f ,^s-. ^iC^r-^ '( LI BRA i;/^^] DUKE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY FRIENDS OF DUKE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY GIFT OF .Fx.anJi....B.aker.. V -^ !7^ ■^' CRITICA SACRA EXAMINED. «©= ^28^ I CR.ITICA SACRA EXAMINED: .0 R AN ATTEMPT TO SHOW THAT A New Method may be found to reconcile the feemingly glaring V a- RiATioNs in Parallel Pas- sages of Scripture. a N D T li a T Such Variations, confequently, drc no Proofs of Corruptions, or Mis- takes, of Transcribers. By Mr. R A P H A E L B A P. U H. LONDON: Printed for the A U T H O R, By W. HAY; and fold at his Shop, next to the Academy of Artifts, near Exeter Exchange, Strand. MDCC LXXV. ERRATA. Page. 36.- ibid 45- 54.- 63- 69.- 99.- Line. -19. 2.— ''b')^^ "^nm^:; bi^ k: j^d nmi^ read, — - ^b•)^^ >nn3t^ bi^ i^:i i^2 -I. v'^bwn read, — u^^Db^n — 9. — For three thirty -Kb3— —6.- — laft line, fecond- -note, — •ip-)''- -10.— ly^K'J -6. — 'sy^Tsy^ ni^D 115.— 7. —pp^ 143. — laft line, — refigned 156.— 16.— riun 181.— 8.— I'^Tiin 184. — 2. — D^t:^i«n'- ibid. — 3. — INIll TND'' 191.— 18. — im.T l'7D ibid.— 2Q. — jinnn ns" -third, reigned 24. — in^tr^i^'' n*^rn in*'::^^^ rwv 8. — ^fTj- ■ ■ ■ ■- — pcrs. 200. 215, 22«. 2^8i— 16.— rb^n "^rm n^ 247 ibid.--. 18.— Dmo yii^'y - 4.^— return ■ .. — - B^'^rc ^ '_^ _ '—^ F'^'^'^ ' ' ^ PREFACE. IT Is not my intention, in the following fheecs, to maintain, by any means, that a continual miracle was performed in favour of JezviJJj tranfcribers, that no er- rors might be ever committed by them in their copies of the Old Teitament ; this being what the Jews themfelves do not pretend to ; for, on the contrary, fenfible of human frailty, they have endeavoured to ellabliih- rules in order to prevent mif- takes, not at all relying on any fuperna- tural interpoiition ; nor do I pretend to hold, that the printed Hebrczu text is abfolutely free from any the leaft error ; this would be prepofterous and infup- portable. It is unanimoufly allowed by ( ii ) the Jezvs^ that even at the eflablilhment of the Canon of the Bible, in the time of Ezra feme various readings were found; and fuch were preferred and ad- mitted in the text, which were authorifed by -the greater number of the clleemed copies; — the fame method was followed, in after times, by Jezvijh criticks, who laboured hard in com.paring and collating ancient copies, to render the text as pure and genuine as poffiblj : Therefore all that I aim at, is, to ihew that no paf- fage, or even a fingle woi'd, or letter of fcripture, fhould be deemed corrupted, nor Ihould any different reading be adopted as original, upon mere conjec- tures, or the authority of parallel paf- fages ; unlefs corroborated and fupported, by a great number of ancient copies of known and eftablifhed charad:er, and upon very mature deliberation ; — for it appears to me, that the old JewijJ} Doc* tors were ev^r very cautious in matters of this kind, carrying their fcruples fo far as to be taxed by modern criticks of great fuper- ( "i ) fuperflition. But were the matter duly coniidered, it would be found, that in- ftead of cenfure, for fuch fcrupulofity, they merited applaufe for their very lau- dable endeavours to prevent miftakes; for, otherwife, it is highly probable thzt the Sacred Books would have reached our hands in the greatefl confufion : And I apprehend, that if fuch caution was not flridly adhered to," there would foon be as many various exemplars of the Bible as there are critics. I would not be thought to believe that the learned Dr. Kennkott aims at any corrections upon flight grounds; but by feveral paffages in his Differtations, in which he attempts to invefligate the true reading of fome fuppofed corruptions, upon mere con- jectures, thofe unacquainted with the Doctor's integrity and candour, might be apt to fuppofe his approving of fucii a plan for adual corrections. It may be proper to remark, that not- withflanding all that has been faid of a z the C iv ) the blind reverence paid by the Jrjo^ to the Mafforetick notes \ it is certain that they only hold them in high repute whilft the Majfora was thought to be in its purity, quite corred: and free of errors ; but as they arc long fince convinced that many errors have crept into thefe notes through the carelefTnefs and incorre<5tnefs of tranfcrib- crs, (who did not think themfelves un- der any obligation to be careful about 5t, as about the text) ; the feveral cri- tics, have endeavoured fince to corred: the Mairora itfelf as much as was in their power, upon the authority of ancient copies, which were for ever the true ftandard for tranfcribers to be ruled by ; as may be feen by confulting the books of thofe critics, and particularly that excellent performance of K^. Menahenty Be LonzanOf called rry\n IIN where, in almofl every page, he rejeds and cor- redts the Maflbra upon the authority of ancient books. — The Mantuan Collation, or >v nnJD proceeds on the fame prin- ciple,-^— apd the jejus are fo far froni per- C V ) mltting the alteration of ancient books, on the authority of the Majfora, that the greatcil Rabbins among them de- clare it to.be facrileglous, and pronounce the greateft Anathema againft fo doing. Fide R. Mofes Barnabman in his notes on Trad. Baha Batra, Sed:. ]''t^n"):3 t^** fol. 58, 3d column, and Rabenu Tarn in his n'k^*>n "^30 R. Jacob H(jjgz, in his riDJD n'^li:)?! in the name of many great Rab- bins ; — and the author of the book Ddod *l^''?^^;^ ; ^o that the charge laid on the Jews of having corredcd the ancient books, upon the Maffhra is either groundlefs, or if done by fome, was through ignorance, and not with the national concurrence. In Ihort, from the refult of the annotations of thofe critics who took indefatigable pains to corred the Mafora, upon the authority of ancient copies, a very accurate ex- emplar has been eilabliflied to ferve as a ftandard or criterion to tranfcribers, which is called DHSID ppD ; the idea they mean to convey by this name being, literally, :be Jlandard for Jlribes. But, notwith-. flanding VI iianding all their extraordinary labour and refearches, we find that thofe paflages which of late are fet forth as plain corruptions, were ever found to Hand fo in the moft ancient copies, that fell under the infpeftion of thofe judicious critics ; and can be demon- llratively proved, that it flood fo for up- wards of 1500 years. However, if fuch palTages cannot be corrected by proper aur thority of other ancient copies, we ihould endeavour to reconcile or explain them, by fludying, with great attention, the genius of the Hebrew language. But I humbly conceive, that we cannot, by all our criti- eifms and conjedtures, even aflifled by ancient verfions, attempt any thing fur- ther than a mere comment; for to rely barely upon fuch authority to corre^ft the Hebrew text, is deemed by the befl cri- tics, to be not only precarious, but very dangerous, as it is very probable that many phrafes may have been ufed by thofe tranfcribers by way of paraphrafes, without having different readings ; — or the tranfcribers of fuch verfions may have changed ( vii ) changed fome phrafes for others, which they deemed conducive to render fuch paf. fagcs more intelligible. It mull be confefTed that, if the great work of the learned Dodor Kennkott difcovers fome valuable readings, of fuf- ficient authority to be relied on ; the world in general muft be exceedingly obliged to him; and, at all events, his attempt merits the greateft commenda- tion, having fpared neither pains nor ex- pence in making fuch vaft collations, to furniHi the world with an inellimable colledion of all that treafure, that could be gathered from fuch a prodigious number of manufcripts, which muil certainly be acknowledged a very ufeful undertaking. However, I venture on the prefent pub- lication, not without the flattering idea, that fomething new and flriking may be found in this performance to fatisfy the reader's curiofity. I beg leave to rev commend, to fuch critics as would enter deeply ( viii 5 deeply into the merits of the matters in qucftion, to read in their Bibles the parallel palTages of each collation, previous to their examination of my remarks thereon ; fince, to avoid fvvelling this tract to a large fize, I have oilly tranfcribcd from fcrip- ture the moft material parts which I at- tempt to reconcile ; but a review of the whole context will greatly tend to form a right judgement of the difficulties that occur, and the folutions humbly pro- pofed* I have only to add^ that, fenfible of my deficiency in the Englilli language, thou eh enamoured with it's copioufnefs and energy, I entreat for that indulgence which a foreigner may claim from Bri* tifli candour and generofity. — I have cor- rected, in the Errata^ many typographi- cal miftakes ; others, I d^:aibt not, have efcaped me, which the judicious obferver will pleafe to redify* CRITIC A CRITICA SACRA EXAMINED. ^%'<. H E prevailing tafle of the p-^ rj.^% learned of the prefcnt age, 1^"^ k.3r fccnis to be that of Scripture '^^c^ Criticifm. This tafle, though indeed a laudable one, has led them, ftep after ftep, to perfuadc themfelves of there being numberlefs corruptions in the He» brew Text ; till, at laft, it has made them affume the character of rcdifiers, and cor- re<5i:ors of thofc pretended corruptions, occafioned, as they imagined, by the inaccuracy and miftakcs of Tranfcribcrs. Many and very judicious plans have been propofed by thefe learned men, to find out thofe corruptions; and many ingenious methods have been devifed towards reftoring the true reading to its primitive flate. I do not pretend, in the following llicets, to enter into the great queftion, Whether or not A the- ( a ) the Hebrew Text has reached our hands in it's primitive purity ? I am fenlible that the generality of men of letters are ftrong- ly of opinion that it has not ; nay, it is almoft univerfally held, that many cor- ruptions have been introduced by the neg- ligence and carelefsnefs of Jewiih Tranf- cribers. But be this as it may, ifappears very flrange to me, that any perfon of ikill and erudition Ihould take upon himfelf to correct fuch imagined or real corruptions in Scripture, let him be aflilled by whatever authority he may, except that of ancient Manlifcripts of approved reputation : For he ought to conlider that, perhaps, by fo doing, he may really create a corrup- tion in a found and wholefome limb. Critics ihould be very cautious, in at- tempting to corredt one pafTage on the mere authority of a parallel one in ano- ther book; fuch a rule would entirely fruftrate the elucidation, that the author of fuch repetition might have in view by an intentional alteration of his own; for there is no relying upon human Judge- ment in things written by Divine infpi- ration ; And even granting that there were real ( 3 ) real corruptions, none but an infplred per- fon, and of a degree of infpiration flill higher than the writer himfelf, could with propriety be intitled to undertake a work of this nature and weight by his fole au- thority. It is thought by fome *, that the Book of Chronicles is perhaps themoft cor- rupted book, as well as the lateft in the GUI Teftament : yet it is by them held in high efteem, becaufe it frequently fettles the true reading, in books which are more an- cient and more important. The author of Critica Sacra recommends, as a means to difcover and corredt many errours in the Hebrew Text, -j- " To compare together *^ th^e fcveral correfpondent paffages of ^^ Scripture — noting their difference; — ^^ and then to adopt thofe particular read- '^ ings which beil agree with the tenour cf " the context, and the rules of grammar." And the fame author further fays, That if " thefe parallel § places werecarefully con- *^ fulted, and compared together, the " judicious Reader might eafily colledt fuch an ample ftore of Hebrew Criticifms * Dr. Kennicott's DilTcrtation, Page 79. t Page 6. § Page 7. 2 A ^^ as 1i€ ( 4 ) *^ as would- not only do honour to his parts *^ and learning, but alfo prove of infinite " fervice to the caufe of religion; by cor- '' icdting the errours, and fupplying the '^ defcdts of the prefent text, making '^ one part fubfervient to the redtification " and improvement of another.'* And to this purpofe, the fame author points out, under feveral heads, thofe parallel paflages of Scripture, found to differ with one another; all which, indeed, feems to afcertain the current opinion of the cor- ruption of the old Teftament. But whatever the prevailing opinion of thefe learned men may be, w^hom, with great deference, I refpedl; I hope it will not be difagreeable to the Learned in general, if I lay before them my humble opinion on thofe parallel paffages, together with the fyftem which feems to me the moil reafonable, ^or the reconciliation of all thofe feemingly glaring variations, which are found by collating of correfponding paffages, and which are the caufc of all thefe fuggeftions, I propofe confining myfelf to thofe colla- tions ( 5 ) jtions which relate to the Book of Chronkhs only, as pointed out by the author of the Critica Sacra ; and I flatter myfelf, that if my remarks are not entirely approved of by the Publick, they may at lead contain fuch hints as rnay Ihew fufficient caufe to thofe refpedtable Critics, not to be fo pofitive in pronouncing fome of the paffages in queftion abfolutely corrupted; or, at leaft> will make them a little mofe cautious in their propofed corredlions. It is neceffary for me here to mention, thatfince the time the excellent DilTertations on the ftate of the printed Hebrew Text, by the learned and indefatigable Dr. Kenni- coty came to my hands, I made it my particular bufinefs, (as I then enjoyed fomc ieifure), to collate the whole of the Book of Chronicles, with all the parallel paffagci in the other Books of Scripture; and have itudied that book with great care and affiduity, as far as my fmall abilities could reach, and I hope to have difcovercd fome IJghts, which may merit attention. A few able and candid friends encourage I mc ( 6 ) me thereto. But, upon the whole, I un- luckily differ in opinion in many very ma- terial points with the above mentioned Jcarned man. However, as that perform- ance is not a Ihort one, I do not fuppofc it will ever fee the light. But when, lately, the above Critica Sacra fell into my hands, the author of which has taken vaft pains in pointing out almoft all the parallel dif- agreeing palTages throughout the old Tef- tament, * recommending to thofe who are happily endowed with more leifure, to note the variations that occur in thofe paf- fages, in order to difcover and redify the miilakes ; I could not help extrading out of my faid work whatever could ferve to reconcile thofe feeming variations ; and, fuch as my obfervations are^ I humbly lay them before the Public. Whoever was the Author of the book of Chronicles, whether Ezra or any other; no matter who ; he certainly was an infpi- red and learned man ; and it w^ill, I hope, be readily granted, that he wrote it at or Page 10* near ( 7 ) hear the time that the Sacred Books weri colledted, and their Canon eilabliihed* One of the naany reafons that might have induced this infpired man to write this Book might, in my humble opinion, be-, to throw light on thofe paflages which he purpofely copied out of the other books ; and, by altering^ or adding fome phrafes, meant only to explain fuch dark pafTages, or to refolve a difficulty which flared in the face of the Reader, in thofe very ancient ac- counts, as they flood recorded.''^ The Author of Chronicles chiefly meant to record fome fadls, or things left out in former accounts^ and likewife to fupply fome de» ficiency, or even to introduce a different account of fome circumflance in hiflory^ as he found it regiflered in fome other authentick record, not quite agreeing with that recorded in thofe ancient books. For indeed it mufl be confefTed, that, before the Babylonian Captivity, they were very much negleded by the Jews; and the hard- * Something much to this purpofe was hinted by the learned Dr. Bayley, in the Appendix of his new Hebrew Grammar. fliips ( 8 ) fliips ind calamities, to which they wer^ cxpofed during that period, was very; unfavourable to preferve the purity of ancient writings. This infpired man chofc rather this method of repeating with fome variations what had been fo recorded^ than to take upon himfelf to alter the Ori- ginals ; hot having, in thefc points, fufEcient authority from antient copies. Indeed, after a very accurate and mature obfervation, it will be found, that the order in which he places the fadts, and even in the addition of a iingle Letter in a Word, or the ufing a fynonimous phrafe ; there is great meaning, and ? tendency to anfwer fome good purpofe. That this was his fcheme^ will appear by the feveral remarks which will be made in the collation of the following Paflages : Befides, it is but reafonable to think fo; for, otherwife, what inducement Could he have to feled: a few paflages only but of the oldeft Book, and copy the fame without any apparent material difference ? Suppofing then this to be his plan, we will proceed to examine the glaring variations which appear by the Collation of the paf- feges. ( 9 ) fages, one with another : I fay the glaring variations; becaufe it would exceed the bounds of what I at prefent propofe to my- felf, to take minute notice of trifling va- riations, and to account properly for them ; fuch a Tafk is not the objedl of my pre- fent enquiry. The firft Collation, pointed out by the Author of the Critica Sacra, in the Second Sedtion, under the dafs of Genealogical Regiprs, is. Gen. V. 3. — 32. with i Chron. i. i. — 4, I muft confefs, that I cannot com- prehend what miftake this Collation may lead to difcover ; for the names re, giftered in both places agree exadily with one another ; except it be meant to fill up the paiTage in Chronicles, with an account of their refpedtive ages, and at what age each Patriarch begat his fucceffor; cir- cumftances not deferving a repetition, be- ing very immaterial, and would have ren- dered one of the two accounts quite fuper- B fluous; ( 10 ) fluous; whereas the intention of the author of Chronicles was, probably, only to af- certain the account of the creation, rela- ting a regular genealogy from Adam, and ihewing that the generality of the nations at his timeowned their origin, as it is recorded in Genefis. In this view, it anfweredhis pur- pofe to give only a fummary account of the ^ucceflion of the Antediluvians till Noahy by whom the earth was repeopled : And having mentioned the origin of the nations, that fprung from Noahy he proceeds to give a fummary account of Shem's defcendants, down to Abraham y the Patriarch of the JeWy and many other nations. In fhort, in the whole of the three firfl Collations, I do not find any material difference, only that of fome Letter added or dropped in fame of the names, which cannot be an objedt of critical correction, particularly as the Author of Chronicles may have thought proper to mention thofe nations, by the names under which they were known in his time. COLLATION ( " ) COLLATION IV. Gen. X. 22. — 29. with 2 Chron.'i. 11. — 23. I SHALL take no notice of the fmall variations in the Names; becaufe, as I have faid, they are, perhaps, ex- prelTed as they were then pronounced. * But there is befides, in this pafTage, a more material variation, for (/z, Hul, Gethevy and Mafi, which are mentioned in Genefts as children of ^r^w, Shem's fon; the Book of Chronicles mentions them together, with the others, as Shem's own children. But I judge the reafon to be, that the author of Chronicles mentions the origin of the na- tions that iflued from SI:em, therefore attri- butes all thofe nations to Shem^ as their original fource : But Genejis is more expli- cit, giving alfo the Genealogy of Sbem*s own children as a particular family. The Author of Chronicles follows the fame me- thod in the line of Arphaxad, one of Shc/n^ children, becaufe Abraham iflued from * See Cr'itica Sacra, p. II. and the proof which he prp- ,duces ivojnihe Arabic k Copy is not of great weight, be«» caufc it is probable the Trannator made it to conform YfiihGencfs, by way of paraphrafc, B 7. him I ( 12 ) him; and therefore, takes particular no- tice of the defcendants, the better to af- certain his line : The objedts in view of the two facred writers, being different; the feeming variations may be eafily ac- counted for. In Genefts we have the origin of all the nations that peopled the world^ from the beginning; but the author of Chro^ nicies meant to give us, only, the origin of the nations at his time exifling. COLLATION V. Gen. xi .22. 2--g. with i* Chron.i. 24,-27^ THERE is no difference in this paf- fage, being of the fame kind as the firfl, to which I refer the reader. COLLATION VI. Gen. XXV. 2,«-^4. with i Chron. i. 32>— 33, ALL the difference which can be foun4 iti the Collation of this paffage, is, that Ihe ( 13 ) the Book of Chronicles ftiles Keturahy Ahra^ ham\ concubine, when, in GenefiSy Ihe is Itiled a wife. Now, very far from thinking this a va- riation, I look upon it to be an explana- tion of a dark ambiguous paiTage, calcu- lated to refolve a difficulty that would otherwife flare in the reader's face in Ge/tejis; for, if this woman, Keturah, was really Abraham^s wife, the children he begat by her had as much right to be called his lawful children as Ifaac ; becaufe, they were alfo born in wedlock. How then doeS Abraham, or the Scripture, call them the children of the * concubines, when he fends them away with gifts, that Ifaac alone might be his fole heir ? We find no account of Abrahams having knpwn any other wo- man than his wife Sarah, except Agar and Keturah; nor is it known that he had any other children befides Ifaac and Ifhmael, except thofe attributed in this pafTage to f^eturah. For, a little time before his ber * Gen. XXV, ver. 5. 6. getting ( 14 ) getting of IJhmael by Agar^ Abraham ex- prefsly fays, that * as God had given him no feed, his own fervant Eliezer would in- herit him, upon which the Lord promifed him, that he Ihould have a numerous offspring; and after he begat IJhmael^ when again God promifed him a child by Sarah y he prays for IJhmael*s life, -f- as if he was fatisfied with him alone, thinking it fcarce poffible to have any more. After Sarah's death, he takes Keturah ; and im- mediately after it is mentioned, that the concubine's children are fent away with gifts, making Ifaac his fole and general heir. It is then evident, that when the Scripture fays the Sons of the Concubines, the fons of ^^^r and [Keturah rnuft be meant; and it will thence follow that Keturah was not Abraham's wife, but his concubine. The true meaning therefore of DH^lHi^ ^V^^ % nn*)rop r]12m nt^K np''") (tranllated "then *'' again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah '") is not a lawful 4C * Gen. IS. Z- f Gen. 17. 18. \ Gen. IS- 1° wife. ( 15 ) Wife, but a Concubine; n::^2< a woman taken for cohabitation, becaufe when the noun n^N has not apronoun annexed, ora prefixed Lamed in the Sentence that ihows polTeflion ; as >:3ab n;:^K DT^pb^ * " and take a wife unto " my fon &c." yn^D n^i^ IDi* ^b npni t Dn:iD " and his mother took him a wife *' out of the land of Egypt." nr\b M^^^) § nvaXID W^m " and they took them wives of *^ the women'of Moab," and many other in- ftances ; or if the noun r^wi^ be not repeated in the fame fentence with an affix of relation to the perfon that took her, calling her "jn^K his wife or '^nwi^ thy wife ; it is not to be conftrued in the fenfe of a wife, but only as a woman taken for a Concubine. All which is cleared up by the Author of Chronicles, by only altering the word n^i^ into that of It may perhaps be urged that if IJhmael was a concubine's fon, how came he to be mentioned in Scripture together with Ifaac^ * Gen. xxiv. 4, t Gen. xxi. %i, § Ruth, I. 4. both ( I« ) * both as Abraham's Children, and as if both had an equal title to him ; when, by what has been faid, it appears, that Abra- ham difowned all the Concubine's chil- dren, including IJlomael amongfl them? To explain this point it fhould be obfer- ved, that, in former times, when either a man or a woman was anxious for having children, either becaufe they had none, or becaufe they wanted to encreafe the number, the cuftom was to acquire fome* by way of adoption; but in a different manner than that ufed by the Romans. For if the wife wanted children, fhe ufed to give her own woman-flave to her hulband, with this condition, that the offspring fhould be looked upon as if ilTued from the wife herfelf; and in this manner, Sarahy Rachel, and Leahy gave their maids to their hufbands, and the children ifTuing from fuch inter- courfe were to be looked upon as their own. And if the man wanted male chil- dren, having a daughter, the cuflom was to marry her, flipulating with her hulband, * Gen. XXV. 9. that ( ^1 ) that tlie children fhould be named after the wife's family. Thus * Machir, Jofeph\ grandfon, gave his daughter to Hetzron^ fon of Terez^ the fon of Judah, and got jSeguby who begat T^ahir^ who is faid to iave been the Proprietor of Twenty- three cities in the -j- country of Gilead, and Chronicles calls them all, the children of Mach'ir, the father of G'llead-, though we fee this very Tahlr^ the own'^r of thofe cities in G'llead, is called by Mofes % Ta * hlr the fon of Manajfeb, and goes after that Tribe, although his Grandfather was of that of Judah, In this very manner § Shejloari^ of the Tribe of Judah ^ gives his daughter to an Egyptian flave, and all the offspring are called his own. 7/Zv;;j^/ therefore, though Agdr^ fon, is to be confidered as Sarah's property, according to her agreement, n:a?D T\^2\^ 'b^'i^ '^n'n^v b^ KJ^a ** '' I " pray *' thee go Unto my maid ; it may be that I *' may obtain childrenby her; " and confe- quently had a title to rank in honour as * I Chroiii li. 2t. f I Chron. 22. 23. \ Num. 3a. 41. § I Chron. ii. t,^, ** Gen. xvi. %, C Ahraham^i ( i8 ) Ahraham^s fon, together with i/2?jc, although he had not a title to his inheritance, be- caufe Abraham had a right to give his fub- llance to whomever he pleafed. Not fo the reft of the children, who were not begotten in wedlock, or under the fanc- tion of Sarah, the lawful wife. COLLATION VIL Gen. XXV. 13 — 16. with i Chro. 1. 29—31. THERE is no material variation t^ be obfer.ved in this paffage. COLLATION VIIL Gen. xxxvi. lo*— 14. with i Chro.i.35 — 37, THIS PaiTage affords a very material difference; for, in Genefts, we find V^D/> Timna was a concubine to EllphaZy by whom he begat pbf2}^ Amalek ; and Chro- nicles does not mention any thing of this concubine^ ( 19 ) concubine, but records . one ^^:2n Timna, as one of Eliphaz's children. To clear up thefe difcordant pafTages, we muft make another obfervation in that Chapter of Genefis. After having mentioned the children which both Efau and Eliphaz begat by their refpedtive wives, they are again named with the titu- lar epithets of ^'bi^ Duke; and there we find, that although by the firft account Eliphaz has only fix children, namely Tenia riy Omar, Zepbo, Gatam, Kemz, and Amalek ; in the titled roll fcven are men- tioned, Teman, Zephoy Omar, Kenaz, Korah^ Gatam, and Amalek ; but we no where find Eliphaz to have had a fon called Ko-^ rahy though we fee one of this name among the children of his Father Efauy which he begat by AhoUbamah his wife^ and is again mentioned with the title of 5)1^i^ Duke, verfe xviii, among the reft 0£ Efau\ children, as it is alfo in the fame place in Chronicles, Now it is certain that Eliphaz, even by the account in GenefiSy according to the titled R.0II, had feven children, agreeable to Chronicles; all th^ C z differeuc^ ( 20 ) difference being, that, in Chronicles, one is mentioned bythfename of Timna, ^^Dn, and in Genefis, b)'' that of Korab Tl')p in the titled Roll only. Here perhaps the Critick will readily conclude that both places arc abfolutely corrupted, and will think him-» felf amply authorifed to redtify, without any further inveftigation, this feeming cor- ruption; but for all that, in my humble opinion, both places piaybe reconciled : For we may fuppofe, that Elrphaz might have had a concubine, and a fon, both called by the name of y^DJl Titnna; and the name Vy0Pi"\ at the beginning of verfe xii. jufl after the names of the preceding children of EUphaZy ftands there to two purpofes ; I niean as if it was * doubly inferred, and as * Inflances of a word fingly inferted, ■which ferves as doubly expreiTed, are many. Deut. xxxiii. 6. ''^I^*') ^pj^ ^DDD VH/S \ ''H ilT:!^' ^KlThis verfe literaUy tranflated is, *' Let Reuben live, aud not die; and let his men be *' few," which would be a curfe, inftead of a blefling: but the word . ''' is to be looked upon, although fing- gly, as if doubly inferted; as if the reading was 'H^ *nDDDVAlC\-i^^N1 mO^Sf^l tniJ^n therefore the Tran 'Motors have ntrhtly rendered it, *< Let li((fhrt «' live andrijt diCj and let not his men be few." H i 1 ( ^I ) if the reading was nD\^ p^n TS^'PK '>n Vn^l t^:)b"'3 nn-'H ^jiT^ni : v::2r)^ r:p"i Dni^:>i is:^ T3''^x'? ^ ^And the fons of Elipkaz (xi.) were, Teman, Omar, Zepbo, and Gatam, ^^ and ir^;/J2; and 57;;/;/^ ; (xii.) and Timna '^ was concubine to Elifhaz/' &;c. And perhaps, for this reafon, there are Two mufical points on this word );2i2r\ the one called pD3 Fafecky which is a flop; prov. XXX. 3. nv^i nD::n ^n^i.t^S Kb> y^N CD* tt^lliV literally, " I have not learned wifdom •* and knowledge of the Holy, I know;" which cannot be, for the preceding verfe fays, *' Surely I am more brutifli '■:- than any man, and have not the underftanding of a *' man;" but the word JS7V^ ^^ ^^ looked upon as if doubly inferted, as if the reading was '^"10^ N^ J^IK nS tjWr\p nni PiDDH properly ren- dered by the tranflators, " I neither learned wifdon»» *' nor have the knov.-Jedge of the Holy." I C^r.«. ix. 42. nny» n>? n^^^n triKI » Andi^/;^r *' begat Jarahy This Ahaz fliould have been mentioned with the reft oi M'lchas children, who are recorded in the preceding verfe, as he was in Chap. viii. ver. 2)5' 36. but is to be looked upon as if doubly infertejl- The fame may be obferved in chap. viii. ver. ZZ- d "1^ ^^^ the fa- ther of KIJ}) \l^^T^ not mentioned among the others of Clleon's children, although one of them ; and in almofl all the Genealogies, fome perfon is mentioned after a lift of names, without expreffing w^hofe fon he was, becaufe that name ought to be looked upon as doubly inferted, illid 2^ if mentioned among the others. ( " ) and the other Shophar olech, which denotes a continuance without a flop ; the firft is to warn the reader, that this name belongs to the preceding fet ; and the fecond to hint, that it alfo belongs to the following fentence ; the name ^imna being a man's name, as well as a woman's; for we find * J?:iDin ^^bi^ Duke T'imna^ — and in. the fame Chapter f J?:?Dj-1 ]i^)b r)^m^ " and ** Lotan^s filler was Timnay" It now remains to give fome account, for the variation of the name in Genefis itfelf; for calling him at one time ^^^'OD "Timna, and at another Korahy mp; and why the author of Chronicles, records him rather by the name of )jyor\ Timna. As for the difference of names in general, and why a perfon is called in Scripture, by feveral names ; we may obferve, that the antients ufed to give names to their children, in order to record fome accident, or any other circumflance they wanted to commemorate ; but that name was very often altered, if any change happened in the accident firft intended to be recorded. Befides this, they had another method; namely, that the * Gen. xnvi, 40. \ Ibid Verfc %%* chief C n ) chief intention of a name^ was to preferve the Idea, or meaning affixed to it; and it was not material to retain flridtly the original name, provided any other fubilituted in its place conveyed the fame idea. For inftance, the names of Two of the children of* David are called );'QV'hi^ ElijJmma and VT^K Ell- cda\ and when recorded a fecond time by the fame \ author, are called ^V^''^i^ EUJIouMy and yn>'?;^ni Beeliada ; which names, although different ^words, convey neverthelefs, the fame fenfe, and the fame idea; thus BaihJJoehah i?nt^ nn David's wife, IS called in Samuel |* DV^bi^ J13 V^l^ J^3 " Bathjheba the daughter of Eliam;^ and in Chronicles y § ^K'DJ? TO V'^V J1S Bath- Jl^ua, the daughter of Am leL'' Thefe different refpedtive names of the father and daughter convey one and the fame idea. -^* Likewifc r\^2 ID^^ Ifo-boJJoety Saul's fon and fuccef- for, is called *** by^U^ii EJJj-baal; be- caufe the word rw:^, and bvi are fynoni- mous : the Idol being called rW2 in Jere- * 1 Chron. lii. 6. 