Crieff, Dundee, Arbroath, Montrose, Fettercairn, Aberdeen, and other towns in Scotland, as well as in London, and various places in England.

For farther particulars of the doctrines of this sect, see the works of Messrs. Barclay, Nicol, Brooksbank, and M'Rae. See also Mr. A. McLean's Treatise on the Commission, first edition, p. 88. in which Mr. Barclay's notion of assurance is combated.

BERENGARIANS, a denomination, in the eleventh century, which adhered to the opinions of Berengarius, who asserted that the bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are not really and essentially, but figuratively changed into the body and blood of Christ. His followers were divided in opinion as to the eucharist. Some allowed them to be changed in effect; others admitted a change in part; and others an entire change, with this restriction, that, to those who communicated unworthily, the elements were changed back again.

BERYLLIANS, so called from Beryllus, an Arabian, bishop of Bozarth, who flourished in the third century. He taught that Christ did not exist before Mary; but that a spirit issuing from God himself, and therefore superior to all human souls, as being a portion of the divine nature, was united to him at the time of his birth.

BETHLEHEMITES, a sect called also Star-bearers, because they were distinguished by a red star having five

rays, which they wore on their breast, their synagogues every sabbath day: the in memory of the star which appeared number was fifty-four, because, in their to the wise men. Several authors have intercalated years, a month being then mentioned this order, but none of them added, there were fifty-four sabbaths: have told us their origin, nor where in other years they reduced them to their convents were situated; if we ex-fifty-two, by twice joining together two cept Matthew Paris, who says that, in short sections. Till the persecution of 1257, they obtained a settlement in Antiochus Epiphanes, they read only England, which was at Cambridge, in the law; but, the reading of it being Trumpington-street. then prohibited, they substituted in the BIBLE, the name applied by Chris-room of it fifty-four sections out of the ians by way of eminence, to the col-prophets; and when the reading of the lection of sacred writings, or the holy law was restored by the Maccabees, the Scriptures of the Old and New Testa-section which was read every sabbath

ments.

people in the Chaldce language; for which purpose these shorter sections were very convenient.

out of the law served for their first les1. BIBLE, ancient Divisions and_Or- son, and the section out of the prophets der of. After the return of the Jews for their second. These sections were from the Babylonish captivity. Ezra divided into verses; of which division, collected as many copies as he could of if Ezra was not the author, it was introthe sacred writings, and out of them all duced not long after him, and seems to prepared a correct edition, arranging have been designed for the use of the the several books in their proper order. Targumists, or Chaldee interpreters; These books he divided into three parts. for after the return of the Jews from the I. The law. II. The prophets. III. The Babylonish captivity, when the Hebrew Hagiographia, i. e. the holy writings. language ceased to be their mother I. The law, contains-1, Genesis;-2, tongue, and the Chaldee grew into use Exodus;-3, Leviticus;-4, Numbers; instead of it, the custom was, that the -5, Deuteronomy. II. The writings of law should be first read in the original the prophets are-1, Joshua ;-2, Judges,|| Hebrew, and then interpreted to the with Ruth;-3, Samuel;-4, Kings; 5, Isaiah;-6, Jeremiah, with his Lamentations;-7, Ezekiel;-8, Daniel;9, The twelve minor prophets;-10, II. BIBLE, History of. It is thought Job-11, Ezra-12, Nehemiah;-13, that Ezra published the Scriptures in Esther. III. The Hagiographia consists the Chaldee character, for, that lanof-1, The Psalms;-2, The Proverbs;guage being generally used among the -3, Ecclesiastes;-4, The Song of Jews, he thought proper to change the Solomon. This division was made for old Hebrew character for it, which hath the sake of reducing the number of the since that time been retained only by sacred books to the number of the let-the Samaritans, among whom it is preters in their alphabet, which amount to twenty-two. Afterwards the Jews reckoned twenty-four books in their canon of scripture; in disposing of which the law stood as in the former division, and the prophets were distributed into former and latter: the former prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings; the latter prophets are Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve minor prophets. And the Hagiographia consists of the Psalms, the Proverbs, Job, the Song of Solomon, Ruth, the Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, the Chronicles. Under the name of Ezra they comprehend Nehemiah: this order hath not always been observed, but the variations from it are of no moment. The five books of the law are divided into forty-five sections. This division many of the Jews hold to have been appointed by Moses himself; but others, with more probability, ascribe it to Ezra. The design of this division was that one of these sections might be read in ||

