is ^ 1 iVV^. tt / COLLECTION OF PURITAN AND ENGLISH THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE f LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY 72SS t. CriticalrEnqdstfies INTO THE Various Ctrittons O F T H E M~J • PRINTED In Divers T L AC E S and at feveral TIMES. Together with ANIMADVERSIONS UPON A Small Treatife O F Dr. ISAAC FOSSIVS; Concerning the ORACLES of the S1BYLLS. And an ANSWER to the OBJECTIONS of the late C R I TIC J S AC RA. Written Originally in Latin, by Father Simon of the Oratory: Tranflated into Engltfh by N. S. LONDON, Printed by Tbo. V» 1 Robert Denifon T O T H E Mod Worthy and Learned H. THis little Qifi,which} being not long fince at 'TW/i, 1 received from a moREminent 'Divine of that City, I bequeath, moft worthy Sir, to You, as knowing well how fuccefs- fullyfor many Years you have bent your Studies to this fort of Learning. The enhiingTreatiJe was taken out of theLargeCriticalHiftoryoftheO/*/7V ft anient, Written Originally in the La- tin Tongue- which Original the * Au- F' sim'*- thour was lately thinking to have pub- lifhed himfelf. For the French Lditi- A 2 on, The Epiftle be but attentively confidered, you fhall not find him to have exceeded the Laws of Moderation and Equity. But I need fay no more to recommend to you, fo Knowing and Judicious in this kind of Learning, the Reading of this little Treatife : Fori remember how highly you valu'd,refiding in TarU, the Wit, the Learning and Judgment of the Au- thor of the Critica Sacra , tho other- wife little known to you at that time, then by his Writings. A nd indeed fuch is the Genius, worthy Sir, with which you came into the World , that what is good you approve, what is right and true you applaud, even in Men who differ from us in their Religion and Forms of VVorfhip. Therefore if there be any thing too fharply uttered in that fame Author, or which may feem not to comply with the General Doctrine of the Trotejlants, you know him. to the Reader. him to be one of thofe who profefTes the Faith of the T^omifl) Church. In the mean time accept this little Prefent , whatever it be y and believe that I am always ready to ferve ycu in greater things. Oxford , the middle of The Translator to the READER- Candid Reader. THE former Crttuk $f Mr. Ri- chard Simon, one of the Fa- thers of the Oratory, lately pub- lijhe, fir ft in French, and then in En- glifh , having fufferd the fate of all other Books ( of this nature efpecially, ) and undergone the Cenfures of the va- rious Capacities of Readers - the Author hath Jince thought fit to take the work a fecond time in hand, and having revifed, and abridged it, be put it into the hatine Tongue, from whence we have made this Verfion, intending ( as I believe ) that fewer of the igno- A rant. 1 he Tranflator rant, and injudicious part of his Coun- try-men Jlould hereafter bufy their beads about it : Adding to it an Ap- pendix, by way of anfwer to certain objeclionsraifed again ft it, by the incom- parably , and famoufly Learned Dr. Ifaac Voffms in his late Traffi, Jnti- tuled,De Sybil linis Oraculis. As for thefewpafjages that in the former Editi- on were any way obnoxious to the cavils of fome, they are here moftly omitted : fo that there is very little to be found that is like to prove off en five to any fort of men or per fit a ft on in Religion, if but mode- rately Ingenuous. Ibis great and ex- cellent Scholar is, [it muft be confeft) one who lives in the Communion of the Roman Church, but it muft be withal remembred, that fo was the great Eraf- mus alfo, who nevertheless is highly valued by all forts of fober Proteftants,. and equalled in a manner with the very prime r to the Reader. prime, and befl of their Authors, info* much that his learned Commentaries up- on the Holy Scriptures were rendred into our own Tongue, and chain d up to the Pillars of our Churches in the very heat of the Reformation. As to the Book it- felf 1 (hall not befo importune as to fore- fa I either the judgments or, fatisf 'action of its Readers, but only adventure in the general to fay thus much -ythat as it fa- vours neither of the Raverics of the Bigot, nor of the infolence of thePropbane, fo in it the learned Alan and Scholar will find what will content him, and the com- mon man, when he fees how many, and atflrufe things mufi be fir ft known before a man can arrive to a competent judgment of Scripture difficulties, will find great reafon for mode fly 5$ humility, t£ not over pragmatically to oppofe his own private fpirit to the wifdom of his Directors. As for thofe to whom either the Name, or A 2 Pro- The Tranflator, Sc. Profejfion of our Author may create an infuperable "Prejudice, let them but per- ufe the learned Prolegomena ofBiJhop Wa\ton,premis'd to his Polyglot Bible, and they will find that that Learned,and Reverend Prelate was (I had almofl /aid) exactly, but I may fafely fay upon the main of the fame fentiments with our Author. For my own part I doubt not but that the Candour of his Spirit, the ju fine fs of his Judgment, and impartiality of his C en- fur es, will unqueftwiably fupport his Re- putation,with all the Ingenuous andWife, and as for the refl, their very commen- dation would be a Calumny. Adieu. U. R. A COLLECTION O F T H E CHAPTERS Contained in this TREATISE Chap. 2. f\F the Bibles in general, as well amongthe Jews, as V^J Chriftians. pag. I. Chap. 2. Of the Hebrew Manufcripts of the context of the Bible. pag. 6. Chap. 3. Several of the Mamifcript Copies of the Bibles are ex- amined : Their various readings are approvd by the Teftimony of the learned Jews. pag. 12. Chap. 4. Of the publijht Exemplars of the Hebrew Context, which are Maforttkk. Of the Art of the Maforites. Of its Original, and what Opinion we are to have of it. pag. 22. Chap. 5. The parts of the Mafbra, m relation to the Mann- fcript Copies, are weighed, and illnfirated. The true Original o/rkMafora. pag. 28. Chap. 6. Other parts of the Manufcripts, in reference to the Mcwufcript Bible, are examind» Their true Original, and the The TABLE. Maforctfck^ Lcttion confirm "d. pag. 35 Chap. 7. Some things unprofltably, and fuper flit ioufly noted by the Mafot&kkty are illuflrated out of the Manufcript Copies of the Bibles. ^ ^ pag. 44. Chip. 8. Some Examples of different Writings , are producd from the Manufcript s, which vary from the Maforetick^Verfions. pag. 48. Chap. 9. Whether the Jews corrupted their Bibles of fet purpofe. The Opinion of the Fathers concerning this matter examind. pag. 56. Chap. 10. The Opinion of Ifaac VolTiUS, concerning the He- brew IsAanufcripts, is examind, and refuted, pag. 7 1. Chap. If. Of the Samaritan Bibles, their Targumim, or Para- phrafes. pag- 81. Chap. 12. Of the Bibles of the Sadduces, and Karraeans. pag. 92. Chap. 13. Of the Targumim of the Jews, or the Tranflations of Sacred Script urey and firft of the Chaldee Paraphrafes. pag. 98. Chap. 14. An Appendix of the other Tranflations of the Bible in ufe among the Jews. pag. 1 37. Chap. 15. Of the Tranflations of the Bible of great eft Au- thority with the Chrimans, and flrfl -of the Septuagint. pag. 140. Chap. \6. A more particular examination of the Greeks Septua- ghrt Tranflation. pag. 1 50. Chap. 17. The Opinion of Ifaac VoffillS concerning the feventy Interpreters, is examind. The Vindication of St. JerOIfl. pag. 157. Chap. 18. Of the reft of the Greeks Tranflations of Sacred Scripture, and the Hexaples of Origen. The Opinion of Ifaac VoftiUS concerning the difpofttion of the Hexaples, refuted. m pag. 172. Chap. J £. Of the Antient Verflons of the Latin Church. pag. 186. Chap. 20. Concerning the Authority of the Antient Verflom of the Latin ( hurch, and flrfl of the Vulgar. In what fenfe it maybe f aid to be Authentic!*. pag. 1 93. Chap. 21. Of the Tranflations of Scripture us d by the E after n Church : and firft of the Arabic, Coptic, jEthiopic, Arme- nian, &c. pag. 201. Chap, The T A B L E. Chap. 22. Of the later Verficns of the Bible , and prfi of nil, of Latin Vcrfions, done by Catkolick^ Divine:, pag. 209. Chap. 23. Of the Latin Iran flat ion of the Bible, made by P ro- te ft ants, pag. 215. Chap. 24. Of the Translations of the Bible in the Vulgar Tongues, andfirftofalloftbofemadebyCatholtcks. pag. 221. Chap. 25. Of the Bible, done into the Vulgar Tongue, by He- terodox Tr an flat or s. pag. 226. Chap. 26. Of the Tr an flat ions of the Bible, which were writ m the Vulgar Tongue, and their rife from the Geneva Schools. pag- 232. Chap. 27. Of the Polyglot Bibles. pag. 240. Animadverfions upon a fmall Treatije of Dr. Ifaac VoiflUS, con- cerning the Oracles of the Sybils, and his anfwer to the objecti- ons in a late Treatife, Intituled, Critica Sacra. pag. 249' Critical ■ CO CRITICAL ENQUIRIES Into the Various EDITIONS of the BIBLES at (everal Places and Times. CHAP. I. Of the Bibles in genera! \ as well among the Jews, as Chri- ftians. TH E whole Context of Sacred Scripture is remark- ably known among the Chriftians by the name of The Books, that is to fay, The Books fo call'd for their Excellency above all others-, and thefe Books contain both the Old and New Te [lament. The Jews however allow of no more than only the Books of the Old Covenant, and of *c old thofe only written in the Hebrew Language 3 for as for thofe Tcftimcnt- which the Church has receiv d from the Hcllenift Jews in the Greek^Lan^uoe, they deny them to be Canonical, and there- fore will not admit them into their Synagogues, Whereas the Church infpirid with the Holy Ghoft,admits them likewifeto be of Divine Authority. As to which difference, they who among Chriftians afliimeto themfelves the Name ot Frote- ftants and Reformed, rather chufe to take the Synagogues part, than to joyn with either of the Churches, that is, theEaftern or Wefteni. And therefore the Chriftians have only admit- ted into the Church thofe Books of the Old Teftament,whicB B they 1 Critical Enquiries. they received from the Jews. As for the New Teftament, Cferift the firft Author of it, committed nothing of it to wri- ting, but his Difciples after his Pafllon made publick thofe New Books which we call the Books of the New Teftament. Now Ctfiament. who were the real Authors of thofe Books, fome there are who very much doubt, asif the Gofpels of Matthew, Mar^ Luke and John, were nor afluredly theirs. For, fay they, they would not then be entitl'd the Gofpels according to Matthewy Mar^ Luke and John, but the Gofpels of Matthew, Ma;\, Lukg and John, had they been wrote by them 5 and thus we generally fay, the Books of Mojes, and not according to Mofe s. But the Titles of the Gofpels and other Books are plainly dif- ferent. For that the Gofpel \vhich Matthew publilhed, wras not Matthews, but Chrifls; and therefore it is rightly inferib'd, According to St. Matthew, that is to fay, the Gofpel ofChrift according to the Teftimonyof St. Matthew, upon which the Chriftians ground their Faith. ?.::.: Epift. BUt now to return to the Jews, with whom the Oracles of ;^e Ka' God were firft entrufted, as the Apoftle (peaks it, the Holy Bible among them is called by feveral Names. For fometimes The names t]^y ca][ ^ Micltra> Or Reading •, in which fenfe thofe Words of pture a-" Keheimah are to be taken, where he fays, c.8. v. 8. And mo:;g the caufed them to under ft and the Reading. For though it be true ]qvs. that Nehemiah in that place difcourfes particularly oftheLe- vites reading the Law of Mofes, yet afterwards that name was not unfitly attributed by the Jews to all the reft of the Books of Holy Scripture. Sometimes they denote the Scripture by thefe words Cnef- r'unve Arbang,ox Twenty four ^ under which name they com- prehend the number of the Books of Sacred Writ. To which Prskfi'ms ^L 7cr0m teems to have alluded, where he fays, Which are not uponNebm. of the Twenty four Antient, have not equal Authority with Di- mdEfdr; vine Writ. Now what is to be underftood by the Twenty fourAntient, the fame St. Jc? om more manifeftly declares in Prolog. Caleat. Neither is there any thing to be more frequent- ly found than this name of the Sacred Writings, which they generally affix to the beginning of their Manufcript bibles 5 in- timating thereby the whole Context of the Old Teftament : Although jofiihiu, a notable Witneis in this Argument, af- firms the Sacred Books allowed by liis Nation to.te no more thau Critical Enquiries. 3 thin Twenty Two. Which feems to have been fo conclude to the end the number of the B K)ks might be die more r dily and ftedfaftly retained in the memory, by the numbersof the Letters of the Hebrew Alphabet, which arealfc twenty two. Neverthelefi it is not a thing lookti by the Jews as much material whether they reckon twenty four, or twenty two Books, only they divide them after another manner. This was well known to St- Jerom, who informs us, that they wl > number 'd twenty four Books of Holy Writ, feparated f Book of Ruth from the Hiitory of the Judges, and the L tatiofis of Jeremy, from the Prophelie it felt 5 which is not con- tradicted by the Jews in our time, who attribute thefe two Books to the number of the Sacred Writers, but not of the Prophets. But they who feem'd to have had the choiceft Opinion of the Bible, were the Sect of the Carraitans among the Jews, who gave it the name of a Prophefie. Under which name aEpiflcr; St. Peter feems to comprehend it : and indeed it may be l9' thought to have been the Antient and Genuine name of the Scripture, which was not underftood by the more Modern Jews, who have invented many Subtilties concerning the Books which are inferib'd Hanbnm, or the Prophets ; and I admire to find that fome Christians alfo liften to thefe acute Do&ors. The Antient Divifion likewife of the Sacred Wri- tings into the Law, the Prophets and Cetuvim, Writings, or ac- cording to the Vulgar expreifion, Holy^ Writings, is a thing The Di- which is well known to all people. Which Divifion wonder- V!(ion ^ fully tormented the Brains of the Jews, who have been very ScrlPturc' laborioufly inquifitive about it, and what was eaiie before have ftrangely perplexed with their Niceties. Ifaac Abravantl a mod acute perfon, complains, that none of his Rabbles have come near the mark, unlefs one Ephodxw. But as to what that Rabby at large difcourfes concernihg that matter, we thought fit to pafs over in filence, as having more of wit than folidity. Taking therefore our leaves of thefe lighter Fan- cies, we may have fome reafon to believe that the name of the Prophets was given to the Books of Jofhua, judges, and other Hiitorians, which were written before the Jews were carried out of their Country into Babylon, becaufe at that time the Jews called them Prophets, who undertook to write the An- B 2 nals 4 Critical Enquiries, nak of the Age wherein they liv'd. Thus in the Holy Wri- tings of the Books of Samuel, frequent mention is made of 6*4 fathan, and other Prophets, becaufe they carefully collect- ed the publick Tranfa&ions of their own Time, and then with no lefs diligence tranfcrib'd them into the] :k R-e- gifter. Which is the meaning of Jofephus, wh£re he affirm^ that it was not for every one among the Jews, to write the , ^ Publick Annals, but only for the Prophets. This Theodore* ■•:-:f> more largely explains, where he boldly aflerts, That there •in were feveral Prophets among the Jews, of which every one • in wrote the Story of their own Times, and that the greateft 1 /• part of the Books by them written, are pad recovery loft. And ia. l R& therefore he affirms it to be paft all doubt, that the Books of the Kings were taken out of feveral Books of the Prophets. With Theodoret, Diodonss, Trocopius, and others not a few, eminent for their Learning, agree. Which feems to be the True Reafon, why the Books of Sacred Scripture, which were written after the death of Mofcs, before the C.iptivity were call'd by the name of the Prophets ; but that after that time they were only known by the fingle name olCetuvim, or Wrj*. tings. Not that thereby they depriv'd them of the Infpiration of the Holy Ghoft ; for the Jews no lefs than the Chriftians, willingly admit their Divine Authority, but only content themfelves with the fingle name of Cetuvim, or Writings, as we generally call the whole Scripture by the name of the Bible. To fay truth, it is for men that have little to do, more accurately to enquire into thefe names, and to hunt thefe My- fieries, of which the Antient Hebrew Writers never fo much as thought. For this reafon the Chriftians, who in the Infancy of the Church, borrowed the Books of the Old Teftament out of the Synagogues of the Jemjh Hettenifis7 neither ieparated the Book of Ruth from the Judges, nor the Lamentations from the Pro- phecy of Jeremiah, as the reft of the Jews do, who refer thole little Treatifes to the third Claflis of Sacred Writings, which are called Cetuvim. Nor is it a little to be wondred at what cruel pains that moft fubtle Do&or Ahrayanel takes, where he very angrily enquires, for what reafon it was, that the Book oiRnth was not joyn'd to the Hiftory of the Judges, to which it ieems to belong more efpecially, acknowledging Samuel to be Crli be the Author of both. But the ChrUHans the Example of the \U ift lews, Books of Sacred Scripture into much better order, whi< feems to be the tirit order and difcofition of the H< Writings , which was allowed by the Antient \tw>, and approved by the publick ufe of the Synaj re the Jews commit a great folly, who as well in their Manu- fcripts, as in their Printed Copies, ieparate the Pr< cy of Damel from the body of the reit ; as if the Infpiration of the Holy Choir", which wa.s prefcnt with Daniel, when I pheiied, were not the fame in all, as that wherewith die o- ther Prophets were infpired. The fame abfurdities they run into concerning David, whom they refufe to number in the Lilt of the Prophets, though they confefs him to have uttered many Prophecies. So true it is, that thole Rabbies, who io highly value their Paternal Traditions, invented many things unknown to their Fore-Fathers, and which it feems much more rational to take out of the Books of the Chriitians, than the Works, efpecially of the more Modern Jews. For the former imitated the Antient Cuftom of the Synagogues, which does not feem to have defcended entire to the Jews of later Ages. And therefore that Order of the Books of Sacred Scripture is to be retained, which is obferved in the Greek and Latine Bibles of the Christians. Neither are we to liften to thofe, who following the Ex- ample of the Jewilh Rabbies,pervert that Antient Order in the Greek and Latine Copies of the Bible which they put forth. And yet I do not believe that Order to be io exactly neceilaiy In fmaller Editions, in regard that as to thofe things, neither the jews agree among themfelves, nor the Chriftians neither. CaJJlodorm divides his Work of Divine Reading* into thefi three Heads •-, The Divijiun of Scripture according to St. Fere The Divifion of Scripture according to St. Auftin ; The L h tf Scripture according to the Sept uagint: The' Jews alio, tl moft paflionately devoted to their own Tl*aditi< us ;; govern1 d by the Taimudick Rabbies, obferve, in t! of the Books of Holy Writ, another Method than i approved by the Talmudiits. Alto the veryOrctL Manufcript Copies varies in that particular;. e \ Critic J Enquiries. CHAP. II. Of the ILhrew Manufcrifts of the Context cf the Bilk. w E may divide the Hebrew Manufcripts of the Jews into two forts, of which theohe ferves for the pub- lick ufe of the Synagogues, the other for the particular ufe of private perfons. Neither do they read in their Synagogues every particular Book of Holy Writ, but only fuch and fuch The Books fele&ed Books, which are adapted and accommodated to the of Scrip- Myfteries of their Religion, fuch as are the Books of Mofes, the%?ru^n fr°m whence they derive the Precepts of their Law, and thofe gogues. ' which they comprehend under the name of the five Megilloth or Volnmcs. That is to fay, the Canticles, Rath, the Lamenta- tions, Ecclefiafies and Efther. For thefe are the Volumes that are read in their Synagogues upon certain prefixed days ; the Camicles upon Eafter day, Ruth upon the Feaft of Seven days, the Lamentations upon the ninth of the Month Ab. Ecclefiaftes upon the Feaft of the Tabernacles, and Efther upon the 14th and 15 th of the Month Adar. And as for the Law, it is di- vided into (6 many Sections as there are Sabbaths in the year ; fo that they read a Section every year, with an addition of fomething taken out of the Prophets. The Super- Tis a wonderful thing to fee how ridiculoufly devout, and ftmori of idly fuperflitious the Jews are in writing out the Copies the Jews in ^[^h are for the ufe of the Synagogue. For in the firft place, thdr^er- not content with the bare and naked Letter according as is vjce-Book:. to be feen in other Printed and Written Copies, they adorn the feveral Letters with little Coronets which they call Tagin. Neither are they afham'd to make God the Author of thofe flourilhes, which they fay, ^ Mo[es learnt of God in Mount Sinai. R. Mofes Seem Tob in his Book, where after the manner of the Cabbalifts, he feeks for the Reafon of the Letters of the Alphabet $ tells ye many ftories concerning thofe Coronets, complaining that they were known to few of the Jews. Thou. (halt under ft and and hear, faith he, the Difcottrfe which was drawn byonr Anchors ofblejfed memory , in the Treattfe H/ * fevtn Coronets : There 4rtf even ni the fame nature in the Law ^ Beth, wherein are three Coronets, they arc four in ti v 5 Gimd, ipJbtfb 6*i /1 i/tei, flbrw in the L>vv i Daleth, which hns four rijbes, fix in the La After the fame manner does the feme Rabby run over all the reft of the Letters ; he alfo has been Co punctual* iveusa Copy of the following Fk)uriflies,with InftruiHon how to make them, and how often they are to be met with in the Books of Mofes. He alio obierv'd their differences 5 ibme of thefe JFlourifhes being fix'd dole to the Letter ; others let a Gnall di - fiance from the Letter, either over the Letter, or underneath it.But thefe were only the Dreams & Fancies of Jewiih Brains, about which never thelefs thole Rabbies trifle away their time very ferioufly. Thus Bal Maftm makes Coronets for the Let- ters Zdln and Heih, quite different from thole which F. Set % Tob delineates from the Tradition of his Fathers. Farther, thefe Jewiih Rabbies i'hevv an extream Superftition and Dili- encein the choice of their Parchment; for Paper theyutter- y reje&asa new Invention. This Parchment niufl be very clean ; nor can it be prepaid by an Infidel or Ethnick, but by a Jew, and he neither an Apo/tate or a Heretick. Therefore the Sj.marit.ui Copies are altogether renounced by the Jews, as vile and impure. Moreover, they do not write as we do in folded Sheets, but in large Volumes, after the Cuftom of the Antients, which they divide into Columes or Pages, obfervmg as it were a Geometrical Proportion, and making ufe of a Ru- ler to draw the Lines {freight 3 for they have the vanity to af- firm, that Mofes. order'd that no Copy of the Lav lhould be written without a Ruler 5 and they alio pretend that Mofes taught them what fort of Ink they lhould ufe; In writing care- ful in the firlt place, not to joyn their Letters ciofe together 3 obferving this proportion between the Letters and the Words, to leave the fpace of a Silk Thred between every Letter, and of a fmall Letter between every Word n, that die Lines be di- flant one from another the meafure of one Line, and every Line to hold thirty Letters. To thefe .may be added the Di- . ftin&ions of the Sections ; of which fome are larger, and ibme lefler: And then again fome of. thefe Sections -are laid to be dole, others open. Thofe are cali'd clofe, which are Co^n- clos'd on both iides widi Letters? that tbe fpace of four Letters be 8 Qitkal Enquiries. be only left, in open Sections the fpace of nine Letters." Be- iides tnefe, there are alio other larger Se&ions, which are alio to be feen in the publick Exemplars of their Bibles. But thofe Jewifli Rabbies are mainly deceiv'd, who believe that Aloft s was the Inventer of thofe Divisions or Se&ions, which are TbcAnticot mac^e m r^e Modern Copies. Fpr thofe Diminutions were Form of found out by the late fort of Critid s elpecially thofe who theBibJ call themfelves Mofomh* \ for that in the Antient times there were no mark of DUHn&ions to be found either in the He- brew, Greek, or Latine Copies : For that was the bufinefs of the Grammarians •, and as Eliot the Levi te rightly obferves, the whole Law was antiently Tafuc\^Ecbad, without any di- ftinftion of Letters or Words 5 which as the Learned know was alio obferv'd by the Grecian Criticks, in reference to Ho- tners works. Neither do the words of Nehemiah contradict Neh. 8. 8. Vvhat is here faid, And they read in the Book 5 Mi the Law of God dijlwcbiy, as if the diftinCtion of Verfes had been brought in- to the Context of the Law ever fince the times of Efdras : T.i.Tricl. Which Opinion the Talmudick DoCtors feem to favour very Kiiinm. much. At leaft it could not be later than the Talmud, when Baalffkttu- the Talmudick Writers make mention of it$ and as R. Ja- rim in com. cob, Ben After Baal Hat turim teftifies, It was the Cuftom of the find, talm, Antient Tabnudicl^DoBors, to interpret the Law in another Lan- iua. lib. guage, to the end the people might under ft and it, becauft the Lan- guage of the Law was Aramean. Now the Reader could not read above one Verft to the Interpreter 5 for he firft read one Verft, then followed the Interpretation. Then he read another Vcrft • nor could the Interpreter proceed till the Reader was got to the end of a Verft\ nor could the Reader read another Verfe, till the Interpreter had made an end of his Interpretation. Whence it may be collect- ed that the Exemplars of the MofaickLzw were diftinguifhed into Verfes before the Talmudiits were in Being. But all thefe things might well enough be obferv'd as well by the Reader, as by the Expofitor, from the times of Efdras^ without any note of Diftinftion between the Context of the Verfes, which the Antient Tranflations of the Bibles, which werepublifh'd in Greek before St- Jerom liv'd, apparently de- monftrate* and St. Jerom himfelf,who frequently diftinguifhes thofe Verfes after another manner from that which is now made ufe of, in the Maforetick Editions generally published in Critical Enquiries* in thefe days. But this feems chiefly mod worthy obfervi* tion as to our prefent bufmeis, that there appears nothing at all of the Points of Vowels, which as it were, confine the Mo- dern Reading of the Hebrew Context within certain bounds, nor in like manner, any thing of thole Accents which arc now in the room of Points, Titles, and other late invented (trokes of the Pen. Then again, that there was formerly no divifion of Sections in the Manufcripc Copies, the Samaritan Exem- plars diffidently teftirle, wherein luch kind of Sections are mark'd after a diftinct manner ; Which had they been added to the Law by Mofa himfelf, as the Jewifli Rabbies falfly imagine, there would follow the greateit content that could be, as to this matter, between the Jews and the Samaritans. Falfly therefore the Talmudifts pronounce, that no Verfe ought to be diftinguilh'd that was not diftinguilh'd by Mofcs. For if it were fo, why do the Talmudifts differ in this particular from the Mafaethita, who are faid to have put a hedge about the Law, SU Le Torah? Was it impoifible that the Jews, fiich refolute observers of their own Traditions, fliould not be able to retain the fame Tradition receiv'd from Mofes, and to preferve it entire in their feveral Copies ? Nor is there any r, Moftu other judgment to be made concerning the Divifions of the Sections, whenas the fame Maforet hires, as R. Mo fa attefts, by reafon of the difference of the Copies to which they trufted, could not agree among themfelves 5 and Mofa himfelf ac- knowledges, that he found a very great Confufion in all the Copies that came to his hands 5 infomuch that rejecting all the other Exemplars, he ftuck only to one which was thought to have been corrected by R. A feer, and followed it in every thing for the making out a Copy for his own ufe. As for the Time when thele Marks of Sections, Com- ma's, and other Diftin&ions firft crept into the Context of the Bible, it will be needlefs to make any over-curious en- quiry. For thefe things being only the Fancies of Criticks, will obtain no greater Authority than what it can win from the conient and publick practice of the Rabbies * for that ac- cording to the variation of Times, and fucceflion of Ages, they were fubject to various Alterations, as being things that depended meerly upon the Judgments and Conceits of men. One of the great Criticks among theje>vs,£//^ theLevite.ttat C all I'O Critical Enquiries. all thefe things had their birth in the School Rabbies of77- ktrtM* vulgarly calfd the Maforites, after the Deceafe of St. Jerom and the Talmudifh : io that whatever was publifh'd afterward concerning the Antiquity of thofe Diftinctions,were but the fancies and conceits of idle people, as if any other Opinion were to be conceiv'd in this particular of the Holy Writings than of the Greek and Latine Books. For it TVas ootneceffiry that Books, becaufe they are holy, mould not be permitted to coine into the World without their Points and Interpun&ions: as if, for Example, the pointing of the Modern Latine Yerfion, which the Holy See has approv'd by her confent, and has thought only fit to be retain'd in all the Latine Editions of the Bible, were necefiarily to be derived from the Times of the Apoftles. But we have faid enough upon this Subject j now to the Copies in ufe among private peribns. Thefe alfo may be faid to be of two forts-, of which fome were written cut by the Vulgar Jews, and fome of the com- mon people ; others by men that were skilful in their Lan- guage, and for the ufe of thofe who were eminent in Authori- ty; inch as were thofe who took upon them the Title of Nafp, or Prince. The firft being written in a lefler Chara&er and Bulk, and not fo carefully corrected 2s they ought to have been, are found to be full of Errours. And feveral fuch Co- pies as thefe are found in feveral Libraries of the ChrifHans. But the latter being done with great labour and coft, and om Copies the molt Antient and bed correded? are far to be preferred before all others. They are written in large and raolt elegant Capital Letters, and which is a certain fign of a good Copy, none of thofe words appear to be omitted in thefe, which are added down in lefler Characters upon the Margin of the Leaf, as in the Books of the common Jews, which abound with thofe kind of faults. For they being de- ceived by the fimilitude of words and fentences following one another, fn down the mai'm'd and curtaifd words of the Con- text, hardly minding what they write. More cor- Moreover, it is of great confequence from whence, and from t-e ted what hands thefe Manufcript Copies are taken. For the Spanifi BiiJes. are much better corrected than the German^ French ,or Italian^ For the Sptwifl) Jews have been much more careful to correct their Critical Enqturksi 1 1 their Copies, than any of the other Jews befide~, that they are more curioirs in the neatnefs of Writing. Which was the rea- fonthat£/M* the Levite, not a little pra&is'd in this fort Study, after a recital or feveral Copies of Bible! concerning the: h Exemplars, Tin B w^Afpamia, t that contains all the Spanifh Ex '■■-,.- better corrected than others. R. David K fre- quent mention of thefe Exemplars in his V. them Sepharim Madrigum, or Books well corrected. B) means the Spanifh Jews have not a little polifh'd their Lan- guage, in imitation of the Arabian^ from whom theyborrov ed all the Grammar Which they have, lend in all th€ ftudy and induitry to the correction of the Bible. The I Kur.cln, who was alfo born in Spain7 is much applauded by Aben Mclech, for the great pains he took in fearching after the choiceft and beft corrected Spanifh Copies, Who, faith lie, ever A i k tooi^fo much care as he did, in fearching after the be/r corrected Copies that were in Spain? Now, how thofe Copies are to be '" diitinguithed and known from others, is eafily apprehended. For the Spanifh Characters are four-fquzre, and of an extraor- dinary cut, like thofe in the Royal Bibles fet forth by PI am in at Antwerp, and thofe other of Robert Step hens, which were cer- tainly tranferibed from fome Spanifi Copies. The Italian and French Characters are fomewhat rounder. The German imi- tate the th ugh it fett&S to L\ . enough. We have feme reafon to (b(peft f/MW to be a . :>v/by Nation, and a famous Rcvlor of fome Academy, who re- formed the Maforetick Edition in firadry places ; ng to the Antient Copies. After his death his Copies, as b corrected than the Vulgar, became to be high in eiteem,el". daily among his Country-men ; and *s Antiquity fwells .' hills wto AioHMAins after Death : Thus the Name of HUL I be- ing become famous, was foon made ufe of to gull the more ignorant 5 afterwards a lfo his Name fedue'd tne more Learn- ed Jews, leis wary than they ought to have been. And why I lhould thus think, the very nature of the HrUelian Codex, which varies in very fewr things, and thofe very flight, from the Maforetick, which at that time was approved by the pub- lick ^Practice and Authority of all Schools 5 which feems to be confirm d from hence, for that then feveral of the Rabbies, especially in Spain, even after that tedious Labour which the Maforites undertook, fcrupled not to write down in their own Books, the Variations of Scripture taken out of Antient Copies. And hither ought we to refer the Animadverfions of R. R. Judas, Jonas, Kimchi, and others, who have oft recourfe to the Sepharim Midvikim, or corre&ed Copies ; and hither alfo belongs that note frequent in the Margin, moft especially of the Spanijl) ManufcriptS, B 'Sepher Achar, in the other Copy. But that Htikl was a Spaniard, is not only to be proved from hence, that his BiblickCopy was found in Spain, and firft ex- toll'd by the Spanijh Jews $ but becaufe I find feveral of the Spamjh Ledions quoted in the Spanijl] Exemplars, quite other • wile than in the German and others, In like manner we may affirm, that the Exemplars of the Bibles, which the Jews extol under the names of Ben After* and Ben Narthali, were written out by fuch perfons, who be- ing Prelidents of PublickA.cademys, made it their bufinefs to reform Erroneous Copies. But in what time they liv d, is a thing not well known ro the Jews themfelves, very little cu- rious of their own Chronology, How ever common fame re- ports i 6 Critical Entiuirief* ports them to have liv'd about the year 1034. long after the R- Mfes Tybcrian Maforites. And this was the Opinion of R. Gedalia, TtbU.c.9. R Davjd Gans, and feveral others am ng the Chriftians. It cannot be unknown what R. Mofes has w ritten concerning Ben sifter's Manufcript, which, as he aflerts, was very well known iaEgjpty by which the Hierofolymt^m jews corrected their Own Books. That is the Examplar, faith he, which they all ufe, becaufe Ben Afcer corrected it 5 labouring at it for many years, and correcting it many times quite thorough. For the Gover- nours or Prefidents of the Academies, formerly according to the Cuftom of the Jews, wrote out Copies, which afterwards were made ufe of by the Provinces, of which they were Chief Rulers and Princes 5 efpecially if they were in any efteem for being Learned ; whence feems to have rifen that variety of Readings which is found among the Manufcript Copies of fe- veral Provinces, and diftind: Ages. Nor do the Rabbies them- felves feem to deny it, who believe that the Weftern Jews Follow'd R. A[ur \ and the Oriental R. Naphtali in the Tran- fcription of their Copies. Now, they call the Weftern Jews thofe that dwell in and about Jemfalem, and the Eaftern Jews thofe that live in and about Babylon. The Hieroftlymitan Co- dex, faith Ellas the Levite, is that which Rabbi Jonas the Gram- marian found, by the Teftimony of R. David Kimchi, and perhaps may be that Exemplar which R. Afcer corretled, who liv'd a long rime at Jerufalem. But the Ledions, about which the Rabbies themfelves arc at variance, are very flight and trivial, as they are in the Hilk- lian : Nor will it be worth while to repeat them here, in re- gard there is a Catalogue of them annexed to the large Vene- tian, as alfo the Bafil and Englifi Bibles* Let it fuffice to ob- ferve that the Catalogue of the fame Varieties in Manufcript which are fixed at the end of fome Manufcript Bibles, and to which they mignt have recourfe, do not exactly agree with thofe that are Printed at London, Bafil or Venice, For fome, which in the Vulgar Editions claim Ben After for their Author, belong to thofe Catalogues, which indeed owe their publica- tion to R. Naphtali. Such is that which is reckond the fixth in number, and thofe which follow. Thofe Manufcript Ca- talogues alfo add fome5and other Variations they omit, befides thole already Printed. For where the Modern Le&ion makes ufe R. Ellas Lt %\tj* Critical Enquiries* I 7 / life ofthe Accent Macca\ h} the m >re recent Manufcripts r int I>4 or fiich cl Nor ( there be any other way to knit to 'the feri >fe flight nil- bee no ufe. For I Id weobfen the Variances of thiskindi which might I found in turning over thole Manufcripts, with an intention to eml Jy them in one heap 3 inch a C y fwellintoa large Volume. For I mult n v, they had I lire to (pare, who lookt after the Edition of the Englifh Polyglottons, who have not only publifh'd thofe Ledtions e ry one in their order, as they found them in the Bafil and l'c- ian Editions, but have alio added the feveral places of Scripture, of which there was hither never any Index before. So that I wonder that men otherwife Learned, (hould haveno better thought than to employ themfelves about fuch trifles : But as to thofe differences of Readings, which before the Times of theJTiberian Rabbies commaculated the holy Text, and are of greater moment, fhould be lb fluggiflily carelefs: And, which is worfe, having little knowledge of the Books of the Ancient Writers, but only accuftom'd to the Varieties in thole Manufcripts of later date already mentioned ; yet they affirm a wonderful agreement of the Hebrew Copies among themfelves. Here might be added alfo thofe Varieties which are, Ben ALignarabei on Afadnachei, between the E aft em and Wefternjews : But in regard they are already publick, and ve- ry few that are of moment, that I may not feem to be an Am- plifier of Scripture-Variances 1 1 hall forbear to repeat them, efpeciaily they being publifh'd at the end of the Baft I B; However, from hence we may colled, that the Hebrew Ex- emplars do not Co eafily agree among themfelves, that there /hould be no variance, as mod of the Jews, and the Chriftians their Hebrew followers, would make us believe 3 whenas Ibme of thofe Le&ions, though not fo many, produce a dif- Vari ferent fenfe. LeaioJ: Now let us come to the Teftimonies of the Rabbies, which ^y V fr confirm the fame Opinion concerning the Difcrepancy of Scrip- ture Copies. There are not wanting Examples of various #& Readings among the Talnaudicfc Dodfcors, drawn from the pt*f. h publifh'd or Malbretick Tranicriptions. Of which ibme are m*(.m cited by R. Jacob Haiw7 which BuxtorL a Itrenuous Champion l D for A',tl07t x 8 Critical Enquiries. for the Maforetick Exemplar, though unwillingly acknow- ledges 5 nor will he have to be other than a very few ancj thofe of no great weight; not contradictory to the truth of Senfe-, and yet they fpend the greatcft part cf their time in writing out the words either fully, or defectively, as thev term it. However, among thofe few which R. Jacob Haim brings by way of Example, it may be plainly demonstrated that there are fome which alter the knk of Scripture. But I may fay, that we fhould in vain go about to find out thofe various Le&ions in the Talmudick Work now extant, which formerly might more eafily be gathered from it. For that for many Ages together, the Jews have made it their bufinefs to reform all their Bibles, both Printed and Manufcript by the Maforeticks, as in the Reading thofe Books I have often obferv'd. However, care muft be that you do not 'miftake that form of fpeech frequently made ufe of in the Talmud Readnotfoybutfa for a various Leftion. For it is a kind of Allegorical fport, very familiar with thofe Rabbies, who re- ferving to thcmfelves the fubffance, as I may fo fay of the word, have childifhly invented feveral ways of Reading one and the fame .word. If any one has fo much leilure to animad- vert upon thofe places of Scripture, which are extant in the Talmudick Work, there is no ncceffity for him to turn over thofe immenfe Volumes, fo inaccefTible to manv men 3 for we have a Table which is entitled, jnnN m^n TE& wherein all the places of Scripture which are extoll'd in the Trlmud are djgefted in their order,, with the place and the page where they may be found m the Talmud. But what profit or advan- tage a man fhall reap from fuch a tedious piece of labour I cannot apprehend, unlefs we could have recourfe to the nVoft Antient Copies of the Talmud, which have efcap'd the im- pure hands of the Jewiih Criticafters. Far more Varieties of this nature are found in the Books of the more Modern Jews, although they pretend themfelves mod flout Aflerters of the Maforetick Reading, Thus R. Da- vid Kimthty does not (o devoutly adhere to the Maforetick Copies, butthathefometimesforfakes them; and therefore upon thofe words of Ekxkiel the Prophet Lc Mickdajlj Me^t Comment, he makes this obfervation, the word Mickdafh is a word marled \ 11. imhal/cxhdi mdertitath the Daleth: Neither is Megnat Ni ■ Critic J Enquiries. ip K'oun j4;lj<:c!ivc, but a Si r I cr,- rcclcd Copies ; mothers ( \y be an Ad Where \ in our Modern Copies i Earth .1 with blood I . . . it in his Co- py c , or /'• ; yet he obii 1 1 be extant in fome other Verfion O s ord i in the iirluv . ( Fthe finae The ft ones Elgavis, nreftor.es like hail-ftones 3 Editions the word El tf>/^ Gavii •- I u A'ata £^- ra, Kimchi, and other Grammarians. He in the 24th chap- ter of the fame Prophet E^ekjel upon the word Harkach, which in -the Maforetick^ Editions is read with the Vowel Pa~ I :ck_ under the Letter He ; Harkach is the Infinitive or Impe- :tive of the Conjugation Hiphil. R. Jonas writes that he found the fame word in the Hierofolymitan Copy noted with a Garnets A^t Mm under the Letter He '-, and fo it will be the Infinitive of the Conju- /,-:;; ^ C:, gation Hophal. He alfo writes, that he met with the fame word 24. £r in the Babylonick Copy, noted with a Pathack, and R. D. Kimchi z-i0- Teftifies that he found it fo tranferibed in the corrected Copies. From this variety of Reading may thofe words of Ifaiah be illuftrated, Hajkmcn Leb Hagnam Hazjueh, which the LXX. Interpreters have translated one way, St. Jerom another. For they reading the word fOtt>n with a Camets under the Letter ifa. c. 5. He, read and tranllated the words thus, Ua^/rAii >o >> &ph'a -6 haz rr'cTi, The heart of this people was hardened. Whom the Writers of the New Teftament have imitated. But St. Jerom, as be- ing addicted to the Reading of the Jews in his Time,tranflates the fame words thus, Blind the heart of this people -, and with Hi mnch anxiety demands why St. Paul in the New Teflament f.&ifi ftake not according to the Hebrew, which he knew to be true, but according to the Septuapint. Wherein he ihews himfelf a more tenacious obferver of the Reading which he had been taught by his Matters. For the various Interpretations of that place D 2 might 2 0 Critical Enquiries. might have been enfily reconcil'd, and in the fame manner as Kimchi and other Rabbies have referr'd the various Interpreta- tions of the word Harkach to the difference of Reading. For the LXX Interpreters read the word Hojhman in Hophal, whereas St. Jcrojn read it Haj . in the Imperative of the Conjugation HiphiL I might here add feverai other paflages out of the Works of the Eben Efra, I ned by the jews, the Wife 3 who as he was a very skilful Gritick, fo would he not altogether depend upon the Copies and Readings of the Maforites ; but he ra- ther minds the fenfe, than the Letters of his Copy. For which reafon, to omit all others, he believes that the Letters Aleph, Vau,Jod. which are vulgarly call'd the Mothers of Reading, . were added or neglected by the Tranfcribers at their own plea- fures. Neverthelefs it is a wonder to fee how carefully thofe Letters were obferv'd by the Tiberian Dc&ors ; that is to fay, how often they were, how often they were not to be made life of But that moll: Learned Rabbi did not deem himfelf fo religioufly bound to follow the Decrees of the Maibrites and their Exemplars, that he thought it a crime to depart from them. Therefore at the end of his Book Jefed Mora he thus M.hilib. Writes 3 There is no neceffity at all to obferve, that thofe Letters Jefed Mora. Jod, He, Vau, Aleph, being changdvne inld another, are fome- times added, fometimes left out, 8cc. Wherefore in his Wri- tings he does not fo much regard the manner, as the reafon of /i. /.>; r.0.5. the Tranfcription. Thus in his Commentary upon Pfal. 5. he believes the word Nafah written with a Samech and He, ro be the fame with K$y5, Nafa, written with a Sin and an Aleph-. It was not from the purpofe, faith he, that He fmdd be the fame with Aleph, and Samech the fame with Sin. In like manner, expounding the 2d Chapter of Joel, after he has ob- ferv'd that the word nHN^ proceeds from the Root Peer, he prefently tells ye, that R.Japtei derived the fame word from another Root. As if the Letter Aleph were in the num- ber of thofe Letters that are fuperfluous, as the Maibrites term them, and unprofitable, as if the word were to be read ins», ithout an Aleph, and were Lajhon Shackotb, or the fignifica* u Blacknefs. In which fenfe this. word is taken by raoft of the Interpreters s and this Reading is confirmed by Jh- d*M, Vtbb compil'd the Mufreth, with this Marginal Note added C :! F)l:j: . \ 11 added to the Hebrew Text ; This word is of the which arc written with an Aleph ih the mi p,rjs\l. Laftly, There feem not ro have been wantii j Jews certain Criticks* i have < d all t; • in noting the Readings of the var ( Of principal are Rabbi M zm de i > in a 1 titled I the Author of a certain rife entitled My t He divides his "w ..work in- to two parts \ and every pure or hand contains five fingers, of which the firft illuftrates all the various L< is which he iildfind in the feveral Manufcripfs of the Mofaical Law, by the help often written Copies 3 which he thinks to have been written within this five or fix hundred years ; at c >mpar them with the fecond Edition of Bomberg in Folio, which is the mo ft accurate of ail ; he alfbftri&ly examines the Words, t Letters, Points and Accents of this Edition. But all this indefatigable labour and diligence of K. Menahem, tei no farther than to demonstrate, that the various Rt of Scripture, which are found in the feveral Copies or the Bibles, ought to be tryed by the A s as the molt cer- tain Rule oflveafonand Writing. Of the fame Opinion is the Author of the Little Treatife«called Minchtth-Cohen, who there moft acutely difeourfes of what words are to be writ- ten fully, and which defectively : And ftudies to reduce fe- veral Leftions to their natural exaCtnefs by the help of the Mafora, and the corrected Books. Of neceflity therefore thole Maforetick Copies are to be examined, whole fine rity isib highly applauded by the Jews-, whether they arc- pure and correct, that it may be thought a point of Faith . iwervefrom their. CU AP 21 Critical Enquiries. C H A P. I V. Of the Fi'.HifijJ Exemplars of the Hebrew Context which are Maforetick. Of the Art of the Alaforites. Of it* Original, and what Opinion we are to have of it. Of the M* y]vj the latter t;mes t\^ Exemplars of the Biblick Conteft tfthe ^ ^ are no other, than whac are vulgarly call'd Maforetick. For I the Jews for many Ages together have acknowledged no other, and from them they came into the hands of the Chriftians. Whence arofe that general Agreement between fo many Co- pies of Several Places and Times ? excepting thofe few and trivial Niceties, which are rather the flips of negligent Tranfcribers, than various Le&ions. For how could it other- wife be, whenas the Jews, who look upon the Mafora to be as it were defcended from Heaven, fcruple not to make that their Rule for the Reformation of all Bibles, rating out of all other Manufcript Copies, Letters, Words, and whole Sen- tences, to make them conformable to the Mafora ? And this is eafie to be obferv'd by thofe that run overall the Manu- fcript Copies that have been written for thefe four or rive hundred years laft part; and hence it is that there is fuch a wonderful concurrence among the Printed Bibles. To which, while not only the Jews, but alfo the moft Learned among the Jews, do not give a fufficient refpeft, admiring over- much the Exa&nefs of the Hebrew Copy, they (hew them- felves the Promoters of the latter, with a more than needful Zeal. Therefore Arias Mom amis boldly affirms, that the He- brew Context has been preferv'd with fo much care by the help of the Mafora, that it never could be difcenul by the moil diligent and piercing Wit or Judgment to have admitted the leaft variance in feveral Exemplars. In like manner Bhx- torf, a perfon that had very much, and long turmoiPd in thefe ftudies, extols the Mafora even to excefs in thefe words, as if it had been fent from Heaven. Herein as far as the Eafi and Weft extend^ the Word of God is to be read in one Language y and after one manner. Here is to be fcen a general Confent of all the Books O'itic . r. 2 j Booh th.it are . m Afia, Africa J t never hay nch a felicity has i either of the CI .. 3I1S, ( [S,R< Howe . this egregious A] rofthel rite ks rather out of a \ nceiv'd Opinion of the Jews, tl ing to Severity of tbe Thing He has leenui to tranflate in- > Ms Commentary upon theMai . ch, all the 1 his Matters, to whom he wholly dedicated hfmft y that means he has drawn in moflpf ehe Proteftant ines, ejpecially the Northern, ro his own, i therthejews Opi- nion of the Exactnefs of the Hebrew Context were overwhelmed under the Tel Rab- bins. They who have been canverfant n die Monuments of the Ancients, cfpecially in the Commentaries of St. J;/ , and are therefore better experience in Critich L , think far otherwise of that Work : Nor do they prelently (wallo thofe things for Truth, with which the Jews, halfafleep, ar illiterately contented. Rather Ettas the Levite is to be Iiftened to in this particular, who alone among tiie jews, apply'd him- ielfto thettudy of the/U;/^/, then to the Rout of the jews, who were altogether ignorant of it. That molt Learned Ral being requeued in a Letter by /• ,r? to tell him what fbtt Ellas L ofperfons the Maforites were, ei tlly thofe of Tyberias, thus in 1 - aniwered in the Jewiih Language: R. Jonas- writes*, that the Jews of Tyberias were well vexsd w the holy Language. R. Aben '" Ezra alfo writes , that from them the Authors of the Mafora, point-» mgi and accenting^ too!