8. " f I Chron. xiv. J. 7. I I Sam. xi. 3. § I Chron. iii. 5. ** See the agreement of thefe names io that of David** fons. ^* I Chron. viii. 33, miah ( 24 ) ** the 7^/ hath devoured the labour of our <^ fathers." and^n^K Vn Tlii; nSDD >3 t jTirrntD DJiDi:^ D'-^tt^n*' jtujih ibddi niirp !?:ir:ib nrop"? ninnriD n^D^b; " for according to *^ the number of thy cities were thy Gods> *^ O Judah; ^tnd according to the number *^ of the ftreets of Jerufalem have ye fet up ** altars for the Idol, even altars to burn «' incenfe unto Baal '' mps bvi "l^^l HDH j TW::h T\'^y'^ " they v^^ent into Baal ^^ Peor, and dedicated themfelves to the *^ Idol" and though the tranflators have rendered the word n^2 in all thefe palTages in the fenfe of Jhame, the context will fufficiently prove the meaning of this word to be, an idol: upon this principle we can account for many double names, as far as what remains of the Hebrew language will enable us to judge* But there ate many others for which we cannot account, be- caufe we cannot difcover their true etymology ^nd proper fignification, fo as to dcmonflrate that both names convey the fame idea; owing to the irreparable lofs of great * Jer. iii. %/[, | Ibid xi. 13. | Hofea. ix. 10. part ^fl part of the Hebrew language : It i^ more than probable, that originally the names of ^yon and rrip had one and the fame fignification, particularly as the word ijLo v:,»2 in the Arabuk Language, means fometimes a deiart country, a place bereft of any vegetable produdtion; and rn\i means in Hebrew a bald heady where fio hair grows; the verb yy^ itfelf in Hebrew means to deprive, to bereave ; and a bald-headed-man is one deprived of hair* The author of Chronicles chofe rather to ufe the name of y^DD to throw light on the verfe of Genejis^ where this very name 13 mentioned in an ambiguous manner, not clearly to be under ftood for one of Eli' phaz's children ; and, by this means, the reader may reconcile the feeming difference between the two Lifts, or Rolls, in the account given of them in the above chapter of Genejis, COLLATION IX. Gen.xxxvi.20 — 28* with I Chro, i.38— r42* COLLATION X, Gcn.xxxvi.3i-^39.withiChro.i.43.— 50* P COLLATION ( iS ) COLLATION XL Gen.xxxvi. 40 — 41 .with i Chro.i. 51 — 54, N O alterations worthy of notice. In any of thefe Three Collations. COLLATION XIL aSam.xxii.8* — 39*withiChro*xi. 10 — ^41. THIS whole Collation relating to D^wVs mighty men, was veryjudicioufly analized by the celebrated Dr. Kennicott^ in his Firfl DifTertation. It is not my prefent bufi- ncfs to controvert the notions advanced by that learned man; I here intend to confine myfelf, in accounting only for thofe vari- ations which feem material, and worthy of notice, in the befl manner I am able. Therefore I fhall only treat of fuch vari- ations, and lay before the learned my opinion thereon, fubmiting the whole to their better judgement. The Doftor endeavours to rcfolve this grand queftion in Samuel; at the end of the lift of David's mighty men, it ( 27 ) jt is exprcflly faid that there were thlrt}'-reven in all ; whereas, when we reckon them by their names, we find only thirty-fix? The Doctor is of opinion, that Joab^ the General, i? the firft of the mighty men, and ought to be confider>ed as one of the number, though not mentioned in the lift, becaufe he has been very often mentioned throughout Z)jz;/Ws hiftory. But I mufl beg leave to differ with him in this, ^s unhappily I muft in many other points. How far an opinion from fo rcfpedtable an Author may go in the folution of the pre- fent queftion, the learned are better able to judge ; but, in my humble conception, there is another method to clear up this difficulty, far more preferable, particularly as it ferves, at the lame time, to eniight-en a very dark palTage, in which Commenta- tors have been greatly perplexed. I have already obfcrvcd, * that by due attention it would be found, that the peculiar order in which the Book of Chronicles places the fadts therein recorded, conveys much • Page. 8. D 2 jTieaning ( 28 ) jticaning, and anfwers fome important purpofe. Let it be now remarked, that the Author of Chronicles inferts the lift of the mighty men, at the acceffion of King David to the throne ; vvhiift the Author of Samuely does it almoft at the end of his reign, when the nation enjoyed peace and tranquility^ Hence it may be reafonably concluded, that the refpective infpired Authors of thofe Books had different objedts in view, when they penned this palTage* The Author of Samuel feats David on the Throne, without recording the merit of the famous men that took up arms, and flood by him, affifting him on that occafion; nor is the leaft hint given by that Author, pf the eftablilhment of that noble College of Heroes, three being of the higheft rank, and thirty lefs eminent, tho' famous, which were certainly formed by degrees; and, by the concurrence of feveral circumftances, ^t the beginning of his Reign. Therefore the Author of Chronicles thought proper to fupply that defed, by introducing them in the tenth verfe, Dnin:in ^U^i^l r^b^^ < ^9 ) <* are the Chief of the mighty men, whom *^ David had, who flrengthened thcmfelves *^ with him in his kingdom, and with all *^ Ifrael, to make him King, according to *^ the word of the Lord concerning Ifrael." This introducftory verfe plainly exprefles, that his view was to record the chief mighty men who Hood by David to place him on the Throne ; and this will further ap- pear, if we obferve, that at the end of the lift (in which there are many more than thirty-fix, who it feems came to aflift him after SauVs death) he proceeds to * men- tion many others, who came to his afliftance^ «ven before Saul's death. The engage* ment of thefe mighty men, in David*% fervice, was at firft, with the fole intention of fetting him on the Throne ; and this being accompliihed, they had no further obligation to bear arms. But, as notwith- ftanding this, many of them (who were found at laft to be thirty-feven) continued ia David's fervice during life; thefc mighty p:hta C 30 ) men, by their exploits and fignal ferviceg- in the Army, acquired fingular fame, an honourable pre-eminence, and a right to be named firfl in rank, even by the Author of CbronideSy who records their names at a time that the grand diflinction was not as yet eflablifhed; therefore they are introdu- J:iyn'):ny Nin >'':;'hvr\mEngliJ]j/' Thefeare " the names of the mighty men th^Li David " had (that is, that he kept ccnitantly in hi^ ^* lervice) ; he that fits in the feat of the " Tacbmonile, (that is, Jajboheam the " Hachmonlie) who was chief of the Trium- " virate, or the feries of Three; he isAdino *^ the Eznitey' &c. I take this Adino to be the very fame Ad'ina the fon of Shiza^ mentioned with fuch great * honour that he was U'vbv ybv^ ^^niKn*? ^tk'l " the chief of " the ReubeniteSy and had thirty under his *' command ;" who was not at firfl of any college of the mighty men^ becaufe he quitted David^s fervice after his acceflion to the Throne, as many others did beiides him; .ney,having taken up arms only to fet him on the throne; and, at Jafioheam's death, he obtained that vacant poft of dig- nity by his great merit: \^\w p the fon of Shiza, is the family-name, and ^:3S;^n , the £c«/7^ his country's name; io * I Chron. xi. 42. E that ( 34 ) that in this phrafe, 'iDi ^ilODnn n2^2 ntin* ^Ji^Vn "):nv^^^^ he that fits in the feat of the Tachmonite^ &c. he is ^^ Adino the £z- *^ «//f," &c. Two mighty men are ex- prefTcd, namely, the HachmoniteyZn^ Adinoj who fucceeded him. Ahijhai indeed was not to be preferred to Adino y in replacing Jajloobeamy nor was he deemed, at the inflitution of that college, fuch an hero as to be one of them; befides, fince the inflitution, he was efleemed,tho'not as mighty,yet nobler than them by birth, as it is faid, * TWbwn p TDD^ on ** he is honourable more than *^ the three ;" therefore he was made, on that account, a captain over them urh "•»!"'*» ^wb ; *^ and was to them for a cap- ** tain;" fo that, by this degree of dignity, he was an over-numerary in all the feries to that body, as a captain. Or, it may be faid, that although he could, for his valour and merit, Hand as a candidate for any vacancy in the College of * 2 Sam. iiiii. 19. Three, ( 35 ) Three, as * nwb^:i U^ I*?*! feems to hint, '^ and he had a name, (namely, a claim ''^ to be named, a candidate) in the three;'' as he for being nobler was appointed their captain, which made him above them, of courfe he could not be named in the place of Japoheam ; for then, inflead of a preferment, it might be looked upon as 3 degradation. Thus we might find the number of thirty-feven mighty men exactly compleat^ without looking for any others, befides thofe which are mentioned in this very paflage; and without fancying a double ternary of three, which we muft fupply out of our imagination, witho t any ne» ceffity. Benaiah was alfo the nobleil among the thirty, and was a candidate for the firfl vacancy in the college of the three, and therefore the verfes 22, and 23, fpeaking about him fays, 7]vbli)'^ UV 'b^ Dnu:n '' and he had a name, (a title *^ or a claim to be named) amongft the three mighty men;" his character * 2 Sam. xxiii. 18. E 2 ^^^"S a ( 36 ) being *' Ni ub r\)Dbvn bi^^ liiDi v'^b^n ^la " of the thirty he was the noblefl, but he *' did not enter in the three," notnnD3''Dn as is faid of Abijhai, which phrafe lignifies fuch a degree of certainty as to noblenefs, in comparifon of the three, that implies a fuperlative in a high degree; but Benaiah was only i:i:dJ, which denotes the noblefl, the firfl among the three, as well by birth as merit. There is no doubt that the fcveral ex- traordinary heroical deeds performed by the three mighty men, induced David to form then) into a moft honourable College by themfelves ; but, before this cftablifh- ment, they were numbered among the thirty, without any diflindlion at all, there being only that body ; witnefs verfe J 3, in Samuely (whofe author takes pains to record the mighty deeds of each of the three) ; where it is faid, rwbv n"T»') t^j^n W'^Dbvn^ '^ and three went down, the '* flower of the thirty;" which paflage is word(?d in like manner in Chronicles^ and ihews that^ before they had fignalized themfelves ( 37 ) themfelves by thefe deeds, they were not a leparate bo(.iy, but three of the beft among the thirty. Let us fuppofe, now, that David was induced to diftinguiih thefc three from the thirty, and prefer them to a moft honourable body of three, for the mighty exploits which they had achieved jointly, delaying only to put it in execu- tion, until fuch a time that every one of them, by himfelf, fhould perform fome great deed, to be diftinguifhed by it : It will then follow, that Samuel, who, (as I have faid) recorded things in a period of David*s hiflory, in which all thofe fadts had long before happened ; could, in con* fequence, record with propriety the deeds of each of the three; and alfo thofe of all of them jointly ; and he could, likewife, conclude that palTage faying, yiy nbH Dninjn iTi:;^^ " * Thefe things, or ex- *' ploits, were performed by the three ^' mighty men," meaning that thefe great adlions were the occaiion, that the three mighty men were created into a feparatc body. But the Author of Ckronkle^ re- 2 5am. xxiy. 17, cordi ( 38 ) cords thcfe deeds at a period of David's life, when thofe exploits had not been yet per- formed ; and the body of the three had no^ been actually eflabliflied, tho' refolvec} upon by David, in memory of the allonifh- ing expedition of the water ; and Shamabj who made one of the party on that moft perilous occaiion, had not yet fhewn what te was fingly able to do, and, confequently^' not yet inftalled in that high poft ; therefore he could not then, with propriety, mention any thing relative to the prowefs oi Shamab in particular ; and as this college of three, altho' refolved upon, was not as yet eftah- Hfhed, when mention is made in Chronicles of Abifmi^ he is not defer ibed rwbVTi P !I3DiOn " he is more honourable than *' the three*' as in Samuel^ but Vi'^bvr\ ]D IDDi U^yv:! '' * of the three in the two h^ *^ was noble;" that is to fay, of the college of three refolved upon he is more honour- able than the two, which are known to be of that body ; for the third place was not yet filled up. * I CLroB. li. 21. Another ( 39 ) Another reafon may be given why the Author of Chronicles t^kts notice only of the prowcfs of Eleazar, the fccond of the three mighty men, and not of the third, even allowing that this honourable Body was already created ; which is, that he meant to throw light on that fact, as recorded by Samuel, and to fupply fomc circumflance therein omitted : For the Author of Sa?nuel does not give an account of any deed performed by JajJooheaniy but goes on, fo foon as he has mentioned his name, to give the hiilory of the fecond, y^^XV^ -^rrb^b r\tw ')^D^^i D^nt:^^3D Dsnnn tit ^X-)'^> t:?"•^^ ^y>^ rendered by the translators, *' * And after him w^as Eleazar the fon of *^ Dodo the AhokitCy one of the three *^ mighty men with David, when they '* defied the Fhilifiines that were there •^ gathered together to battle, and the *^ men of Ifi-ael were gone away;" but it fliould be, " And after him was Eleazar '^ &c. with David, when they, in the terri- • 2 Sam. «iii. 9. . *^ torics ( 40 ) *' tories of the P^/7i/?/;/^5, zvlntering''^y were *' gathered together to battle there, and '' the men of Ifrael went up;" the meaning of which is, that this mighty man was with David when they took up winter-quarters in the territory of the Fbilijines, who coming to attack them, and the men of Jfiael retired up (perhaps in fome Urong hold) as the phrafe feems to denote, i^V^ bi^T^V^ U/^N,"andin that critical circumllance ** he arofe and fmote the PhiliJfineSy' &c. In addition to this account, the Author of Chronicles mentions, that the place where David had taken up winter-quarters was Pafdaminty and that the battle began in a field of barle}^, which the Ifraelites wanted to preferve, perhaps to fubfifl upon ; and the Philijlines attempted to dillodge them, and deftroyor takeaway the barley, in which flruggle the Ifraelites took to flight, (to comment what is meant by "h'^^^, and they went up), when Eleazar, together with * The word D3*^rT2 ^^^V ^^ ^^^^° ^" ^^^ ^^"^^ ®^ -whiter^ the fame as Ifaiah xviii. 6, y^J^H JlDnH ^3") 5)in"l ; tranflated, *^ * and the Philijiines were gathered to- *^ gether into a troop;" but fhould be, '^ and the Philijiines gathered together '^ to forage^ ^ " or to pillage, to lubfifl upon ; and Shama faved the field of lentiles out of their hands, which they wanted to take pofleffion of : this occur- rence was not taken notice of by the Author * a Sam. xxiii. it. t That the word p^H ^^Y ^^ ciplained fubfiftaticc, omcthing to live upon, appears by Ifaiah. Ivii, ic. ilK^!D "n** /ITl " '^^y ^^^^ ^*^ foimd a livelihood." F of ( ^^ ) ©f Chronicles (according to this fecond modtf of explanation), becaufe he had nothing to remark on. Upon the whole, this hiftory in CbronicleSy is to be looked upon as ad- ditional, or explanatory, to that in Samuel^ only repeating thofe things, which he thought required an elucidation ; and in" deed it fecms evident,, that the book of Chronicles was wrote to ferve as an Appen- dix, or Illuflration, to other parts of Scrip-- turc. On this fuppofition, I flatter myfelf the fludious Reader will be able to account with eafe for mofl of the other variations, between the correfponding paflages^ with- out rafhly determining them to be cor- ruptions or miliakes of Tranfcribers. The learned Author of the Critica Sacra^ in his note on the variations, in the names of David's fons *, recommends the colla- tion of the following paflages : I Chron. iil. 1—4. with 2 Sam. iii. 2 — 5. 3 Chron. iii. c — 8? • 1 e z ^, . -^ o ^with 2 Sam. V. 14.-16. I Chron,xiXc4 — 83 ' Pagic 10. LET ( 43 ) LET us now confider the variations found in this Collation. In the fitil place, we find, that the fon which David had by Abigaily who in Samuel is called :im^D Kil-abj Chronicles calls him Daniel ; fecondly, Abfalom is recorded by Samuel regularly, as the reft of David's ions, Dl'?t:^:ni^ ''^''^wr\'\ " and the third was AbfalomJ' But Chro- nicies adds a prefixed Lamed, uht^ivh which feems needlefs and rather unintel- Hgible ; thirdly, Chronicles adds, at the end, the feeming fuperfluous words T^i^ 7}"^'^ pnanD lb " * Six were born to him in Hebron,'' having already reckoned them with the ordinals ; firJl,fecond, and third, &c. the firft and fecond variations are thought, by many, to be Corruptions that ought to be corrected in this palTage of Chronicles, In anfwer to this, I beg leave to refer the Reader to what I have already re- marked, as to the cuftom of the antients, in regard to names; which was to keep to the meaning of the word originally given for a name ; being at liberty to ufe any * Vfrfe. 4. F 2, Other ( 44 ) Other word, provided it conveyd the fame Idea. Now, in the prefent inftance, I fup- pole, that the fon of David by Abigail may- have been recorded amongft his defcendants hy both the names of Kil-hab, and Daniel (which names mean nearly one and the fame thing, as will be hereafter ihewn), and the Author oi Chronicles, whofe bufinefs was to clear up all matters of Genealogy, thought proper to record feparately David's fons, which he begat before his Reign became general, juft when he was about recording 2i\\ David's defcendants till his own time, and he mentions this fon explicitly under the name of Daniel to record that he had both names ; and left it might be thought that this Daniel was another fon befide§ Kil'hab, he takes care to exprefs at the clofe, that there were only fix born to him in Hebron, The name of Daniel is compounded of p which fignifies a Judge, or Judging, and of b'ik * which figniies Jirong and mighty ^ * Ezek. xvii. 13. np*? Y^J^^n ^'7''^^ ilHI He had alfo f aken the mighty of the Land. fo ( 45 ) {q that the idea annexed to this name originally was, a mighty, or fevere Judge. The name .2l^b2 Kil-bab, takes its origia from ^"72 a prifon^ and means tg impriJQ/i^ to pvnifh peopk by confinement; and th^ name n':>D may have originally meant an Imprifoner, a Judge^ who orders peo- ple to confinement; (for names of men, although plainly derived from verbs, very feldom keep to grammatical rules;) the confining of people, then, will anfwer to the characftcr of a fevere Judge; or, at leaft, there is a great analogy between the two names of Daniel and Kil- hahy both conveying almoft the lame idea. Let the candid Reader not look upoa this manner of reafoning as too far-fetched; for unlefs wc enter into the genius of thofe times, we fhall find things much more difficult to be accounted for. I am fenfibie this will not be much reliihed by the de. licate taite of modern Criticks ; it fhould, however, be confidered, that we might be able to give better explanations of the analogy of names, if the Hebrew had con- tinued ( 46 ) tinucd a living language, but we are now confined to that fmall portion of it which remains in the facred books ; we there fee many names which feem obflrufe, and with fcarce any figniiication, though it is natural to fuppofe, they were origi- nally derived from verbs, and had a proper meaning ; as we plainly find by many other inilances. We may thence con- clude, that this rule of the analogy in names mufl be true, though we cannot always account for them in a clear and ratiopal manner. As to the prefixed Lamed in the name of Ahfahniy let it be confidered, that this Prince died in his father's lifetime; who had a furprifing love for him, (as he fhewed by his repeated lamentations at his death), though he had been fo ungrateful a fon, David therefore, no doubt, took more than ordinary care of Abfalom's chil- dren, for the love he bore to their fa- ther; for which reafon the author of Chronicles mentions Abfalom with a pre- fixed Lamed, to fignify, that he would not, •n account of Abfalomh guilt, afcribe him to ( 47 ) to l)avU, but fubflitutes in his place hh offspring, whom David took fuch fpecial care of, as if they were his own children. Let us now go on to coniider the other differences on the reft of David's chil- dren, rcfulting from the fecond colla- tion, 1. The firft of his children, who i« called both in * Samuel and -f Chronicles^ by the name of l^^r2lV Shammnay % is here- called \^i^^v Shimea, 2. Chronicles calls Solomons motheryit:^ nzi ^l^"QV rin " Bath'JJnm the daughter of ** Ammiel" and in § Samuel we find her called Dr^>^ rO V2V Jin " Bathfieba the " daughter of Eliam" 3. Chronicles adds Two other children to David, in this fet, namely, tD*?3>^K * a Sam. V. 14. t I Chron. liv. 13. \ I Chron. iii. 5. S * Sam, xi. 3, Eliphaletf C 48 ) EUphctlet, and n:)^ iVno-^^, which arc not mentioned in Samuely and takes care to record, at the end, that there were nine. 4. The fecond fon in this catalogue, who in '^ Chrdnidss and "f- Samuely is cal- led J;r^''^^i Eltjhua^ is here called v^;:^'?^< EliJJjama. . 5, He adds at the end of the fir ft catalogue, (ver. ix.) IS^D 1^1 ^ja bo Dninhi iDrn D^;i^:i^2)n •'^s '^ all David's. ^* children, befides the concubine's chil- *^ dren, and their lifter T'amar.'' ■ All thefe differences, if duly attended to, far from being corruptions, will be found to be valuable fupplements, and ex- cellent notes upon the correfponding paf- fages in Samuel, Let us, firft, remark the analogy between the different names : and, I fuppofe, I need not fay much to prove that ^j^')>2U; Shammua and K^^Di:^ Sh'mea^ are * a Sam. xiv. 5, f Ibid. V. ij, both ( 49 ) both one and the fame name, parti- cularly finding in, the very Book oi Samuel * in T7N^ r^vi2V p ]ny\r^^ nsn " Jona- '^ than the fon of Shlmea the brother of ^^ David flew him,'' who is alio the fame with n.'^Jti; Sham?nah^ enumerated with the reft of DavUrs brethren in Samuel^ -f fo that yi'D'^ Shammua^ i^V^'^ Shlmea^ and HD^ Shamah^ may be the names of one and the fame perfon ; for the wanting of the letter j; in the name riD*^ Shammahy is a peculiarity of that letter in all oriental languages, which is frequently fuppli- ed by a firong afpirate n, and this is very common in the Arabick, This pre. fuppofed, it will clearly appear, that all thofe three names convey a fingle idea, which is that of obedience, their common root being yryi^, one of whofe accepta-. tions is to obey, \ fo that the idea is * a Sam. xxi. 21. f i Sam. xvi. 9. and 1 7. 13. 1 1 Sam. XV. 22. a'nn?i Iyb^v:l ^r^b ^iinn *' the Lord as great delight in burnt-offerings and facri- *' fices, AS \n obeying the voice of the Lord? behold to *' 9h(y, is better than facrifice.'* G the ( io ) the fame, although in different words. In like manner we may account for the names of V^^ T^2 Bath-Jheha and '^^iwn^, Bath-Jljua; thefe two names may be faid to agree with one another, by explaining the word '^W to mean noble * or boun- tiful, and the word ^2t:^ in the fenfe of Tlenty ; or even in its other fignification of feven, which is a number that, in Scripture, is often the type of abundance^ freedom, and hountifulnefs \ ; but, as I faid before, this manner of accounting for * Vide Buxt. Lexicon, Rad. )^)V alfo Ifa. xxxii. 5. V"\'^ IDS'' K'? *h^'2b^ " ^or the Churl fliall be faid ** to be bountiful." t Levit. XXV. 3. 4. D**^*^ )Dm ^lt:^ ynm ww "^^ X^i^b riTl'' ])n2'V n^li^ /iT^t^^n " six years *' flialt thou fow thy field, &c. but in the feventh jtzt " fliall be a Sabbath of reft unto the land." And Ibid xxv. 21. It is exprefsly faid, JlJ^ '♦n*''):*') U^yiVn 'iLlb'^b " Then I win command my bleffing c* upon you in the fixth year, and it fliall bring forth *' fruit for three years," and whatever the land fpontaneoufly produced in that year, was to be comi mon for every body. Levit, ^^5. 6. i names ( 51 ) hamdS, can be relilhed only by thofe that eftter into the genius of thofe ancient times. v^i^rtSV Amiel and UV'h'i^ Eliam are one and the fame thing, both clearly being a compound of D^ people^ and b\^ Jlrong -f . In the fame manner ^i2V^bi^ Elipama and ^11^'''?)^* Elljhua^ convey one and And in the Jubilee year, which is at the end of every ic^cn rclcafe-years, it was ordered, that every body fliould enter again into the poflellion of their land, h-c. Ibid. :lxv. 13. innnK^ ^^'^i^ ^2^:) nj^trr ^srn r\TV2 *' in the year of the' Jubilee ye flxall return, every man »' unto his pofleflion." Ibid. XV. 12. r{:iw2'\ '^:i^ '^^ivri ymi? ")3d^ o ID^D •'*^E)n ^^nbt^n n';^''Dt:fn ^^^ if thy bro- *' ther, &c. in the /event h year, thou flialt let him go free •* from thee," and charges the Made r ^^ p^JJ^ri p2Vil '1:1 ']2p'^t2^ in:)D') i:3J^:«JD " Thou flialt furniili *' him liberally out of thy flock, &c. Beut. XV. I. 2. : r\:£ir2:D nm^n u'Tvy^v xp:2 M> n'^?3 by2 bD roi^'^ nio*Dt:»n nni n-^ o vn?^ riKi ^nv1 /ik t^i:^ k^ inna n*^> t«:'j^ mn^'? ntODti/ i^'lp " ^^ ^^^ ^^^ of every /riY^ years, *' thou fliall make a releafe, and this is the manner of the *' releafe, every creditor that lendeth aught unto his *' neighbour, fliall releafe it, he fliall not exact it of hi^ *' neighbour, or of his brother, becaufe it is called the «* Lord's releafe." t Vide Note at Page 44- G z the ( 5? ) tht fame idea, for the verb ^"^V very oftcil means to give attention, or to accept of a prayer, of which there are innumerable in- flances; and "^W. may be derived from T^yil/ to accept bw'i rp ^i^> ^nn^n bi^') ^an bi^ 'n vti>^> nr^ ab Mmir^ ^' * and the Lord acctpte^ ** ^^^/ and his offering y but unto " Caiuy and to his offering, did he not ac^. '' ceptr As the lift of Samml o^aits Two of, Davtd\ children; the aiAthor of Ci'.^^o* nkles records them in his lift; and to' prevent the Reader to look" upon this ad* dition to be an error, or corruption^ par-, ticularly as one of thofe fo added, is another lO^^^^i^ Eliphalety he takes care %p fay, they were nine in all. And laftly, as the unhappy affair of Am- non and Tamar is fo recorded in Samuel^ as to be underftood to have happened be^ tween a brother and fifter, Chronida by his manner of introducing Xa,mer^ in- forms us that I'amar was only a uterine lifter, to the children of David, by his con- cubines, equal in honour to them, but * Gen. iv. 4r of ( 53 ) of no kin to Amnon, and confcquently might have been married to him ; which totally clear? hin> from the crime of in- ceft. ^amar^ although uterine fifte-r to Ah^ fibm, is mentioried as the concubine's chil-^ drens filler^ becaufe not b^gdt by David^ for ihe was already born when her mother w-as married to him, BefidesL it is hinted pven by Samuel that Tatmr was not David\ daughter^ fftf if ihe was, how could ihe have ex- pefted that David would ha:v'^ confented to her marriage with Ammn} 2 Sam. xiii. 13. '•:)};2D"' i^b O iS-DH ^« i^i naT •JOD " Now, therefore, fpeak unto " the king, for he will not withhold me " from thee." As to the refledlions made by the learn- ed author of the Critka Sacra, to account for the origin and introduction of incorredt- ilefs and corruptions, and the initances he * produces ; I have already explained that pafTage : and in regard to the variation SIS to NumherSy for which he refers the * Page II. I Page n Reader ( 54 ) Reader in his note to Dr. Kennicofs firlt Dif- fertation; as that relates to David's mighty men, and the fuppofed corruption in the prowefs of the firfl of them, one text faying, he had withilood nixa ^b^ three hundred men ; and the other text expref- fing them to be mi^D T\y\'0'^ eight hundred ; I muft likewife refer the Reader to what I have faid on this fubjed: : -f and if it be allowed that ^yi^ Adino, is not the fame perfon as UVyiJ"' Jajhoheam^ this diffi- culty muft, of courfe, immediately vaniih; for where is the w^onder, that difFerenr men fhould have different powers and degrees of valour? It is now incumbent on me to proceed to the examination of the Collations re- commended by the learned Author of the Critica Sacra, in his fecond Section . * Page 3*, ^c. t P^g^ 96' ^'^- COLLATION ( ss ) COLLATION L I Sam.xxxi. I — 13, with iChro. x. i. — 12. THIS Collation contains the hiflory of SauV^ death and burial, in which we find the following variations. 1. In Samuel amDHD 1KD ^H"'') and in Chronicles Dnvn ]D bn^^. 2. In Samuel, H^J^H ub'^V'n ^'^y^ ]9 ^n 1^b;^nni -^-ipn and in Chronicles, \^ •'n 'j'p'^V-nm rh)^r{ D^bn^rr iKa^ and the im- * portant circumilance of fmitingy "'TypTi is omitted, 3. It is faid in Samuel, rwb^ b^'i^'^ r\ty^ ^' fo iS^zz^/ died, and his three fons, and *^ his armour-bearer, and all his men, ^^ that fame day together;" but Chronicler fays, "nn^ iD'-n "^Di vja rwb^^ ^1^^l:; nD"»i I/ID ^^ fo Saul died, and his three fons, ^J^ and all his houfe died together." 4. InfleacJ ( 56 ) 4. Inftead of what Sumuel fays, IhJTI laya ii^^Ni pD^rr 13^:2 nt:^^ b)^^w\ ^mt^ yWT^ " and when the men of Ifrael that ^^ were on the other fide of the valley, and '^ they that were on the other fide Jordan «^ faw," Chronicles only fays, t^^i^ ':»D 'Ji^n*'') ** pDPl lir^i^ bl^'W^ and when all the men of Ifrael that were in the valley faw.** iC 5. In lieu of what Samuel fays, 1rT^^^ ]^ no /IDinn ^^ and they put his ** armour in the houfe of JJhtaroth, and ^^ they faftened his body to the wall of '* Batb'Jbany" Chronicles fays, Ji?^ ID^'ti^^l p:)*! " and they put his armour in the ** houfe of their Gods, and faflened his •• head in the temple of Dagon" 6. Samuel {rjs, i);b:\ t^n'' '^y^'^ vbik ')Vf2U^'^^ ^* and when the inhabitants of Jdhefld- ^* gikady heard,'* Chronicles fays, ipDt^^^l nj?^:i t^TD'' ^D " and when all JabefJi-gikai *' heard/' It ( 57 ) "J. It is faid in Samuel rh-bn ^:: '):)T7 r\ty\r\^ v:2 jt'i:) nj^i 'r'li^t:^ n^i.i Jii^ inp''! inpn D**:^ DD1^^ iD-i'^^t n'i^2> ^^$n"'1 ]'^ ji^i '' and they went all night, and took the *' body of Sduly and the bodies of his fons^ *^ from the wall of Beth-Jljan, and came ^' to JabeJJj, and burnt them there, and ^^ they took their bones, and buried them *^ under a tree at Jahejlo, " And it is further faid, in 2 Sam. xxi. 12. npil in "1^1 nniD DDij^ in::i 1-^:^^^ "ry^.") ^^^d-' ^'^rra jik^-o *^ and David went and took the bones of ^^ *y^/^/3 and the bones of Jonathan his fon, '^ from the men of JahejJo-gilead^ who *^ had ftolen them from the ilreet of Beth- i^ JJjan, where the Philijllnes had hang- ^^ ed them.," &c. But Chronicles fays, D')^^on v:a ri3i:i n.