HEBREWS. 
the Greek, in which dia$nxn admits of a twofold meaning ; 
coafequently the epiltle was written in Greek, Again, the 
Hebrew n nes Meaxiordex is interpreted, Heb. vil. 2. by the 
ek words Basirzus dixaiorvyn: +s and t e Hebrew word 
yu. by shenvny wigh interpretation oe? Bere, been fu- 
seiei if the epiftle had been written in Hebrew. More- 
over, it is faid, that if the epiltie to the Hebrews was $ written 
mean in Hebrew, it is very extraordinary that the 
ginal fo fuddenly difappeared; that no ecclefiailical 
“of it ; 
and the Ebionites, who made ufe of te tag iki re ee 0 
St. Matthew, ar are not papers, eit 
Hebrew ? It is aifo urged, shad the quotations in this epi 
Old 'Tefament are made i he Sep- 
tuagint ; and that this epiftle is more free from Hebraifms 
_ than mott other books. of the New Teftament, eile ould 
hardly gas — the sae if it had been a tranflation ef a 
Hebrew oe epiftle to the Hebrews con- 
taias man an S allegcnicat inteepretation, fuch as were in ufe 
among the Helleniit Jews, and are found in the writings of 
Philo; whereas alleadriee ‘a this kind were not adopted by 
the rabbins, who. wrote in Hebrew, ae igen language 
sing too pure to admit of them. Belfides, the quotation 
made in ch. i. 7. 6'xosv THs ayythas abte mrevpala, cannot be 
es gems are fairly 
spon by elon Lae as he has ed the other 
ee nt was written, and which Hebrew, x ch. 
written, though the Jews led j it- as the pautace of prayer, 
. both in Pal. alettine and in the Eaftern Afia; and it was under-. 
tiom quently the words quoted from 
the Jews, as Voffius thought, was at leaft underftood by 
many of them. 
ftyle of this epiftle, whiel, it is faid, cannot. be St. one 
original ; for ner of writing Greek is totally dif~ 
ferent, whether we cao the choice of fingle words, oe 
mode of connecting them, or the conftruétion and rotu 
of the per riods. Car pagvins, however, after fome see wi 
brews was written 
and to 
was able to write ag sees he ch ofe it. Pe ag las 
ena’ 
Septuagint, but would have — his own e.- 
on of the Hebrew, as other w of the New Teftansent - 
have fometimes done, elpecialig St. ag a One. example of 
this kind occurs in Heb. xi: 21. cited from 
Another inflance i is Pf. civ. 
7. | More~ 
epiftle which, as worded in the Greek, appear to be in= 
accurate; but asfoon as they y are reprefented in t the He 
we perceive that the inaccuracy is ee ms the tran 
like $e. ge: MicaQs ae. See alfo ch. i are li. 
epiille to the Hebrews was written in Gree! 
t L 
Qz 
or 
the author himfelf, it is very extr 
apter he fhould have omitted to have Sr a in Vv. te ad 
between Abel noch, the name of Enoc 
hom: language is ufed, Gees iv. Ser i is fo ebvioully 
differed figs it, omitted the nsec i 
Hebrew. _ Hebrews was written in the Hebrew ep kersfe fome of them: 
But ee oe ter. = e Sao 
: Native la on the Jews: 
Tag hat » fnot the native ‘angsoae of 
em; and- 
> maintained that it was anal eae by: Luke, orby 
Clement of Rome. Admi ks tae opinion, that it is 
a tranflation, Miloclis this thinks that it pees from a perm 
fon who was not infallible, “and who confequen tly ex 
pofed to the danger of midaking the alk of ‘aeamehie. “te 
mutt: be allowed, however, or es one who un sey cern 
rely 
vie xlvil. 31. ;. 
Of thofe ancient) ~ 
- Chriftian writers. who w&e of opinion that the epilfle to.the 
4% 