^ their Original, contrary to the common Sentiments of our F at hers. of kkjfed memory, who ajfrmth.it Ezra the Scribe was the f.rft that order ' d and appointed thofe Reform** tints. Thus what E&as reports concerning the Learning and Skill of the Jews of Tyberias in the Hebrew Language, agrees with what has been written hfOrigen, Epiphaniu*, and }erom upon the fame Subject. He teftifies that he fent for an Hebrew Matter from the School at Tyberias, whoaffittedhim iiftranila- ting the Chronicles out of the Hebrew into Latine. Toward the end of the fifth Action of the 2d Council of i\fa*,mention is made of a certain Jew of Tyberias, who in the Reign of Leo ifamkm, was the Author of the Decree againtt the Images of theChriftians. Whence it is apparent, that the Jewiih School at Tyberias, to whom the Maforeckk Work, or the Emenda- tion 2 j. Critical Enquiries. . of the Biblick Exemplar now in ufe among the Jews and Chrifti is attributed, was the moft famous in the time of our. -, and was in j /, efpecially among the Jews. Whence it came tc it their Critical Ani- madverfions upon ieveral Exemplars of the Bibles then pub- lickly difperfed, were the more readily received by the reft of the Jewilh Nation. They are Trifles therefore, and the Delirium's of the Fe- veriih Jews, which the moft of them, and by their induce- ment many of the Chriftians vainly chatter concerning the Ori- ginal and Antiquity of their Mafora -7 as if Mofes himfelf had been partly the Author of it, and partly Efdra*, with the Se- nators of the Sanedrim. For the thing it felf demonftrates that the Mafora was invented long after the LXX Interpreters, and St. Jerom, who made ufe of Rabbiesof Tyberias, but ne- ver makes mention of the Mafora. There were indeed among the Jews, as among other all other People, perfons addi&ed to Criticifm, who had reform'd their Language, and correct- ed their Works, by the help of Critical Learning, and the affiftance of Manufcript Copies. And the Variations of Scrip- ture which thofe Criticks obferve, and which they place in the Margin of the Hebrew Context, manifeftly prove that ieveral Exemplars of Manufcript Bibles were by them re- view'd and corrected. But what Divinity or Infpiration could be aflerted from hence? What was not perform'd with much more fuccefs in the Greek and Latine Copies ? But the Jews, who were born rather to Superftition than Religion, being altogether ignorant of the Critical Science, which was after- wards brought to a greater perfection by the Greeks and La- tines, feigned a thoufand monftrous Opinions, which fbrne of the Chriftians afterwards too greedily embrae'd. Elias the Le- vite, who had frequented the company of Learned Men at Bome, Venice, and other parts of the World, neglecting the Traditions of his Fathers, rightly obferves that there is no other Judgment to be given of the Jewifli Bibles, than of the Greek and Latine 3 and for Adherers to his Opinion, among the Chriftians, he had all thofe who had any knowledge of the Greek, Latine, of Critical Learning. Yet I think the Trea- tifes of Cappe/ltts, and John Morhws, are to be cautioufly read, who ihewiiig themfelves fomevvhat fo eagerly incenfed againft the Critical Enquiries. i 5 the Jews and Hebraifts in the heat of tltati 1 nor r Jy apprehend w! /bra 5 as if it were then z wholly i was firft communicate .' vs. Rather it 01 ro be received by us for tliat very re us from perfons skilful in the Language, a l- nufcripts. For from whence could the Traditi brew Pronunciation be better communicated to us, t thofe who had retain'd it in their Syna and However, we are not to adhere to the Decrees of tion, as being } unane, and fiibjed to Erroun though feveral Emendations may be admitted, as being the Labour of the Doctors of a moft h kjus Academy. The number of die Maforites is hardly to be reckon'd up, as Ll'uu the Levite affirms; and to trie his own words, Ha andTbottJands there per efucc&e ding one another for ?n .my year* ^ nor is the time certain when they be ,.w, nor nhen they co/npleated their work:, that is, the prefixed n ne, For he conftantly af- firms, that it was fince the Talmud and he refers the begin- ning of it to the year of Chrift 506. So that I believe itmi have its firfl beginning about the year 600. at what time the A\ w took it incQ their hands, to whom the Je ire be holding for all that they have of Grammar and Criticks. They have a Mafora belonging to their Alcoran, not much unlik that of the Jews : The Letters, Words and Verles of tfc Book being numbred, which they feem to have borrowed from the Greek and Latine Bibles, which they tr.inflated in:o their own Language. At firft I am apt to think that the Mafora was tranferib'd apart into particular Books, by tiie Doctors of Tyberia, for exercife of their Scholars within the walls of t!, School. For that they durft not prefume to introduce the Vowel P oints, and other marks of Maforetick Ingenuity in- to the Hebrew Text, is fomething probable from hence, be- caute thQ pointed Vowels, Accents, and the like, were not ki our time to be ieen in the Manufcripts which were pub- lickly us'd in the Synagogues. And the moft approved Copies of Manufcripts for the life of private perfons, wanted thole In- novations, as I have obferv'd by their reading 5 bat il eK5 added afterv/ards by the Jewilh Criticakers. Jbuc then the Tranllnbers, miderf landing the benefit of Points and Accerrs E r 26 Critical Eiuptiria. for the reading and diftin&ion of the Hebrew Context, made no fcruple to infert thole New Additions. Thus by degrees from thofe Maforetick Notes, which neverthelefs were grown to an immenfe bulk, the more choice, or at leaft thofe which were c^ntain'd in the diftir^ .s of the * 'afora, were col- lected for the benefit of th< opies which they had daily ion to tran be leen in molt of the Manu- ifh 1 Dies h but chiefly in the Venetian md d Edition, which being colle&ed fron , were I ii ft publilhed by K.Jacob Ben Ha- jim, who - - c*d the fcatter a parts of the Maforainto the Form which now they obferve. From whence it was intro- duce!, and added to thofe Bibles which Buxt orf procur'd to be Printed at Bafil. Now from what has been faid, who can believe that the Jews could ever be able, by the help of their Maibra, to pre- ferve their Bibles from all manner of Errours, when thofe Criticks, who lent their healing hands to the Copies of their Times, were neither Prophets, nor infpir'd by die Holy Ghoft, but only men,, who being die Governours of a moll famous Academy, review'd the whole Context of Sacred Scrip- ture, and fought as far as in them lay, to bring it to a com- pliance with its moft Antient and uncorrupted Exemplars, as the Doctors of Lovain undertook St. ^uftw's Works. So that we may rightly compare the Maforetick Labour to the Toil of Lhcos Bmgsnfisy about the Latiae Interpreter. For he, fo foon as the Latine Edition by the command of Sixths Onmin^ and Clement the VIII. was compar'd with the moft Antient & beft Efteem'd Tranflations, and thereby refin'd from its Errours, put all thofe Corrections into one Volume, left the Latine Bibles fhould be afterwards Printed with their Errours. Ne- verthelefe, no man of Judgment will fay, that that fame La- tine Verfioa is free from all miftake, when Baronius, Beltar- mny Lncas Brngenfis, and others, fome of whom aififted at this Correction, make no difpute that many Errours remain very neceflary to be amended. Some of the Jewifh Rabbies indeed there are, who highly commend the Diligence and Induftry of the Maforites, for that with fo much Labour and In- duftry they took an account of the Letters, Words, and Verfes of the Hebrew Context, to prevent the future depra- vation Critical Enquiriif* 27 vation of Holy Writ. But who cm thence think it poffible to be provYL that the Sacred Books were thereby reftor'd to to their Antient Form } True it is, that the Doctors of Tybc- rias might number the Letters, Words and Verfcs of the Books extant in their Time : However, thofe Books were on- ly Copies, and not Originals. I will alio grant that they were mod perfeft in the Hebrew Language, ana that they made ule of the mod correfted Exemplars of the Bible, which by dili- gent fearch they could find out for the carrying on their Cri- tical Defign : But yet their Materials were ftill deficient, when they could have no recourfe either to the Greek Interpreters, nor to the Latine Verfion, who in their Tranflations made ufe of Copies differing from the Maforetick. Then again Tradi- tion combates for the friends of the Maforites, which the fig- nification of the word infinuates, as if by the aififtance of Points and other Characters, they had render'd the Reading and Pronunciation of the Hebrew Context receiv'd into ule for many Ages certain and indubitable. The Seut of the Car- rdtns alio became ftrenuous Champions for the Mafora of the Jews, and the Exemplars fet forth, who though they rejedfc the molt of the Jewiih Traditions as old Womens Fables, yet admit of the Biblick Context in the fame manner as it was re- formed by the Maforites of Tyberias, together with the Titles, Vowels, Accents, and other marks of the Maforites. But though thefe, and many other Arguments of the fame nature may be brought in defence of the Mafora, and the Mo- dern Context of the Bible, and to prove that the Copies re- formed by the Dolors of Tyberias are no way to be delpifed, becaufe the correction was perform'd by perfbns well skilfd in the Language, who determin'd the manner of reading theHebr. Context not according to their own pleafures, but the receiv'd Tradition-, nevertheless, no man ought thence to collect, that all other Exemplars of the Bible are to be refornui and cor- rected after the Emendations of the Maforites, as molt of the Jews would obftinately maintain. For the Greek Interpreters, and St. Jerom, had alio their Mafora^ or Tradition, for the Reading and Pronunciation of the Hebrew Context, w nevertheleis very frequently vary from the Reading of the Maforites. And which is worthy obfervation, the m< Learned Rabbies of the Jews, R. Juda^ Jena^ E 2 Kimci 2 3 Critical Enquiries. KvmcWu and others not a few, while they illuftrate the Scrip- ture with their Commentaries, are not fo devoted to the Ma- foretick Ledion, but that/fometimes they corred it, and com- rr.cnd other Manufcripts which they call correded, though they differ from the Maibrecic ks. Therefore as I do not think they are altogether tp be favour'd, who being effendedwith the Jews, de trad from their Copies, (o neither are they to be imitated, who dote upon the Maforetick Strudure, and look upon it as a piece of Divinity. tor thole upholders of Jewifh Superftition, fhew themfelves unskilful in Criticiim. There- fore the Modern Maforetick Ledion of the Context of the Bible, is not altogether to be contemned, becaufe it was not rone by the Authority of men that were Prophets, and infpi- red with the Holy Ghoft 3 for by that reafon the Bibles of mod of the Eaffern Nations would be rejected, there being as much to be faid againft the Chaldee, Syriack, and Arabick Exemplars, as againft the Hebrew. There is none of them that make ufe of Tittl d Vowels, which confine the Pronun- ciation and Reading within certain bounds, which were all in- vented by the Critickss for that without their help the Reading not being afcertained, was fubjed to a humour & fancy. By this means the followers of that famous Impoftorrendredthe Read- ing of their Alcoran certain, which before was dubious and uncertain. And from thefe 'tis very probable that the Jewifh Rabbies had their Points, and fome other things which they introduced into the Hebrew Manufcripts,to the end they might be read with moreeafe and readinefs. C H A P. V. The Parts of the Ma for a in relation to the Manufcript Co- pies > arc . hed and iUufl rated. The True Original of the Major a. THE great pains and labour of the Maforeticks confifts in numbring up the Verfes, Words and Letters of the He- brew Context 3 for that by tin's means the former Variances being obfeiVdj the Reading might be preferv'd more certain and Critical I tries* icj and conftant for the filters and the Holy Writings be- free for the fii cure from all m* That r nd \ wei'C numbred by the .: ■ . fherfc is noqueftioo to be made. Tl Diipureanles about the I .in re. tk\ztK*J*cob Ben ft (the / 10 have with all in. Hligenoe | e Mafora, deny chat this part of it was ever made pubKek: By whole Authority ]> being fway'd, affirms that thai work was never undertaken by the Mafbrites; which fee • the more probable,in regard the Enumeration of the Le: if the Hebrew Text which is already publiih'd, is very far from the Truth. But that there was an account taken oi them I the Jews before the Talmud was publiih'd, may be provd b) thofe Arguments, which are u(ually drawn from the Tra- ctates Kiddnfcbifij and the Scribes* where the letter Van in the word "irl3, or Gachon^he belly, Levity i 1. 43. is laid to be the middlemoft letter of the Law. Nor do I believe that part of the Malbreth to have been neglefted by the Malbrites : For I obferv'd it in turning over ftvteraj Manutcrlpt Bibles at tl end of an Exemplar written about fome four hundred years ago, where among many other things collected out of the A 1 fora, there is the fame account of the Letters, which I fhall fetdownin the lame manner and* words, as it is there deli- vered, that the eriticksmay judge whether it be exact or no. The Sections of the Book of Gehefis calfd P h, are reckoa'd to be twelve; the other Se&ions call'd Sedarim 43 Verfes 7534- Vords 20713. Letters 78100 and the fe words are in the middle of the Book G'^/CW^t/j 1 b. By thy c . Sword thou lhak live. The P 'ar -Jhotb of Exod u are numbred to be n. the Sedarim 33. Verfes 1209. Words 165 13. Let- ters 63467* the middlemoft words Elohim lo Tehallel, Thou Exod. fhalt not revile the Gods. The ParJJjotb of Lei u are 10. 28. the Sedarim %$>. the Verfes 859. the Words 11902. the Let- ters 44989 the middlemoft words Hannogeang Bib far h1. . Levit. 1 5.7. He that touches the ftelh of him that has a running Iflfie. In Numbers Par fret b 10. Se daring. Verfes Ij88- Words 1 67 3" Letters 62529. the middlemoft words Ve t ' Haifch A her Zbcbar, And the man whom I ihall chufe. Deuteronomy has N Farjlrjth\ io. Sedan m 30. Verfes 9055. Words 16 Let- ters 548^2. The middlemoft words Yt c ( trt }0 Critical Enquiries. &««■ l9- dahar. And thou fhalt do according to the Sentences. As for the reft of the Hebrew Context, there is no number of the words. But if we compare this Enumeration of the Letters of the Mofaical Law, with that which is fet forth in the Venetian and Bafil Bibles, you will find this to be very erroneous. For that allows to Genefis no more than 4395 Letters, whereas the for- mer reckons up 78100. and therefore feems to be fartheft from Truth. But why fiich an indefatigable diligence in numbring the Letters of the Hebrew Letters with the Mafo- rites, fhouldbecall'd the hedge of the Law, by the benefit of vvhichit ispreferv'd entire and uncorrupted from Errouror Miftake, 1 cannot well apprehend: Whenas they who were fo anxioufly laborious, number'd in other Letters than thofe oftheir own Books, which no wife man will look upon to be fo free from faults, or to be compared with the Original. Then, as Aben Efra, rightly obferves, the Letters Aleph, He, Vauy and Jody are frequently added, frequently omitted, ac- cording to the fancy of the Tranfcribers. Certainly no man that underftands any thing of Critical Learning, will from thence only, becaufe the Mafora obferves fuch a word fome- times fiird up, fometimes defective, prefently infer, that all other Biblick Exemplars are not of that value, becaufe they vary in their Legions ; but imbracing both Ledtions as pro- bable,will determine nothing certain in a thing of fo much in- certainty, as being taught by the Examples of the LXX Inter- preters, At/nil**, SymmachpUy Theodotiony and St. Jerow, who many times not only vary from the Maforeth, but from one another. And therefore the Jews, and the Idoli2ers of the Maforites, are miferably deceiv'd, who believe that the Ho- ly Writ was reftor'd to its Antient Form by a bare Enume- ration of the Words and Letters made by the Dotfors of Ty- , heriasy and cry it up in the place of the Authentick Original, Than which there could be nothing more fabuloufly invented, efpecially after fuch a long fuccefnon of years, that the He- brew Language has been as it were buried, and the Traditions of the dead almoftentomb'd, at leaft mofi flrangely interrupt- ed. And therefore the more vrudentAben Efra rightly compares the Maforeticks that have fo carefully enumerated the Letters and Words of the Hebrew Context to thole who /hould number the Leaves and Pages of a Phyfick-Book, which would Critical Enquiries, j i would nothing contribute to the health of a fick Patient. As for the Diminution of the Verfes which appears in the Maforetick Editions, I think the fame fentence is to be pro- nounced, as concerning the numbring of Letters and Words 5 in regaru that the Authors of this Enumeration have obferv d no other than the Rules of Criticifm, in did ingu ill ling the V erics after the manner of the Grammarians. But if we Iiften to the Talmud ifts, they cry, Every Verfe which Mofes does not diflin- gttiflj, we never dijlingmfh. But if that Tradition were received from Mofes, wherefore do not the Talmudiils agree in all things with the Maforifts in this particular ? Why alio vyas not that Tradition of which Mofes is feign d to be the Author, known likewile to thofe Jews, chat liv'd in Time of the Greek Interpreters, and St. jerom ? For they alfo differ in ma- ny things from the Maforites. The whole Context of Sacred Writ was formerly in Anticnt Times written in a continu d feries of words, as it had been one entire Verfe, as Elias Levi- ta well obferv es : As alfo were the Books of the Antient Greeks and Latines 5 which may be collected from the Proem of ' Eufiatbiw to his Commentaries. The Poem of the Iliads wm- Euftttb. in and continnd a well compacted body of words \ which the Gramma^ &*** ^cm. nans fo com mud by the command of PififlratUS King of Athens, and ptted as they pleased themfelves. The chief of which was Ariftarchus, and after him ZenodotUS; But becanfe it was prolix and intricate^ and by that means irksom to the Reader, they divided it into fever al parts, which Seclions they would nor call the firft^fe- cond and third £00^ &c as QuintUS did in his continuation of Ho- mer : But in regard the Compofition was large enough for fever al Sections, they thought fit to divide them into Sections under the four and twenty Letters. And lllatuts commends One Comatas, who diftinguifh'd and pointed the Sentences of Homers Poem, /?:id [fc p which never had any fubdiftin&ions before j as appears by die aiui ani- fcllowing Verfes. mdi erf in Amiq, H> ^Ti^d^ tPiiey who gave the Roman Church her Name, will adhere in explaining the Latine Inter- pretation, if they be wile, obferving the Points, and all the marks of diftindion in -that Edirion. ] Nevertheless, that a clearer and more probable feufe will rife from another man- ner of diftindion, they do not fcruple to prefer it before the Vulgar Diftindion in their Commentaries. In which parti- cular the Jews agree very well with the Catholick Divines, who do not depend fo much upon the Maforetick Diftin&ions, as to make it a point of Conference not" to depart from them, when the receiv'd Diftindions will not yield a fev.fe fo proper and confentaneous to the Context. To which v e may add the Infinite Variety of Manufcript Copies which differ many times as to theie matters as well from themfeives, as from the Maforeticks. The Critical Enquiries, 3 5 There is alfo another fort of Verfes,of which they feem not ThcAnrfcni co have made mention, who have handl'd this Subject; jJ^Ja from whence I am apt to believe, that all the Maforetick 0f Verfes. Drudgery drew its Original. Thefe the Greeks call'd six** £omy the Latines Linens, or Lines. Thefe Verfes were com- prehended under a certain number of words. And the fetters forth of the Book were wont at the end of their works, to add die number of the Verfes therein contain d, tint thereby they might prevent Additions or Diminutions, which might be obtruded upon them. Thus Dioocnc s LacrtuuxeWs us the largenefs or imalnefs of the Books which he cites in his Hiito- ry> by giving an account of the number of the Verfes of which they confift. In the fame manner were the Volumes of On- gen compiFd, as St. Jcrom feems to intimate, where he fays, that there were feven or eight hundred Verfes wanting. In the Book of Job, according to the Antient Edition of the La- tine Interpreter, the Verfes are frequently reckon'd up at the end of the Samaritan, Syriack and Arabick Copies. So that 'tis probable that the Jews deriv'd this Cuftom from the Ara- bians, and they from the Greeks, which afterwards the fubtle Rabbies enlarged according as their Fancies prompted them. But there was a neceflity for them to diftinguiih other Verfes, by reafon of their Readings and Leflons in the Synagogues ; to which they put a full flop, not according to the number of words or letters, but according as the fenfe guided them. For that from the time that the Hebrew Language began to fail the Jews, they never read the Law without an Interpreter, who repeated it, as it was read to the people, in the Language they underftood. And thus the Interpreter followed the Rea- der when he had read one Verfe, which was fuch a Ihort Sen- tence as might eafily be delivered to the People, without op- preffion to the memory 5 which being read and interpreted, then the Reader read another, and then another, till he came to feme new matter -, fo that his Leflons for Morning and Evening were therefore divided into Verfes. Nor can there be invented any other Original of thofe Verfes which are point- ed by the Doctors of Tyberias in the Sacred Context, to be feen in the Editions of every Bible, Although there were another fort of Veries wTell known to thole of Tybenns, be- caufe they do fometimes reckon up the Words and Letters of which the Verfes conlifi , F A >4 Critical Enquiries. Another A third fort of Verfes the Criticks feem to acknowledge, fortofVer- which the Doctors of Tyberiasy the Authors of the Mafora iL:- feem not altogether to be ignorant of. The word &%&:, which the Greeks borrowed from Military Difcipline, does not only fignifie a Line, but a certain Order or Rank of Lines, and con- sequently of Verfes. In which fenfe Hefychim compos'd a Tractate under this Title 'S.v/t^ *& o&pnw< The diftirtiHoh of the Twelve Prophets. To which the word Sita anfwers in the Mafor#$ and from the fame Fountain the word Sedarim or Orders fecms to have proceeded s where it figqifies the fame CafHid. di Vn ith the Greek word sqpgfr, which djftinftkks and fib di'iincl; ions Divin.Ltft. were invented, that the breath being tired by a fang Sentence , might recover it jtlf by the means of allow d Paafes, as Cajfiodorits rightly obferves. Of the fame nature were thofe di(Hndions,which the Greeks call Ke?«\*«t, the Latines Capitnla, or fmall heads differ- ing from thofe which we now call Chapters. For thefe ki^aa*. divided the whole Context of the Books into leller Sections, and the Heads of thefe were placed at the front of the Book. This is to be feen in the New Greek Teltament Printed at Ve- nice, Anno 1538. and in the Greek Edition of the fame, by Robert Stephamu, which was copy'd from the Manufcripts pre- ierv'd in the moft Chriftian King's Library. Had the Cri- ticks confider'd more ferioufly thefe things, and fome other things, which I pafs over in filence, while they were making their Animadverfions upon the Original of the Maforetick Art, they wrould not have waited fo much time and labour, in refuting the Jewifh Miracles, who talk of nothing but of Mofes and Efdras. To this I will add fomething concerning the Notes which the Jews calhJ******, the Latines Accent m, or Accents, which ferve in the room of Colons and Comma's to diftinguiih the Hebrew Context 5 in the fame manner as the Greeks make ufe of points and fir oaks. However,in this the Rabbies feem to have exceeded the Greeks and Latines, becaufe they not only found out the marks of Accents for the diftinction of Senten- ces, and their Members, but alfo invented other Accents for marks of continued fpeech, as if what was not diftinguifh'd was not continu'd. The Original of thole Accents they take from hjdras himlelf : But how vainly, any man may judge by what has been already laid concerning thole other forts of Di- ftfadibns. Critical Enquiries* 55 ftinctions. For indeed they have no other Author but the Doctors of Tyberias) who ia this particular aflted the part of Grammarians. Neither are the Jews (0 ftriCt inobferving them, as to make it an Article of their Belief that they arc not to be departed from, efbecially where another Diftinction producesa better ienfe. Thus Abcn j makes mention of u tib. Tfk- a certain Learned Rabbi, by name Mofes Cohen, who took little notice of thofe Maforetick marks in diftinguifhing the Sentences of the Biblick Context. And yet I have the (ame Opinion of thefe, a? Cafftodorm had of the Points that were d< Dn added to the Edition of the Latine Interpreter by the Critic!?*. Utt, Thefe Points, faith he>are as it were certain Paths of the Scnfes,and Lights of Sentences. But they muft of neceflity dote as the Jews do, who look upon thofe Periods of the Hebrew Context, to be the Effects or Divinity, and thereby ihe w themfelves ab- folute Grangers to Criticifm. Nor do I wonder that the whole Nation of the Jews embrae'd thofe marks as well in tranferibing their Copies, as in the Explanation of the Con- text ; feeing all that profefs the Faith of the Roman Church, (6 religioufly adhere to the Vatican Edition of the Latine Inter- Eretation with points and ftroaks, and never fwerve from it, ut when they play the Criticks in their Commentaries, which that it was alio a thing much pra<5tis'd by the Jewiili Rabbies, their Comments upon the Scripture abundantly declare. CHAP. VI. Other parts of the Manufcripts in reference to the Manu- fcript Bibles, are examined, their True Original, and the Maforetick Left ion confirm 'd. MOft of the Jewifh Rabbies not unwillingly acknowledge TheAmkm that the Sacred Manufcripts of the Old Teftament do &&&***■ not altogether retain that Form, which the moft Authentick JJ^B' and Original Copies reprefented 5 and they believe that this according Alteration of their Bibles happen d after they were carry'd in- to the to Captivity, at what time they had no Rabbies, to read to Rabbie^ them theMofaick Law, their term of Worihip being utterly F 2 aboliih'd; 3 6 Critical Enquiries. abolifh'd 3 and their Civil Affairs in that deplorable condition, that they had no time to look after their Books. Therefore R. D.Kim. D. Kimshi frequently affertS in his Works, That they period in the Babylomfli Captivity, and they being deftroyd, nothing but con- fufwn followed-, with many other expreflions of the fame ra- ft. Efhod. ture< j^ Ephoddins is alio of the feme Opinion, who writes, That in thofe Seventy years of theBabylonifh Captivity^ cor- ruption and confufion began to overwhelm the Sacred Wri- tings: For that, as Kimcbi fays, the Doctors of the Law were dead. From thence therefore, that before the time of Efdras, the Sacred Writings vary'd in feveral places, they believe it may be made out, thztEfdras, who examin'd thofe Books, left feveral Lections which he met with in the Copies of his Time unmedrd withal in the Books which he himfelf examin d ; and for this reafon, they give great credit to the differing Scrip- tures, which were mark'd by the Criticks of Tyberias, as if they proceeded from Efdras, who was infpir'd with the Holy Ghoft 5 than which there is nothing more idle or remote from AbmMtlin Truth. This Aben Mekch obferves upon the words Diphath lkf.i. Para- and Rodanim. Diphath in the Book^of Chronicles is written with lip' * Daleth, and in the Book^of Genefis^ tp/>£ a Refch. Rodanim is written with a Refch, and in GenellS with a double Daleth, be- caufe Refch and Daleth are alike in their form -, and they who ever viewed the Books of Genealogies written in the Antient Times y fome write Daleth, others Refch. Therefore in the Book^ qfGenefis the word was written one way, in the Chronicles after another, tofliew tlxat the word was the fame whether written with a Daleth or a R.efch. Thus Jod and Van are written promifcu- oufly, becaufe they are alike in their figure. And the fame is to be faid for the mute Letters, Aleph and He in the end of a word, as in the word nroD vvith a He in the end, which is the fame as NJTDD with an Aleph in the end. For Aleph and He are agreed to be both Afpirates, and every one makes ufe of them at his pleafure. Thus has Aben Melee h written almoft word for word, from the Commentaries of R. D. Kimchi. The fame Aben Melcch produces many other Examples of feveral other varieties of the fame nature, which he teftifies to have collected out of the Tractates of R. Judas, Jonas, Aben Efra, Kimchi, &'c. Thus he obferves Aim and Alevan to be read . Critical Enquiries: } 7 read in Scripture promifcuoufly, with a Jod fomenmes, and fometimes with a Van* Hemeran and Hemdan with Refch or with Daleth. Jaal^an and Fsafom with Jod or with/7** 5 with many others, which I omit for brevities lake. They minded, faith he, the change of a Letter or two, and he obi it to have been frequently done. He alio makes mention of the tranfpolition of words, and upon thpfe \ Is in Chr - nicies, Bathfceva the Daughter ofAmief^ he makes this obser- vation, Bathfceva the Daughter o/Amiel, Jhe is Bathlceva t Daughter o/Eliatn, [l Sam.n.) which fome read Barftba, AbmM others Bat hfeeb a, becaufe they are near in pronunciation: In edc.$ci the fame manner Amid and Eli am are the lame, but that the Letters are tranfpofed 5 which tranfpolition of Letters is to be obferv'd in the firft place, there being feveral Examples to confirm it in the Hebrew Copies, of which the LXX Inter- preters made ufe. R. Levi Ben Gerfom makes the fame obfer- vation upon the word Jabes. I believe Jabes with an Ain to R- L* Ei"- have been one of the Judges, and to have been that per [on, who in ™J the 12th of the Judges is valid Abetfon with an Aleph : For Aleph and Ain are near in pronunciation, and often changed one into another. Don Jojlph alfo the Spaniard, in his Expofition of r. 7. the Book of Chronicles, inquiring why there appears fo much Comment. difference in the Genealogies, between that Book and the in L Books oiMofes, Jolhaa, Samuel., and Kings7 unfolds this que- ll ion in thele words ; That Efdras feemd to have found thofe words or hard names in fome Compendium, and fo wrote them down as he found them. Then obferving a vaft difference of names and things, heprefently adds. Neither ought that to be a wonder, for that in the Series of many Ages, great alterations happen both of names and things. But Efdras wrote down thofe Families in the fame manner as he found them fc alter d in little Manuals, fome out of o?ie place, fome. cut of another, and in words abbreviated. And therefore the Family which he mentions is defer ibed in many places without order and method. Laftly, The fame Rabbi believes that the Jews had forgot their Genealogies, and that Efdras wrote what occurr'd to his memory, though it were written without order, and at p, 7 > feveral times. i- i-c And therefore moft of the Jewilli Rabbies rather chufe to c' ■' accuie the Books which they believe Efdras icade ufe of in digefting ^ 8 Critical Enquiries. digefring the Context of the Bible, than the ofcltancy and carelefneft of the Scribes that came after- In this indeed the Fathers of the Church agree with thole Jews,that both afcribe to Efdras the Title oi Reftorer of the Sacred Context at that time in great confufion 5 only the Fathers believe that being infpir'd with a Prophetical Spirit, he reform'd it from many TnPrjfa. faults. That mo ft adtnir able E(dr IS, faith Theodoret, tranfcriVd in PfJ. thofi Sacred Writings , which by the carelefnefs of the Jews, and the Impiety of the Babylonians were entirely corrupted. And thefe are rather to be believ'd than the hair-brain'd Jews, who will have Efdras topublilh the Scriptures deprav'd and corrupted as they were with all their faults •, and fo they attribute all thofe various Leftions which the Maforites denote under the terms of Keri and Cetib, to the fame Efdras ; as if thofe various Readings, which the Criticks daily remark upon the Margins of their Books, were to be attributed to men infpir d by God. We muft therefore conclude that the Maforites o(Tyberiasyby the help of the Antient Copies, and affiftance of good Judg- ments, corrected what Errours had crept into the Copies of their Times, through the Ignorance of the Scribes. But bear- ing a Veneration too fuperftitious toward the Sacred Wri- tings, they durft not infert into the Context the various Le- ctions, though the truth of their Authority were part contro- verfie, butplac'd them in the Margin of their Bibles, writh The origi- this mark Keri, which is as much as in Greek yt°r^ writer nal of the intimating thus the true Le&ion of the word : For Keri is the various fame as ;n Latine, LeEtio or Reading. And that this is true, theMaTgins theManufcript Exemplars of the Bibles prove, efpecially the of thcHcb. Spanijh, which are Printed without the greateft part of thofe Bibles. Alterations which are mzvk'd Keri: So that by the' help of thofe the Maforetick Bibles now extant might eafily be re- due'd to their former form. Nor will it be amifs here to produce fome Examples of thofe various Le&ions, compar'd with the spamft Exemplar, elegantly fet forth about iome 13 years fince * to which purpofe let us make ufe of the Book of Jojhnah. The Maforites have mark'd the word * My Si- * >nntf, Jofi* 2. 10. with a cenforious mark, by putting Keri fters. in the Margin to jiniPHN, but erroneoufly 5 for thatinfeve- ral other places of the Law, as in the plural Achoth, in the 16th chapter of Ewkiel it is written without any Maforetick mark C) itical I .<•. * ~ mark y^\ riKj rfc> Sftfm $ : | i in Jojhxah it is truly writ- ten Achot r, and needs no emendation, for thai way of wricing is not erroneous from the Mafora it felf. In the 4th verfi of the jd chapter of .• u r, in the ( lontext is written * v;x with ;i Keri in the Margin, V^3, as if the Let- • Between ter ]od had been omitted in the latter end of the word 5 which ic is really read in the Sptrnfi Copy 5 whence we may manifeftly perceive the Original of the Maioretick Annotatii In feme chapter, v. 16. as well in the Manufcript as Maf< . < Edition, it is written in the Context, #CD180t withaton 'Thepro- in the Margin, cuns^ from the City Adam. In which man- ; iter the feme teaches us it fhould be read--, fo that that Emit ofacity. might eafily he corrected withcut the help of other Copies, by reafon cf thefimilitude between the Letters Mem and Beth. eipecially in (bme Manufcripts, where the Letters are dotted at the top like the D. In the 4th chap. v. 18. the word is in the Context B ;h, the Keri againft it is Cagnaloth. ^ they afcended out, as it is really written in the Spanijb Bible, with the Letter Caph, and not with the Letter Beth. J Bat in other . (h Exemplars, which I have confulted, I find i: written I ifoth with a Berb, though without the Maioretick note. Wherefore in this place the Malbrite Exemplars va- ry, which is evident by the abfence of the Keri upon this place in fome of the Bibles extant. Chap. 5. v. 1. in the Context k is Gnat Gnabrtnoa ; the Keri reads it Cnabram, till they pa/Jed over •, as it is without emendation in the Spanijb Edition. Chap. 6. v. 8. the Context reads the wTord ThoJCgnatt, theop- pofite Keri reads it TbotCgnei, as if V*h had crept in inftead of Jod} which Reading the Spanijb admits without any more trouble. Chap. 8. v. 16. the Context reads Ba Gnair, the Keri alters it, Ba Gnai, in Ai> as if the Fefch were to be caft away, which the Spanijh Edition does to their hands. Chap. 10. v. 8 the Context reads it *yv3., over againit which ]atbir}$d7ca^ awayjod? which the Spamflj Copy does without intimation, which confirms the exactnefs of the Maforetick Corrections ap. 15.V. 47. the Context reads Hajam HagaboL the Keri alters it Hagadol, the Great Sea, as it is read in the Spavijb Edition. So that the Doclors of Tybcrias did not make their Corrections out of their own brains, but took them from die choiceft Manufcript Exemplars. The reft I omit, for fear of being Ao Critical Enquiries. being tedious. For thus 31 is manifeft what we may think of the Km and Cetib, or the written and read, being the marks of the Do&ors of Tyberias. And that it may be more mani- feft, we iliall add fome few more Examples, to fhew that they made ufe of the moft Antient and moft Authentick Co- pies they could get} and thefe out of the Chronicles, with other Spamfj Manufcripts. Lib. i.chron.c. i.t/. n. the Context read Ludiim with a double Jod ; therefore the Mafora in the Margin adds Jathir Jod, leave out Jod, and reads it Ludim, as it is in the Spamfl) Copy. V. 36. InfomeCopi.es, of which one wfas accurately Printed at Am ft er dam, by Jndatu Manaffes, over againft the name Tfephi, the Keri reads Tfephu with a Van, not with a Jod, as it is in the cited Edition, which confirms the Mafora. The fame Edition alfo reads Dodanim, with a Dakth, as in the Pentateuch, not Rodanim, with a Refch, as in the Vulgar Editions. For Shephi, v. 40. with a Jod, this Edition read ShephiuvtixhuVau. V. 46. the Context reads Gnainth with a Pi» after the Jod, the icTm alters it Gnavith, or Avith, as it is corrected in the Spamjh Edition. Laftly, V. 51. the Context reads Duo Gnaljah -, the Mafora corre&s it Gnalvah, as it is in the Spamjh Copy. So that the Spamjh Edition above recited, obferves no other than the Maforetick Emendations. In the laft verfe of the 3d chap, the Context reads Hodijahu, the Keri Hodavaihu, as if the Jod and Van had been tranfpos'd, which Emendation of the Keri is obferv'd in the Spamjlj Edition. Chap. 4. v. 7. The Context reads Jetfochar, the Keri alters it Fetfochar, which the Manufcript Copy follows. V. 41. the Context reads Hamgninim , their Habitations, the Ke- ri in the Margin writes Hamgnonim, as if the Jod had crept into the place of the tittled Vau* Which Maforetick correction is obferv'd by the Manufcript Copy. Chap. 6. v. 26. the 'JContext reads tja, with a Van, inftead of >jj, with a Jod ; nor is it otherwife written in the Spanijl Edition. In the fame chapter the Context reads Tfiph inftead of Tfoph, corrected by the Maforak^, and confirmed by the Authority of four Manufcripts. In the 7th chap. v. 1. the Context reads Jajlnb, the Keri Jajhub, and in one Manufcript the Maforetick Emendation is followed. But for thefe particulars let this fuflice. For it may feetn fuperfluous to note the reft, feeing there Critical Enquiries. 4 \ there is the fame reafon for the one as for the other. For if thofe Lemd Ccrib and £m, that the one fupplies the defect of words in the publiih'd Editions, ffilth words of more Authority out of the Manufcripts •, the other cuts off fuch as are deem'd iuperfluous. So that there is no- thing at all of Myltery, a> the Jews vainly dream in the Animadverfions of the Doctors of Tybcn.u, which in this matter has not been before perform' d by other Criticks in the Greek and Latine Bibles, and that with more fuecefs, and lefs SuperfHtion. The fame is to be faid of certain words,which the Mafor^ tickCriticks thought fit to expunge out of the Text,as feeming to them tobefomewhat obfeene. For as R. Mofes teftifies, the Hebrew is called the Holy Language, which will not ad- mit any words that carry any femblance^of obfeenity. But thefalihood of this is eafily proved. Befides, that alteration is not eaiily difcern'd in the Manufcript Copies, and therefore is to be little regarded. And therefore I would be a means, that what words are left out of the Text without any caufe, ibould be again reitor'd to it. Now from what has been faid, it may^be concluded, that many of the various Lections are unproritably mark'd by the Maforeths, which were the pal- pable Errours of the^ Scribes. In which thing Cappe/fos and Morintu lhew themfelves the more inveterate againii the Jews, while they multiply the number of the various Read- ings out of fundry Editions of the Bible compar'd together * whereas the manifeft Errours of the Scribes ought not to be accounted various Readings. On the other fide John Vkcars leflens their number more than he ought, affirming, that in feveral Manufcript Bibles, which he found in fundry Libraries of Italy ', he met with no fuch thing as Kcri and Cenb. True it is, there are much fewer in the Manufcript Copies, espe- cially the Sp*mjh -7 but I never met with any Manufcript yet, where d;verfity of Reading was altogether absent. C2 CHAP. i .' 44 Critical Enquiries. CHAP. VII. Some things unprofitally and fuperflitioufly noted by the Mafore ticks, are illujl rated out of the Manufcript Copies of the Billes. The Super- >-plS a very ftrange thing how laborioufly, if I may not fay, writing of * fuperftitioufly, the Maforites have preferv d in the He- the Hebrew brew Context, certain Letters differing in their fhape from Bible in the reft, of which they have moft feduloufly forrn d an Al- fomc places, phabet. The Jews vulgarly believe fome Myftery lies con- ceal'd under thefe things. And Buxtorf, who folely depends upon the Jewifh Writings, thus delivers himfelf concerning B thofe Letters. There is no quefiion, fays he, hut the caufes of Comment. *hofe diver fities feemd worthy and juft to thofe wife and prudent Mafor. perfons in former Ages, hut the various Exilements, and grievous Calamities of their Pofitrity, have buried them in oblivion, or al- ter d them into various Figments and fond Myfteries. Thus Bux** torf rather chufes to make himfelf a Patron of Maforetick Su- perftition, than to enquire into the caufe of that Superftitious Writing ; which Superftition fhews it felf in this, that the Modern Exemplars of the Bibles, which were examin'd by the Doftors of Tyberias, are fome lefier, fome bigger than others-, fometurn'd inward, others hanging downward. The caufe of which feems to be no other, than that the hands of the Scribes could not fo make the Letters of Lines extended in length,as to be every wray equal one with another 5 whence it happened that fome varied in fbape from the reft. It might fo fall outalfo, that fome Letters at the beginning of the Vo- lume, might be made bigger of fet purpofe; as Aleph and Beth \ of which the one is the firft Letter in the beginning of the Chronicles, the other ofGcncfis. But the Jews, who knew how to fetch out a Myftery out of the leaft tittle of a Letter, began to conceit new Fi&ions upon this Writing ; which af- terwards by virtue of the Authority of the Do&ors that firft invented thefe Fables, being receiv d by the reft of the Jews, were eafily propagated to Pofterity. But Critical Enquiries. But though the ufe, or rather abufe of chofe Letters ftems to be very antient, and long accuftom'd by the Maforites, yet have I found a vaft difference in the obfervance of thofe De- lineations between the Exemplars of the Manufcript Bibles and thofe : For in thofe there are fewer Examples of thofe Letters \ or if you meet with any, the form of the Letter is hardly difcerna to differ from the other. Thus the bignefs of the Letter Aleph, which is thefirft in the Book ofchromctes, and Beth in the beginning of Gene/is, in many Sptnifh Copies, is fcarcely to be difcern'd 5 Co final 1 is the difference between them and the reft. In one Spamjh Copy written about fome 1 3 years fince thofe trifles are altogether neglected. Thus Jfaiahyc.^6. io. In the Maforetick Bibles the word Tfophau, or Watchmen, is Printed with a great * Tfade $ but in the Ma- nufcript Copy, the lame word is written without any man- ner of diftin&ion from the reft ; and fo it is likewife written in another Manufcript. Thus in the 44th chapter of the fame Prophet, where we read in the Text nx yo], He planted an Ark^, with a fmall Nun at the end of the word is writ as it fhould be with a proportionable Nun. So vain and fuperfti- tious is that Maforetick Annotation upon that place, There happen three fmall Nuns. In the 6th chapter of Daniel, V. 20. NlETtiDPi is written in the Maforetick Bibles with the latter Pf,very large, whereas there is no fuch thing in the Spamjh and other Manufcripts. In other two Spsmfh Manufcripts there is a great Pe to be teen, but with this difference, that the one enlarges the firft Pe, the other the fecond. In the 3d Chapter of the Prophet Malachi, according to the Hebrew, but the 4th in the Englijh Tranflation 5 and v. 4. "n:j, remember, is written with a large Zain, but in the two Sp*m(li Copies there is not the leaft appearance of any fuch thing ; nor in the Bibles of Menajfeh Ben Ifrael Printed at Amfterdam. The lame account is to be given of Letters turn'd and raised above the reft, as in the Hebrew Exemplar, as of Letters letter or larger. Thus in the 18th of 'Judges, v. 3. the word npJg, or Maneffes is written with a little Nun rais'd above the reft, which is alfoadvane'din the Manufcript Copies, but not in that manner, for only the top of the Nun is rais'd a little above the other, not the whole body of the Letter. Therefore the Jewifh Grammarians erroneoufly give thefe Letters the Title of 4 6 Critical Enquiries. o(.R*ud Letters,, is it were feparated and fee above the other, when it could be nothing but the fault of the Scribe, who was not fo fteady at that time. There is one Spanijli Copy alfo that will not own the deprefled Caph in the word nrQD1?^ to weep for her , Gen. 23. v. 2. nor the great Zain in the word ruv, a Harlot, Gen. 34. 31. Nor is the word ShtllejhiM fo written in the Manufcript with a capital Mem, as in the Ma- foretick Editions. Only one word of this Book, Gen. 2.4. CTNl-n^ when they were created^ is written with a fmall p, He, as the other Copies have it. To fearch the Scriptures any farther for thefe trifles, will be a vanity, fince they are only the dreams of idle Fan- cies- And I could wilh that cuitom might be utterly rejected for the future. The fame fond Superftition alfo was theocca* fion of fo many Figments about Aleph, ]od,He and f*/i, which were the Original Vowels of the Hebrew Language, efpecial- ly omitted in the writing. For Example, in 2 Sam, c. 9. you find the Negative to Lu> with a Kibbuts, vyithout the Letter V*n, which (hould otherwife have been writ thus si4?, upon which I found this Maforetick note in the Margin *, Lo is twice qacTin defective, becaufe Abfolom did not overcome. And that this Gtn. the Jews obferv'd ever fince the time of St. ]erom, his own words fufficiently teltifie. As we have here put %t in the Hebrew his fir ft name is written Ephran *, yet after he w.ts over-rulcd to take money for a Burial-placet though he were preffed to it by Abra- ham,^ Letter Vau, which is read among them, was tak$n out of his name 5 and inftead of Ephron he was called Ephran ; the Scrip- ture thereby intimating that he was not aperfon of true and perfect generofty. Here, as frequently in other places, St. Jerom does not fpeak his own, but the mind of the Jews. However, it is probable that this variety of Chara. 18. Where the modern Exemplars read Limleketh, to the Queen, without an Aleph, yet in a fingle Manufcript, it is written with an Aleph nitOO^ And hence rrofe thofe Maforetickobfervations, of Redundant Letters. CHAP. VIII. Some Examples of differing Writings, are produced from the Manufcripts, which vary from the Maforetick Lecti- ons. AFter that the Hebrew Language ceas'd to be familiarly fpoken among the Jews, and that the Chaldee Language .became the Speech of the Country, the Writers made many alterations in their Tranfcriptions, by ftafon of the Affinity of the Languages. Nor were they fo curious of neat Letters as they were before. From whence without gueflion it came to pals, that the Letter Akph. fo "much in u(e among the Chal~ lUansy is many times miftaken for the Letter He, and added to words without any reafon. And from hence I fuppofe it happened, that there are fo many chald&ifms in the Hebrew Te#t; as Shelechebeth, Flame by the Addition of the Letter Schwi according to the cuftom ef the ChaUe? or Tmc/w.becaufe thenumber of theCities is made up without them. Johannes Morin m, who has commented more largely upon this place,believes thefe verfes to have been obli- terated by the injury oftime,& the negligence of thjewsjwhich feems mod probable: But in the fame place, he erroneoufly obferves,that the twoComma's which were in theManufcriptby him cited,were afterwards eras'd by him that tranfcribed it,this annotation Critical Enquiries* 5 1 annotation being added in the Margin, we found not thefe two verfes in* the HiMetum Exemplar;for in pending that ManU- fcript, I perceived that note to be added by lbme jewiili Cri- ticaftcr, long after the tranferibing of At Copy, who ad- ded to it foine of the circled Vowels and fome parts of t\\c Mafora befide. For that fame Criticafter was deiirous, that his Exemplar lliould conform in all things, to the Maforetick, and to gain the more credit to his Emendation, he cited the /////f//^Manufcript.Therefore D- Kimebi7{eems more addict then was needful to the Lection of the Maforites, while he affirms that he never faw thofe two verfes, which are wanting in the Maforetick Edition, in any ancient corrected Exemplar, but only noted in. Neither does Grotitu weigh thole verfes, with a fufficient accuratnefs, iuipechng them to have been added out of Chronicles, to the Book of Jofua^ after Kimcb's time, and thence crept into the Greek and Latine verfions. On the other fide Marimu believes them to have been tran- dated out of the Book of Jofua, into the Chronicles by Efdr*sy and afterwards left out through the careleThefs of the Scribes. Which miftakeof the Scribes, might in this particular more eafily happen by reaion of the frequent repetition of the word, ] Vmematteh, and of the Tribe, &c. Whence it came to pa ft, that afterwards,the feveralManufcripts did notconftantly retain the feme order of fentences. In a manner not much unlike to this, the ancient Jewifh Scribes made many more miftakes, efpecially in the accompts of their families. For the fame words, and the fame Phrafes often occurring to their fancies, as they wrote, great confufion by that means crept into the Books of facred Scripture, as may be eafily apparent to any one that (hall compare the Books of Chronicles, with the other Hiftorians. For tho it be not permitted, to corred the firfl: from the latter, yet is it moft apparent, that there are many things wanting in both, that might be reftored from the ancl- es efpecially the Greek Interpretations: the authors of which had Copies differing from the publick Exemplars of the Bible: Whofe different writings I pafi over in filence, as being obvious to all, and aiming only at thofe which may be taken out of the Manufcript Copies of die Jews. And indeed thofe Errours have been in the Hebrew Codex of an ancient (landing. But when any Jewiih Rabbi has got himlelf a name H i for 5 1 Critical Enquiries. for learning among hisCountry-men,prefently taking a prepofte- rous courfe, they reformed their own Manufcripts by (uch a ones Copy, rejecting the more ancient Books. Such among the Jews, were the Doctors of Tyberias, R. £. Ben Afcer, Ben N*pbtaliy HUM, and feveral others to us unknown. By this means it came to pafs, that the Ancient Exemplars of the Bible being laid afide, the differences of writing in things of greateft moment were likewife loft. All which things maybe demonftrated from other Books of the Jews. For if we com- pare the written with the printed,and thole which were pub- lilht in feveral times and at feveral places, 'tis a wondeiful thing, to fee how they differ one from another. Thus the lit- tle Book entitled Jttfira^ or, of the Creation^ which the Jews falfely attribute to Abraham the Patriarch, differs egregioufly from it (elfin feveral Editions, and (till there is more disagree- ment bet\een the Printed Copies. Moreover the Latine verfionof this little treatife, in many things difagrees as well from the Manufcripts as printed Editions. So that they who look t after the Mantnan Edition, found the vaft difficulty of publiihing that fmall Trad, to confift as well in quantity as quality. The fame publifhersalfo obferved, that the Inter- preters, who adorned it with their commentaries, do very much differ in the reconciliation of the Text. And indeed in the Mantnan Edition, there is extant another Copy of that Book, not much different from the firft. In like manner if you compare the Manufcript Copies of that famous piece en- titl'd ZoW,either with themfelves or with the printed Copies, you will find a very great difcrepancy among them. Nor need you look any further then the Edition of that Book printed at Cremona, wherein the variousLe<5tions,which are almofl infinite, are feduloufly noted. The fame may be obferved in the vari- ousCopies of theBookentitrdCo^W,of which one was written. But I (hall infift no longer upon thefe things. Certainly the extream diligence and Induftry of the Jews is highly to be applauded, who have fo ftudioufly obferved the readings of various Exemplars. On the other fide they were highly to be blamed, who making no mention of the Books from, whence they took their Editions, make corrections of them as they think fit themfelves. Therefore I would have it, that thofe places of (acred Text which Critical Enquiries* 5 5 which bad Connexion tells us to be falfe or corrupted, li.ould be reftored by the affi fiance of the mod Ancient Interpreters, feeing in things oflefler conftquence,theManufcripts ma/help. For the wniftakes are very ancient, but the Written Copies of a later age, and reformed according to the rule of the Mafora. So that although as well in the Manufcripts as in the printed Copies, the 13. verfeofthe 145. Pftim be wanting, it might beeaiily fupplyedout of the Ancient Interpreters, which have it in their translations. It is not to be doubted, (aysGrotius, bat 0 n \n that this verfe was loft out of the Hebrew Copies through the /'i;'-'4v negligence of the Tranfcribers, for there wants a vtrfe which JljOuld begin with the letter Nun. Andfoon after he .1 ids, II will they anfwer this, who would have tu Ji and to all the decrees of the Afaforites>In which words he aims at our Mafora worfhip- pers, by whom the Hebrew Text is lookt upon to be the fame with what it was in the times of the Prophets. So obfti- nate are they in the defence of their Mxfora. But in thefe and the likedefecls,the verfions of the Ancient Interpreters as well Greek as Latin, fupply the place of the Hebrew Exemplar : Nor is it unufual for theCriticks whoTranflate Greek or Latin into any otherLanguage,to have recourse to moreAncientTran- flations,toIlluftrate the Lections of thofe books which they tran- flate: Which wasthefucceisfully obferved by fomeinTranflation the of N.Teftament,who calledtheLatinlnterp.totheiraflfiflance. LaftIy,That the plenty of Jewilh Exemplars of the Hebrew context, fell very lhort toward the aflifiance of the Jews of Tybcn/.i, is prov'd,not only by the Teitimoniesof R. R. Jiida*y Jonas, Ahen f-fra, Kimchi and others, who fometimes quote the Manufcapt Copies, and thofe the* mod corrected-, but alio by the Annotations of Ben Hafim, who tirit collected into one Body, the difpers'd parts of the Mafora, and fet them forth inPrint.For he has added otherLecYions befides the Maforetick totheMargentof theVenet;anBible,which he allures us he had gathered from moft approvedManufcripts.Thus upon the word Chefoos,a*a cramjfaiah. 