^i ^ik'^ nsi:) jii«^ i^::;^^ utn^a rh^r\ jinn Dn^ni^^ij? ns^ n:ipn nv^y^ " and they took away the bodies of Said, " and the bodies of his fons, and " brought them to JaheJJj, and buried " their bones under the oak in JabeJhJ* H Thelc ( 58 ) Thefe are the moil material variations J Let us now attempt the reconciliation. It may be proper to premifc, that the chief view of the Author of Chronicles in recording the fatal end of King Satd, feem? to have been, to introduce after it the reign of David, the head of the royal fa- mily of the kings of Judab ; it ihould be recolledted, that when this Book was written, the y^Zc's had been jufl rellored to their ancient country and city o^Jerufakm, under the government of Zeruhahel, Nehe^ miahy &c. being freed from the BahylonijJo captivity ; the Author likewife kitended to fhew, whence David's right to the Crown arofe, in preference to another family ; and as he faw it proper to record SauFs un- happy fate, he endeavoured, at the fame time, to throw light on fome paflages, that were not very clear in the firft ac- count; and alfoto^^add many circum.ftanccs that had been omitted. Having made this ihort but neceffary Preface, we will pafs to the explanation of the above variations ; the firft being, the difference between Dnv and DnV2. It is very certain, that Saul, throughout his whole life, gave fufficient proofs of his undaunted ( 59 ) undaunted courage, and extraordinary va- lour, even in this his laft day, though he knew the wrath of the Almighty was de- clared againit him : and though this was confirmed to him by the dreadful oracle of the Pitonite^ or Samuers Ghofl, he was not in the leaft difcouraged. * Not- withflanding all this, he did not negled: his duty as a warrior, but diredily went and put himfelf at the head of his army, and joined battle with his enemy; how is it then poffible to conceive, that a man of fuch wonderful courage ihould be difmay- ed, and tremble at the fight of archers ? and yet this feems to have been the cafe by the account in the book of Samuey DmDHD nXD'^m") which words, ought to be rendered, " and he was greatly * difmayed * Let commentators differ as they may as to the expla- nation of that difficult paffage ; fuch a predidiion, attended with fuch terrifying circumftances, at the very eve of a battle, in which his life and croAvn were at flake, mufl: have greatly affeAed the heart of Saul, who did not doubt of the r^zXiiyoi Samuers appearance. f The word ^y^l*) is derived from the root H^H ^° ^" ''^K to be in palu, to be grieved. Jei: x. tg. ^/l^Q 11^11^ H 2 " (Or ( 6o ) ^^ (or in pain, or grieved,) at the ardi- ^^ ers." But this great difficulty is folved by the book of Chronicles^ with the greateft facility by the alteration of a lingle letter. Saul did not fear the archers as Ibldiers or warriors, but dreaded to be bafely killed by the diftant arrows, without being able to die like a foldier fword in hand^ fighting f my wound is grievous. Ibid. '|^^^UK") ''TTl )!* ." This is a gr'wf. and I muft l^ear it." ll'id. xii. 13. iV^^V i^b 'bn^ " They have fut thcnif elves to fain, *' but iliall not profit." Amos vi. 6. ^j; ^b^^ l^^l ^DV ^y\D " ^^^ *^^^y s^'C not grieved for the alIli(ftion of *' Jlf'^P'-^" The tranflators render the pafTage in queflion 'both in Samuel and Chronicles, " and the archers liit hinj, *' and he was fore wounded of the archers," which verfioni humbly apprehend cannot be admitted, if we attend to the context, andthe whole of the hiftory, for if the archers fliot at, and wounded Satd, it is to be fuppofed that they would have feen him fall ; but the Phllijlines did not find Sauly until the next day : befides this, let the narration which the young Amalekite made to David, be confidered, and it will appear that Scid died not imrncdiately after he fell upon his fword ; and the Amalekite had time, and flif_ £clent leifure, to take the crown, &c. and bring them •fafe to David. But it feems that the tranflators have in ithis pailage copied the Vulgate, which renders, et vitlne^ fatus eft vchcmcnter a Sc/ittariis. again (^ ( 6i ) againfl his enemies ; therefore the meaning of the words Dm^nr^ 1S^ '?nn, " and he *^ was greatly in pain, (grieved or difmay^ ^^ ed), atthe archers," is,thathe was great- ly in pain, or grieved, at the arrows that the archers might aim at him from afar off; and as this meaning- could not be eafily underftood by thefe words in the Rook of Samp.el, therefore the author of Chronicles has fct this paflage in its true light, by only altering the word DHID into that of Dnv which thofe who * un, derlland the genius of the Hebrew Lan- * The better to illuftrate this, let it be remarked, that the word D'^HT^ is a derivative noun from the verb m* as appears by the Ecmmtick Q added to it, therefore this noun defcribes archers, as men whofe fervice in the army* or cliewhere, is to flioot any weapon at a diftancc, and are called by this name, even when not in actual fervice. But the word Q'''^V '^^ ^^^ plural mafculioe of the ''^l^^^l or prcfent of the fame verb y^-ji in Kal; which *iy\'y'2, is called by Grammarians nomen ogcuti, and cannot be ap- plied, but only whilfl: the adlion of fliooting it. perform- ing, this name being improper, as foon as the arrow, or weapon is darted or difcharged. Let it be alfo obferved, /hat the verb HI"' or to flioot, is a tranfitive a^iion, and h will then clearly appear, that the word DnV means ♦he very action of fliooting. guage, (' 62 ) guage know, does not mean archers, but the adtual ad:ion of Ihooting of arrows, or any other weapon which offends at a diftance. There was another apprehenfion which greatly troubled Saul, in this his deplorable iituation ; he dreaded left the archers, by Ihooting at him, might difable him, ^nd being taken alive, he might be ufed with fcorn, indignity, and derilion, as the mighty Samfon had .fatally experienced; this fear he cxprefTes by thefe words, u ^bbvnrr\ >y^\n^ rhi^^r^ ub^vr^ ii^ii"» ]3 * ^^ Left thefe uncircumcifed come, and '^ thruft me through, and abufe me." Now the word "ipl in Hebrew in its ftrid: fcnfc means a wound, cither with a fword or any other weapon, from which there is no recovery, -f- but muft * I Sam. xxxi. 4. f That the word *)p*7 generally means a mortal ■wound, can be proved by many iulTances in Scripture, Numbers xxv. 8. Qn**^'*^ Jlk^ "lpl''T " ^^^ ^^ thruft *• both of them through," and the context fliows that *' they died immediately." prove ( H ) prove mortal, though the wounded pcr- fon may languifli fome fhort time; therefore Saul could not dread iuch a wound upon this occafion, for, in fuch a cafe, he could not be long tormented with the derifion of his enemies; we fee that the very falling upon his own fword, to prevent his being taken by the Phili- JiineSy did not difpatch him upon the fpot, until the young Amalekite finifhed the kil- ling of him, at his own requeil; and if he had been folely appreheniive of the fcorn and indignity to which his body might be expofed after his death ; this could not have been prevented by his laying violent hands upon himfelf : it therefore follows, that all his dread was to fall alive, and with- out any mortal wound, into his enemies hands. But as the flrid: fenfe of the word ''^Tlpn in Samuel does not correfpond with Judges ix. 54. j-|»2>i i-^yj innpTI *' and his young "' man thruft him through, and he died." ifaiah xiii. IS- n3D:)n b'2^ ipT j^*JD:n ^d ^-)nil biS"' " c'^^O' one that is found fr. ail be thnift *' through, and every one that is joined with them fliall ** fall by the fword." this ( 64 ) tlirs idea, and perplexes the natural coiv Uruction of the pafTagc, therefore the Au- thor of Chronicles wifely omitted it. As there is an important text on the fubjed; we have been treating of, which feems to me to have been mifunderflood by Tranflators, I hope a few obfervations thereon wdll not be deemed a degreflion, efpecially as they wdll more fully illuftrate my remarks on this Collation. 2 Sam, i. 9. 10. ''^}; }^j i^);i 'b^ n^i^>i '1:1') 1^3^ rnii^, rendered by the Tranflators, *^ he faid unto me. Stand, I pray thee, *' upon me, and flay me, for anguiih is '^ come upon me, becaufe my life is yet " whole in me: fo I ftood upon him, and ^^ flew him, becaufe I was fu re he could not " live, after that he was fallen :" feV. But Ihould be tranflatcd, " Stand, I pray thee, " upon me, and finifh to kill me, for I am " fei fed with convulfwnsy for nothing of life re- mains 2 ( 65 ) *^ mains [in me, {id ejl, I am mortally ^' wounded), and I flood upon him, and ^^ finiJJjed to kill kirn, becaufe I was fure *^ he Gould not live," &c, I render ''^nm:::'! JiniJJj to kill me, (and fo 'l^nJl!^^^')) ; i* e. give me fo many mortal w^ounds, one after another, until I am ef- fedtually dead ; the double r\ in the verb JiiD importing a repetition, of which many inftances could be produced. Judges ix. 54. When Abimelech was befieging the Tower of Thehez, and a cer- tain woman caft a piece of a millflone upon his head, and fractured his fkull, it is faid, -iDNn rb'2 Kr: ')V^T\ ^x HinD Knpn ^' then he called haflily unto the young ^^ man his armour bearer, and faid unto ^^ him. Draw thy fword, andjlay me, that ^^ men may not fay of me, a woman *' flew him :" But ought to be rendered, " Draw thy fword, and jinijlo to kill me, &c." For he was already mortally wounded^ paft any likelihood of recovery; therefore I ' his ( 66 ) his armour-bearer did nothing elfe, but '"-^ JiniJJymg to kill him. When Jonathan went up to the Thilijiines with his armour-bearer, it is faid *bl^''^ * Vins^nni^D V^D ^^mys in^in*' ••^s':' rendered by the Tranilators, " And they fell before *' Jonathan; and his armour-bearer^^^ze; after ^^ him" but it is evident that it Ihould be rendered, " And they fell before Jonathan; '^ and his armour-bearer finijhed to kill ^' (them) going behind him;" , that as, Jonathan wounded them mortally, and his armour-bearer, who followed behind him, finijhed to kill them. After David had mortally wounded Golliathy with the flone, fo that the Giant fell on the ground, it is faid '^^\2T^ in V")^1 i" '^y\ irrnilD''') rendered " therefore David *' ran and flood upon the Fhilifiiney and " took his fword, and drew it out of the * I Sam. xiv. 13. t % Sam, xvii, JJ. " fheath ( 67 ) '^ fheath thereof, ^mdjlew him, &c." but ought to be rendered, and finijloed to kill him; for the preceeding verfe mentions, that David had mortally wounded him with the ilone )^b\>1 Twbiir\ p in ptn'^'J *' fo David prevailed over the Fkilijline ^' with a iling and with a ftone, and fmote ^^ the PbiliJIine, and flew him ; but there " was no fword in the hand of David ;*^ therefore the word innn::''') muft mean that he jinijhed to kill him. There is one Text where this double Ji occurs, which at firft light feems not to admit of the fame conflrudtion, and there- fore requires an explanation. PfaL xxxiv. 21. ^Dt:^^*^ pn^: ''^w^ nv") v^^ niivjji tranflated, " Evil Ihall flay the wicked ; and " they that hate the righteous fhall be de- " folate/' The Royal Pfalmijl had juft before faid (verfe 19, &c.) that the righteous man undergoes many evils, but the Almighty delivers him out of them 'n ^^b''r d^ddi pnii jtij?-i ninn " Many are the afflictions of the righteous; ^^ but the Lord delivereth him out J z " of C 68 ) *^ of them all/' in contrafl to which h^^ adds, that a fingle evil, (n^n) or calamity, that comes upon the wicked man, gives him a finiihing il:roke, or deadly wound ; therefore the above verfe 21, fhould be rendered, " an evil to the wicked Jimjbes to ** kill him, &c/' which is comformable to the interpretation of the former inftances. The words *^1 Wz^:^ I^V b^ O have been, tranflated " becaufe my life is yet whole in " me-, '' but, I think, it ought to be rendered, '''for fcarce any life remains in ^' me;" and that the particle ^D has very often this lignification, may be feen by the following, among many other inftances, b:^ r^ '^'^b^ *, '' but the poor man had nothing;" nUl 'PO IJnnst:^^ ]''K fy " thine '^ hand-maid hath not any thing in the ^' houfe; " HJK'pD b:^ HWD vh §, " thou, ^^ fhalt 7iot do any work;" Dl b'y) n^H b'2 % ^b'^'t'^n \^b ^^ that ye eat neither fat nor blood;'* b'2 V^^ ntt^n^ i^''t:;s):3** ^'our foul is dried away, ^' there is nothing at all;"r]\>^ MW^:! N^ ^^W * a Sam. xii. 3. f z Kings, ir. 3. § Exod. xx. to. \ Levit. ill. 17. ** Num. xl. 6. ff Pfal. vlix. ij. ( 69 > tan '^for when he dieth, he Ihall carry* nothing away." <( It cannot be fuppofed that the negative particles of ^b and ';>K are the caufe of giving the particle b'2 the meaning of nothings becaufe the negative particle ^b plainly governs the verbs PT^^^nO^^^^^ ^nd T]\>'' ; and the other negative particle ]>K in the other inftances, governs the eliptical verb to have, as if v^'^b had been cxpreffed initead of ]>N\ But, to return again to our fubjedi. The Author oi Chronicles, in mentioning the death of Saul and the overthrow of his houfe, had folely in view, to introduce David as his fucceffor to the whole king- dom of Ifraely without intending to fay any thing of the weak reign o{ IJlo-hoJheth , SauVs fon, becaufe it could fcarce be called a reign, as it was daily decaying, and was foon reduced to the loweft ebb ; beiides it is obvious, that his plan was not to record any thing belonging to the kingdom of Ifrael, except fo far as immediately related ( 70 ) to the houfe of David; therefore he men- tions, abruptly, the total fall of Saulzxi^. his houfe, in confequence of the lofs of that battle; for, fnice that fatal event, by the death of Saul and his valiant fons, his fa- mily was abfolutely ruined, the feeble JJh-boJheth, could not, by himfelf, fupport his dignity and authority ; and had it not been for the advice and affiflance of Abner, it is highly probable, he would never have attempted to Hep on the throne. It is for this reafon that Chronicles afcribes, to this unfortunate day, the entire deftru6tion of Saul's houfe, | The Author of Chronicles had alfo in view to record, how and when Samuel's prediction was intirely fulfilled, which was the great title by which David claimed the Crown ; and this could not be faid to be entirely accomplifhed, until his fove- reignty over all Ifrael was acknowledged ; therefore he concludes by faying nt:^i^ 'n 1^1^ ^KID^ T2 "IDI " according to the word of God which he fpake through Samuel, and not fulfilled by the hand of Samuel, as fup-- pofed ( 7J ) pofed by the learned Dr. Kennicot ■-; for though God^ through Samuel, faid that David fhould be king over his people Ifrael, yet Samuel did not live to fee the acGomplilhment of his oracle, for at the time of his death. Said was flill the king of Ifrael; but when the Elders of Ifrael came and anointed David for their king, then the oracle was effediually fulfilled ; for the anointing of David by Samuel was not an adlual in- vefliturc of the kingdom, lince, in that cafe, he would immediately have taken up the fceptre, and Saul would have been depofed ; but that anointment was only to give David a proof of his having a divine title to the Crown : There- fore the Elders of Ifrael anointed him again, and this unction was the real invefli- ture of the kingdom, whereby the oracle was fully accomplifhed. Let it be obfer- ved, that Saulhim{c\f was, at firfl, anointed King by Samuel in private,-)- but altho* * ifl bifTertation, Pag€ J7. t I Sam. xxxi 7. this ( 7^ ) this gave him a divine title, the invefti- ture was afterwards confirmed by the fandiion of publick lot; and becaufe, in the beginning, it was^'not generally approved of, a fecond general aflembly was found requifite, fully to eilablifh him in his regal authority. By the account given by the Author of Samuel of the flight of the Ifraelites after that battle, it would feem, that they had abandoned all thofe territories along the Jordan^ which was properly the Land of Promife; for he fays ")t:^K ^Nlt:;^ ''t^^^K li^nn '^i:^:^ -id: •'J '\i'^'^r\ nai^D n^Ki \>^vr^ n:i:^D ]na ^yD'>^ u^nvbii ^^y^^ \^o^y^^ " §|And when *^ the men of Ifrael, that were on the *^ other fide of the valley, and they that ^^ were on the other fide of Jordan faw, ^^ that the men of Ifrael fled, and that Saul *^ and his fons were dead, they forfook *^ the cities and fled; and the Philijtines * I San. X. 20. f I Sam. xi. 14 $ I Sam. XXXI. 7. *^ came I ( n ) ^' came and dwelt in them.'' Now it is ivell known that the river Jordan runs through all the Holy Land ; but this ac- count does not correfpond with what the fame Author immediately after exprefTes, J nb2 bi^^-:)' bv^ ]Q^:n bv') Dn3>^ bv^ *^ And y^Z'z/^r the fon of Ner^ captain of '' Said's hofl, took IJJo-hoJJjethy Saul's fon, ^^ and brought him over to Mahanaim; and *^ he made him King over Gilead, and '^ over the JJJjurite, and over Tezreel, and *^ over Ephrabuy and over Benjamin, and *^ over all IfraeV — Tezreel, the territory af Ephraim, and that of Benjamin, and indeed almoft all i/J-^^/, was along that fide of the Jordan, that by the iirft palTage feems to have been forfaken ; and at the fame time David reigned over Judah in Hebron^ which was likewife on the fame fide of the Jordan ; therefore the Author of Chronicles^ to obviate this difficulty, only mentions, pD;;S It^i^ " f which were in the valley," * % Sam, ii. ?. t T Chron. x. *. K t» ( 74 ) to explain that thofe only who were hi the valley, on the fide of mount Gilboa^ towards the land of the FhiUJlines^ were the people that fled, and forfook their cities, and not the others ; and as to the expreffion in Samuel of pTn i::^^, it may with propriety be underftood, in the * fording or pajfage of the river, for nD^l has this acceptation, and does not always mean on the other fide. As to what was done by the FhiUflhies to SauVs body ; Chronicles records only thole circumflances which were not taken notice of by the Author of Samuel, for Samuel only * Deut. 1. 1. ^^ n::^D lyi ni:^K onain rh^ ^ITil "l^J/^ '^J^nii^^ b'2 *' Thefebethe words which *' Mofes fpake unto all Ifraely on this fide the Jordan^ " it fhould be, on the/or<;/i«§- or ^<7^^f of the Jordan, for then J\ioJcs and all Tfrael ivere encamped on the borders of that River, at the place where they intended to pafs it, as they afterwards did, and Mofes then faid, that God had told /;;•;« (Deut. iii. a;.) HtH pTH Di^ 12Vn K^ " ^^o^ •' flialt not go over this Jordan." In this fenfc, the remark of the learned F. S'mion, Chap. vi. of the Firft Book of his mjioire Critique, (taken from Abcn Ezra) to prove, tka^ this Textmuft have been wrote by fome other hand after the death of Alofes, will appear to be ill grounded, fince n*l*n *l!3V^ "^^y ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ fGrUng or ^ajjagc, and • »9t Qn the thafidi of Jordan. mentions C 75 ) mentions that Saul's body was nailed up on the wal]s of Beth-JJjan, but Chronicles gives us an aditional circumftance, that his head was nailed up in Dagon's houfe. By the account in Samuel, it does not appear that the Philijiines ufed the dead bodies of SauVs children, in the fame manner as that of SauVs ; and yet he afterwards fays, that the men of JabeJJj-gilead took down SauFs body, and the bodies of his children, from the wall; and in 2 Sam. xxi. 12, Saul and Jonathan are only mentioned, which feems inconliftant; but the true meaning is, that they took down SauV^ body from the wall, and thofe of his fons from the field of battle, where they were probably left by the PhillJlineSy after having taken the fpoil ; and the plural pronouns Dnib^ 1:1^:) nt:>K " who had ^^ ftolen them,'' and Dli^^JI '^V^ " had '^ hanged them,'' only refer to SauVs bones. For we read in i Samuel xxxi. 8. that the Philijiines found Saul and his fons dead, on the field of battle ; and tho' he defcribes the opprobrious ufage given to Saul's body, yet he does not mention any fimilar treatment K a lb ( 76 ) to his children; therefore the Author of Chronicles^ to avoid any fuch ambiguity, only fays, that the people of Jahejlo-gilea^ took the bodies of Saul, and thofe of his children, without explaining the refpediive . places whence they were taken. COLLATION IL s Sam. V. I — 3. with i Chron. xi. i — 3* THE Learned may obferve, that there is not, in this Collation, any remarkable variation in the words, and not the leafl: difference as to the fenfe ; the reafon of its being repeated by Chronicles^ ha$ already been hinted at in the foregoing Collation ; nanjiely, to fhew David's right to the Crown of 7/r^^/, not only by divine ap- pointment, but alfoby the people's eled:ion» COLLATION IIL a Sam» v. J7--25, with i Chron.xiv. 8--16, THE firft remarkable difference is, that Samuel^ verfe 14, ufes tJie words yn ya^''! ii ( 77 ) nnViJ^n bi^ T^l^l " and when David heard it, ^* he went down to the ftrong hold ;" and, in Chronicles verfe 8, it is faid Til V'^*^''! DH^^b'? J^'^n " and when David heard of it ^' he went out to meet them/' This which, at firfl light, appears a very material variation, is, agreeable to my^ fyflem, only a proper addition or illuftra* tion; for indeed, as it flands in Samuely David feems to be reprefented as a coward, who, as foon as he heard of his enemies having taken the field againft him, went and Iheltered himfelf in a flrong hold, through fear ; which however was not the fadt, iince he only w^nt down prudently to pofTefs himfelf of a flrong place ; not to remain there fhut up, but to march out and fight his enemies, which is emphati- cally explained in Chronicles by Dn'iSb N*i''^ ^' he went to meet them." The fecond remarkable difference is, that Samuel ufes tl^e exprcffion of in Di^*^^") ''-' a Sam. v. »i» C 73 ) l^^iiOS'l but" Chronicles^ fays "rn 1»i*n * tt^KIl 13")::'*n which is a very proper change of phrafe, only to afcertain, the true meaning of the word Di^ti^^l that it is not to be here underftood to carry azvay^ as that verb generally imports, but that it means to hum, as in Nahum i. 5. VJS3^ V*^^''^ Nt^^n') ** and the earth is burnt at his prefence ;** and many other inftances like it. The reft of this Collation, does not contain any other material difference, as to the fenfe. COLLATION VL aSam.vi. i. — 11. withiChro.xiii. j, — 14* THE hiflory of DavId^s going for the ark of God, is repeated by the author of Chronicles y to illuilrate and explain feveral particulars, which are very obfcure, as re- corded by SamueL David having at his back, his declared enemies the Philijiines, it was very prudent in him when he re- folved to go for the ark of God, with all » Verfe la. Jfrael ( 79 ) Jfraely to form an army of obfervation, to keep his enemies in awe, and prevent any furprife, whilll: he and his people were em- ployed in that religious undertaking, which precaution is hinted at by the liril verfe of the fixth chapter of Samuel, in liy ^D^ ^l^ UWbv ^^^T^•'2 ninD b^ r\\^ " again " David gathered together ail the chofen *^ men of Ifrael, thirty thoufand." But after this, the fame author proceeds, faying that David arofe, he and all the people that were w^ith him, without tell- ing us who thofe people were ; for if he meant it to refer to the thirty thoufand men he had juft mentioned, it would have been proper to fay, DJIJ^ "1^1 "Vn opn *^ and David arofe and went with them." He further fays, that he moved from Ba- de of Juda u^rbi^n \r\Vi n.^ ar^ n'b::^^ *' to get up from thence the ark of God ;" by which expreffion we cannot know what place is meant, as we do not find any place mentioned to which this local pronoun Ut^^ may refer; and it could not be Baale Jmia, becaufe that is the place he fets out from. He further fays, '^ the ark " of C So ) ^^ of God, which is called a name, 'n ^)D Dt£f ^^ ybv D^an^n y^r JTI^^ni the name of the " Lord of hofts, dwelling in the cherubim *^ upon him/' which word v':'^ is not clearly underflood to whom it refers. . In ihortj as the whole paflage feems obfcure in ^S*^- muely it was therefore highly proper for the author of Chronicles^ to begin this hiltory ^r by faying, that David gathered all Ifrae^ Qj/j to go to this religious expedition ; for as he was a pious king, he was willing that his firft care, and that of all his people, Ihould be of a devout nature, and thus he acquaints us, who were the people that accompanied Z)^z^/W; he likewife explains, that the place where he went to, to bring from thence the ark of God, was Kiriath^ yearim, a place belonging to the tribe of Judaky and that the ark of the Lord who dwells on the cherubim was called ,UV There is no other remarkable difference in the reft of this Collation, COLLATION C 8i ) COLLATION V. 2Sani^vi. 1 2. -i 6. with 1Chron.xv.25.— 29^ BY this tranfaftion^ as it is recorded by the author of Samuel^ it feems as if David was moved to diflodge the ark from Ohed-edom's houfe, out of envy, being in- formed that the Lord had bleiTed his houfe; therefore, to clear David from fo heavy a charge, the author of Chronicks takes care to explain, that the reafon of David's refolution to remove the ark was^ his being convinced by the bleflings poured on Ohed-edom, that the misfortunes which the ark had occafioned to its former pof- fefTors, was becaufe it had not been at- tended or miniftered by the Levites only, according to w^hat is prefcribed by the law, for the ark w^as far from being the fource of calamities ; on the contrary, it was very propitious, when properly and lawfully miniftered, as Obed-edom, who was a Levite, experienced ; and this is what Chronicles infinuates, ''t:?Nl DDK UT\b ")Qi^>i ( 8^ ) •DS)'k:^DD 'ini:::^")^ i^b * " and faid unto ^^ them, Ye are the chiefs of the fathers of *^ the Levites : fandtify yourfelves, both ye *^ and your brethren, that ye may bring <« up the ark of the Lord God of Ifrael, *^ unto the place that I have prepared for ^^ it : for becaufe ye did it not at the firft, *^ the Lord our God made a breach upon *^ us, for that we fought him not after the *^ due order ;" and, as a very ufeful addi- tion, the fame author employs from the firft verfe to the twenty-fifth, in defcribing all the preparations made for that folemn ce- remony; the whole being with a view, to explain what David inferred from his being told that a bleffing befell on Obed-edom^s houfe ; and to erafe the leaft fufpicion of jealoufy, or envy, in the condud; of fo pious a monarch. * I Chroa. XV. li, 13. COLLATION C H ) COLLATION VL aSam.vi. 17. — zp.with iChro. xvi. i. — 3. THIS Collation affords no remark- able variation worthy of notice. COLLATION Vir. 2 Sam. vii. i — 29. with i Chro. xvii. i . — 27. THE plain meaning of the author of Chronicles^ in the repetition of this oration of DavU, is, to explain fome difficulties that occur in the fame paflage in Samuel, keeping, upon the whole, to the fenfe, with- out fcrupuloufly repeating the fame ex- preffions; for, his purpofe was rather that of a commentator ; upon this principle, thg learned will very eaiily find, a rational caufe for even the fmallefl variations. For in- ftance, the author of Samuel, ver. 7, makes ufc of the word ""^Dt:; " fpake I a word ^^ with any of the tribes of Ijrael, whom I L 2 ^' commandecj ( 84 ) ^^ commanded to feed my people Ifrael^ ^' ^c, which certainly means, any of the Princes of the tribes. This is properly para- phrafed by the author of Chronicles^ in verfe 6, ^ZOBIt!^ Judges, which change of a fingle word, fets every thing to rights. Again, Samuel, \cu 9, makes David ufe this ex^ preffion, D"7Kn miJI Jibuti " and this is the ^^ manner of men, O Lord God;" which conveys no clear idea; therefore Chronicles fubftitutes thefe words, Dli^n "llilD ''^n^'i^ll n'p^arr hinting that the w^ord jimn in Sa-^ muel, is to be underftood in the fenfe of Tin time, although tranflated, *^ and haft ^^ regarded me according to the flate of ^ *^ man of a high degree," but ought to be, ^^ and thou fheweft me agreeable to the *^ time of man," (that is, agreeable to what a man can expedt, as man^ in this xvorldly life), greatnefs or high rank, COLLATION VIII, ^Sam,viii. I,— i8,with iChro.xvii. i. — 17, THE firft variation in this Collation j3, that the aythor of Cbronifks writes, npn ( S5 ) T^''r\^^2^ n:) nj^ np-'i '^ and took Gath and ^^ her towns," initead of what Samuel *' fays, n»i<^n:iriD JIN ^^ Metheg-ammah-^^ to reconcile which, it is natural to fuppofe, that the diflridt of land, upon which the city of Gathy and its dependant villages, were built, was called in David's time by the name of HDJ^n IIDD Metheg-ammah^ which denomination becoming afterwards obfolete, the author of Chronicles explains it to be, n'^Jlim n:) Gath and its de- pendant villages. The fecond great variation is, that the number of horfemen taken by David, from the king of Zohah, appears by Samuel to be, only one ihoufand feven hundredy but, in Chronicles^ they are faid to be fevert thoujand. In anfwer to this variation, let it be remarked. That the author of Samuel does not take any notice, of the number of chariots taken by David on that occafion, although he mentions, that he dellroyed all the chariots, one hundred excepted; which omiflion was fupplied by the au- thor < 86 ) thor of Chronicles y by recording that the number of chariots taken was one thou* fandy and, as in the facred idiom, as well as in the Arabicky the noun v^'^ or ^j^.y is equally applied to horfes of a generous breed, as to horfemen; (fometimes mean- ing the one, and fometimes the other) ; it is probable, that the author of Samuel takes notice only of the number of horfe- men taken, and not of the number o^ horfes, which naturally mult have been employed for the ufe of the chariots, and of courfe muft have been taken with them : and the author of Chronicles y without any view of altering what was recorded by the author of Samuely but only with a defign to fupply that omiflion, records, that the number of the horfes taken were feven thoufandy and perhaps in this number are ;ilfo included thofe of the horfemen. To corroborate this idea, it may be proper to produce fome inflances to evince, that the noun t:;-)S) is often, in Scripture, yy^^d for horfes of a generous breed, ab- ftradedly from riders. Ezek* ( h ) Ezek. xxvii. 14. DHISI a'Zn^^ &V)D T^I^T^l ']2n2 wrongly translated, '• horfcs ^^ and horfemen and mules, traded in thy " fairs " but fhould be *^ Cvmmon horfeSy *^ fpirited korfes (or horfes of high breed) ^^ and mules &c." for, tho' ilaves may be deemed -marchandize, no body will fay that horfemen are fo. Ifaiahxxu 7. ^D") a^i:;"i3 "T*3i: 3Dn nt^ni 'bt2^ HJI "nT^rr alfo wrongly tranflated: *^ And he faw a chariot with a couple cff ^' horfemen, a chariot of affes, a chariot df '^ camels &:c." which Ihould be " and he '' faw a chariot with a couple of horfes '^'* i. e. drawn by two horfes, for in the ninth verfe he expreflly fays "^D^f^ ^T\ Kn r\\ n:m a^::;i3 "r::* : the literal tranllation being, *' And behold here cometh a chariot of a ^* w^« with a couple of horfes^'' and not *^ a chariot of men with a couple of horfe- ^' men ;" for, W)^ here is lingular, and not a generick name; and, in fad:, to bring a piece of news, a fingle man was fufficient. Ifaldl^ ( S8 ) Jfaiahxxxu i. n"l?V^ Dn^D DnnVH ••in IXD IDiJV ""^ D'^iyns wrongly tranflated, *' Wo to men that go down to Egypt ** for help, and flay on horfes, and truft '* in chariots, becaufe they are many, and *^ in horfemeriy becaufe they are very flrong *^ 8cc.'