served to this day. Prideaux is of opinion that Ezra made additions in several parts of the Bible, where any thing appeared necessary for illustrating, connecting, or completing the work; in which he appears to have been assisted by the same Spirit in which they were first written. Among such additions are to be reckoned the last chapter of Deuteronomy, wherein Moses seems to give an account of his own death and burial, and the succession of Joshua after him. To the same cause our learned author thinks are to be attributed many other interpolations in the Bible, which created difficulties and objections to the authenticity of the sacred text, no ways to be solved without allowing them. Ezra changed the names of several places which were grown obsolete, and, instead of them, put their new names by which they were then called in the text. Thus it is that Abraham is said to have pursued the kings who carried Lot away captive as far as Dan; whereas that

place in Moses's time was called Laish, the name Dan being unknown till the Danites, long after the death of Moses, possessed themselves of it. The Jewish canon of Scripture was then settled by Ezra, yet not so but that several variations have been made in it. Malachi, for instance, could not be put in the Bible by him, since that prophet is allowed to have lived after Ezra; nor could Nehe- || miah be there, since that book mentions (chap. xii. v. 22) Jaddua as high priest, and Darius Codomanus as king of Persia, who were at least a hundred years later than Ezra. It may be added, that, in the first book of Chronicles, the. genealogy of the sons of Zerubbabel is carried down for so many generations as must necessarily bring it to the time of Alexander; and consequently this book, or at least this part of it, could not be in the canon in Ezra's days. It is probable the two books of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, and Malachi, were adopted into the Bible in the time of Simon the Just, the last of the men of the great synagogue. The Jews, at first, were very reserved in communicating their Scriptures to strangers; despising and shunning the Gentiles, they would not disclose to them any of the treasures concealed in the Bible. We may add, that the people bordering on the Jews, as the Egyptians, Phoenicians, Arabs, &c. were not very curious to know the laws or history of a people, whom in their turn they hated and despised. Their first acquaintance with these books was not till after the several captivities of the Jews, when the singularity of the Hebrew laws and ceremonies induced several to desire a more particular knowledge of them. Josephus seems surprised to find such slight footsteps of the Scripture history interspersed in the Egyptian, Chaldean, Phoenician, and Grecian history, and accounts for it hence; that the sacred books were not as yet translated into Greek, or other languages, and consequently not known IV. BIBLE, rejected Books of The to the writers of those nations. The apocryphal books of the Old Testafirst version of the Bible was that of the ment, according to the Romanists, are Septuagint into Greek, by order of that the book of Enoch (see Jude 14,) the patron of literature, Ptolemy Philadel-third and fourth books of Esdras, the phus; though some maintain that the whole was not then translated, but only the Pentateuch; between which and the other books in the Septuagint version, the critics find a great diversity in point of style and expression, as well as of accuracy.

Langton, archbishop of Canterbury, in the reigns of John and Henry III. But the true author of the invention was Hugo de Sancto Caro, commonly called Hugo Cardinalis, because he was the first Dominican that ever was raised to the degree of cardinal. This Hugo flourished about A. D. 1240: he wrote a comment on the Scriptures, and projected the first concordance, which is that of the vulgar Latin Bible. The aim of this work being for the more easy finding out any word or passage in the Scriptures, he found it necessary to divide the book into sections, and the sections into subdivisions; for till that time the vulgar Latin Bibles were without any division at all. These sections are the chapters into which the Bible hath ever since been divided; but the subdivision of the chapters was not then into verses, as it is now. Hugo's method of subdividing them was by the letters A, B, C, D, E, F, G, placed in the margin, at an equal distance from each other, according to the length of the chapters. The subdivision of the chapters into verses, as they now stand in our Bibles, had its original from a famous Jewish Rabbi, named Mordecai Nathan, about 1445. This rabbi, in imitation of Hugo Cardinalis, drew up a concordance to the Hebrew Bible, for the use of the Jews. But though he followed Hugo in his division of the books into chapters, he refined upon his inventions as to the subdivision, and contrived that by verses: this being found to be a much more convenient method, it has been ever since followed. And thus, as the Jews borrowed the division of the books of the Holy Scriptures into chapters from the Christians, in like manner the Christians borrowed that of the chapters into verses from the Jews. The present order of the several books is almost the same (the Apocrypha excepted) as that made by the council of Trent.

