[1]. The translator wishes by no means to be supposed to agree even in those opinions, which, from the manner of bringing them forward, appear to be the author’s own. The discourses of the old man of the temple with Helon, in the second volume, are evidently an anticipation of Christianity, founded upon the author’s views of the doctrines of the New Testament. Those who agree with him in these views will think it reasonable, that such anticipations of the nature and office of the Messiah should be attributed to a Jew who was piously expecting his appearance; those who do not, will perceive that the prolepsis which the author has allowed himself adds nothing to the evidence of the doctrines in question. I have passed over these parts of the work generally without remark, the only authority which could have been alleged in support of them being passages of Scripture, respecting the meaning of which the Christian world is far from being unanimous in its opinion.
[2]. See Maimonides, Preface to the Mishna, in Surenhusius, vol. i.
[3]. Basnage, Hist. of the Jews, b. iii. c. 5-7.
[4]. “Ne credant se ex Talmude multum in antiquitatibus Hebraicis profecturos. Nam ubi Judæi, post destructionem templi, inter se adhuc disputant, quomodo hæc vel illa res suscipienda fuerit, quam tuto horum decisioni credas, qui te multo quam antea incertiorem relinquunt.” Schöttgen. Hor. Heb. ii. 804.
[5]. Deut. xv. 14.
[6]. Deut. xxiii. 7.
[7]. Gen. xxvi. 2.
[8]. Gen. xli. 44.
[9]. Jer. xlii.
[10]. Deut. xii. 1-14.