*; but fliould be, '* and m generous *^ horfes, becaufe they are very flrong;" for in the third verfe it is faid K*?") aii^ Dn^iDI nn Kb-^nt:^! DH'^DID') ^i<^ " Now the Egyp- ** tians are men, and not God, and theit *^ horfes flefh, and not fpirit;" and does not mention horfemeriy altho' he does, the Egyptians and the horfes ; but if UW^"^ (^^ I apprehend) means horfes of a generotis hreedy they are included under the general name of horfes. And as the noun tt^ns is equivocal, and may be applyed to horfes as well as to horfemen, when Ezek. xxiii. 6, talking on the errors of Samariahy fays, D^DiD '•3Dn D''ii^-i3 d'^d idh mn:i " All of '^ themdefirable young men, ^(?r/?;;z^;7,riding *^ upon horfes,^' and IhiL verfe 12, again d'^d idh mna d-'Did ODn D^::^n!D " horfe- ^* men, riding upon horfes, all of them *' defirable ( S9 > ^' defire^ble young men," he makes ufe of what would feem a difagi ees ble, need- lefs tautology, faying twice horfemen, and riding upon horfes, were it not confidered, ;hat O^i:'"^^ may be ufed both for men, 5nd for horfes, and therefore it is not a ^eedlefs, but an explanatory repetition^ I now proceed to the third variation in this Collation, which is, that the author of Samuel fays, p"\J^a W^^^ in DC^^I ^^ then David put garrifons in Syria of *^ DamafcuSy &c" But the author of Chronicles leaves out the word pU^*J^ gar- rifons, and only fays, plKn "in Dt:^^ pvryil " Then David put (garrifons) in ^^ Syria Damafcus, &c/' It fhould be ob- ferved, that the tranilators have added the word garrifons out of the Vulgate, which renders this paffage et pofuit milites in DamafcOy &c. Let it be firll remarked, that the word Sifci does not properly mean a garrifon, biit an officer, whether he has a body of *I men ( 90 > men under his command or not; therefore the Tranflators, in i Kmgs iv. 5. and 7. renr der very properly D''3iiJrT " officers," and ^bidvtr, xix, n^:) " officer;" and to fhew the impropriety of rendering the word niJi garrifoHy let us only obferve that in 2 6'^- muelVm, 14. DHJ^ b::^2 D^D^^ii D'n>^l D*^^'* Wy^l UV the Tranflators have rendered, 5^ and he put ganifons in Edo-m, throughr ^^ out Edom put he garrifons,^* which tranflation is partly after the vulgate, " et ^^ pofuit in Idum^a cujlodes ftatuitque prafi^ ^^ dium^'' it is certain that thefe DU^iJ, let the meaning be as it may, continued in the land of Edoniy until the Edpmites rebelled againft the houfe of David, in the reign of Jehoram. Now we find, at the death of J^- hofaphat, i Kings xxii. 47, DHKn TK i^^} n'^D 2)il which text the fame tranflators have rendered, " there was then no king *^ in Edom, a Deputy was king", we may thence conclude that W^^^ are officers or ' deputies, and not ^arrifons, although fpme times D'':i^ m.ay mean the officer and the body of troops under his command. This being admitted, it aj^pears by the author of ( 91 ). hUSamuely that as foon as the firft battle was gained by David- over the king of Sy- ria DamafcuSy he eitablifhed thefe officers in that country, without any further flruggle; but this could not be effected,' unlefs David had gone and attacked him in his own country, which is not mentioned in Samuel; who only records that he vanquilhed them, out of their country^ when they came againfl him as auxiliaries to the king of Zoba, The author of ChronicleSy therefore, hints at this fecond attack in Syria, only by dropping the word 0^3':*: and faying Dl^vn in VW>^ pli^D"»l; the meaning of which is, "Then ^^ David waged war with Syria DamafcusJ* For the verb UW expreffes the waging of war, I Sam. xv. 2. T)"tD i") WV 1^2^^ im- properly rendered, " how he laid wait " for him in the way ;" for the faftwas, that jinmlek openly came to w^ar againft Ifrael, i Kings xx, 12. vn2V ^i^ 1Q>^^1 Tjrn b^ 1^''::;^ ID^D " and he faid unto *' his fervants, fet your/elves in array, and ^^ they fet themfelvcs in array againft the ^' city;'' in the fame manner TH Di^^'l M 2 zr\^:i ( 92 > £j*>K:i means, that David fet hii troops in array, in the territories oi Syria Damafcui;' when the Syrians chofe rather to be Da^ vid*s fcrvants, than to be at war with him; Thus the author of Chronicles, by omitting a fingle word, flippHes an extraordinary de- ficiency, without contradiding in the leaft the author of Samudt The fourth variation in this Collation is, the different manner m which David's affair with the Edomltes is related. Chro*' nicks afcribing the vidory to AhlJJyal^ whilft by Samuel the glory i^ attributed to Davidy and AhiJJoai Is not even mention- ed. The Ix. Ffalntf compofcd by David on the occafion, feems to attribute this deed to Jbah^ limiting the number of the flain to twelve thoufand. Dn» n'A Mmn2, oni<* pi'A T'1 SKV li^^'-i nnvi Dij^ nvc\ onnj 9^H nw D^::^ rh'o K^:ia " when he ftrove ^^ with Aram-nahaYalm and with Jram-zo- ^^ hah, when Joah returned and fmote of " Edom, in the valley of Salt^ twelve thou- « fando'' It C 93 ) It mull be confefTed, thit this paffagc in Samuel is very obfcure, UV in ^y^l n^Dz; n'pa ^'^x^ xr\\^ iiK liii^rro 1211:^3 ^"A "1W rendered thus, " and i)^wV got ** him a name, when he returned from ■^ fmiting of the Syrians^ m the valky of ^* Saky behig eighteen thoufand 7nen" This text is very unintelligible, not-^ withllanding the Tranflators fupplemental words of him, being, and men. The ob- fcurity of this pafTage, th^refote, induced the author of Chronicks to elucitiate it, by recording thefc additional cfrcun^anccsy 5^^K ^W T\T\':2'^ ^^ Moreover AhiJIjal " the fon of Zeruiah flew of the Edmmtes ^ inr the valley of Salt, e^hteen thou- " fand ;^' and although this exploit wa4; performed by AbiJJjai, it tended to render the name of David famous; thi* vvofd Q'sJ? meaning fame, renown, as m Ecckf, vii. r. 2113 ]:2^r:i QV yi^ '^ a good lT*ame is bet- ter than precious ointment," fo tjiat Q'^^ by itfclf ftands for a good name; and the prefixed vvQrd-21t3 means better. Gen, \u Wif7\ ^v:i)f^ " men of renovm". As to the ailair ( 94 ; affair of yoah's flaying twelve thoufafid men, mentioned in the Pfalms, it may be faid, that it was a dillindt vidtory, gained by 3KV, as the word 2V'^^ " and Joab re- *^ turned", feems to indicate that after what had paffed, as to the eighteen thoufand men, he returned and fmote twelve thou-- fand more. The fifth variation is, that in Samuel it is faid, vn D^^HD in ^22^ rendered, " and David's fons were chief rulers." . But Chro- nicks has it, -]>'? D'^^t^^i^lH im ''nf ^tyn; rendered^ ^^ and the fons of ^^ David were chief about the king/' This variation is certainly meant to ex-r' plain the meaning of the word D^^ilD' nfed by the author of Samuely left it might be conftrued in the ordinary fenfe oi Priejls; therefore Chronicles fays, that they were the fir fi by the king, perhaps the captains of the life-guards, and both places are very properly rendered by the tranflators. COLLATION ( 95 ) COLLATION IX, 2 Sam, X.I, — 1 9. with i Chro.xix. i, — 19* THE variations in this Collation are, that in Chronicles we read '^ feven thoufand chariots," :)Di u'^b^ ir;y:) inflead of *^ feven hundred" irw^r^ V^V mentioned in Samuel ; and Chronicles alfo reads ^^ forty <* thoufandy?j<7/;?/Y« or infantry/' ^i^ WVy^^ ^by\ ^'\^ inftead of " forty thoufand horfe- nen'' D'ti^lS ^l^^^ D^pa")J^ expreiTed hy Samuel. The firft of thefe, apparently great diffi- culties, may be cafily folved, by only ex- plaining, that Samuel gives the number of chariots taken, and Chronicles the number of men employed or fighting in thofe cha- riots. Let it be obferved, that, in both paflages, the expreffion preceding the pumbers;, either of feven hundred or feven thoufand, is, and David Jleiv in y^^['l^ but as chariots cannot be the objed: of Haying, the word :iD-i, in Samttely mufl pecelfarily mean men employed about thefe chariots, and therefore the tranflators have very properly rendered this paifage in S^- mely " and Bavid flew the men of feven hundred ( 96 ) hundred chariots of the Syrians^'* and have alfo very juftly rendered the correfponding palTage in ChrmiicleSy " and David flew *' of thetS)r/j;/jfeventhourand which fought ^' in chariots/' which clearly reconciles the Jirft difficulty ; and I ihall only add, that ^^n independant of its meaning of a cha- riot, fignifies alfo riders^ whether on horfe-» tack or in chariots, 2 Kings vji. 14^ G'V^'O 3Pl "^yi^ *\'r\\>''"^ is wrongly tranf- ■lated, " fo they took two chariot horfes^** for it fhould be " tzvo riders,'* or horfe^ men, fince it is faid immediately before, that, there were no more than five horfes left in all the city ; and this cir- cumilance confidered, it is not likely they would have ventured in what, (according to them), w^s a very hazardo^ expedU jtion, almoft all their ftock^ 2 Kings ix, 16. KIH^ Dpn^l f^ fo Jehu '^^ rode in a chariot," and Ibidwcr. 17. XXp Dnsnp'? rhv^ ^T\ " take an horfeman, ^^ and fend to meet them." As to the fecond variation, I fuppofe that the author of Chronicles having fovincj in ( 97 )■ jil ComQ other authentick. record the words »^:n ^''i^ infantry, in lieu of D''^"13 caval- ry, he thought proper to infert them, efpecially as- it was more probable that he ilew forty thoufand of the infantry, and^ not forty ;:houfand horfcmcn. COLLATION X. 2 Sam. xi. i. xiii 30. — 31. with I Chronicles xx. i. — 3, I N this Collation we find, that the author of Chronicles does not mention any thing of the affair of Uriah and Bath-JJoebahy .nor any circumftance about the belieging of Rabbah; indeed he is generally filent as to what relates to David's private affair^, or perfonal prowefs, and only records whatever concerns David as a klitg, or what affedts the nation in general. Beiides, he may have omitted thofe fadts, becaufe he did not find therein any thing that required illuilration, or further explana- tion; fo that the whole of this Collation N is ( 98 ) is confined to only two texts, 'viz. z Sam. xii. 30. — 31. ^vith I Chron. xx. 2. — 3* which are pretty near the fame, without any remarkable variation. The author of Chronicles by faying in the firfl verfe of the twentieth chapter, nn*l n^♦ DKV y\ HDin^l ** and Joab fmote Rabhah, and *^ deflroyed it," does not in the lead con- tradid: that faft, as recorded by the author ci Samuel, who fays, that after Joab had taken pofTefHon of the royal city, and the city of the waters, he then fent to David inviting him to come and enter the city as conqueror ; ' for the truth feems to be, that the author of Chronicles, in defcribing that Joab battered and demolifhed the city walls, intended only to give an explana- tion of what is faid in Samuel, thatr joab took poflcflion of it, wdiich means, that by rendering it deflitute of defence,- It lay entirely at his mercy, but he would not enter it, referving that honour to Da- vidy as it was a royal city, and the king himf^f was to be one of the prifoners. COLLATION' ^1 J ( 99 ) COLLATION XL 2 Sam. xxi. i8.— 22.with i Chro.xx.4. — 8. I N the Collation of thefe five verfes, there is a very material variation in refpedt of the names of one of the giants, and of ^he hero who flew him. Samuel records W^i:^^ ^^':22 ^^\'T^ yri ''n:^n rvb:^ '' that '^ Elhanan the fon of Jaare-oregm^ z Beth* /^ kmite, flew Goliath the Gittiie, the flafF of whofe fpear was like a weavers beam.'* and not the-brother of Goliath the Gittite, as the Tranflators have thought fit to add. But the author of Chronicles fays, ]2nbi^ y^ P^yii^ ntJO^ " that Elhanan tjie fon cf *^ 7j/V, flew Lahmi the brother of Goliath ^^ the Gittite, whofe fpears-flaff was like a ^^ weavers beam." The addition made by the Tranflators in Samuel^ of the words the brother of^ that are not in the ori- ginal, was to remedy in part this va- riation, which is deemed a plain mif- take of the tranfcriber in the text of Smuds by the learned Dr. Kennicot in his N z firfl ( 100 ) foft Differtation />. 78; who very ingenw oufly attempts to conjedlure how this fnjftake might have happened. But I hope I Ihall be able to flaew, that not- withflanding fuch a difplay of erudition^ bd*h palFages may be reconciled without the lead contradiction; I have already ob- ferved, that the chief view of the author of Chronicles, in mofl of thefe paiTages, which he thought proper to repeat, or to extradt from preceeding facred writings, was only to illuilrate the fame, by explain- ing fome obfcure exprefiions, or by record-r ing fome circumftances which had been omitted by the firfl writers ; for many cir- cumftances may be deemed immaterial to be recorded, when the events are recent and well known, which, nevejrtl^elefs, by length of time, become important to elucidate the fubje^S; and indeed this fcheme is managed by the author of Chronicles with fuch fkill ai^d delicacy, that an adept in the He- brew language may, with due attention, be able to difcover many beauties, even ii^ fuch particulars that feem irregular, or quite needlefg and fuperfluous; as in the <^hange of one conjugation for another; tranfpofitio^ ( loi ) tranfpoiition of words, — and even the order of events. — I flatter myfelf, that I have Ihewn fome inllances thereof in the courfe of this fmall work, though at prefcnt I muft content myfelf with barely hinting at this, without entering into the proofs of my aflertion ; nor do I propofe to enter into a controverfy with thofe refpedlable learn- ed men, who widely differ from me in this refpedt; I ihall here folely confine myfelf to the reconciliation of the variations in queilion, and let the unprejudiced Crl- tick then determine whether thefe pafTages afford any proof of corruption in the fa- •pred writings. It may perhaps be readily granted, that this hero Elhanan, the vanquilher of this Giant, is one and the fame perfon with that Elhanan who is numbered amongH the mighty men of David, fecond in rank after Afael {JoaFs brother) in both the catalogues, for he is called nn p ^:^'7^^ X2'rh /T'^D rendered " Elhanan the fon of ^' Dodo of Betk'lehem ; " the word mi is not a proper name, but means ^^ his uncle^^ 5ind is properly rendered by the vulgate '' filim ( 102 ) ^^^ ^^^ ^^ ther of the valley of Cbarajhtm;* af- figning the reafon of their being fo called, becaufe, vn D"»l2^"in ^D, for ther were *^ craftfmen;" but the author of C^rofr/V/^i", vvhofe view in recording the deed in queftion, was only to throw light on th6 name of the giant that was fiain, did nof think it material to give the family n?.me of Elhanan, efpecially as it was already recorded by the author of Samv.eL It is further to be obferved, that the name of rhz GoUatl\- (in rhy humble opinion), is not a proper name, but an accidental one, an epithet, or name giveii to defcribe fome accident or peculiarity natural to the perfon to whom it is given ; it means, in Ihort, a giant ; and whoever is of a prodigious corpulency, may be fo called ; r\b^ may be derived from ^:i, amount, and as a vafl heap of ilefh and bones bears analogy thereto, there- foire giants in' general may be epithc- tically called Goliaths; and confequent> * I Chroa, iv, 14, ( 104 ) !y It does not follow, that the expre/^ fion in Samuel, of Elhanans killing Goliath .the Gittite, fhould imply that he was the fame Goliath ilain by David, but he might well be a brother of his, (as explain-* ed in Chronicles), who being alfo 2i giant, was likewife called Goliath, However the pro- per name of the giant in our prefent paflage, was Lahmi, as we learn by the author of Chronicles, who records this fad:, not to corredt, but to fupply the deficiency of the giant's name in Samuel, and to illu- flrate thereby this hiflorical paflage. COLLATION XIL 2Sam.xxiv. i.-25.with i Chro.xxl. i.— 27* THERE are two variations in thefe accounts, that deferve fpeeial notice ; one- is, as to the numbers of Ifrael and Judah- and the fecond relates to the fum of mo- ney paid by king David to Arnan the Je- hufite for his field, to build upon it aft altar to facrifice to God; all the other va- riations will be found, upon examination, not to be corredi,©ns, but only additions and ( 105 ) and illuilratiohs" of fome particulars of this hiflory. The firfl variation. It is faid in Samuel^ that Joab found the Ifradites to be eight hundred thoufand men ; and the men of Judah five hundred thoufand ; whereas Chronicles fa3-s, that 'Joah found Ifrael to be one million, one hundred thoufand; and thofe of Judahy only four hundred and feventy thoufand. Suchdifcordant accounts, would feem to authorife a fufpicion of corruption ; and fome Criticks perhaps may beapthaflily to concltde, that Chrc* nicks meant to corredt the correfponding paflage in Samuel, fince the refpedtive num- ber of the men of Ifrael and Judah, as given by Chronicles, feems more natural and proportionable, than that given by the author of Samuel; but not with ftand- in'g this unfavourable appearance, I hope I iliall be able to fnew, that Chronicles^ even in this remarkable inflance, doe? not correct, but only fupplies deficiencies, and explains the account recorded in Sci-' mueL Let it be obferved, that it appears O bv ( ic6 ) by Chronicles, chap, xxvii. that there wcfe twelve divifions of Generals^ who com- manded monthly, and whofe duty was to keep guard near the king's perfon, each having a body of troops, con- fining of twenty-four thoufand men, which, jointly, formed a grand ar- •my of two hundred and eighty-eight thoufand ; and as a feparate body of ^velve thoufand men naturally attended on the twelve Princes of the twelve tribes mentioned in the fame Chapter^ the whole v\ill be three hundred thoufand, which is the diiference between the two accounts of eight hundred thoufand, and of one million, one hundred thoufand*. As to the men of Ifrael, the author of Samuel, does not take notice of the three hundred thoufand, becaufe they were in the adtua^ fervice of the king, as a {landing army, and therefore there was no need to num- ber them; but Chronicles (as a worthy and learned friend of mine obferves) joins them to the reft, faying cxprefsly, *7K")t£^^ ^D ' all thofe of Ifrael were one million, * Vide Alichot Kolam^ p. i8i, whence I have deduced this natural folution, as to the number of JJrael. C ^07 ; <* one hundred thoufand;" whereas the author of Samuel, who reckons only the tight hundred thoufand, docs not fav, bi^-WD^ b2 " all thofc of Ifraei;' bur, barely, b^-)^^^ MJii " and Ifniel were, ^V/' It mufl alfo be obferved, that exclufive of the troops before mentioned, there was an army of obfervation, on the frontiers of the Thilijiines country, compofed of thirty thoufand men, as appears by * 2 Sam. vi. i. which feems were includ- ed in the number of five hundred thou- fand of the people of Judah, by the au- thor of Samuel; but the author of Chro- nicies, who mentions only four hundred and feventy thoufand, gives the number of that tribe, exclufive of thofe thirty thou- fand men, becaufe they were not all of the tribe of Judah, and therefore does not fay, niin* ^D " all thofe of Judah,'' as he had ikid, "PN^'^^ b:^ " all thofe of Ifraei;' but only TM'):]^) ^^ and thofe of Judah;' and thus both accounts may be reconciled, by only having recourfe to other partg of Scripture, treating on the fame fubjcd:^ * Vide Page 79. O a which ( loS ) "V^hich will ever be found the befl me- thod of explaining difficult paflages. The above variations are in appearance ^o glaringly contradictory, that if the ftanding army of two hundred and eighty- eight thoufand men, and the army of ob- fervation of thirty thoufand, had not been recorded in Scripture, by which the diffi- culties are folved, * fuch modern criticks who take a delight in finding feeming defedis, blemifhes, and corruptions, in our copies of the facred books, might, with great plaufibility, produce the pre- fent Collation, as an irrefragable inftance to fupport their poiition. But let us, for a moment, fuppofe, that thofe circumflances^ though real facts, had not been recorded ; how would the date of the queftion then I'eil:? Thofe criticks would plume them- '^ For, as to the other twelve thoufand, it is reafonable to fay, that ihcy were not taken notice of by Samuc!^ iiecaufe they were alfo in the king's fervice, or as at- tendants to the twelve Princes of the tribes, or as officers wipon tht king's lands and revenues. felves C 109 ) felves on what they would call the irre- fiilible force of fuchcontradidtory inflances; but all their boafting would be grounded on the bafelefs fabrick of a viiion, I mean on our ignorance of thofe particulars, which if known would immediately re^ concile the variations. The inference I would draw from this obfervation is, that many difficulties may appear infurmount- able, which might ealily be Iblved, had the facrcd writers been more explicit in re^ cording of circumflances, which perhaps they have omitted, as being well known in their time; and therefore Criticks fhould be more cautious, than peremptorily to pronounce all fceming variations to be a proof of corruption, iince our prefent in- ability to reconcile them, is no certain proof of any blemifli or defedt. I am fcnfible it may be faid, that the various readings gathered by a Col- lation of many ancient manufcripts and printed copies, often corroborate the aiTer- tion of miitakes in our prefent copies; but even this is far from being convincing. J.et us, for inftance, ftate the cafe, that the pafii sge. C MO ) pafTage we have been treating of in Sa- nmely was found, in fome ancient manu- fcript, to agree with Chromdes in the num- bers of one million, one hundred thouland; and of four hundred and feventy thou- fand. This, in my humble opinion, far from invalidating our copies, would only prove, that the tranfcriber being at a lofs to account (as we have done), for the extraordinary difference, as to the numbers, in thofe authors, took it for granted, (as our modern criticks do), that one of thofe paiTages was erroneous; and deeming that of Chronicles to be more confonant to reafon and probability, determined to give it the preference, and therefore altered what he found in Samuel, thinking he was only correcting a vifible millake, whilft in fadt, he was adlually corrupting the facred text; and I, (by what I have feen,) am apt to think, that many of the various readings, ariling from fuch Collations, will, when duly confldered, be found to have no better foundation, than the difr polition of Tranfcribers to corredt what they, (for Vv'ant of due fkill or informa- tion) judged to be erroneous. I ( III ) 1 now proceed to the fecond materlaj variation in this Collation, which is con- cerning the price paid by David to the Jebiifite Arcwna ; by Samuel it appears, to be fifty Shekels, and by Chronicles fix hundred Shekels of gold ; but the curious may obferve, that in Samuel, David bar- gains for the threihing-floor only, pUT to build an altar for his prcfent ufe, to gether with all neccflarics for the facri- iice; w^hereas in Cbronicles, he purchafcs the w^holc, undcfcribed premifes, Dlp*jrT which he dcfigns to build on, a laflLng place of worfhip, which may be eaiily perceived by confulting the context ia both places, and by recolled:ing that it Is the very fpot upon which Solomons temple w^as built, which place preferved the name of Dlp^, as It is recorded in Chronicles, brv) ]on i^ii inu?^ I'^Mb nsn:j -^:^*^i r]'i^:2n *'D^ytl P'n^^ ]i:a TM Dlp^n " Then Sohmon *'' began to build the houfe of the Lord at ** Jerufalem, in mount Moriah, ^\'here the * Z Chron. iii. i. Lord ( 11^ ) '^ Lord appeared unto David his father^ *' and which he prepared in the place " belonging to David, in the threfliing- ^^ floor of Oman the Jehujite.'' COLLATION XIIL i Kings iii. 5. — 13. with2Chron.i. 7.— 12. THERE is not in this Collation any variations worthy of notice, both keeping a flridt harmony with one another, in point of fenfe, and only ufing different phrafes, which are far from being ufelefs ; lince, if the curious would attentively examine them, they would be found to illuftrate each other. COLLATION XIV. I Kings vi. i. — 3. with 2 Chron. iii. i. — 4. I N this Collation, Chronicles furnilhes' feveral valuable fupplements to the ac- count I ( i'3 ) count given in the book of Kings of this great building; for he begins by telling us, the place where the temple or houfe of God was built; explains that the cubits of the meafure ufed in this building wefe of the old dimenfions, to apprife us that they were not fuch as were ufed in the author's time; and according to the ancient Dodtors, the old cubit ufed in that building was of fix hands each: he alfo adds, the highth of the d^M^ the Porch, which was omitted by the author of the book of Kings ; befidcs fome other minute additions and illuflrations, which can be eaiily accounted for/ -t^ ^ ^. • - COLLATION XV. I Kings vi. 19—28. with 2 Chro.ili. B.-^i 3« I N this Collation the Curious may re- 'mark, that the author of Chronicles only fupplies fome deficiencies in the book of KingSy and repeats fome particulars which wanted illuflration ; but is quite iiknt as P to ( JH ) to diofc things that do not want explaha^ tion. COLLATION XVL X Kings vi. I J.-22, with 2 Chro. iii. 1 5.-1 7. THIS Collation relates to the defcrip- tion of the two famous pillars ; and there is a feeming glaring difference in their di- jnenfions; for, by the book of Kings, they appear to be of eighteen cubits each; and, by Chronicles^ of thirty-five, including ^he top, or Chapiter, which was of five Cubits : To which it may^be faid. That the book of Kings gives us only the highth of tlic body of the pillar, without the pedeflal, upon which mofl probably it was erefted; and perhaps this pedellal was twelve cubits high, making in the whole, from the ground to the top of the ehapiter, thirty-five cubits; and the fifteentli vcrfe in Chronicles^ which fays, *i:sh W'^^ tn^em x::i'thv ^^^'o^ u^yD D»-t)Di? riun i^DfT tw» wvn bv ^tiv^ rmns ■p'r^* ^''* - ought I ( "5 ) ought to be rendered, " he alfo made *^ before the houfe, two pillars of thirty *^ five cubits high, with (or including) ♦^ the chapiter, on the top of each ** of them, which was of five cubits;" the •) prefixed of /ISIM*) ferving inllead of p;^'' as in I Sam, xiv. t8. p-)^^ HM ^J bii'\^'> ^:2i K'lnn Dva o^n^^rr properly rendered, " for the ark of God was at *^ that time with the children of Tfrael;'* and having made this addition, and that of the jnni:^")'.^* chaifiSy from the temple to the pillars, omits all other particulars, as being already properly defcribed in the book of Kings. COLLATION XVII, J Kings vii. 22.-26. with i Chro. vi. 2."5» THE firft variation found in this Collation is, that, in the defcription of the grand bafon, the author of Chronicles ufes D^")pn inftead of uyp^ as exprelTed by the author of Kings, verfe iii. ; this we may fuppofe was a fort of work of relieve^ P 2 round ( ii6 ) round about it, under the border thereof; the phrafe U'^p2 being rather ufed by the author of Chrouicksy as being more fami- liar in his time, the. better to convey the idea to his readers. The fecond variation is far more mate- rial; for the author of Kings fays, that the bafon was large enough to contain two thoufand mcafures ; and the author of Chronicles fays, th^t it could contain three thoufand meafures. It appears to me, that this kind of meafure, was called ^0% which feems evident by his faying b'^y D^3^H TT^^V D^na \>'^'^'nn ^' and it received and held three thoufancj ^*^ bathim;'' for if ^O^ was a verb, he would not have ufed two verbs of the fam^ iigniiication in the fame fentcncCjto exprefs pne fingle thing, pnriD and b^y. Nov/ to reconcile the variation as to the quan- tity, I fubmit the two following conjec- tures to the judgement of the Learned. I . That the Author of Kings fpeaks of Jiquid meafure, and the Author of Chro- nicks of dry meafure, as corn^ grain, &c, which ( "7 ) which can be piled up above the brim, and of this it was able to hold three thoufand pieafures, tho'only two thoufand of liquids. 2. That the meafure called b^y was altered into a lefler quantity, than what it contained in Solomon's time : therefore the Author of Chronicles gives the quantity of the meafure of *?0^ of his time, being three thoufand, which were equal to two thoufand of the former ; this folution is rather more probable, becaufe, as there was an alteration in the cubits, as we have al- r^eady obferved, from Chronicles in Chap, iii. ver. 3, where it is remarked that the cubits were ^^ of the former meafure,'* n^'^t^^i^'irT mon it may be prefumed that the liquid meafure was alfo altered, COLLATION XVin. J Kings, vii. 38.-5 1, with 2 Chro.xviii. 6-1. • I N this Collation, we find many necef- fary additions, and explanations, made by the Author of Chronicles. He ( "8 ) He explains the ufe of the DHVD Lavers, ivhich were tolerve towafh the fleihof the facrifices : and points out likewife the ufo of the great bafon, which ferved for the priefts to make their ablutions with that water. He alfo defcribes where the candlcflicks were placed, namely in the temple, five on the right hand and five on the left, fov the expreffion in Kings "lUin ''^3^ " before " the oracle " wanted explanation, parti- cularly as in that book they are mentioned among the reft of the things made up by Hiram. He adds the making of the ten tables ; not mentioned by the Author of Kings ; as alfo the priefts hall or yard ; and the great kail with the gates &c. and the ftation where the great bafon was placed ; which are circumftances that were not at all taken notice of by the Author oi Kings , Let it be further obferved; that the things belonging to the temple mentioned in ( 119 ) In the hook of Kings, are not mentioned m the order as they were placed, but rnereiy as they were made; that is, the things belong- ing to the bviilding apaft^ ^iid the uteHlife apart, under .the. catalogue of the things made by Hiram ; but Chronicles relates every thing in its own place, with great regtila- rity, and afterwards gives the lift of the things made by Hiram. COLLATION XIX, iKings.viii. I.— ii.withzChro.v. 2. — I4 did not require elucidation, it would be Sk needlefs repetition ; but as the Hymn or Pfaim fung by the Levites when the ark was removed from Obed Edom's houfe, is not given by the Author of Samuely it is introduced in i Chronicles xvi. from ver. 8, to ver. 36, and in a much more ample manner than what is retained of it in Pfalm cv. which agrees with Chronicles only in the firft 15 verfes; and the reft of this hymn, is with little variation the Pfalm xcvi.; the concluiion, or the lafl three verfes, excepted. COLLATION XXL I Kingsviii. 62.-66. with zChro. vii.4.-io. I N this Collation, we find the Author of Chronicles makes fome additions in the dcfcription of this folemn feail, and fome explanatory alterations. 0^2 COLLATION ( 1^4 ) COLLATION XXIL I Kings, ix. I. -9. with 2 Chro. vii. 11. -22. WHATEVER is additional in the book of Chronicles in this Collation, arifes from the difference in the refpedtive Re- gifters out of which thefe pafTages have been extracted ; this being fimilar to what I have already faid in Collation xx. to which I beg leave to refer the reader. COLLATION XXin. I Kings.ix. 1 0.-23. with ^ Chro.viii.i.