III. BIBLE, modern Divisions of. The ivision of the Scriptures into chapters, as we at present have them, is of modern date. Some attribute it to Stephen

third and fourth books of Maccabees, the prayer of Manasseh, the Testament of the twelve Patriarchs, the Psalter of Solomon, and some other pieces of this nature. The apocryphal books of the New Testament are the epistle of St. Barnabas, the pretended epistle of St. Paul to the Laodiceans, several spurious Gospels, Acts of the Apostles, and Revelations; the book of Hermas, entitled the Shepherd;

Jesus Christ's letter to Abgarus; the epistles of St. Paul to Seneca, and several other pieces of the like nature; as may be seen in the collection of the apocryphal writings of the New Testament made by Fabricius. Protestants, while they agree with the Roman Catholics in rejecting all those as uncanonical, have also justly rejected the books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, and 1st and 2nd Maccabees.

5. BIBLE, Georgian. The inhabitants of Georgia, in Asia, have long had a translation of the Bible in their ancient language; but that language having now become almost obsolete, and the Georgians in general being very ignorant, few of them can either read or understand it.

6. BIBLE, Gothic It is generally said that Ulphilas, a Gothic bishop, who lived in the fourth century, made a version of the whole Bible, except the book of Kings, for the use of his countrymen; that book he omitted, because of the frequent mention of the wars therein,

military genius into that people. We have nothing remaining of this version but the four Evangelists, printed in quarto, at Dort, in 1665, from a very ancient manuscript.

7. BIBLE, Grison. A translation of the Bible into the language of the Grisons, in Italy, was completed by Coir, and published in 1720.

V. BIBLE, Translations of. We have already mentioned the first translation of the Old Testament by the LXX. (§ 2.) Both Old and New Testa-as fearing to inspire too much of the ments were afterwards translated into Latin by the primitive Christians; and while the Roman empire subsisted in Europe, the reading of the Scriptures in the Latin tongue, which was the universal language of that empire, prevailed every where; but since the face of affairs in Europe has been changed, and so many different monarchies erected upon the ruins of the Roman empire, the Latin tongue has by degrees grown into disuse; whence has arisen a necessity of translating the Bible into the respective languages of each people; and this has produced as many different versions of the Scriptures in the modern languages as there are different nations professing the Christian religion. Of the principal of these, as well as of some other ancient translations, and the earliest and most elegant printed editions, we shall now take notice in their order.

1. BIBLE, Armenian. There is a very ancient Armenian version of the whole Bible, done from the Greek of the LXX. by some of their doctors, about the time of Chrysostom. This was first printed entire, 1664, by one of their bishops at Amsterdam, in quarto, with the New Testament in octavo.

2. BIBLE, Bohemian. The Bohemians have a Bible translated by eight of their doctors, whom they had sent to the schools of Wirtemberg and Basil on purpose to study the original languages: it was printed in Moravia in

1539.

3. BIBLE, Croatian. A translation of the New Testament into the Croatian language was published by Faber Creim, and others, in 1562 and 1563.

4. BIBLE, Gælic. A few years ago, a version of the Bible in the Galic or Erse language was published at Edinburgh, where the Gospel is preached regularly in that language in two chapels, for the benefit of the natives of the Highlands.

8. BIBLE, Icelandic. The inhabitants of Iceland have a version of the Bible in their language, which was translated by Thorlak, and published in 1584.

9. BIBLE, Indian. A translation of the Bible into the North America Indian language, by Elliot, was published in quarto, at Cambridge, in 1685.

10. BIBLE, Irish. About the middle of the sixteenth century, Bedell, bishop of Kilmore, set on foot a translation of the Old Testament into the Irish language, the New Testament and the Liturgy having been before translated into that language: the bishop appointed one King to execute this work, who, not understanding the oriental languages, was obliged to translate it from the English. This work was received by Bedell, who, after having compared the Irish with the English translation, compared the latter with the Hebrew, the LXX. and the Italian version of Diodati. When it was finished, the bishop would have been himself at the charge of the impression; but his design was stopped, upon advice given to the lord lieutenant and archbishop of Canterbury, that it would seem a shameful thing for a nation to publish a Bible translated by such a despicable hand as King: however, the manuscript was not lost, for it went to press in 1685, and was afterwards published.

24.