38. 14 He has made this ex- traordinary annotation in the margent^ In fome Copies it is written chfis with a Jod, and the notes direct it to be read Ch'fois, but J found not this in the Catalogue of thofe words which having Jod in the middle, are to be read with the Letter Vau. In like manner the fame Rabbi, upon the word ch'Ari, makes this obferva- tion, J4 Critical Enquiries. - rion, which egregioufly confirms the Tranflations of the Creeks, and St -Jerome of the 22. Pfal. v. 13. Infome corrected Copies I haze fcen the wordfpelt with a VaU, with a note in the Alar gent , that it wa< to be rend wi: b a Jod. I fearctfd the Cata- logue of words which arc written wubaWzwat the end and read with a Jod*, but J could not find thU word in the Number , nor im Gene- the Catalogue of different Writings between the Eaflern and the commenr Wtfkern Copies. Therefore Gembrard miftook in this place, in ppu. 22. w'10 attributes this Critical Animadverrion o{R. Jacob Hajim, reftorerofthe^/^/or*?,to theAuthorsofthe great or RnzlAdafbr*. 1 here are alio many other Examples of fuch like Discre- pancies, which that Rabbi produces out of feveral approv d Copies of the Bible, which were never taken notice of by the Maforites. I will here only add, to make the bufinefs more plain, uhatofter'd it ielf to his obfervation inperufing the Manulcripts, concerning the Pronoun jon> ilky ox He. Now the Criticks of Tyberias were very accurate in their observa- tions, how many times, and in what places wn in the Femi- nine Gender was made ufe of inftead of jon in the Mafculine. But that laborious toil feem'd to be very unprofitable, feeing that the Manufcript Copies fo frequently differ from the Print- ed in that particular, no lefs than the Ancient Interpreters of Sacred Writ. Thus Judges 14.4. wn nirro ^, That it was of 'the Lor d? is read in the Text without any Marginal Note of the Maforites, yet in one Spantib Copy it is written *o:-. In the 21th chap, of the fame Book, the Maforetick Editions conftantly read wrK without any Marginal Annotation, yet in one Manufcript it is written sin- In like manner Dan. 2. one Manufcript Copy reads xir, whereas in the Printed Ex- emplars it is written ktn Now if thefe things, and many others of the fame nature, which at prefent I pafs by, had been rightly known to moft of the Proteitants, they had not blam d the Latine Interpreter, whom we have read for thefe many Ages, rendring the words in Gen. 5.1 5. She flail bruife thy bt ad \ for that only reafon, becaufe the word is not k n in the Text, ,-,m but NIT. //ere, iaith Sixtimis jdmama, it ps written ^r, not Amaml in N H, nir is the place correcled by the Ma for or, as if the Maforites itibark. hadexamirid all the Copies in the World. The Maforetick Le- dtion feems lb much the more probable indeed, becaufe that in n 41 y Copies of the Latine Interpreter and thofe in good efteem riticd Enquiries. 5 5 tfteem, in other peaces we find Jpfty /A, and not Ipfa She, as in the modern verfion: So that that vcrfion /i[faS4*,wasnpt prefently to be condemned, 'because it difter'd from the A iaio- retick context. For it might be that the Latin Interpreter found it M H in his own Copy, for that in the writing of this Pronoun the Tranfcribers might caiiiy mil take, is apparent from the Manufcript Exemplars, Now from what has been produe'd concerning the Mafore- cick Exemplars, there is no man but willealily determine what judgment to pals oi the Hebrew Bible,now (6 generally made ufe of by the Chriftiansas well as Jews. But here it may not T;. « be improper to add a few words more concerning the mod seica Edi- felect Editions of thofe Bibles. The Hebrew Bibles, whole riom of 1 c Editions were over-lookt by the Jews, are far more corrected Hebrew than thofe which were publifh'd by theChriftUas. VVhtrefbre L:JCS* FHas Levitt rejected the Bible which was let forth by Romberg in Folio at Venice, Anno 1 5 18. Felix Pratenfis leading the way* as not being well corrected, efpecially in the M.jor.i, which Prxrev/is feems not to have well underftood. Therefore that Bible was of much more credit, which was publillul by R. J a- cob Hajtm, Rcftorer of the Maibra at the colt and charges of the lame Bonbcrg. For in this there is not only Printed the Hebrew Text, but the Targum, or Chaldee Paraph rale, with Commentaries of the mort Learned Jews, both upon the Scri- pture, and both the Mafora's, as well the larger as the left. The fame Bibles were again Printed at Venice Anno 1618. Bu: this Edition was much inferiour to the reft, there being many things reform'd and amended, or rather lpoil'd by the Inqui- fitors, efpecially in the Commentaries of the Rabbins. Ano- ther Bible was alio fet forth at Venice by Daniel Bo?nberg, but lefs exadfc Neverthclefs, thofe are not to be contemn'd which the Jewscaus'd to be put forth for their own ufe at Pif/turnm, Sabiomfa, Aiantna, Frankfort ^ and Other places. Buxtorf alfo publillul a new Edition of Bomber g% Bible, which was over- look^ by R. Jacob Ben ifajm, which he believes to be cor- rected in many things by himfelf, efpecially in reference to the Tittl'd Vowel of the Chaldee Text. But as for the Edi- tion Printed at Bafil 16c8.it feems much inferiour to that of Bomber -g, out of which it was taken, and is contemn'd by the Jews. Imperfect alfo are the Bibles Printed by Robert, Stephens ia * 6 Critical Enquiries. in Quarto and Dccimo Sexto, and by Plantin in Quarto, and in other Volumes, compar'd with that which R. Menaffch Ben lfrtel and other Jews caus'd to be Printed at Amjhrdam in Quarto 1635. and in Octavo 1661. Moreover, the Jews, efpe- cially they who inhabit the Eaftern parts, highly commend an Edition let forth at Venice in Quarto, in a large Paper by Lom- brofus, which contains the Literal Notes. The Rabbi alfo himfelf explains the moft difficult places of the Text in the Spanijh Tongue. To thefe might be added other Editions of the Bible, and thole a great many publifh'd by the Jews, not only in Italy and Germany, but at Conjrantinople, Thejfa Ionic a,znd jHadnano\>lc, but ic fuffices to have given an account of the mod remarkable. We have alfo (aid, that the Chriftian Bibles are not to accurate as thole fet forth by the Jews, but the Chriftian Characters are far fuperiour to thofe of the Je ws.The Five Books of Mofes alfo are fet forth apart by them- (elves, with a threefold Targum and the Commentaries of Solomon Jfaac. Thus was the Pentateuch printed at Hanovia 161 1. with verfes diftinguifhed by Number according to the Latin Editions. CHAP. IX. Whether the Jews corrupted their Bibles of fet purpofc. The Opinion of the Fathers concerningthis matter examined. A Lthough there be a very great difference between the . Exemplars of the Hebrew Context, which are now extant, and thofe which the Seventy Interpreters and St. ]e- rom made ufe of, and that in our days they very much vary one from another; yet we ought not thence to conclude, that the Jewifh Bibles were by themfelves corrupted, in hatred of the Chriftians, as fome Divines bearing no good will to the Lee capo. Jews, have been pleas'd to report. Leo Caftro, aSpanim Di- vine, urges highly for this the common opinion of the Fathers, and produces a great train of their Testimonies. After the fame manner Johannes Monmu fhews himfelf fomewhat too fevere againft the Jews, for though he adjudge this Opinion not Critical Enquiries. 57 not altogether fo probable, yet he mufters up a long Catalogue of the maintainors of it, to impofe upon the more ignorant. And what feems to exceed all belief, Ifiac foflim, among the Heterodox Jus uttered many bitter reproaches againft the Jews as adulterators of facred Writ. But if the weight of their reafons be conlidered, rather than the number of their reafons, we fhall find tlieir accufations to have quite another face. True it is, that they condemn under the name of the Jews, the vcrfions of Aquilas, Theodotiun and Symmacbm^ in regard that the Jews continuilly fet them up in oppoiition to the Septuagint. Therefore as often as the Fathers queition the Jews for corrupt- ing the facred Scripture, they only (peak of thole verfions, or of fomething like them, as hereafter we (hall make it appear. Upon which accompt St. Jerom labouring to excufe himfelf, for having tranllated the Scripture out of Hebrew into La- tin, gives this realbn: I have not fo much endeavoured to aboltjh fyft. 3?- the Ancient, as to produce thofe Tcftimomcs, which by the Jews are either omitted or corrupted, that ours might K.dcrjhznd what the Hebrew truth contains. In which words he fharply taxes Aquilas, Symmachw and other Interpreters, whom he frequently calls by the title of Semi-Chrifiians. For when the Fathers in their difputes with the Jews, concerning the truth of the Chriftian Religion, made ufeagainft them, of no other Scrip- ture but the Septuagint; on the other fide, the Jews (till had recourfe to the Hebrew Books, that is, to AquiUand othe» In- terpreters, who had made new tranllations out of the Hebrew, for this reafon chiefly was St. Jerom indue'd, to make a new translation from the fame fountains: And for the fame reafoa Ongcn before him had compos'd bisHexapU with wonderful Art. The rirft that comes into the held is Jufti* Mzrtyr, who Jufik Mar. difputingagaind TVyfWaccufes the Jews, of falle and crafty ty&?w«x expjfition of the Scripture: As when he obje:1s to them, cX^amcd- their ignorant and malicious applying the words of the P/*/,y;, V[d\, ll0. The Lord [aid to my Lord, to Ezcchiah, which are Only to be undenlood of Chrift: As alfo their milapplication of the words of lfaiah, Before a child knows to call his Father and his Mother, Sec. To the fame EmchiJ? -7 which as he demonftrates, ought to be interpreted concerning Chrift. Ttoea he alfirms many things to have been taken out ofScrip:ure, by the per- verfenefs of the Jews, becaufe they favoured the Chrifcian I Religion ; m-:n 5 8 * Critical Enquiries. Religion 5 and then that fome words were changed into 0- thers However in all this there is nothing ttgp'd againft, but the perverfe expofition of the context, or mifinterpretation, riot againfc the text it felf 3 in regard J*fli* could give no Judgment concerning the Integrity or fall hood of that.as being one that was utterly Ignorant of the Hebrew Language, which is palpable from the Etymology, which he gives of the word Ijrael. This namcXvc&ci faith he ', fignifies a man overcoming Power-, For Ifra is* man^andYX Power. T lis above all the reft is molt worthy obfervation,that J*fi in by the word Scripture un- derftands nothing but theTranflation ofthe ieventylnterpreters. So that when he accufes the Jews for depraving the Scripture, he alfo taxes theverfion of Aqmia, which in many things dif- fers from the Septuagint. Which led feveral learned men into miftake, not heeding what Juftin meant by the name of facred Scripture. And thus he condemns the Jewim Rabbies for rafhly a flerting that there was never any fuch thing Wrote by Jfaiah, as, Behold a Virgin frail conceive, but . Behold a young Woman pall conceive. The whole COn- troverfie lies about the Tranflation of the word GW- mah, which the Seventy Interpreters Tranflate **flb&, virgo, a virgin : But Aqmla v-£:>lc, paella, and after Aquila, the Jews of that Age. Which Interpretation nothing alters the Hebrew Text. But Juftin allowing no Scripture but that whfth was publickly received for theufe ofthe Church, that is, the Septuagint, oppofes the Authority of that Tranflation againft the Jews. But yon, faith he, in thefc things pre fume to alter the expoftions of your Fore-Fathers, who lived with Ptolomy King of Egypt, faying/ W it is not fo in the Scripture^ as they tr an fated it, but behold a young Woman fi all conceive, &C. Now there, by Scripture is meant nothing but the verfion vtAquila, to which the Jews always adher'd in their difputes with the Chriftians.In like manner Juftin accufes the Jews to have eras'd out of their Bibles thefe words , M ™ 5uV a Hgno, from the wood, Pfal.95. But if we confider the matter more atten- tively, thofe words feem rather to have been obtruded upon the place, then omitted. And therefore they mult of neceflity be deceived,who too unwarily follow Juftin Martyrs opinion, too peremptorily giving his Judgment upc/h things which he did not altogether fo well unaerftand. I mould for my pare Critical Enquiries. 59 part rather hearken to Try/ : Jew, whom hfimhi >in anfwering his Dialog oncerning the mutilation of the Scripture, doneoy the Princes of the Jews The 1 - ■edible; I s to fait f*ari ible tk >tbc Molten Calf qr Children offer* (to Devils, ortbckilUttf of the ' Prupbtrj thwfdvcs. Certainly the Jews had Gich aRe- verence for their Holy Bibles, which would nor permit them to corrupt them on let purpoie. Moreover by the anfwers of Trypbo, which Jttfii* fupplies, it is apparent that the Jews at that time Co zealoufly devoted to the letter of the Scriptures and the fubtleties of Allegories, adhered the more cloiely to the Hebrew Text, that they might the more vigoroufly in- force them upon the Chriitians. For which reafon they made Greek Transitions, which might more truly correspond with the Hebrew Text, then the Septuagint. For which reafon Jujlfa alfo many times praiies as well the Jewilh asChriiti- an Verfion, to the end thatdifputing with the Jews, he might convince them out of their own Books. Laltly, there is no reafon why the Jews mould be called in Queftion for depra- ving the Copies of their Bibles, if they have tranilated one and the fameHebrew word in thatfignification,whidi was mod proper for their bulinefs ; as when foftw in the fame Dialogue objects againir Trypho, that the Jews read the 49th of Qeuefis amils, ***<*'* 'i^T* 7u'i-KtJuLvzu:i;o dof.ee veniant qua repofita funt ei, Tillthofe things frail come which are I aid up for him. Where- as the words in the Greek verfion of the Septuagint are, m i» 'ihhcL'u.-r'yji,cu, until he ihall come for whom this is laid up. For the Hebrew Word Shi/o, may be rightly rendered in either ienie, neither is it certain whether the ver- fion, which Jnftm io confidently avers to be that of the LXK Interpreters, was really theirs or no, whereas the Roman Edition owns that for the true one, which Jufii* attributes to the Je^vs, where theScholiait obferves that it is the fame in Qlem%nt Alex an dr inn s^ Liife'ouu, Chryjojtow^ Cyrill, Cyprian and 4*fiin among the Latin Fathers. The next in order is fre/ttns, who accufes the .h,\ iih Ralv M- c- 25- bies, for jet ting up their Laivonrrary to t t La:v of Mofe; rvhrrc i/i they add fome thiri^s, t.ike avr.iv others, and other place? they in- TheOpi- terpr.t a» they plea fe. ^ But the bietfed lrep. Principle or Foundation u apparent, that the Jews corrupted both their own, and our Bibles in hatred of Chrifi and the Christians, and rasd fome Books out of the Canon, was taken for granted by our mofi holy Fathers, and upon the confidence of that Foundation, they did fometimes unfold fever al occurring difficulties, and anfwerd the Objections of the Hereticks and ]ews. But with the good leave of that moft learned Man, I muft needs fay that he. never con- futed the Fathers in this matter, but only made ufe of what he had read in other Authors, and in the works of Leo Caftro, a mortal Enemy of the Jews, and inferted their words verba- tim into 'his Exercitations : Nor am I one who believe an obligation C. 1 L 6 1 Critic J Fihjurrks. obligation of {landing to the Opinion of theFathers in this mat- ter. Their Authority is of great moment in matters of Faith, butinCritick Learning it isjhen to be efteernd, when ita- rees with 'Truth ; and for this we have the Authority of the nee of the Lacine Divines St. A*ftitt) who as he was a man of a moft acute Wit, and piercing Judgment, was not afraid to recede from the Opinion of other Fathers upon that Ar- gun ent, which is now the Subject of the Controveriie, be- aufe he thought it lefs probable. So that when he came to confider the ditference of the Greek and Hebrew Copies, in the years of Metbttfaltm s Age, he could not favour their Opi- nion, whopreferfd the Greek before the Hebrew Copies. Though St. Anftin readily acknowledges with the reft of the Fathers, thai work to be the work of the Prophets. He re- ntes the Opinion of tome perfons of his Age in thefe words. Di chit. 1 bey admit not that hers night be a greater mifrake of the Intcrpre- ,1 i$- ters, rather that.' th.it it flwuld be falfe in that Language, from whence the Scripture wqs tr a? fated into our Language by the Greeks but they fay it was not likely that the LXX Interpreters, who at one and the fame time agreed infenfe, could err ^ or would impife a faljhood, where no Inter eft could fway them. But the Jews, while they bear us ill will, becanfe the Law and the Prophets are become common with us by Interpretation, have made fome alterations in their Copies to leffen the Authority of ours. This Opinion, or rather Sufpition, let every one accept as he thinkj good 3 but certain it is that Methufelah livd after the Flood.Here St. Auftin feems to be guided rather by the weight of reafon,tban a cloud of Writers, who, as he well knew, did not make a right computation of Meth'-4elah\ Years.^ Wherefore handling the fame Argument again, he openly affirms that he cannot agree with them who believ'd that the Jews had corrupted their Scripture of let pur- pofe. He denies that the Jews, being a People fcatter'd into all parts of the World, could joyn in fuch an Univerfal Con- fpiracy to a Falfhood that ihould be never difcover'd. At length he adds 5 / could never doubt but that tt would be weft done, that when there is any thing of variance found in both Copies, when there cannot be Truth in both, let the Truth be judged by that Languxoe cat of which the Tranfation was made by the Interpreter. And that St. Auftin fhoulube of thisOpmion contrary to the Judg- ments of almoft all the Doctors of his Age, nothing, but the Truth (rit Enquiries. Truth over-rul'd him. I will] that - r with St. would rather confider the things themfelves, then r thority of othc Fcfr this Bi in Opini i earily be reconcil'd. I pa6 by theTeftimany of other Fa- thers, of whole names / > a long (croll to littl purple : it will Ik- tufficient to produce them who under- ftood the Hebrew Language. For it would be an idle thing to produce WitnefTes that know nothing of the bufine Among the Greeks, on , among the Latines, only ]crom applied himielf to the underftanding of the Hebrew Lan- guage. For to omit all the reft, Epip Has, whom Jerom cry es up for his knowledge of rive Languages, having a of Hebrew, underftood nothing of the Critical Learning. St. Jerome fcrupl'd not to call Onopi, next after the Apoftles* Mafter of the Church, by reafon of his ringular Learning, el- pecially in the Scriptures y but if we fcrioufly confider Origem Hebraick Induftry, we (hall rind him but meanly vers'd in that Language . But for that he is to be pardo- ned ; that grafping at many things, he fometimes (peaks not fo exaftly, imitating Phiio, and fuch kind of Authors. But he was furniihed with Hebrew Learning Sufficient to un- derhand the difcrepanciesof various Editions, though'he were ongm inferiour to St. Jcrcme in that particular. Therefore hisjudg- Opin ment concerning the Purity of the Hebrew Text, is not to < be defpis'd. Thefe Writers that promote the Jewifli Copies, i,1; " ;: bring many Quotations out of Qrigcn, by which they feem to , traduce the Jews for being Corrupters of the Sacred Wri- tings. Thus in reference to the words of Jeremy, The Six of Juda is written rvitb m iron Ptny he argues the Jews to have plainly falfify'd, who tranflate the words their Sin, infteadof the Sin of Judah. Again intheEpiftle which he wrote to - frkan, concerning the Hiftory of Sufanna^ he aflerts that the Jews have cut off many paftages from their Bibles, left they lhouldberead by the Plebeians. We muft fay, that as to tho; things which contained the Reproach of Elders, Magiftratc and Judges, they took away as much as they could from the knowledge of the people, which are kept among their si na. And as an example of that Corruption, he brings v the Author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews relates Jfaiah j and affirms that the words there written concern i 64 Critical Enquiries. the Prophets, they were ftoned, they were famed, and put to feve- ral deaths, are not in the publiuYd Bibles: but that the words o ncerning Ifaiah's being cut in two with a Saw, were taken by Tradition, and preferved in fome fecret place. Which, faith he, was craftily, & of fct purpofe done perhaps by the Jews, fome unde- ceftt words being infer nd into Scripture, to abrogate the belief of the whole. Other Examples he adds,but of the fome kind,in the fame place, and all to prove the fame thing; which Chrift in the New Teitament objects to the Jews, as being taken out of the Old, yet are not there to be found. Such are the words, Jerufalcm, JcrrtfiLm, who feweft the Prophets, and ftonedft them who were fent umo thee, &c. The fame ftory is related of Zecha- rtA, flain between the Temple and the Altar, which becaufe they do not appear in Scripture, he therefore fufpefts to have been taken out by the Rabbies. Wherefore, faith he, there was nothing more which the Seers, and Princes, and Elders of the People more defird, then to blot out thofe pajfages which contained their mi f deeds among the People, And therefore it is no wonder, that they who were not much unlike thofe Elders in their practices, fiould ftcal, and remove out of the Scriptures the true Story of Su- fanna, again jt whom the lafcividus Elders laid their unjufi Accufa- tions Many other Examples might be heaped together out of Ori- gens Works, to prove the fame thing ^ which many Writers abufe, to fubvert the Hebrew Text •, not^ underftanding Ori- gens genius, and his proper method of writing. Which Eu- Erfatb. dif ftathius was not ignorant of, who reproves Crigen, for every fin. diEn- where inferring Opinions contrary to his Writings. And this, gaftr. *dv. ]erom long before had obferv'd not only of Origen, but of £/.- ro^Ai'l*' febius, Methodius, and Appollinari'Ui, who fometimes fpeahjwt what ail. Rhgii. they thinks but what is neceffary. That too much liberty of Driven was thereafon, that when he prattl'd without judgment whatever he had drawn out of other Authors, he was looked uponasaHeretick for delivering the Opinions of others as his own thoughts. Thefe things are therefore diligently to be ob- ferved, if you would reconcile Origen to Origen, never to ob- trude for Origens what he wrote only upon probability, proper for the Times and the Perfons to whom he applied lumfelf. OrherwifeO/mv;, unconftant to himfeh, will be thought to fpeakalway contrary to himlelf, as by the example of thp pre- fent Qfitical Enauiries* y6j fcnt controyerfie concerni i ig die purity of die Hebrew Text, it is no difficult thing to make out : For the fame Origeny who never (peaks well of the Jews,as corrupters of theSacred Scrip- ture, is cited by Jerom for a mod eager defender of the Hebrew truth. But if any one fha/ljay, faith Jerom, that the Hebrew Bibles were afterwards falfified by the Jews, let him hear Co:nrr m what Origen, m his eight volume of Explanations of Iiiiah, an- inc fwers to this Que ft ion, that the LordChrifi, and his Apojlks, who fevcrely reprove the Scribes and Pharifees for the reft of their fins, never made the leaft mention of this \which was the great eft. But if they jhallfay that the Bibles were fal fifed after the coming of our Lord & Saviour, and the preaching of the Apoftles, I cannot but laugh that our Saviour ,t he Evangelifts and the A poj ties, Jho/dd produce Teftimi- nies,how the Jews would afterwards faljify. Here Origen does not play faft and loofe, but freely and plainly delivers his opinion what he thinks of the Jews.But why the (ameOrJgen fometimes affirms the Contrary, the fame St. Jerom, who well underitood p his humour, teaches us in thefe words. I pafs by Adamantius ^^m* whofe name, if we ?nay compare little with great things, is the more in Graf, envyed for my fake, who in his homilies which he fpeaks to the people, following the Common Edition in his larger Deputation fur- r0//7/?Hebraick verity & troops of his own followers, fometimes feeks the aid of a forraign Language. Thus Origen proceeded One way with the learned, and made ufe of another method with the common fort, and as they fay, wife with a few,' what he had gathered from many, made thole things publick. Agree- able to this are thofe things which Origen writes againft Celfm. For after he had produced fome things concerning the Cir- cumcifion of £/t^^r theSon of Mofes,accord'mg to the Edition published at that time, he prefently adds the Text it felf L adr with this noie--)Bur thefe things which Jeem more nice, and not fit for cciH vulgar ears, &c. That is, when Origen had obferved many things concerning the power of names in various Languages, according to the principle of theMagi 8cCabbalijh,dc had noted fomethingfuperftitioully concerning the circumciiion upon the eighth day, the words of Scripture being cited both Greek and Hebrew, as it were correlating himlelf, he omits many things which he thought too far[remote from the knowledge of the vulgar, acting the part of a Do&or, whole buiinefs it was to teach the multitude according to the principles of Chriltian Religion,not of Judaifm. K Were 66 Critical Enquiries. Were thefe and other things, which in prudence I omit, but rightly obferved, in reference to Origens Genius and man- ner ofwriting, it might be eaiily difcerned, how he came to be induced to tax the Jews of falfifying Scripture. For in his Homilies to the people he was bound to aft the part of a vul- gar perfon, and loin his epiftle which he wrote to Aftitaimi he followed the opinion of the Ancient Fathers, concerning the Hebrew and Greek Copies \ not daring to depart from it, left he might leem to joynwith the Jews, as by the words in the lame Epiftle he plainly intimates: Take n&t therefore left thl impradunt and ignorance we abrogate tbofe exemplars, which are r calved in the Chinches, and give an ill example to the Frat erh ityj t o lay a fide thofefa c red books which are frequent among them, .. :ve credit to the Hebrew Copies, as thoje wherein there is nothing ofmiftakc. Then he calls to mind what a dammage it would be to Chriftianity, to favour the Opinion of the Jews concerning the Tranflation of the Septuagint. Upon which OCCafion he farther adds i Confider whether it be not good to re- member what is written, Thou flialt not remove the Eternal bounds, which thy Anceftors have appointed, Thefe things 1 fay, not that I fear to fear ch the Jewijh Scriptures,and to compare theirs with ours, and to fee where they differ-, for if it be not arrogancy to fay fo much, we have done to the utmoft of our power, to exercife our ft ti- dies in all Editions and their differences, at what time we men feduloufly examined the Interpretation of the Septuagint, left we might feem to have introduced any thing of falfe and Adulterate, into the Churches under Heaven, and jhould give an occafion to thofe who feek^a pretence to calumniate thofe which are in the middle be- tween both, and to accufe thofe which are commonly ufed. By which it is manifeft that Origen did not entirely approve the Opinion then vulgarly received concerning the Jewihh Copies, but only for Government and convenience fake; in regard that among the Learned he taught the quite contrary, nor does he feem much to value the Reafons which he produces in his Epiftle. For he adds a conjeftural expreffion, as it were doubt- ing, Which perhaps, faith he, wot done by craft on fet purpofe by the Jews. To all which we may add that the probations of thefe things, which he produces,are very (hallow, and full of them- felves} neither do I believe him to be the Author of them. But as he was a man of unexhaufted reading, he only quoted what Critical Enquiries* 67 what he had read in other Authors. For how highly he valued the Jews, Origen openly tefttfies, when he made i:(e of them as his inftructors in the Hebrew Language, and by frequent difcourfeand converfauon with them, far exceeded all the otherDoctorsof cheChurch in thekno . ledge of the Scriptures. In like manner jerom Teems to have a different Opinion of ™cn ° the Jewilh Bibles, fo that the Learned men of his A fly r> was expected, but they add, that their own (ins retard his coming. Thefe are the words of the Talmudiits. Tim is the Tdlm. u Tradition of the Hoafe of Elia : The World (hall confifi of fix thou- ]} *&• i fatid years. Two thoufand JJiall be of emptinefs, that is, before the jfl^ ln Law. Two thoufand jhall be fpent nnder the Law. And two thou fan d f4L " years the Mefliah//j aH reign. But by reafon of our iniquities, thofe years are already claps' 'd. Voflius endeavouring to draw this Tradition of Elias to hispurpofe, has err'd in many places. For riril he feems to applaud it, as being delivered by ElU die Prophet, or taken out of his Book, which formerly as he fays, was numbered among the Books of the New Tefiament. But this Elias was a Talmudick Dofior, like Rabbi Hilldl, R. Schammaiy R. Johanan and feveral others whofe names are fee down in the Talmud. Then it is a fiction to fay that the 2000 years that preceded the Law of Mofes, ought not to be num- bered from the beginning of the Creation, but from the Flood, or from that time that God told Noah, that he would deitroy the World. For the Opinion of the J$ws concerning the fix thoufand years Duration of the World,according to the Tradi- tion of R. Elias, is in this place far different. For 'the Founda- tion of that Prophefie is deriv'd from the fix days of the Crea- tion 5 for that as God created the World in fix days, fo the Lime World iiiouid endure fix thoufand years : So that the computation of the years of the World muft be taken from the rirft Creation of ail things. The Commentators upon the Talmud reckon two thoufand years from the firft man crea- ted to the time that Abraham, abandoning u\q won hip of p .■-.. Idols, embrae'd the true Religion of one God. Ac what lime S according to their computation, he was two and Fifty years of 74 Critical Enquiries. of Age. But thofe are frigid Arguments which Vofsins pro- duces to prove out of the Epiftle of St. Peter, that the beginning of the World is to be reckon'd from the Flood, becaufe the Apoftle call'd that the Old World which preceded •, and the Earth which we now inhabit the other World. I {ay thefe are very forry Arguments, and quite from the purpofe. But enough of Eiias Prophecy concerning the duration of the World : Nor is there any heed to be given to that Book of the Prophecies of Eli as, which Ifaac Fojjius, cajoli'd by the name of Eli as the.Talmudift, believes to have been receiv'd into the number of Canonical Books. Now let us examine his ether proofs brought againft the Jews, whether they be of any more moment. In the next place Voffvm brings a load of Arguments to prove that the Jews have mutilated not a few Texts of Scripture,and fir ft he calls Jnftw Martyr for a Witnefs, who writes that fe- veral Exemplars were corrupted by the Jews. But as to what may be borrowed from Jaftin, we have already made a ple- nary anfwer. Jnftin never confulted the Hebrew Text, nei- ther could he •, as being one that underftood not the Language, as is manifeft out of his own Writings. But, faith Voffins^ how bravely had the holy Martyr foiled Trypho, and the reft ef the Jews with whom he livd, had not thofe Crimes been true that were ■[ :c- laid to their charge ? But this way of arguing does not become *"'ovc * a Learned man, who, in perufing Jnftws Books, might eafily have perceiv d that he had miftaken in many things. But f^of- fins goes 011 5 The Prophecy of Chrift which occurs Pfal. 22. 1 6. where inftead of they digg'd, as a Lien is put in the roomy moft of the Chrift ians, except J htnatiiks. and Semi-Jews, acknowledge to have bien dtpravd by the R.-bbtes. True it is indeed, that the Jews are call'd in queftion by moft Divines, for having pur- poiely corrupted this place. But, far be it from me to pro- nounce thofe people ffenwr/wb or Semi-Jews, who clear thfe Jews of this offence ; when Rabbi Jacob Ben Hafun, Reftorer of the Afo/flr^publiekly teftifies, that in feme Manufcripts of the Hebrews he has met with Cam, they diggd, or piere'd, which is in favour of the Chriftians. Nor is it a wonderthat the Maforites chofe that reading nttth ** a Lion, which was moft for their purpofe. I acknowledge the Tranflation of the Greeks and St. Jerom to be the truer * yet the Jews are not to be Critual h/ijiiiries. fr* beaccus'd of fltfforian for having made choice, out of two Readings,of that which was moll: for their turn. In the words Cart zi\d Car v<} all unierlhnding Cri ticks know there is but little difference, and how eaiily and frequently the chang ■ of ]od for ^an, and Vm for JW happens. (ides that, there are feveral other Examples of the redundancy of the Letter Attph- which were not unknown to the Mazoretns; fo that the Let- ter Aleph may as well fall out to be liiperfluous in Caro*, as ne ceflary in Can. Wherefore the Greek Interpreters and St. ]erom part it by as ridiculous, or e!le perhaps it might not be in their Copies ; but the Maforites, who acknowledge it, made ufe of it. Vain are alio thofe things winch Vo$h$ alledges out of Z chary, c i2. v. lo. as if the Jew. had purpofely chang'd the Antient Reading, which the Old Interpreters found in their Copies. But there is no skilful Critick but will difcern that this diverfity happen'd from the variance in feveral Copies, while in fome it is read 'Hjn, they have pierced, in other T"Wn, they have d.viced, by reafon of the eafie tran (mutation of Refch into Daleth, and Daleth into Refch : Nor do I fee any reafon why for that, or five hundred more of the lame fort, the Jews mould be more accus'd of Falfification than the Greek or Latine Scribes, or of whatfoever other Nation, who make frequent miltakes in their Tranfcriptions. This change of Let- ters fo alike in ihape, cannot be avoided lbmetimes in any Language, whence after wards arifes that vaft difference in Manufcripts. In which particular let Scioppms s little Trea- tifeof the Art of Criticifm be confulted, who perfectly 11- luftrates all thefe difficulties. Leo AlUtins alio a great perul'er of Manufcripts, has cited feveral places to confirm this AiTertion. Whofe words it may not be amits to quote from his Ani- madveriions upon the Fragments of Hetrufcan Antiquities, P- $5- which were publiih'd by Inghiramius. Moreover, fays he, the Err ours of fo many Tranfcriprs, the changes of fo man) names of fo many Letters in the Am lent Monuments, proceed from nothing elfe but from the Itkenefs of the Capital Letters one to another : Let Ms only make ufe of a few Examples among others, for fer.r ^f being taxd of too much cptriofty by fom? idle perfon or other. Jofeph Scalieer Upon Varro de re Rxfiica', I. z.c. 3. Meduim noh MeU iriL by reafon of the cfafrgi *f L into D, famih.tr to the A . \ its ; as L 2 on 7 6 ■ Critical Enquiries. en the other fide thofe Hens were calCd Melica?, which ought to have been calid Medico?. Godefcalcus Stevichius upon tht fhft Bookof ApuleiUS ohferues the frerutnt interchange of the Letters D and T« arid in tht fifth Book he attributes the mutilation of the fentence to tic/: J of the Letters B and P, for that both thefe and the Let R i-iicitently are miftaken one for another 3 for which he brings Quilitiljan /md Pliny as Wit neffes, together with then ad- <- nit tons concerning the ufe of Capital and Small Letters. Johannes IfaaC PontanUS in hit Antient French Gloffary calls the frequent change of B andV, the folemn Aletaftaf.s. ScioppiUS of the Cri- tical Art by fever al Examples proves C w G, D inh, F in E, P///B, an clR frequently interchanged by rcafon of the likenefs of the Letters. In like manner the Greek Capitals have a great refemblance one to another, fo that the miftakes of b for p , r for t, and a for a are eafily committed, without a lingular care, and fuch a one that it is almolt impoftible- to take. To which we may add, that many times a very great confufion happens by reafon of likenefs of fmall Letters. Thus many times among the Greeks nafr is miftaken for vV" • and among the Latines Orbis for Vrbis. Chronologers, Hiftorians, and others object to one another the various Readings of their own Ma- nufcripts and Editions,as for one Example among many others $ Hitherto it has been commonly receiv d, that Dagebert, by the Advice of his Council, took to Wife Nanthild, a lovely Virgin, whom he fore'd out of a Monaftery. But the moft famous Perfons of our Age Jacob Sirmond, Adrian ValefnujxA ethers lighted upon certain Manufcripts, wherein it is not written, as Aimomm erroneoufly cites the Text of Fredegar- dips, and taking Nanthild out of a Monaftery to- Wife, he advancd her to the Throne , but taking Nantechild, one of the Virgins from her attendance 5 de Minifterio, not de Monafterio. Such mi- flakes as theie arifing not only from the likenefs of the Let- ters, but from innumerable other caufes, are to be found in all written Manufcripts, of whatfoever Language or Condi- tion. Whence thole Monfters of various Readings have fprung, that have fo tormented the Brains of the Criticks,and caused molt defperate Wars among the Grammarians : So that they who boaft themfelves the true Imitators of Cicero up- braid themfelves with their own Ignorance of Gceronianifm, frequently Critical Eiiquii ks. 77 frequently for no other reafon, but becaufe they made ufeof feveral 1 Manufcripts, the nature of which Henry Stephens has cfj**at wittily obferv'd. But not to ltay upon thofe things which can be only un- known to the Ignorant, I will only give an Example of one Edition of Cicero's Printed by Elzevir 1661.2nd over-looktby ScbrivelsHt, In which Edition the Various Readings of other Editions and Manufcripts are added in the Margin, to the great benefit of the Reader. Were the feme thing done in the Hebrew Exemplars, no man in his wits would think the Jews had ever been guilty of corrupting their Bibles 5 but out of thofe various Readings, every one might chafe the belt, as St. Jerom did, who in his Commentaries upon the Prophets frequently recedes from the Tranflation of the LXX Interpre- ters. Thus, mod addicted to the Ledtion of his Matters, he makes this obfervation in the fecond chapter of Hofeah, c. 12. Inftead of ' Forrcfl hi the Hebrew ,T:;, 7*gnar, the Septuagint had tr an flat edit Teftimony, miftaking Daleth for Reich; for taking away the Jod, and reading Daleth for Rcfch, the word is iy, or Teftimony. Again, upon the fifth chapter of the fame Pro- phet, v. 7. he blames the LXX Interpreters for reading ChafU Ruft, inftead of Chodcfchz. Month. Again, upon the ninth chap, v- 12. putting the Que/Hon why when the LXX Inter- preters tranflated the words, My flejh from themt he had ren- der'd it, When I depart from them ? He makes this Anfwer, In the place mention d, where we have tranflated it. Woe to you when I depart from you, the Septuagint and Theodotius have tranflated it, Wotothem, my fleih from them. And examin- ing the reafon offuch aftrange difference that in the Hebrew La:: gnage Behri, fignifies my flelh, but H*1tp3j Befitri, when I de- parted from them. For the fame caufe there was no reafon why St. Jerom fhould depart from the received Verfion of the Septuagint, *« 1) Mm n, where thy caufe, which St. Paul con- firm d by his Authority, but that his Copies prefented to him another Reading, inftead of >nx, My where, rvnXj I will he. The fame tranfpofition it is better to obferve in Dakeru, they pierced, and Rakedn, they danced, as a thing accidental, than with Vofftm to reproach the Jews, as if they had introduced that change into the TeKt of fet purpofe. Vofftm indeed fays true in faying that the Maaufcript> 7 8 iriticd Enquiries. of the Jews arc vitiated in federal places, an unhappy fete as well to che Greek and Latine as tothofe. So that George Horrjws deferves to be hifs'd at, when he oppofes to the moil Learned Vofftm the Decrees of Kings, Princes and Magiftrates, forbidding all other Translations to be read in the Churches, which were not corrected by the Hebrew Copies 5 as if fuch Decrees of Princes could preferve or reftore the Parity of the Antient Originals. Only ^ojfita is to be condemned for fo ftifly aflerting, that fame of thofeErrours were introduced of fee purpofe by the lews, in hatred of the Chriftians. Thus up- on the words of Gen. 49. IO. The Scepter fijatl not depart from Jtldah, nor a L.nv-giv:r from between his feet , till he come who is to bejer/t, he nukes this observation. This place the Jews have maimd not only in the GrJ^erfion, but alfo in all the Hebrew Mann- tfcripts, through the writing of D^n^, For Th&$ ** & obfervd by fzcral^wkfe Opinion is confirm9 d by the Samaritan Copy. But who does not well know, that before the invention of Points, the latter Jod fervd lbmetimes inftead of e, fometimes of *, which Letter, as well as thofe other Vowels call'd Ehevi, were care- lefly written, as the Scribes themfelves thought fit. And therefore whether it be read rfr'&i *s m trie Modern Mafo- retick Editions, or rto, as the Seventy Interpreters feem to have read it, the Jews are not therefore to be accus'd of Falsification, becaufe they retaind Jod in their Exemplars, And it may be probable alfo that the Greek Interpreters read it in their Exemplar, when the fenfe is the fame wThether It be pronounced with a JW, or without one 5 for that 3W is as often pronounc'dlike an e as an I But the Maforites, who conjedtur'd that it was to be read Schilo, retain'd the Antient Jodf, which docs not hinder but that with the Greek Interpre- ters we may now read Schclo, as fome of the Rabbies dp. Theft things Voffitu ought not to have been ignorant of, that fo often impeaches the Jews, and farther writes, that they who deny this place to have been corrupted by the Jews, obliterate all the Prophets. The condition of the Hebrew Text was the £me both before and after the coming of Chrift. Nor is there any reafon, if there were any depravations before the coming of Chrift, why Voffiiu (hould attribute them to the careleihets of the Scribes \ and as for thofe which were in- truded into the Hebrew Exemplars after the coming of Chrift, why Critical Enquiries* 70 why he fhould afcribe them to the wickednefs unci malice of the Jews. FoflUu too mach detracts from the Maforites of Ty ken.iSy when he calls them Barbarians and Strangers to their Native Language, from whom nothing could proceed but what was vicious, and void of reafon. For with Pojpw I readily grant them to have been no Prophets, nor do I doubt but that they were the firft Inventors of pointed Vowels and Tittles. But from thence to infer that they were Barbarians, DtScriftia. and unskill'd in the Hebrew Language, and that the Scriptures 7 :* were burden'd rather than adonfd with pointed Vowels and c' 5°' Tittles, was a piece of extravagance. If thofe things are true which Coffins boaftsof himfelf, that he had km above two thouiand Hebrew Manufcripts, it is not probable that he was altogether ignorant of the Maforetick Art. That was the In- duftry of the Jews of Tybe rias, who afcertain d the Heading of the Hebrew Text, as it was then publickly in practice by the aiTiftance of Points. It was call d the Afafora, becaufe it con- tain'd the Tradition or Method of Reading the Hebrew Text approv d by long ufe. The fame Judgment ought to be given concerning their Criticks, and of the Greek and Latine Books examin'd and corre&ed by Learned men. The Doctors of 7>- btr'uu were the Matters of the molt famous Academy among the Jews, who colleding the Exemplars and Copies of the Bible from all parts, publifh'd an Accurate Edition out of ail together. Nothing was here done by them that deferv'd to be blam'dor upbraided. And beiides, this corre&ion of theirs was no hindrance to others, but that they might examine the feme Exemplars again 5 and I believe the fame Exemplars may- be re-examin d in our Age, according to the Greek Veriion of the Septuagint, and the Latine Tranflation of St. ]trom\ infuch places where it fhall appear, that their Copies differed from the Maforetkks. Howrever, we will not accufe the Jews of FalfifTcation, as Fojfms does, becaufe their Manufcripts were not the fame with thofe, which the Greek Interpreters made ufe of in their Tranflation : But we muftfay this, that various Readings are no lefs tp be found in the Hebrew Exemplars, than in the Copies of the Greeks and Latines, and other Na- tions. Vofliw believes there can be nothing of folidity in the Traditions of the Rabbies, that are only propagated by the y^ ;^ Ear j Andfnch Tr*ditionsz faith he, vrhkb are only prcpapawdby 'he go Critical Enquiries. Fc is rcfo- the Ear, feldom out-Uft above two or three Ages. But what does k<*. this concern that Tradition, which is now in difpute? There is no Controverfie about the Oral Traditions of the Jews,which he acknowledges to be defervedly exploded by the more pru- dent j but only about the Mafora, which the verry Carraites, who condemn the greateft part of the Jewifh Traditions as Old Womens Fables, have however^ cordially embrac'd. If Vofinu rejects this, he mult of necefllty reject the Le&ion of the Chaldee, Syriack, and Hebraick, which have nothing of Antiquity. For to all thefe, in like manner as to the Hebrew, are added pointed Vowels, which make their Legion certain. Bat that Text, faith ^ojfiifs, is ?;nitc, which no man knows how to read or under ft and, as being defetlive in one half part, nor fur- mfl)d with other lrowels than the Enemies of Chrifi have added. Was the fame Codex or Text lefs defective in the days of the LXX Interpreters, when there appear'd no pointed Vowels at all in it ? Such is the nature of the Hebrew Tongue, as of all the other Eaftern Languages, that it makes a fliew of the feweft Vowels. So that the Reading of thofe Books which are Printed in the Hebrew, Chaldee, SyriackjmA Arabic!^, does not a little depend upon ufe, which as the Jews do, we here call Tradition, or the Mafora. Now from whom could that ufe of Reading the Hebrew Text be borrowed but from the Jews ? But, lays Voffuu, They are Enemies of the Chrijtian Faith. Have they therefore forgot to read their own Books, becaufe Jews f Certainly, unleis they were Jews, they would never read the Hebrew Text in their Synagogues. Neither could the Reading of the Books be derived by any other means to the Christians. Befides, the Seventy Interpreters were Jews, upon whom ^jf/j/^ altogether depends, and they followed no other Lection of the Hebrew Text, than what was receiv'd among the Jews by the publick pra&ice of thofe times. So that all the obloquy that Voffus throws upon the Hebrew Text, that it is defective in the half part, may be affirm'd of the He- brew Codex, which the LXX Interpreters made ufe of: Nor ought the Text fo much tc be accus'd, as the Idiom of the Hebrew Language ; and upon that account all the Eaftern Languages may be accused for half Languages. Neverthelefs VtfftMs inculcates it over again, even to loathfomnefs, that the Hebrew Text is mute, and by the acknowledgment of the Rabbins. Crttical Enquiries. 