-io, THERE is, in this Collation, two feeming glaring differences. Firlt, by the book of Kings we find, that Solomon gave to Hiram twenty cities ; and by Chronicles it appears, as if Hiram gave Solomon fomc cities. But might not Hiram have made a return to Solomon's generofity, prefenting him fome other cities ? this feems to be hinted at by the Author of Chronicles. The ( 1^5 ) "f he fecond difference is, that in Kh?gs\c\\ 23. it is faid, that the number of the rulers over the workmen were five hundred and fifty ; but Cbronicles records them to have been only two hundred and fifty. To this it may be fufficient to remark, that the book of Kings Charadtcrizes them thus, nt:; rdii D^'^^^DH nob^b n:>i^br2n bv "^^i^ au^i^rr ^^ Thefe were the chief of the officers that " w^ere over Solomon's work, five hundred '^ and fifty, which bare rule over the people ^^ ihat wrought in the work," but fhould be rendered, " five hundred and fifty, thofc ^^ which bare rule over the people, and ^^ thofe which wrought in the work. '* What leads me to this, is, that it is natural to fuppofe that there were chiefs among the workmen, as well to compel them to work, as to direct them how to work ; the firft kind of rulers, are meant by UV1 DHin ; and the fecond kind arc hinted at by nJkS^^n D"*'^;/!!; now the Author of Chronicles has purpofely left out the words ^D^^'?Qn D^Wil " thofe that *^ wrought in the work" to make it beunder- " ftood C 126 ) flood that the two hundred and fifty which he mentions, were only thofe that had rule over the people to oblige them to work; as all the people employed in that work werd bonds-men or hired llrangers, ; and as the Author of Kings mentions this number of rulers, after having exprefsly faid >^D;d> rirr-isi iiDn ni:^i v^'^bm v^m inDyi *' But *^ of the children of Ifrael did Solomon *' make no bondsmen^ but they were men *' of war, and his fervants, and his princes^ ^' and his captains, and rulers of his chariots *^ and his horfemen*" The reader might thence think that the five hundred and fifty rulers were all of the children of Ifrael f therefore, the Author of Chornicles, after regillering the fame, ver. 22. continues to give the number of the rulers,^ that had power and command over the people, faying they were no more than two hundred and fifty; thereby infinuating that the other three: hundred, the complement of the five hundred and fifty mentioned in Kings, were Surveyors or mafter-mafons, that dired:ed how the work was to be executed, and they themfelves were w^orkmen. ( 127 ) workmen, being ftrangers, hired for that purpofe. As to thofe circum- fiances which the Author of Chronicles has totally omitted, it is natural to fup- pofe he did fo, becaufe they wanted no illuflration, the remaining fmali variations in this Collation are but explanatory- alterations. COLLATION XXIV. iKings ix.26.-2S.with2Chro.viii.17.— 28, THE refult of this Collation will, in my humble opinion, ihew, that two different circumftances attending this tranfadtion arc recorded. The author of Kings gives an account of Solomons building a fliip }n the port of Ezioa Geher on th^ Red Sea^ and that Hiram fent his fervants, a Tea- faring people, (well ikilled in navigation), who performed that voyage in company with Solomon's people, ^V. And the au- thor of Chronicles relates the circumftance of Solomon's going himfelf to Ezion Geber^ &g, and ;hat Uirqm fcnt to him the tno- del ( 128 ) ^els of fiips^ to build a fliip hf- them, D> "'PIV " and Hiram fent him, by the *^ hands of his fervants, fhips, and fer- ^^ vants that had knowledge of the fea;>* namely, fkilful mariners, to navigate the ihips. As to the variation in the quantity of gold, obtained by that expedition, which, according to Kings, was four hundred and twenty talents, though four hundred and fifty are mentioned by Chronicles; va- rious are the explanations offered by Com- mentators to reconcile this variation; fome fay, that the author of Kings records only the fum of money, which entered into the king*s coffers, arifing from this expedition, which was four hundred and twenty ta- lents, after having dedud:ed the expences thereof, which was thirty talents; whereas the author of Chronicles records the whole grofs fum they brought at their return, without any dedudtion. Others fay, that the Jerufalem talent was greater than that of Ophiry fo that Four hundred and fifty ot G/)^/r-talents, made Four hundred an4 X f-^9 ) ^ and twenty oijerufakm; and that. the. a\i- thor of Kings records . the iiim. .. pf ^J-e-^ rufalem talents, and Chrmkks. \hzt^ :oi Ojibir* But 1 rather think it . probabJe that the author of, .C/^row/V^j mierted^th^ quantity that he found '.recorded in .forne publick regifler ; not with any intention of correding the text in Kings, but rather to corroborate the account in general; and in order to obviate any doubt that might arife as to the largenefs of the fum, heajc^t quaints us, that other records exceed . it. • COLLATION 5tXV. i Km^s X. I.— i^.^^i^tlftSr^xlTji^iS. ALL the variations in this Colla- tion are merely explanatory/ as ^theftudi- ous may eafily difcern ; verfe ii in Krngi fays, -)^3iJ^D anr «^3 1t:^^^ dth ^:j^ d:)*) r]^p^ .tranflated after the Vulgate, ". aad *^ the navy alfo of Hiram, that brought '/-gold from Ophir, brought in from '■■- R . Ophir, ( 13^ ) ^* Opiiy, great plenty of almug trees andf ^' precious flones/' Now it is plain from the contcit, that he talks here of the Clip or fhippirig, that king Solomon built in Ezion Geber, upon which Solomon's and Hiram's fervants jointly ufed to go to Opbir. But, as this paflage in Kings is fo worded, that it might be coriflrued to fcfer to fhipphlg belonging fotely or fe- parately to Hiram, therefore the author of Chronicles explains it, clearing it of all ambiguity, by exprefling the circumflance irt queflion, in thefe words, "^IDJ^ D:h n^siND DHt wan ^wik nub^if nay*) on^n '^Ji U^D^jhik ^XJ/ Mk^2n " and alfo the fer* *' vants of Hiram, and the fervants of So- '^ lomoHy who brought gold from Ophir, ^* brought alfo," ^c. COLLATION XXVIL t Kings, xii. I. -19. with z Chro. x. i.-ig, COLLATION XXVIL T Kings, xii. 21. "24. with 2 Chro. xi. i.— 4. COLLATION ( 131 ) C O L L A T I ON XXVIII, J Kings xiv. 29. 31. — ^. with 2 Chronicles xii, 13.— «-i6» I N the whole of thefe three Collations, there is fcarce any variation worthy of notice, according to the plan J have adopted, ex# c.epting indeed that the book of Chronicles^ as ufual, furniihes us with many valuablip additions, and illuilrations. • COLLATION XXIX. 1 Kings, XV. I. 2. 7. 8. with 2 Chronicles^ xiii. i. 2. 31. 23. THERE is a very remarkable vari- ation in this Collation, in the nanne of king Abijam or Abijah's mother ; tn the book of Kings ihe is called 7Jaaca the daughter of Abfalom, ?.nd even in Cbro* nicies * Ihe is alfo called by this fame name; but in this paflage. Chronicles calls herby the name of Mlcayau the daughter of Uriel of Gihea, * Chap. xi. ver. 20. R 2 To ( ^^^ ) To folve this difficulty, I beg leave to offer, that the title of ^bnr\ D^, and that of HT^jn defcFibe one and the fame thing ; I mean that the phrafe "^D^ D'^"^ and his mother's name was &c. when exprelled on a king's accefiion to the throne, at the begining of his hiftory, does hot always imply, that the lady whofe name is then mentioned was the king's mother ; I apprehend that "^dK //'^king's mother, when fo introduced, is only a title of honour and dignity, enjoyed by one lady folely of the royal family at a time, denoting her to bg* the firft in rank, chief fultana, or queen dowager, whether llie happenned to be the king's mother or not. This remark fecms to be corroborated by the hiftory of king Jfa *, who w^as Ahijah's fon : " In the book of Kings ^ at his accellion, this fame Maaca Jbfalom'^ daughter is faid to be his mother, 4nd Afa afterwards deprived her of the dignity of mui), or chief eil in rank, on account of her idolatrous proceedings, but it Js certain that Maaca^ was his grand-? * I Kings, XV. 9. acd 2 Chioa. xv. 16. mother. ( I3S ) mother, and not his mother, as here dcf- cribed, therefore if we look upon the ex- prefiion of the Kin^s Mother^ to be only a title of dignity, all the difFxulty will ceafe, for this Maaca w as realy Abijas mother, the dearly beloved wife of his father Relaboaniy who for her fake, appointed her fon, Abija^ to be his fucceflor * to the throne ; but when Abija came to be king ; that dignity of the king's mctheVf or the firfl In rank of the royal family, was for fome reafon, perhaps for feniority, given to Micaxau the daughter of Uriel of Gibea, and afterwards upon the death of Micayat^, that dignity devolved to Maaca, and ihe enjoyed it, at the accefllon of A/a her grand-fcn, \\ho afterwards degraded her for her idolatry. This I fubmit as a ra- tional w ay of reconciling all thefe paffagcs, which feem fo contradictory and repugnani: to each other. The better to prove this aflertion, lei it be obferved, that in 2 Kings xxiw 12. it is faid, i^.-p ^y n^n^ i^bo yy^n' ^T^ * 3 Lron. x'u 29. ai. 21, C 134 ) i^^d"? nz^^ n:io ^as i'^d inm " and •^ Jehoiachim the king of Judahy went ^* out to the king of Babylon, he and his " mothevy and his fervants, and his *^ Princes, and his officers, and the king ^' of Babylon took him, ^r." and, /^/V. ver. 15. D.^ riKi n'?ni p^w r\\^ '?:i"'i ^^y) n^13 T^in yi^rr " and he carried *^ away Jehoiachim to Babybn, and the *^ ;^/;;^*^ mother , and the king's wives and ^' his officers," &c, and Jeremiah xxix. 2. mentioning the fame circumftances, fays D^Dnom nnu:)m t^qh n^:3:)> nm '^inii '1:11 mirr* nt:^ " after that Jcconiah the " king, 2Lnd the queen, and the eunuchs, **^ the princes of Judahy &c. departed from *^ Jeriifaleniy* now it is evident, that queetiy m this vcrfe, cannot mean the king's wife, as it would feem by the Translators ren- dering always the word mu:)?! queen; but means the lady that is invefted with that dignity, of being called the king\ mother; the phrafe n"»''3:in in Jeremiah cor- refponding with ^'^i^jn Di^ and ')D^^ in Kings, The Vulgate tranflates the word riTIlJ I Kings C 135 > I Kings x\. 19. and z Kings x. 13, Re- girne; i Kings xv. 13^ Prlnceps; 2 Chrort* XV. 16. depofiiit imperio; Jer. xxix. 2. Domina; Ibid, xiii. iS. Domiriatnci; — and the Tranflacors aUvays rendered It ^.een. That "fT^n DK was a title of dignity, is obvious by i Kirigs ii. 19. nD ^^3il') in^:i>^ ^>r "6 nni^ r^^bv -fpon "pk ynx^ I^^D^^ 3^J1") l'70n DN^"? SCD D'v:^^ IND^ *' Bathjheha therefore went into king ^' Solomcn to fpeak unto him for Adonijahi •^ and the king rofe to meet her, and ^^ bowed himfelf unto her, and fat down *^ on his throne, and caufed a, feat to be ^* fet for the king's mother ; and flie fat on " his right hand," for it was better to fay KDJ rh W2)'^^ " and caufed 2 feat to " be fet for her,'' but fays, U^b J^DD WV''^ ^t2r) for the king's motbery and perhaps it was on this occafion that Bath-Jheba was firfl invefted with the honour of that dig- nity, COLLATION ( 136 ) COLLATION XXX. I Kings. XV. 9.— —15. with a Chro. xiv. i — 3*xv. 16. — 18. I N this Collation there is no alteration worthy of remark, but there are many very valuable additions in Afa's hiftory as recor^ ded in Chronicles j which the Author of Kings has totally omitted. This fame ob- fervation occurs on the next Collation. COLLATION XXXI. I Kings, XV. 16. — 24. with i Chronicles, xvi. I. — 6. II. — 14. ^c. A S to the difficulty relating to the name of Afas mother, faid to be Maaca, th^ reader will pleafe to refer to Collation xxix* The fecond variation in this Collation worthy of notice, is, that by the book of Kings ver. 1 8. it appears, that king Afa fent to the AJJyrian king ^ " all the gold andftlver, ^f that ( 1 37 ) *' that were left in the treafures of the '' houfe of the Lord ; and the treafures of ** the king's houfc," tp:inb:> Di^ SDK np>^ b'ut the Book of Chronicles fays, that king /ija took Jbmc of thi ^old md filv^', for it is faid in Ve'r. 2. /^n!i'^^iD 1r\\^ :»)DD KD« N:i^) l^DH /T-^Vn n^3, ^* then .^ brought out ^' lilver and gold out of the treafures of " the houfe of the Lord| and of the kkigH ^' houfe," &c. To reconcile this variation, I am of opinion that the expreflion in Kings ^ T^\>''^ anrni ?)DDn b:i r\'^ KD^^ " then Afa took all ^' the gold," &;c. is calculated to inlinuate, that he charged his fervants, by whofe hands he fent thePr«fent, to fay fo^ in their melTage to the king of AJyria^ to make him believe that he had fent him, at once, all what he had, both in his own and in the treafure of the houfe of the Lord ; and 'therefore the fame Author immediately adds ND» T^on unbv'^^ in!:v 1^3 D^n^^ " and he delivered them into the hands of ^' his fcTVants, and king Afa fent them," 5 that ( ^38 ) that is to fay, he delivered that gold and filver to his fervants, to be carried, as if that was all that was left.— But the Author of Chronicles who relates the fadt as it really was, omits the words vnnv TO DITI^^, *^ and he delivered them into the hands of ^^ his fervants," and only fays \l ^K vhv^y T\Ti " and he fent to Ben-adady' ^c, COLLATION XXXn. 3. Kings, xxii. 2. — 35. with a Chronicles. xviii» i. — 34. THIS Collation aifords only fome il^ luftrations and additions in Chronicles* COLLATION XXXIII. J Kings, xxii. 41. — 50. with 2 Chron, xx, 31. — 37. xxi. i. AMONGST thofe circujTiflances, which the Author of Chronicles thougl^t proper to repeat, we find a very great va» nation in an important occurrence. ( 139 ) By the book of Kings it feems that Jeho- Jlmphat made fome fhips, to go to Tharjhijf) for his own fole account ; but the expedi- tion was fruflrated, becaufe the Ihips were wrecked in the port of Ezion Geber ; after this accident, Ahaziah the king of Ifraely propofcd to JehoJJjaphat to enter into an af- fociation, for another expedition, and to fend on board the Ihips his own fcrvants, along with thofe o( JehoJJjaphat ^ who reject- ed the propofal. But, by the book of Chronicles^ the cafe feems to be quite the contrary, for the firft expedition, there is faid to have been i« company between the two kings, and God had caufed the fhips to be wrecked, on account of fuch an af- fociation with a wicked prince. In anfwer to this, I prefume that- the real fad: was, that JehoJJjaphat and AJjaziab were aflbciated in the firft expedition in this manner ; that the fhips and men be- longed entirely to JeJjoJJjapJjat, and that the- king of IJrael was to contribute half the* cxpcnces of the undertaking, as an afToci- ate, and afterwards when the fhips were S 2 dcftroyed; ( HO ) dtAxoycd ^4^:az:ab propofcdton>ake another expedition^ the fhips to be manned with the fubje<5ts of both kings ; which propofal was rejedted by JehoJJoaphat. On this fup-; pofition. we may reafonably fay, that the defign of Chronicles in regiflring this tranf- . ^dion was to make the neceffary addition to the record found in kingSy to explain, that the fadt was as above defcribed ; the Author of Kings attributes the expedition to Jeho- fmphat alone, vysD mo>> rwv ^DS'^in"' nTB")K r\:h^ ^.^ Jehofiaphat made iliips of " narjhifi XO go to Qphir ior.^oldy but ** they went not Sec/' to hint that the firft expedition was attempted with 7^^^1 nMn.^ DV min> i^^ roB^z^in** i^nriK " And " afterwards did Jehojhaphat king of Judah " join himfelf with Ahaziah king of Ifraely " &c.'' and again nWV^ "^^V innsm n3:i ]Tiv:^ nv:^< wv^^ 'j:)w^n iiD^*? nv:i>* *^ And he joined himfelf with him to make ^^ flaips to go to narjhip^ and they made '' the I ( 141 ) ^V the fliips in Ezioyi-gehery' meaning, that Jehojlhiphat aflbciated Ahaziab with him "V^)) ini^n'*') that is to fay, agr,ced to grant him a fhare in the expedition that he intend- ed to make, which Ihips indeed were wreck- rd, accordingtoEfe^r's prediction, record- ed in Chronicles verfe 37. The whole ferving as an additional note to the records of the book of Kings, and to render this more in- telligible, it may be proper to blend both accounts, by which it will appear that the additions in Chronicks are only illuflrations* Chronlcks, '^ And after this did Jehojka- '' phat king of Judah join himfelf with " Ahaziab king of Ifrael, who did very ^* wickedly : and he joined himfelf with *^ him to make ihips to go to I'karjhijhj ^' and they made the fhips in Ezion-Gekr. Kings. ^' JehoJJjaphat made fhips of Tar- " A/^, to go to Ophir for gold. Chronicles. " Then Eliezer, the fon of Do- '' davah of Marefia, prophcfied againft Je- ^^ hoJJ:aphat^ laying, becavife thou haft ' ; *' joined ( 142 ) *^ joined thyfelf with Ahaziahj the Lord " hath broken thy works, and the ihipa *' were broken, that they were not able to go to T^harjlnJJ:'' €t Kings. " Then faid Ahazlah the fon of ** Ahab unto Jehopaphat, Let my fervants *^ go with thy fervants in ^the ihips; but " Jehojhaphat would not/* In fhort, the chief view of the Author of Chronicles was to explain ver. 48. in Kings *' JehoJJjaphaty made fhips of T^harjhijhto go ** to Ophir for gold/' — by the verfes 25, 36, 37, adding the circumftance of the prophecy of Eliezer, and thereby hinting that Ahaziab*s propofal to JehoJImphaty and by him rejedted, was for a fecond expe- dition* COLLATION I < 143 ) COLLATION XXXIV. 2 Kings, viii. i6. — ■> 24. with 2 Chro. xxi. 5. — -10, 19. 20. &c. THERE is not in this Collation any material diiference, except fome valuable additions in ChronkleSy of fadts and anec- dotes not recorded by the Author of Kings. COLLATION XXXV. 2 Kings.viii. 25.-29. with 2 Chro. xxii. i-6» THERE is in this Collation, feemingly a yery glaring variation as to kin-g AhaziaJ/s. age at his acceflion to the throne; for by the book of Kings^ ver. 26. it appears that he was twenty-two years old, and in Chronicles it is faid that he was forty-two years ; this • lafl account has a great appearance of a nuftake, becaufe we find his father Jehoram^ coming to the throne when thirty-two years old, ai\d he refigned only eight years, f© ( 144 ) {q that Ue. lived only forty yqars : how tTi'cn 'cdlild 'his' fen Ahaziah," b^ forty- two years old at his aGc<^lIion, when his father Jehoram di\c6. at th^.age of forty? befides, that according to Chronicles, Ahaziah was the youngeft of all Jehoram\ children ;. the elders having been all llain by the Arabs, In order to reconcile this great vari- ation, I beg leave to obferve, that the ages of the kings mentioned in the facred books at their acceilion to the Throne, are not always the age of their life; but they often mean, the years iince they were declared by their fathers and predeceflbrs, to be Heirs apparent or Princes Royal, thereby invefling them with an indif- putable title to fucceed to the Crown. We fee that the fcripture reckons to Saui the age of one year, when he was publickly eledted king over Jjraely which only means one year fince his being privately anointed by Sanw.ely from which time he acquired a title to the Crown ; thus alfo the Scripture fays, that David was thirty years ol^, whe^ ( ^45 ) When he came to the Throne, whicb certainly does not refer to his birth, but to the time he was privately anointed by Samuel, from which time he acquired hi^ divine title to the Crown ; and perhaps this inflitution or cuilom of a king nominating his SucceiTor, by appointing a Prince Royal in his life-time^ was eflablifhed by David himfelf, to avoid civil wars, or ani- moiitics between brothers at his demife;- or at leaft was introduced by the example fet by David, who long before his death appointed * Solomon ; and, the better to eitablifli this as a precedent, caufed him afterwards to be crowned in his life- time, efpecially as he faw the re- bellion, or confpiracy> attempted by his fon Adonijah Ben Hagit. But be the origin of this cuflom as it may, it certainly pre- vailed, for we fee frequent inftances of kings appointing a Prince^ -among their children, as heir-apparent, or fucccflbr. Thus we find, that Rehoboam appointed his fon Abijahy (not the eldeft of his children) • I Chron. xxvui. 5, 6. T for ( h6 5 for his fucceffor, long before he * died I and fuch declaration gave to the Prince, fo nominated, an indifputable title tqf the Throne; nay, fometimes he was evert aflbciated in the regal power with his fa- ther. Thus we find Jehoram the fon of Jehofmpbat is named in the Book of i^/«^i by the title of Krng, * at a time that, by the Context, it appears, that his father was yet living : and Jotham governed in his father UzziaFs life-time^ after he was af- flicted with the leprofy. It is alfo probable that when the Prince Royal was thus nomi- nated and afTociated to the Crown, he might, in his turn,- have the power to nomi- nate his fucceffor among his children, al-» though his own father might ftill be liv» ing, and himfelf but partially feated on the Throne. This premifed,we now return to the Col- lation in queftion ; the age of twenty-twcT years, afcribed to Ahaziah in the book of Kings, was his real age from his birth. This^ • a Chron. xi. 22. f z Kings i. 17. compared with l Kings xxii.J 52. and % KiugJ iii, I. Prince ( 147 ) Prince became heir to the Crown, on the fatal accident that befell all his elder brothers, who were flain by the Arabs. The father, during that ihort time that he lived, after this great misfortune, being afflicfted with a very grievous illnefs, did not invefl his now only fon with that im- portant right of nomination, to fix the Crown on his head with an indifputa^ble right, againft any of the royal family, who might difpute it with him; though perhaps, on the prefent occafion this was omitted, as there was no probability of a competitor to the Throne, There- fore the author of Chronicles afcribesto^/;^- ziah forty-two years, not of age, but of no* mination, to be computed from the time his father Jehoram^z.'^ appointed Prince Royal, for he came to the Throne after thirty- two years, fince he himfelf was appointed fucceffor, * according to this fyltem, and reigned eight years, making together forty years; and two years are lolt'irithe ac- count, by reckoning a few months for a • 2 Kings vHi. 17. , . T z whole ( h8 ) whole year, which compiitation the au^ thor of Chronicles was induced to make, as this Prince Ahaziah was deficient of this quality of prenomination, infi- nuating that by his father having been invefted with that right, it was tranfmitted to him ; adding, befides, another circumftance, the better to fupply the deficiency of his perfonal prenomina- tion;' that the nation vmanimoufly agreed in exalting him on the Throne of his father, fpecifyingthat this was done becaufc the others of Jehorayn\ children, among whom was the Prince Royal, were flain by the Arabs J and the father m.ortally afflidied with heavy, and grievous iiifirmities. .COLLATION XXXVL z Kings xi. I .—3. with 2 Chro..xxil. io.---i2. THERE is not, in this Collation, any flriking variations; but even in thofe which Teem' to be immaterial, miuch meaning may be difcovered ; wer-e ' the cifriovis ( 149 ) furious to take them properly into coriii lideration, they would] be pleafingly fur-, prifed, at the delicate ' manner in which the facred writer of the Book, of Chronicles executes his grand plan of illuflration; hence criticks may perhaps learn, that there is great delign in the fmallell va* riations, and that they Hiould not be deem^ cd mere changes of phrafeology. The better to convince the reader, let it te obferved, that the author of Kings records this almoft general mafTacre of the royal family of David, by the hands of the inhuman Athaliah, in a flile not quite explicit, for he begins by faying, up^\^ HD^DDH ;7*nr b:i i1J< 12^*n% " ihe arofe and ** deflroyed all the feed royal," by which cxpreffion it would feem, as if none had efcaped her barbarity. But he foon after informs us, that Jehojloeha daughter to king Joramy Ahaziah's fifter. Hole Joap^ AhaziaFs fon, from among the king's Ions, which were Jlain, and hid him fo that he was not Jlain, which is rather ob- fcure, for how are we to comprehend that he ( 150 ) he was among thofc that were Jlain^ yet he was mt Jlahiy this inconfiflency api pears, even in the. manner that this palTagc is rendered by the Tranllators, though they have laboured to make it intel- figible, for they have exprefled it thus : **, And flole ^him from among the king's ^^.fons which: were ilain, and they hid '^ him, even him, and his nurfe in the *' bed-chaniber from Athaliah^ fo that he *^ was not jlainJ" But the text in Kings fays, ^^n •':2 i"inD ini^^ n*):):>r)"i literally, *^ and ihe ftole himj from Y^ among the king's fons, wha werejlain^ ^f.tie and his .nurfe- in- the -bed-chamber, ^r and -they hid him from ^tbalitib, fo f.'.that he was notjlain.'' I-hdeed^the verb 0'»iT1D1?2rt may either mean aBmlly Jiain or ^med to death^ as- in Ge/u xx-x;- i .• DH' i3i)H nriD V^ ^rendered, " or elf® i die," but • nriD' is preterite, and; ihould be, *''or elfe, I am dead," .E^^)//^ xii. 33. D'DD ^t)^2 r\U)^ O " for they faid, we " be all dead men," but ftridtly,^ " wc are C 151 ) *^ are alldead*" Deut, xvil, ^, r^!::ir\ A^'J* *^ He that is worthy of death, Ihall b^ *^ put to deaths" and we find in Dcaii^ \u 13. a Chaldean verb of the fame import and fignification, V'^'-p^"^^ i<'D';:m mean- ing, " that the wife men fliould be ** flain." But as the author of King% opens the hiilory with the words "iHKill n3'7;::.':2n v^\ ^d t\)^ it fecms that C^r^DIDH means that they were really Hain, and the Vulgate renders laKjn'J et interfe- at, and D'JI^'^Dn qui interfciehaHtur, Be- fides, there is not the leafi hint in the book of Kings, of any connection betwe^-a Jehofiebahy Joaf/j's aunt and deliverer^ witl^ any prieit, or other perfon of diflinguifhed rank, and yet it is certain, th«it fuca ^ one joined with her in concealinp^ th^ infant, fof the text in Ki'ngs exprelQj^ fays, "in^non " and they concealed him," in plural. Bcfides the farne author fay$^ \\2,nr^o 'n iv:^ rsn^ ^n^V '^ and he w^ ** \y\ih, her hi4 ^ the hpvife oi the Lojtd/t but does not inform us, how fhc had any riglji^t to be in, that f^ered place; IQ Wii^lm ^\\ tfe,i^ ^;ii,l?i§wi?^', the author cf Ckro?iidcs C 151 ) Chronicles in the firfl place changes the word iDi^ni " and dellroyed/' into that of I^T/ll a verb which is derived from •D1 plague, the fame as in Pfalm xvnu ^/inn U'^V ^y^'^ and ibid, xlvii. 3. liT 'Sy^nnn D^DP though rendered in the fenfe <)i fnhduing. This Phrafe is very figni- ficant, meaning, in the firft inflance> that God had caufed the nations with whom David was at war, to be feverely plaguedy until they were fubdued to him; and in the fecond, the fame meaning in the future tenfe. The in- tention of Chronicles , by uiing this verb, is to exprefs, that Athaliah, at the firfl onfet, grievouily wounded all the Princes of the royal family, jufl as the plague generally does; but as fome of them might reco- ver, Ihe certainly meant to finiih the flay- ing of them, as fhe actually did, either by further wounds, or by depriving them of proper afliflance; but be that as it may, they were at lafl efFedlually deflroyedl Joajh at firfl fuffered with the refl, and would certainly have perifhed along with them, if his atint had not ftolen him when- I ( ^53 ) (when perhaps he was looked upon as dead,) from among thofe that were mor- tally wounded, and flie put him and his nurfe in the bed-chamber in the houfe of the Lord, a facred place, where, none but priefts could enter: which llie had an opportunity of doing, being the high- priefl's wife ; and as none but JeoJJjeba is mentioned at firil, to have under- taken this truly heroical deed, therefore inflead of ITriD^I " and they hid him," in plural, ufed by the author of Kings; the a^ithor of Chronicles ufes "inTDDm '' and ihe hid him," In lingular feminine. Inftead then of iniK 'y\^:^r\') IX2^r^ ^b^ in^'^ny " and ftole him from ^^ among the king's fons zvho zvne Jlain^ *^ he and his nurfe in the bed-chamber, ^^ and they hid him from AthaUahy fo that *' he was not Jla'vn^'' as it is literally in Kings ; • the author of Chronicler fays, j^ViD^n nnnn irip^:)^ nsn inij^ inni J1::?^^ niin'' ib^n iin r^v:it:^in^ inn^-iDm ( 154 ) innJi'^n l^b^ in^bw " and ftolc him, from ^^ among the king's fons that were flain, <^ and put him and his nurfe in the bed' ^^ chamber, fo Jeojhabeath, the daughter ^^ of king Jehoraniy the wife of Jehoiada *^ the Prieft, (for ihe was the fifter of ^' Ahaziah)y hid him from Athaliah, fo *' that fhe did not JiniJIj to kill him," Per- haps the meaning of nitO^rr nini " the ** bed-chamber," is rather the chamber where the coffins lay, as we find in 2 Sam. iii. 31. niODH nni^ i^irr in I'PDm ^^ and *^ king David himfelf followed the hieTy' for ntOD often means the coffin where the corps lay, or the bier; in this fenfe Joajh might have been put (with the reft), into a coffin, being deem- ed to be dead, and might from thence be taken and^ hidden by JeoJJoaheah : the con- fequence of this heroical deed was, vh'y •jnnjniDn that Athaliah did not [finifh to kill him, this being the true fenfe of * in/lJT'DrT and not, " fo fhe flew him ^^ not," as rendered by the Tranflators* Vide Page 62^-6%^ This ( 155 ) This great circumflance the Author of CZt^- nicles had in view, and which he fully ex- plains by only changing the words DDin )^b^ of Kings into irrrin^Dn vh^ ; it therefore ap] pears that, by a very fmall variation, great meaning is conveyed. COLLATION XXXVIL 2 Kings XI. 4.-20. with 2 Chr. xxiii. i.-2i. WHOEVER takes the pains to com- pare thefe parallel paflages ; will find them to correfpond as to the great objedt they had in view, namely, the league concerted through the means of Jehoiada the high priefl, to re-eftabliih king JoaJJo m the throne of his anceftors, and the happy fuccefs that attended his loyal and pious endeavours ; but there is a great difference in the detail of the mea- fures taken to bring about this great revolution, the hiflory being very concife in the Book of Kings^ whereas in that of U 2 Chronicles ( 156 ) Chronicles we find many additions intermix- ed ; the text o^ Kings fcrving as the bafis or ground work of the relation, and fomc phrafes are changed the better to convey the meaning. It appears by Kings that, in the fevcnth year of AthaliaFs ufurpation, Jehoiada thought it was time to difcover to the people their lawful king; but it is defcribed in fuch a manner, as if he went about it with great authority, and without in taking the neceffary precautions, though one would think' he had much to fear from .Aihaliah; for he fays, nit:^ni niKDH n't:^ r\'^_ n'p'''\ vi'^in^ nb":} ivv'y^r\r \n rro:i cmK ii/at^n nna urh nnjn "nno I^Dn p n^ DrnK Kin , \^ And the fcventh '* year Jeh'oiadah'fent and fetched tht rulers *^" over -hundreds, with the, captains and the, '^ guard, and brought them to him into *^ the houfe of the Lord, and made a *^" covenant with them, and took an oath of ^^ them in the houfe c^f the Lord, and " fllewed them the king's fon:'' And then ]wvn nc'N^ nnin nr ^dn^ Dii:n " And he ^^ commanded them, faying, this is the " thing that ye fhall do/' ^c, which ex- prefiion ( 157 ) preffion feems rather too harfli and anthori- • tativc, and has the appearance of rafhnefs and want of prudence, in condudllng fo important and delicate an enterprize, in fuch a manner, and with fo fmall a body, as by the Book of Kings the confederates ' feem to coniiil of; and then in the orders diftributed by this high-prieft, he divides* them into three companies, afligning to- them their refpediive ftations (ver. 5. 