11. BIBLE, King James's. See No.

12. BIBLE, Malabrian. In 1711,

ment.

13. BIBLE, Malayan. About 1670, Sir Robert Boyle procured a translation of the New Testament into the Malayan language, which he printed, and sent the whole impression to the East Indies.

Messrs. Ziegenbald and Grindler, two || others contend he only translated the Danish missionaries, published a trans- Gospels. We have certain books of lation of the New Testament in the parts of the Bible by several other Malabrian language, after which they translators; as, first, the Psalms, by proceeded to translate the Old Testa- Adelm, bishop of Sherburn, cotemporary with Bede, though by others this version is attributed to king Alfred, who lived two hundred years later. Another version of the Psalms, in Anglo Saxon, was published by Spelman in 1640.-2. The evangelists, still extant, done from the ancient Vulgate, before it was revised by St. Jerome, by an author unknown, and published by Matthew Parker in 1571. An old Saxon version of several books of the Bible made by Elfric, abbot of Malmesbury, several fragments of which were published by Will. Lilly, 1638; the genuine copy by Edm. Thwaites, in 1699, at Oxford.

14. BIBLE, Rhemish. See No. 23. 15. BIBLE, Samaritan. At the head of the oriental versions of the Bible must be placed the Samaritan, as being the most ancient of all (though neither its age nor author have been yet ascertained,) and admitting no more for the Holy Scripture but the five books of Moses. This translation is made from the Samaritan Hebrew text, which is a little different from the Hebrew text of the Jews: this version has never been printed alone, nor any where but in the Polyglots of London and Paris.

16. BIBLE, Swedish. In 1534, Olaus and Laurence published a Swedish Bible from the German version of Martin Luther: it was revised in 1617 by order of king Gustavus Adolphus, and was afterwards almost universally received.

18. BIBLES, Arabic. In 1516, Aug. Justinian, bishop of Nebio, printed at Genoa an Arabic version of the Psalter, with the Hebrew text and Chaldee paraphrase, adding Latin interpretations: there are also Arabic versions of the whole Scripture in the Polyglots of London and Paris; and we have an edition of the Old Testament entire, printed at Rome, in 1671, by order of the congregation de propaganda fide; but it is of little esteem, as having been

17. BIBLE, Anglo-Saxon.-If we en-altered agreeably to the Vulgate ediquire into the versions of the Bible of tion. The Arabic Bibles among us are our own country, we shall find that not the same with those used with the Adelm, bishop of Sherburn, who lived Christians in the East. Some learned in 709, made an English Saxon version men take the Arabic version of the of the Psalms; and that Edfrid, or Ec- Old Testament printed in the Polybert, bishop of Lindisferne, who lived glots to be that of Saadias's, who lived about 730, translated several of the about A. D. 900: their reason is, that books of Scripture into the same lan- || Aben Azer, a great antagonist of Saaguage. It is said, likewise, the vener- dias, quotes some passages of his verable Bede, who died in 785, translated sion, which are the same with those in the whole Bible into Saxon.-But Cuth- the Arabic version of the Polyglots; bert, Bede's disciple, in the enumera-yet others are of opinion that Saadias's tion of his master's works, speaks only version is not extant. In 1622, Erpeof his translation of the Gospel, and nius printed an Arabic Pentateuch callsays nothing of the rest of the Bible.ed also the Pentateuch of MauritaSome say that king Alfred, who lived nia, as being made by the Jews of Barabout 890, translated a great part of bary, and for their use. This version the Scriptures. We find an old ver- is very literal, and esteemed very exsion in the Anglo Saxon of several act. The four evangelists have also books of the Bible, made by Elfric, ab-been published in Arabic, with a Latin bot of Malmesbury: it was published at Oxford in 1699. There is an old Anglo Saxon version of the four Gospels, published by Matthew Parker, archbishop of Canterbury, in 1571, the author whereof is unknown. Mr. Mill observes, that this version was made from a Latin copy of the old Vulgate. The whole Scripture is said by some to have been translated into the Anglo Saxon by Bede, about 701, though

version, at Rome, in 1591, folio. These have been since reprinted in the Polyglots of London and Paris, with some little alteration of Gabriel Sionita. Erpenius published an Arabic New Testament entire, as he found it in his manuscript copy, at Leyden, 1616. There are some other Arabic versions of later date mentioned by Walton in his Prolegomena, particularly a version of the Psalms, preserved at Sion Col