8 i Rabbins, a half Language, as being deftitute of true vowels- But what were the true ancient vowels of the Hebrew Text, he confeffes he does not onderftand, while he fo confident^ avers the Language to be deititute or them. Yet as he himtelf makes no queftion, the Ancient Hebrew Vowels arc Akphx He, Van, and Jod. To which St. Jerom makes an Addition or. others. But becaufe the Eaftern people rarely made uie of them in writing, the Criticks invented pointed vowels, for the more quick and ea(ie reading of the Scriptures. But Pbffiiu ipeaks very uncoheringly, not fo much as to the truth of thebufinefs, as out of a preconceived prejudice againft the Jews. C H A P. XI. Of the Samaritan Bible r, their Tar^umim, or Paraphra- fes. Concerning the Nation,Cuftoms and Religion of the Sa- maritans, who by the Jews are calPd duheans, the fa- cred Text relates many things in the Books of Kings, Chronicles, and Efdras, which afterwards Jofiphus explains more at large, an ample Teftimony in this affair.Inour Age Johannes MorinZ in his exercitations with which he has adorned the Hebrew Pentateuch, Hortinger in his Antiraoriiiian, Exercitations, Walton in his Prolegomena to the Samaritan Text, and other mod learned men have illuftrated the Samaritan affairs, and therefore patting by thofe things in (ilence, I proceed to their Texts, of which (bme of the Fathers as well Greek as Latin have made mention, together with the Scholia/1: of the Ro- man and Frankjurt Editions of the Septuagint. That the fa5i of the Samaritans, makes only ufe of the Pentateuch of Mofes I fuppofe is known to all For at what time they revolt- ed from the Jews, there was one Law among all the Hebrews, the other Books of Scripture, not being yet compos'd, or if r , r they were,not vet made publick. But what to think of that Sa- riuoTexo! mari-.n Copy, is a thing difficult to refolve. Morinm, who was the firft that publiihed it, lalhing out into the praife of it, af- ter his Cuftom extols it to the skies. For which reaibn he is M much 8 1 Critical Eihjnirie<. much blam'd by the learned : Efperially by Mm/mfy then Royal profeflbr of Hebrew at Paris , who very feverely Stig- matizes Morinws opinion of the Samaritan Pentateuch. After that Hottinger fet forth his exercitations upon the Samaritan Pentateuch in oppofition to Morwus. And both reprove a great many things' in him, which he does not feem toaflert, he having only praifed a little more than needed the Samaritan Text, which was then the iubjett of his difcourfe, after which manner prefacing upon his Edition of the Greek Bi- ble, he wonderfully upbraids the Hebrew Text. The moil moderate of all are Ludovictu Cape Has, and Brian Walton y who in many things do notrejed the credit of the Samaritan Pen- tateuch. But of all others Vflter of Armagh hastheworft opi- nion of it, who affirms that the Samaritan Text was of fet purpofe, and in many places new drefled and corrupted by one Defirheusy a certain Samaritan Heretick. Therefore the Samaritan Codex is one and the fame with the Hebrew, only few little variances excepted, as is obferved as well by Enfebius in his Chronicles, and by St. Jcrom. The Sa- in Proi. Go- maritans, faith St. Jerom, write the Pentateuch of Mofes7 with bat. juft fo many Letters,only varying in the (hape and in the points. De emends, which words of St. Jerom ji ofcph Scaligcr feems not to have m'' underftood, when he affirms, that the Samaritans read the Pentateuch with juft as many Letters as the Jews, neither more or left. For St. Jerom himfelf fometimes obferves the various reading of both Codex's ; as in his Hebrew Queftions upon Gene/Is, and his Commentaries upon the Epiftle to the Gatatiansy wherefore St. Jerom when he affirms the Jewifh and Samaritan Exemplars to be alike in all tilings, intended only by thofe Words to diftinguifli the Samaritan Codex from the Creek and Latin Tranflationsj In regard the firfl is the pure and fimple Hebrew context, which cannot be laid of the Greek and Latin Bibles. In the fame manner fpeaks Euftbkmy upon whom St. Jerom altogether depends That the Samaritan differs from the Hebrew Pentateuch, in fome things, is paft all difpute, as may appear by the Pariiian, and Englifh Poly- glottons in Print. Which Copy the noble Peter d Valle, ob- tained from the Samaritans : And afterward Achilles Harlay Sancy, the Kings Embaffador in Turkey, caus'd to be brought to Parity and 1 aid up in the Library of the Fathers of the Con- gregation Critical Enquiries, P, j gregation of the Oratory near the Lotft, And that there are other Copies of the fame Pentateuch in other Libra- ries of Europe y the Epiftles of PercfciW) Pdcr, k Valle, Combtrus, and Ale under to MortMHSy apparently Tell iiie. Jerom Alcar der thus wrote in the year 1628. I would have you to under- ltand, that there is here in the Vatican Library another Smmmrkm Copy of the Pentateuch, written in the fame 5****- rnnn Letters, which Sciph, of Pious Memory, Cardinal of S/< y3bwr were the Jewilh Copies of the Bibles now in ufe to be entertain'd, becaafe they do not exa&ly agree with thofe which the Seventy Interpreters made ufe of in their Transitions. We muft therefore aflert, that the Copies of the Samaritan and Jewilh Pentateuch, are real and authen- tick Copies, though there may be fome difference between them, as Anflotle s Homer plainly appears to be the fame Ho- obfeaions mer which was examind by ArjjtarchHs,ahhou°\\ they cfoagree againfl 1 m all things. „ ^ \ However, there were not wanting fome, efpeciall ■ among rf-/ the Proteitants, who thought the Codex of the Samaritans to :..x:. M 2 5>^ Critical Enquiries. be rejefted, led thereto chiefly by this reafon,becaufethe true Worli rip of God, the Succeffion of the Priefts and Doctors re- mairfd only among the Hebrews, not among the Samaritans, and therefore the Copies of the Law were to be taken from them alone, as being the true People of God. But I wonder, that the Proteftant Divines, who make fo flight of the Autho- rity of the Church, and the Succeflion of Priefts and Doctors, mould enforce thefe Arguments. For in this particular, the Authority of the Church is not greater than of the Synagogue. Who can be ignorant that the Authority of the Church has not been able to make good the Purity of its own Exemplars, or to juftifie them from being clear from all manner of faults, when the Verlion of the Seventy Interpreters, of which the Eaftern and Weftern Church made uie, has not been entire from the very time oiorigen} However, I readily grant that the Hebrew Exemplar is to be chiefly preferr'd, for the Chri- ftians borrow'd the Books of Scripture from the Jews, and not the Samaritans. Only the Authority of any Aflembly what- ever does not make a Book to be without Errour or Fault,but only declares it to be receiv'd and fit for practice. There are alfo other faults with which the defenders of the Hebrew Text load the Samaritan Copies : For firft, they en- endeavour to prove it mutilated by the Example of fome few words, and then they fay, that fome words are foifted in- to the place of others. They alfo object the differences of the Hebrew and Samaritan Texts one with another; as alfo the carelefnefs of the Scribes, who confound the Letters Akph and j4in. He and Hetkx and other Letters refembling in form. But they kill themfelves with their own weapons, when the fame things may be objected again ft the Hebrew- Texts them- riaa texT felves. In this the Patrons of the Jewifli Text are deceived, vindicated, becaufe that out of a preconceiv d Opinion of fome of the Jews, they think it to be free from all Errour 5 which is to be only affirm'd of the Originals. We have already fhew'd you that the manner of writing of the Hebrew Context, was very inconftant, and perhaps more free than among the Samaritans, who never hunted after the Trifles of Jewifli Allegories. Even in this the Samaritan Codex's excel the Jewifli, for that many things which Superftition foifted into the one, are wanting in t|e other. To this we may add, that the Hand and Character ef Critical Enq r. t /'f,Si:* now not ^ear r'je ^me fi^ure m c^e Vulgar Alphabets of the tr'ltat. in' Saniaritans,becaufe inprocefs of time the Letter was alter d. Marin. But Rabbi A'^mas lets down in his Alphabet two forts of Critical Eitqtdries. of this Letter 7V, one of which refembles the n\ of a Cro& y^ro/w Aleander likewife writing to Morinns concerning the Shekels of that Nation which he had lien in RomejMS t ex preJlions upon one piece of money 5 Ton jhaU fee apon both fi the Coin the Letter Tail, in the form of a Crofs, wl ich be iy written //j;/.f X, degenerated at length into this Form &* the lame effect Perefcius wrote to Marinas. Therefore w oneand the feme Character at the fame time in divfcrs j admits of various forms,what wonder is it that this Lett© moil antientof all, after ib. many Ages, efpecially among Leve raland different Nations, ihould vary from his firft figure ' Who fo ignorant,as not to know that the Roman Letters, after the Goths invading Italy, loft their Original and Antient Form, neither were they the lame with thofe Letters which were the true Antient Letters, and werecall'd Lombardkk] But of this fufficient has been (aid : Now let us come to the Samaritan Targumim or Paraphrafes. Becaufe, according to the Admonition of St. Paul, All things that Arc written, are written for our vifirullion, in Antient time both the Old and New Teftameiu were never written in any other than the Mother Tongue, to the end the Scriptures might be read by the Vulgar People. And yet in our Age there is a certain Parifian Divine, who has ventur'd to affirm, that the Books of Mofes Law feem to be compos'd in a Language which was not then familiar with the People 5 and what is hardly to be credited, that mod Learned Doctor has feigned a hundred monftrous Stories of the Hebrew Language, of its Characters and Grammar, of which Mofcs was the firft Author. But the Paraphrafes of the Sacred Text, which the lews and Samari- tans compird in their Mother Tongues, fo foon as the Hebrew Language ceas'd to be familiar, plainly demonftrate that the Scriptures were written in the Language of the Country. Whence arofe that Verfion wrote in Syro-chaldaick^ not unele- gant neither, which denotes its Antiquity. This is put forth in the Parifian and Englifh Verfions,and feems to have been com- posed by the Samaritan Doctors, to be read in the Schools, and to the end that all the words of the MofaickJLaw might be read, when the ufe of the Hebrew Language it felf was only among the Learned. The Samaritan Paraphrafe exprefles almoft ver- batim the whole Hebrew Context ? from which it fwerves in N but 89 The Scrip* ture I wrote in the co mon Lin - guage of the Coun- try. Dr. Af&t. <> o Critic ai Enquiries. but few things, moft efpecially in the names of Rivers, Cities and Countries, which he accommodates for the moft part to the time prefent. Nor does he feem to be free from all pne- conceiv'd Opinion, for which reafon he tranflates the word Elohim Angels. Thus where we read that man was tranflated ;>/ the tikenefs fG'od, lie renders it, in the likenefs of Angels 5 and a little before, iniread of thefe words, Te frail be as Gods, as it is in the Hebrew, he renders the words, Yefa&be as Angels. Sometimes he confines the Hebrew words to his ownfenfe; as inftead ofthofe words in the Latine Edition, The Spirit of God was carried upon the fice of the Waters, he trar.fhtes it, Blew upon the Waters. But the La fine Interpreters of the Samaritan,feems nor Co accurate in all things, efpeually in thofe places where he differs from the Hebrew Samaritan, which in fome places wants correction. There was alfo a Greek Verfion of the Samaritan, for the ufe of the Samaritans,that us d the Greek Language. Of which Verfion the Antient Fathers have fo frequently made mention TnExeratat. in their work& that Morions affirms it to have been done by in Pent, ^a- them. But in fo faying, he is extreamly deceived. Jfaac Coffins is alfo in an Errour, v\ ho denies that there ever was any Greek Verfion of the Pentateuch among the Samaritans-, but that all thofe Quotations by the Fathers of the Samaritan Codex,were taken out of Otrigtos HexapU, illuftrated with Scholiafts, where are various LecYions of the Samaritan Exemplars. I do not deny but that Origen has cited many things by way of Com- ment in the Margin of his Hcxapla. But the Fathers who make mention of the Samaritan Codex, cite the Tranflation of the Pentateuch, which was read by the Samaritans, to whom the Greek Tongue was more familiar. And indeed there is no pro- bability that it could ctherwife be 3 juft as the Samaritan that (pake Arabick,had a Verfion of the Pentateuch into Arabick. Yet Matfins fufpedts there was no other Greek Verfion for the Greek Samaritans, than the Verfion of the LXX Interpreters. Tho it is much more likely that the Samaritans after the Ex- ample of the Hellenift Jews, made a new Verfion for them- telves, that is to be us'd in Schools and private Houfes 5 the Hebrew Samaritan Context being always referv'd for the ufe of the Synagogue. To which we may add,that the Ver- fion cited by the Fathers under the name of the Samaritan, dif- fers ( h Enduines. c) i fers in Come things from the Translation of the Seventy ,as ap- pears by the Chronicle oft ntcb*. At. i/ins alio telHries that Symm ichits being an Efadoni te, was for n > other reafon indue'd to make a new Translation of the Sacred Text in the Creek, but out ofmeer hatred to the Samaritans, whofe Opinions he had deferted. This Greek Transition agrees in fome things with the former Samaritan Veriion, where it differs from the Hebrew Samaritan Text, as if the Greek had been taken from thence. But in regard they frequently differ among themfelves, there can be nothing certainly arHrm'd in reference to this par- ticular. All which is ealily illuitrated by Examples. Thus o\n. 49. 23. where the Latine Interpreter rightly expreifes the words, both of the Hebrew, as of the Hebrew Samaritan, Hi ving Dans, the Author of the Greek Verfion of the Samari- tans tranflates the lame words ***•#' wa-foh which agrees with the Samaritan and the Chaldee Paraphrafe. Soon after we read, v. 24. as well in the Jewiih as Samaritan Hebrew Context, Beetbany which in the Latine Edition is rendred in Forti-y in the Greek Verfion of the Septuagint, £•/*/« Fonundine ^ but the Interpreters of both the Samaritan Verfions, have rendred the wordw profwidirate. Which Interpretation does not exprefs the Grammatical fenle, as they call it, yet it may fo happen, that that fenfe is commonly receiv'd by the Samaritans, 6>it. 5. 19. We read in the Samaritan Verfion, and in both the He- brew Texts, pro Deo, which the Greek Interpreter of the Sa- maritans renders Junto Denm, as it 'he had mace ufe of a Copy quite different from all the Modern Exemplars-, and yet R. Saadi.u Qaon has the fame Interpretation in his Arabick Para- phrafe, who neverthelefs had no other Exemplars than what we ufe at this day, Exod. 9. 22. Inflead of the word Flies, which Is read in the Latine Edition,in the Greek Samaritan Verfion the word CVcm> is made ufe of, the Interpreter mi/taking the word Oreb for Erobj which fignifies a confus'd multitude of Flies or little Infects. Which Errour may be imputed to the Inter- preter, by reafon of the various manner of reading, becauie of the want of Points in the Hebrew Samaritan Copy. The Samaritans have alfo an Arabick Verfion of the Penta- teuch, which was compil'dfor the ufe of them that fp.ike the Arabick as their Natural Language. l:or tho the Samaritans, Hke the Jews, read no other than the Hebrew Text 0. 'h N 2 Law3 ni Critical Eihjub.e;. Law, in their Synagogues, yet have they feveral Translations for the feveral Provinces belonging to it. The famous Pertfciw had a third fort from the Samaritans, but defective, wherein the Arabick Verfion was written in a Samaritan Character, of which there are fome Copies however written in a Samaritan Character. Hotwtgcrhas inferted the 4th chap, of Gcnefis out of a certain fragment of that Arabick Tranflation,both in Arabick and Latine,in the third Book of his Bibliothec* Orientate. The mod Learned Walton makes mention alfo of the fame, which Vfljer of Armagh communicated to him. The Samaritans have alio other Arabick Books, written out however in a Samaritan Character. Thus J. Scaligcr makes mention of a Samaritan Chronicle,the Epitome of which Hottingtr has rendred into La- tine with this Title, An Epitome of the Chapters of the Book^ of Jofhua. Becaufe it begins from the Death of Mofes, and the DiEmaidat* Conduct of Jojhnah, and extends, as Scaliger obferves to the : * ReigRS of the Antomnes. Nor do the Samaritans want the Hi- flory or the Book of Jojhua, it felf, which however does not agree in all things with the Hebrew Text 5 nor do they look upon it as Canonical Scripture,in regard they acknowledge no other for Authentick Divinity, but the Law of Mofes. I (hall not trouble my felf with the Lexicons which are now in ufe for the Samaritan Language, of which Perefcim teftifies him- f elf to have one, in his Epiftle to Morinns. Peftelhts alfo makes mention of theirGrammar. Which Writings were they Printed, would give great Light into the Samaritan Language, and how the Samaritans pronounce the Hebrew,and what Significa- tion they give to fome more difficult words. CHAP. XII. Of the Bilks of the Sadduces and Karraeans. Bibles of £~^ Ertain it is that the Sect of the Sadduces in the time of the Sad- V^-/ Chrift's being upon Earth, was the moft noble Sect, and duces. one which had the chief management of the Publick Affairs among the Jews. But after the Deftruction ofjerftfaiem. and that the Jews were fcattered into feveral parts of 'the World, that famous Sect became fo entirely extinct, that there is not die leaft footftep of it. There only remain'd the Sect of the Phari fees* Critical Enquiries* 93 Pharifees whefe Room the Rabbanifts and Talmud ifts,vulgar- \y Co call'd, in after times ufurped. For they are the (amc with the Pharifees whole Traditions the Jews io greedily i wallow'd, and ador'd, as if proceeding from the mouth of God. Therefore the Scriptures of the Old Teltament came to the Chriftians V< v.,; it from the Pharifees, and not from the Sadduces. But in this 5 IjdMc Coffins, and leveral others feem to have been deceiv'd , St JirroMPihiimelf being their guide and direcler, while they affirm that the Sadduces in imitation of the Samaritans, transla- ted no more than the Uve Books of Mofes. For what reafon was there why the Sadduces, who were but a late Seel among the Jews, after the Volumes of the Prophets were conrlrrnd by the publick practice of Reading, ihould only believe in Mo- fes. Therefore there is no queflion to be made but the Sad- duces receivd all the Books of Sacred Text, or*tt7« rk y* yojtyLvtf*, all that was written, rejecting only the Traditions of the Pharifees, which feem'd to them to be only the Figments of idle perfons. More notorioufly do they miftake, who believe the CArrdtans to have followed the Samaritans in this particular- And which feems almoft incredible, Ifaac Coffins, otherwise a Learned Perfon, places the Cantons among the Ebiomtes, No* uireans, and other Seels of the Jews, who retaining the Cere- monies of the Mofaick Law, believ'd the Gofpel. Therefore it behoves us to relate in fhort what the Seel: oftheC^rr^^j was, and what was their Opinion concerning the Sacred Scriptures. The word Karrai, from whence the Carrtans derive their name, fignifies a man exercisdin the Reading of Scripture. But that name,which was formerly reverene'd, became to be hated, by reafon of the Sect of the Carraans, that firit began to fpread it felf toward the beginning of the 10th Century. They like the Rabbanifts allow of twenty four Books of Scripture with the Tittl'd Vowels, and other Maforetick Marks. In expound- ing the Sacred Scriptures they follow the Maforetick Lection every where, efteeming it no lefs than Aben Eur a, Kimchi, or any other of the Jewifh Grammarians-, and in imitation of them are great fearchers after Grammatick Quirks. Therefore was Buxtorf horribly miftaken where he writes, We have read of the Carra?ans, who rejecting all the Traditions, only adhere to the Text, that they not only differ extreamly one with another , as to the under- / . ftandingand Expo/ition of things, bnt alfoin the Reading of Scrip- ture, as refnfmg points which they look^npon as a piece of Oral Law, 04 cr'ttiCdl Enquiries. or Tradition. Buxtorf had had a quite contrary Opinion con- cerning the Csm*mii he had lighted upon thole Books,which he feems not to have been furmi-i'd withal. For they do not altogether reject die Talmud and Traditions of the Jews, but they prefume not to compare them with the SacredScriptures, as the Rabbanilts. And therefore laying thofe afide, they en- ceavouv after the manner of the Criticks, who arc free from ail prejudice, to draw forth that which (eems to them to be the tmefi lenfe of Scripture, by comparing one place with ano- ther, taking little notice of the JTalmudLck Expoficions, which many times make large Excuriions far from the matter. And therefore if the Jewifh Kabbanifls (peak ill at any time of the Carrtans^ as Corrupters ol the Biblicl^ Context, it proceeds out of meer Envy and Malice» not from heat of Difpute. All which things may be more perfpicuoully feen in the Books of the Carraam themfelves. Aaron t\\t Son of Jofeph, of the Seel: of the Carratans, who wrote the Commentaries upon the Law, An 1 294. at the be- ginning of his Book, deplores the lamentable ftate of the Jews, and their being fcattered into all parts of the World, averting that Villon and Prophecy was taken from them, and that they Iiad almoft forgotten the Hebrew Language. But, faith he, ft- cral Doctors appear d Among the Jfraelites, tvIjo fcarched out the Scripture, which contains the 24 Books in ufe amorq us. There- fore the Carrtans do not agree with the Samaritans upon this point,but with the Rabbanilts allow the whole Scripture to be Canonical and Regular. And they alio frequently call it a Pro- phecy, thereby to diftinguifh it from thofe other Traditions, which the rell of- the Jews are not afraid to obtrude upon us. In the fame place he rebukes the Cabbalick Doctors, who ma- ny times propound for Scripture the Figments and Fables of their own brains, and, to uie his own exprelltons, depend *$q?j [he Cabbala, and tattle idle ftorics, and boafi their Cabbala vr Tra- dition to be dbove {he Scripture. However, the Carr&axs do not reject all manner of Tradition, but tliey feparate the ridiculous *nd uncertain from that which, lias fome appearance of Truth; as the fame Carman openly teftifies in thefe words; Nor let *;;y one object to as, that we are Enemies to $he Writing, Reafon and DoUrinc deliver d to us by (Mar Ancestors. For this Tradition winch wu make ufe of was not lojt, and is comprehended in true Scripttm- .IS Critical End S. C.5 Scripture, not feat ed in variety J ccncernin: which the J ill things agree. This is that Tradition which caus'd them to approve by their Authority the Maforetick Scripture received by all the reft of the Jews- with the Points and Accents $ which will be ftill more apparent from rhe above quoted Commentary of the Carraan. It is a wonderful thing how (iudicus th b rf Modern Le&ion and Grammar, when they \ r oferu] to tl Explication of Scripture. Sometimes he appeals to the moil celebrated Mailers of the Jewilh Rabbamfts, to confirm his Opinion by their Tef-i monies ; iometimes hercfetcs them, eipecially theCabbalifick, and Allegorical Do&ors.Bw n ofteaerhe has recourfc to the Analogy of Grammar, than to the Teftimonies of otkers. Thus at the beginning of his Ex- pofition of Cenefis, he has thefe words \ Berefchith t< of the fane form as Scherith, only that Aleph is not fronotned. Now it is known that the rwr^Refchith is a word that fyntfies timc,and that it dtnotcs the time that precedes, or that which is fir ft of all '-, as Lxod. c. 23. The fir ft of the Fruits of thy Land \ he adds ill this place, that Refchuh is a name of time $ then he reproves a certain Rabby by the name of R. Jefua, who believes that the Angels were from the beginning ; and oppofes to him the Opi- nioitof the Adifnick^Doctors, that the kneels were not created the firft day, and makes it out from die words ofScripture,that there was nothing that day created ; and that this was the common Opinion of the Interpreters. Upon the word y*rr\ Vihaarns, Otmu and the Earth 5 heobferves that the Vku prefix d to this word, ought to be taken like the Phc Rafkumm, of the Arabick Lan- guage, and that it is not a fervant to the word, but the begin- ning of the word. That the name of Ehbm is proper to rhe Judges, to which he adds, that after the word Eloah was found out, then we under/rood Elohim to be a Plural, and then eaffc it niS3n |W?j Lefiion Tif carat h,a word of honow or ornament. He explains the properties & genuine fignification o(Tohu,Boi^y and Coflxch, and illuftrates thofe by other places of Scripture, 'and refutes a namelefs perfon, who believes the word Cofhech. to iignifie the Elementary Fire. He fays, that Meracheperh is of the Dagefh Conjugation or Piel. He expounds the force of this Sentence according to the Letter, and refolves many dif- ficulties arifing as well from the Context, as from the Expofi- tion o6 Critical Enquiries. tion of the Interpreters. Upon the word rVr1?, he makes thefe Obfervations, the Letter He in the word tmtl*bjs meer- ly additional, and there is the fame account to be given of all words ending in He, whole Accent is M%kel\ Where we read in the Latin Interpretation, Let us make m*n,and in the Hebrew Text rv^yj, Nagnafeh, who reproves fome Interpreters, who thought it was to be expounded, /tp/7/ m*ke, as if it were writ- ten mryx> becaufe in ibme places the Letters Ethan, Ale^h, Jod, Tan, and Nun, are chang'd one into another ; which Rule the Can-tan does not difapprove, but only here denies it to have anyeffeft. Upon the word jrD^riE, Mechelbehen, Of their Fat, which is writ with a Tzjtri under Beth,he makeschis note ; this word is mark'd with a Tueri under Beth, becaufe it is in the Plural, to diftinguifh it from ES^n, Chclbam, their Fat, which is written with a Scheva, and it happens to be without zjod, which is a fign of the Plural number, as in the words *] *?V% ^!33> Becot Phagnalec, In all thy works '-, and in many other Examples of the (ame nature. In the third Chapter of Genefs he obferves upon the word rO'X, Where? that it is read with a Dagtfh between the latter Caph, for ornaments fake. Now by the quoted Examples, I fuppofe there is no perfon but may eafdy colleft, that the Carraans obferve the Modern Reading of the Hebrew Text, and depend wholly upon the Maforetick Copies, accurately obferving the niceties of point- ed Vowels and Accents. Frequently in this Carraan Author are read thefe words, Great Pathach, Little Pathach, Hateph Kamets, Cholem, Sheruc , for fo he Writes it, and no Schnrecy and many of the like nature, which are the Inventions of the Jewifh Grammarians. • Nor does he fhew himfelf lefs expe- rienced in Philofophy and Theology, than in Grammar. But I gafs by thefe things, as being far from our purpofe 5 only I will lay fomething concerning their Theology, left any fhould hereafter confound the Carraans with the Samaritans -, as if both did not acknowledge the Immortality of the Soul Therefore The Thee- Up0n thefe words, Let us make man in our likenefs , the Carman % Marram * ^° °^en a^ea^ QUOted, obferves, That the Soul of man con- fifled of fuperiour things, but the Body of the form of inferiour things -, for which he brings this reafon, For that the Soul of manfubfifts no otherwife than the Angels? and adds at* laft, the World Critical I n^uirhs. 97 World fall be for the file of the Soul. Much to this pur- pofe was oblm*\l by chat Jew; who over-viewed theConftan- tinopolitan Edition of the Book Ji ■• I:or in the firft page of that Book, Hone, (kith he, it *ppc*rs, that the Camrans are not the Sadduccs of our Agc\ for they acknowledge Reward, Punijhwent, and Re furred, ion. Laftly, Tliis Carr,zan, doing the part of a Learned Interpre- ter of the Scripture, reproves exceedingly the method ofthe Cabbaliftick Rabbies, who follow the meer trifles of Alle^< ties. In the fame manner he moft ilaarply rebuk U thoi things which are feigned concerning the Tree of Life \ Every one, fays he, has taken up that Argument as a Parable 5 but then proceeding, know, fays he, that all which is there written is literally true. And then as an Example of their Allegories, he produces what thofe Cabbaliftick Doctors dream vulgarly concerning the Serpent : They Jay, fays lie, That the Serpent was as big as a Camel, and that Samuel rode upon him. And that God fporting with the Camel, rode upon him alfo. They farther te\\ \l$,We nrnft not read Tunicas -py, the Coats of the Skin, but Tunicas TU^ the Coats of Light. Which ridiculous Expofl- tions he Utterly exclaims againft. They depend upon their An- ceftors for moft of thofe Expofitions, and others like to them. And thencurfing thofe idle Interpreters that abufe their own lei- fur e ; Woe be to him that impudently undertakes fuch a work. He alfo doth refufe feveral Readings which thofe Do&ors of their own brains frivoloufly intrude into Scripture. To that pur- pofe he rebukes certain Interpreters, who in the firft words ofGenefis for ina, with a Refch, read n-o, with a Daleth. There are fome, faith he, that change Refch into Daleth, but it is a fittion of their little brains. In the fame manner he girds them feverely that divide the word Bohu into two words, as if it were to be read in the Text Bo Hu. And thus much for the Seil of the Carrtam : Now let us return to the Jewiih Rabbanifts, from whom we made this digrefHon. O CHAP. * r,g Critical Enquiries. CHAP. XIII. Of the Targuttim of the Jews, or the Tranflat'wm of Sacred Scripture, anJfrfl of the Chaidee Va-aphrafes. TH E Hebrew Language remain'd fo long entire and fa- miliar to the Jews, while the Prophets abode in y*r*/i- lem, who made their Sermons to the People in the Hebrew Tongue, which was then underftocd by all. But being carried Captive to Babylon, they forgot fheir own Language, at leaft all the vulgar people. Wherefore upon their return to Jew- falem, they could not understand the Law of Mofes, but with the ailiftance of the Rabbies, who interpreted the fame in the Babylonifh or Chaidee Idioms. To which purpofe we read in Nchemiah, that Efdr as made him a Pulpit, whence he fpaketo the People*, and, together with the Levitcsyread in the Law of Goddiftinttly, and with a loud voice, to be under jtood: And after that, Then [pake Nehemiah and Efdras the Frieft, and the Levites and Scribes interpreting to all the people, as it is moft probable,in the Chaidee Language. Which Cuftom is ftill retain'd by the Jews in our Agedifpers'd over the face of the Earth. Thus the Spanim, German, Turkifh, Grecian, Perfian, and other Jews, make ufe of Spanim, German, Turkifh, Grecian, and Perfian Interpretations of the Text. And from the fame Fountain! am apt to believe that all the Translations and Paraphrafes of the Bible now found among the Jews dedue'd their Original. For it is not probable that it mould be the Original of that Tranflation which goes under the name of the Seventy Interpreters. For the Jews of Alexandria, who fpake Greek, made for their own ufe a Greek Verfion, which afterwards fell into the hands of the Chriilians. As for the Chaidee Para- phrafes, they were made at Jcrufakm, and other places near adjoyning, whence they were tranfmitted into places farther remote- Thofe Chaidee Paraphrafes are highly efteem'd by the Jews even in thefe ktter times, efpecially thofe which are attributed to Onkelos and Jonathan. But as to the Authority and Antiquity of thofe Jews, the Learned are at variance among themfelves -, and therefore becaufe no man has handled that point more accurately than Elias the Levite, a perfon long vers'd Critical Enauiritfn 99 vers'd intheChaldee Tongue and YYriters,it will notbeamiis to tranflate fo much of his words aslhall be necellary for our purpofe out of his Preface before hisChaldee Lexicon- When the jews wtre carried away captive ou QJ their own Land into Babylon, they forgot thur own I *#y** the Boj^o/ Ne- hemiah tejlifies. So that at the knowledge of the Raboies And per- fons skilful m the Law, was chiefly publicly in the BabylonrJj Lan- guages. In th.it tht Babylomjh Talmud was composed, further- more^ during the time of the fecondl'emple their Language was for the moft part Babylomjh ; which when Jonathan the S - /'Uzziel became fen fible uj \ he wrote a Chaldee Paraphraje of the eight Pro- phets for the ufeoj the People. Onkelos aljo wrote another of the Law. But the \ Hagiogrnphy was not tr art fitted till long af- ter, m the Language of the Jei'llfalein Talmud, at I jhall af- terwards relate. In the mean time let hs examine fome things that concern the Paraphrafts themfelves. Tirft, why it is fad in Ge- mara, that Jonathan was long before Onkelos. How Jonathan uw one of the Difciples of Hillel, who flourifhed about a hundred years before the Deftruclion of the Temple ; bat that Onkelos was the Son of TitttS who deftroyd the Temple. And if it were fo, why Jona- than fir ft paraphrased the Prophets, and did not begin with the Law. Our Anceftors of bleffed memory have reported indeed, that he in- tended to have explained the Hagiographers, but that a voice fpake to htm from Heaven, faying, Is it not enough that thou haft laid open the Myfteries of the Prophets ? Wouldft thou pro- ceed to open the Myfteries of the Holy Ghoft ( that is, of the Books of the Hagiographers ?) For that reafon he did not para- phrafe upon the Hagiography. Bat then another difficulty offers it felf, why he did not expound the Law ? efpec tally feeing a Cabba- liftic^Dottor Rabbt Menahem Rekanatenfis has wrote w the Se- ction MatZOrang, that he alfo tranflated the Law, where he has thefe words, And he fern a live Bird. For thefe a»e his words. I found in tht Tar gum of Jonathan the Son of Z/cuW, of happy memory, and he let go alive Bird-, nor does he write other- wife in many other places. If this be true, ic is a wonder how it fhould be loft in ib lhort a time, and not the lea ft remain- der of that Tranilacion be to be ieen. We may alio enquire why Onkelos did not tranflate the Hagiographers, and why t'ley continu'd unparaphas'd till the time of a c^riainHierofolymlte, who explained them paraphraftically.i^r nho he was,or what his O 2 na 100 Crilicd Enquiries. name was , cr rrhcn he livd, is not certain. Thus the H'wrcfolynt':- tan Interpreter irbo translated the Law, is to us unknown, --rbcrher he he the fame who interpreted the Hagiographers, or whether they ■were two Interpreter* that liv'd at two fever al times. Some fay that Aqilila theProftlue was the Author of both Par aphrafes ; others there are afrm Joleph the Blind to be the Author of both. And in truth 1 have found in Bcrefchith Kabba taken out of the Hagio- rraphers and Prophets under Aquila's n&nc, as that Verfe, Life Fnv. i:. and Deaths tin the power of the Tongue, &C. See in the Root Niarztar. Alfo upon the fe words of Ezcchiel ; The Brides of their Adulteries. Aquila"'s 1 argum reads, NmH}% HK^Tj {that is, 7,-nAfti':' -ri /.»:■. thcAnticKt Where.) tee the Root ntf^r. Thus Aquila alfo interprets feme of the Garments of which Ifaiah makes mention. But there is no mention of Rabbi Jofeph-f Paraphrafe in Berefchith Rabba, for he was net yet alive. But there- is mention of it in Gemara upon certain Verfes of the - Bro]>hets and Hagiographcrs, which are not found in the Ferfcs of the Law. Know however, that the Language of Qnkelos's Paraplwafe differs in no- thing from the Language of Jonathans. For both- fpcal^the Babylo- mjh Idiom, as do the Book* of Daniel andEtdlUS', yet their Lan- guage is much more pure and elegant than that of the refi of the Targums. As for the Hierofolymitan Targum, it differs very ?nuch from the Babylonifli, in regard it is compos d of fever al Lan- guages, the Greeks, the Roman, and the Per fan. And becaufe fo many Languages arc found to be in it, this mixture J 'cents to me to have begun from that time, when thofe Empires had the Dominion ever Jcrulalem. Therefore is that Language caJfd the Jerufalem Targum *, for that in that fame mixture Rabbi Jonathan composed the Jerufalem Targum about 300 years after the deft ruction of jerufalem. At what time every body knows that Jerufalem was fubjeci to thofe Nations, as we find in the Booh^of Joiephus Goro- Ilidas. But at what time the Jerufalem Targum was composed up- on the Law and the Hagiography, is unknown tous^ whether before or after the Hierofolymitan Targum was fimjked ; I am induced to believe that theJJicroJolymitanTzYguni was never extant but only Xp- ert Job, the Proverbs, andVi"A\X\$, c fthe jews, [relieve the::- 1; pliraies to have been made about the time that Chrift Iiv d upon Earth: Ozhers think them later than Qrigen or St. Jet bec.iule they neither make mention of them. Yet it might that in thole very times they were known* t > the BabyToniih Jews, where they feem to have had their Original ; but n being yet redue'd into one body, they were not madecom- monly publick : And thus I have lighted upon fome Exem- emplars of the Pentateuch, to which there was added to every word of the Hebrew Text an Exposition in French; yet a Trench Paraphraie upon the Law oiMoJis was never yet cited by any of the Jews. And therefore it is very probable that cer- tain Doctors of the Babylonian Schools expounded the Hebrew- words in Chaldee for the benefit of the people, out of which in procefs of time an entire Paraphrafe wascompil'd. And to make me io believe the purity of the Chaldee Language wherein they are written induces me. Winch is to be under- itood of the Paraphrafe only that goes under the name of On- if/kr. upon the Law oEMofes^ and of that other upon all the former and latter Prophets, which are attributed to Jonathan: Fpr .that;fiflae Jonathan, or whoever elfe were the Author of the Paraphrafe upon the Prophets* did by no means compofc that other, which is publiiffd by certain Jews under Jonathans name; fo different is the 1 tile of both •, which I wonder was not taken notice of by Haetms, and other Criticks, who con- found this fame Pfado-Jonathan with die True and Antient Jo- nathan$& if one and the fameAuthor had paraphrase upon the Pentateuch and the Prophets. But as for tliat Itory of the Tal- mudick Doaors of the Voice that fpoke from Heaven to deter Jonathan from explaining the Hagiographers, ti.cjre is no wife man i qi critical Enquiries. man but takes tl .em for the dreams of the Jews. But firft we are to taken »tice of -what has been obferv'd concerning the diver- I ;v of the Babylontth and Hieroiblymitan Dialedfcs by the fame Elias^who teems to let little or no value upon the reft of die Paraphrases which are extant upon the Hagiographers, be- caufe they were written by men of no name. To which we mayadd, diat their Authors frequently fwerve from the words ofthe Hebrew Text, foiiting in the room of thole Talmudick Fables and Stories ofthe fame nature. Qxkelos end Jonathan (tick much clofer to the fenfe of Scrip- ture, and yet fometimes they are nor. fo very careful to exprels ivvtrbatim, as the Leviteteitiries- But, faith he, The Pa- t ipkrafts do not always objerve the Rules of Grammar. For fome- times they render the PratcrpcrfeSt tence by the Future, and the Fa- titrt by the Prater per feci: tence, and fometimes the Participle by the Fr jit erper feci tence and Future. Sometimes they interpret a Verfe at they judge ihojt ay ce able to the Targumick^ Language, not fo n itch minds» g the Bibitck^Context. To this Eli as adds the Tefti- man. of Salomon Jfaac, whom we erroneoufly call jarchi, who obferves Oxkelos not to be very curious of the Grammar of Scripture,but to have followed his fenfe and judgment in many things-, and fometimes thole Paraphrafts have omitted not on- ly whole \vords,but whole fentences. For indeed it is the com- mon Fate of all Paraphrafters, who tranflate Books out of one Language into another, to follow the freeft method of tranlla- ting. So that if there occur any difference from the Tranila- tion, it is prefently to be referr'd to its Caufe and Original $ and we are diligently to enquire, what might have beefi the Product of the various Readings of the Codex's, and what might be alter'd according to the Fancy of the Interpreter. However, this is chiefly to be taken notice of, that the Wri- ting of the Chaldee Paraphrafe was heretofore very confus'd and diforder'd : For there was no Analogy of Orthography, the Letters Vam and .W being without any diitindion made ufe of, and inferted into words without any fignirication. In like man- ner, the Author of the Chaldee pointing obferv'J no method in putting theTicles to the Chaldee Context, as Elias the Le- vite plainly teftiries, who was the firft that polifrfd the Chaldee Language. Now how difficult it was to frame a Chaldee Grammar, I rather chafe to (hew from the words of Ettas himielf, than my own. Many Critical Enquiries. i c 5 Many, faith Eliot, ask W wf, whether a Grammar could be fr an'd fit thefe Targumims | I anfwerd according to my ovrn ftntimtnts, that I could not do it, in regard the Exemplars v. try d among thtrrt- felves,as well in words as in lettersrtnd altogether in tin faints, which differ d almoff beyond all pojfibility ofrccottcffiatii And that p> - ceeds from hi nee, becaufe the Paraphra/is wrote their Vetfioni wi:h~ oat points, which were nor yet invented, as J have truly demOn ft rated in my Preface to Maioreth Hammaforetll. To this we may add,: hat the moft Antitnt Exemplars are all without point sjbecaufe t 'I rs of the Maibra never pointed t / em af they point ed t he » eft o fthi tare. But a long time after they were pointed by one or more pel forts, tho of no note, at they thought good. Therefore there is no Analogy o.fr- fcrv'd, neither can there be any method produced for the making of a Grammar. And indeed unlefs it were fo, who could imagine that fro the time that the Tar gums Were composed, there Jljould be no per- fans among the jews who had Erudition enough to frame a Grammar, at Rabbi Juda dtd, who was the * fir ft Grammarian of note ; whereat * yn r- ■ before him there wot no Hebrew Grammar. But becaufe he found the Ella* Sacred Books of Scripture noted with points and accents, as alfo far- '■ i '■' ■■ nift/dwith a Mafora by the Maforitts, he began to ajfifi the Jfrae- :Mr lit es, and to enlighten the exit d Jews with Ins Grammar. Him followed '. ' ~: f^i -ff.Jona '•> and after him came R. Saadas Gaoil ; and after them an Gramra iri- inntimer able company of Grammarians. But there was no perfon who Jr> amoug animadverted upon the Targum, re corrcQ what was amifs; all flighted that bafinefs,fo that it came forth perverted, which is only prefervd. W>1 ' ( r Therefore J began to thinhjof a way, whereby every one might be able him Rah i to make aT &rg\KI\Gram/uar in fitch a manner , that he might take his Saad asy foundation out of fuch things as were wrote in the Books of Daniel u'1)'1 Jic and Efther; and only upon that might build his fuperftr -act urc\ a?,d ,. . j . . * i • r t . ' OH1.I .1.: deduce his Grammar Runs, if not altogether, yet in part. Soon after he adds thefe words in the fame Preface-, In time p aft before the Art of Printing was invented, there was not found above one Targum m theCity^and one in theCountry.Jherefore thefe wot no ?nan who minded them. But there were many Exemplars of the Targum of QnkeAos found, becaufe they were bound to read two Setlions of Script are, an done of the Targum every Sunday. There- fore there were fome that made it their bnfinefs to write fomethhg *fl on itjout it came to little or nothing. There wot alfo a Mafora tnadt upon itjvhich I never could fee ; but there wot no ?nan who jo mzch as open d his mouth to explain the Prophet sand Hagiographers. Neither was there any that requirdit, but all cry d, Let us let that noori alone till Elias come. But ' j 04 Critical EjiJi But when i he Chaldec Grammar was once found our, Vvhich Elias had deem'J Co hard tq frame, pre! .irly Munfter, Mercer, and other Learned men lent thei lelpi » hands to reform the Chaldee Con- texc : Above ail the r.,: f Buxtorf who with a daring boldnefs caus'd to bepublifh'd a va heap of Paraphrafes conformable to the : e:hodofthe New Grammar. We h*ve reducdt faith Buxtorf the Chaldee Text, which u caWd the 2*i £r] Targum, and is a m ft noble Commentary upon the Hebrew Text in Mofel and the Pr phetsyto the Antient^ True and Perpetual Analogy of the Old Chaldee Language^ fairly jJ)ew\l its m the Books of Daniel and Either, rtftnd font all the idle and deformed feinting^ which is to be lien in the Venetian Editions. Buc as it is excellently well obferv'd by LuJovicm de Dieu. there are many things after all Buxtorfs Emendation, that require a better Reformation. In perilling Certain written Manufcripts or rhe Sacred Text, I met with a Pentateuch written in large Letters in a large Parchment Folio, which ^Contain'd the Paraphrafe or. Onkelos in fuch a manner, that a part of the Paraphrafe followed every Verfe of the Tcxt.But in that Exemplar the Chaldee pointing wonderfully dif- fers from all other that I could ever find as well among thepublifh'd a3 Manufcript Copies. For it relembled the pointing ot the Books of Daniel and Eft her far better than the Buxtorfian Edition. However, the firft Edition of reforming the Chaldee pointing, is attributed to the Cowplutenfes, which being poliuYd by Arias Montanus, was af- terwards perfected in the JS^r/f/ Bibles. But it feems to be much more perfect in theManulcript which I have mentioned. Wherefore I am apt to believe, that be ore E'tas the Levite liv'd, there were Jews that were both vers'd in the Chaldee Paraphrafes, and skill'd in the Lan- guage. But fuch Exemplars never fell into Elias** hands ; and I v/onder the Jews,that over-look'd the Paraphrafe of Onkelos,made ufe of no better Copies. However, I would not advife any one to pin hi» Faith upon the Modern Pointing Co much by Buxtorf reform'd, but where it feems to carry a more proper fenfe. But rather to have re- courfe to the Antient form of the Chaldee Context, which had no Points, as being lately invented by the Rabbies, and added without Art to the Paraphrafes. The Chaldee Pointing is not Co Authentick * r,s the Hebrew ; tor the latter had the Doctors of Tjbcrjas for its Correctors, whofe credit was no lefs than the repute of the School of Tjberias ; the other known to few; and at this day unknown to moll of the Jew». CHAP Critical Enquiries. 157 CHAP. XIV. An Appendix of the other Truncations of the Bible in tife among the Jews. I Doubt not but there are other Paraphrafesof the Hebrew Context, befides the already mentioned, as yet not publi- shed ; for I find fome, in reading the Rabbins, highly efteemed by them not yet Printed. But thefe through the Jews igno- rance of the Chaldee have been long lince laid afide. Where- fore the Tranllation of the Bible into the Mother Tongues was abfolutely neceflary,!ew of the7*ipj,the Doctors excepted,under- ftanding even the Hebrew j this occafioned the fo many Tranf- Tke Arabic lations now in ufe among them. R Stadias Gaon,or The Excellent tnnilation of nine hundred years and upwards, Tranflated the whole Bible in- V****« to Arabic, although the Pentateuch only is come to our hands, which the Jews of Conflantinople Printed in Hebrew Characters, and is fince Printed in Arabic Letters in that Excellent Englifh Polyglot Bible. This Interpretation of R. Saadias is more a Para- phrafe than a Tranllation, for he keeps not fo clofe to the Con= text, and fometimes changes proper names, and as he was alto- gether unbyafTed,fo he often gives his own fancy rather than the fence of the Text, it fhould therefore be no wonder if any fault have efcaped in thisTranflation of RSaadias, feeing the Jews had not then attained any great knowledg in Grammar ,al though his Tranflation has few HebrewaifmSjbecaufeParaphrafticaUyet it is not altogether fo much Arabic, but that we may ealily know him to be 2 J eve from words retaining the Genius of the Hebrew Tongue, this was the caufe that the Latine Interpreter of that Arabic Tranflation committed many great miftakes in that he had regard only to the Arabic, becaufe he undcrftood not the Hebrew Tongue. Erpenins hath publifhed another Arabic Tranflation of the ;Anothcflr A~ Pentateuch by an African Jew, which comes much nearer to the JJjj Jf^SjJ] Context than that of Saadias, and the' Hebrewifms are therefore the more frequent , yet notwithftanding he keeps not clofe to S the \ i 8 Critical Enquiries* the Text, but that here and there he follows the opinions of his Country^ we may bring into the fame clafs the Ttrfiau Tranflation or the Petateuch made by James of Tans, from the City where he was born , becaufe it is much of the fame flilc, and for the Hebreafms therein, this was fir ft publifhed by the Jews of Conft amino fie in the Hebrew Character together with Saadias Arabian Paraphrafe, and fince reprinted in the Engltfi Polyglot in Perfian Characters. Traoflation The Jews have alfo a Tranflation of the Bible in Vulgar Greeks into Vulgar pnblifhed at Conftantinople of great credit with the Car ait* Greek* Jews, efpecially thofe whofe Mother Tongue it is, the Penta- teuch of this Tranflation was Printed at Conftantinople, by the Rabbinifts or Jalmndijls in Hebrew Characters with the Vowel points, I have feen the Book of Job in the fame vulgar Greeks Printed at the fame place divided into two Columns •, of which the one is in Hebrew^ and the other in the vulgar Language, (hews the Greeks with this Infcription. A job Belefoon Hakodifh VbeleJljonRomaikj, Job in the Holy Language, and in the Roma- nic Speech R. Mofes the Son of R. Elias Phobian the Author of this Tranflation, tells us in his Preiaceto Job that he tranflated the Proverbs of Solomon into the lame Tongue^ and that the Jews ignorance in the Hebrcw,was a great motive thereunto,the . fame Jews of Conftantinople have joyned to this Spam fi Tranf- •iito Jp"2?/t011 *ation °f cne Pentateuch, Printed in Hebrew Characters with the Vowel points, the Jews of Conftantinople, Adrianoplei Tbejfa- lonica, and in other places of the Levant, whither they fled when e.vpel'd Spain were certainly the Authors of this Tranfla- tion , the Vulgar Greele^and SpaniJJj in thefe Tranflations are almoft unin: elligible the Hebrccifms are fo frequent. A"other *tgm The Spavifl) and Italian Jews have a famous Tranflation tu>n. °f ^e whole Bible into Sftwjh, Printed at Ferrara in the Year 1553. the Tranflator teems to make it a point of Conference to deviate from the Context, the Tranflation agrees foexacly word for word with the Hebrew Text, the literal Tranflaticr, and the obfolete words ufed, no where but in the Synagogues render it very obfeure \ if we may give any Credit to the Pre- face of this Tranflation, the greateft part of the Tranflation is Pagrimas, bur I think the Jews therein had a better opinion of Kimchii^AbenEfra and other Rabti?is,whom Tagnintts confulted, than ofPagn.nns when they openly profefi they allowed that tiny thereby Critical Enqu'rics. 139 thereby might not incur the danger of the Inquifition. It is very likely that Abrah.-.mVfque zPottugal Jew did make ule tor the perfecting this Tranflation ot iome old Spamfl) Rubbins,w\\o had long before his time read the Hcb>exv and Spamjl) Bible in their Synagogues. There is this in that Edition ot t'trr.r.i worth obferving that the Interpreter was fo well convinced of the difficulty of Tranflating the Bible, that he has put Aftcries where he finds the fence dubious, and could not be definitive in a thing of fo great difficulty, thefe words pre to be found^n the Preface. And it is to be noted that in the place marked with an Afterifm, thus* it is a mark to aflift ye in the Expofl- tion of the word, and fom times of various Opinions. But the Jews who Printed the Second Edition with Amendment in the Year 1630. have left cut moft of the Afteries, whereas there was more need to augment than diminifh that Number \ but what profit the Chriftians can reap from a Tranflation which the Jews fcarce underftsnd , is not mnnifeft if the ridiculous affectation of A^hiU a contentious Trai:flator,wss reprehended by the Fathers, lure none will approve of this affected Tranfla- tion, which has more regard to Grammar than to the fence of ca/Jiod.de X? the Context. Caffiodore de Regna blames his Expolition of m. thefe words of the 9. of Efaiab, Vocabitur nomtn ejus admira- Ifaiah 9. f. biUs^confiliariM, Letufortis, pater ftitnri fee M7 frinceps pacts , as they are in the Vulgar Edition, in that he forcing the words contrary to thegenuin fence, attributes thefe words, pri?;ceps f.ic ts to the Mejfia, and all the others to God. But theTranfla- tor here and in other places, is by a (Ted by his Countrymen, yet in this he is inexcufable, in that he hath not kept fo clofeto the Rules of Grammar, whicn he hath proteft^ for he hath prtfixt the Article el marravillofo , conftjero , and elfewhere , whereas the Hebrew prefix ha, the fame with the Spanifl) Arti- cle f/, is not prefixt , in like manner he errs in other places, whereas he hath Tranflated the firft Verfe of the Pfalms, bi<.n Pfa!m ?.v. i, avantnrado el v*ron, when according to the Rules of Grammar, it fhould have been Tranflated, bien Avantttrancas de el varon, as it is in the Hebrew , but we will pafs over thefe Subtilties. S 2 ' T \ 1 4° Critical Enquiries, Various Opi« lions of the £r«fctran(la tlonof the iible. CHA P. XV. Of the Tranflations of the Bible of greatefi Authority with the Chriftians, And fir ft of the Septuagint. ALtho the GV^Tranflation of the 70 EJders, is publickly read by the Jews in their synagogues and Schools ^ yet I think it not amifs to rank it among the Tranflations ufed by the 0)riftUnsi for the Chriftians have long fince received it from the Jews, aid to this our time is retained by molt Churches. But the Difputes about its Authority and Translators, not yet de- cided, may be a wonder *, for there be fome who deny its Au- thority, therefore others who highly maintain its Authority in all, efteeming the Tranflators as Prophets infpired by the Holy Spirit. Others again of a middle rank between thefe two extreams, do highly value this Antient and to be honoured Tranfhtion of Holy Writ, yet in lome places they think it not Authentick. I willingly pafs by the Hiitory of the Tranflators as it is in Phile,Jofephus, and in feveral Greel^znd Latin Fathers, becaufe known to moir. The Fathers borrowed the greateft TtjlSnf***1 Part of this Hift°ry fr°m Arift&ns in his Book, of the Tranfla- tion of the Divine Law, out of the Hebrew into the Creek by the 70 Interpreters : and a part, fince invented by the Jews^ The learned Critics have thought Arift&u?% Book in part fup- pofitious, fuppofe the Book that goes under Arift&ufs name were not fuppofitious, I mould think them nowiferthafc quote him for the Truth of this Hiftory, then he that thinks Xemphons Cyropxd'ui to be a true Hiftory of Cyrus -, (or as TuUy upon the firft light perceived that Xenophon did not acl: theHiftorian,bat that in Cyrm he gave a Model or Pattern of a juft Emperor, fb it may eaiiy be feen in the Reading Ariftttu, that he is more R jmantick than a true Hifiorian.We may eafily guefs from the Context^that fome HeRemft Jew^iit this Book in favourof his Nation. The Writer of this Hiitory, according to the Genius of hisNation,fpeaks great things andMiracles: For he relates when KlngPtolomy wondring that the Writers of other Countries, madfr tfArtftus, Critical Enquiries. 1 4 1 made no mention of that Excellent works, he bring in Demetrius anfwering him thus ; Becaufe^ fays he, t$ is a Holy Law given by God; and becaufe that fomc going about [he T ran flat ion have been diverted by being punifhed by God : and that 7 "heopompwy when he would have inferted fomc thing out of that Law not fo well tranflated, was Diftraeted for above thtty days, and that during fome little intermiflion ot his Diftraction, having prayed to God to let him know the reafon ot his Diftemper,God reveal- ed to him in a Dream, that what hadhapned, was becaufe he went about to publifh to the World Sacred things , and that at length, when he had defifted from his Enterprife, he was freed from his Difeafe. And he larther tells us, ot one Theodeclet a Tragical Poet , who when he had inferted into his Play fome- thing or the Laws of M>fes , was ftruck blind, till he had re- flected upon what he had done, and had intreated G^d by his Vows. Thcfe truly are more a Romance than a Hiftory, and fuffici- ently (hew the Genius of the Jevts, which always delighted to in- vent Miracles •, therei s fuch another Story of a Voice from Heaven which did frighten the Writer of the Child, \ an Para» phrafc from the Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures ; moreo- ver the Suppolicitious Arifttm feems to contradict here y for where he (peaks of Theopompus , he tells us, Th t the Law of Mofes vra< before this tranflated into the Greek Tongue \ but if it were fo why did they fo earneftly defire another Tranflation ^ wherefore Baronius and other learned Men with good reafon,re- jecting Clemens Alexandrinns^s Authority chiefly induced by this reafon fay, that the Scriptures were not tranflated before into 6>tt^,and that there was no Tranflation whatfoever before that of the Seventy Elders. Neither can you fay, this firfl Tranflati- j fepH Sc«- •n to have been lefspolitc,forfuppofe it ever fo imperfect at had lie, inawimadv. been kept in the Kings Library, not altogether unknown to the J?*0!: E^ebm King, with thoufands of other Books. 