6.)' '"1:1 D^^"in nni^ "ir^n " a third part of- *' you that enter in on the Sabbath, ihall . ^^ even be keepers of the watch of the . *^ king's houfe: and a third part ihalP *^ be at the gate, of Sur, and a third^ *^ part at the gate behind the guard," ^c"," and when, by this diftribution, the reader- naturaly thinks that all the confedrates are- entirely employed, twoother divifionsof the fame body are mentioned (ver. 7.) ^riW nnt:^n ^k^{> ^d D^a nnNi " And two parts " of all you that go forth on the Sabath, " even they lliall keep the watch of rhe^ " houfe of the Lord about the king." It' alfo ( 153 ) alfo feems as if he addrefTed himfelf to all of them a fecond time, charging them to fur- round the king; and carefully watch on his perfon v'^DI W>^ y^V ^^DH bv DDDpm 1T1 (vcr. 8.) " and ye fliall encompafs *^ the king round about every man with ** his weapons in his hands ;" all which is fet in a much clearer light by the author of Chronicles, by exprelling that, in the feventh year Vl^in** ptnnn " Jehoiada ** llrengthencd himfelf,'' or took courage^ and difcovered the fecret to Azariab, &c. So that by only changing the word n'pti^ fmt for in ver. 4. of Kings, into ptrrnrr Jlrengthened himfelf, in ver. i . of Chronicles; and mentioning the names of Azariah, IJhmael, Azariah the fon of Ohed, Maafeiab and EUfhaphat, he amended what might appear rafh and imprudent in Jehoiada, according to the Book of Kings : For he explains, that thefe five principal men were the firft that entered into the fecret confe- deracy, and are thofe meant by Kings, under the general name of WT^XW nO n')^iD ntt^ *^ rulers over hundreds, the captains and ^* the guards." And Chronicks further adds. ( 159 ) adds, that the firft flep of this feledt con- federacy, was to encreafe their number and refourfes; for which purpofe, they w^ent all over the kingdom of Jtidahy and gathered all the Levitcs and chief men of Ifrael^ and then returned to Jeru- falenty to form the great confederacy- hinted at in KingSy when it is faid ^\ly^ 'n /)"»nn djiik v:^^^"^ -nnn nrh " and ^' made a covenant with them, and took *^ an oath of them in the houfe of the *^ Lord;" and after this folemnity, he produced the king's fon, r\\^ DJIIJ^ K")^1 I'PDH p '* and fhewed them the king's ** fon," adding to the account of Kings, that he proclaimed him to the Confede- rates in thefe words, ^i^d'' ^^,'::^T p n:rT nn >n bv 'n niT Itil^KD " Behold, the " king's fon ihall reign as the Lord « hath faid of the fons o^ David;'' and further to clear Jehoiada from any charge of affuming an unwarrantable authority, the author of Chronicles omits the words nDi^b DVi''1 '^ and he commanded them, '' faying," made ufe of by the author of Kings, (verfe 5.) and introduces Je- hoiada's ( i6o ) ho'uida^s fpeech as an advice, and not as a command; laying only, (ver. 4,) WVn 'W^ "l^'^n nt " This is the thing " that ye Ihall do:" And, as there was no time to lofc, after an affair of fuch importance was difclofed to fuch a num- ber of Confederates, there can be no doubt, that they immediately proceeded : to confult on the mofl fpeedy and expe- dient meafures that were to be taken, €ffe(^ually to bring about the revolu- tion. And the better to illuflrate the Prieil's advice, (which by its having been embraced without hefitation, was record- ed by Kings, as if it were a command), he proceeds to explain it, by Ihewing that the diflribution of the three bodies was compofed of the Priefts and Levites only, who had liberty to be within the holy j walls, (ver. 4.) ; and the refl of the peo- j pie, not Priells or Levites, were to be in the out courts of the houfe of the Lord, (ver. 5.) ""n Jio mniinn Di^n by\ " and all the people Ihall be in the 5' courts of the houfe of the Lord;" and notwithflanding that the expreflion ( i6i ) in the Book of Khigs^ (ver. 7.) ^/i^-) ''):)1 DDa mTil " and two-parts of all " of ye;" &c. feems to denote, that the firft divifion mentioned in ver. 5, was compofed of all the Priefls and Levites that came on duty that week; as it is faid, jinu^n "'^*n d:dd n'':)^bz'n *' the third part of ^^ you that enter on the Sabbath;" and that the other two divifions were of thofe that went out of duty '»Kii> ^j dDS n^TH '^nm jn2\Dr\ ; as this circumitance, by it's not being mentioned in it's proper plape, oc- cafions perplexity; for it fecms, as if there were two other divifions, befides the three already diflributed in their pofts : Therefore the author of Chronicles leaves it out, faying, that none fhould be per- mitted to come within the facred walls, but the Priefls, &c. (ver. 6.) Kn> 'pK') '\')r2]D'> Dvrr '?3i nan u;ip o "iNU^ non "n ni^^:2 ^^ But let none come into the " houfe of the Lord, fave the Priefls, ^^ and they that minifler of the Levites, ^* they ihall go in, for they are holy, *i but all the people fhall keep the watch ( i6z ) ^' of the Lord ;" and as the author of Chronicles introduces thefe difpofitions of Jehoiada as an advice, and not as a com- mand, — therefore, inftead of the word DD3pm ^^ and ye fKall compafs," (in Kings, Ycr, I.) which imports a command to the fecond perfon plural, Chronicles fays, IS'^Pm ^^ and the Lcvites iliali ^^ compafs," (in ver. 7.) which is the future tenfe to the third perfon plural; generally ferving for the optative mood; And further explains the word nm^rt ^^ the ranges, (in the fame verfe) by that of r)"»Dn " the houfe ;" for the meaning of ■Kings, could not be otherwife, although /)mti^ may more generally mean, an out- fide precind:, or kind of palifadoes; and we find that all the people, not Priefls or Levites, were admitted within the out^ part of the facred precindt ; and as the executors of thefe difpofitions were the Levites, and the people of Judah, therefore inftead of Jil^^Drr nii^ WV'''^ and ^^ the captains over hundreds did," (as in Kings, ver. 9.) ; the author of Chromcks fubftitutes (ver. 8.) D^I^PT 1W*1 ^W b7\ " fo the Levites and all Judah f' did/ ( i63 ) " did/' And as the author of Khigs^ iii the fame verfe, mentions, that every com- mander brought up his men, both com* ing in and going from duty, ]i;>ii inp^l *^ and every man took his men that were *^ to come in on the Sabbath, with them '^ that were to go out on the Sabbath ;'' which double body could not but give a flrarige fufpicion to the tyrant's court; therefore the author of Chronicks ob- ferves, Jii^ pon i^^iin^ IDH) vb O mp'l'pnDn ^' for Jehoiada the Prieft dif- ** miffed not the courfcs, '' to infinuate, that Jehoiada, long before attempting the execution of his plan, in order to render it more practicable^ had intro*- duced a regulation, of not giving leave to the divifions orcourfes of thePriefts andLe* vites to depart immediately to their houfes, as foon as relieved by the divifion or courfe^ whofe turn it was to come on duty in their Head : And as this was his practice a long time before, no body took any notice of his now keeping both divifions. X 2 Ol ( i64 ) Or perhaps the words yT'in^ DIDB i^^ ^5 /llplbnon J1K IHDH mean, that Jehoiada^ by his calling to Jerufalem all the Levites, '&c. pretended, that he wanted to ellablifli z new order in the divifions of the troopii ior parties^ whofe duty it was to come weekly to adminifter in the temple ; which bufinefs was purpofely procraftin^ated by 'Jehoiadc, and this is the meaning of ^ij- mpi^nDH r\)>< \r\2r^ yn>*)n"» nio3 '^ the verb IDS being the fame as -|/13; that is, de^ clarey explain y or appoint; namely, that Jeho^- iada did not declare or appoint the proper divifions, with the order of their weekly fucceffion; therefore they were detained on that account, and every body imagined, that the caufe of this general meeting in Jerufalem w^as owing to the intended new orders. He alfo changes the^expreffion*in Kings, verfe 13, UVr\ r^^nrr ^>p JIK ren- dered, " and when Athaliah heard the *^ noife of the guard, and of the people,'* (the particle and being added by the Tranflators to make it fenfe)> into that of D^'^^nom D^'iiJ-irT Dvn b'\\> r\)^ (verfe 12.) *' the noife of the people running, and ^^ praifing/' ^r. left it might be under- ilood Jiood as the Tranfldtors rendered >nirt D'':i")ni ^' the captains and the gmrcQ* Thcfe titles are no where ufed in this hiflory by the author of Chronkksi vvhoj, however, takes care to explain them in Verfe.zo, by the words TiNI Qn^TKH n^ b;7'2 b''yv:^\':2n ^' The nobles and the go- " vcrhors of the people,*' The FuhuU fenders very properly the above vcrfe in rentis* In fhort^ it is certain, that by "analizing the words of Cbronkksj an3 carefully comparing the parallel paiTages, numberlefs beauties may be difcovered, great part of which,- for want of due in-- veftigation, appear as formidable" vari- lations. COLLATION XXXVin, z Kings xi. 2.1 i xii* 21. with . * 2 Chronicles ''X)xiyj.:j>ft-2 7. THERE is, in this Collation, fuch great variations, that the Facts fecm to be related in a difcordant manner, as may be eahly perceived, by whoever takes the trouble of comparing thefe two paf- fages* - C 166 ) fages. But the real cafe, in my opinion, is. That there were three refources dcfigned by the king, to bring in the money that was requifite, for that great and expenfive work; the one was, the money of the CoU ledtion inflituted by MofeSy (^Exod* xxx. 13? ^^0 namely, a poll-tax of half a Jhekel, from which nobody could be ex*-- empted, from twenty to fixty years of age : And the fecond, was the money arifing from efthnation^vows : {Lev. xxvii. :) And, laftly, the voluntary contributions* Now the author of the Book of Kings takes notice of all thefe Fund ; for it is faid (Chap, xii* ver* 4.) b)^ U^i^in^ nDKn nu Kav -it:^i; D^i:;iprT c^dd ^d D>:nor1 " And Jehoajh faid to the Priefls, All *'^ the money of the dedicated things that '^ is brought into the houfe of the Lord, *^ even the money of every one that paf- " feth the account; the money that every ^' man is fet at ; and all the money that " cometh unto any man's heart to bring " into the houfe of the Lord;" but fhould be Tendered, " and Jehoajb faid to the *' Priefls, ( i67 ) ^^ Priefls, All the money of hallowed things *^ that fhould be brought into the houfe *^ of the Lord ; either the money of every *' one that paffeth among the numbered, or ^^ the money of eflimation-vows, on *' perfons, or whatever money that com- *^ eth into any man's heart to bring to " the Lord." The King's orders to the Priefts was concerning the eflimation and voluntary money, they being the refident receivers and depofitories thereof; but not jcollediors to go about for the legal poll-tax; and he further ordered them to receive the monies, and repair the houfe of the Lord. Therefore the author of Chronicles very properly adds to the King's orders, concerning the fund of the 2irm\x2i\JJjekels^ the order for it's col- lection, direfted both to the Priefls and the Levites, Chap. xxiv. 5. jiK yup^l miH'' n;;'? \si{ urh 1'0V(,'^ d^iSii wyn^n W^br^ Y\'r\'0 ^' And he gathered together /* the Priefls and the Levites, and faid to ^^ them, go out into the cities of JuJab^ f^ ^nd gather of all Ifraely money to re- " pair ( i68 ) i " pair the Iioufe of your God, from ycap ** to year, and fee that ye hafle the mat- ** ter ; howbeit the Levites haflened not.* I am apt to think, that CkronicleSy by men-» tioning at firfl both the priefts and the Levites, ^meant to inlinuate, that the Prieils received orders relative to the efli- mation and vow-money apart; and the J^vites received alfo feparately the other order of gathering the poll-tax; for at the end af the vcrfe, the blame of negledt is laid on the Levites only ; and the king afterwards, in his complaint to the chief Prieft, only charges him for not having preflTed the Levites about it, vb J^np ir^rrrai mwD j^'^nn'? w^bn bv rwn \s\ "n Tnijr two jin^^d rw^ " Why haft ** thou not required of the Levites to ** bring in out of Judah^ and out of Je^ ** rufalemj the collection, according to the ^ commandment of Mofes^ the fervant of <* the Lord?" &?r. and by his laying the blame on the Levites alone^ the Priefts are cleared of the apparent charge imputed to them by the author of Kings; frorn whofe account it appears, as if the Priefts 1 ( i69 ) Iiad applied the money to their own ufe, without repairing the houfe, as was in- cumbent on them; but the truth was, that they could not proceed in it, except the colled:ion-money was brought in by the Levites, which was the chief re- fource: And as this could not be well collected without the kin.9:'s immedi-f 2ite authority, the king interpofed, and had a cheft fixed by his command, on the out-iide of the gate of the houfe of the Lord, and ilTued a proclamation, that every perfon fhould bring in his colled:ion'- money, (verfes 8. and 9.) which accord- ingly was done, (vcr. 10.) On this oc- cafion, the Priefts on their fide chofe to make another chefl, which was placed by the right-hand fide of the altar, to de- pofit therein all the monies arifing from eftimation-money, and voluntary contribu- tions, &c; and both the chefls were emptied into a general coffer, by the hands of fome infpedtors^ who were appointed, by the King and High Prieft, to fuperintend this bulinefs. And as by the Book of Y Kin^s ( 170 ) Kings it appears, that out of this money no- thing was employed in buying neceffary utenfils for the houfe of the Lord, but that all was expended in the repairs ; therefore the author of Chronicles further explains, (ver. 10.) that this rule was only kept during the work, but as foon as it was finifhed, all the furplus of the money that had been collected, was employed in ne- ceffary utenfils for the houfe of God. In ihort. It is evident that the author of Chronicles has added many circumftances in his account of this tranfaftion, which was not fufEciently explicit, as defcribed by the author of Kings, And as the author of Kings records the misfortunes that befell King JehoaJJo ; and his fending to the king of AJjyria all the facrcd veffels and gold, (that he and his forefathers had dedicated to God), in order to divert that king from coming againfl him; and lallly, the parricide perpetrated againfl him; and as fuch great misfortunes, and fo unhappy an end,- feem unmerited by a king, whofe charac- ter^ I ( 171 ) ter, fo far as it is drawn by the author of Kings y is a mofl excellent on:?3 vr)')n« oy ^dm^ nnpn the author of Chronicles adds, that although it was in the city of David, he was not deemed worthy to be laid in royal ground, for (as it Ihall be explained in Collation xli.) there were, in the city of David, fe- veral places deflined for the burial of Kings, of different degrees, as to honouj: and dignity, y z All ( 17^ ) All the reft of the differences are va- luable additions of the author of Chro- fiicksy in the hiflory of that Prince, whofe inp;ratitude towards the fon of his bene- fadtor is moft adonifliing. COLLATION XXXIX, Kings xiv. 1—6. with 2 Chro. xxv. 1-4, ■ALL the difference in this Collation confifts in this, that Kings y in the character of King Amaziah fays, ''^^ya ■)t:^^'^ ti^'^'S ti/i^V -iT^V ^V'^ 'PDD Vnj^ THD N^ pi 'rT XWV V2K '^ and he did that which was ^^ right in the fight of the Lord, yet not ^^ like David his father : he did accord- Vf' ing in all things, zs Joap his fathe^f '^^ dicl/' And Chronicles, .inllead thereof, expreifes, sn^2 ikb pn \"i ''J^yn '•)^'n t^P^, pb^ r. and he did that which was right f^. in the fight of the Lord, but not with ,f^ a' perfed: heart." Let us firil remark, J:hat the author of KingSy notwitftanding jie fets JoaJJ/s character in the beft light ; (for ( 173 ) (for he records none of his blemifhes,) by his faying now, in AmaziaFs charadter, that he was not fo good as David, but that he ad:ed as Joo/Ij his father, he re* fledis greatly upon both by hinting at the wickednefs of yoajl:^* Belides, this cha- rad:eriftick verfe, at the beginning of Ama^ ziaFs reign, does not appear to be in it's proper place; for it could not be faid with propriety, that Amaziah did accord- ing to all that his father had done, but at the end of his reign; for though the infpired writer may well be fuppofed to know what is in futurity; neverthelefs, when he ad:s the part of an hiflorian, he ought to follow the order of time ; parti- cularly when the condudt and charad:er of the Prince, whofe hiitory he is re- cording, is fo variable and fludluating. Therefore, to obviate this difficulty, the author of Chronicles left out that exprellion, ^nd makes no comparifons, faying only, D^t:^ ^^'^'Z K^ PI " but not with a per- f fedt heart;" for although when Amaziah ^fcended the Throne, he did what was right, r 174 ) right, it was not with a perfect heart, for if it had, he never would have fo far deviated from the paths of virtue. This character might well become him at the beginning of his reign, without comparing him to any of his predcceflbrs ; but in the fub- fequent defcription of Amaziahh life, Chro- nicks ihews in a clear manner the great limilitude between the life and adtions of the father and fon, and their equally un- happy end; which indeed is exemplify- ing at large the character given to Amaziahy by a fingle expreffion in the book of Kiytgs ; 7^j/6 was at the beginning a pious king; {o was Amaziah. Joajh afterwards worshipped the idols ; fo did Amaziah. Joajh caufed the Prophet who reproved him in the name of the Lord, to be ftoncd to death; Ama- ziah indeed did not take away the life, but he feverely threatened the Prophet v/ho had reprimanded him in the name of the Lord. Joajlo was for his crimes abandoned by God, to the armies of the King of AJfyria^ who entirely fubdued him; Amaziah was alfo, for his crimes, abandoned to the power of his enemies, and ( '75 ) and even taken piifoncr. Joajlo \vz% at lafl betrayed and murthered by his own fubjedts ; and fo was Aniaziak ; for the fame caufes will always produce like ef- fedts : So that the autlior of Chronicles had no occafion to ufe the fame phrafe as Klngs^ that Amaziab adted as his father had done, fince his own hiilory was intended as a full defcription of Anmziah\ charadicr, and of the remarkable fimllitude it bore to that of his father. COLLATION XL. 2 Kings xlv. 8. — 14. 17. — 20. with 2 Chronicles xxv. 17* — 28a AS the caufe of AmaziaFs war with the king of Ifrael is reprefented^ by the author of Kings, as proceedihg from mere wanton- nefs, and caprice ; and that Amaziah^ out of vanity and pride foleiy, fcnt to challenge JehoaJ}) king of IJraeJ; therefore the author of Chronicles thought proper to record, that A'rnaziah was not pern:iiLtcd by God through the Prophet, to keep in his army the one hundred thoufand men which he took in his ( i7« ) his pay from Ifrad; and that having ordered them to return home, thefe auxiliaries looked upon this difmiffion as an affront^ and thereupon made an irruption into the territories of Amaziah ; this irruption, and the fpoil which they took, and damage they occalioned^ the author of Chronicles feems to infinuate, was the true caufe of the challenge fent by Amaziah to Jehoajhi The few other variations^ if duly taken into coniideration, will prove to be only illuftrations. COLLATION XLL 2 Kings xlv. 2 1 .—2 2 . XV. 2 .—7 . with 2 Chron. xxvi. i. — 4. 21. — 23. THERE is, in Chronicles^ a very great addition in the hiftory of King Uzziahy particularly the account of his facrilege> in attempting to miniiler in the temple as a Prieft, which was the caufe of his being forely afflidied with the leprofy, and excluded from the holy relidence : But as his character, as far as it is de- fcribed in the Book of KingSy is rather a good C 177 ) good one, the author of Chronicles thought fit to record his crimes, to Ihew, that the misfortunes which befell him were highly merited. As for the variation in this King's name, who is always called inntV Aza- riah in Kings, except in xv. 30.' and 32. where he is called Uzziah, as he is gene- rally in Chroniclesy and in the Book of Ifaiah; the Reader will pleafe to recoUedt what we have mentioned in relation to •- names, and he will obferve that the meaning of nv and nij^ is fynonimous. The other variation is, as to the place of his burial ; for, according to the Book of •f' Kings, he was buried "in n''yD " in the city of David" and by % Chro* nicies it appears, that he was buried ry^d^d? "Wi^ n-iinpn nira " in the field *^ of the burial-place belonging to the * Page 22. f z Kings XV. 7, \ % Chron. xxvi. 23. Z ^' Kings," ( 178 ) " Kings," u)n nt:^D in^K ^D " bccauft " they fiiid he is a leper*" The fame variation we find as to the place of King Ahaz's burial ; for in Kings, * it is faid, that he was buried in the city of Da- vid'y and in Chronicles it is exprellly faid, bi^'yD'^ ""D^D '^'\2iy> " and they buried ^* him in the city, even in Jerufalem, but *^ they brought him not into the fe^ *^ pulchres of the Kings of IfraeV^ It is probable, the author of Chronicles meant to explain, that although Uzziah was buried in the city of David, it was not ^mong his predecelTors, but in a field near the royal burying-place, on account of his leprofy ; and the fame may be faid in regard to Ahaz, for the n pre-^ fixed, to "Tiy fcrvcs inflead of an n of remark, and means the known city, namely, the city of David, known to be the burial place for Kings ; but adds, D''^Ii^')TIl per- haps to hint, that it was in that part of the city of David, the moil contiguous to the » Kings xvl. 20. f % Chron. nviii. 27, City ( 179 ) tity of Jerufalemy becaufc on account of the horror of Ahaz\ crimes, he was not interred in any fepulchre near the royal family. For the reft, Chronicles records many of King JJzziaFs adlions, which were ommitted by the author of Kr/i^s^ COLLATION XLII. Z Kings XV. 32. — 38. with 2 Chron. xxvii. i. — 9, The author of Kings, in the cha- ra(fter he gives of Jotham, fays, 1V'^'^^ vn^^ innv r^m ^^i^ ^3:) "n "^y^v:^ yv^n T\W ^^ ^^^ he did ikat which was right ^^ in the fight of the Lord ; he did, ac- *^ cording to all that his father Uzziah had ^^ done." But the author of Chronicles, who had mentioned Uzziah's facrilege, of attempting to miniiler as a Priefl in the houfe of the Lord, very properly adds to thefe charadleriftick words, ^K xn K^ p"J 'n byn " Howbeit he entered not into *^ the temple of the Lord," to hint, that jfctham had all his father's good qualities^ Z 2 and C i8o ) and not his wicked ones; there is be- fides, feme additions in Chronicles, concern- ing the defcriptions of his buildings, and vicfiorics over his enemies; circumftances totally omitted by the author of Kings. COLLATION XLIIL 2 Kings xvi. !.■ — 20. with 2 Chron. xxviii. i. — 27. THE author of Khigs barely men-r tiohs that Tekah the fon of Remaliah King of Ifraely in conjundlion with Rezin King of Syria^ made w^ar againfi: Ahazy without giving us any particulars of the war. But the author of Cbro-' nicies is more explicit; he aifo defcribes the brotherly ufage "that the captives of the people of Judah, who were carrir- ed to Samarlah, met with, and their being fent back to their houfes, ^c, he records^ that the Edomites and Fhilijlines diflrefTcd Ahaz and Judah, and took fevcral places from them ; and further adds^ that Tilgath- pilefeYy ( iSi ) plefevy whom Ahaz bribed, with all the valuable things which he ftripped from the facrcd places, iSc, after having relieved him from Rezin his enemy, became him- ifelf an adverfary; for being a very co- vetous friend, he was worfe than a de- clared enemy. nDK:ibB jnjl^n Vt'i? N^n*'') iprn K^l l^l i:^') nil^'i^ I^D " And Tdgath- *' pilefer King of AJjyria came unto him, *' and diflrefTed him, but Hrengthencd ^^ him not." It appears by the Book of Khtgs, that Jbaz, when at Dama/ct>s, fent over to Uriah, the Priefl, a model of an altar which he faw in Damafcus, to build one fimilar to it in the houfe of the Lord, which was accordingly executed. But this fad: is fo reprefented in Kings, that it may be underil:ood that this magni- ficent altar was intended to flicrifice there- on to the true God. Therefore to unde- ceive us, the author of Chronicles hints at the criminalitv of the deed, informine us that, O -^IDK^I U D^D^DH pr^i-^i 'Vh'i^b n^v^ nathi urh ur^\k Dn?VD on u^^^ •'j^d 'rh\i *' For he |acriiiced unto the Gods of Da- viafcusj ( iSz ) *^ wafcus, which fmote hhn: and he faid, *^ becaufe the gods of the Kings of Sjria ** help them, therefore will I facrifice '' to thcjn^i, that they may help me. But *^ they were the ruin of him and all •^ Ifrael" So that it is to be prefumed, that this altar, the model of which was fent from Damafcus, and built in the houfe of the Lord, far from being grounded on a pious intention, was upon an idolatrous defign. As to the variation in the place of his burial, I beg leave to refer the lea- der to Collation tXu COLLATION XLIV, 2 Kings xviii. i. — 3. witi; 2 Chron. xxix. i. — 2. THE only variation in this Colla-j tion is, that Kings calls Hezekiah^s mother Abi, and Chronicles calls her Abijah ; but who does not perceive that Abi is the dif minutive oi Abijah f'; As ( i83 ) As the xlv. xlvi. and xlvii. Collations do not relate to the Book of ChronicleSy 1 wave trcathig thereon, as they are not within the bounds I have prcfcribed to myfelf in this performance. COLLATION XLVIIL 2 Kings XX. 1 2.— 2 1 . with Ifa. xxxix. i .—8. Sc 2 Chron. xxxii. 24.-28, THE account of the Bahylonij}:) em- bafly to King Hezckiahy as given by the author of Kings, agrees very well with that recorded by Ifaiab, fome trilling differences excepted; but I cannot help remarking, that fome v/ords that do not fecm to be grammatically exprelTed, are recorded by both with the fame apparent defect. Modern criticks, perhaps, will boldly pronounce them corruptions, but they fhould confider, that thefe parallel paffagcs wrote by different authors, re- tain exactly the fame feeming impropri- eties^ which on the fuppofition of their being ( i84 ) being real mlilakes, is highly extraor- dinary : for inilance, D^'^IKH '\')J2i^ HD ybi^ 1KU1 ]\^^^ *^b^^ literally, " What *^ have thefc men faid, and whence " JJoall they come to you ?*' nD^* have faid, is preterit, and IKU^ they Jijall come future,— although both verbs are proper- ly rendered in the preterit tenfe " What *^ have thefe men faid, and whence came ^^ they unto you ?" however thofe ivho are verfed in the genius and peculiarities of the Hebrew Language know, that fome- times one tenfe is ufed for another, and confequently no miftake fublifls; but if this will not fatisfy the rigid critick, we may further fay, (which I think is the befl folution), that the future tenfe, ferves in Hebrew for the fubjundlive, optative, and potential mood; according to the accompanying particles, as I have already hinted; * this being premifed, the true meaning of this paffage is, " What *^ have thefe men faid, and wherefore ^^ Ihould they come to you?" that is to fay, what reafon may have moved them from the beginning to have come into * Page 162. ( i85 ) Uiito you ? and we may further fay, that the Prophet had great meaning in uiing the fu- ture for the preterit, to intimate that he wa^ charged with the unhappy prediction, of the future corhing of the Babylonians to Jerufalem, to take every valuable thing away, and to carry the royal family into captivity. But to return to Chronicles, the author thereof did not think proper to regiiler the whole of this palTage, as a Ihort abftradt was fufficient to intro- duce fome neceflary additions, to account for what otherwife would appear very flrange: Who can avoid being furprifed (reading the Book of Kings) to fee fo good and pious a King as Hezekiah^ reduced to be overwhelmed with grief and afflidiion, at the prophetick declaration of the heavy calamities that were to befal his po- ftcrity? But by the author of Chronicles recording, that he grew vain and proudl of his profperity, without humbling him- felf in due time before the Lord, to ac- knowledge that all his riches and gran- deur proceeded from the Almighty's A. i bounty ; ( i86 ) bounty ; our wonder at his misfortunes ceafes, efpecially when we fee that he attributed to his own honour and glory the Bahyloniflo embafTy, which in reality was (as recorded by Chronicles) merely to enquire about the prodigy that happened in his time ; either of the wonderful re- trogradation of the fun ; or of the fudden deftrudlion, in one night, of the Ajjynan army, that threatened him with ruin : which of courfe he ought to afcribe, as a devout king, only to the honour of the Almighty. COLLATION XLIX. 2 Kings xxi. I — 9. with 2 Chronicles xxxiii, I 9. THE firfl variation is, that Inflead of n"lki^i^n b'D^ made ufe of in Kings, Chro- nicles fays, bl2Vr^ bv^ very fignificantly, becaufe rrw^ is a tree or a grove, and no image can be made of it ; and although it is tranflated " and he fet a graven " image of the grove," it is certain that the rVW^ grove or tree itfelf was the objedt of idolatry, as appears by many pafTages ( i87 ) paffagcs in fcripture; and for this rea- fon the planting thereof was exprefsly forbidden, Beut. xvi. 21. -j^ ^^D "ti^ nwn ^rv^ T^^^^ 'n rrnro '7:ii« yv "^^ niti^i^ ^ " Thou llialt not plant thee a grove " of any trees near unto the altar of the ^^ Lord thy God, which thou ilialt make ^^ thee;" therefore he explains thatphrafe, by changing it into ^DDH bVii " the " carved image ;" this being the idol which Manajfeh had made. He adds many other circumilances to ManaJJeh's hiftory ; his diflrefs, his peni- tence, reftoration and good deeds ; im- portant particulars, which are all omitted by the author of Kings ; and this obfer- vation will account, for the variations in the following collation, fo far as relates to the clofing of the hiflory of Manajfeh. COLLATION L. 2 Kings xxi, 17. 26. with 2 Chronicles xxxiii. 18. — 25. IN the hiflory of Anion, Manajfelfs fon, there is no variations but what Ihould be A 2 deemed ( i88 ) deemed valuable additions : Chronicles re? marks, That he imitated his father's wickednefs, but not his penitence ; there- fore he was murthered in his own houfc ; whereas his father was delivered from his enemies, reflored to his throne, and died in peace, in confequence of his penitentiaj fondudt, COLLATION LL Z Kings xxii. 1,2. with 2 Chronicles xxxiv. I. — 28. IN the hiftory of king Jojtah, the author of Chronicles^ in addition to what has been faid in the book of Kings, takes notice, that in the eighth year of his reign, aU though he was then a youth of fixteen years of age only, he began to feek after the God of David ; that is, he gave him- felf up to the worfhip of the true God ; and four years after, namely in the twelfth from his acceffion, he ordered the kingdom of Judah and the city of Jerufalem, to be ^leared from all the high places and groves^ ( i89 ) groves, objedts of the people's idolatry^ and utterly deftroyed the idols from all his do- minions and territories ; circumftanccs which, by Khi^s, appear as if they had hap- pened long after, even after the reparation of the temple. Chronicles further records, that in the eighteenth year of his reign, he appointed three of his great officers to f\i- perintend the reparation of the temple, which he had refolvedlhouldbe thoroughly repaired: and ordered all the monies, which the Levites\\d.dL gathered from all Ifrael and brought to Jerufakm^ to be depoi!ted in the houfe of God, under the care oi Hilkiah the high-pricft ; and in addition to the order iflued by the king to that high-prieft (aS mentioned in the book of Kiiigs) to defray out of that fund what was requifite for the materials neceflary for the repairs, and for the pay of the workmen to be therein employed ; Chronicles records the execution of the order, and the names of the officers who were employed to fee the work pro- perly executed : and as the author of Kings abruptly fays, that Hilkiah acquainted the Chancellor Shaphan of his having found the book ( 19^ ) book of the law in the houfe of God; the author of Chronicles, adds the occafion on which it was found, which was, on the taking out the money that had. been dc- pofited in the houfe of the Lord ; this circumflance, though trivial in appear- ance, was recorded to infmuate, as I appre- hend, that the High Priefl availing him, felf of a favourable opportunity, when the king and his officers were very zealous about repairing the Temple, and reftoring it's proper worfliip, thought it expedient to fend, then, the book^ of the Law to the King, as if newly found, to intimate that the true worfhip of God did not con- liil in the repairs of his houfe, if this was not accompanied, by the obfervance of all the precepts commanded by the Lord, through the hands of MofeSy in that facre^l book ; and that this was the true meaning of the High Prieil, may be deduced from the effedt, for as foon as the King had the book of the Law read before him, he im- mediately acknowledged (verfc 21, Chro- nicies, and 13, Kings) that all the v^Tath of God againft them was for their not having obferved ( 191 ) obferved the pracftical part of the Law. The refl of the variations are of the ex- planatory kind ; for in the words of the Prophetefs, the author of Kings fays, (ver. 1 6.) S^^ n>n i^'2r2 ''::n 'n ir^ik hd 7\l^r^> i^r:> J^-|p -^Vi^ ' " Thus faith the " Lord, Behold I will bring evil upon this " place, and upon the inhabitants there- *' of; eve?i all the words of the book " which the King of Juciab hath read." Which words certainly wanted explana- tion, as it did not appear in what part of the book he happened to read, that could occaiion fuch a terror, and denunciation of punifliment ; therefore the author of Chro- nicles properly fays, niniriD.I D^b^n b2 Jli* inin'» ^70 ^}Bb isnp nt^^K nsDn b*^ " even ^' all the curfes that are written in the ^' book which they have read before the ^^ King of Judah" which are the curfes pronounced againft the nation in tale of their forfaking the law of God called n3*T {Deut. xxix. I.) Jinsn nni '' the words of '' the covenant," as it is called by Jojloiahy both in the book of Kings, and Chronicles, COL- ( 19* ) COLLATION LIL 2 Kings xxiii. i. 3. with 2 Chronicles xxxiv. 