1 pafsby other remarks i»fj*rj2 * of learned Men , efpecially Jofeph ScaligeSs of this Sup' ofiti- Qf^k Hjjlorj^ ous Anft&Hs which Ge rardVoffms, wellverfed in this matter,fays are very weighty i from whence it may be conjectured Anftxus to have writ this H'ftcry perhaps to the Ida* of a pious and a good moralM Prince, and this Hiflory ought not to be look'd upon otherwile • wherefore the Author of thefe Fables miltru- Sing hisCaufe,as being, improbabje^adds farther,/ fe/zin/^fays he,, 1 42 Critical Enquiries. my Readers will fnfpecl my credit, but truly as it is rot lawful to re- late any ZJntruth, -which hath been received \ fo it would be a Crime to be [dent in this Affair, but as they have been acted, fo I have re- lated them, that 1 might avoid all "Untruths , and for that reafon I have endeavoured to? eceive the Truth from thofe who Were privy to the Kings Affairs. Truly he leaves nothing out that may corro- borate his Tcltimony which he feared would be fufpefted by all. But the Authority of the Fathers and other Writers of good Note and Credit, who have inferted in their Works the Hifto- ry of Arifldus as true, doth make for it •, and it will be thought rafhnefs to defend the contrary, but we are not to confider what the Fathers have faid, fo much as the reafons of their opinion ; for in things purely critical Reafons are of more moment than Authorities. It is evident the Fathers were moved by the bare Authority of Ariftd*st or Philo and Jofephxs who writ irom him} but they had no reafon to examin critically the Hiftory of Ari- fl&us whether true ? Seing the Scptnagint Tranjlation , which at that time the Church ufed againft the Jews,who had recourfe to the Hebrew in their Dictations with the Chnfiians , did greatly fupport their Caufe. The Fathers had been ill advifed, if they had laid by thatTranflation which the Jews could not totally re- Jerom. jecl. Si.Jerom,* man well verfed in ail Leaming,and had ftudy- ed this Critic'fm, for this reafon contrary to the common Opi- nion of the Fathers <\\<\ confute the Cels of the 70. Interpreters. I ^eWtf^fayshe, who firft invented the Story of the 70. Cells, and then laughs at Jitflm Martyr, who affirmed he faw them, and looks upon him as a fimple Man eafily induced to believe the Jews Stories. In like manner he differed in opinion from the Fa- thers , for from the Authority of Ari(l manumfn <*», the Greek G^ eleElornm Ifra* el neqm mm* d:.j[enfit \ Hemfins thinks that number of the Tranf- lators and their miraculous Agreement to have rifen hence, but whatever Hcmfins th'nks, I am of the Opinion that the Inter- preters were rather Jews 01 Alexandria than Hiemfalemfot there are to this day fome Egyptian Words as Abrec, Remph.m and o- thers, and beeaufe it was of fo great a confequence it is very likely it was approved of by the Sanhedrim, and there called the Septuagint Tranflation from the 70 Elders, or Senators of the Great Council-, for which reafon the place of the Talmud - otherwife very difficult , where the Greek TranfUtion is afen- bed only to five, may eafily be reconciled with the common 0- pinion of 72. by the fame Authority it is made authentick to all the Jem, efpecially the Ijcllemjls as the Fathers of the We- ftern Church in the Council of Trent have made their Tranfla- tion Authentick; for as the Ignorance of the Christians in the Greek causM Trandations into the other Tongues; and thefe Tranflations became Authentick to the Churches by their ufe , in like manner the Jews Ignorance of the Hebrew Tongue did move the Jews of Alexandria to translate the Bible into Greek for their ufe, which franflation was afterwards rend in their Synagogues and Scbftolft; and beeaufe, as very probable it was approved or by the tanked im at Hierufalem , upon whom at that time the whole Hm ion of the Jews had a dependance, it hath acquired the Name of the Septuagint. 1 44 Critical Enquiries. Yet I think there is no neceflky to have recourfe to the Sena- tors of the great Synagogue, that the number of the72.Inter- preters (to whom that Tranflation is commonly afcribed) may be the better made out ; but we arc only to confider the Form of Speech familiar to the Jews , by which they attribute every thing of moment to thoie 70. Senators , that the things there- by may acquire the greater Au hority : For this reafon they as- cribe the Vowel Points, Accents, and many other things of the like nature to the Sanhedrim , not fo much from the reality of the thing , as from that Form of Speech \ lo that it is difficult to diftinguifh when they fpeak plain and when allcgoricafly .- This way of fpeaking hath led many men , and thofe Learned , into various Errors, when in reading the Jews Books, they con- fider more what they write than the manntr and caufes of their fo writing. We may bring for Example what occur in the Rab- bins about the Title of Holy Writ •, the Keris and Cetibs, or va- rious Readings entire, defective, redundant, and fix hundred of the like nature. All thefe moflof the Jews afcribe either to Mofes in MountSinai, or to the Synagogue or Senate aflemblcd under Efdras ; all which if not taken Allegdrically after the manner of the Cabbala, as the Jews themfelves write, are mani- feitly falfe, for the fame reafon if we are not as attentive to the words , as to the manner of writing proper to the Jewifh Nation, theHiftory of the 72. Interpreters not improbably will feem to fpring from the fame Fountain , whether it really was approved of by the immediate Authority of the Sanhedrim or whether through connivance publickly read in their Syna- gogues it at length by long ufe became Authentick, which truly feems more agreeable than what the falfe Ariftaas fays of the jirifl. of the Approbation of the Greek Tranflation in thefe words, The 70- near the Tranflation being finijhed, Demetrius didfirfl read it to all the Jews ■■d. who Were affembledmthe place where it was perfetled, the Tranjla- tors were alfo by , who were complemented and care fled by the Body of the Jews, as Authors of fo g, eat a good ^ and in like manner they gave Demetrius his due Praife , and earneftly requeued that he would grant a Copy of that Tranflation to their Rulers. As foon as that Volumn of the Law was read , the Standers-byjhe Priefts, the Interpreters, Elders and Governors of the City, and the Rulers of the People f aid thus, becanfe that Interpretation Was throHghont fo exact, accurate and divine n it is rtafonable itjljould remain fo, and that no alteration be made therein. But / 3 Criticnl Enquiries. "145 But if the Men of Alexandria were as skilful in the Greek as in the Hebrew, that they could j'dge from a bare Reading of the goodnefs and exact Agreement of the GreekJranflation with the Hebrew Context, why did their King io earncftly delire Strangers when he might have made nfeof their help' And then who can believe , that the Hellemft Jews, but indifferently verfed in the Hebrew, could be competent Judges of the Tran- flation from a fepcrficial reading, when the Learned of our times well skiUM in both Tongues, dare not pretend to it. Wherefore what is commonly quoted out or Jofiphw, Thilo, and others,in the behalt of the iincerity of the feptnagmt Tranfla- tion is of no Moment, neither can it make againft the Hebrew Originals, becaufe there is nothing of the Greek Tranflation of the 70. in thefe Writers, but what was firft taken out of the falfe Arijlcu*. Although I reject the Story of the 70 Interpreters, which Ji^gmwit goes under /^w'sNamc, as an Invention of the Hel'.emjl of cIle Grec*- Jews, yet 1 would not detract from that Tranflation, which for trat * a long time hath had a Reputation in the Synagogue and Church , For I know how much the Antients eireemed this Translation, fince it was praifed by the Apoftles, and the Chrifhan Religion by no other Teftimony propagated through the whole World, mo/1 Churches do to this day retain it, perhaps the Sea of Rome would ufe it to this time , if St. Jerome had not made a new Tranflation from the Original Hebrew, thefe and other reafons cafily to be produced, manifeftly declare this Tranflation tc be of great moment, but it doth not hence tollow, as is the opi- nion of Ifaac Vrfiut and fome others, that th.'s Tranflation is the only true and leaft Corrupted Peice of Scripture, and to be preferred before thcHebrew Ccpies.lt hath been a received opi- nion among the Ancient Father s of the Church, that they could have nothing found in Scripture , but what they had had Tran- ilated from the LXX. becaufe the Church owe its Birth and Growth to their Tranflation. Origen dared not Diffent from this opinion, although he hath acknowledged a great difference between the Greek, and Hebrew Copies, and as he hath testified of himfelf, and hath exerdfed his ingenuity upon all th Edi- tions of the Bibles, and their differences. There is no nt i, fays he, that 1 ffeahjsf Exodus, where the j4fturtcn.wces of the Ta- oriq. EpUh bcrnacle, its Court and Ark^ where the Veffmtntt of the High Triefi Afikm. T a?.d c l 46 Critical Enquiries. *rtd?riefis are very much altered, infomnch that the Since d$th n$t fcem to bet Jos fame, Let us take heed therefore^ th.it we do not impru- dently and ignorant ly alrogate the Copies which are in many Churches. In this psflage Origen favours the Septnagint Tranflation more than the Hebrew Original, for this reafon, Jeaft he fhouldbe thought to bring Novelties and Corruption into the Church ; yet at other times among the Learned , he did more highly value the Hebrew Verity •, neither truly the Ancient Church, which fufpceled the JVa?.f finccriey could or ought to have any ci- ther opinion of their Copies : But the Judgment of St. Jerem^ and the Learned Fathers of our times ought to be prcfened \ for the Antient Fathers only skilled in the Greek, or Latin Tongue, could not be pofitive in things not underftocd by them, but we in this Age can compare the Hebrew Originals with the Greeks and pais our Judgments upon them. Neither can the Authority of the ApoftJes , who had recourfe only to the Greekznd not to the Hebrew^ be any Argument to the con» trary. What benefit could thcApoftles, who lowed the firft Seeds of the Gofpel through the World, reap from the Hebrew Copy, at that time underftood but by a few Jews? But as for Cicero for the Greeks, it was become as Cicero doth Teilifie, the Mother ArchthePoct. Tongue to moft Nations. The dfoftUs thzxe did not ufe the Greej^, becaufe they were more per feci: than the Hebrew Copies, but with Judgment, becaufe it was adopted to the genius of thofe who were to be inftrufted in the knowledge of the Scrip- *7frf/,the Authority therefore which the GV^Tranflation of the 70. acquired, was extrinfick, neither was it the more correct be- caufe praifed by iheApoftles in thtnc^TeftmmevP^xi it were cor- rupted before their time. In like manner the Authority of theHe- brew context it net I e fried, becaufe lefs familiar to the Ap files and the firftFathcrs of thcChhrcb, but as the Fathers of the Courcel of Trent by their Decree, by which the Antient vulgar Tranflation was made Authentick,had left the Hebrew and Greek, Copies un- touch*!. Jn like manner the ufe of the Greek Tranflation in the Church time out of mind did rot diminifh the Cred t and In- tegrity of the Hebrew. The Septuagint hath it faults even from the Infancy of the Church, many of which Sir Jerom hath marked ^ I do not Ipeak of thofe which Jer*m, taking too much Liberty in following his own tancy fometimes doth not fo well Correct. The Wcftern Church hath patronized Jeroms Gen- Critical Enquiries. 1 47 Ccnfurc in leaving the Greek Tranflation of (he 70 fj long and fo univerfally ufed for Jeroms new Tranilation from the Hebrew. Nor were the reafons mean which induced Jcrom to this new Tranilation from tiie Hebrtw Original, which aitcrwards was defcrvedly ufed by the Church, for as he himlclf tcftifieth, the many errors in the Greek were not the fole cauie of the under- taking of that work, which many (peak of, but that alio he Irad found, from his exadknowJed^ in both Tongues, the Greek Interpreters had not iully expreflcd the Hebrew Context, whom for this reafon he doth often reprove in his Commentaries. I pafsby, to avoid prolixity , thofc miftakesof the 70, many of which are taken notice of by the Commentators of the Bible, and to make npthe Catalogue, the obfeure places of the Greek ought to be compared with the Hebrew context, kt they ha- ving not followed chiefly in thefe place?, the fence cf the Oii- ginal, have varioufly and at large digreflid, I cannot but praife the induftrious and learned If Foffitu, in that he endeavoured to vindicate in all that Greek Tranflation in his opinion Di- vine, but tbeunbyafled Mafm feems far more able to fudge of ^^fiut\^rtf. that Tranflation, a Man of an acute Wit and (harp Judgment tof°P- and well known in the Hebrew, cjrv^and Syriac Copies. Where- fore what we mould j idge of the 70 may be, I think far better learnt from A£*fiui than frcm Voffuu. The Learned Man gives this Judgment of them/ Whofotvcr^ c fays he, Will but confdsrthe Boohs of Scriptnre^ will find the Tr4n- ^jlationof them, the Lave of Mofesr.*rf/>^,afcribed to the 72 in- * terpreters, that it will not feem probable, that the 72 Doctors c fent to Ttdemy by the High Prieft,were fo unapt, fo unskilful, ' fo uncapable of Tranflating and abfurd,that they could com- * mit fuch grofs mifrakes,for there are not only great verbal er- 'rorsarifingfrom literal miftakes,when they Interpret one thing c for another, but, and that not feldnm, even in long Periods. Thus this Learned Doctor defends the opinion of St. Jerom, jerom^f. who thinks that the Transition of the Pentateuch, and of the upoathc^^* other Books of Scripture were not done by the fame Hands,the Trar.il. fame M*fm a little farther explaining himfelf more clearly Tub- *4ffim* joys what is worth obfervation. c Neither truly do I calculate 1 the above mentioned errors by theHcbrew context now in ufe, 1 that the novelty of points, errors, interpoints,and theaddi- T 2 tion ^g Critical Enquiries. 4 tion of Vowels and Accents,which the Authors of the Mafo- 4 retb arefaid to have invented :, or the unfaithfulnefs of fome 4 Transcribers whom /do not approvers if they had defigned- 4 ly corrupted the Hebrew Context in many places, may not be * any excufe,the very things treated of do often fufneiently ma- 4 nifeft the Abfurdity and Incongruity of Words and P'hrafes* 4 which the Trtnflaters have u fed, and prefently concludes the 4 whole matter thus. It my opinion fhould be asked, I mud con- 4 fefs that the Trandation is Divine, and Teems to be penned ra- 4 theT by Prophets than by their Interpreters in fome places, in 4 othtrs (illy, nor at ail agreeable to the Learning of Co g reat 4 Doctors, andbecariel met with thefe'dirnVJiies iiot onlyin 4 the other Books ( altho in them the errors arc more grofs and 4 confounding) but alio in Mefes Pentateuch as wc call it,and be- • caufc the Story of Ptolemy and the Intepreters, related by fo 4 many, can't be without fome ground, I am apt to believe their 4 opinion to be mod likely, who fay that not only the Law of 'Mofes, but alfo the other Hiftorical and Prophetical Books 4 were Tranflated by thofe Jews, at the defire of Ptolemy. Thus far Mrfu4} whofe words I have been the longer upon, becaufe they very much llluftrate the Argument in Hand ; At firft this Learned man, well read in the Hebrew, Cnaldee, Syria and CmJy^ares not afcribe the Greeks Tranflation ,the Pentateuch ex- ceptcd,to the LXX ; it was fofull of grofs errors, and becaufe he hath perceived many faults alfo in the Pentateuch , he hath embraced yet fomewhat doubtfully, the common opinion ot thefe 70 Tranflators : neither doth he fpare to call thofe whom he acknowledges from a prejudice, the chief among the Jews of that age, abfurd, filly and illiterate, and he feems to be intro- duced thereunto by the Authority of St. Jercm, and the truth of the thing itfelf^ afterwards as it were correcting himfelf, he acknowledges fome or the Tranfhtion to be Divine and Di- ctated by Prophets rather than Interpreters, and what is chiefly to be confidcred, he declares he did not reprehend the Creeks from the modern Copies of the Jews, which it is evident are degenerated from the antient purity in many places, in fine he cenlures the generality of Divines, who take upon them Ma- giftcricuily to judge of the matter in hand, of which they are ignorant, and do bring in frrange fancies into the Church, as that the H threw context is defignedJy corrupted by the Jews, as Critical Enc^imes. \ ^ as is afTerLed by forne, ihat the Greeks to be preferred before the Hebrew, with fome others of the fame nature which come from thofc who have more zeal then knowledge, if the Learn- ed Mifim was now alive, he would wc ndcr that an\ Proteltant and /j'aac y»fmi the fir it , fliould have the fame opinion of the Greek and Hebrew Copies, w'th thofe divines he repre- hends. Mafius had been wholy of our Opinion , if he had not given fo much credit to the Srory of Arijltpu, which he faw w?s con- firm'd by a Cloud of WitiieiTes , he fhould rather have con- iidered Realon than plurality of Voices, neither truly will he judge otherwife of the Greeks Tranflation, who (h?A\ critically Examine it by the Hebrew Originals. And this is the Opinion of all the Critic Expoiitors of the Scripture. For ifatanytime they have u(ed the Heirew and Greeks for illuftrating the Con- text, fometimes they fci uple not to Correct the Hebrew by the Greeks, bur much more often the Hebrew is preferred before the Greek. Anguflin of Engitkio, to pafs by others, in his review of theold \ eflament to \fat Hebrew verity, having compared the varicus Editions, accuies the Greek Interpreters fome- times of ignorance j * This GV^Tranflation, fays he, whether c the 70. Interpreters were per feci Matters of the Gr$i1t, whe- c ther they ufed other Copies, than could Le had in St. Jercms or 4 our time, or whether they did defignedly fo Tranflate, differs c very much from the Hebrew verily. Some places do (hew a 1 manifest unsfcilfulnefs of the Greele^, and others a great igno- * rznee of tha Hebrew Tongue. Ammfiim himfelf is not always infall.b'e, as for Example, when he condems them for Trafla- ting in Chap. 1 9. Genef. />/<*c*inftead ofbarquet, but he obferves not that in i\\zGreekQQU^K.ycnetian it is r'iiM flace for *Z}4t banquet , as is truly resd in the Roman Edition. The fame Anguftine makes himfelf ridiculous, when he condemrs their Translation in Chap. 27. Genef. of the Hebrew word naph.il, by the Latine word manere^ whereas it fhould have been Translated by the woid cadcre, fall, whence he takes occafion to defend the vulgar TranfLation which has it obiit \ but the Greek Tfaflfltf- tion cf the 70. is the belt, the Hebrew ought not to be other- wife Tranflated, if we confider the fence, for the death or Ijhmadis not there lpoke of, but the Land wherein hedwelr^ as appears by what goes before. Wherefore we are net to hear- ken t 5 6 Critical Enquiries. ken to Angnfline always when he condemns the Gr^Tranfla- tors, akho he hath truly marked many of their Errors- CHAP. XVI. A more partic •nlar Examination of the Greek SeptUagint Tranfla- tion. TbiJo 2. Book fT-Hat the Greek. Tranflation of the 70. was had in great S2£. * efteem, and received with a great deal of joy by all the ancient Jews may appear from Philoy who reckons them among the Prophets. There is, fays he, an annual folemnity in the If e of Pharos, to which pLce not the Jews only , but many others do Ferry over, honoring the place where this Tranflation received its birth, and returning thanks to God for his renewing hi* wonted mer- cies to them, after prayers and Thanksgiving, fome pitching their Tents upon the Shoar, others fitting in the open Air upon the Sands, feaft and make merry with their Relations and Friends ; at this time they prefer their Tents and the open Fields far beyond their fumptHOHs Palaces. It is evident that this Tranflation was re- The rejection ceivedby moft 7«w in their Synagogues and Schools, and that of 70. by the rnany thereby have been Converted toChriftianity. But the 3cm* frequent difputes between the Chriftians and Jews about the Ex- planation of the Scriptures, caused the Jews tofrudy the He- brew more than before they had done. Upon the deftruction of the Jews and the Jewifh Nation fcattered by the Romans, the Authority of the great Council was almoft totally Ecclipfed, but there were a few Mailers left «, who taught the Hehrtw Tongue in the Schools : Then did the Jews Brft, efpecially they or Palefline, who had ftill fome influence upon the.other Jews, through their hatred to Chriftianity, cry cL.vn the 70, the ample teftimony of the Fathers , and of Juftine Martyr who complained often of its rejection , do confirm the Truth of it. The Jews endeavoured what they could to afperfe that Interpre- tation ufed by all the Chriftian Churches, hence it was that they ordered a Fall:, and feigned that the Earth was covered with darknels for three days , becaufc the Law had been Tranflated into Critical Enquiries* \ 5 i into Greets By this Talc they would divert the more flmple from reading the 6>Yr^ Tranflation of the 70, when they took it ill, that it was read to many Synagogues , efpccialiy in the Synagogues of the H ellemj} J cw s , principally from this time it was negleclcd and difeltcemcd by the Jews. Ar.d it it had not been well received by the Church, to which it had pair, from the Synagogue, it had been utterly ufelefs,butbecaufe the Grcekjoi chat Tranflation is not fo pure-, it hath,as I may fo fzy, many He h at fms and5jr/4/W,whichI lake to be the Reafon that it could not well be preferved in its integrity, whilit every one WOQld under trkc tccorreft what he underflocd not For the pre- Th« tongue fent I fay nothing of ihcHeBeii/} commonly thought thcTongue Tiatflit' of the 70. Tranflation, 1 veiy much wonder that the Learned fhould contend fo long , whether there be any other Hellenift Tongue diftind from the Greek, for the Hellemft is no other then the C?*^Tongue which hath acquired fomething of the Hebrtw ard Syriac from the Jexvsy and this hath not only hapned to the Greedy but to all the Tongues, which the Jews have made ufe ot in their Tranflation of the Holy Scripture. The drabic, Spamfli and Per/tin Trarflations are fcarce under- flocd by the j4r*tbians, SpAni,irdj, and Ptrfiatti unlefs they alio underfrcod the Hebrew Tongue. We may well call this Tongue of the Jews, the Tongue of the Synagogue becaufe it hath its original thence, and is adapted to it. The Crcel^of the New Teftament is the very fame, for it is taken from the 70. the words of the Old and New Teffament are all of them Greeks a few excepted j but the Jews according to the occafion do fome- times enlarge,and fometimes re ft rain the'r lignificarions, accor- ding to the propriety of theirTongue,torwhichReafon the anci- ent Latir.e Interpreter, who TranfUted the Gree]^ into LMtnt for the benefit or the Church, veiy often miitakes*, in fome places he hath not at all expreft the fence of the 70. As for ex- ample, whereas in Chap. 49. Genef. in the Greek^we read, r*^, Tetfet-ndjv irtiidL-nijcni Avixiv the Author of the Ancient vulgar hath tranflated it tentatio tentabit cum, but St. Jet em has much better tranfhtcdit, from the Original, Gad^Utrancultu latrccinabitnr eum^ Jertm hath learnedly Corrected may Errors of the like nature,in that ancient Tranflation,and there are many more yes tc be corrected which have efcaped him. T I l 5 2 Critical Enquiries. r The Greek That Gnek^ Tranflation was fo corrupt in Jeroms time, that rj*/.falfe. (he learned Father had rather make a new TranQation from the Original than correct the old One, the Greek as well as the La- tin was fo faulty, fome are of opinion, that there arc no re- mains of that old Edition, but the Works ofthec7rf^and Lenn Fathers do prove that it hath beenpreferved to our time,altho!:gh very imperfect, and defective, in whofe Works we have a great part inferted, as it is in the (freely Copies, which go under the Name of theLXX. and thofe who have no more Hebrew than what they have received from the Modern Grammars and Lexi- cons, can't judge rightly of it : And although I willingly ac- knowledge with St. Jerom thofe Tranflators to have erred in ma- ny places, yet 1 am of the opinion that they are very often un- juftly cenfured by him and laterTranfhtors. Pierfon in his Pre- face to the LXX. publifhed at Cambridge 1655 hath learnedly Ihewn, that Jerom hath often overfhot in his Animadverfions j I will bring other examples, by which it will appear that the modern Tranflators have not done the LXX. Juftice in many pla- ces, the 4th Verfe of the 109 Pfalm is thus rendred by the LXX. 2w ffffife «* roy duuvt J(sfc7tw rriv rtl^iy MsA^/^/ix,, 1 h es facer dos in tternHm feenndum ordinem Afelchtfedec, which Tranflation Jerom keeps in his Latin Tranflation of the Pfalter from the Greek. Grot, upon But (j>otius and many others think this place very ill rendred, 109.?/*/«. Our Text (fays he) hath it9 feenndnm c$nftitt4tionem me am 0 Rex mi Jufte-, Grotins , and the reft are very much to blame , that forfofmall acaufe they dare di (Tent from the Author of the Epiille to the Hebrews, they thought the Gra^Interpreters did not read in their Copies Dior ot hi with a jod, as it is in the Mo- dern, but Dioroth without the jod : but there was no need they fhould have rccourfe to the different readings, whereas thetfrid^ Tranflation might have been maintained by th# Figure P*ragtgt, which they are forced to admit of in other places. The Letter jod at the end of this word doth exprefs the antient Vowel E, or our modern Scheva, which is neceffarily pronounced at the end of every word, as alfo now at the end of the Imperatives /W, die, &c. among the Latins the Letter is hard in the pro* nunciation which Enniiu , FUhttu, and other ancient Authors exprefs. Whereas we read in the prefent Text, quu mecum ? id, ofK's 9 dMp.the LXX hwtTrmjUted it 77* « wi ^m es tn ? For the lame reafon Critical Enquiries. i c ^ reafon, viz.. they regarded not the jod in the end of the lie- brew word, and for ittbi they read attb, what we have faid the Letter jod holds good at the Letters AUpb and Van , wnich were ancient Vowels, and put in and left out according to the pleafiire of the Traniciibers , according to this Method the LXX, read Alcpb in the word La en. Cert. Chap. 4. as if it were Gei.\.i$. Locen, r.on fit , the moderrs becaufe they read Lacen without the AUpb, have Tranflaced it, Oh.* propter in Gttiefis Chap. 30. the ^'••30.1 1. I XX read ba Cad as two words with Aiifh in the Mallbret Co- pies it is Bagudiu one word wirhou A'.cpb, the Firft of Samuel 1 Jjw.i 5.5. £/;.i.%. nD^,7fr#w. 7. Some fay, the Alepb is defective and left out and ought therefore to be Tranflated Op/is, as if read with an AUpby otheis again, as it is not defective but that it is the right reading and with Jercm Tranflate it Regina. The Hebrew word Dnmiab in the 3 Vrfe of the lame Pfaim is better and more intelligibly Tranflated SUemiam by Jerome and the modern interpreters than £pos& fafipientia by the 70, which is fcarce fence, the Hebrew word Col is very well rendred in the Gm^and according to the genuine fence iiat/^ as if you mould lay he wholly referred himfelf, the reft which follows do very well agree with the Hebrew •, but the Hebrew word Cart in the 17 Ferje is far better, and more intelligibly TranQated ofuf«F foderunt by the Greek interpreters, than Coari,Jict4t Leo, in the prefent Hebrew Copies and as it is in theTranfWionfalfly afcri- bed to VatMus, Verfe 2 5 they read in their Hebrew Copy Mim- meartt a me for Mimmcnmt ah eo, Verfeiq. they have Trar Hated hanavim nhprei Panptres, as if it were writ with two JWs, but this changing of the Letters Van aud Jed is very frequent in Scripture ^ for which reafon they heve Tranflated Naphfo anima ejus in the 30 Vcrfe , « ^x» P* *~nima rut*-, as if they had read it Napbft, the fame various reading is in the Tfalm 24. 4. and there is a great difpute among the Rabbins, fome of them rezdNaplofo, fome Naphfi^as if it were really marked in the little Mfiforeth ; but the great Maflhrcth hath took no notice of this difference, and therefore in the Venetian and Baft I Edition of the Collection of the Mafforcth, we have thefe words in He- brew. cIt is frrange that this word Napbft was not put in the great 1 Mcffvretb among the words which end with a Vau^ but arc read c with ajod -, as if the Jews of Ttberim had marked all the vari- ous readings. RR.AbenEfra, RtS$lomon Jfaa^Jofeph Ha\on, David Critical Enquiries. 1 5 5 David Kimbi, Obadiai Stphomo, and many others, who prcferr'd the reading in the Mar; i i before the context, read N.*pbfi hut the Greeks Interpreters and 7 eromN.iphfo, I did If ok upon four MSS of g^od credit, three of them had Naphfo y the oth Naphfi buc without any mark of the lit:le AUifforeth, whkhof thefe two readings in that variety of Copies and Interpreters muft we ehooie .' Moreover in the fame Verfe the Particle U follow \ng Naphfi, is rend red quite different by Interpreters, and this happens from an Aleph or VtMyfot lo with Altph is n n, with Vam r#s and Aqu.U Tranflated it 2m$ ei \ but in theCopies which Jenem uled and in the prefent Hebrew it is writ with an Aleph: thefe various Readings are very antiept?nd not unknown to Jerom, con\ crn- ing which he has theft words uron this place of Ifatab, c J met nentongregthttur ) which by the 70 is Tranflated, ut Cengregarem Jacob ad earn I very mueh wonder, (ays he, how the Vulgar editim (he means the Latin which was Tra;. Hated from the 70 and ac that rime called the Vulgar)**/** to overt hr-.w the ft?, ngeft Ar^n- mtf.tof the Jew* rthb-lef. wh-reas T hcodoti m rf>.^Symmachus d§ approve of ourTra>fl tun. I do not at all Wonder At Aquila who 'J '"/ anfatvgvord ft r word cither difembi.d his knowledge tn ih:s pL.ce or wot dectiv dly the corrupt and malitiom expo' t ion of the Phanfees, that he hath Tranflated, & Ifrael ei Congregabtur, viz,. Deo. Whereas the Hebrew word lo is mt writ by Lamed and Van which if it were the figm feat ion thereof would be ei or illi, but by Lulled and Aleph whofe proper figntfic at ion is non. ^*'hat alteration thefe various readings came fufficiently appears from the context and St. Jerom. Yet he is a little to levere upon the 70 in urging fo fTricftJy the reading of the Copies he made life of: Seeing he himfelf in the 6^Chapterot hisCommentaries upon the fame Prophet doth acknowledg the d fferent readings rot aflerting one more than another of the Hebrew Copies in this place to be exceeding various. In the lame Verfe the -o hath Tranilc ted the Hebrew word Zera.^ crriy.* y.* }/emen >/•;*//»*, which P.onoun the Greeks Interpreters or rranferibers mf;ht eafily add : Vet it is probable it was in the Original Hebrew, but, be- caufe two Jod?s came together in this manner Zeraj jahabdetma, that the firfr. might he left out. Laftly, th-j 70 have j yncd thefe words Ladduor yibony which in the prefent Hebrew Copies are thus diitinguiflied, Laduor hath a Comma after it and Jabon bc- V 2 gins — »"-»*^ i c 6 Critical Enquiries* gins the next Verfe^ thus ywA >> ^f£tpfri!) gtneratioventura: by under (landing the Pronoun afcker,^*. The G'rrrJ^I irerpreters could not be tied by the diftinctions now cited, becaufe they were not then invented, for at that time the whole context of facred Scripture was, as it were one Verje. We may by thefe eafily conjecture what caufed the Septua- gint to differ from latter Tranllations •, becaufe the reading of the Hebrew Context is uncertain. Wherefore I can't fee what the Interpreters of our Age , who would have us follow the Majfortth altogether, whereas their Copies are often defective and impcrfective, can fay to thefe and many more Examples I could produce. Who can deny that all the 1 3; Verfe of Pfalm 145 is not wanting, for whereas all the Verfesoi this Pfalm are difpoied in an Alphabetical order, there can be no reafon gi- ven why thatVerfe,which ought to be marked by the Letter Nun, mould be only wanting, which defect is by the 70 reftored thus, 777ccV Mej-W •* tvk $oyot$ avrx ^oacs I9 771*07 Toisi?yot< etur%9 by the Latin Interpreter, fiddis Doninm in omnibus verbis fuis & farMut in ofertbutfei. Yet we are to take care, that when the 70 exprefs more than is in the Hebrew Context, we judge it not always defective and gelded, for in fome places their Tranflati- on is more a Paraphrafe than an Interpretation, and what is fpe- cially to be taken notice of, we have not that Tranflation entire but very confufed,Thus the 70 have Trar fbted thefe two Hebrew words Eli.EU^o $i'o< fxov, 0 3-eo /uot/ 7r? foyyi pot, Dew meus, T)em me- *u,refpicc in me,$:.Jerom hath Translated them very well accoid - ing totte HcbrewOzg\x\2\,Deu4 men*,Deu4m: us. T\\z Hebrew word ^may be TianflatedZ>#4 meusfi it be read e//,and ad me [feltii, both thefe Tranjlations have been approved of by thofe who could not compare the GVf^with the Hebrew, and became one,becaufe the fence by this means did feem more compleat and full. I am cf the opinion that T?byi; t^i re [pice in me was not in the true Scptuagim Copy, or ar. lealt with 0sd* but once expreli For the fame reafon in the beginning of the 3 Chapter of the Prophet Habacuc, there are two Tranllanons heaped together in the fame Tranflation, the Hebrew runs thus Bekcreb Shanim,cha]ehx Bekcreb Shanim which is thus Tranflated by Jerom in Latin, In medio anncrum vivified Mud, in medio annorum notum facies, which expn ffes the Hebrew very well, but the 70 have Tranfla- ted this paflage thus \v &ahu «T.v'o £Jm yvwQiir», \v 7$ iyyifap tol '(t» Wtyya- Critical Empt'tries. 1*7 iT ty V a1) )'tit9tv T$ T&fHHU il'.' Kzif;v a.v&. in refp. ly they who foretold things to come, were calPd Prophets, but add j GtXris. they who uniolded either pad or pre lent Predictions •, we can- fa:r- f 6. not find , though indeed there was in that matter no caufe of difference between him and the Author of the Cntica Stcra. While S:. ferom denys the 70. Interpreters to have been Pro- phets, and afferts them to have been only Interpreters, in that feme place he thought a Prophet to be no other trnn a Perfon infpir'd with the Holy Ghoft , in which Sence all the Fathers had call'J thofe Greek Irrerpreters Prophets , nor has Voffms madeufeof that word Prophet upon any other Accompt , who has fo confidently aflerted their Qtotmusr&v, or Divine Infpira- tion. I am not ignorant f fays he, that 1 {hall not o.ly incur th$ De Tepf, la- reproof , hut the hatred of many; for having fuch tranfeending tcrPrer«*« -5- thoughts of this lro fion , fo th.:t J can ha dly forbear to five it the Title cf Divinely infpir*d. And indeed J defire to l^-.cw what reafon can be imagined . irhy J fnould not believe th.a which has b.en belie- ved by allth C r.fians fromth: Apoflies time :, txc fting only fo me few tto mh h favouring tie Jens of later Age:. Among which no queftion but he meant St.Jerom. Then he endeavours to prove more at large their Gsocr/:- 97 *r, or Divine Infpiration, oppofir their Arguments , who afhrm they could not be infpir'd with the Holy Ghoft or the Gift of Propriety , the Jews affirming , Thatdurii gall tie time of the Second Temple, the Gift of Prophefy and Infpiration ceas'd. Which foys he,«i altogether Ra- binual and Fiftitioiu : But no lefs idle is that which he prod ices again!! St.Jf/'oa» in thefe words. Seing there the words Prophets ^; , and Pr fhefie were ufed in fo Urge a Sence , even among t he Hebi ews^ they are not to be admitted veho deny the 70. Interpreters to ha: e been Prophets ! 6o Critical Enquiries. Prophets , as being the Chief Trie fts of the Jemfh People, and got only Interpreters of things f*ft , but of things hkewife to come. As if it had been the bufinels in queftion, whether the Title of Prophets might be applicable to the Interpreters -0 while the word P/ophetC\gn\Rcs no more than an Interpreter; when he had endeavoured to prove in fomany words that they were Prophets in refp. ad who were infpir'd with a Holy and Propherick Spirit. Nay he e- Critic. facr. fteems them injurious to St. Jerom , who abufe his Teftimonies to overthrow the Authority of the Seventy Interpreters. When hehimfelf being now of riper Years, was of opinion that their Errors are not to be imputed to the Interpreters thcmfelves , wlo Tranllatcd the Holy Scripture by the Infpiiarirn of the Holy Ghoft, but to the Scribes and Amanuer.fs. But we have already made appear what was the Sentiment of St. Jerom con- cerning this prelent matter, which Voffms underiiood not*, for now he was arrived at Years of more Maturity , when he ex- plained his Books by Commentaries. And how often he there correds, not only the Scribes but the Interpreters themfelves, there is no man can be ignorant. Thol deem the Hidory carry'd about under the Title of A- rifttan to be an Illegitimate Birth -, yet I willingly acknowledg , that the interpretation which is attributed to the 70. Interpre- ters , was made by the Jews of Alexandria, in the Reign of Ptolemy Philodelphos , and copyed out of the f/ebrcw Manufcript in Chaldee or Babylonic Chara&ers *, in regard the Jews made no ufe of any other Letters for tranferibing the Scripture but only thofc , after their Return out of Captivity : But as for the o- ther Greek Verfion, which Voffms believes to have been made by a Perfon learned neither in the Greek or Latin Tongue,badly and negligently copyed from the fame Hebrew Exemplar in Sa- jnAritan Letters, it is ameer Fiction taken out of the Pjeudo- Ariftobulas, who neverthelefs fpcaks not one Tittle of the Let- ter ; wherein Voffms maintains ihe fame Copy to have been writ- ten \ neither did any body befides Voffms ever dream of 'em \ fo far is it remote from all probability of Truth. They miftake indeed, as Voffms well obferves, who believe that Verfion was deriv'd from any Chuldaic or Syriae Paraphrafe, there being no fuch tiling extant at that time , and it being as certain that Phi- lo takes the Hebrew and the Chaldee Language promilcuonfly for the Critical Enquiries. 161 the fame. However we may have fomc rcafon to conjefture.he had fomc regard to the Ch.ddcc Language, which was familiar to moil: cf the Jews alter rhcir Ret'" D from Captivity. There was at that time neither Ch.nd. tot Sv sac Paraphrafc •, yet long before that, the Rabbics, as well in their Synaj i es as Schools, read the Scripture Text as often i C ldeet$ the I/drew Language, whence it might come to , that lever; I words in the GV##^TranQation were more adapted to the Idiom cf the Ch. Ideas Syn.it Tongue, then the propriety ol the Hebrew Speech. The fame re fists invented another Fiction, aflerting that un- D: tyilmc. til the Time when slq.iiLi itouriflicd , there wai no other Scrip- rure read in the Synagogues of the Jews, then the Verfioncf the Septnagirrt, in regard the Hebrew Language was fo forgot- ten , that the Rabbics them. 'elves did not under ftand it. But the 70 Interpreters., as Vofiisu will have it , flourifhed at what roj/Jiu'iEtzcr* timet he Hebrew Language was familiarly fpoken.But thcHcbrew Language was no more aFamiliarSpeech in the time of the 7oIn- terprcrcrs, then it was when AqmU lived. For that it was abo- lifhed after the Jiws were carried Captive into Babilw^nd after their return it tea feci to be any longer the Language of the Country. How then could ic be, that it fhould only continue amom; the Rabbles, who taught it publickly in the Synagogues and Schools j or if it be true , that till the Timt or JqiaU , there was no other Scripture read in all the Synagogues of the Jews, hue the Greek Interpretation of the -70 Interpreters. How came it to pais that Flavitu Joftybtu expounded the Lav/ of Mofes in the Hebrew Language, as lrofim affirms, and more- over that the fanxejefepbtu, the mofl learned of all the Hebrews of h;s Age, fet forth Ik's Pillory of the Jews in the Hebrew Language, before he wrote it in GreekJ Yet if we may believe Vofrsu, the Hebrew Language was then wholly lofty I it were fo,w hy does he call it \hcConmry Lang 1 'a;: e ( ff ofipbiu} I . er ag-iec with any who dij "agrees with Hsmfclf It is man rom the Writings of Jofephus , that the Jews of Faleftinc 3nd the Territories adjacent fpake the Hebrew Language ., which they learrt by praliie, without any Grammatical Rules, which were not invented till after fix Hundred , as Puffins would have it, but not tiD after nine Hundred Years and more. In which fence, as Voffiut relates, Jofephtts reports c that X he I 61 Critical Enquiries. he cccell'd in the learning of hi^ Cmntry all there*! of they*™ '• butthar. he learnt theCjre.bby (grammatical InfimStiont. Now he calls hisConntrj Le imngthe knowledge of the rlebrew Languure & ihc Lav of Afofes, wheh thtHyerefolymitan J.ws read in the He- brew Language in their Synagogue «.NTevertiicleis it we believe/^0/"- yi**,who frequently contradicts hi rhfelE, Chrift and his Apoftles fpake Greeks m JudeaAVhtrcver% faith he, from the time of Alexan- der the Great, the Grecians dilated their Co qtefts^ there Jfo the Creeks Language prevailed , and a Little after, as in Egypt > Aha and the re/t of Syria, fo alfovn Judca there was no other Language fpol^en, efptcizlly in great TcWns and Cities, Yes ■ there was in Egypt bciides the G,e,k the Coptic* > in Syria the Syriac, in Judea the Judeac, or Chaldce Syriac. Jro]fits might have learnt from the Evangelifts, that the Language of the Jews who Inha- bited Jemfalem, which ought to be numbered among great Towns and Cities,was ihtChddce or Syriac, and that Chritt did not (peak to the Jews of that C ty in Greek\*ut in Syriac. Which Language, the Jews who inhabited that Country afterwards re- tained trio corrupted, as may be prov'd by the Example of the TalmndyV/hlch is vulgarly called the Hierofolymitan^nd the Lan- guage aifo wherein that Book is written is called the Hierofoly- mitan. But among the Babylonian Jews, as at that time, fo a great while after, the Chaldie Language was mod Familiar, who have alio their Talmud written in the fame Language. For the moft Ancient Books of the Jews , except fome very few , were not written in any other Language then the Impure Chal- daic. But there is no reafon we ihould fpend any longer time in refelling the Affertions of Voffius, which have nothing in *em of Probability. Such as are thofc things which he delivers Jfc^de Sybil!, concerning the Jewifh Traditions, which he will have to be writ- Orac ten in the Cj ^Language before JuliniarPsRaign, and of the Bo.Vk Mifna, which was t ran (la ted about that time out of the Gree\ into the Hebrew, becaufe by an Edict of J uftinians the Jews were prohiuked to read th? Book of Traditions in tneir Synagogues. Theref ore (kith ProfpHsi to elude that command cf the Emperor, the Book was Translated into Hebrew, Rifum ttneatis Amid. But Critical Enquiries» 1 p ? But if the Lrr:rr.ed Gentleman had applyVJ his mind to the Thei&i m Ed'.Ct of Juftimtw, he might have found, that the Hebn I xn T ta was read Dot only at Jernjalem but in the ogues of the ] Hdlenifls. Which is :iy e i Ic \t\ ini tto rer\ words of the J// i V are g t to under fi and y Ths.tjomc fu\un x..,ci , the knowledge of tie \ Tonguet .1. e defuousto wi cenjhtut. mahnfeof thai in the Reading §f the Scriptures; th \i ct c,s w 'I l^* alfo take in the Grt I^E'litic, We then co fidtrcd thefc things, belt vethem to do be ff , rho mal of the Grcc Tran naif* in redding the Scriptures, andev y other Lan- guage fn eiy which the fUce makes more Convenient ter for the hearers.This Law of Jnjlinian fes th< Jews to be of two forts, of vvh 'ch (bme being wholly addicted to tl e H threw Language, read the Scripture in their Synagogues in the Hebrew Language only: others becauie they underitood the Greeks made life of the Greek» Trai il tion, likewife. By the E I of Jnfiinian they arepermitted to read the Scripture not only in Greeks, but in any other Language whatsoever-, Therefore all the Hellenifl Jaws in obedience to the Law of Mo fes , never lead the Scriptures in their Synagogue in any other then in tl Hebrew Language, to which foon after their Domeitic Native Language fucceeded. Nor is this any way contradicted by the Teftimonies of the Antient Jtor* and Fathers \ from whom it is apparent that the Jems of Alexandria, and all thofe other Jews to whom the Graj^was familiar, read the Gteeky zriion of the 70. Interpreters in their Synagogues. In like manner i: appears that there were certain Synagogues in Jerufalem, in which the Law of Mofcs, and the Prophets were read in the Crra^Language. All ibefe and many other Arguments that might be here collected together, ferve only to prove, that the Reading of the Greek Interpretation was only added f exposition's fake to the reading of the H brtw Text. As re v in our days, the Jews according to their ancient Cufiome every Sabbath day, read both in Hebrew and Chaldce •, becaufe that in the Ancient Syru les, there ad E>: ,ders; which Gift or Functicn ;.. erpreter or Pro- phet was Tranflated out of the Syna e to the Chi in Aflemblies , as ap] the ApoftJes words in Epi- le to the Corinthians Chap. 4. H - perhaps it cs roe to thatthe Greel^ Interpretation of the S . cs X 2 I 64 Critical Enquiries. Jefs accurately exprcfles the weds of the //.fowText in re- gard than they who made it, fiipply'd the office of Paraphra- se:-s rather then of Interpreters j efpeciaHy in thofe places chat were moft cbfctire. But as I have not leifurc, fo do I neither care to refute at prefem all thofe things which yoffwshasat large prodic'd to defend the Tranllation of the 70 Eiders, and to magnifie the E e riplars of the Jews againft ali manner of pro- bability. Therefore it will be much more to the purpofe, to cor pa e St. Jenms Verfion with the GreekjR feme pla:es, thence Rerp.adC.it'c t0 make maniteft how truly Vojftus has averr'd that St. Jerom ne= vcr des ia'ed upon right grovnds !rom the Ancients, and that he was thefLft amongft theChriftians who compiled a Rabbinic Verfion, and HicaM others the way to dare as much. Far dif- A/H«.E*gab, ferent was the Judgment which Austin EngubwHs eavc of St. Jo \c prefat. lib. romS Verfion which is now read in the Eofiesn Church; his words de } WgJ* it. ^TCXhcfe : Thus if you cemp -re the Hebrew Text with the Edition of the Seventy, /might be told to u/e this fimili, in a ff. sting that you comp.v e Light with D.-.rkriefs. . Which we flj.iU m.\ out tn eve.y pxrt of this Treat fe. Certainly we fliall find this 1 0 be fo unnecejfny to the Churchy that unlefs the Divine J.rom had blefSd us with this effect of his Indnflry^ we had necefjarily remain d to this day in many Erro-s. The Greeif. \ (hall therefore cull the Examples of this Companion out of Verfion com- the prophets, which St. Jerom Translated out of the Hebrew. par d with the , .,, , \ . , , . ^ , , , ' LlttnQc$ * .and illuitrated with his Corrimtntancs, both being extant as row. well the Old as the NewTranflation in his Works. However it is not my purpofe to vindicate St. Jerom from all his (lighter mifakes, as Voffim earned ly undertakes to vindicate the 70 In- terpreters .- In regard thatfeveral things have flipt St. Jcrom^ tho' otherwise mod: learned, while he, too much addicted rothe jewsof his Time, mnny times too feverely corrects the Greeif Interpreters. But that the Learned Father was Co many limes decei . 9d as he deviated from them, according to Vo$uef% judg- .2.22. merit, I utterly deny. In the Second Chapter of his Comment upon Ifaiah, upon thefe words. C-sfefrcm Man, whofe breath is in his N'rfrilsy fos wherein is he to be accom\tcd of ':, He wonders tint the 7© Interpreters omitted to Tranfhte into rhe Greeks fo perfpeuous a Prophcfie of Chrifr,as it feems to him to be, and he condemns the Jews for interpreting the word which in the Hel rcw is ambiguous in the worft fence. Now under the name of Critical Enquiries. \6) of the J ws in that place he tax< 1q.nH* and other Interpreters whoof fet purpofe compiled a different Tranflation from the SeftHdgint) to which the rw/, forfi h \ncient Interpre- tation had recourfe, Now whether thisOmifli >n be to be attri- buted tothe rranfcribe'rs or to the 70 them (elves, I Ilnll not now enquire, teeing it is certain that thofe words were not m the Greek. C )pi< s before Origin** Haae, the words be Dg added with a mark of little Afterifms in the Edition of Aqtila. N;r do I difputeofthe excellency of St. Jeroms Tranflai >n whether it be to be preferred be;orc that of y/7.7 fa. B 1 hence, I infer that St. Jeroms rranflation was erroneoufly call M Rabbinical by Vo$us, as if St. Jerom now being old had given credit to the Jews alone in compiling his Translation of the Hebrew Te;t. In the $Chapterot the fame Prophet i-jVcrfe, where Sr.Jeom Tranflatcs it, according tothe propriety of the He- hew words, And the L >m'.s flj.ill fed after their tunnies; he ta^es the 70 Interpreters, for that, for what reafon he undcr- llood not, they had Tranflated the words, They [hall feed rent in pieces like Bulls. Underftan ding Bulls inftcad of L imbs, and for Strdngtts interpreting Lambs. Neverthelefs the He' rew words are not intricate here, and the fence is open. S;. Jerom alfo re- proves the Grtck. Interpreters for Transiting the Text, And l[i.6.S» who will go for H* f Becaufe it is Lar.u in the Hebrew, and who JJjall goto this People, which words are not in the Hebrew. But perhaps inftcad of Lann1 the read Laam \ or elfe the fame words wh;ch foiiow alter, Go to this People, are here added for Explanations fake \ in regard the Pronoun lis (ignifies nothing there asm m my other places But much more worthy Obfervation arc thofe things which S:. Jerom reports upon thefe words which he had Tranilated ac- cording to the Hebrew Te\t, Blind the heart of this Ptople,and load the Ears of it, when the Greek interpretation feems much more kindly. Wherein it was written, Andthe heart of this people became obdurate. But they whounderftard che Hebrew Language know well, tlrit this variance might proceed fro m the different pointing of the Vo.vcls: and the 70 tollov\M the pronunciation moll ufual in their own time, which was different from what was praclic'd when S .J^o^liv'd^and this is demonftrablefrom the Mafcretic Exemplar. Both Readings are confirmM by Tradition. But the Grcekjs here to be prclerrM before St.JV; / had nc: Sermon m tbei •. / rr, but in the //ri iv L 1 e. ll't-ethci rant eft he H M L .• i ttimt *fth Ap ft ' . . he the Evat/% tlifl I) e ? 1 1 : j. but ch'd in S/fltf the Quotations which hcci.es he could not cite in any other ■otl"r'*fcr Language then the H.brew, becaufe the Hicrofolymitan Jews re the Law or Mofes in their Synagogues in the Hebrew, no: the Greel^ Language; and if any othei Inrcr,Teration wereaddedit was done in the S riac Speech, which was the vulgar Language, as Voffv.'A here freely confcflcs^ftOt in the Greek, which wascniy ufed in rhe Schools and Synagogues of the Hellemfls. But in this I confefs S:. Jtrom is to be corrected, where he Comseat la fays, that Matthew and John took their Citations from the Me- c- -- W* brew of the Old Tcftament, forgetful of th?t Rule which he fets down in his Hebrew Traditions upon Gene/is , that is, that sy 3r*w»tax^ the Apoftles and Apoftolick Pcrfons madeufc of the GreekJL\- c cmplars, for no other reafon then becaufe they were common among the Gentiles. But as for the Hebrew Copies , they were kept only in the Synagogues of the Jews, among whom very lew were to be found who underftood them. On the other fide the Greek Language was familiar to molt Nations. But it is /to be obferved, that the Apoftles, though they ftook to the Greek Copies, yet they did not altogether fo totally depend upon them, but that many times rhey took more notice of the fence then the words. Wherefore S.Jerom expounding this place Micba. <, of Michah, and thou Bethlehem Ephratah makes this obfervati- on ; Some obferve that in all Quotations taken out of the Old Tefra- 7nent there is fame mftafa or other , that either the Order or the words are chan?' dyand fomt times the very fence it felf varies , the Apo,lles orEvangi lifls not looking in the Books yl;ut trnjting to their Memories, that might fomctime fail them. Thefe words indeed feem fome- what too harfh, n^r h? /c i quoted them that Voffms mould give any Credit to them. A. id yet he can hardly forbear at the fame time to beleive John Calvin, who commenting upon the fame place 2 i68 Critical Enquiries. place of Aficha, thus obferves. What necejpty is there to weft the words of the Prophet, when it Was not thepnrpcfe of the Evangilifi to repeat the Words of the Prophet, hut snly to note the Text. In like manner S.7fr0/«,fpeakir:g his own and not theOpinion cf ethers, ini.ap. concerning thefe Quotations which are cited out cftbeOldTe- u.irnent into the New,*» many Quotations Saith he, which the Evan- gelifis or Apoflcs have taken out of the Old Tefiament, we are to take notice that they do not fellow the order of the words but the fence. But let us now return to our purpofe. The fir ft words of the ninth Chapter of the fame Prophcfle, Ifai.p. i. are hardly to be underfiocd in the Greeks Verflon, when the fence lyes open in St.Jeroms Verflon. St. Jerom producerh both in twodiltinclCoIums after this manner. At fir ft the Lai d of Ztbulon,uld be the Word, asSr.fcrom interpreted it : who prefently adds the Original of the miiiake in thefe words. In the Hebrew Language the word 121 which is written with three Con fonan' s, according to the propriety of the places wh re it is ufed tf it be read Dabar it figntfics a Word or fpc ch.but if Deber, it fignifies Peft Hence and Death. N >t iar from the begin- ning of the ictbC h:p'er cf the fame Prophet upon thefe words, iuu. 10. 5. mto AJfnr, Sr. Jerom accufes the Interpreters fcr net having accurately obfervedthc Hebrew. Again in the 28. verje of the fame Chapter upsn thefe words, Hj is come to Ajath, he fhews large how much they differ fi orn the Hebrew, and taxes them of Falfhood for interpreting \t Rama City 0/Saul for the City §f Sau! U called G-d\ fad, as it is in the Helrtw. Moreover Critical Enquiries. i 6y Moreover St. Jeroms Opinion concerning the Seventy In- terpreters is quite different from thar of Vef\\ns, who believes there is nothing but Gtcck^ in it, and that ic is hardly call'd t Language that had its Original in the S , nagogue, For thus he ipeaksin hisiixth Book of Ccmir.cnraric . Infeadoi (Iran 'cr, thatil t^uxJtk, the Seventy have Traujlated yti+fAf * which it #« Hebrew (Jer— Therefore Gee .is ts no t.r^ei: word. I Ht an _ -. Hebrew no-d decltrrd after thi Greek manner: whi-.h u cr "tQ ^/ftr9mi \t*ri, roWi-'t '.n^ ih vc > i '*:>i yerfen rod;- ja hfi Ji g- *fo /; n o d ' tfw aG - ■■ i m /, becmnfi hehasth tart el the me:co cc:n- ist/t tj.i of the Jr' r- gntfies I *>>d ; . U r-£rhe Lao- ^ is Solicitude 4 (Are N >w ; n in I Cr,^ i: . iretersh *? ro * de lated from h nceoi Scnptu e, in thee, l+ver. 25 of the feme P het, where we read in :'vc Lit ne EJ on, The Mo njk * I I e (hamedtund • he Sun jl? /< b cn>. feu% de f St. j e , um truly • : f. 1 . '. • ids, hijlead §f that vph ih we Intcrp ety The Mean (h II be afhamed, and t\ . be confounded, Tne^c ■ Tr?. il he i o:ds. the Brick (hall be mejred and the ^ -a\\ ih II fall. '•• d 1> and by hed rs i lie rcafon of the miftake, becaufe tha i I ot the Hebrew uo;d Levant ni^:? which Ggnines the Moon, they read Leiena wh'ch ngnines ' »-* a Brick, aid in (lead of n£1? Chammah which Cgnifies the S//>/ , from h^ heat, they read r,T,n Chomah which figmfics aWilL Br I ftav too long upon thefe things, in regard that St. f:r cmes Commentaries upon ifaiah may be read by every body :, where he frequently taxes the Cyrr^Imerf re- ters of MifUkee, fome irnes deceived bj the Ambiguity of words, fometimes upon other accompts. However fome- tiroes he fpares them, as in the $oth Chapter, where after he had condemned their inconftancy of Interpretation, by and by as it were correcting himfelf, he adds, I Am apt to believe they did tot err f rem the beo^nmng, hutth^t they were depraved by the negligence of the Ti arfcribers. And £.40. where he notes ibmc things omitted by the Interpreters, he prcfently adds, ?s it were in fome doubt, either omittedby the Septuagint / terpreters, orby the fault of the Tranfcribtrs. In like manner fometimes he corrects the (feeb Exemplars according to the Htbrew Coricc, leaf: the miftake fhould he rut upon the Intel 'prefers, as upon thefe words, Chap. 45. Thus faith the Lo.-d to my Annoimed Cyrm) he truly obferves, that moll of the Lathes as well as Y the \yo Critical Enquiries. >e the Grukji did very much mi flake in believing the words to b< written, Thmjaitbtbe Ljrdto my Lo d, For the Text doth not fay;-. which lignffies Lord, butwf?^ to Cym, whoin/&- brew is cali'd UJTO Curofch. Tiie fame things are to be feen in St. Jeromes Commentaries upon Jeremiah, Ez'k^cl and other Prophets. And indeed there is nothing more frequent in his Commentary upon Jeremiah, then his obfervations of things omitted by the 70 , or at lead of paflages not to be icen in the Greek Exemplars- For fomet'mes he accufes the Interpreters , fometimes the Tran- fcribers. In this Commentary alio upon Ez.ehel, where heob- Ferves the Omiflion of the G>r^ Copies heprefently adds :, In divine Scripture it is better to take all in that is [aid, th. ugh thou und< rjlandifi not wherefore it is /aid, than to take array what thou do ft not know. Neverthelefs in the 5th Chapter of the fame PiOj'lKt^he fcarcely dares adventure to accufe the Interpreters, where he fays, c 'tis much better to Tranflate what is written, c then to feek to defend a thing ill Tranllated. Nor do we fay c this was done by thofe to whom Antiquities has given Authori- ' ty •, but that after many -Ages it was deprav'd through the 5 'negligence of the Readers and Writers, though both Arifleat c and Jofephm and all the Schools of the Jews, aflert no more * than only the five Books of Mofes, to have been tranflated by 9 the 70 Interpreters. Nor is it only in this place but in many other, that St. Jerome feems to deny that any ether pait of Scripture was tranflated by the 70, unlefs the five Books of M^fes, as upon the 5th Chap, of Mic*h, wheie- he has thefe ex- . prellions. The Interp etatien cf the 7n ( '/ W-ie done by the 70, for J ifephus vor teSy and the Hebrews ajfert by [raditien, th.u on- ly the five Bosks of the L^w of Moles were Tranflated by them, and delivered to l'i*g Ptolomy) vary** fo far in the pi ac cited, from the Hebrew Truth, that vce can neither fet the Chapters right , nor expeurd their Sentences together. But faff** is of a quite contrary Opinion, who not only feeks every where a Defence for a place ill tranflated, toufe the words of St. Jerome^ but openly tci lilies, that he makes no queftion but that the Prophetical Hooks were alio tranfla- ted b the Seventy Interpreters, though formeily he made a doubt of it. And which feems to be above all belief, if we ; credit Fojfws , the Greeks Interpreters fliew themielves molt Critical Enquiries. \y\ mod accurate in the more oh (cure Books of Job and the Fro- verbs. But 1 believe rhcrc is nopeifon sikUM in both Languages, who will agree with him in this particular, lb trivial is tl Grec!^ Tranilation of thofc Books in many places. Yet am I St. Jerome not fuch a one as to pin my Qeeve fo paflionately upon St. Jerome fometimeitax- as every wh< Thus not to tares upon R. ting down the Sons of the Rbodians in It cad of the of Bid.. deceived perhaps by the Jikenefs of the firit Letter, whilftthey xezdRadaniox Badun. But that this miftake is rather to be attributed to the Tranfcribers then the Interpreters thofe Verfes which follow in the fame Chapter plainly demo'frate, where the Seventy write Bcd,m, as in St. Jeromes Tranila- tion. ;ain in the ^th Chapter of the fame Prophet, where men- tion is made of Gog^ heobrcrves, that the Creek Interpreters in the 24th o> N.imbci s for A gag in the Hebrew have made ufe of the word Gog , But it is a man. 'felt miftake ot the Tranf.rib. But to omit a thoofand thnigsor the fame nature, the Obfervatir on of St.Jorome is much better in his 40 h. Chapter of the fame Commentaries, aim ft all the He reW words,and ma;,y in the Greek and La tine Tran\l a ion were Corrupted by long Antiquity, and de~ ■prav'd through the negligence of the Tranfcrilersrand while they are Tranfcnbtd out (fb.id Copes into Copies more corretled, of Hebrew words they are made Sarmatic nay of no Nation at alljvhile they c cafe to be Hebrew *nd become Forraigr.e. Therefore are thofe things moft carefully to be diliinguifhed, and according to thcR'iles ofCriticilm , which St. Jerome taxes as ill tranflated by the 70. For as he has r'ghtly difpIayM the moll of their Errors, So he ?'^'}\ corrects many things, which deferve not to be found fault with. Nor is it to be wondred at when Sr. Jerome himfelf teftifies that he could hardly compleat h;s Em , n regard there was not an hour, fcarceiy a M oment, wl n he did not meet with whole trocp; of the Brethren , ?s.d for that be- ing then old befides the icultyo dictating, he v. >!e to look ovci the Heb\ Volums h the Print. In like rr ;s1 that he cculd not Cm» hi rightly tranflate fbmething, while he had not time to co iider for hall: cf dictating. Therefore neither S: ome% Y nc \yx Critical Enquiries. nor the Seventy Interpreters being Prophets they muQ: ofne- ceflity ilip many things, becaufe they were but Men. CHAP. XV1IL Of the reft of the Greeks Tr inflations of Sacred Scripture , and the Hexaples of Qn gen. The Opinion of Ifaac Voflius concerning the Difpofition of the Hexaples refuted. THere was no Perfon before St. Jeromes time, whodurfi: adventure to frame a New Tranflation of the Sacred Scripture from the Hebrew Original, in regard the GYre^Tranf- lation of the Siptuagint was looked upon over all the Chriitiaii World as Divine , and proceeding from men infpir'd with a Prophetic Spirit. And therefore it was thought more proper to recount the reft of the Greeks Verfions rather among the Jewifli then among the Chriftians, as being fuch as were fini- Ihed by the Jews or half Jews i n hatred of the Chriflian Religion. But when Origin inferred them all inh\$ Hexaples, together with the Verfionof theSeventy Elders, And that the ancient Fathers of the Church confuked them in Expounding the Scriptures, and that noihing more frequently occurs then the names of thofe Authors in the Writings of St. Jerome, we thought it con- veuient to bring them in next after the Interpretation of the Seventy Eiders. "Aqkitit Firft therefore we will take notice of JqniU , whole Greek «reck Trail- Verfion we fhall refer to the Reign of Adrian the Emperour. «itloB. He hav'ng forfaken the Chriftian Religion, which he profcfTd before, revolted to the Jews, and at the fame time undertook a new Venion of the Biblic Context, in opposition to the Greeks, which at that time was univerfally received in the Church. And becaufe he found the 70 Eiders to be rather Pdtaphrafters than Interpreters, he began a new Tranfhtion,, which fhould render the Hebrew words k&t* -mi* , or follow .'ng the fignification of every .vord at the Heels -, from whence he got the Name of the Contentions Interpreter, and his depraved aff-vftnuon , which they called k^/.o( k\%v , was condemned: Ahhough Stjcrom, :oraing to his cullom, feciusto have a better opinion of him, for Critical Enquiries* 1 7 1 for fometimes herraifes him as a Learned and Diligent In- terpreter, rhw writing to Damafus, Aqula, faith he, n?/,^ Eplft. 125. u not Contentions , 41 £r I/ reported to be , /w/ inter ft Its diligently word fer Word. Nevcrthcleis in another place he calls him a contentions and lilly Interpreter, tbatis to fay, having relation to things and places, he gives a different Judgment oi one and the fa ne Interpreter, and taxe>.him as a half Chn'ftinn, calling him withal, Jew and B/afphemer. In like manner Epifhanii who detracts from AquiU, as a pcrfon that Frequently n> mltjn or fpeaks Barbarifms, yet calls to his affiftance againft the Arn- ans his VerGon , forfaking that of the 70 Interpreters. How highly he was efteemed by the Jews ^ Origen tells us in theft words, S0, faith he, did Aqnilafubfervient to the Hebrew Phrafe ?pl*« ^ ^ make his Tranflation^ who anting thejewsis thought to bale ten- 'ric' dred the Scripture with greater ap:h.nfe^ whom they thirfiy make ufe of who are ignorant of the Hebrew 1 ingite, as Ptlcivitig him to have attained to the perfection of it. However the k4x*£*)aU or depraved Affjftation of that In- terpreter can hardly be exculed, who while he keeps over clofe to the words of his Text, clouds the fence and me.inini of it. Wherefore hehimfelf notcontented with his own Tranlhtion, undertook another, wherein following the fame method of In- terpretation, he was the caufehimfelf that thofe Veriions had no other approvers then the Jews. Nor do Jujhn and fome o- thersof the Fathers feem to have recourfe to them, but cniy to inforcc their Arguments more home upon the Jews. Who was the next that after jiqmla tranflated the Scripture The Greek out of Hebrew into the Greekjs not certainly known. For fome TraalteticD of attribute that Verfion to Symmachus, others to Thcodofion. Syma- fyimnuhus* chm the fir ft of the Samaritan Seel, afterwards turned Nazjtrite Chriftian.or Ebonite. He is vulgarly reported to have compiled his Verlion in hatred of his own Nition, the Samaritans whole Religion he had for(akei"u and that in the Raign of Severn* the Emperor. He finding AqaiiJs Interpretation to be e ntemn'd bymoft, efpecially the Chnftians, becaufehe interpreted word for word, applied himfelf, as St. Jerom tcftifics, rather to ren- der the fence then the words. Symmachns, faith he, ufes to fol- low not only the y&Y.oZ>)KidLv of Wirdt, but the order of Sence. Af- ter that, by the report of the Tame S Jerome, he undertook another Tranilation: as if the former had not been fufrkient- ly accurate to his mind. The 174 Critical Enquiries. The third place , among the Greek Interpreters of Sacred Context is yeilded to Theodotion , who never thelefs is thought by mod to have lived before Symmachus, under the Emperor Commodns. He embracing at firft the opinion of the Marcte- mtts, afterwards turned Ebiomtes , and in compiling his Verfi- cn, altogether laying Aqnila% afide, comes neareft of all to the 70 Interpreters. Wherefore Origen took out of that, what leems to be wanting in this. And St. ]crom teftifies, that in his time, the Prophcfie of Daniel was read in the Church, ac- cording to Thcodoticrs Translation-, nor is ita difficult thing to prove that he regarded much more the fence then the words of the Text. Thus in the ^tb. Ch*p. of Genefis. v. 4. where we read in the Septuagint im- ron.e, a mofl remarkable Teftimony in this cafe. A'e andria and Egypt in their S'pfu gints 4pla.d Hefychius the Anther \ i.t> Ape, Gonftam inople even as far us Al-.x. ndria approve the Ctpies of adv. Kuffis. Juftin Martyr \ the provinces in tie midjl of thtfe read the Pale- iiine Aftiniifciipti whnh Eufebius and Pamphilus publifind, being Elaborately vien ed by Origen ; and the whole World coh tends ab.Ht this threefoldTruth. But ApoUmariuj out of all compoled one Edition, tin ugh unfi iccefsfully being rejected as well by the JcwsasChriftians 0 wherefore St. Jercm gives this Ji dgment of him. 1 pafs by Apollinarius, who with great xjeal and diligence , but nA ai cordmg toknowLd^e, ha i endeav.nred out of all the Tran- flatio,i% to make fever ai peices of Lioith into one Garment, and t weave tr.e Corjeque*ct of Scripture^ net according to tie rah of Truths but acco/dingtohis ewn Judgment, But thefe thin sfli 11 j be made more manifeft, when we come to explain the Difpo- fition of Origen s Hex pic, which was known to vei y few, as we (hill prove by what follows. St. \erom m kes a diftinction of two Verfions of the Septu.t- gir.t, efpecially in his EpiitletoS//w/*jand Fretcla, whom he ad- monifhes, that there is another Edition of the Septuagint^ whi h all the Grecian Commentators call *.wh or Common , and ano- ther which was to be found in the H xaples of Qrigerry and w h< iy£ Critical Enquiries. he teftifies to have been faithfully tranflated into Latin by him- felf. St. ]erem adds that there is this difference between the one and the other, that the kqivI or Vulgar was corrupted by the va- riety of Places and Times, and the negligence of the Tran- fcribers , but that which was to be found in the Hexaplcs, that was the TranfUtion of the 70. which was preferved incorrupt and immaculate in the Books of the Learned. Which words however are no* to be underftood , as if that Greek Edition, which tht Exemplar j oiOri^en prefent to our view,were ihepure Original of the 70 Interpreters free from miftake, feeing that Onnen himfclf tells us chat he had corrected the Vulgar Exem- plars with all the exactnefs he could, which were moil: of them corrupt and depraved in his time. Now who will be fo hardy as to affirm that fte reformed every particular Error that was in thofe Copies? Rarher it might happen that under pretence of Correction , he might obtrude fome Errors that were not there before upon the antient Exemplars , like that fame Critic, who examined the Greek Edition, which is extant in the Bibles, Printed at Complutum , or Alcana de Henares in Spain , by the Cr^Copies which were antient and ol good repute, butfome- times alfo by the Hebrew Originals. Therefore as the Edition of Complutum is not therefore the more pure becaufe it comes nea- reft the Hebrew Original •, but ior that very reafon rather dis- commended and rejected as corrupt; fo neither is that E*i tion of Ongen , which St Jtrom magnifies , becauie it is more agre- ablc to the Hebrew Truth than the Vulgar Greeks Edition to be therefore thought the more pure and without Fault, becaufe it is more agreeable with the Hebrew Exemplars than the *pwii7 or Common One. I conlefs indetd that Onge» has made no al- teration of tet purpofe in the Verfion of the S^ptuaghit which he inferted irtto his Hexaples, becaufe he avows it of himfelf, wri- ting to Africanus , where he favs that he had no indention to frame any thing which might d fT r from the Scripture received in the CathJick Church ; But the reafon of his Method , which he has followed in correfting the antient Gretl^ExtmpItrSjphin- Jy demonftratcs that in them he has msde fome Innovations. For thus he fpeaks in his Treatife upon Matthew. What Incongrui- ties tbe>e were in the Exemplars of the Old Teflament , we were a- ble to reconcile by the affiPance of Cody making ufe of the othr Edi- tions : For thofe things which in the Sept HAgint fee mid to be dubious , by Critical Enquiries* 177 h n*f°n °f rfyc Difertfdrtcy of Exemplars , weighing tndconfider- ing the other id no s , vre m.id: to ajrec Kith tie Reft. Therefore Origen, while he lent his healing hand to the Vul- gar Exemplars oj the Greek Edit ion of the Sepenagint, conful- tcd j4qml.i) Symmachus and other Authors, nay and it is very probable the Hebrew Text it fell too. Now who can prcfun e to affirm hi into be fo happy in his Emendations, as never to fwerve from the true Reading; nay though he had lb exactly examined altogether all the Editions, as he fays himfelf, a; d all varieties, that by comparing the Difference of Tranflations, he mi^htunderftand the Septnagint. Concerning the Emendations of LeecUn and Hf chins , who r in like manner examined the Exemplars of the Vulgar Greek theEdidomiS Editionw;th the anrient Exemplars , the fame Judgment may lutlamssA Be- be given of them: For it is very probable they coniulted the fjehim* Verfions or Aqnila and others : From whence arofe that Diver- fily o! the Greek Codixes , which now appears, in feveral Editi- ons of the Greek Tranilarionof the Septuagint . A'l which we may reduce principally to three, from whence all the reft were derived: And thele are theEdi'rionscf Complutnm, which is ex- * tant in the Royal Bib'es, or thofe Printed at Antwerp -7 in the Pa- La e Greek rifian PolyghtsfivA the Bibles that are Printed under the Name £ditions*i$il o, Vatablus. The Alciin or Venetian Edition, which was after = wards Printed at Str4sburgh, Baft I Franl^lrd, the Order of the Books being fomewhat changed * And laJ:iy thcfowa^Printed o from the Vatican cWf*, which was afterwards Printed a Secc n 1 ^ Time at T.*m by the care of John Mori-mis , with an anrient Latin Verfion \ and ;'s the fame with the Englijh transferred in- J^2^* to their Poljglotton , as being the molt acurateo' all. The Edition of Complatum was the moll full c f Faults of a- ny of the reft, as being examined and mended not only by the Greek, but by the Hebrew CodcxesMo ; fome alfo attribute co Eufe bins and Pamphilus* new Recognition orEmendation of the Euftbiu^i Greek Verfion ol the Sept nagint •, but if" there were any Edition ditio • of Enfebtus it was little d.ff _ e c from-that o[ Oriren: F.>r as St. Jerom renorts, Enfebtus and Pamphiius divulged the Codex^s , I- ad\ that were elaboratly mended by Oigev; Enfebtus alio recites ^,tin- an Epiftle of Cc rift ant ine the Emperor to himfelf, m$} Kz-m- ffKivK $torM» relates, they took the Name of the Pal.fli'.e Manufcripts;as thofe which were corrected by //*- Ths fileffhst/ychitu wcicciUedConftantinopilitan \ and they that were revis'd Confimtm9fo- by /,•«;/'<« carrycd the Nime of Alexandrian, And this Diver- htin M.iAjx- f]Cy 0 Editions appears in feveral Exemplars in our Age-, while auimn Ediu- fomt relate to th >(e of Origin, or the PalefUman, others to th Alexandrian, Now let us inquire what was the Order and Di poflcionof tne B:>oks inOz-^w's Hexaples , which is varioufly controverted among the Learned. If.ac Voffutt promifes that he will at one time or other de- de Sept. In- rno:iitiate that Qrigen in putting his Haxaples together took a- ttrpret.' J.*9. nother way then is vulgarly believM. Wherefore in his anfwer to the late Critics, he maintains that the Tetraples and Hexa- pies oiOngen were not fo calPd from the four or fixColumns,but that they were call'd Tetraples, becaufe they contained a fourfold Vj.fion:, Hexaples becaufe they* comprehended fix Verhons. That h Author of the Critics errs as to the Oftaples, while he foil v Epifkaniusxn his fniftakes, becaufe Origen never wrote any Oftables , that the Hebrew Codex was never reckonM into frigcni vaft t:i- N nber of Verlions, by reafon that Origen calls the fir it Co- rn king lum is to 'eC&vkIp £<&?•*, the Foundation of all Tran flat ions. confoer'd. j ~o fus adds that in the Tetraples there were fix Columns, in the Pentateuch Mo feven, as to which the Samaritan Exemplar might be added, Printed in the Original Hebrew Letters, as they are call'd by Eufcbms and African*»*, But becaufe that was only done in the Pentateuch, there ore thzTetraples were faid tocontahonly fixColumns by the (anae reafon as in th H-xap!es ,ihorM thcPffl. a feventh Version is alfo added ; and yet the Title o' HexapUs remains, becaufe that feventy Verficn is wanting in other Books. Thus far fofy.us, who oeverthelefs cites no other Authors but hi nfe f, to fh:w what that new way wab which he promisM tod m rate \ yet that we may give the greater credit to his w< ds. Since thee arc ).o cxewfl.tr remaining, or at leaft, none hitherto to bt found of H xaples or Tcirzples^tocintc.d a- bout thefe things too profufely would butjhew the Canity of a perfon too Critical Fihjnirics. too liviflily faumdring avc*y Ins let/u e. After this manner Vof- fius2Cr\nx\ himfclf or hs prcmiies to difpfcva new and un- heard of Dilpcfeloi Origin* fjexdple*. Hut fince he never faw anyExempla so] them, it will doc be anuTs to coBfulcchofc an- cient Fathers or the Church, and firil of all l.p ph*mns, who describe them as Eye witnefles. D onyf.Hi Pit/ivim a mofl learned Jefuit, and nolefsversM in the GV<eel^ in GVfd^Letiers. d qnt u I Symmaclus. Sipui^i* t. TLezdotton OCTAPLE'S. Heir {jo in Il-br'w Letters. 9' ■ _ ■ - ■ ■- 1 Hebrew in Greek Letters. slq i U. .v}w» n >th--s. \ Septii.igim. Theodotion. Fifth Edition. Sixth Edition. - — - z* But l 8o Critical Enquiries. But, faith rofftus, t\\zTetrj.flcs and Hexaplts were not io cali'd from the four or fix Columns, but fiomthe lour- fold Ye; Hon, becnufe they comprehended fix Tranflacions : wherein the learned Gentlermn is grofly millaken. For the name of Tetr*plesy Hexapies and Oclaplcs was deriv'd from the number of the Ed::ions. And every Edition took up one Column or Page accord n; to the ancient Cuftom of Writing out their Volumes, as the wotds of Rnffituis plainly evince. It was the Intention of Xu/fia. iaveel. Or gen to (hew us what was the manner of reading the Scriptures a- mmg the Jews, and th.refore he placed every one of the Editions in their proper Columns or Pages. The fame therefore was the me- thod of Pages and Editions inOrigens Hexapies. Norare thofe Arguments of any moment which Vojfms deduces from the word Vote?*?, which Title 0*^« gives to his firft Columns, that is to lay, to 'y-C^jkov %Jicpo$ as being the foundation of all Ver- iions. I would fain know what elfe can be thence inferred but thztOrigen had a mind to diftinguifh by that name the Hebrew C untext from the Vcrlions that were made from it, as being the ground of all the Translations. In which fence St. Jerom calls the fame Context the Hebrew Truth. Does it lefs from thence appear that the Context written in the Hexapies in Hebrew and Greeks Characters took up two Columns, from which equally as from the Verlions, each of which was written in it's dLftinct Pages, the name of Hexaple was deriv'd .? Moreover it is a Fi- ction of the fame Jro\fiHS% which he fains concerning the Samari- tan Codex written in the Original Hebrew Letters, which was ad- ded to the Pentateuch. For that was unknown to the ancient Fathers o, the Church Epiphanius, Jerom, Rnjfinus, as alfo to Eufebius and African** whom he endeavours to draw to his par- ty. Neither will ever Fcjfi us be able to demonftrate by certain Reafons what he fb confidently afFcrts touching the Samaritan Codex which was in Origerfs hands, and vainly he produces for Witiufles Eufcbiu-s, Afruanus, SynciHus, nay cvenOrigen him- felf, wJ ( i to much as dreamt in their deep of this Sama- ritan Exemplar, written as he fsys in the Original Hebrew Let- ters. The Samaritans indeed had a Greeks Verfion of the Tent*- tench which W3S well wo ro the Fathers, and out of that -/4- fru i n», Eufebim, and S melius took feveral Readings of the Sa- lt, ritai Exemplar translated from the Hebrew which they infert- cd into their Writings- As for Origen, he ftudyeth the Hebrew Language F.i b, /."'. Critical Enquiries. \ 8 1 Language undei the Inftru&ion of HuiUm% Patriarch or the Jens, and not o I nmaritmu \ and chci fore he did not make ufe of the Hebrew Copies of t\& Samaritans^ but t i e Jnv. In which Sence thole w rdsof / him i t to b So great wot the are and diligence which Ol i en //i\/ mj bisacCH* rate Examination of the S-icrtd 1 1 i iffj^'i rW fc#/# rnt tbt Hebrew Lan^u ige^ And b.ught up the Origin .ds which W r, amongtheJcWS, Written m the Hebrew Characters. But P0//&0 apparently wrcfts In Rcfp. ad thewordsof EufeUm to another Sence \ n:.d to accommodate O 1 *& Crifi them the more calily to his ow& Opinion fcrupl'd not to alter the vulgar Reading without the help of any Manufcript Copy. For thus he reads the Sentence, 7t2< 71 xa^l rois 9l*Jkiot{ lu^irj- uiv&i TfcfloTV&Olf OLVTtli ' Y.C rc/.lW SCS%JH0Si J (y.l'M KjnfJUt l/W TQl'*crsL- Ott/, whereas it is vulgarly read tjwMi/t»?, not T?a/J<>7i/Voi?. And thus he renders it, That he learnt the Hebrew L wgua^e, a,tdpw ~ chafdto hitnfclf thofe Scriptures which were written in the Original Hebrew Letters Now faith Fofftu, in Eufebius^s Sence, the Ori- ginal Characters are no other then the Samaritan, and Eufebins had manifestly contradicted himfelf, if he had meant the Vul- gar Letters of theory/, when he had wrote the contrary in his Chronicle. I cannot, but wonder at the Ingenuity of Vof-- pus to imyofeupon his Readers in a thing fo plain and obvious to all that have but kifs'd the threfhold of the GVf^Tongue. The Books of Eufebins are in every Bodies hands, whole intenti* on in the place already cited was no more then to (hew the in- defatigable pains and unwearied labour of Origen in perufing the Books of Sacred Scripture and fea renin gout their Serce , which that he might the more ea'ily attain to, he learnt the Hebrew Language from Jew ,(h Mailers, read over their Books in the Hebrew Characters, and compai'd them with the Verfions of the Seventy, Atjitila, Symmachtts, and others. Whether it be to be read T?«laTuw or Tflalo-nArw* I will not at prefent difpute, by reafon that though VoffiH$\ Ldbion^ (honld hold water, it is certain that by Prototype or Original Lecters the Hebrew Cha- racters are only to be underftood. That is to lay, the Hebrew Context in Origen s Hexaplet is written in Hebrew and Creek Let- ters, as has been already obfen'd. Wherefore Eufebins then bearing in his mind the Hebrew E templars, which were at that time read by thole who did not underitand Hebrew , becaufc the 1 8 1 Critical Enquiries. the Characters were GVr^ rfl'eits that Origm rurchas'd an He- fr**? Exemplar written 1 fiehren Charr-ctus. For how cou:d it othciwi/e be when the Jdcj were his Mailers ai.d not the Sam*- iit**sHvrA acknowledgti.at thcExempters o ths Sam* nmfen» tat.uch written in Cnaracters different from the Jewiih, were not unknown to/ ufebi*s,0> ;gerj^ and others of the Fathers :, b.it bj- caufe mod of them dd not undeiftand the Heir evr Tongue, where theyfpeakef ihtSa/naritMCodrx .moll zttlutdl) they mean the Gre ture received in all the Churches, thep the Tran flat ion o. the 70 Interpreters, he fet forth that apart with certain No:cs, by the advantage of which all the reft were put to view :, fo tftat what feemed to be wanting in the Hebrew Contest, he fiipplied out of Theodetion's Vcrlion, with the add'tion of a mark which the Gramariam call an Afieris^ as ill ultra ting thofe words cf ThelfoMf the Context, which were too much curtaiPd, and as it were W***1* abbreviated. But if any thing feemed to abound and ro be fu- yerfluons in the Hebrew Contest , in thofc luxuriant places he added another Mirk by the Critic's called a Spit oiObelas, as of what was luxuriant in the G e /^Edition ot the Septuagint were tobecutand murdered as fextraVagaat : And the chief Defign of Origen, as Epiphjnins (edifies, in the Difpofition of that work was, that the Jew? might the more eafily be convinced by the Chrftians in their Deputes. Becaufe they frequently ob- jected that it was otherwise in the H brew Exemplar , than in theG^eek £di ion. The fame is alio teftifyed by St.J^rowand Ruffmu^ though Sr Jcrom fometimes gives a reafon of tho Notes fomewhii differe it. Ori-ren had added alfo other marks to this Work in the fa (h ion of a fmall Labd , concerning the ufe of which rhe Criticks of our Age do not agree , and which has been hitherto revealed but by a few 7 we axe to underhand, that Greek Edition of the ^gpuogint^ with all thofe illuilrating and killing Noces in the Hexa-les of Origin, was found Cose- the: with the rra nil a tions Aqnila^Symmaems and the other I iter pre ters, I he wor is of Ruffinm lee n co prove. O.igtn1* Intention w> ■ to (Ihxv m -chat manner of Rea i the Scriptures was ervtd among l'je J* P '• j andwote the ft v r ■ Ed tion » i f them eve- ry on, 1 . bis prop'r Col am s a i wh ttever t led r taken away in any of them he noted With cert. un mm\\ at the beginning of tne srfes 1 84 < Critical Enquiries. Verfcs, and in that which was another mans and not his own woyk he affixed Ins own ma, kj only that iy\s Ukg Daggers, they denote that the Seventy havefddvtorc then there :$ in the Hebrew. Where there are any Afterisks or little Stars, they JigK'ifie an Addition by Origen out of Theodotion^ and there WS have Tr. inflated the Greek-, here we cxprefs^d from ihe Hebrew rch .t We unJerflood^ obferving rather ths Truth of Sence, then the Order of ihe words. This new Tranfiation of St. jerom from the GnckJLxe nplars was joyfully rcccivM by moTt Churches, as being of lingular ufe in the Explanation of Scripture \ and fhew'd the difference between the Exemplars of the Church and the Synagogue. For which how Ruffinus has fum'd and ftorm'd againft that mofl learned perfon and lb well defending of the Church can hardly be exprefsM. Who, faith Ruffinus, would have dar'd to unhallow the Inslruments left by the Apojlles, but a ju- daic Spirit? For Ruffinus does not fpeak of the Verfion which St. \erom afterwa? ds made from the Hebrew, but of that which he drew from the Grrd^Tranflation of the SepttMgint^ with fome additions under tne mark of the Afieriskt and the little Dagger ^ to (he the Hebrew Truck, far greater difficulties arife upon it. F n of that, e\en anions, his Friends heistax'd as an Innovator. In lb much that St. Aufiin himfeli could not brook, that the Greek, Tranll ttion, which it is manifeii the Affiles had us'd, fhould be defamed : as if the Authors of it had miftak'fl. It will be zery hard, faith 9t. Ail in Writing tO S:.]eromy if whin thy Inter fret.it ion (had begin to be frequently re.d in muny Churches, that the Greek at.d Latin Chu ehu jhouldftomtodifagi tg. Soon after, he confirm the tiling by exam] !c in ihefe words. A tert am 'Brother of ours, a Bijliop, whin he had determined th.it 'they TranfatioH Jl)> uld be r.ad in the Chu ch where he frefideS, another perfon ftarted anObjetlienj b.>t theText woa by theft othtrwife Tran» jutted in the Prophet J Onah, then had been tncu'.cated into the Set.ce and Memory of all p. epic fcr .0 many Ages, upon which there arofe fnch a Tumult among tie people the G ecks c hetfly blami; g and cla- mouring againfl the Cahuntny if the fuppos^dfallhcod, that the Bifaop was forced to have lecourji to the Teftimony of the jews. For this Verfion St. ferom brought upon himfdf the Curfes of all peo- ple, of which he frequently complains even to Irkfbmnefs :, nor is it a Trearife fo much as an Apology which he every where writes. Wh..tfl s, ..nd hat I m i) ft l^more plainly , Heirs of the Grnm- ITi ..-. 1 Faction :insl e v h\ ■' ■ di c fe ai carding to the Hebrew- If they ao mi b tit vt u. , let yem e. thofe :htr Editi • ous of /^qiiila, SynimachusrfWTheodotio : let^tmtxamint Hebrews not in one p'ctce bat in fever. d Provinces, and when they find them all agree With my Error or [gnoi ance, lit Vw H .- derfland 1 hi mfelves to be ove. wife, at.d , other defirous to (I en loam, and let 7cm inhibit in the 70 Cells of Alexandrian Pharos. Laftly ipo Critical Enquiries. L.fih, he decs r.ct fparc the very Eyebrews of the Bifhefsy to ule his own Words , wl.o tpdeavours to efpejs whcmfceier tkey fee fcWnfulintbc Church and to 1/ojcfs the word of God. But I ij.end time in vainj his Apologies againft Ruffnus being eve- iy wheieto be li2d. In which he ftrenuoufly defends tie rea- lm or his Veificn, and fhews hew much he profited in his Stu- dy cf the Scriptures under his Jewifh Mai ers , and how much by the Jamelnfhuc t is, Clemens Alexar.drinus, EuftUtu and fe- veral others advantaged themielves; who while they difpute fcbout the Scripture, and endeavour topro\e what they fay, pi educe the Jews for Witnefles and Patrons ot then Opinions. And becaufe Ruffinushzd objecled to St. Jercm , that while he made his Tianilation lie was not infpired with a Prophetic but a Judaic Spiiir, Heanlwers, Wiuldit ?.ot femtedtcus, or rather would it i.ct favour teo much of vain Olo-y, J auld jljciv thee ii hut an advantage it is to near out the Threft.oldsof cood Maflers- and to learn Art from Artificers. For St. Jeremwiote an Epi- ftle to Tammadnus, ent'licd, concerning the heft manner of Tran- jlating, wherein he refufes the Calumnies of one Palladius, who at the Jnfiigation of RufJ'inns had befpattered his Tranflation. He there (hews by many Examples, that it is not the duty of a good Trai ; flat or , to tranflate his Authors verbatim, when nei- ther the 70 Interpreters nor the Evangelifts fellow 'd that Me- thod cf Tranflation Aquila, faith he, a Vrofel te and conten- tious Interpreter , wko endeavoured to Ti an fate not or.ly the wards but the Et\ mo logics cf words is defet vediy rented by us. Concern- ing the 7clnterpieters in the lame Epiitle tie has this expreflion. It tsntvp too long to enumerate hew much the 70 have ad Jed 0/» acknowledges that in framing a new Tranflation of the Sacred Text, he chiefly confulud'rhe Jews Critical Enquiries* \ n i Jews as his Leaders and Inftruftors; neither does he rpeftion but that) many things might Qiphim as a mm, fo far was he from the Opinion of th >(e, whoaflerted hi nin that underta- king to be infpir'd with the H >lyGhoft , wh >m MtrUruk egre- gioufly refutes. W&*t *<:/.* fji/, faith char learne 1 fefui e, tftkr fo m.ttiy Agety to flr.un for nc :v F&ions to fet up new Prophets? Shill we call hi m a Prophet, who in the framing his Tranfla- tion follows fometimes the Greek Interpreters, fometimes the Jcvvsof his Age, upoa whom he more frequently depends ? Can he be faid to be a Prophet , who frcq.ienuv but chiefly in lis Commentaries upon the Prophets, doubts of the Genuine Signification of the Hebrew Words? Tis true I knew Pdfmnus and other Writers, efpecially of the Proteftant Belief, who de- ny\l that Verlion to be Sc. Jeremi , which for many A *es has been read in the Eaftcrn Churches v but if you except fome few Books of that tranlhtion, which it is certain were not rendrcd by St. Jerom, as they are extant in the Edition, no perfon tru- ly candid will deny bat that this Interpretation which a;oes about under the Title oL the ^V£*>*, was really made by St. Jerom^ though there be fbmething in it of the ancient Latin Verflon, which betore Sc. Jeroms time W3S only efteemed in the Church. So that in fome places, wiiich ho.vever are very few, there does appear the reading of the Ancient Verfi on, or elfe a mixture of both. And clear it is that that fame Trandation was made by fome n\:i\ e Latinift fr )m the Hebrew Original. Now who in the whole Latin Ghiirch befideSc. Jerom at that time nnderftood both Languages , that is, the Hebrew and cue Latin ? Bat they thir. defire co know morco :hefethings, let them confult An- ftin Eufubin, and J§hn M+ % in their Writings upon this Subject. Now that we may lore p rfe Ty underfland the N iture o" that Vulgar Editio ;, we m i(b take noti :e that St. Jerom, tho he confeiT mielf tot to have exprefled the Words of his Te t verbatim, and 'ike a Gram rv, neverthelefs fone- nes he (licks more clofe to his Words then the 70 , or the o- ther Interpreters , lo thathei always like him a his TranhVion. Again we are to obferve , that the modern Le- ftionof the Hebrew rextisnot fo often to be corrected from the Tranflation of St.Jcrom, a !tdifagre< >mit^ tor tho- he make profeflbn to have followed the Hebrew Truth, yet fome- ipi Critical Enquiries. fomctimcs heforfakrs it t^frllowthe GVfeiy interpreters. Nei- ther do I think that the Hebrew Exemplar of his Mailers, which he frequently oppefes againil the 70 Interpreters is to he preferred in all things, feeing tto t St. Jtyom hirnfelf had no O- riginal Exemplar of the Hebrew Text , neither do 1 think wc are to give Judgment 11; on the Verfion of Sr. Jercm , by tlx la- ter Tranflations which frequently vary from the other, but we mudhaverecourfeof neceffity to other Grammer Rules, then thefe which have been let down by our late Infti lienors, as hath been at large demons-rated, and which it is no difficult thing to confirm by many Examples. I mail therefore produce only e- nongh to puzzle the lefs skilful. We find according to the vulgar Edition , in the 9th of Za- charp ver. 1 1 . thefe words, Then *lfo in the Blood of thy Tcfta- went haft fent forth thy Prifontrs out of the Pit : but according to the Hebrew Exemplars it ought toberendred, / have fent forth thy Prifititri, and the Pronouns Thou, thy, thine, are in the Feminine Gender, and fo make the Scncc liar different from that of St.Jerom, which agrees with that of the Seventy Inter- preters. Msr.y to defend the vulgar Edition in this place,reje£t the J wifh Exemplars , as corrupted by them on fet purpofe : But it is much more proper to fay , that the fame Pronoun in the Feminine Gender is taken fometimes for the fame in the Malculine ; which the Mtforites of Tyberias allow, whoadded the pointed Vowels to the modern Context. And thus they de* monftrare the fame thing to have happened in three places of Scripture, which they cite. Wherefore if the fame occur in any other places which the Maforites have omitted , the and- entTranilators are nor therefore prefently to be accus'd,becaufe they do not agree with the later. Infhe fame manner St. Je- rom maybe vindicated for trar.fluirg the word, Then haft fent , when according to the Hebrew he ought to h;ivc trai.fi .ted it, 1 have fent. For this difference of Tianflation arofe from the Lettei Jod , which is noted b the Maz^ontes ro be often fuper- flooiis. 1 he Maz^orites themielvts reckon up 43 TLccs markM jathir jod that is, throw away JW, as redundant. Thus jer. 32^33. where we read, Thou haft taught, in the iecond Perfln. The Fk brew word is writtet wirh Jod at theend,as if it (h uld have been rendred in thefirit Perlon. And indeed in the 'tlfer Maz^orah it is marked to be read without a Jod , and in the le- cond Critical Enquiries* \ 9? cond Perfon , as Jcrom renders ir. But I | a \ by thefe things , 2Ddmany others, by which it might be made o;* ; ie .;: ha tg ' y ly '•> f the Roman I o-.tifex it is come to p*fsy th.it all other i 5 an latiom tx - dated ext rmi uuedt even (he Pro- t&tyre of ti e /A ire utby the vulgar Ldtin Ve (to \ h... .1 q wed mkind e>J 'Uivine 'Primacy. Nor has lfaac Cafaubon^ aperfbn A-Jaan lBi- otherwife very learned, fpar'd the Tridentine Prelates, who roa. affirms that the Hebrew Truth has loft its Priviledge aad Au- thoi ity, fince ihe Greek and Lathi Ver: were made Authen- tic^ at Trent. But the Proteftants undefervediy complain of the Decree ol Irmt becaufethe; ill not put a kind Interpre- tation upon the word Authentic, and d e from Divines who arc cf highefl; Autlicrity in the Church cf Rome. The Triden- tine Fathers, when they made that decree, confultcd the Tran- qi [Uityof the Churclies, and defigned only to obviate rhefe, who out of an Uch of Innovation I cd their Doctrines would gain no (mall credit, if they detracted from the true Ec- fuftical Verfion then in the hands of every P'erfon. No lefs was the errour committed in this particular by fun- The imp- dry O,thodov Divines, who maintain the Vulgar Edition to be ^cnt zeal of free from all mi! lakes ^ whkh opinion was patronized by mofl ^).'nc Spauilh cf theS ulh Divines in AiareanaH time \ fo that the learned iVin*r* diirftnot 1 a contrary opinion. For thus he begins his Trca- tife in defence of the Vulgar Edition. We undertake a Tronble- Minx* pro fom norland very t web perplexed, a dangerous Canted, then which D*fc*f»PMg» J l^ow hot whither any in ihefe Later Ages, efpecially amngthe Spjsifl) : es hot been maintained with greater Meat and Ammo- fity and msrt JmUai. 1 d tween the forties 5 Jo that from 0 0 tch d ' 0 nn tr th :vht h th ) have d famed oneano- theyk gth cited one an ther to Tribunals of Juftice^ a d 1 hat p.irtyw 1 1 tft con it own (trength, has pur- fnedhie adverfaries eing . >, as Impious, Freud, ■ n wl sat re] . jrning, have 1 ; in Chains, tothenofmall d of Healths But Mariana fhe.vs . e Ex- w, many fa fhoo r in r, • a fm .-,-- ref tbofe Err: ulgar Edition. In like man* : Pe 0. paz, , a: :, in the Tic. (' whi . ' l.2 Cod oteconcei e H,, Editions of si AUirid rewar.d G*eek, a Herts the Gi : a of the Sep- tuagmt 1 n 8 Critical Enquiries. tuagint with the ancient Vulgar ? 10 be no lefs Authentic! than the Mcdern Vulgar \ wherein he queftions not but that AnimjlinAi- ^^ 2rc many b'emifhes and failings. The fame Depute tif.BctruJc. Leo jiujiu tells us was darted concerning the Decree of the Council of Trent, which declares the Vulgar Authentick by the Fathers of a Society , to whofe care a certain Academy was committed, and at the fame time declares what the facred Ge- neral Confiftory thought of this, in whofe opinion it is a crime Several Judg- not to acquiefce, in thefe words ta'cen out of the Library of menu at ^tms Cardinal Prifcia. Ti e \yh- of January \ *76. the general A[- the Latin In- icn:bly $• ?• L ^- S- Moi.taid Sixt. Caraf voat of opinion that no- tcrpretcr. thing could be urged that could oppofe the vulgar Latin Edition, that there was not fo mm h as on Teriod one S entente, one Word, one Syl- lable, one Iota amifsf and jharply reprehends Vega, becaufe in his 'Tenth Book of J unification c 9 he utters himfelf fo boldly. But that decree of the Colledge of Cardinals, becaufe it ne\ er was pro- mulgated, never obtained the force ol a Law even in Italy , as all thole things manifeftly prove, which Cardinal Palavicini ur- ges againft Padre Paolo, wno hath ipoken concerning the Tri- dent ine Prelates , as if they, by approving the Latin Interpre- ter by their Decree, had detracted from all the other Editions. But Palavicini (hews at large that the meaning of the Council W3s far otherwife, and in the Explanation of the word Anthsn- tiihjne perfectly agrees with us , declaring that the Prelates of Trent did not punfie the Vulgar Edition from all its faults by their decree • when as ic might be ftill corrected and another Edition much more accurate be made, neither had Gulielmtu Londanm any other Seihi nents of the Vulgar Edition long be- fore that, who has cbferved many E rours therein , which he does r.ot lay upon the Trar.fcrfbers but upon the Interpreter himfelf. But above all the reft, Framis Lucas Brugenfis is a ma- terial Teftimoi y in this particular, wherein he had expended thefluiiesof his whole Life. He therefore in h sEpiftle De- dicatory, before his notes upon the Bible, where he has dili- gently obferved leveral difference, in (iindry Copies, thus ex- prefTes himfelf. What others eh feU 1 9 us ^ that becaufe tin Linn Edition ha6 been approvt d and declared Amheniu j^ • y tie Council of Trent, it needs no farther Correction, is ridiculous For neither d'dthe Counc I believe the Exemplar s of this E it ion to be void of Err our s • neither did they recommend any get tain Exempt r f any ' Edi- Critical Enquiries. \ no r.dtiott, to be followed in General \ OPtly p erened tb.it Edition be- fore any of the L.:t*n which are txtan , and . I it a .t>.en.i.bz With rvhich aj rce the Corrections of thei u Edition which Bulla j.V. were made at fevers] times by the Commando! Scxtns the V.and Bulla Ckn. 2. Ctemem the VIII. forSexttts fearing Icaft we fhould [ail into the former Chios o! Editions of which S:. Jtr§m (peaks , declares that he fnd made choice of Perfons skilful in the Scripture, Theologie and many Lnn g lages, and or their lunge perience piercj ; idgment and diligence highly eminent , to correct the antient Latin Edition4, according to the ancient Latin Copies and Expofitions of the Fathers^ but in ilich things wherein they were noc fufficiently (trengtiiened by the content of the Copies nor of the Fathers, to have recourle to the Hebrew and Greek Exemplars according to the Counfel Ol St. Jerom. How- ever Sext m ad monifhes 'em to do it eautioufly and fparingly, for fearof caufing a fluctuation in things which longufe and pra- ctife had author iz'd. And laltiy he makes a decree of his own, that that Edition fhould be received by all, as being that which the Tnd.ntinc Synod had declared Authentick, and recom- mends the fame as True, Lawful and Ur.queitionable, and to be received in all pub lick Difputes, Readings, Sermons and Explanations. Furthermore he forbids any Bibles of the Vul- gar Edition to be publifhed for ahe future , which not being con- formable to his, would but dilturb the peace of the Churchy and further decreed , that they fhould be of no Credit or Au- thority which did not agree with his Edition. Tims far Sixim V. w; o alfo teltifies , that to the end the undcrftanding might be more correctly accomplilhed, where any thing feemtd con- fii$*d or that might be confounded, he amended thole things with his own H \ .d ?Tw.u the Labour of oth -s, I lith he, to confute and adv feb'tt curs to lr.: I fpeak of thofe Errors at; prcfcnt, Which arc without Contro- vcrfic the mcer failings of the Aavmianps. I admire the Ln£- lijh in their Bibles took no notice of many which they let Hand. For to omit fevcral others, who c HI Id have (lipp'd this Error in the 5jrMc VerGoo in the 14th Chapter of Gentfii9 where the Hebrew reads (jojim Nations, the Syriac Geloje, which the Latin Interpreters of the SyrUc renders the People call'd Cjclitcs. So in the 22Chaptcr5 where the Hebrew Examplar has it Mori*, the Syriac reads Omouroje, which the Interpreter renders the Amorrhxans, as if there were any thing there mentioned of the Am$ rkaans. But thefe Errors 1 attribiue partly to the Scrtbtr, partly to thofc who pointed the Syriac Verlion, in regard that points fiipply the place of Vowels, as well in the Syriac as He- brew. In like manner Gen. c. 32. v 32. the Syeranj who under- flood not the Hebrew word Nafche or fining have made of the Word Genefo , which the Latin Interpreter tranllatcs the female Smew, and inftead of the Sinew that (hrx*^ , upon which the word Genefio appears in Ferrari^s Syriac Lexicon, which nevcrthclefs feems to be feme corrupted Hebrew word and not to be numbered among the Syri.c. But I fay no more of thefe nor of fix hundred more. This is only worthy of observation, that the Syrian Scribes have erred in Writing out the Syrian Exemplars far more frequently , then the Jews who underftood the Hebrew. Thus Jof 19. in inftead of King Bafan, the Syriac reads King Mathnin. Which diverfity proceeds from this, that the Syrian Scribe did not diftinguifh between B, and M. In like manner for Kiriath Jearim, the Syriac reads Kirir ath Naarin, and the Latin renders it the City of Naarin. So in the 7th Chapter or Judges the Syriac reads N eduba.il for Jeru- baal, and Chapter 9. Neptha^tor Jeptha : all which might eali- ly have been mended, with many more of the fame nature. Wherefore 3S to the Syrian Exemplars that have been fet forth in Print, we may truly affirm, what St. Jeromatterted concern- ing the Greek Copies.* Troat fme of the words are not only not He- brew, but Barbarous and Sarmatic. I could alfo enumerate thofe places where the Syriac Tran- fhtors,forfaking the Hebrew, follows the GV^Verfion of the 70 Elders. Wnich variety neverthelefsol Interpretation is rather to be laid upon the Scribes who (trove to make the Syriack^Trzn- llition conformable to thofe other Exemplars either Syriac or C C 2 Arabic loA Critical Enquiries. ^r^.V^whichwcreTranflated from the GVwI^Edition. Thus Gen. 2. both in the Syrlac and Greel^we find it, upon the fixth day, whereas in theH.b, ew it is the feventh day, and the Animadverfi- ois of Jtrsmwpon this place prove this Lection of the Hebrew Text to be the molt Ancient. In like manner, Gm. 4. This Claufe, Lt m go into the fie:d^was TranOared out of the G?e\ Vc iirotheS) ■,-//ir1 while St. Jerom terrifies that in his time the fame v\ as not to be fofind in the Hebrew Exemplars. Lafl !y, Gen. 8. Wnere mention is made tf the Grtvo which AW? fent out of the Ark, both in the $yri*ck&nd Gretk a e do not find that ever the Crew renin. 7d :, but the negative particle is not to be found in the Hebrew Context, norwaskthcre inSr.^rcwjtime, as may be eaiily prov'd from his Writings. From whence we in- fer that the Verfion which the Syrians call Tare •, from it's anci- ent perfe&ion, is much degenerated, and now to he cak'd rather mixM then Pare. Thofe variations which arife from the diffe- rent marking of the Numbers I pafs by -7 as fore Adjudges 16. Where the Hebrew and the Vulgar read 1100. the Syriac Verfion numbers 1300. iSam.c. 6. for 50070. in the Hebrew Greeks and Lxtin, the Syrlc reckons 5070. But no man can be ignorant that th:re aie frequent variations of numbers in all Books of the fame nature. There are other Examples of dif- ferent Readings of more moment in the Sy.iac Tranflation, which altogether alter the Sence , fjchare, fome in the Book of Jfl/fe/^efpec.'ally in the diviiion of their Allotments to the feverai Tribes. Another Alteration there is in the Syriac Ex- emplar where all the Infcriptions of the Pfalms are left out, on purpoie to put others in their places. The reafon of which leem* to be, for that anciently the Kapafouof or Argument of the Tfalm Was prefixed at the beginning of every Pfalm. Whence it came to pafs that the Hebrew Infcriptions of the Pfalms which did not explain the Pfalms to the liking of the Syrians were omit- ted, and others added by the Syriac Rabbies. As to the Syriac Language and it's various Dialers, I (hall fay nothing at prefect, in regard that many have already learned- ly handPd that Subject. We are only to difcourfe or thofe things which concern the Syriac Verfion. Therefore what before we have obferv'd touching the Jewijli Exemplars, to which the Rab- bies of Tiberias added the Points /that fupply the place of Vowels, that is now to be noted as to the Syriac Exemplars, to which Critical Enquiries. 205 which the Syrian Doclors have added the Pointed Vowels which now appear in their Coppies. Therefore W.dton is . an Error, who believes that Gabriel SunitA^ the AUrc?ii:e of M :.t Lebd- r.on, was the fine that inierted pointed Vowels into thcSyriac Exemplar : Hcw.u the firfty fiith he, fj ea! rng of this Gabriel, who pointed it,a.,d aJded the Latin Interpret. >tio i of the fame. Fir before, all the Afanu'hipts Were either MefirPHte of p ■n,s) or if any word or vowel hipptnd to be pointed, in w /.other H oas emitted, one S)U-ible printed Mid amtther val^ d, as toe fee at th;s d y in the Ma- tiftjerift Copies. That tins is j artly true I will not deny, for that the Syriac written Copies fbme have more, Pome have lets points at the pleaiureof the Tranfcribers,who nevertheless feldom o- mit the Principal. Yet 1 have met with Manulcripts that have been c ly pointed. Abraham Echtllrnfs.i jf.rcnite of Mount ^. E^cl ■ -u Lebanon teftifics alfo , that he had by him fome Books written in the Syri.w Language above 3 co or joo years before, com- pleatly furnifrfd with all the Points. Then again in mofl: Copies they never omit any Points, but on! ch as are of no ufe in reading, which may be eafily fopply\! by the Reader. As we find in the Syriac Edition of the New Teflamem which wasfirft ptibliuVd by Vuidmanftadius , wherein Tome Points are omitted, which are of little ufe. And therefcrethe Indullry of Gabriel Sionite, a mofl learned perfon, is not fo much to be applauded for his adding points to the Copies ; but he is rather to be corns mended for this, for that with great labour and toyl he cor re . ti- ed the mofl: of the Errors which ai e extant in thofe Manufcr i p though that Edition does not feem to be fo abiblute and per feci neither. Thz Arab r-^Tranflations feem to be of much lefs Authority, of ^m/r^ which are read at this day by the Fafern Chriftians. Nor do oi: Xranfl they feem to be fo ancient as the Syriac. For the mofl: of them en:, were made pubb'ck among the Syrians as well Jaccbites and Ma- romtes. as Nefturians, when the Syriac Language ceas'd to be fa- miliar, when they were fubdu'd by 'he Saracens, whointrodir.