29. — 32. THE variations in this collation are chiefly of the explanatory kind. The author of Kings fays (ver. 2.) that the King went to the houfe of the Lord, and all the men of Judahy and the inhabitants of Jem/a- kniy D*K"'a:ni D'^HDni " and the Priefls and " Prophets." Who thofe Prophets were, and whence they came, we do not know; for a fhort time before, when it was needful to confult the oracle of God, none but a Prophetefs could be found to have recourfe to ; but if any man had been acknowledged as a Prophet, it is pro- bable he would have been eonfulted with on the occaiion, in preference to a woman ; k is vaftly eafy to fay that the true read- ing ought to be U"'^T\'\ " and the Levttes^ as in Chronicles^ and that this word was corrupted into that of D^^^'*3i Trophets in the ( ^93 ) - the book of Krngs ; modern criticks^ per- haps, will take this for granted, and pro- pofe fuch corredtion without any further enquiry ; but I beg leave to fubmit, that the word D''^5"'2J in this place, is not to be underflood in its ordinary acceptation of PraphetSy fmcc here it only means Fcets^ whofe employment was to compofe hymns to be fung in the houfe of the Lord; the flune as in i Chronicles xxv. 2. :^D^5 l"* ^y l^,"Dn n"* bv S'^^n wrongly tranilated '' un* *^ der the hand of Afaph, who prophejied '' to the order of the king;" for it ihould be ^^ under the order of Afiph, who was a Poet in the King's fervice :" And, in the following verfe, treating on Jeduthcn's fon, it is faid bv ^2T\ ni:D2 \\r\r\' U7\'2^ n** b); ^rh b^m r\XT(r\ " under the hands of their ^^ father Jeduthim who propheficd with a ^^ harp, to give thanks and to praife the '^ Lord." But fnould be rendered : " Un- *^ der the coramand of their father J^i/^/Z'^?;, " with the harp, who (i. e. Jeduthun) was a " poet for compofing thanks and praifes to '^ the Lord." It feem.s that thefe chief poets iiad diflinft departments, the chief duty of % B the a ( 194 ) the firfl was, to compofc for the King : and the fecond, was chiefly employed in the praifcs of the Deity; and we actually find the charadler of thefe great men dcfcribed every— where, and particularly in the TfalmSy as famous Poets, but not as Prophets: nor is the Hebrew language the only one, in which the fame word fervcs to fignify both a prophet and a poet; for antiently the art of poetry was chiefly, dedicated to fing the praifes of the Deity. We further find, that all the phrafes made ufe of in Scripture to denote a prophecy, ferve alfo to exprefs a piece of poetry ; and the reafon is, becaufe mofl: of the prophecies were delivered in a poetick flile. The noun ^W^Q which generally fignifies a prophecy, certainly means poetry in i Chronicles xv. 22. o vw^2, "iiD'' ^^^?Ja D^ibn sv in''::!:n J^^rr y^yo which is tranflated ^^ and Chenan- ^^ iah chief of the LeviteSy zvas for fing : <« he infl:ruded about the fing, becaufe '' he was fkilfuL" But fliould be, " he " was for poetry : he inflrudted about «' poetry y &c.*' The name nnn applied to .prophets, is likewife given to poets, ^^ Chro" nicks ( i9i ) nkles XXV. 5. -ybDH r\m iD'H^ D^:):i rh\k ^3 D^1bK^ nD"T2 rendered, ^^ all thefe were *^ Tons of Heman the King's feer in the '^ words of God." But ihould be, " all ^' thefe were fons to Heman the King's ^^ poet, in matters regarding God ;" for Heman s character was that of a' poet as is fully evinced by the book of Tfalms. I therefore think it may be readily granted, that the noun D\^''2^ may ferve alfo to fig- "nify poets ; however, the author of Clro- nicleSy inilead of this phrafe, ufes that of W^TV\ merely to elucidate it, left it fhould be taken in the common acceptation of pro- phets ; and I prefume it is evident, that the bufinefs of the Lcvita in the houfe of the JLord, was that of poets and fingers. The author of Chronicles fubftitutes alfo Inftead of lir^yn bv " t>y the pillar" in Kings (vcr. 3.) n^V bv " in his place'* to hint that T,^): in Kings does not mean a pillar, but a place where the Kings ufually ftood on folemn occaiions, in the houfe of the Lord ; Vv'hich might be by a pillar, as wc find when Jodp was pro- 2 B 3 claimed ( 196 ) claimed " he flood by the pillar, as was *' cuftomary ;" ^' LDBti/'JD Tl^^H bv niD^r? ^nd the fame paflage in \ Chronicles is cxpreffed pIDV bv "I'^'^P ^e flood in his place. COLLATION LIIL 2 Kings xxiii. 21. — 23. with 2 Chronicles XXXV. I. 17. 19. THE hiftory of the PaiTover, kept by King Jofiah's orders, as repiefented by the author of Kings, feems to infinuate, that fuch a Pafibver was never kept fincc the time of the Judges, and never during the government of the Kings of Ifrael and Judahy which i-ndeed would be very furpriiing, as many good and pious Ki^igs reigned over Ifrael, particularly David, of whofe praifes the Prophets are full, and whofe charadter is fet forth as a model to all good Kings. Belides, Hezekiah kept a folemn PafTover, which h defcribed in d, * % Kings, xi. 14. I 2 Chronicles, xxiii. 15, very ( T97 ) very pompous manner by the author of Chronicles, Chap. x^x. Therefore, to obviate this difficulty, the author of Chro-r nicies explains, that fince the time of Samuel, who was the laft of the judges, and fince the time of all the kings of Jfrael, namely Saul, Davidy and Solomon^ who were kings over all Ifrael, fuch a pafTover was never kept as in the days of Jojiab ; that is to fay, that the whole body of the nation, then in the Holy Land under one King, kept it uniformly with- out any prevarication ; for after Solomoyiy the kingdom was divided, and by the great fchifm of Jeroboam, ten tribes were deprived of fuch a celebration ; and tho' Hezekiah endeavoured to folemnize a PafT- over, as in the time of Solomon, by fending letters of exhortation, for that purpofe, to fuch of the tribes who had not yet been led into captivity by the kings of AJfyria ; very few hearkened to his devout invita- tion, and the greatefl part made a derifioji of him and of his * mefTengers. To cor- roborate, that this is the peculiarity of jfofi(ih*s PafTover, it may be proper to re- ♦ % Cliroiiiclcs, wx, mark. ( 198 ) mark, that after the captivity of the ten tribes in the time of Hezekiab, and tho wonderful mortality that happened in tho AJjyrian arihy, (which attempted to carry in like mamier the kingdom of Judab into captivit}'-^^) the- territories of' Judah wer© not only confiderably enlarged, but it is natural to fuppofe, that great numbers of the Ifraelites were added to Judah ; for there can be no doubt, but many of them fore- feeing the impending danger, took timely fhelter in the kingdom of Judalo^ and pro- bably many others fled from captivity. To evince this affertion, let it be obferved, that the firft care of Jofiahy ^fter his acceffion to the throne, was to deftroy idolatry n0{. only from the territory oi Judahy but alfo from all IfraeL PVD'^T X^^^'^^y XW'^'Ci n^l n^3D DH^niannS ^'^nSi 1:1?') " '^ And fo he did *^ in the cities of Manajfeh^ and Ephra'm'^ ^^ ^nd Simeon, even into Napthaly,vjith their " mattocks round about ;" and further, -f "bi^iv' YIN ^DS 5;i:i p^jsann ^^r ^^ and hg cut * 2 Chronicles, xxxiv. ^. • t IbiU. ver;|7. 'i ^(•:al .:i ^j^o.^i- . ^^ dowli C 199 ) *^ down all the idols throughout all the '^ land of Ifrael'' God's remarkable pre- didlion to Jeroboam many years before, was now fulfilled, that out ^ of David a perfon would be bom whofe name would be Jofiahy wha would flay the priefts of the high places tjutning incenfe upon thofe very altars, -j- at Beth-el y whidh formerlTy belonged to the Kings Xii-'^lfmel ; and we find that at the reftoration from the Bahy- lonijlo captivity, many returned of the tribes of Ephraim X and ManaJJeb ; belides, the zuxhox -oi Chro'n'icks very plainly infinuates this, by faying, r\'^ D-N'JD^n ^KT^^'^n Ir;?*") nDDH " § And the children of 'Ifrael that " ^ere prefent kept the PaiTover.''' The w^ord D''^^A:3:^ meaning thofe that were then found in the kingdom, and' under his do- minion; and a little before it is faid, iny"'') Dn^nbis> ^n ns '^^2V^ bt^^v^i K^:^J:l^ bz nt^ " And he ** made all that zuere piefent * I Kings, ilii. a. f a Kings, xriii. 17. \ I Chronicles, ix. 3. § Chap. XXXV. 17. * 1 ChronJclesL, xxxiv, 33. ^' ia •Me. ( 200 ) ^' in Ifrael to fervc, even to ferve tKc' /^ Lord their God." Meaning that he caufed all the Ifraelites that were found in his dominions, to ferve the Lord their God. But to return to our fubjecl, agreeable to what has been faid ; the exprcffion in Kin^s^ (ver% 22.) k^ o rxy\rv ^::h^^ "^^ni^r^ o'pd ^d* "pb*) b^'^^'^ n^ tranilated, " furely there was not holden ^' fuch a PafTover, from the days of the *^ Judges that judged Ifrael, nor in all the ^^ days of the Kings of Ifrael, nor of ^^ the Kings of Judab ;'* but ought to be rendered. " There was not holden fuch " a PafTover from the days of the Judges "^r/ieir— ^c ^Yi^^ judged Ifrael, jtor^from^ the days '•^-^J^J " of the Kings of Ifr'^l zn^ Kings of li^J-fC^UU,' '' Judah'y' namely, iince the time that '^^^^^"* ^oth the kingdoms were united under Ji^nxh^^ one king; and (ver. 18.) of Chronicles ^^^^^^ ''nv^i^> n^^:;;, tranflated, " And there was ^Az-Zi^ fij^Jftfy li j^o PalTover like to tliat kept in Ifrael, "^^ * f ^ from the days of Samuel the Prophet, neither I ( 201 ) '^^ neither did all the kings of Ifrad keep *^ fuch a PafTovcr as Joftah kept ;" fhould be tranflated " from the da3^s of Samuel " the Prophet, and of all the kings of " Ifrael" for the 1 of 'pDi is not a dif- jundtive one, but ferves for the conjunc-* tive particle, and; and the D of '•^VJ that defcribes the ablative y)-(?w, governs the whole, and is as if it was twice in- ferted^ " from the days of SaniUel the ^^ Prophet, and from the days of all the " kings of Ifrael" I fhall alfo remark that the author of Kings employs only three verfes in the defcription of this PafTover (chap, xxiii. ver. 21 « 22. 23.) but the author of Chronicles illuilrates the whole^ in no Icfsthan 19 verfes; and avoids, or rather explains the equivocal phrafe of min> ••:)'?D') bi^-^.V' Ot^lD 'r^'^ b^^ " nor in all <* the days of the kings of Ifrael and " kings of Judahj' by omitting the words 2 c c a L^ V ( 202 ) COLLATION LIV. 2 Kings xxiii. 29. 30. with 2 Chron. XXXV. 20. — 24. and xxxvi. i. THERE Is no material variation in tkis collation, only that the author of €kronicles gives a circumftantial account of JofiaFs encounter with the King of Egvpty to fhew that Jofiah was the caufe of his own misfortune, by not regarding the admonitions of the King of Egypf^ who required him, in the name of the Lord, not to diflurb him in his way. vh^ ^3njin 12 urhrh d "odd v:i3 r^'^^'^ nDrr wrbi^ ••BD •»:): nm 'pk v^'^ v^^ '^ Never- ^' thelefs Joftah would not turn his face ^' from him, but difguifed himfelf, that " he might fight with him; and heark- *^ ened not unto the words of Necho^ frorfi *^ the mouth of God,, &c.." C O L- ( 203 ) COLLATION LV. 2 Kings xx'iii. 30. — 37. — xxiv. i. — 6. with Chronicles xxxvi. 2. — 8. THERE is no material variation in this collation, only a few explanatory ad* ditions in Chronicles, COLLATION LVL 2 Kings xxiv. 8. — 17. with 2 Chron. xxxvi. 9. 10. THERE is, in this collation, fome very material variations ; the firft is, that, by the book of Kings, it feems that Jebo- iachin was eighteen years old when he afcended the throne ; but, by Chronicles^ it appears that he w^as then only eight years of age. This variation I prefume may be recon- ciled, upon the fame principles as are ad- 2 C 2 vanccd < ZC4 ) vanccd in Collation xxxv, (page 144.) to ^yhich I beg leave to refer the reader ; upon that plan we may fay, that the book of Kings gives the real age of Jdwiachln .fince his birth ; but the book of Chronicles only records the years that elapfed, fince his father aflbciated him in the govern-r tnent of the kingdom, to fecure the fuc- ceflion to him. The next variation is relative to the perfon of Zedekiah who fucceeded Jtho-. iacbin, and was fet on the throne by Nebuchadnezzar ; for, according to the Book of Kings, this Zedekiah was Jehoiachins uncle ; for it is faid, * m^ ^22 i^D l^D"*! in^pi^ iDi:^ m 2V'^ vrnn nn n^jriD /^ and the King of Babylon made Matta^ /* niah^_ his father's brother. King in his /^ flead, and changed his name to Zede- ^^kiah'y' and this alfo appears by Jeremiah y-f •who calls Zedekiah y the fon of Jofiah; Belides, this feems to have been really the cafe, becaufe the mother of '^ehoahaZy '■" 2 Kings xsiv. 17. I Chap. i. ii. and 37. I. who < 205 ) who reigned immediately after his father ^ Jofiah, and was certainly uncle to Jeho- i -y^^^ ^^ ^^ iachin^ and the mother of this Zedeklah^ is [^'y^r^j/?^!^ defcribe d as the fame perfon^ Am utaliYiO. l^^^^^^^^^^jt daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah ; but ViOXrAu'd7^^^£^ jj^ withitandino; all this. Chronicles records, %)^^^'^cifUri % that Jehoijchins fucccfTor, Zedek'iahy wasHr-pr: ^^^^S his brother, and not his uncle. ^ ^^.^' ^^^ , Some very refpedtable authors have en- ' ' ; * i •«: t^^^ deavoured to reconcile this variation, ^Y tt/^- /^f)^J?^ faying, that Zedekiah who fuceeded Jehoia-^it^?/ijuL^ 'al ^ fhirt, was his uncle, as appears both ^Y / ^ ^^^^f^'^'cf Kings and Jeremiah, and though he is called ^^^ ^ ^x^ in Chronicles^ Vni^ his brother, it only means/J^^^ b<7^^aT^ his kinfman, being fo nearly related toTe/fea^^ ^s&^ him ; as it is the cuflom of Scripture to call^^^^*w»- rc/c^^ by the name of brothers, thofe who ^^ //la^ /$^ ^^^^* near relations, as in Genefis xiv. i^.^^^njoA M/^ Abraham calls Lot his brother's (on/^^^^^^^^^ Hl by the name of brother o D^n^; ^^""^^^ ^^ /^^^~ Vn^^ n3"«:^: " and when Abraham ^'^^^^^\^^^^^ jL <' that his brother was taken captive" ; ^ ;?ri«^rv^!^-n^V . and, (ibid. ver. i6.) vn«^ :ii'? D^ :3j'> '^ and ♦ 2 Kings xxiii. 31. Ibid. 24. 18. alfo ( 2o6 ) ^^ alfo his brother Lot-." And Indeed there are many other inilances, even of thofewho have no other relationfliip, but that of being of one and the fame nation, and yet arfc called brothers ; and, therefore, Zedekiah is called, by Chronicles, Jehoiachrns brother, although he was his uncle. But, without any difparagement to the foregoing folution ; I beg leave to offer my own opinion on this fubjecft to the learned, w^ere it only to Ihew that there may be another method to reconcile this variation ; proceeding on my plan, that Chronicles was wrote to explain fome dark pafTages, and to throw light on all ambi- guous phrafes. Let it be firfl obferved that the word TH dodo in Kings, does not neceflarily mean an uncle, but may be un- derftood in its other acceptation of a fa- "jourite or beloved friend, the fame as *nn> redido; and although this word m in Scripture, is generally made ufe of in this fenfe only in the language of lovers, yet we find it fometimes on other occafions, as in Ifaiah v, i, riT^ nn-'b Ki nh^^^N ( 207 ) 'i:)*) y-DID^ nn " Now will I fmg to my ^' wcll-belovcd^ a fong of my beloved ** touching his vineyard." In this very fenfe o( friend or favourite, I conceive that the author of Chronicles * makes ufe of the word in when he fays "sn nn IDJnnM >TC2'2n ]2, 'pj^^nn i^irr "^d-^di lo^^ ^'J^ yrv T^rjrr ^:n ay which fliould be rendered, " alfo Jonathan, David* s favourite, was a ^^ Counfcllor, a wife man, and a Scribe ; he " and Jehiel the fon of Hachmoni were with " the King's fons," that is, were their pre- ceptors or companions ; not with (landing that the mufical point athnah, that clofes the fentence is at ^^^^, as if they were two difTer- ent employments. Now Jonathan could not be David's uncle, becaufe it is not recor- ded, either in the genealogical account of David's family, or in any other part, that Jejfe, David's father, had any brother^ and if this Jonathan had been his brother, he certainly would have been mentioned as fuch, efpecially being fo celebrated a perfon ; for though the children of Je^jfg * I Chronicles xxvii. 3:, do ( io8 ) Ao fiot Ihine in hiflory, we find all theit' names carefully regiftcred ; but I prefume that this Jonathan is the fameperfon as 211V Jonadahy mentioned in fecond Samuel x\\u 3. in ^ni^ r^v^'^ inm:viDti?i vi ^^Ti^^^ " But ^^^2;/o« had a friend (or rather a com^ *^ panion) whofe name was Jonadahy the *^ fon of Shimeay David's brother," becaufe this Jonadah's character is defcribed in ihe" fame verfe -^^;D DDH t:'^^^ niiVI " and Jo- *' nadab was a very (not fubtle as tranllated, *' but) wife man" which agrees with the foregoing description of Jonathan ; and, as his employment was to attend on the king's fons, he might with great propriety be called yi a companion to Amnon^ thd^ then Prince Royal ; and in 2 Samuel xxi. 21. and i Chronicles^ xx. 7* we find in ^nj^ S*r!:3^ ]1 in^iirr " Jonathan the " fon of Shmeahy David's brother ;" which makes it clear that he is the fame as Jo-^ nadab, who is iikewife defcribed as the fon of Shimeah, David's brother, in 2 ^9^- muelxnuQ,4 It being then evident, that Jonathan of i Chronicles xxvii. 32. is the fame as Jonadab of 2 Samuel xiii. 3. and ( ^09 ) £s he could not be David's uiicle, fince we fee he was his nephew, or his brother's Ton ; it therefore follows, that in cannot be underftood in the common acceptation of uncle; but, in it's other fignificationj of beloved ; Nor is the difference in the ninids, Jonathan and Jonadab^ any objection to this conflrudtion, becaufe Jomdah. is -» a diminutive of njirr Jehonadaby in th^ lame manner as ]riiV Jonathan is a dimi- '■ nutive of ]nJin^ Jehonathan^ and we find, in Jeremiah xxxv. 6. :aD-) ]n 2i:v Jonadaby ) ^^ " the fon of i^^d^Z^," and, ibid. ver. E. ^^J'^^^^ the fame man is called nD") p aT:iW ^^^^^ 9^/^;.^ *^ Jehonadahy the fon of i^^c^rf^;" and thefe t^ c^y^^xL ifu i two names of Jehonathan and Jehonadaby ^fm< c^ffU convey the fame idea; for, to be free in giving, or to be generous, are fynonimous terms, the idea attached to both thefe names being Goi^^'i'^. " Admitting then that the word m as to Zedekiahy means his favourite .or beloved; 1 fuppofe that the pronoun hlsy expreffed w -the Hebrew by jtlie \ affixed ; is rela- tive X.0 Nebuchadnezzar J who is the agent of D d the ( il<^ ) the verb "^bD^, " and he made him King;*' the true tranflation of this verfe being ** and he (/. f. Nebuchadnezzar) caufed ** his favourite Zedekiah, to reign in his " ftead." How this great and intimate friendfliip was contradted between Nebu- chadnezzar and Zedekiahy is not clearly ex- preiTed, but we find that Nebuchadnezzar y on his firft coming to Jerufalem, dethroned Je- boiakim, and put him in chains to carry him into captivity to Babylon. 2 Chron, xxxvi* n'PDn ^yb^^b WniDnn " Againfl him came ** up Nebuchadnezzar King of Babylon, and ** bound him in fetters, to carry him ** to Babylon" He then confented that Jehoiachin his Ton Ihould reign in his place, for it was in the power of the Babylonian King to place, on the Throne of Judahy whomfoever he liked bed; and it is probable, that, on this occafion, he carried alfo Zedekiahy Jehoiakinfs fe- cond fon, and the reft of the leading people of Jehoiakim's court, in captivity along with the King ; in the fame manner as was afterwards pradtifed with his fon ;and fucceiTor Jehoiachin, as appears by 2 Kings ( "I ) 2 Khigs xxiw 12. — 1 6.; and, during Ze- dekiab's relidence in Babyloriy it is highly probable, that he ingratiated himfeif fo much into Nebucbadnezzar*s favour, that in a little time Jehoiachin was dethroned, and Zedekiah filled his place. Nebuchad* nezzavy however, made him fwear, to be faithful to him, and his tranfgreffing this oath, \vas afterwards imputed to him as a very great crime. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 13, D'^n'PNS " And he alio rebelled againl^ ^' King Nebuchadnezzar y who had made him *' fwear by the Lord," ^c. but fuch was the affed:ion Nebuchadnezzar had for Zede^ kiahy that even when he had him in his power, after fuch want of fidelity, he did not take away his life; and although this lenity may be accounted by fome as an ex»- cefs of cruelty, yet life is very precious, and the prophet * Jfr^w/^^ foretold to him, that he fhould not die a violent death, but that he Ihoyld be gathered to hia fathers in peace. It remains now to account for the great difHculty in Jeremiah on this fubjed:. ^ Jcr. iixlv, 4, 5. D d 2 If ( 212 ) If Ze^ekiah, Jehoiachins fucccfTor, was his own brother, and is the fame as is mentioned in the genealogical lift, i Chron, iii. 16* 13:3 n^pi:^ m n^^D^ D^p'^in^ ^jm " and the " fons of Jehoiakim^ Jeconiah his fon, ^* Zedek'iah his fon," and not the fon of Jofiah of the fame name, recorded ,in the fame palTage, ver. 15. Why AoQ^Jeremkh Chap. i. 3. calls him Zedek'iah thq fon of J-ofiah^ and more explicitly, wld^ chap? xxxvii. I. r\r\T\ in^t:^K^ p xv^Ti i^d i'?d'^i t3"'pnn> p in'^D " And King Zedekiahy the " fon of Jofiahy reigned inftead of Con'iah f' the fon of Jehoiaklm'^ On which we may obferve, tl>at, even in the days of the righteous King Jofiah^ the wrath of God was kindled againil Judah, as appears by the Prophecy of Huldah the Prophetefs, when confulted by Jofiah* s orders ; tho' the punilhment was fufpended in conlidera- tion of his virtues. His fucceffors Sahmiy or Jehohahaz and Jehoiakimy his fons, and Jeho'mchin his grandfon, were all three ini- quitous Princes, who brought upon them- felves the vengeance of God, and many f urfes were denounced againfl them by 7^^'^- miaht ( 213 ) mJah. As to the firfl:, he fays, Jer. xxii. ii^ ^n')^ i^:rT -)•l:;^^ Dipos o ni^ di:^ ai;:;^ n^ 1^;? HKT i^'? 7^^^?^ y-isn /ih^i jt;::^ d::^ " for ^^ Thus faith the Lord touching Salum, ^^ the fon of Jofiab king of Judah^ who *^ reigned inftead of 7^/^/^ his father, and " who went forth out of this place, h^ ^' fhall not return thither any more, but '' he ihall die in the place whither they ^' have led him captive, and ihall fee " this land no morc:'^ (he was carried captive to Egypt. ^ As to Jehoiakim, it is faidin Jer. xxii. i8. 19. \-t 1D{< n3 p"? l':';:;m y\T.D nnp> ^T*:n /iiuP :n-in ^im D^':)*^')!'' nvti^"? ^^^^^D " Therefore thus *^ faith the Lord concerning Jehoiakim .'* the fon of Jofiah king of Judah ; they *^ fhall not lament for him, fiying. Ah ^' my brother ! or, Ah nry filter ! they *' fhall not lament for him, fnyifig. Ah '* lord ! or. Ah his glory ! He fhall be ^^ buried with the bur i-al n '^^y' nn'ik n:^*h^ Tni yt)^^ '•t^pno th T^nii arr^JSD " As I live, faith the Lord, though " Coniah the fon of Jehoiakini king of Ju- " ^j^,' were the fignet upon my right hand, " yet would I pluck thee thence : and I '^ will give thee into the hands of them that *^ feek thy life, and into the hand of them *' whofe face thou fearefl," ^c, and ibid", ver. 28. T\^y2 ntn li^^KH V'i3^ n?n:i y^VT^ 11 ysn r^* '''^^ D^ " Is this man Coniah ** a defpifed broken idol ? is he a vefTel " wherein is no pleafure?" ^r, znd ihid^ 7^J cutt^ ^ ver. 3o.n^-u^ ntn t:;"*Kn jin lani 'n "idk n:3 ^'—^^ V. ] " Lord, write ye this man childlefs, a man c^fLaru^ L" that Ihall not profper in his days," ^r. *>7^7/zSy:^ 7^ -^^^^ ^"^^^ ^^ ^^^ relation to Zedekiah : Jot all Iii s^ f^^rtTn^/ Jr crime, or rather' misfortune, exclufive ^^ r<^^^ of the breach of his oath, was an error in '^^<^>^^j^'^!&^ judgement, that he did not take Jere- r^f^-\^^^**^ ^/^^»s advice, to go out and fubmit to Il^JJJA^ the King of Babylon y as in Jer. xxvii. 12. 7 (- y and the greatefl evil ever predidted to him ( 215 ) him by Jeremiah was, Jer. xxxii. 5, *' and he, {Nebucka^ezzar), fhall lead Z^- '^ ^/j/:? to Bahylofiy and there he fliall be, *' until i-v4fit him, faith the Lord, though *^ ye fight with the Chaldeans y ye fliail not *^ profper;" and Ibid, xxxiv. 4, 5. ^,'2::; ^j^ *' Yet hear the word of the Lord, O *^ Zedekiah King of Judah; Thus faith the *' Lord, of thee; Thou Ihalt not die by " the fword ; but thou Ihalt die in peace, " And with the burnings of thy fathers, " the former Kings which were before " thee, fo Ihall they burn odours for thee ; " and they will lament thee, faring. Ah, " Lord ! for I have pronounced the word, ** faith the Lord." By all which it feems, that Zedekiah was rather a worthy Kino- who perhaps was weak enough to fufFer himfelf to te influenced by the wicked- nefs of his minifters, as we fee in his fuffer- ing ( 2i6 ) tiig Jeremiah to be iJl-trcated by the falfc politicks of his court, though he took care to fave him privately ; and Je- remiah hlmfelf feems to charge him with this wcaknefs of temper, when advifing him to furrcnder, Zedekiah was backward to follow his advice, Jer. xxxviii. 22* T^'cn nnDiK n:m ^nD i^d nt:^ \s p^'t^'^M:^ linK " And behold, all the women that *^ are left in the king of Judah's houfe, *' JJjall be brought forth to the King of *^ Bahhn's Princes, and thofe] women *' ihall fay, Thy friends have fet thee on, *' and have prevailed againfl thee; thy *' feet are funk in the mire, and they *' are turned away back* And a^ Zedekiah imitated rather the Goodnefs of his grandfather Jofiah^ than the wicked- ncfs of his father Jehoiakim, the Pro- phet calls him the fon of the righteous Joftah. As for the motlierof Jehoahaz.zf\A oiZe^ dekiah, both being called Amutalxht daugh- ter C 217 ) ter of Jeremiah of Lihnah, it has ,been al- ^i ready remarked in the Collation xxix. / uziJ- ^^ J Page 131, that the title of the King's mo- ^ y (I^Ui ther^ was a title of dignity, which was not /^^^^^ ^ ^f^ always given to the King's own mother, \ , 't ^"""^^^ but to the firft lady of the King's houfe. jTf^jc^ ^ There is a third variation in this Colla^ ^^ ^^^fi2r- tion, that by Kings y^YAsi, 10. it appears, ^ XA/y, ^' that the King of Babylon himfelf went up /^ , "^ ^^^^^f-^ru to Jerufalem^ and took King Jekoiachin into 2!^f^ ^^^ ^ captivity; whereas, by Chronicles xxx\i, "^^^ "g^2 10. it feems that he fent his fervants - ^ . ^^ ^^-t to take him. I'^Dn vb^ T\WT\ rc^'^rb^ // Jy^ j"'"^ ^ 'rr JT'^ " And when the year was ex- */ ^- — »^^— ~ *^ plred. King Nebuchadnezzar ^ fent and /7^^ / , *^ brought him to Babylon, with the good- ^^ // ^ t '' ly veffels of the houfe of the Lord/* "^^ W But if we duly coniider the matter, there is not the leaft contradidtion; for accord- ing to KingSy the King of Babylon fent his fervants firit to befiege Jerujalem; and when the fiege was far advanced, the King himfelf came, to enter into the city E e H ( 2i8 ) as a conqueror, becaufe it was a famous metropolis; we find a fimilar inftance in David's war with the Ammonites ; for after Joab, the General, had reduced Rahhah their capital to the laft extremity, he de- iired that David * might come and ob' tain the honour of entering it; it is in this fenfe, that this PafTage in Chronicles is to be underflood, for, at firfl, -[^DH vh^ ")^K^"1D1I1^ " Nebuchadnezzar fent thither " his fervants,'' and then he himfelf went up, took King Jehoiachin, and all be- longing to him^ and brought him to Ba- hyloun COLLATION LVIL 2 Kings xxiv. i8. — 20. xxv. i. — 30. with Jer. lii. i .-24. & 2 Chron. xxxvi. 1 1 .-2 1 . WE find in Kings, ver, 19. & £o. fpeaking of Zedekiah, 'n '':)''yi yiH '^T'^ XMy^xy \i ?]i^ bv o : u^^^^rv xwv ^'^'^ ^3^ b'Xl l'?03 ysVyr^ "in?^''') " he did that ' ** % Sam. xii a8. «^ which ( 219 ) " which was evil in the fight of the *^ Lord, according to all that Jehoia- ^^ kirn had done : for through the ^^ anger of the Lord it came to pafs in ^^ Jerufalem and Judah, until he had call ^' therri out from his prefence, that Zede- '^ k'lah rebelled againft the King of 'Bahy- <' /o«.'* Which feems highly to refled: on ZedekiaFs character, telling us that he was as wicked as Jehoiakim ; therefore the author of Chronicles takes pains to ex- plain, that all his mifcondudt confided in thefe two objeds ; the firft is, y222 n'? \1 ^3Q ^^u:l^ in^IDl^ ^:d'?3 " * he humbled L^*/>^''^ '* not himlelf before Jeremiah the Pro- ( 9^ ^ *' phet, /peaking from the mouth of the J^f '^ " Lord." That is to fay, he did not pay ^. • ^'^^ due rcfped: to the Prophet, who repeat^ >tv5 A--fc edly admonilhed him to fubmit ; and the ^ fecond is, his breach of the oath of fidelity to the King of Babylon, Thus far relative * The additional particle and, added here by the tranf- lators, is wrong, becaufe it makes it a feparate fentence, •when it is only an eiplanation of what his wickeduef» conlifted in. E e 2 to 1 ^«' ( 220 ) to the King ; but, in order to rr.anifefl xht reafon of the wrath of God againfl the nation, he further explains how much the nobles, and all the different clafles of the people, were corrupted and idolatroufly inclined, and that their wickednefs had arrived to fueh a pitch, that inflead of amending by the daily warnings of God through his prophets, they continually ridi- culed them, and contemned their exhorta- tions ; to illuflrate which. Chronicles em- ploys no lefs than five vcrfes ; on the other hand, the author of Kings writes the whole twenty-fifth chapter, to defcribe the ruin of the kingdom of Judah^ the deltrudtion of the temple, and the captivity of the royal family and people to Babylon ; but the author of Chronicles fums up the whole in the 4 vcrfes 17, 18, 19, and 20, becaufe as matters were then very recent, it was needlefs to enlarge thereon, efpecially as, after condign punifliment, the refloration had taken place ; he therefore remarks (verfe 2 1 .) that as foon as the term of years of captivity, mentioned by the Pro- phet C 2^1 ) phet Jeremiah y was expired, (agreeably to the covenant made between Ifrael and Mofes in Mount Sinat, Levit. xxvi. 34.) God moved the heart of the king of Perjia, to rellore the nation to it's former flatc. Belides, as the particulars of that great cataflrophe were already recorded both in Kings and in Jeremiah, one reflediing fuffi- cient light upon the other, there was no occafion for the author of Chronicles to dwell on that melancholly fubjedt. COLLATION LVIIL 2 Chronicles xxxxvi. 