-'d the Arabic among them. The Coptic alfo, or the Ohriftian's that inhabit Egypt had their Bibles written ia the ancient Coptic Language which they ftill retain, but becaufe that Coptic Lan * guage was known to very few, there was a ncceiTity to make new jtrapichj) erfions which might be underftood by all. So that the mofl: of their Books which are made vSc of in their Churches are written both in Coptic and Arabic* Therefore it is very probable, that 2o6 Critical Enquiries. that tht Syrian* Tranflated the holy Scripture out "of the Syriac into Aralic, fuchas were thofe Arabicb Exemplars, at the end wherco" we find the Arabic Yerfion to have been Tranflatcd from the Hebrew ■, that is from that Syrian Transition, which the Syrian's call nr.mixt. By the fame reafon we might affirm that the Exemplars of the Arabic^ Verfions which fclLvv the Creek Copies of the 70, were not fo much Tranftated from the Grtel^ o- the 70 Interpreters, as according to the Syriac which was Tranflated trom the Greek : though it be probable that the Seel of the Melchites took their Verfion from the Gn ^Copies, as they did mo/l of thofe other Books of which they make life. But whether there were any Verfion of the Scriptures before that time I mail not now enquire, it being certain that moft of thofe Verfions now usM by the people that inhabit the Eaflcrn Regions are not now the fame which in former times were madeufe of in the fame Country. And indeed mould that Arabic^ Verfion, publifh'd in the Farifian and Engltjh Poly- glots, be throughly examined it would be found \ery imperfect, full of faults and Errors. Thus the Arabic Book of Jofhuah, thcugh toward the end it may be faid to be Tranflated out of the Hebrew, yet it appears to be a mixture of GVf^and Hebrew or ra- ther Syriac : Befides the Author of that Trsrflation many times fhewshimfelf aParaphrafer net an Interpreter, and he makes no fcruple of altering the Sence of his Text. In the Book of Chto^icleswe find the name* of Greece, Turkje, Cborafan, Scla- njonia , France, Cyfrnt and the like. Yet all the Errors of t'lat Verfion are not to be imputed to the Arabian Tranfla- tor, the moll without doubt being committed by the Scribes. Thus Jof. 11. We read in the Arabic Verfion Nab in King of Ctfarea, whereas in the Hebrew Text and ancient Translations it isjabw King of Hafor. In the fame Arabic Verfion Jo[hua is faid to have afTail'd the City of Gtfarea, which was the Metro- polis of feveral other Cities: ?r\r\ Judges 3. inftead of the He- brew word Tefilim, which Signifies Idols, the Arabic reads Tale- ftinc. Laftly , tome Ei rors have crept into the Arabic Exemplars through the inccrtainty of the pointed Vowels. For the points are no lei's defective in the Arabic then in the Hebrew and Syriac. T^e Ccftlc The Coptic Verfions of the Bible, which were anciently made Verfbni. by thofe Chriftians that inhabited Egypt feem to be of more Cre- dit then the Arabic • For they carry a femblance of more Anti- qui y. And if we may believe Kircher, who had by him fome Exemplars Critical Enquiries. 209 Exemplars of thofe Verfions, we may look upon 'em to be asan- cientas the Council of Nice. But not to contend about their Antiquity, certain it is, that they were rerd in the Churches cf Egypt long bcfoie the Arabian, which were taken from them. The word Ccfttu orC'fhnu fcems to derive it's Original from a Cry or the lame Name which was heretofore the Metropolis of Theb.dsok which both Straboznd Pint arch make mention. Aid very prob ble it is, that that fame Coptic Language was the an- cient Language of the Egyptians, not pure, but having fome mix- ture or' the GV*^,efpec!ally from the time that they m re rnder the Dominion or the Macedonians \ fothat they chang'd i he an- cient Characters of their Language, into the Greek, which they partly retain to th;s day.1 But in regard that Language furceas'd by degrees to become familiar and only rcmain'd among thofe who had fomething of Learning and Education, the Egyptian Rabbies added to thofe Books which were then read in their Churches in the Coptic Language, the Arabic Explanation, after they became fubjett to the Saracens. They have alio Lexicon andGramm.irs for that Coptic Language which Kircher pubMh'd in Print, by which we find that the Ancient Coptic Tongue, bc- i;dcs the Creek words which it had learnt under the Crucian Princes, retained alfo femething of the slrabic. Put ro man ought to doubt but that the Coptic Verfion was taken from the Greeks Tranflation of the 70 Interpreters, in regard that the Jevrs of old, fomcof the Syrian Churches excepted, always read the Hibrevo Text, or Verfions taken from thence. As to the Ethiopic Verfion of the Bible written in the Ethio- The Etbiofk pic Language, we (hall make fome few oblerva'ions. Thisv^n*- Verfion, as all other Books which are read in the Ethiopic Churches, was Tranflated out of the Optic into the Ethiopic Tongue: Therefore the Ethiopic B.bles are the lame with the Coptic, rendeiM only into Ethiopic. Neither do the Ethiopian* acknowledge any other Patriarch but only him, who aflumes the Title of Patriarch of Alexandriay being an Egyptian , and the Ceremonies of their Church are borrowM from the Egyptians or Coptics. But the anc lent Ethiopic Language wherein their BtbU is written, has fomethin?,of mixture both of Hebrewt Arabic and Chaldce : Efpetfally ot 1 he Chaldee\ lo that the Ethiopians call their Language Chaldaic or Babylonian , as if it were the fame wi b the pure and ancient Babytonic} from which however it differs ve- ry 2o8 Critical Enquiries* ry much. BMt the modern Ethiopic, now familiar among the Ethiopians, differs little from it. Neverthelefs they do not ufe any Points, like Hebrews, Chaldeans ^Syrians and Arabians ,but e- very Letter makes aConfonant and a Vowel , which is peculiar to that Nation. The Tap.** TI:ere feems to be nothing at all at prefent remaining of that Vc.inns. fame ancient Perfian Verfion which beyond all Controveriie was t: -k m from the 6>:d^Tranflation of the Seventy. The ancient Perfian Language alio has admitted moth of mixture, by reafon of it's bsiflg jumbl'd with the Arabic, from whence it has bor- row 'd all it's terms of Arts and Sciences, together with the A- tc Ch:ii "afters, the ancient Perfian Letters being lofr, and no where to be ken but in fome Antique Copies. But as for that fame Verfion of fome part of the Sacred Scripture, publiuVd in our Age, it does not feem worthy of any great efteem, as be= 7 : « Amt> ing but of late years. If we will believe the Armenian Doctors, r. r. iranil tti- t»ne Veriion of the Bible which they now read in their Churchts in the Armenian Language, was not made by John Chryfojfome, as fome believe, out oi the Greeks into tht Armenian \ bus by fome Doctors of their own Nation, who (iudied thec7r*^Lan- gu3ge, more clpecially by one Mofes, SirnamM the Grammari- an, and one David vulgarly caliM the Thilofopher; and this hap- pened to be much abort John Chryfiofiomes time. The Armeni- ans alio deny that John Ckryfoftomt was the Inventor of the Ar- menian Characters, which they attribute to a certain Hermite whole name was Mefiop, who invented them in the City of Bain, not far from Euphrates : who alfo liv'd much about the time that Chryfoftome ftouriuVd. But becaufe there were hardly any Ex- emplars of thofe Bibles to be found entire, and thofe very dear to boot, in our Age Jacob CaraBri Patriarch of the Armenians fent into Europe Vfchxn Tnfchnavanchi.z Bilhop, that by his care and induflry the Ancient Bible might be printed. Whereupon the Old and NwWTV^wcw/- was Printed in the Armenian Lan- guage and Character at Amslerdam anno 1664. But certain it is, that this Armenian Tranflation, and I had it from the mouth of the Bilhop himfelf, was taken from the c7m^Vcifion of the 70 Interpreters. The Veifl- Lnftly, the Mttficovitcs, lleri.ns, or Georgians, a people inha- ens cf the k|t;ng t!ie Regions o\Coolchi<, have alfo their Tranflations of the GwgUus'ud H : ly Scripture, and it is not long fince that the Bible was print- other prcple. ed Critical Enquiries* 200 ed in the Mafcovitic Language and Chara&er. But there is no queftion to be made but that they were all taken irom the Greeks in regard thofc Nations derived their Chriilian Faith, and their Eccleuaftic Ceremonies from the Greeks And thus much con- cerning the Bibles made ufc of by the E*ft$rn Nations. CHAP. XXII. Of tee later Verfiim of the Bible, and firfl of all, of Latin lrcr[ions, done by Catholic^ Divines. THO UGH Francis Ximenim of Setmros , Card,'nal and The Bil),<* Arc' -B;fhop of Toledo* has given us no other Latin Vcr- of.Card,Qil fion of the Hebrew Text, in hs Complin enfian Bible, than the' vulgar, or that of S:. Jerom, yet he may be deferved-'y rank'd among ll the Catholic Interpreters of the Holy Scriptures: For firft of all he pubhfrf d in that excellent work the Chaldct Para- phrafc upon the five Books of Mofts, with a vetbal Verlion into Latin, asalfothe Seventies Greek Verlion of all the Books of the Old Teftament, with an interlineary Lain Tranflation. And "*■* bles, it may not be improper in this place to give lome account of the deiign of that learned Cardinal in this new Edition of the Bible. He affirms in his proxminm to Leo the tenth, that e- very Language has it's peculiar Idioms and Properties of ex- prellion, which the molt accurate Tranfiation is not able to ren- der, and efpecially the Hebrew^ and a little after fuhjoins thefe Words:, f Moreover vehcr. fit vcr the Latin Tranflators differ, cr a + /ahi»Pfo- reading is fufpt tied to be corrupt, we muft have recourfe to the O'igi-. ?^ae zo Lco nal in which the Scriptures were writ, as St. Jerom, and Aultin, and other Ecclefiaflical Writers direct % fo that the fincerity of the Verfions of the Old Tclhrncnt mujl be examined by the Hebrew, and the Ntw by the Greek Copies. But who would believe that this Cardinal who (peaks fo great things of the Hebrew, mould, by and by, in another Epiftle to his Readers, fo bafely detract from it? fo that we have reafon to flifpeft thefe pafTigcs were toifted in by others. We have placed, fays the Cardinal,! be La- rh? fa™e 2 i o Critical Enquiries. die isjcftu, i.e. the Roman Church. For this alone being built upon a jlrong and lafl ing Rock^ficod always firm in the T urh, when all o.hers aevia ted from the right Uitderfiandirig of the Scriptures • a com pari foil highly unworthy a Card.nalof the Roman Church, which yet Nnholas R miu, a Spaftifh Divine too., and Bifhop of Cuba, has transier'd into his Tia:t of the Vulgar Tranfla- tion S*l Vjgnin a Dominica», fir ft publifh'd a Veriion of the hcJy Serif;, ures according to the Hebrew Original in the year MDLXXV11. with twoEoiftles of the two Popes, Adrian the rhe Veifi- Sixth, and Clement the Seventh, in the Iront of the Book, who onui r^nin:. both ftrengtnen his Edition of the Bible with their Authority, and before this time Leo the Tenth had approved Ptgnin$*% de- iign of making a N :w Vranihtion of the Bible accoidi ig to the Htbftt~t a:,d co&pleat interpretation of the hdy Scriptures, Buc Critical Enquiries. But it's evident that Tannine err'd in naany particulars F firit, he declared that he would keep dole to t he Latin Inter- pretation, except in fuch places where 'twas abi" y ncccila- ry to do otherwife : Notwithstanding which he often defcrtcd it without any colour or fliadow of realcn, only that he Bight follow Kimchi and other latter Ribbins of tkejiws. For how came it about, that for thefc words in the beginning of Gencfi;y which in the Vulgar Tranfl.uion are, Spir.tw Deiferebatur fuper aeju.v, the Sfirit of Ged mov*d upon the Water r, he fhould render, Spirit tu Dei fnperjlabs.t in fuper ficic a quorum, the Spirit of God breath* d upon the Face of the Waters, unlefs became the Cj.i'dce Paraphrafe, and ibme Doctors of the Jews had foexplain'd it, Again who could brock the Verflon or the fame Vagnine in the fixth Chapter otGenefis, who forthefe words, which in the Latin Edition, are ; on permanclit fpiritns mats, ; my Spirit frail 7.0: al- ways abtd:, l;c put no?/ ertt tit in vagina fperitiis mens, my Spirit Jljail not be as if hrvere in a Scabbard. He w s not content to ex- plain the Senle of the Hebrew word only, but likewife the Ety- mology of it juft as Kimchi had done it : Wherefore he fhew'd himielt a foolifli and quarreifome Interpreter. (AsAcjnila or old had dene) in /peaking fo barbaroully. Thus where the La- tin Interpretation has it, in the 1 of Gen. and the 20 v. rf. prod*- cant aqttx reptile, let the Waters bring forth every creeping th.ng. He Tranflates,r^?erc faciant aqux reptile, let the Waters make e- 'very creeping thing to creep , and in another Edition, reptificent, let them creep X$LC. Neither does he always follow the Senle of the Hebrew Text •, thus in the 8 Chap, or Nehemiah, the Latin Inter- preter excellently well tenders thefe words from the Helrew, leger/tnt in libro in lege Dei difiintle; they read in the Book^m the Law of God difin'dly -, B.it Pagnine contrary to all Senfeand Rea- fon Tran flares it fe, legtnmt in lihro in lege Dei expofti : They read w the Bocl^of the Law of Cod Expounded in wh-ch place he contrad'fts hiralelf, for in his Dictionary thofe very words a othcrwifc explai \1. Other reir.arks !n be made up- on Pagm.:\ Vcr.iion I fn.. II, for brevities f J:e oui;t. Arias McntamiA Was not the Author of the new Verfion o; the Bible, he was content to correct Pagn'mcs Tranflac:'on infome ace». Bitf having a more then ordinary regard to the bare Grammar Rules never minding the Sence, he outwent ?\ > *> t in his barbaroufnefs. He fptnt his whole rime h . reffing the Dd 2 He- ll I 2 1 1 Critical Enquiries. Hebrew exaclly without any rcfpeclto the Senfe , thus in the 9 of Exedtti, where Pagnine has pretty well render'd ncvi qnianondum ttn.eatts, / i^on7 vecaufe ye will not yet fear, the Corrector Arias Moi.t-inus tu; n'd, novicjiaa antcq-am timtatis. I k^iow, becaufe yt fear bef.rt tb.t. The tit brew word Ttrtm has doubt lefs a diffe- rent i^nifkation, in one place it tignihesprtufquam, before th.it in another nouuannot yet: which Ar as never minding turn'd it to that Senfe which comes next to hand. An infinite number almoft of inch abfurdities may be found in this Tranfbtion, which I advifed'y forbear to mention. Who, for Gods fake, can undeiftand ^r/tfjM interpretation orth?.t re- fc of the 1 loPfalm-, where for theie words, which we read in the Vulgar Edition, tu cs Sneer dot ii dternum fcundam ordmem Melchtfedec,t\:ou Art a Pritft for e:er after the order of MeUhifedec. \w Pagnine s\ eti- fior, fecutidum mirem Mclckifedtc; then aot arrived to the kiiowledg of the Tongues. This Work was likewife approv'd of by two Popes, TiShrancifcus Luca, PtirgenfsrchtQS, and Gregory the 13//7. in his Epiftie to Philip the Second of Spain c^Ws it y opus veri aurcum, a work truly great. This is farther corroborated by the Authority of 42 Spanifli Divines notwithf landing all which, Arias Montana has Critical Enquiries* i\i has but an ill repute among ninny of the Clergy in Spain, particu- larly for that he fee forth a Ch*Uet Paraphrase, not only on the Pentateuch, as Cardinal Ximtrim h?d done, but on all the red: of the Bible excej t fome few Books. Of this Andrews de Leon Zan.o- renfts, aMinor of the Regular Clerks, complains in an Epilllc which he wrote to thole t! at Printed a new Polygltt p.t Pans, where concerning the Chaldte P.iraphrafe publiuYd in the Royal Bibles, he 1 peaks thus : Wh.it jh. ill I fay of the Chalclec pa> afo which the Rabbins c.U the Targum f Tis vitiated a>,d ext, ear . ctrrupted, 'tis degenerated from it^s anci: tit purity and and ur^fnh of TaimituiiCdl Fapks, and Sacri'.egions hr.pojturcs. hi this all men a- ^reeyeven Cardinal Xi;ncnius himfelf in his Preface to the Complu- ten fis ajfertstt. Nay Cay tan himfeif gives a free account of his me- thod of Tranflating //fus & afper ufque adco Hebraici ferments horror cm frquutus eft, Ht cum mult a Latmis auribus m llitcr accomn.oi.irt fotuij]ety omnes t.imen Hcbrai- eiftrmonis prop, ;et ius £r phrnfes adeo jctv.ire ftudkit, nt nrc ipfos Hebraicort.m m mii.m ft idortsfYtto mil ttrt zolutnt, ingertni L tints au:i' us ubicj>cp oOli llzzijah, pro Ezechielc Jechczohe), C?c. Bur I wordei that Sixtus fhould be To nice ar.d critical, fee- ing he Co highly commends Ctjttan , Tagr.in, Oleafter and ibme others, who sffe&ed a iar more barbarous and unpolke Style. Likewife Ceretrard treats him with as little enndor and mode- ration, pafTing a fTnrp and fe\ere cenflire upon him : Murifie- ths, frith he, ne Ucv.ivocum propria not atr.ne fepc Lub.ranifa- bat, & a fuo Franfctfci in ft it ni* d fcedzbit. Certainly none of the Moflern fefpccially Proteftant rranflators, have more ful- ly and emphatically e^prelsM the genuine fenle of the Hebrew Text) than MHnfttr \ whocanno; defervedly be blam'd ior a- ny thing, bur for fli hting the aiitient Interpreters of the Ho- ly Scripture, and adhering toj clulcly to the late Jewifh Do- ctors • neither is he foro ighand harfh in his ftilfe, abating fome proper names, asS'.v/ajanJ fome others fancy him to be. Ha- iti us, who iecmst: e moft impartial and unbia:s'J in h s Judg- ment, gives him this Character, S baftianus Mur, erus Bibliorum I erprts fme da I us in Htbraica femptr (IHh t ll icons adtaqi mttiquam yon fe c mpoiens. Yet without doubt he h .. . n-ri greater applauic , ii according to the advice of Conradns P.-H- .1 1 6 Critical Enquiries. c units his Tutor in the Hebrew Tongue, he had chiefly followed the Rabbins in Grammatical niceties,confulting in other things, as well the Antient Interpreters of the facred Text, as the mo- dern Jivrs j and then he had not difagreeM with the Latin Tran- flators in (b many particulars as he did : For what necefllty was there, tha: for Crt [cut & multiplic amine, & impute aquas Marii, which we find in the vulgar Tranilations •, he lhould put Frntti- cate & MHfefcite & implete aqitAs wfrctU, which words carry a tar hardier found with them than the former. Likewife Leo Judaea Zuinglian3 Translated the Old Testa- ment, oratleaft the greateft part of it, out cf the Original Hebrew into L?.tin , and became he died before 'twas quite fi- nifh'd , / . i-Lr and P. Cholinui completed it.* Bihliander turned the eight lail Chapters of E^echiel, and alio Da.nel^ Jojy Ecc!cjL:jtts , the Car. ides and 48 Pftlm* out of Hebrew } and Cholinus trandated the books, which the Proteftant Divines c?\\ the slp9cr:pb.i,out of Greek. This Tranflation was fir ft pubiiflicd at Zurich in the Year 1543. and afterward in the Year 1545, there came forth a fecond Edition of it by R.Stephanus, but without the name of theAuthor,and with the vulgarTrandition on one fide, as we have intimated before. But the Tarifuin Divines raii'd and invelgh'd bitterly both againlt theEdition and the Publisher of ir; fo that sfrer many hot and wrangling difputes about feverai things belonging to the Bible, Stephanas was at Ienght fore'd by the prevailing party, to leave his Country, and to .fly to Ge- neva for Sanctuary, there he writ his Apology againlt the Pari- fiati Divines, and publifhed it both in Latin and French, where- in he made grievous complaints of them ^ but in molt things he fhowed himfelf to be an Innovator and a rigid follower of ■Calvin: Yet he was defended in fome things even againlt the Tanfian Divines by P. CufteUanus Bifnop or Al.fcoi and grand Alm.nsr of France , who often carried the matters in con tro- verfie to the hearing of the Kings Council \ for he hadobferv'd how the Panfians , through their Ignorance of the Tongues, had laid many things frilly to his charge. Neither did this Trai. Action of Leo Juda cfisape the Cenfures of Gcncbrardj who thereby got the Favour and Patronage of the Parian Di- vines, he himfelf bcir.gonc of the fame faculty. But Siepha- t;hj was entertained -with far more couitefic and civility by the Spanifh Critical I \iurtes. 1 1 7 Spanifh Divines y who without any I (> icnquii ftcrthc Authors name 5 or without i I * the Partjt4ns9 reprinted this Editi< n at Sola» tm . iih 1' >rnc fmall variation of the notes-, and m^rcovci judged it w >rth] to be read of all thole who were inquifitive after of the Scripture. 'Tis tiue that Leo J r'd fom I! words lcis rroperly than Mmfter% but ho took m : to ac- commodate them to the Latin Phrafe : S j th .t I c [ Iy beaccuicd for anything, but his tranflating by i of Para- phrale, purpofely to avoid obicurity. The moil famous and generally recei.M Tranflation oi the S<^aa. Caft;I. Bible, is that ol'Ci/?"/;^, of which there are 11 eral Imprefli- Intcrp. ons : But that is accounted the bell, which was made at Bi I in the Year, i 5^ $. Sixtus Sewn/is giving us lis ] highly valued by the Proteflants, efpecially in England and Geneva, where 'tis altogether ufed in their deputations. A^out the time when it was publ.fhed , Drufiuta mm of the Ptoteftant perfwafion , and Profcflbrof the Hebre v ronguein an Univerficy in Weft FrsezelMndJpgred no (harpnefs and feveritv in his animadvcrfions upon it, but made it appear r hit they had grofl/ erred in fome things •, and a lon;j, time after Conftar.tme I.'E.w.pererv Prof. (Tor of the He- hrew Tongue f which he was a great m titer of) in the Univer- fity of Ley den, pafTed the like cenfure upon Jnnitu and Tremel- l uss Tranflation in thefe words, /; vittendis H braids a Junto & i'rcniellio non raro abire d but •, Hoc enim in ■..- tuxt. r:af. con flri.ily followed their Tranflations ; and nil the L< ing L** Hebr« our Cric'cks pretend to, who (light and und< ■ old Tranlbtors, is glcanM out of this Lexicon, TrtweeU w , v ho was a JVvv before he profefled C-Avinifm, icenrs to have r > bundanceof things from Che Modem Jews , andbeftdesl is La- tin flile is unnatural and affected , which w'thout d tfbt he learn'd at Geneva : for 'tis very ufual with the Geneva L :s to interlard their Sentences with pronoun Relatives, when there does not appear the leaft fh.-.dow of a Relation -, as we read in the TremeUian Verfion of the firft Chapter of ( /, Gen. 1.4. viditque Dcm lucent hanc effe ben am , & difttnftiontm fecit Der.s inter Lucem banc, & . again a little after, Fecit ervo Deusb c v. 7. cxpaufnm quod diftinguif inter h.ts aqua* qua [ant ab inferior 1 ij\ ihs e.xpanji & . qias ijlas. Thecal* e Bez»a has lbme things not much unlike thete in his Vranilationof the New Tel lament : neither didTremciitu fcruple to infert feveial words to Illuiirate the fence, which quite alter it; as in the id. Chapter or Genefit- where in the \ ulgar TranfUtion we read , fed Ions afcendebae e terra, and in lbme other Translations &vaf r, &c He Tran- llatcs it aut Vapor non afiendebat •, following the Arabiik^V*\iz- phrafe of Rabbi Saadias , Simamed Gaon , or the excellent. Moreover in the Stb. Chapter of Nekemiab, befides thele words Which are turned verbatim out of Hebrew, viz,. Legerun^ in Libro Dei Legis diflincle & aperte ad intettigendum , & intellsx- erunt cum legercrury he adds thefe of his own, perfenptu p- fam, which are not in the Hebrew Text, and renders them thus, e xponen do fenf urn dab ant Intelligent iam per Scrip: ur am %pfam\ in which thing tie did not fo much regard the words of the Hebn \v Context, as the Principles of the Calvimfiical Divinity; and he differs very much from Seb..ftian Miwftcr, Lee Jud . Cafialio and aB other Proteftant Interpreters, except ihoft of Geneva > who were wonderfully taken with Tremettitu's T I it i^n We can likewiic allow Luc OfUnder a pla< c among the Prtti* B,b. Luc* oj. ftant Interpreters of "the Bible •, for tho he did no defign to give us an entire Tranflation of it , lefl: he fho"!d in any wife fecm to depart from the Ancient received Latin Tiaaflators, yet thofe places which he thought were not well rendted, he Tran* E e 2 Hated 2 2 o Critical Enquiries. flatedourcf thcHebrcw, retaining neverthelefs the old Tran- (lation in thofe very places, that Co by co aaparing them , men might better judge cf his and the Ancient Tranflation ^ as for inltance, in the firft Chapter of Gtnefis^ where we read in the vulgar, fcrcbatur •, he puts down in another Character , mot- babat , as if the Hebrew word was more fully exprefTed by the Latin word itttubabat than fertbdtttr. Indeed Ofiander miftakes in a great many things, when upon any Trivial account he leaves the Latin Tranflator, whom he did not follow as clofe as he mould have done , yet he is defervedly commended by the Divines of Tnbingc for this piece of prudence, that in his Edi- tion of the Bible, he gives u> likewife that which was ancient and re ei ed for a j it many years, by all the Weftern Chur- ches N it vriH it be unfeafonable here to mention the Judg- ment of the Divines of the Univerfity of r«£wfr, concerning the modern Interpreters , which we have in thele words : Dim Mi ftozM verflonct . ffentnt, videmnr ftadiofis Theologia vet (ram ill am Qr ufitatam veUe manibtu excnte e. Kor.nnlli in vertendo objeuram dUigcntidm hebr orum & f . , didam AKexQe+zv, quam illorum Gram- matici habent Cequ »tes9 no i modo grati.im, fed.fr u^lnm ftuduii fui pi opemoda.n amituuut . Sunt ttiam non panci qui dtftituti folidt.re fgnitiont Htbrrd lingut & ignari p opr ;et.it U & elgantis^ inter- pret at i ones in m di tm ajfernnt , a:tt pioigofas , ant ceteoifatis in/lit m§ convementes. In like manner Andrew Ofundcr the Son of Luhe} following the fame way of Tranfliring that his Fa- ther did, published the ancient Latin Tranflation, together with the corrections of it, retaining mil the old Edition. A id no man of fenie will ever queftion, buc that this is the beft me- thod o: Tranflating ; provided the emendations be not infer- ted into the Te.vt of rhe Latin Tranflation, but only put down in the M irgin as probable conjectures. Not many >cars (ince Cocceitu receded from this way of Tranflating •, who was a man that had great skill in die Hebrew Tang le, and ons mat had exercifed himfelf very much i.i this kind of S udy, as it Ap- pears fro n the Latn Tranflation of theO 1 reftament, which he adds to his Com iient, and likewife from his H brew Lexi- con, which he adapted to the ancient Tranflations, which noc- vrithftanding h: departed from in his Tra illation, relying too much upon his own pans, and catching rather at words and flu- dovvs than the fubftanccs of things. CHAP. Critical Enquiries* 22 t CH A P. XXIV. Of the Tranjl :tio*s of the TZible into ths l^nlg.xr T§ngHi% , tndfitft of a!1 of th fc m.idc by Cstholickj. AFtcr the rife of new Hereticks in the Weftern Church, who carting afide Traditions, would acknowledge no other rule and ilandard of Religion befidcs the Scriptures; there were feveral warm difpui.es betwixt Divines of all perfwafions about this very thing. The more prudent and moderate Ca- tholicks, did not ablblutely condemn the Tranllations of the Scriptures into the mother Tongue of every Nation, becaufe it was allowed of by the Fathers : But they judged it rcquifite to (top the increafe and progrefs oi: Herefie, which fprung from fome mifinterpreted and perverted Texts of S:ripture, to for- bid the promifcuous reading of them in the vulgar larg lages, byrealonot leveral inconveniences which attend it, without a due rcgaidto thePerfons,Times,and fome other circumfrances. Faith according to St. P*nl comes by hearing , and 'tis certain, far more have been converted to Chriftianity by hearing of the Gofpelthan by reading it. At the fir ft prom i\ 7a~ion of the Chriftian Religion, there were no Bocks of the G.^fpel, from whichMen might have learned thePrinciplesof theiiReligion,& 'tis very provable, that ifcheApoftles had never wi iteany thing ab..u: the Chriftian Faith, yet our Religion by the help of Tra- dicion, had been tranfmitted unto us entire and perfect. This is the general opinion ot the Cacholick Doctors, who do not politixely forbid thefe Trandarions, if fobe all pcrlons in^all times and places be no: promilcuonfty permitted to read them, for'tis their Maxim. Won profit pothu quicquid abeffe potcft. Now 'tis eafily prov'J, that almoft all Chrfftians before the rife of the Protectant Innovators, had the liberty to peru!e the Scriptures in their native Tongues. For what other reafon mould 2 21 Critical Enquiries. fhould the Grecians prefer the Septuagint to the Original He- brew, but that the Greek was their Mother Tongue. Likewife the People of Italy had the Bible Tranfbted into Latin, becaufe they naturally fpeke it, and for the fame reafon the Eaftern Peo- ple had their Syritc^ Coptic'^ Arabicl^ani Armenian Tranfla- tions, which tor brevity I (hall omit. 3Tis true that fome Tranilations are now read among thefe People , which the / do not underftand, as the Latin is at this day among the Italians; but this is no convincing argument, that thefe Tranilations were never in the Languages familiarly known and underltocd by the common People. Now I pafs to the Tranilations of the Bible into the modern Tongues. Jacobus d$ Varagine is highly efteemed among the Italians for his Translation of the Scrip- tures into their Tongue: But now there are fome other Italian Trarllnions much in vogue, which carry thenamesof Nicho- las Malo rnins Abbot of the Monafrry of St. Michael de Lern and Anton. Bucciolns •, and in fome Editions there is a Preface, in which the Author difcourfes at large of the Translations of the Scriptures into the vulgar Languages, but there is this dif- ference beiwixt Brucciolius and fome other Interpreters : He turn'd the Bible immediately out of the Or/ginal, whereas they only tranflated it from the Latin Interpretation, which was ufu- ally read in the Weflern Churches. There are fevera! Editions of this imn -cdiate Tranflation from the Hebrew, the fir ft: of which the Author dedicates to Franc* the Firfl King of France in the Year 1 5 30. afterwards there came forth three other Edi- tions in'the Years 1539, 40 and 4 1 , but the Edition in the Year 1 540 is accounted the belt , becaufe there are feveral very ufe- ful Marginal Notes in it, together with an Epiftle of Antonius Brucciolius to Rcnata the Wife of Francis Duke of Ferrara in the defence and commendation of the Tranilations of the Bi- ble into the Vulgar Tongues, yet this kalian Interpreter feems to be t :o we ;k f r the management of fo noble and weighty a delign ; fechig he 9 icks not clo'ely enough to the Htb) ew Text, but follows other Tranflations, efpecially that o[ P ■£».'«, whofe very errors he has copiedout, adding fomemoreof his own in fome places, which he did not nr d< rftand. For in the 8 Chaf. of Nthcmiah, wlvre Pspirn perverts the Original by rending it •, In lege Del ixpofii, he trahflates it, Nulla lege d'jddio dichi- Arata) differin] .... much frotn Pag>?mt as the Hebrew Text : For Critical Enquiries, 222 For bccauf* he fearched not into r he Hehtw Copies, he did not take notice that the word which Bgni r is of the Feminine Grnder, and trnt the Par i( iple pafGve, whi h be render 'd by Dichiarata was of the Maiculine Gender ; and fo while he pre- tends, without confulti 1 ; the words of the Context, to cor- rect Vagnin^ whom he did not wdl underftand, he i lis into a dowmirht error. I (hall forbear tQ (ay any thing of theTran- flaronof Jaccbm de Foraign • becaulc I never law it. P*flc- v'tom who had a Copy of it, gives no very grear Character of it-, but others highly commend if. Bit, I think I may confi- dently affirm, that \ ery few of thofe Tranflations, wh;ch are ta- ken out of Lat iu Editions, can be accurate and correal; fee- ing it happens very often, that the Latin Interpreter cannot be nnderftood without tome knowledge 1 f the Hebrew Tongue : hence it is that Jacobus de Fors.igne, Matter mm, aid others, who turn the holy Scriptures cue of Latin into another Tongue, are often guilty of grofs mi flakes. There were feveral Tranflations of the B hie Into French long *"*"• Ver^ before Calvin was heard of: For before the Cat Ho lick Religion was reformed, or rather deform'd by him, a French Translati- on of the Scriptures was read in Geneva and the nei 'hbouring Mountains, which was composU in the year MCCXCIV by one Cniars dci Mc*Un$, a Canon of Aria in Artois^ formerly under the jurifdiction of theBifhop of Terovcnne, a Copy cf that Tranflation is ih'll kept in the piibh'ck Library at Geneva, and another at Paris in the ftudyoi the Famous Henry J aft e He, and I am of opinion that this is the Tranflation which is men- tioned by Robert Ol vet anus, who fent the fird Bible in French to *-£. olivet. Genevah. Likewife there is another French Tranllation in fome Pi xi. ia BibL Libraries in France, which is believ'd to have been done by 0- rof»::s Canon of Rouen, in the time of Ch*rlcs the fifth \ and Car.Alolir.AH6 gives out that he had feme look Manufcrip: Peices of it. Moreover, 'tis evident that rhe Divines of Lovaine were net the firft, as is commonly belicv'd, who Printed the French Tranflation of the holy Scriptures. We have a Tranflation pul lifh*d at Antwerp in the year 15*0, by Martin V Empere*r9 w : Privilcdge of the Emperour Charles the Fifth, but we ca; ' 5 no certainty of that Edition \ becaufc the year of the In' (agrees with fomcthings containM in the Priviledg, viz,, that 1 he year 1530, was the fir ft year ot the Reign ot Charles the ll a Critical Enquiries. the Fifth, who was made Emperour in the year 1529. Befides , in the lame Priviledge, the inqunitorsand fome other Divines aremention'd -, who had the inipexion of that work •, but at that time and in thefe pla:es there was no Inquifinon. To thefe things may be added another observation drawn from the third Charter of Genefs, where we find thefe words, Jpfa content caput tmun, which occur in the Latin Edition, to be rendered the fame way in this Tranflation, as theProtelrants render them, viz* cette femence brifera ta tcfte. Moreover in the Preface to this Tran- slation, we have the fame divifion of the Scriptures, which we find in the Proteiiant Bibles : for there thefe Bosks are only rec- koned to be Canonical, which were writ in the Hebrew Tongue, and recer* 'd into the Jewifh Canon. But we may give a proba- ble anfwer to all thefe Obje&ions. Firft, fomc error may be couchM in the Priviledge, ?s we may gather from fome other Editions of this Tranflation. Secondly, 'tis very probable that the true Inquifitorsare not mentioned in the Priviledge. Tnird- ly, 'cis no wonder that he find cette femence, &c. in the French Tranflation, becaufe the Tranflation tells us, that he followed the old Interpretation. Laftly, the Author of this Zranfhtion, who alfoTrarflated the Edition of St.Jerom, as may befeenin the Title Page, might have imitated St. Jerom in the divifion of the Scriptures, at that time there being no Decrees of the Coun- cil of 7>magainftit : Neither did Cardinal Cijetan, who writ a long time after, give any other divifion of them. I fhall not fay any thing at prefent of the Divines of Lovain, whofe Tranflation is generally read among the Catholicks, and which huh been feveral hundred times Printed and Reprinted, and alio accurately corrected: Whxh w:>rk they did not at- tempt, upon any other account, but that : hey might draw the Co nmd people, a^d the unlearned from the reading of the Geneva Bibles, which were then had in great eftcem. Likewile thofe Divines who TYanflated the Bible into the Englijh, German, Polifl?y Hungarian, and fome other vulgar Languages, profefs they did i' on uurpole to divert the Catholicks from reading ProteftantTrr'flatr'ns. 'Tisfaid that a M mufcript Co. y of Trarflat. ^ Bible was found in Province in the Langi lage of the C ) uitryj w d . twf* which I fane 1 made by the Waldenfes in their Mother rong ue ]ehn Uge* not he j ure French. John Lejrer a Calvinifl, who compofed t.'ie Hirt. des vdU Hiftory of that Se:c, makes mention of it, and tells us, that he has Likewife a Copy oi it. There Critical Enquiries. 225 There were Bibles likewife in Germany in the Dutch Tor Gemm Verl read by Catholicks before the innovations oi Luther, as fomcon1. Writers a (firm, who prefer the Netimhttgh 1 A ■ ' ■ ■> I'ci- ons before the Luther an***, after this Jeanne si , D.cltnlcr- gerus, and others opposM the German Tranflation tothofe of the Proteftants:, 7*"" WewiexJtus^ Jcfuic Presbyter, tuj ;c poJntig. Bible into the PoiCh Tongue, at the ( (idol > the 1 3 rib. and his Verfion was afterwards approv'd of b) Clement the ttk. We have read likewife that there were Verfions bit inthcFngltflj Tongue from the timcof B -.vJe^bu: at 1 Imethe Englsfh Catholicks ufe an Mnglijh Verfion made by fi me Englifh Divines, who fled to Rhetrns in France, and there p iblifh'd a Verfion which they might ly opposed to thofe of the Pr< ants; a late Writer atteits in thefe following words, that there were SpAvtfl) tranflations or the Bible from the time of St. Fincentius, firnam'J F err arms ; U Biblia in lenrud Fahnciana con licencia de los htcjwftdorcs a cnya transition affifto, S. V inc cm c Ferrer : And affirms that 'tis publiftVd in Fclto in Royal Pmfelf for a (1 •. tr>ldly affcrts, that as for all the Jlratajrem of Po- pery, u'l th< tophitical Tyranny of the School-men; ya and the whole Kingdom f Antichnft, he had invad.d fubdued^ and totally overthrown them, N.iy if we may believe nim hetelleth us, th a d Ins Languages were a terrour even to Lucifer himfelf. 'The DtvU, (faith hej is not fo much afraid of my Faith, and inter* 71 al \ Critical Enquiries, tiy mi C.hy*£<, a tf mf Ttngm, F», *»d Ivnlid&t in tit H.ly * llT&is Patriarch of the Ctrmm Pwteftantt, as not retting tery well ttilficd, I fuppofc, with the firfl Edition cf . i- flation, wherein he prelum* to have repulfed the An I ot the' DeviUnd to have (bakenoffthc Pofet tyrannical yoke, fet his Brains a work for a more accurate Veifion; th Se- cond attempt was lb far from being embraced by the bk le of hs iQWovtznjttMStkrtiMn MnnCitr was .net aftraid to gl?e bis Mm^ A Mafter the Title of a very Fable Trai fhtour, aid no ; real , the Bhk) Coniuret in the Httrt». This made Butcr maintain that L ■■ h - .1 o« Ttanflation was faulty, and Mektior y.ar,ck,«s writea n •b«£\cta* Rook of the Authors Errata. Hence it was that the , mi < J""»- confided in therofelves.and turned the//*J>r.w B.b.e into rr- m«», that fighting Lnbtrs poor endeavours, they caft themkh es upon one 1« jW* ; though theft proceedings were not well taken by the above mentioned Tra. fl icor. Hence it was that the Lnh&mttry Proteflants, mighty Adorers of this Htrk-Gtr- man Tranilation, together with thole of Suctta, Finland, Len- mark, I.eUnd, and the reft of the Northern People, who had formerly ftuck clofe to Luthcrs Errors, openly declare their readinfsfoia new Tranilation of the Bible, ben? that, That Of Lthcr. vm done all in a hurry ; and that, as John Lenjdem Hebrew Profcilbr in the Univerlity of Vtrtttbt, tefhfies, Lm- then Worts lay under a great many grots nuftakes, whereof fome indeed might inveagle themfclves in ■ but that others, Wii hout difpute arofe from the fluggifhnefs of the Aiithor,fUim- br ver the L^-D,:tch Tranfiation. And yet, as Mr. Luef. M 1 ui Lhe>*Mt*p*'y//ftoodup Tooth and Nail for this In- thtra» Tranfiation, relenting it very highly thaty#ha«w Vn$- novti fhoild take upon him to Cot reft Mattin Luther upon the Nw Teftament. Though the Proteftants of Lew-Germany, in the Synod of !>*«, as they call it, rejected Luthirtl ranfla- tion which with all kindnefs they had formerly careffed-, look- ineupoBit as fpurious and degenerate, an off fpring nothing related to the Mother- Hebrew : wherefore they were delivered of a Tranfiation of their own, and Chtiftned themfelves the Rcviiors and Interpreters of Dort. Now 'tis curProvince to enquire what order and method,Af-r- tin Luther oblcrv'd in his farcwilTrar.fluionof the Scriptures. F f 1 Since 22 8 i Critical Enquiries. Snice he publickfy aflerts,that the Hebrew is void and ineffectual, that the Jews are not men to bebelieved,and that Sr.Jcrom him- felfinTranflatingthe Scriptures was not infpired vvithChrilrian w:idoir.;j imping into Rufjh.ushis opinion,whogave out that the abo\ e named H jly Father was a Jew in heart. For he wonders that any C ian will concern rrmielf with the ridiculous Co- mentaries of the Jews; The J^ijh trifles (faiih the fame Luther) argue their Authors to know little or nothing of Holy- Writ ; and yet forfooth thefe an hi Idols of our Modern arid Famous Divines ; Divines mofi A x erom in the Hebrew Tongue, and yet the mo ft apt to after fitch likewhimfies. He hath Jikewife a touch upon th ft R • s, whole Trent is mod commonly employed, and 1 Gi mmattcal affaires, decrying them thus, Thatthey nta\ kptWptrhaft the Nominal and bare fignif cat ion, but as for the re- t$l,an intri fit that they are ignorant of ify%nd th.it therefore nothing rffoundntf. at folid'tty maybe expttlcdfrom them.Wznzz it is that he rejects he f/fir#*-Tntfifl itors, and their adheren;s,asa pack of Fools & 1 ,who would pretend to fhclter they* w//fc Tran- sitions, vrithrn the icof of the Scriptures. And he thought it m"ch better that the more obfeure places of Scripture fhould bw expounded by the Analogy, or Rule of Chriftian Faith, than by afcy Rabii ical Books, by reafon the fcflce loft Hebrew is im- pofiiLik: tobe retrieved, and that the true fi nificjnen of a grea ) w rds in that Language is yet unknown, c by t\\zjerrs th( n felves, as well as by the Chriftians : The ufi and knowledge of the Hebrew Tongtee (faith Martin Luthrr) it fo much left arid \nged that it can nevtr be recovered ; neither do the words only ■ 1 1 1 !fo the very Phrajes and Cot.fr utlior^) lye under a mo>? d ti . i . I . and various oi fcurity : Hence it comes to pafs th it we tyioto net i, efo :e Figures ard Emphafis of agrext ma y words and fentences; r i ich ;f a y Chri ian may ever fift out^ jo as to ^ ow their meaning - h \ ecejfar. iy be one of thefe men% v.- ho with the he'p t ' . A W Vefla t La h acquired to himfelf the fulllenow» ledge oj ■ Hres I is in this Method cf Lnthers may be h otedat, is p L ite, more efpecialfy thole ■ bj ctions which infl: the Tranflators of his Time, In that they depended • much upon Rabbinical Books, ^nd yet the i i hy he prerended to calumniate thefe men was, becaufe they had fj againft the impropriety of his Tran- Critical Enquiries. ny Tranflation. Luther, \ furmize, was in the fault when he flood diflatisfied noc only with the Books of tiic i n Jews, b I alio with Sc JtroM, and the ancient 1 n he hadftrangelj difrefpected, he betook himfelf ( 11 the world were Fools but his w ;:flvp), to a i ;y rule of Faith, upon the faith of his own Brain. More no great Critic in G rammer he was fou:d guJty, and t ncdof feveral mi! interpretations \ fo that trut j' dice, and Opinion j he giveth as for thefe word Chapter of Genefis) Ptjfedi kominem pa- dominium^ I ha\ % gotten a manfrim the Lord. Pojfedi hominem Deminum, I have ge man Lord. Certainly Luther was no ft ranker to the Cs Doctor's O union,who out of this place would gladfy i : op a A/y, and jump's Up new Trrnflations of the Bible : which as foon as thev come a little in vogue, the Authors of them pre- fently pcikt up, fhow their faces, and ridicule th\ Oid Tran- flatoui making it their end,and aim to build up their Yefter day Opinions, upon thcie new and unheard of Tranflations : being the Critical Enquiries* i? the fole way they nuke u!e of to thruft theirmonftrous Do- ctrines into the Church, and which they do openly acknow- ledge laying, Tb.it tkt Sim of tb: Eaftern Lmguagts ^;, thty bttool^tbem e et to the Hebrew Fonntmns , the better t* find out , and confute the err ear i tf fofery^ the better to eft. iblifh their Religion. That the Englijlj Protectants was clo'jM and overcharged with the numerous Tran flat ions of the Bible, the bare wjrds of the Bifh >p of Ltnebnin bit conference at HsmptM-Court may be of liifficicnt evidence. J:" each man (b g ;is the Bifhop) had hn peculiar fincy wt could mver expttl an end of Tranflstton : wherefore the goodwill mndfleaxfure of . is mofl Exl ell. nt Majtfiy ytis% that fome uajorm Vtrfim bethought upon; add ,ig moreover^ that then he had never met with an Engltjh B*bte Well Tranflatsd, ajid "Was very well J "atisfit d) that a/r.ong the bad ones, that of Geneva was the worji : whtre he then though* expedient that the mofl Learn- id i n both ihe ZJntvcrfitics JJjuuld confer notes to/ether and makeup a Tramflation, whic > being tirftrewfed, by the mofl Learned BiJJ)cpsJ and Privy C until, fnonld at loft be eftablijhed by the King* Autho- rity, The which b ting done, tkt Church ^/England will be confined to o' e Tr. inflation i end no mere We may ealily from hence con- clude with what noyle , buttle, and difpenfion the diverlitics of BJ)lcs came accompanied into England , under t^.e different Names of T ndal dnd Cjverdnle, Tb&. Matthews , Tonftal and Httbe- Parker Arehbilhop ol Cmturbury and other Bifhops , the lad named perfons, being the A ithor of a Bible, Entituled the Bijhors Tran Ration, Now the Geneva Tranfhcion, which King Jamrs w;/l have to be the word, is the fame with the Trench itcd at Geneva, the which was made Engltfh, and R, ad in Great Britain by ibme of the Geneva Proreilion. As for theHiftoryof thefeandfuch like Bibles yo i may have it in Buret and tult.r^s State of England. M 11 wifely therefore did King James, the full: of the Name of the K ags of England, Eftablifh Fhat,rejefting and making void all other Traoflacions, whirh .verc then us'd :n the Nation, lbme new, impartial, and unaffected Tranflation fljould be compofed. Likewifc he made a Law for Interpretation, and ordered thofc who had the over* feeing of it, to go from tht Bijhepi Tranflation, as little as poi- .fible , willing that iome particular words which were in a man- ner Confecrated to the ufe of the Church mould be retained, as 2 1 1 Critical Enquiries. as the word Church it fe\f^ which flgnifiesa public meeting j and by this Decree, he reprimanded the Geneva Reformadoes, who had loif led in other Names, commanding, lor thefe mens fakes that all Marginal Notes, and Annotations,at the beginning and end of the Bible fhould be ftruckout, as things of bid confe- quence, and the fnares of the common People. Thefe, and a great many more particulars of the like Nature were order'd by the Kings Royal Authority ; and accordingly effected j fb that to this intent there is no Tranflation madeule of in the Church of England, than the ErtgUJh one only fet forth by his Ma jellies efpecial command. To which Tranflation truly their Book of Common Prayer may bear fome refcmblance, which Book except the Verfion of the Pfalms, hath been fo far from the leaf! alteration, that it hath been ufed in their Publick Worfhip ever fince their Reformation , in the Reign of Edward the Sixth. Though it be a general Opinion that the Englijh had a Tranflation of the Bible in Englijh , done by Wichft ^ and that before the above named King began his Reign ^ which Tranflation together with that which was a- broad in England in the Reign of King Henry the Eighth, was done into Englifh out of the vulgar Latin. Alio CechUus will tell you that Lnther^s Tranflation of the New Teftament was made Englijh. Befides all this, there is a common report that a Bible waspublifhed at Londtnin Welch ^ that James Vjher the Bifhop of jlrmaugh , turnM a new Copy into In fa and Mr. WiUiam Bedd an old one j and that both of them are fuppofed to have been burned. chap. * Critical Enquiries. 233 CHAP. XXVI. Of the Translations of the Bible, which were writ :n the vhIjat Tongue, and their Rife from the Geneva Schools. WE find not any French Tranilations of the Holy Scrip- tures, and done out of the Hibrevt and Circe':, which went not to School at C/^t/^neither do I omit that Tranllation which may feem to becompoied by RenatusBcneMclns,onz of the Partfian Divines ^ fince the Geneva Tranflation, and the afore- named piece are moft nearly related, as l (hall hereafter make evident. Rohatus Olivctamis, born in Picardie, and a nigh kinf- man of Jo. Calvins, was the firir that attempted that great work, and at laft finifhed it in the year of our Redemp- tion 1 5 3 5 -, which was the fir ft year of the Re'gn of that monfh nous Religion, fet up at Geneva, by Jo. Cilvin, fince that beiore that time (as the above named teltifics) feme old Copies only of an old French Manufcript were read in thele and fuch like places, and thofe without an Author. Now what method Olivctanus followed in his Tranllation, we may know by his Preface, which method truly was not ridiculous had he been fit for the undertaking fuch a task, Though in the in- terim feveral circumftances liifTiciently demenftrateuntous the Tranflatoi's ignorance in the Hebrew and Greeks Tongues. As for the French I dare not fay heunderifood it, being that 7«?. C.li'w, who looked over this Tranflition, leaves this for an Animadverlion, That the Author writ falfe Frerch. Neither truly in his famous Preface doth he fiiew any competent know- ledge he had in the Hebrew, when he tells u? a Tale of a Tub, and fiories only fit for three-davsHa:iding-/^rrc#^j ; where helearnedlv obferves R. Aben £^-^hinifel'. This OUvctamu therefore d.'d not take the trouble upon him to dorhc Hebrew Copy into Frerch, but with much more eafc followed fame forerunning Interpreters Since he tclieth us of two Italian and three German Tnnllitions of the Bible, at that time extant. And yet in the very beginning ^f his work , he ^ retells that he G g fcorned H L'tiical Enquiries. fcornedthe equipage of a Learned mans Footman, that lie was tree from prejudice, and leaving other Tranflarions , betook himfelf to the Hebrew, That lie had marked ihe more obfeure places of Scripture with an jifierish^ and put down other mens Comments in the Margent. The fame Olivet+mu fets a great value upon the different Readings of the Bible,more cf; ecially upon thofe, which he had obferved ouv.of the Qrttk^ Interpeters and St. ferwm , through the great light which they give to the Scriptures. Wherefore he openly declares char, he values not the help of the Modern J, w/, or the ailillance of their Books:, neither is he affraid to maintain that the Hebrew Vowels were firft toifted in upon the Bible by the Doctors of Tiberius \ and therefore for his part piizedthc Stftteagim and Sx.ftrom much above the common He.re vp Bible. Neither in writing Hebrew wl\\ he imitate the Modern Jevtifh Debtors-, but prefers himfeJf before them, look- ing upon the new Jewifh Pronunciation as Monfhous , though in the I a ft place he acknowledged that St. Jcrom knew the He- brew Tongue b t cr nan himfelf. The gifts of Heterodox Men mi ft certainly fhine forth in a miraculous manner^ before rhey win the applaufe of the Ca- tholick , though Robertas Olivet amis , I am fdlfy perfwaded , kntw,ar,d s.f proved ofbetttf things, when he followed the worfe^vfho in one bare year, apunttiliovi time in compai ifon, compleated a work which required fifty years ftudy. The Gentleman, I mud needs confeis, very feldom takes any notice of the diffe- rent readings, and fcarce at all looks back upon the Ancient Tranflatours : Some* imes truly he (ticks to a Zeis obvious lenfe, as in i Chap, of Gen. where for tbefe words which are in the vulgar, and in a manner all Trai fl itiors The [pint of God Sec. he will give you thele, the Wind of Godi 6\c. And to the end he would not be called in quell mingany arTect.d novelty, be produces in o^enC'/urr as Witn< 11'. s of his true Tranflation, certninof the Greek Fathers, wi» > wereor the lame opinion, th< gh at the i rid of his Book he iufeitsa different Interpreta- tion. Thus OUvetanus (lid into a grea: many gtofs miftakes, not only thr >ugh his Ignorance in the Hebrew and Greek, but likewile in the Latin. Hence it is that having a greater refpeft for the Latin Tranflator, then the Hebrew Copy, an Ocean of Errors o\crwhelm him -y an Example whereof we have in the l . Cnaf. Critical Enquiries* 2 3 5 l Chap, of 6>/;. where for cite i /r* in the Latin Tia; (1 it ion, he gives us in the French Gn l A riw. But how he can make c^agiec to B*l / their i mce in the French Particles, whereupon the true fen eand meaning of any Text wholy depends. Since this time there was never published any Other Corre- ction of the Geneva rranflation , dune by a lyof th fe Do- lors*, only ibmeobfuieie words were cafhiciV, tint the T an- llation might look more neat a^d handfome, though indeed you nay fb'mble upon their Notes upon any dark place of Scrip- ture, which indeed multiply according to the good will aid pleafureof the Geneva, \\ ho have a mod admirable faculty in vamping oi their franrick notions of Scripture it felf. 