22, 23. with Ezra i. i. — 3. T H ER E is no variation at all in this lafl collation ; and the famenefs of the lail verfes in Chronicles^ and the beginning of the book of Ezra, (hews (as the learned Dr. Bayky hints in his Hebrew and En^- lijh Bible, at the clofe of the book of Chronicles^ ( 2.22 ) Chronicles) that both books are the work of one and the fame author ; the firfl de-* figned to illuftrate all the hiftory until the captivity, and the oth^r, the hiitory of the refloration. FINIS. ( 223 ) ^ - ■ k .J«( ^ APPENDIX. CONSCIOUS that fuch an under- taking as that of reconciling of fcrip- ture variations, could not be confined to a fmall compafs ; my chief view (as I faid in the beginning) was to Ihew, that there might be found a rational method to re- concile fuch difcordant readings ; and if I fucceeded in fome, I hoped it might ferve as a caution to criticks, not to be too pofitive in pronouncing all fuch variations as miftakes and corruptions of tranfcrib- ers : For this reafon, I thought it needlefs minutely to difcufs all the fmall differ- ences, that occur in the foregoing collar tions, efpecially as I relied, that, if my propofed ( ^24 ) propofed plan was adopted, it might be cafily followed and improved by abler hands. But finding that I have, through hurry, omitted to take notice of fome ma- terial points, which may be thought to have been done defignedly; I think it incumbent on me, to attempt accounting for them in an Appendix, and Ibeg the curious reader would refer thefe additions to their refpedtive places. Collation VI. Page 12. To my pofition, that Keturah was not Abraham's wife, but his concubine, it may be objedted that the word ?)DV*) at the be- ginning of that account, feems to inti- mate, that Abraham took again a woman in the place and charadter of Sarah ; and, in confequence, this woman mull have been a lawful wife ; but I confefs, that I do not fee the neceffity of making the adtion of the verb cjdv") to have relation to Sarahy and not to Agar ; for as both had been connefted with Abraham, this laft adtion ( -25 ) &6:iofi of his, 'mky'have reference to either of them, but it is more reafonable to fuppofe it fhoiild refer to Agar, as it is clear from the context that Keturah was only Abraham's concubine, and ■ Agar had no longer any conned:ion with Abraham, who had difmifcd her long before the death of Sarah. — I was obliged to make this remark, becaufe the objec- tion was ftarted by a judicious friend of mine, whofe good fenfe and judgement I greatly efleem. Collation XIL Page 26. Having explained that two mighty men are recorded in 2 Samuel xxiii. 8. in the words Nin "1:^^*^^ z^m '^l^^Dnn ri2\V2 2^^^ ^riVn ')T1V namely, Jajhobeam and Adino, I proceed to the conftruction of the remain" ingpart of this text 0:^32 bbn JT^r^Q nJOti^ bv rsn^ efpecially as the learned Dr. Kenntcott (ill, DilTertationj p. 87.) aiTerts, Tliat " there is in the fenfe fuch an hiatus^ ^^ as no Elliplis can excufe, the fame tiuaf F f '' Adtno ( "6 ) " Adino the Eznite *^ againft 800, whom he flew at one time.*' The do6tor lays fuch llrefs on this ima- ginary hiatus, that he makes it the foun- dation of his whole fyflem; after fup- pofing that the words D2'^2 2'^^'^ are a corruption of UVy^'' he fills up the hia- tus (p. 89, and 90) making iTij; to be a corruption of iiip i, by fuppofing the van blundered into a yody and mifplaced after the firft rejhj this reJJj corrupted into a daled — the fecond rep, into a nun\ — and, by fome egregious miftake of a tranfcriber, a final ncedlefs vau added. With the help of all thcfe tranfmutations, the ingenious Dodtor thinks himfelf fufficiently autho- rifed to affirm that 1:1^^ is a corrirption, and that the true reading ought to be "I'^V as is in Chronicles, " for (he pro- *^ ceeds, p. 91.) that this word mufl have *^ been a verb of the fame fenfe with nnii^ is *' plain from the fubflantlve that follows *' it, which is lefs underftood (if poffible) ^' than ini^ with all it's corruptions." But the Dodtor finds afterwards the fenfe of ''li^'n to anfwer exactly the form and force of ( ^27 ) of Wirr riW. In Ihort, according to the Dodtor, this verfe ought to be exad:ly the fame as that of Chronicles ^ in every refpedt. But, notwithftanding all the plaufibility of thefe affertions, I fubmit that the whole may be accounted for, without the leaft corruption, agreeably to my plan; that Adino on the deceafe of JaJJjobeam filled up his place : But as we do not find Adtno to have belonged to either of the feries of the mighty men who were conftantly kept in the king's fervice ; luch a fudden exaltation, without fome reafon afligned, would feem very ftrange ; for we might have expedted to have feen fome of thofe worthy officers preferred before Adino, of whofe valour nothing remarkable had yet been recorded ; to account, therefore, for this fudden preferment, the Sacred Writer defcribes the great merit of this hero Adinoy by emphatically faying, " he that ^^ fits in the feat of the Hahmonite [i. e. " Jajhobeham] who was the chief, or firft <^ of the ternary ; he is Adino the Eznitey* on account of 800 men whom he flew F f 2 at ( 228 ) at one time nr\i^ 0'j^2 bbn /^1^^D r]2o^ b)^. So that the latter end of the text, is to affign a reafon, for. the .p^rqmotion men- tioned in the beginning n2^2 y^V Thofe who underftand the geniys of the JT^^rfZo' language, l^now that when the pronoun Pers. j^in antecedes a noun, as m our text mVTi i:inp i^in, it ferves to defcri'oe "'the peculiarity of chara61:er,^ either for fame or renown, or for good or bad adions. As y\'nVC\ 7\V^ Uin * '' thefe ^*f'are?.thatJWo/?j and Aaron f 1,Tn Kin h'^bm y\2^ '^^ this is that Benaiah who ^^ was mighty among the thirty;" Kin THK l^pn " X this is that King Ahaz ;" and many pthers.r— And as this mighty man ^4^«(?, when he performed this exploit of inlaying 800 men at one time, probably ufed fevetal kinds of weapons, it could not be confined to the lance only, and therefore the words iji^^rr m "^^V '^ lift up his fpear,'* * Exod. vi. 26, and 27. ' " f I Chronicles, xxvii. 6. ^ a ChroQicks, xxviii. i:j. are ( 229 ) arc not inferted. That the particle by fre- quently means on account is too manifeft to require any inilances in proof. Thus we fee the text may be explained without any hiatus, and confequently the fuper-* llrudture raifed on this corner-ilone, is far from having a folid foundation. — The words in chis verfe v^^r^'p^n I^i^i — rojb AJha- iijhe [and not SheUfii] I think fhould be rendered the chief or the firft of the terna- ry, becaufe although the word Z'^bv JhaUJJj generally means a captain, and the plural thereof is U'^^'h'^D, the word >\D'hv means a ternary^ or a body compofed of three members ; — and- it 4s in this fenfe that the verfe of (Exod. xiv. 7.) I'^ID bv Wt''hm ihould be underftood. For if it meant, as tranllated, ^' and captains over every one *^ of them/' it would be an extravagant arrangement ; for, according to the ac- counts we have of the war-chariots of ancient times, there could not be a cap- tain over each chariot. But 'h^'2 bv U'^'hv^ is a part of the defcription of the chariots ; and, according to hiftory, fuch chariots were ( 230 ) were cither of a fingle horfe and one man, or of two horfes and three men ; and fcriptiire records, that Pharaoh would have all his chariots of three men each. In this very fenfe, fome ancient Rabbines have underflood this paffage. * In ihort, Adino was a member of the ternary^ and the chief, or firil in rank, among them, and AbiJJoay was their prince, or captain, / I have rendered ver. 42, of Chronicles V U ^hu^ x^- rfpeaking oi Adina^) x:^^vbv V^i?*) ^^ and /U^ -^^o /u^M*,l,'t^^ thirty under his command ;" but left v^'^ ^^Itai ^ ^^^' ^^ thought fo deficient in the ^t^^yyjfy a^- knowledge of HtWezv^ as to have tranf- m,ma^A, <^^/ lated fuch a common word, as V^P under JhiTTh 7^/^72, which ihould be quite contrary, over k^/ic^co^^ J —^^h or above him; I deem it expedient ^'nj .hU.Q^ to acquaint thofe who have not made any tAe-4^^^ */ great progrefs in the facred language, that ? jejt-^^^ ^ ^ although the general, or common accept p^^^t'/iWB^ ration^ of V7y is o'i'fr him^ it lometimes '(^\lcJ //v^3 means quite the reverfe, which is to be C^yT, V cr^ /C ^y4, * Jal^^t Sect. Befhalah, p. 67. 4th column. ( ^3^ ) difcovered only by the context. Many q inftances might be pro duced^ to prQye _thls "^ ^^^A^^-Ju^^ obfervation ; but, to avoid prolixity, I lliall ^h^na$r7W content myfelf with the following remark- }^!T11/^ / able paiTagc, very analogous to our prefcnt ct^f^^^^yc^'^ y fu bj ed:. '^'^'^^^'^^^^ rui We find, in Numb. ii. the military or- der in which God directed the IfraeUtes to encamp and march, was in four feveral encampments, under four dlflindt ftand- ards, called the ilandard of the camp of Judah, .under which camp and flandard were included two other tribes, as fub- ordinate diviiions of the fame camp, and they were all together called tke camp of Judah ; and, in the fame manner, each of the camps of Reuben, Ephra'im and Dan, had two other tribes annexed, going under their own grand flandard : Now, when Mofes defcribes the encampment of the annexed tribes of each of the camps, he makes ufe (ver. 5, 12, and 27.) of the phrafe v^y Q"'jnm tranflated, " and thofc ** that do pitch next unto him ;" and ver. 20, r\'if^^ r^]:^^ ybv^ " and by him ihall iC DC ( 232 ) **^ be the tribe of Manajfeh ;" But in fe- f ality, all thofe yhv fbould be rendered, /\ and under it ; for it refers to bT\ the Itand- i^^yyU\S I ard under which they were. So that we '^i^^c^ iir^\ fee that the word 's'hv ^oes not always y-^ c^cc^ui^^ -^ mean above y and that it may fometimes 'z^y^ t^ rr^ . / ', t mean under ; and it is in this laft fame \T^^ I ' ^^^ fenfc, that this D'»t^»^*^? v'7yi of J^i«^ fhould ^VHfCpT'^ yl , ^^ underllood, and thirty under his com- nJU^ /;(^f, (bmand, for if it was as the Doc9:or would TT^ err nLo^P^^^^^ it (P* 2^70 ^^^ t^^ thirty were /^"^ jdM^^j his fuperiorSy it fnould have been v^j;*) ^/7^/^c^ f ^ D't^^^t^n with the 7:?^ of remark, nor is it y^*^'^^'^ any objedion that the names of thefe ird^jt^^^^ 30 rnen that were under Adina^ are not in- !^^*''^T^>^/W^^^Pferted; for the view of the author of - ^ ^''*' Chronicles in his catalogue of mighty men, was (as I have faid) to record thofe that came to affifl David to afcend the throne^ as appears by the introdudiory verfe 10- x:^^r:d-> ':'^^n•^> 'pd dj? iniD-^DD " Thefe alfcr *^ are the chief of the mighty men whom *^ Z)^wVhad, who ftrengthened themfelves *^ with him in his kingdom,, and with all " Ifrael ( 233 ) " Ifracl to make him king," and after hav- ing enumerated them, he continues inChap. xii. to give an account even of thofe that came to his party vv^hilil he was at Zicklag, in Sd:{rs life-time, among whom we find^ verfe 4. by} D^^^^::?a -)u:i ^:iip:i:n n^^^Di:^^') P';:^'7'i:*rT " and Ijmaiah the Gibeonlte a *^ mighty man among the thirty, and over the " thirty," and as we do not meet this name among the thirty mighty men of David we mufl allow that there was another fet of thirty, which were thofe under Ad'ma ; though they continued, in a body, only until David was placed on the throne. Ijmaiah was one of them, and the firfl in dignity under Adrna, The charadcr of this Ifmaiahy in this temporary corps of thirty valiant men, is the fame as that of Benayaiiy among the eflablifhed thirty ; as we find in i Chronicles xxvii. 6. liT^n Kin W^b^'r\ br 0"'^^*:;^ niS:i literally, ^- this is " that Benaic.h who w^as mighty of the " thirty, and above the thirty," /. f. one of them; but the firfl in rank among them. For thougli wc find thirty-two names in the G g ilft ( 234 ) lift of Samuel, beginning from Benayau, we have already accounted for the two fuper- numerary ones as being the fucceficrs of Afael and Uriah, Doftor Kennicott, quoting this text oiBenayau (p. 224.) only takes no- tice of that part of it, which fays, U''&yVT\ bv f^ over the thirty/' and forgot the begin- ning u'^^b^r^ "11:1:1 rv^^'2 Kin " he is that ^^ Benaiahy the mighty man of the thirty, wliich overthrows his fyftem of Benayau*s being of a fecond ternary of mighty rnen : Upon the whc!"^, I think this matter fo clear, that I readily fubmit it to the candid opinion of unbiafed criticks. I have only to add, that I waved treating on feveral critical remarks of- fered by Dr. Kennicott in his firft diler- tation, on the variations in the names of fome of the heroes, or mighty men, of David; becaufe fuch an examination would have led me far beyond the bounds I had prefcribed to this per- formance; befides, I flatter myfelf that, with due attention, thofe differences may be efifily reconciled by the plan I have de- lineated. ( ^i5 ) ]ineated, of carefully inveftigating into the etymology of names, to find an analogy as to the fenfe, confidering alfo the different circumftances, places, and times, of their being fo recorded : But, inde- pendant of this, fuch a difcuflion would infenfibly oblige me further to controvert feme of the Doctor's opinions^ which is not my defign ; as I only aim at invefti- gating the true fenfe of fcripture with all imaginable candour and fincerity. Collation I. Chap. ii. page c^6. By an overfight, the fixth obfervation was left unanfwered ; it is faid in i Samuel xxxi. II. ly^:) tDy^ ^st^^ v'?^ lyD'^'^i. Bat firft Chronicles x. 1 1 . fays, nv^: )Vy^ "^V^V^^ and omits the word v'?^, which feems im- properly introduced in Samuel; this, how- ever, is no difficulty, for the Pronoun yhtk to him is often ufed in Hebrew, in the fame fenfe as yb^J touching or concerning him^ as Jeremiah xxii. 1 1 . '?^i \1 ")?D*^ HD O in'U^i^'' P Q'^'^*^ " for thus faith the Lord, " touching Solum the fon of Jofiah f and G g 2 ibid. ( 236 ) ibid. ver. i8. p D-pnn^ bi^i 'n -iDi^ HD ]2b 1»T*i:^K^ " therefore faith the Lord, concern- ing Jehoiakbn the fon of JofiahT But this being rather an ambiguous phrafe, the author of Chronicler drops it, giving the fenfe intended hy Samuel, in different words, by way of illuftration. Collation III. Page 76. Among many things that the author of Chronicles clears up, by his pertinent re- petition of this palTage ; we find the ex- planation of two phrafes in 2. Samuel, chap. 5. which otherwife would not be eafily underflood; the one is, that fpcak- ing about the invafion of the PhHiJlincs he fays, ver. 18. & 22. D^KSn prjya W^y'> which word W'l^y'^ is very equivocal, and generally means to abandon ; whereas the meaning here, is that of fpreading them- felveSy which fenfe is more properly con- veyed by the verb, VtO^S'^') ufed by Chro- nicles. The ( 237 ) The other phrafe is that of Y"^rTn ?^ in verfe 24. which the author of Chro^ 'flicks very eafily explains by j^^ji r^i r\^rt>Db '' Then thou fhalt go out to battle/' in vcr. 15. Collation IV, Page 78. The author of Chronicles calls the thrcfh- ing floor, in which the misfortune hap pened to Uzzab, pi>3 p^ (^^r. 9.) which in Kings is called pi p:) perhaps becaufe PTD ]i:) was the name by which that place was known in the time of the author of Chronicles, and it is probable that the name NtIV V"^3 Perez Uzzah^ which was given to that place when that accident happened, was afterwards called alfo pi>D p:i — the word pTD meaning deJlruEiion as. Job xxi. 2, no y^TV ^^^"^'' " his eyes ihall fee his '^ deftrudion" ; for, in reality, Uzzah met his ruin in that place ; and conveys nearly the fame ideas as Perez Uzzah. The vulgar on this principle, permuted the word pDl) into pio , and that place acquired ( 238 ) acquired on that account two names, viZb piD p: and r^^^y yis. The author of Chronicles alfo explains the meaning of bVT^ bv verfe 7. which was UzzaFs crime, by ]-iKn by IT' nbu; l^ii b)^ *^ becaufe he put his hand to the ark/' as the word b^i^ may be underflood in two different ways, the one to let fall, as Ruth ii. 16. r\b 'bwn bu^ D:i " and let alfo " fall," now the crime of Uzzab was juft the contrary to this, for he endeavoured to prevent the ark from falling ; fo that the meaning of b^i; here is an error^ as it is rightly tranflated, and Ihould be alfo rendered fo in 2 Kings iv. 28. i^b nbVT) '*r\'\i^ do not caufe me to err (and not, do not deceive me, as it is rendered) ; for which reafon, the author of Chro- nicles fully explains the meaning of the word, by faying, bv H^ H^t:; '^^Vi by in^rr " becaufe he put his hand to " the Ark/' C O L- ( 239 ) Collation V. Page 8i. There is no contrariety between 2 Sam» vi. 13. Qn;?2i 7^'iD':) 'n pn^^ '^'^^i nyi o ••n-'i l^'^'^ty) 'yw nan " and it was fo that when *^ they that bare the ark of the Lord, *' had gone fix paces, he facrificed oxen *^ and fatlings^' (lltterally an ox and a fai- ling;) and I Chronicles xv. 26.")1T>0 Tl^l in^n 'n r.nn ]'n>^ >Kt:^:i d^iSi jii^ D^n'iJKrT Ub'^'i^ r\V2V^ D^'^H) nv:iU^ " and it came to " pafs, when God helped the Levites that *^ bare the Ark of the Covenant of the ** Lord, that they offered feven bullocks " and feven rams," for the verfe in Sa- muel relates to David, and that of Chronl- nicles to the Levites. Collation VIL Page 83. Following the plan propofed to reconcile the variations in this collation, let it be re- marked, that literally the expreflion in Sa- muel ^nyvb nu 'b r^y::^n hjikh with the n of admiration, tranjlated " flialt thou build *^ me an houfe for me to dwell in ? feems to reprefent i)^i;/V, as unworthy of building a houfc ( 240 ) honfe for the Lord; but the meaning of that paffage is only to cxprefs, that God would not have him build the Temple for the reafons elfewhere given ; therefore, the author of Chronicles avoids any fuch mif- conflrudlion by plainly laying n:3:in HDK \^b n2vb n'^l'h " thou fhalt not build me *' an houfe to dwell in." He changes the phrafe, l/ilij?^ in verfe 10. chap. vii. into the more expreflive term im^n'? from r^rb^, as IfiaJ:> xvii. 14. r^r^b2 n^m iij; r\)h " and hehold, at " evening tide, trouble," and EzeL xxvi. 2 1 . 7:^<') -[:3nK lyrhl " Then I will make " thee a terror, and xhovL fialt be no more,* r.nd ibid, xxvii. 35. ly "l^i^l n^'^n rwh2 D^'^y " thou fhalt be a terror, and never " ihall be any more," thus Myb^b means to trouble, to terrify him. He alters alfo that phrafe in Samuel D^ZODW WV^i ^V)^ DVn p^") litterally, " and " as lince the day that I commanded '* judges to be over my people Ifrael,^* into D^a9'»t:^ WV;i lU^'K D''Q^'^':''), literally, " and ( 24f ) ^^ and fince the days that I commanded *' judges," for this lentcnce being annex- ed to the precedent; " neither fhall the " children of wicked nefs vvafte them any ^^ more ; as at the beginning" (but more properly cis formerly)^ it feems as if, fincc the time that God inftituted judges over Ifrael^ they had been alwa) s afflicted and diflrefTed \yithout intermillion; whereas we fii)d they had enjo)ed many happy days of tranquillity and good government, during the lives of fome of the judges ; and what they fuifered, proceeded chiefly from the anarchy of interregnums when, having no body to conduct them, they went aflray ; therefore the author of ChrO" nicks explains this point by fa} ing Q\:3\'2^> meaning that no body fhould moiell: or diflrefs them as formerly at the times that, to fave them from oppreflion, he found it requifite to eiiablifn judges, &i\ be- caufe by vefiing now the royal authority in the family atid d^fcendants of Davids there would always be a kino- to conduCft thim, and confequently they would no!^ H h ' be ( 242 ) be (o liable to fwerve from the right path fpr want of a leader. Collation XIL Page 104. The a\uhor of Samuel fays, 'n ^t^ :^DV1 n'^l.TI b^W> Di^ 7)^0 rendered ^' and ^' again the anger of the Lord was kin- ^^ died againft Ifraely and he moved Da- *' vid agaitift them, to fay, Go number ^^ Ifra^l and Judah.'' But the true tranf- lation whereof is ; " and the wrath *' of God was again kindled againft If" ^^ raely after David had been moved, or ** feduced (by fome body * not here ex- '^ prefTed) to go and number Ifrael and ♦ It is the genius of the Hebrew language to have the nominative fome time eliptical ; many inflanccs could be produced, but I fliall fatisfy niyfelf only by Gen. ilviii. i. nbin y2^ r^^n ^ovb ^m^) " t^^t aic tou *' J^f^P^i behold thy father is fick;" the ivord one, is not in the Hebrew, and properly added by the tranfla- tion. (' Judah," ( 2^3 ) " '-^ Judah^'' jfor that was certainly the- oc- tafion of God's anger ; and jndeed how could it be coniiftent with julHce, to p'uniA him and them, for a crime that God himfelf was the caufc of it's being committed ? this glaring miftake of the tranllation, proceeds fron^ their not duly attending to the genius of the Hebrew language, which has a kind of preterite that may be called preterit plufquam per- fetl, defcribing an adtion paft and con- cluded^ previous to another adlion aUb pall, which is exprclTed by mentioning the fecond acflion (as to order of time) before the firfl ; for in fiance Exod. xi. 22 j D^DH *iypnn r^'z^rh wn r\^ wm tranf- iated " and he made the fea dry land, *^ and the waters were divided ;" here are two verbs to defcribe two adlions, the turning the fea to dry land, and the di- viding of the waters ; now ^e dividing of the waters was the firft adiion, and then the fea was turned into dry land ; therefore the vau prefixed to the verb-^ ')V\>y^ " and were divided," ought to be H h 2 rf mkrcd ( ^44 ) rendered by the adverb cftcr^ viz, " and " he turned the fca into dry land, after " the waters had been divided ;" alio Jer. X. vcr. 13. & li. ver. 16. pon in/l bipV D'S'^n nbv^^ ^^'2^2 DVJ rendered, " when " he nrtered his voice, there is a multitude *^ of waters in the heavens, and he caufeth *^ the vapours to afcend from the ends of *^ the earth." But as the vapours arife be- fore the waters are in the heavens, there- fore it Ihould be tranllated ; " when he *' uttered his voice there is a multitude " of waters in the heavens.; after he had *^ caufed the vapours to afcend, Cffr/' in the like mann<^r fhould our prefent text in Samuel be underftood, that the wrath of God was again kindled againfl Ifrael^ after David had been feduced to go and number Ifrael; now as the perfon who fedueed David is not expreffed in Samucty and thereb}^ that acflidn is mifconflrucd to God; therefore Chronicles fays pt^r TDV^), TH n?^ DD''*) bViy:)'^ bv " and Satan ftoorf " up againfl Ifrael, and provoked David, "•^^.■" by omitting the firft words of the verfe. ( 245 ) verfc, and adding the word ]12V Satan y re^ liedts great light on this difficult pallage In SajnucL Another, fecmingly great variation in this collation, appears on the offer made by the Prophet to i^j-z^/V, in the name of the Lord, to ohufe one out of three ca- lamities as a puniilimeiit for his offence. In numbering of Jfi-ael^ (which by an exr prefs command, ought, not to be done, but by a poll-tax of half a fiekel, as pre- fcribed in Exod, xxx. 12.) one of thole propofed puniihments, according to Sa- muely was ayn wy^^v^^ 1^ KDnn " lliall ^^ feven years of famine come unto thee ^^ in thy land ?" Whereas according to Chronicles, the years of famine were only three 2^1 U^y^; U^^Z^ QS^ " either three ." years famine." This difference is {o glaring, that it is held .by fomc learned criticks as a moft convincing proof of the falibillty of tranfcribers, as the prophet mufl have mentioned cither three or feven, and not both ; but here again the genius ( 246 ) 'genius of the Hebrew language is hoi duly attended to, for yzv in this paffage of Samuel does not mean feven, as its general acceptation is, but means manyy or a num- ber of years, more than two ; thus we fee, Proverbs "^xiw i6. — Dp*) \>'^'^^ b^p' VIV ^li tranflated " for a jufl man falleth feveh " times, and raifeth up aga'tn^^ but fhould be ^' for the jull man falleth 7nany times j '^ ^r. Levit. xxvi. i8. D^'-Jli^'iDH bv V^^'t) rendered ^' feven times mbre for your ^* fins.'- But fhould be *^ many times, for your fins ;'* Beat, xxviii. 7. & 25. nv^::;^') DOT! " feven ways,** fhould be inanyways Ruth. iv. 15. D^n T^v:^'^^ 1^ nniQ ^^^-r -i::^*^ " She is better to thee than feven fons/*^ ihould be, *^ than ma^ny Jons'' Jeremy xv, 9. n^nu^n ni^ rhbi2\^ "She that hath *^ born feven, languifhed;" flioiild be^ " fhe that hath born many lariguifhed.'^ I Sam* ii. 5. D^^a nnii n;;:!::/ mV'' fiipj; iir nb^DJ* " fo that the barreh nath borii ^* feven ; and fhe that hath rfiany chil- " dren is waxec^. feeble;'* blit fhould be^ <* fo that the barren hath born many; " and ( 247 ) ^* and ihe that hath many children, &cJ^ for it is plain that nnn and r\V2'^ are fynoni- mous, both meaning many ; and in my opi- nion, the following pafTages, 2 Kings vi. 0^^. D^D^^E) yni:/ "i:i^:il I'TIT^ '^ and the child fneez- '^ cdfeven times'' and, ibid, v. 10. Ji'j^ni") fSl p"T'n D\'D>*3 yn*^ " go and wafh in JorcLm " frven times," ought alfo to be rendered viany^ and not feven ; as in our paflage in Samuel : But, as the number of years, is by this phrafe undetermined, and is fo equivocal that it may be underftood, either (even or many; therefore, the author of Chronicles records the precife number of years in a plain manner, faying they were to be three. Collation XXXIV. P. 143, Kings viii. 24, fays Vn1n^^ UV Diva D*^''') in -)^ya Vn^2i^ DI^ napn " and Joram ficpt with his father, and was buried with his father in the city of David : and 2 Clron. ^f xxi, 20, jr\'i2p:^ 16) Tn ')y2 inn:jpi ( 248 ) p0^.r)n they buried him in the city of " Diividy but not in the lepul.chers of " the kings." To reconcile this variation, I beg to return the reader to Colhuion xli. p. 176, This is the whole of what I intended to otfer to the publick in this performance; but leil it fhould be thought, that though we may be able to account for the diffe- rences between Chronicles ^nd other parts of fcripturc, we fhouid not fucceed lb well in the other collations propofed by the author of Crhica Sacra, i\\ fed^ion iv. under the third clafs, I therefore deem it expedient to attempt a reconciliation of the two decalogues, in Exod. xx. 2. — 17. and Brut. v. 6. — 21. the firft collation in that let, which affords very furprizing va- riations, efpecially when it is generally undcrflood that both are the copy of one and the fame thing; namely, the ten commandments fpoken by God himfelf, and the whole wrote by his own hand on the two tables ; confequently, they could ( 249 ) could not have been originally wr9te but exactly in the fame manner; yet as we find that they differ greatly, the plain inference feems to be, that one of the two pafTages mull abfoiutely have been corrupted by the negligence of tranfcribers. But, however glaring fuch variations may appear, I will venture to fubmit my opinion to the learned, and will endeavour to fhew that the difficulty is not fo for- midable that we Ihould defpair of fur- mounting it. I luppofe it will be readily granted, that by the ftile in which the ten command- ments are written, part in the firfl, and part in the third perfon ; we may fafely conclude, that the whole are not the very \vords of a finglc fpeaker, though the com-* piands are all ifiued of one fupreme being; .(let the reader be plcafcd to obfcrve, that, in my explanations of thefe matters, I entirely attach myfclf to the literal fenfe^ I i and ( 250 ) and I do not mean to contradid: or oppofc any of the approved opinions of the antient orthodox dodtors;) therefore I apprehend, that God fpoke and wrote on the tables the DHDl Commandments only , I mean the firft five verfes, as a commandrnent againfl ido- latry, in which God himfelf talks in the firft perfon, as a convincing proof of his ex- iiience ; but in the reft of the command- ments, Mofes ferved as an interpreter be- tween God and the people, at their own reqlieft, being fo much terrified, that they removed afar off; as it is faid, t2VT\ ^31 piniD MDV') ^v^y'^ Dvn «-)'»•) iw '\T^n r\ik^ bi^) nv^wTi ^yov r^m^ nn-i n^tn bi^ iidk^i riim ]D U'T^bl^ I^Di^ niT " And * all the ^^ people faw the thunderings, and the *^ lightenings, and the voice of the trum- ^' pet, and the mountain fmoaking : and ^^ when the people faw it, they removed, ** and ftood afar off; and they faid unto f f Mofes, Speak thou with us, and we will * Ezo4. XX. r8. and 14. hear ; ( 251 ) *^ hear: But let not God fpeak witu.us, " left we die." I alfo fuppofe that God wrote upon the tables the reft of the com- mandments, fiingly and without afllgning anyreafons; as, Not to fwear; keep the Sabbath ; honour your parents, &i\ which confidered as commandments, do not exhibit the leaft variation, — But Mofes, in delivering to the people thefe com- mandements, gave alfo, by a Divine in- fpiration, the reafons or confequences on fome of them ; and as they were not upon the tables, though fpoken by God's in- fpiration, we find that, in Deuteronomy^ when he repeated thofe things of his own accord, he made feme explanatory alterations, the m.ore ftridtly to bind the people to the obfervation thereof : For in- ftance, in the firft fet it ;s faid DV D>i "TiDT W1\h r)yD?\ ^^ Remember the Sabbatji- " day to keep it holy." But exchanged by Divine infpiration, the word ilDT remember into x\i2itoi'y\tZVkecpy to tie the knot tighter, left the irreligious fhould imagine that the commandment confifted only in re- I i 2 membering C 252 ) mcmbcrlng that there is fuch a day ; therefore Mofes explains that command- ment, that the obligation is to keep and obferve it, adding 'jrht^ "n V^^ -|t'K3 *^ as commanded thee, the Lord thy ^^ God," which has reference to the writ- ten tables, in which the mere precepts was recorded, and in addition to the rea- fon which Mofes afligned in the iirft deca- logue for the keeping of the Sabbath, 'i:n 'n rwv ^'^y P(^^ '•^ foJ'^ i" ^\:s, days, the Lord made " heaven and earth, the fea, " and all that in them /V, and refted the " feventh day ; wherefore the Lord blefled " the feventh day, and hallowed it :" He gives another very material one in Benter- onomy, to promote benevolence and hu- manity, which is n>>n •^2V o pr\2^^ " and ** remember that thou waft a fervant in ^* the land of Egypt^ and that the Lord *' thy God brought rhee out thence thro' ** a mighty hand, and by a ftretched-out " arm : Therefore the Lord God com-i *^ manded thee to keep the Sabbath-day f ' as much as to fay, you are commanded to reft. ( 253 ) refl, and tofuffer every thing belonging to your reft alfo ; for when you were in Egyptian bondage, you would have been' glad to have a reiting day ; therefore God commanded you to keep the Sabbath, that you may be able to grant to others that refl, which you yourfelves wanted fo much. And in the commandment of not coveting whatfoever belongeth to our neighbour, he makes it iironger in the fecond decalogue ; for inflead of the word IVjnn iib '^ do not covet" which means a flrong defire to pofTefs, he makes ufe of nixnn 't^b do not defire^ meaning even a llight defire; all of which was undoubt- edly done hj Mofes, by God's infpiration. In Ihort both the decalogues are conform- able to the tables, becaufe on the tables (except the firfl commandment, vv^hich was wrote at length) the mere commandments, without reafons, were written ; and the reft are Mofes's words by God's diredlion and infpiration, according to time and circum- ftances, and therefore our prefent copies of both decalogues may be as pure and uncor- ( 254 ) uncornipted as they were originally, not- withilanding all that criticks may fay to the contrary. I Ihall only add, that fliould this attempt be favourably received by the learned, and meet with encouragement, I pledge myfelf to undertake the laborious taflc of reconciling all the material vari- ations in the collations of other parts of fcripture. FINIS it^» '^ w^ t 4 «1^ /i '(^: 4^ ^yr\^ i t V ■^>