'lis not long ago fince Samuel 'Defmareti a Calviniftical Mini- far ztGroningen , jumbled all his net* variorum, Collections out of the Geneva Doctors , and the feveral Editions cf the Bible into a full Body, whereunco he adjoyncd the Ge- nevaTranjlation, A Book pubinncd by Himfelf: Himfelf, L mean a man certainly of no great Judgment, to fvvell up his Book In: o a Folio wirh a pack of apclefs and impertinent Con- tents. The French Bible alfo , which was Tranjlated by Rena- ius Benedict its a Partfian Divine may be thrown in among the Number of the Geneva Merchandize ; for when he was repro- ved by It's Brother Divines for fo rafh and inconflderate an attempt : He proteftcd before God and Man,that his Translation wis the fame with that of Geneva, which he altered a little, without ever a Glance upon the Hebrew , which he never un- derftood, and that he added and fubftracted only as his Genius and Fancy led him. The reafon why this Divine turn'd a T an- ft .tor, was becanfe that a meer Igneramtu in the Greek tongue, had took upon him to Tranflate Ariflotlos Logicl^, and had got great applauie by the endeavour,vvhich he looked upon as aPrc- fide-it whereby he might be kept harmlefs in going to do the Hebrew and Greek TejUwents, out of their Originals, though he had liv'd always a Stranger to both thofe Languages. Lallly, Jet us pi ice a: ong the Geneva Btbtes the Tranflation of Johannes Adeodates a C I'viniflical Minifter, which was firft publifhed in Italian a d then in French, and is in as much Vogue with the Calvrnifts as the Geneva Transition it (elf. So reverendly is a Translator -efteemed among his Fellows in opinion. Nei- ther were the Tons (lender why his Tranflations fhould be fo muchcryed jpandapplanded,(ince every paflage in it is fo plain and eafie, iince the Author plays the Paraphariir, and tickles the 2 } g Critical Enquiries, the fancy cf his Brother Sectaries , as may be made evident by his Notes upon the 6. Ckr. of Gen. where he follows the Emen- dation of Btrtremiis, yet avoiding his barbarity., Tranjlate s the place more clearly and elegantly : Then they began to call one part of Mankind by the name of the Eternal, though he doth not calt his eye afide, and look upon Rcbcrtus Olivet anus and Jo. Cavin their true Translations, but only putteth down a Note in the Margcnt as a Limit of the Scriptural Senfe. To alter or fubftrair, a word breaks no fquares with this Gentleman, who acting according to his good will, net much minds the proper fenfc of the words, fo the vulgar may by any means understand hirn. Neither is he lb much a Critick as an Orator and Divine , making it his only bufinefs to plcafe the Vulgar, and woik upon their paUjons. His Notes generally are pretty plauiiblc , ferviccable to the In- terpretation of feveral Texts of Scripture, fave only when he Gen. i v. buftiesfor his Religion, enters into Deputations, Preaches, Cants and ridicules himfelf. For I qusftion whether Heracli- tus could have forborn laughing, fuppofe he had read this mans Annotations upon the 2d. Chap, of Gen. Eve was not formed of the Head, fo*- that Woman ought to be fubjetl to her Hi f band \ nor of the Feet j for that (he ought not to be trampled upon or deb a fed like a Servant-, nor of the Ftrft, bee 'aufe it does not become her to thwart him , nor of the Hinder part , for that fije ought not to be defpifed nor r e jelled * nor abandoned in necejfity, but of the rib and the mid- dle of the Body, to (hew the moderation which the Hufbandou^ht to obferve in his fuperiority and the faithful Society they owe to one ano- ther. I wi(h thofe who have a fancy to read Jo. Adeodates his Tran- flation, that they make ufe of the Italian Edition, which is Caflilh's mucn more Elegant than the French j and I only adviie them to French Trail- refld tne Contents of the Chapters, whereby they may attain flatioH. unto a full Compendium of the Bible. None I fuppofe may blame us , in giving room to Stbaftian Cafialio*s Tranflation of the Bible in Geneva •, tho perhaps the poor Author had the bad fortune to meet with nothing at that place, favc taunts and reviling. This Tranflation was pub- lifhed BkBaJil in the Year of our Incarnation 1554, and was dedicated afterward to Henry the id. King of France ; which Tranflation, to make no farther enquiry about it, was done word by word out of the Latin , a way of writing proper to Seba- Critical Enquiries* 139 SebtfHan, who for example in the 491k C**p. of Gene/is tu the word Scbilo in the Latin Tranflation , Seffitdtor, into the French pi obdtim, p rc.ior.htur •, lo thai he itiktly followetli the Latin way of f] 1 ingthusj birft Godcrcaud the Heavtn and the F.arth.and in regard the Larth W*s nothing,] els and da. ie- nefs covered the a'yj's a? dthat the Spirit of ' (Jodhovcrdcver th. v:a- ters^iod fa:d let there be Light 5 doing it word by word out of the Latin TranfLifion ; wherefore 77;,flator, asan Animadverterupon C*ffi- T. T n •dorus his E ideavours. To fj [ainly , neither of thefe pre- Tranflation'" tending Tranflators understood tn< H 2 . That ihcrewas a Tranfl tion of the B;b!e done in // /. ./; by ihe Vrotesla-.ts may be probable, fince Robertas Olivet anus thof two Bibles in Italtan, whereof I Eye-witnefs : That the Author of the one vmAntmias \ru t olas, we have before obferved , tho the Author of the other Tr .inflation is not yet known. CHAP. 240 Critical Enquiries. . , ,_ - . CHAP. XXVII. . Of the Pclyglott Bibles. BIBLES have the appellation of Polyglot t from the feveral Tongues wherein they are penned . Now the Jews of Con- ftatinofk are (aid to have publifhed two Copies or Mofcs his Law, in feveral Languages, the firft whereof gives you the He- brew Text, theChaldee paraphrafely Onkelofim, the Targum% or Arabic Paraphrafe by R. Saadius Sirnamed Gaon , or the excel- lent, and the Perfian Verfion by Tdttfiu: The other prelents you with not only the Hebrew Texts and Caaldee Paraphrafe, but a Tranflation in the vulgar 6wJ^and another in SpamJJj^nd both of them writ in Hebrew Chara£ters with the Rabbinical points, which flipply the places of fo many Vowels. And fome points may be found both in R. Saadias and Tanfus his Perfic Tranflation ; though it may be worth our while to obferve that tke Jevsj who pointed R. Saadias his Transition , did therein have a greater regard to the vulgar Arabic Tranflation than the true and Grammatical, which may be feen by the Alcoran, and made apparent from thefe firfb words in Genefis. Nr2 ^1*? rnnnnpoi FntnnaMa *n» >sn i-in !?ni rnwapbN n^Sn pb3 Compare thefe with R. Saadtas his Copy, which in the Bible printed in England, is Grammatically pointed, though you may perchance find it in a new and different Equipage in the Bible, publifhed at Paris , and you may eafily fee the difference of the Judaical method of pointing from the true and Grammatical. And I will give you a fmall Specimen of the Vulgar Greek and Spanifh Tranflations , becaufc you cannot meet their true Co- pies in any Enropaan Libraries , drawing my example from the 6 Verfion of the 1 Chap of Dent cr on. placing the Hebrew as an unprejudiced impartial Arbitrator between the Spanifh on the one fide , and the vulgar Greek on the other. in unnip in 1 -on imba mm in ntouNoj Uhn \pon wnib ■«dm vd inn *tb llriM untrat" '•bhg Mrn^N vavS^k 'BWjj 1DN5 mm' ir?N ■'inn" mw xzri? ~:n T T V T ♦ 7V\71 D-in p« viftjjM'jan itDunx inn -^3 i£\biM ' 10310 Critical Enquiries. 241' The firft Telyglott was pr.blifhcd by Fraa.Xitre/iins of 5#tofv>, Cardinal and Aichbifhop of Toledo, and v\as \ nearly called tj thnplittitijum Bible. Here you may take a prof] eft of the He- brew Text , the feptuxgittt and a Latin Tranilation fuppofcd to be St. Jercms, together with a Chaldcc P*raphn,fc upon the Pr«- tateuch. Now the reafon of this Illuftrious Cardinals attempt is laid down in his Preface to Pope Leo the iof&. fince that eve- ry Language hath its proverbial proprieties, whole f 1 H encrgic may not be exprefled by the moil compleat Interpretation, which more efpccially happens in the Hebrew Tongue, it mult likewife come to pafs that where there is fo great variety ofLatin Books,ard fo many falfe rcadings,therc mult then an appeal be made to the Original Language,as St. Jcromfit.Aujlin and other Eccleflaftical Writers are plealed to tell us:fo that the right read- ing or the Books of the Old Teftamemyis to be tryed by thcTouch- Itone of the Hebrew-truth,and thole of the Ncvv-Teftament by thcGreel^Copics jindtyct in another of hisPrefaces to the JtvaderJ\e feems to deny the Hebrew verity to recriminate the Je m(h Books, an ufeful method, whereby he might with leflcr difficulty brin^ in vogue, the Old Tranflations of the Church ^ for he declares that when he had placed St. Jcromt Latin Tranilation between the Greek and Hebrew Tongues, he fancied he beheld our Sa- viour, or the Catholick Church between two Thieves. Cer- tainly a moft unworthy flmilitude, and not fit to come out of the Lips of fo eminent a Cardinal -, touching the Chaldee Para- phrafe, He faith he only publilhed that part which related to the Books of Mofes, and as for the remainder upon the reft or the Old Teilamcnt, he looked upon it as corrupt, and unwor- thy to be bound up with the Holy Scripture. This is the method obferved in the Complntenjian Bible, and the Author Cardinal Ximenms is to be commended , that he did not compofe a New Tranilation different from St. Jircms, and yet would certainly have been more applauded ii he had taken notice of the places, where the Tranflatour follows St. J crow a little too hard, and deviates from the Hebrew Text. For truly Criricks go about to remark that St. Jeromes Tranila- tion, as we have it now, is not all of a make, but hath fonte little mixture of the Ancient or Ital an. Herein I quote the m ft Learned Cardinal , that he rcciiiled the faulty Latin Edi- tion., which yet he had the happihefs to penorm in general , namely where he endeavoured to correct the Latin Translator, Hh with- 22 S Critical Enquiries^ without the help of Latin Books : neither came he well off in reforming the Greek Copies with the Hebrew, though he fa- lemly declares he had nothing to do with the Vulgar iurrepti- tious Copies, but the molt ancient, and leaft faulty. Hepub- Jifhed a Book of the words in the New Teftament, and protefTes that his ible aim herein was to prefent the Reader with the bare Letters, only without fpirit, or tone. He faith 'twas an eafic cafe to mannage, That the ancient Greeks ntver troubled their heads rvithfuch l$ke p^^i//o's.Now,why he did venture upon the Scptua- gint, after the fame method, he giveth this reafon, namely, that it was bare Tranflation, and not Text, as is the Greeks Edition of the New Teftament. In fine Cardinal Ximenitu fuperadded to thefe his abovementioned works an Hebrew, and Chaldee Dictio- nary,which he did not take up upon truft at theShops of the Rab- bys, but had it at the beft hand of the Ancient Interpreters. Arias Montana* at the expences, and by the Authority of Phi- lip the id. King of Spain republifhed the Complutenfian Polyglot with no fmall augmentation, which inprocefs had the fpacious Title of Kings Phillips Bible. A Book, which belide the Hebrew the Septnagint and St. Jerome"** Latin Tranflation of the Compln- tenftan Edition gives you a fair profpeel: ot the Chaldee Paraphrafe upon the remainder of thofe Books in the old Copy, which Car* dinal Ximcnius gave to the Library at Complutenfian, together with the Syriac Tranflation of the New Teftament done into La- tin. Neither would Anas Montam\ influenced by Xivunins his example fuffer his Book to contract acquaintance with any Tranflation , fave that of St. Jerome\ and yet that a Latin Tranflation might not be wanting to render the Hebrew Text verbatim^ he inferred in the end of his Book San. Vagninns his Latin Tranflation, with his own animadverfions , where- by the Hebrew might be better underftood. This grand elaborate, and prnccly undertaking tho it was approved of by the Divines of Spun, Lovminm^ and other learned and pious Men ; nay even b; the Univcrfal Bifhop himfelf Gregory the 13*/?. yet it groaned under the common fate of all Books, was carp'd at, and pinched by the men of Lteth. Thefe were the detracting fort ot People, who objected that Arias Mont anus had p it in Execution a moft bold, rafh, and nefarious ac ,pt in daring to publifh that corrupt, and monftruus Paraphrafe, which Ximenim had ordered to be laid up in the Colleoge Libra- ry at Complutenfia. And there were Come Jews who thinking thai Critical Enquiries. 2 j p that thcC/jdWff Paraphrafe was a great Pillar to keep up the fu- perflitions of their Religions wifhcd all health and happinefs to King Philip the 2d. a Defender (as they foppoledj of their Rites and Ceremonies. In the mean time, one Frnnci fens Lhchs of Bruges, a great Divine, and a man of vafi Learning took up the Cudgels again ft thefe impertinent Detractors, and made an A- pology for the Chaldee Paraphrafe. Refidcs Anas Montayius de- clares that Cardinal Ximemns himfclf had thoughts of publifh- ing the fame Chaldee Paraphrafe, and that he had thoughts of adding a Lit mTran /lotion to it, only putting out the Fables. Doubtlefs that princely Work deferves to be had in ef limation with all Divines :, though it be defective in fome particulars, as carrying along with it all thofe deformities, which we took no- tice of betore in the Conylntenfian Bible. For the O^and Lmin Copies are the fame that were publifhed by Cardinal Xtmemus. Arias Montanus did not io much reform San. Pagmms his Latin Verflon, as he did corrupt and fpoil ir, tor preilingthe Hebrew which too clofely he frequently commits totocafu^nd making a great noife about a little Senfe, does often mifs of the proper import of the words. Befides Arias caufed a better method and more Copious Index to be publifhed fas containing more Lexicons and Grammars, than that of the Co/r.plHtcnfian Bible, though many unnecefTary things might be left out, which make nothing for his purpofe. The liberal expences of Cardinal Ximcmus ard Phillip the Se- cond were far exceeded by an Eminent Perfon of this Age, Mich.icl Lejay of Paris ; who undertaking to Publifh the Poly- glot Bible at his own charge, fpent his whole Patrimony in Print- ing cf it, before he had finiftVd fo great and wonderful a work. Firft then they took care to have all that was already extant in the King's Bible, reprinted in a fairer Character ; and to thefe he joynMthe Samaritan Books (viz.. the Hebrew Samxritan Pen- tateuch with the Samaritan TranfbtionJ and the Syriael^ and Arabic!^ Vef fions of the Old Teliamentdiftinguimed bv points, with their Latin Interpretation .• a thing fcarce credible ever to have been attempted. In this bulinefs he vvasafiifted by a very Learned man, Gabriel of Sion, that came from Mount Libanns in the Holy- Lar.d; and in fome few Voiumns, by Abraham an Ecchellenfian, one of the fame Nation. But that part, which contains the observations of feveral worthy men upon the vari- H h 2 cn:s 144 Critical Enquiries • OBsEditions of dieBib!e,is wanting in this work.-and through the nc nee of thofe that were intruded with it, it happened that the Gc ^f the Greek Tranflation by the Seventy Interpreters, and thcLatinonc by Sc.y*/™;, were both compofed anew the very fame with thofe in the Kings B bie •, the Greeks Edition after the Vatican Pattern, though corrected and amended, was omitted, and the Copies of the common Edition were laid afide, though they had been (by Commi (lions from the Popes) flrictly exami- ned afce: the moft ancient and beft approved Books, and that by the Hands of feveral Excellent Perfons and judicious Cri- ticks. However I pafs by thofe faults, which occafioned by the Tranfcibeis overiight in the Syriack^ and Arabic]^ Books, do yet in great rart remain ; Befidcs that the Latin Expcfitors not perfectly underilanding the Syriacl^ and Arabick words, have often failed in expreffmg the fence. Laiiiy, to this vaft Work are perfixed certain Prefaces which recommend it's ufefulnefs. But in this the brave Mr. Lejay proves his own Enemy ; for depending totally upon fuch men as were partly byafsM in their Opinions by prejudice ( efpeci- ally John Morin, otherwife a man of competent Learning) he extollsthe Jemjlj Books, and flicks not to prefer them before the ancient Tranflationsof the Church : but what ieems fcarce credible, he positively ailcrts , that it ought tobegranced as a certain and undoubted truth, that, that common Edition which paflcs about in the vulgar Tongue of the C itholick Church, is the true and genuine Original of Holy Scripture. IJut the Fathers themfelves at the Council of Trent durfl not pafs any fuch de- cree concerning the Latin Books. To no purpofe has that Li- beral Gentleman drained his Purfe in Publifhing fuch volumi- nous peices of the Polyght Bible, if it appear that the Latin com- prehends the proper and Primitive Scripture, and that we mud have recourfe to him as the true Fountain. In Ike manner vin- dicating the interpretation of the Seventy Elders, he draws an .Argument (iolid enough in his Judgment) from a Mahometan Author, who, asto matter of Chronology rejected the H.bnw s of the Jews and Samaritans , and adhered to the Greek. Interpreters: from 'whence Mr. Le Jay concludes, that the Se- venty Interpreters were in the higbeft ereem, no: only amongft the Chriftians but Mahom.t.ms to o Indeed 'tis very probable it Mr. Lejay> to credit the antiquity of the Arnbick, Vcr- Gons Critical Einjuirics. 245 fions which he himfclf fir ft puhlifhcd, would not i tick to fay than by the help thereof St. Jcr*m had reftored the icven or eight hundred Verfes o. Job, which were lacking in the old Translation: and this his afl >n he confirms by St.jercm\ own Tcftimony; who before his lYmilition of the Book of Job had premiled, that in it were milling about feven or eight hundred Verfcs, and that in compiling it he had not fallowed any of the ancient Tranfhtors, but Ind colic ted fometiaies the words, fometimes the fence, and often both at once,out of the Hebrew, Arabicl^ and fometimes Syrr^fc Languages But that St. Jerom hereby mention'ng the Arabich Tongue did not mean the Arabiiky^tCnnjs a thing Co well known, that it needs no proof, thefe words of the Learned Father fignify no :nore,than thac the Book of Job, was difficult to be underftood, tince the Author thereof had notonly wicdHebrexv words,b it alio SynxL^miAra- bick-For the better underftanding of which heavers, that with a great fum he ranfom'd a certain Mafter called Lyd us, who was thought to be of great repute amongft the Hebreci.wi .Scarce had the P.trijmn Bibles got abroad , when In England the famous Walton and other divers perfons begun to think of committing thefe fame Bibles to the Prefs again^to be of lefsbulk, and not fo large a Letter ^ that this New Edition of the Polyglots might be readier and more convenient for the life of fucfa as ftudied the holy Scr:pt.;res.This matter fucceeded as happily as was ex- pected , lb that thefe Polyglot B'.bles appeared in publick in the year 1657, and are vulgarly cailed the Engli(h Bibles, contain- ing fix Volums. They arc indeed much infer iour to the P«ri- fun thptaglots in the largenefs and goodnels of the Paper , as alio the neatnefs of the Character } But they have this advan- tage chiefly, that every context: and verfion may be diicerned by the Read:r in one fingle glance as it were, and with little trou- ble com pared ooe with anoth :r, which cannot be done in rea- ding the p.irifia.i Poly dot, without turning over two vaft huge Voluntas together. A. I hey are to be preferred before that of Paris, in that they contain truer Copies of the GV^Verfi- o.-.s of the Sefsmgim and the Latm one by St Jtrom\ the 6'ivr^be'ng li.v borrowed from a Vat, can B~>ok at Rome, was afterward* Printed at ptrtJ) the Latin \n\ g d from inn umera- : Errours by the Studyand Authority of Pope Slxtus the Fifth and Clemtnt the Light. Bsfides all this you have the AtdhicL and 1^4 Critical Enquiries. and Syriack Tranflations of Ejl*r, Judith , Tobus, and fome other few Books which are not extant in the Parifian Bible ei- ther in Arabic!^ or Syriack. The Englijl) Edition haslikewife a threefold Paraphrafe, one called the Hterofolymitan, another that of Pfcado Jonathan (both which are writ in mixt Chaldee^) and a third Tanfus his Perfian Paraphrafe. It has alfo the four Gofpels in the Perfian and c Egyptian Pfalter, all which the Parifian Polyglots want. In the mean time Monfieur Lejay having confumed his E- ftate in publishing the Paris Bibles complains much of his fad Fortune, and inveighs againft the Englijly men, as Plagiaries, who had taken his Work out of his hands, and had publifhed nothing (except fome few things of very little importance) but what he had fet forth before. Truly the Gentleman ought to be pitied who had lavifhly wafted all his fubftance in hopes of future gain. But the Englifli men in publifhing fuch 'Polyglots, as are more convenient, and better fuited to all neceflities do really deferve Commendation ; and had deferved it much more if they had fet out the Verfions of the Oriental Nations (efpeci- slly the Arabic) which lay dorment in their Libraries •, and are of better note than thofe which were publifhed in the Parifian Bibles. For it had been much better to have fet forth the Co- pies of the Arabic Pentateuch, with the Obelisk*, Asterisks, and others of Origen his Notes which are referved in the Library at Oxon, than to have coropofed anew that Old patched Para- phrafe of R. Saadias, which was extant before in the Parifian Po- lyglots. But what feeras more flrange, is that the infinite num- ber of faults which the Parifian Edition is ftufPd with, especially in the Syriac and Arabic Verfions, as alio in the.'r Latin Inter- pretations, fhould yet be iound in the Englijh one, nor taken notice in the critical Animadverfions made upon the lafc Tome. Much more might be objected againft the Englifl? Edition which / omit 9 fince nothing can be abfolnteiycomyhat, and per ft ft. But the moft notable thing in it is the Animadverfions prefix'd to the fore- front of the Book, though this Preamble hath it's fail- ings too, for it feems to be compofed by feveral Authors, who differing in Opinion about the fame matter, become contrary Parties •• this is the caufc why Walton in whofe name this Book firft appeared in publick, fometimes talks a little incohe- rently. CHAP. ANIMADVERSIONS Upon a fmall TREATISE OF Dr Ilaac Voffius s, Concerning the ORACLES OF THE SYBILLS AND His Anfwcr to the Objections in. a late Treatife Entitled CRITICA SACRA. LOWDO& :, Printed in the Year MDCLXXX1V ANIMADVERIONS UPON A. Small Treatife Concerning the OKACLES of the SYftlLLS, By IS A AC J 0 SSIUS, D.D. And an Anfwer to the Objections againft the late Q RITICA S AC RA. "*S H E Author c( I he Critics, Sacra upon the Old Tcfla- incnr had befpeken Moderation in Jfaac Projfins,whom he lo !;'J upon as aPeribn carried away with too gre?.t an sfTccflcion of the Greek Verfion. But the Learned Gentleman who well underftood tbatChrtfl in f/;Mpocalyrs bad fptSd the Lnkevpirtn oat cf his month, and that God loves nothing that halts bitxcen two Alcdn^s, fell more obftinately to work In ^eff^tdch}, when he ict li.'mfelf to write his fmall Treatife concerin^ the *;• Ctitlcm Oracles of the Sybils, wherein he ieems to have argued to that one thing alone, the advancement of the 6Yfi/^lntcrprcters by applaudug according to his common Gu(;ome the Exemplars of the Jews. For he returns his nnfwer to Simon in fnch a man- ner's if he had addrels'd himieif in his work wiih a Mind prc- poflefs'd by the Rabbins, after the Example of St.Jerom, wLo was the firft of the Cvri/lians who framed a Rabbimc f^erfion, a>:d encouraged others to dure the fame, fcjfms makes large P/otcfla- tions that he does not follow the Rabbins, and that he acquiefces in that Verfion which Chrifl himfelfa ;prov'd . and admonifhes Simon to forbear from any new Tranllation of the Sacred Scrip- ture , in regard a purer and more genuine Verfion cannot be I i made, 2 jo Critical Enquiries. made, then that which wis recommended torn by Chriftand his Apoftles. A ;d Co far indeed P0//Z/W does well in attributing very much to the Greeks Tranflacors ; though he would have done much better,h id he not affirmed them to be altogether free from all manner of Error, and that they were not to be fwcrv'd from in matters of fmalleft moment, as they who were to be lookt upon as Prophets rather then Interpreters. 1 alfo extol the diligence of that worthy Perfon, in vindicating the Tran- flation of the Seventy Interpreters from the calumnies of moil: flanderous perfons , and for correcting their Manu- fcripts. But when he comes to difcourfe of the Jews and their Books , the Learned Gentleman difcovers a world of ignorance in thole things, and frequently endeavours to ira- pofe fa I (hood for truth. Ail which mail be made apparent by Examples. To which purpofe I fhall f elect fome things cut of that famous Perfons Treatife concerning the Oracles of the SybiUst and his anfwer to the Objections of the Critica Sacra \ from whence it will appear that he has given po!itive fentence ia matters which he little underftood, I will therefore begin from the Epiftlc which he has affix.' J to that little difcourfe. At the fir It dam, in th;s Epiftle yojfws takes feveral cccalions to traduce the perlbn himfelf, as learned as he was in the He- brew Language , for a Fool> a half Rabble , and an Egregious Knave , as one that produe'd the words of St. Jerom molt wick- Gee. \g. 35. cdly drefsM and trimM for his own turn. The place in dis- pute is extant in thefe words in St. Jeroms Hebrew Questions, upon Gemfis. The Hebrews, as to what follows. And lie per- ceiv'd not when (he lay down nor when me role up, marly the words at the top, as a thing incredible, and as a thing not to be com* frehendedin nature how a Man fhonld lye with a Worn in and not un- der Fl and any thing of it. Vojfiitx attelts, that he has confultcd many Manufcript Copies, and that he finds it written in all Apponunt, not Appnngunt \ they fet over or n;oa , infread of, they mark with points at the top. He would have faid truer that he never found Apponnnt in any Manufcripts that were of credit or reputation, for what fence could be made of thefe w:>. Is lad Apponnat been fet in the place of Appungunt. Nor docs he tell us where he found thefe Manufcripts. But that we may come to the bulinefs,there was no reafon lor lrcjfms to per- vert the words of the Hcb ev? Text, fearing perhaps, lead from that Critical Enquiries* 2 5 \ that word j4t pnffgnrtt ^.hc Antiquity of points might be made out from St. Jen ms time. For the founder fort of Criticks confeis that thoic points were much later then the age wherein Stfirtm liv'd:, v\ ho nevcrtlielefs acknowledge , that that fort of points, of which St. Jerom here makes menticn, and which are put up- on fomc words of the Hebrew Context, were done upon the lame ground that the Samaritans and the Syrians fix certain Crofi flronks over fomc words which were invented by the Grammarians or Critick*. And the Jews both Ancient and Modern agree with St. Jerom in this particular. Mention is alio made of thefe points, in the Talmud In Medrafchim, or the Allegorical! Comments of the Jews upon Scripture. And they are likewife to be feen in the Modern Exemplars of the Bibles \ and inmefb, upon the word nr^I? , Becwnah,wben JJjearofc, Which is the word at prefent indifputc,thereis added this note upon the Mar gent 1 Ly nipj Kakod gn.l Vau% a Point . upon ran. In the fmall Venetian Bibles let forth by Refer Bra- "' I515" gadinus in the 37th Chap, of Cenefis where the fame point is put upon the word n^, there is this noLc in the Margent md \n -in m«na nVl^p) e-r.e if the fifteen point s which are in the Law, N^W as for the rcalbrs which arc given for thefe Points by the Jtws\ who arc troubled with an Itch of vanity, 1 pa (s them by in fi- lence, as being very frivolous. It is enough to have ob- ferv'd that the Jews retain thole Points in their Exemplars by Tradition from their Anceftors. When Voffjis in his Epiflle deplores 1 he miferablcEftatecf the Accademies in Germany at this day, where Rabbinifme domi- neers without controul, and no Theology but Rabbinical is ad- mii'd. The Learned Gentleman dee» nor believe that human Learning car. be taught or iludyed where RalbimfmTzigns^ and the Rabbinical Screitch-Owls bear an ominous fway. Nor do I difleirt from roffms in this particular. And I would be glad thofe pedling Prkfts might beexpung'dout of the uml tr of Divines, who contemning the Latinznd ( 'lYftLearning^willsd- tit of nothing but the Fictions ol the Ralbins\ B it that Per* 4s eminently Learned , who after the Example f Origen , Jciom, chr fjlo.v, Thiod,ret and others of the Fathers frequent the Threfbolds oithe Jews, fhould be lifted in their Number [can hardly endure. For though gener ..." >art of the Books of the Jtvcs afe fulf 01 frivih h yetthei I i 2 are 2 r 2 Critical Enquiries. are not a few of the Rabbies, who have wonderfully illuftrated Sacred Scripture. And this the Commentaries of St. Jcrom alone mon the Prophets apparently make out, who was ootafliamed to confult the ir.ofl Learned Jtvn [of his Age. But to the nice and fqueamiiti Mv.fojfiHs St- Jerom ieems contemptible and Prince of the Semi R.,bb'nicalD'i\'\nts. And that S mi RMie as he calls him , though he have his failings , has far furpafs'd all the red of the Fathers or. the Church in expounding the B oksof Sacred Scripture, And I could wifh alfo thntrcjfuis had fiiftconversM with thole half Rabbins, before he began to meddle with their concerns Forthorehal; Rabbiesczn hardly for- bear Laughter when they read in his Epiftle before his Trcatife of the Oracles of the Sybils^ that it is not above fix Centuries fmce thole Vowel points came to be us'd with which the Modern Exemplars of the JVir-f are 1 >aded •, That three or fo ir Ages moft fiercely contended together» wkile thefe were of Opinion that the Vowels were thus,others another way to be introduced.- A: d that the Controverfic would never have been at an end, unlets Daniel Bomberg had ended the quarrel, having had lone Centuries of the Jews : and fo thole Vowels crept into the World out cfBcmbergs Shop in Vcnict. Tl a" per{on,'us true,!iad a Library well furnifh'd with Rabbinical Books, from whence he gathered mod of his Fictions more Rabbinical. But they who have convers'd with Books of the Jews, well know, that before Bombergs Edition of the Hebrew Bibles, and in other parts of Italy ^ cfpecial'y at Pefiro , the Hebrew Bibles were then Printed with pointed Vowels. We alfo meet with Co- pies of the Bibles in Manufcript written above four hundred years fince, which have the fame Points ; and Bibles are quo- ted by the more antient Rabbies wherein the fame Points are made ufe of. And it isplain, that thefe Points were in ufe not only for fix, but for nine hundred years ago. FortheRab- bie Saadas Gaon wrote a Grammer about the Ye^r DCCC. wherein hedifputesat large about the pointed Vowels, which were in ufe air ong the Jews lon£ before his time. Betides thofe things are all feigued that Fkffms affirms concerning the foare contention among the Jews, how the Vowels are to be placed upon the Hebrew Context. And of the fame (lamp is that which the LearnedGentleman urges concerning the Editions of Bomber^ which according to the Opinions of the Jews arc full of Critical Enquiries. 25? of Faults. And indeed the Jews ccntemn the firft Edition of Btmlcr^h) which was overlcokM by Ftl x T.itrer.fis , m regard the A^frttic Notes are very unskilfully added rr> theMargent cf t h l Exc ■ plaT , but they applaud and re.erence tne /econd and third of 11*/,^ Pji^J Editioi s. In the adding ihcA/a^y, ct € notes to Fom: rrahj ftdicions areat difficulties aroJc •, fiw that there are few a /on. Lf< j wnfhRab* bics th :t truly under II and the Msfmtk A t, w:i h however /. Jacob Br f&MJitn with mediant toyl and labour over- caine, the firft rdtorer of the A4*fi*** Butwhetb r he waft- ed his Patrimony in maintaining th fe Centuries Bo nhcr&k hii'd, as VtJJms eagerly c< ntends I lh ill neither lollic t m y in- quire, neither is it to the purpofe. Much mcie m h: b^ welded to what I have already produced, and perhaps pro er e. ough to the bufinefs; but I am af:a:d lead the learned Gentleman fhould bring mc to the Bar , for a Semi-Rabb/ and a Favourer of the Jews. Therefore let us come to the E amination 0" his little Treatife concerning the Oracles of the Sybtlls, where he disputes irore learnedly of the jews and their Books. At the beginning of his difcourfe, this Perlbn of an unex- haufted Erudition., produces (bme things in reference to the Oracles of th& Sybi&t, which the jews more cfpecially in Spain niade ufe of againft the Chriftians, And as for thofe things which ieem to be more remote fro n Truth then Fiction, he re- fers them to f. 19 c.r 26. where he han lies that Argument; but feeing that it has already been demonftratcd,that the Chronolo- gy fetch'd from the Booi;s of the JtwsJcCs favc.urs the J errs than that which is taken out fr^m the Greek TranfliLors, there is no reafon we fhould fpend any more time in rifcUing the Inventions of the mod learned Voffins. The quickiighted Gentleman had already obfen'd. that the Jews in the time of jiqHiUJkwKot the nonce corrupted the Hebrew Manuscripts , and had expungM above 2coo Years, thai they m'ght make it out, that the Mcf- fiJPs time was not yet come. But in this place , more peripi- catious then before, he believes that the (pace of that Depra- vation may be Comprehended within ihe limits of two and twenty Years at moir , and this he gathers from the words of tgKMtinsin his E, (lie to the Vhiladelfhians. That Tioft Holy Mityr, according to the rcpr rt of fa/fins, relates that he heard fomefay, that if thofe things which ate contained in the Go- fpete 2 a Critical Enquiries* fpcls were not to be found in the Ancient Monuments,he would not believe fhem. Now, faith Fo/Jius, iince he anfwered and they denied, it is manifeil: that the Jews had deprav'd the Ex- emplars, or fwerved from the Senfe of the 70 Interpreters. But how this Learned Gentleman can wreftthe anfwer of Igna- tins, whoaflerts that Chrifl fhall be to him inftead of the An- cient Monuments, to his opinion of the fewijh Manufcripts be- ing corrupted about that time, I cornels I do not underftar.d. Neither alio are thofe words to be found in the Genuine Exem- plars of Ignatius, which Voffius himfelf fQt forth, Chrijlovelut turn/no facerdcti credendum pottus, quam aliis facer doi thus : Which however the learned Perlon produces, as if they belcng'dco the anlwer of Ignatius, vDcaon yk^ may Myovruv^ In l?,'.' u» lv roi< tyJoti tvfv T* iicLyjzt.is, « 7nszva . To Ucr'iis 0 Xp/srV I have hetrdfomc fayfkat mlefs I find the G off el in the Ancient Monument s9 I will not believe. To th fe I an fiver, that Jefus Chrifl is to me inflead of the Ancient Mwu- ments. But there the difcourfe is not of the Old Tcftament compared with the New, as Foffius believ'd, but of the Here- ticks which fpringing up in the Infancy of the Church, denied the Faith which the Exemplar of rhe Gofpel fet forth. Whence it came to pafs that the Ancient Fathers of the Church. Ter- tullian, Irer.cus and others of the fame rank, did not undertake to refute the Hereticks out cf the facred Scripture, but from certain Tradition, or from the Doclrine of Chriir, propagated by the ApoKles and their S.ieaiTcrs, Apoftolick Perions, in the Churches of fevcral Nations. In which Cenic Ignatius af- ferts that Chriir or his DccTit Inc was to him in the place of the Ancient Monuments. This, unlcfs I am very much deceived, is the meaning of IgHatmsH words, who commends link y of Do- chine in Chrift, whofe Spirit ought to be preferred before any Ancient Monuments whatever. Many other things alfo Voffuis produces in this place, con- cerning the Etymology of the word c/£ryf,and concurs with them who believe Era and the Heriga of the Arabians CO be the lame word j nori; ic improbable, but that which heprefently adds of the Arabic'.:, word Hegyra 1, as if it were to be dedilc'd from the Hebrew "an Hytger, a Pro/elyte or Stringer teems not lo very like!' . The Lfcamed Gentleman believes that lb, era! Jews of the of the Hcrcdan.e known to be the Deity, that was to be adorM by the whold World. Such Stories as thefe Fofjius produces concerning the Oracles of the Sybills. But P.jlellus, yet more quickfighted, aflertsthis Pro- phetical Doctrine to have had its Original from a Woman who was Princes of all the Ea(l,and ne t of kin to Noah. Who would believe that Jfrac KiffiWi who fpares for no virulent exprefli- ons againft the Jews and their Talmud, fhould introduce a Td- mttdic Doctor among the Prophets*, if it be fo, I wonder he fhould be in fuch a fury againft a Perfon Learned in the Hebrew, Lightfoor. who expounded the Gofpel out of the Talmud. He feems to mtj faies lroffms, to commit a Up Sin, who explains the Gofpel out or the Alcoran , then by t'ne Talmud. But of thefe things enough and too much : Let us ncwrctnrnto the Apocryphal Books. I call the Apocriphal Books, when we difcouiTeof Byblick concerns, thofe which neither the Church nor the Synagogue has received as Canonical. Hence it came to pafi, that of old, St. 7*0»* perforating a Jew, .and lately Cajetanc fentene'd ma- ny Bocks among the Apocriphal, before they were rcceivM for Divine and Prophetic by the decree of the Chinch. In this Brifrcf.pr*fiafcnce St. Jerom affirms, that D miel among the Hebnws had Din. not the (lory of Sufanna, nor the Song of the three Ctoild en} nor the fable of the Bell and the Dragon. Which rve> faith he, becaufi th?y a; e difficri ed alhv. r the Wot Id freft rring the t rut h , and with- al defreffing their Authority , h we addd however , leaf we ??,ight feomtohaie cut §f a great part of tie Volume. In like manner, afier he had predue'd the Books of Scripture , which were held Canonical among the Jews y he adds, Whatever we meet with be- JfiermfttiX* fides thefe is to be accounted Apccr 'thai. That is to fay the WJ- lib..Kcg. dom of Solomon, the Bcokvf Jcfrs, the Son of Syrach, Judith Afrkinui. Tibitand the Pieacher inducM by th.'s reafon. African us alfo believes the Story of Suf.nna to have been feign'd by a Greek Writer Dr. Vofjhts's Oracles of the Sy bills* 257 Writer^ others feigned two Daniels, one the Author of the Propheiie that goes under his name, and the other the Writer of the Story ot Sufanna, which in the ancient Editions of the Greek Exemplar was placed before the Prophcfie ot D*>;iiL St. Jerom indeed was the firft that tranfpofed it at the end of the lame Prophefie, bccaule it was not in the Jcwifh Exemplar, which he tranllatcd. And St. Jerom confirms his opinion con- cerning the Hiltory of Suft.nna, by the Teltimonv of other Fa- thers. 1 wonder , faith he, That cert din peevish twafpijh pcrfons are in wrath with me, as if 1 hadc.it of part of the Rookj, whereas Oii~ gen, Eufebius, Apollwarius and other Eclefufticall Terfons and Doflcrs of Greece confefs the fe Ft funs not to be found among the Hebrews; not th^t they ought to be anfwerable to Porphyrin* for thfe things which afford no Authority of ftcred Scripture. Gregc ry Na- z.tanz.en, Mclito oiSardu, and the Author of the Synopfts, which goes about under the Name of Athanafius went farther, and put the Book of Eft her among the Apocryphal Books , meerly becaufe not understanding the Hebrew Tongue, they found fome pieces added to the Ancient Hiftory of Eft her by a Greek Author, for which reafon they condemned the whole Work. It happened, faith Scxtus S^nenfis, that by reafon of t ho fe frag- ments of Appendex's inf.rttd he, e ard there, through the raflsnefs of fome Writers, that Bocl^, though written in the Hebrew, did not find reception among the Chrifiians. Nicholas de Lyra, alio Cajetan and fome others denyed thefe Additions likewife to be Canoni- cal, induced as it is moft probable by the fame reafons. Thefe things have been diicourfed more at large, tkat it might appear to all what Books were rcckon'd to be Apocriphal in the Judgment of the more Antient Fathers. But Voffius a- buling the word Apocryphal, introduces fuppoiitious and Adul- terate Books , inftead of the Old Apocryphal, and fo impo- fes upon the (imple and unwary. For whereas he endeavours to make it out, that the Books of the Sybils , and others which he calls Fatidical, were joyned with the Books of the Old Te- lrament,read in the Primitive Church.and recommended by the Apoflles, it is the Fiflion of one that has noth'ng to do but to (it and Romance in Divinity. For there were no other Books read in the Primitive Church,or added to the reft of the Books of the Old Teftament, in the Greek Exemplars of the Bible, than thofe which are mentioned by the Fathers. Though per- K k haps 5 8 Animadverfions on haps fome of the Gentiles, that they might prefs the Jews and the Gemi.es more home , have fometimes quoted the Books of the Sibylls and others of the fame (lamp, which nevertheiefs no ingenious perfon will reckon among the Apocryphal Books , of which we are now in difcourfe. Vbjfuts is very much griev'd that the Books of the Sibylls and other Sooth-iayer's Books, after they were prohibited by publick Edict, were made Apocryphal and forbid to be read by ary Perfon, when formerly they were openly and religioufly made ufe of by the Jews, like the reft of the Books of the Old Teftament ; whence it came to pafs that the Canonical Books were reduced to a more cer- tain Number , and the word apocryphal was taken in an evil fenfe, for fpurious and of doubtful and fufpe6lcd Credit. In the mean time he never cites the Authour from whence he drew thefe witty conceits,whicharefo like theFablesoftheJfip/; fothat I may prefumeto ?sk this Learned Perfon what the Fac- tious Cardinal Hyppolito dy efle demanded of Areofto Dove hatro- vato tai.te cogloonare. Where did he find out fo many jngling Tricks ? But I agree with him in what he writes concerning the Apocriphal Books , if by them he mean no other then thofe which pafTed from the Jews to the Chriflians , with the reft of the Books ot the Old Teffamenc ; for that the greateft part of them are read in the RemiJJj Church, cfpecially fmce the decree of the Council of Trent, as Canonical, for indeed it m;ght be that thefe Books which were formerly rejected as Apocriphal, becaufe they were not approved by the Cannon of the Jews might have had Prophets for their Authors. Nor is the Authority of Jofephus contrary to this opinion, who affirms, that from the times of Artdxer- xes there was no certain S.icceffion of (he Prophets, and there- fore that thefe Books which were reckoned after that,were not to be accounted Cononical. Nor is it probable that the Fun- ctionof the Prophets was altogether taken away at that time from the Jews ; for while the State o^ the ferns continu'd^there were publick Scribes who committed to writing the Affairs of the Nation, and they were called Prophets , becaufc they were iafpir'd with the Holy Ghofi, though they did not Prophefic of things to come. However it is not neccflary to believe, that they who wrote the publick Affairs of the Nation at that time, fhould be Prophet;- for that the Senators of the Grand Coun- cil, who as we know were inipired, overlooked their works, but Dr. Vof flit*' s Oracles of the Sjbills* 159 but feeing that the publick Authority of the JewiGi Senate, ne- ver Regit terM thole Books among the Canonical, 'tis no won- der that moft of the Fathers would not receive them as Divine, but only as Apocryphal and oi fulpcctcd credit , cfpecially in refpeftof thofc other Books which were allowed to be of un- doubted Reputation. For that Book which was of fufpccled Credit, was not the fame with them, as that which was fpuri- ous, adulterate, zsFcffmsftemstQ think, only under this Title they diftinguifli certain from uncertain , otherwile thole Books had ne'r been read in the ancient Ages of our Forefathers, had they apprehended any thing fpurious and adulterate in them. Only they were or lefs moment then the facrcd Books, and therefore the Fathers calPd them rather Ecclefiaftical than Di- vine. They would have them read in the Cheches , faies the Author of the Expofition of the Creed attributed to Rnfinns^bnt net to be Cited m AmbtntichCQnfirmMtiortS of Faith , and only upon thofe Grounds it is that the Church of England reads thofc Books in their Congregations, yet I doe not beleive, that ever any one here except Voffnts ever dreamt oi introducing the Books of the Sybills to be read in the Church. I know indeed , that fome of the Fathers have in great Ve- neration the Book which is called the Preacher , ancj^hat 7V- tnllian endeavour'd to obtrude the Book of Enoch as of Divine Authority, and that the Jews alfo earneftly laboured to remove feveral Books from the facred Context, which illuftratcd the Chriftian Religion. To which opinion alfo Origen feenf d to adhere, who in the Epiftle which he wrote to Africtnus, con- cerning the Hiftory of Stf/rfww..',afTerts,thatthe Jews had with- drawn feveral paflages out of their Bibles, to prevent their be- ing read by the common People. But thefe things and others of the fame Nature, which are own'd but by a few, and which are produe'd rather to fupport their own opinions than to main- tain the Trirh, are not to be look't upon as the general judg- ment of the Fathers j For Tcrtnti an hi nfelf feems to confirm that common fentence of the Church, by his own words in this place, 7 "he EooJ^of Enoch is not admitted by fome , bec.itfe it is not admitted into the Collection of the Jews. Therefore i'n thofe days it was adjudg'd Apocryphal becaufe it was not admitted among the Canonical Number of the Jews • Origcn alio thorg'ic otber- K k 2 vs . 2 £Q Animadverfions on wife in other places than what he wrote to Ajfrkanus. But ifl this place he could not defend the Hiftory of Sufanna and the o- rher Additions in the Greek Edition of the 70 Interpreters, by any other means than by having recourfe to the Apocryphal Books, and fuppofing that the Jews in Tranfcribing their Go- pies, concealed many things from the knowledge of the vul- gar fort, which were fct down in thofe Apocryphal Books. O- rigen perhaps had learn'cfrom the Jews, with whom he was fre- quently Converfant, that Ffdars and his Companions did not fufFer all the Books which were extant to go abroad , and hence he prefumed it might be inferred, that the Greek Interpreters had taken thofe things which are not to be found in the Hebrew Copies. But this opinion does not agree with the General con- fent of the Ancient Jews, who have acknowledged a perfect and acurate Concord of the Hebrew Text in all things. Nei- ther does it feem to have been invented by Origin and fome o- thersforany other reafon, but that the Hebrew Truth might be reconciled to the Greek Exemplars, of whofe Syncerity there was fufficient reafon to doubt. To this we may add, that Origin in this Epiftle to Africanus, did not fpeak fo much his own Sentiments, but only that he might defend the Books which were then read in the Church. Moreover the learned Vojfuts objects, that a perfon of unex- haufted Erudition, Clemens Alex andr ir.w writes, that the Apo- f He Taul referred to the Oracles of the Sybills, and the Prophe- fies of Hyftafpes, and recommended them to be read. But if it fhould be enquired of Fcff.ns, where St. Taul faid this, he prefently anfwers, that it ought to be fufficient for us thatCfc- ?nexs Alexandrlnus, a Holy Perfon, and Convcrfant with many Apof!o!ick Perfons, affirmed it for Truth, but if any regard be had to that An fwer , of neceflity it follows that all the An- cient Fathers, were frre from all Errour,then which there is no- thing more abfurdl) Ficticious. For they know well, v\ ho have any knowledge of Eccleiiaflk! Affairs, how era tily thofe An- cient Fathers and Clement of Alexandria in the fir ft place, di- fpu;ed with the Jews and Gentiles. Voffms alfo earneftly main- tains, that the Book of E^eeh and other fuch Books, are not to be rejected for that reafon only, becaufe that many Superflu- ous and Magical Fragments are contained in fome Fragments that arc cxtant3 feeing that Balaam was a Magician and Inchan- ter Dr. Vojfw's Or.xclcs of the Sybills. 1 6 1 ter, yet manifeftly foretold many future Myfterics concerning Chrifl , as if thole things which are rcgiftei'd iu Scripture con- cerning BAhamy could be wre,led to the prefent Argument j or that it were lawful by this Example to defend and juftifte thofe Books which we find not only to be ftuft with Lies and Superfluous Fables, but to be written by Impoftors, aflunuflg to t!>emfelves the Names of famous Men. By the fame Art the Dreams of the Feavourim Jews are maintained in Midru, Zo ha> and Kabbah to be infpired by the fame Spirit from whence the Go/pel proceeded, as H Warn Poftellm declares, who did not D^e 0uZ- caP icruplc to affirm that the Gofpel was predue'd from the Do- 7 Ctrine oi Zohar, as that whi< b had its rife from the Hsly G ho [I and Spiritual Anthers. The ChJans alio faith the fame, Thelitis the Syrian yJndi*n, Caldxan Magicians, the Egyptian Gywno fop Lifts and Prophets are from tl^e fame Original, fromv\hom the wor- thy Voffius feemsnot much to fwerve •, whom I would advife to place among the number of Soothfiyers, theProphelie ot Zoro- iib.Zorcb$ le.ibel, which (peaks very plainly concerning the Mejfi.ih, and was publifhed by the Jews in a Prophetic Stile, and in none of t he meaneft fort of Language. But lea\ ing thefe things, let us profecute our intended Subject. b^fidcs, what has been hitherto alledgM concerning the Apo- cryphal Books, we are to obferve that the JiWs did not only frame to them (elves a Canon of Scripture, but that the Church has alfo her Canon , who by her own Authority has reftor'd fe- veral Books which the Jews expung'd. Thus Sc. Auflin afferts, that the Book of M<*ccabccs were not received by the Jews but by the Church for Canonical, which is to be underfrood only L'b- tB.dici» concerning the two firfc Bocks ot Aiaccabtes \ ior the third is w*»^w-c»3*« rejected as well by the Church as by the Synagogue; To which opinion Sr- Jerom feems to adhere :, though frequently in his works he fhews himfelf a mod flout defender ot the J*daic\ Canon. For when Rssffinus objects, that Jcrom in his own Edi- lib.i./foL'.+d- tion oi the Bible, would a/low no Authority of Scripture to verfusi\KpUk the Story of Sufanna, the Song cf the three- Children, and the Sto- ry of Bell and the Dragon, which he had called Fables:, the learned Father anfwers, that he did not fpeak his own Senti- ments, but only explained what the Jews were wont touree a~ gainftthe Chriftians, but Jerom had (aid, that Origen, EnfebtHS, jip/lindtim and other Doctors of Greece , would make no an- ex i6z Animadverfions oii fwer to Porphyrins for t\io& Vifions which had no Authority of Scripture •, and the fame Jcrom thus writes concerning the Book of Judith. This Boo\jhe Synod, of Nice is J "aid to have numbred among the Holy Writings, upon which Erafmta thus obferves , He does * of fay it was approved in the Synod of Nicet but the Synod is f >id to have numbred it ; and really St. Jerom in his Preface to the Book of Kings, had denied both Judith zndTobias to be Cano- nical .Now the queftion is whether St. Jcrom do not feem to con- trad - faith the Leirned Father, which the Hebrews pru:ir,g off from the Catalogue of Divine Scripture, h.ive sondemrfd amorg thofe which they call Hagiegrapha. Who does not 2^4 Animadverfions on nor prefently apprehend from hence that the word ought to be read Apocnpha , notHtgicgrapha, fince it is apparently mani- feft that the Jews never cut of the Hagiography from the Cata- logue of Divine Scripture. The fame observation is to be made in the Preface of St. Jerom upon Judith , where inftead of Ha- giographa it ought to be read Apocrypha. For thus the words run at this day. Among the Hebrews the Books of Judith is reckoned Among the Hagiograpba, vohofe Authority is not fo fujfcierJ to ftrengthen the convincement of thofe things which give occafion of difpute. If the authority of that Book be not iufficient to confirm our Faith, certainly it can be none ot the Hagicgr aph*, wh'ch without Controveriie are accounted Canonical and infpii'd among the Jews \ but or the number of the Apocrypha , wh'ch are of dubious and uncertain Credit, as St. Jtrom thought the Books of Judith and Tobias to be. Thus much concerning the Apocryphal Books, upon which we have indfted longer then the purpofe of our Subject required. But we did not think it a deviation from our Argument to unfold a Difpute highly in- treaguM by the Contentions of the Difputants. But now it was not enough for the molt Learned Voffms to have feignM newProphets much more quick lighted then the an- cient oner, bur. he mull now produce a new Order of the Books ot Sacred Scripture hither to unheard of. The Books of Mofesy according to his own Opinion, make five Volums and not one, as the Jews believe : and to prevent any man from calling this in queltion, he produces molt convincing reafon's for this new Diltrubution. For it is manifeft ; faith He, even out of the Sacred Writings themfelvei, that as other Nations, fo a-lfc the ancient Jews wrote their Books not upon folded Paper, which is a modern Inventi- on, but in rolls and continued Skins : What reafon there was for KoffiHs to have recourfc to the Antient Hebrews I do not under- ftand, when even in our times, the J.vos make ufeor Rclls ot the fame nature,as to the Bcoks which they make ufe of in their Synagogues^ yet for cfl that they do not divide the Law into five Volums.* but comprehend it inone Velum, according to that ancient Cuftom, which was obferv'd even in Chriftstime. By and by proceeding a little farther, the Learned Gentleman affirms that in the time of Acjuila, whom he calls a moil imper- tinent Interpreter, the Jews or elfe AquiU himfelf invented a moft wicked and idle divifioa of the Sacred Books,in hatred to DdriiiPi Dr. VoJJhts's Oracles of the Sybills. i6<$ DaniePs rcetl-j , and th.it they perverted the fcnle and order o. Scripture by introducing a New D'ftributicn , that is to lay, of the Law, the Prophets^ and the tjdgicgrafbets* Now whether anewdilmbution of the Books, fo the Books be entire, let the perlpcac.ous judge. But kafl I mayfeemtq carp it fmall things, I fay itismu. h more probable that /q.ila in his Transition of the facred Writings obfci . \l that order which according to the method of that Ace, the Hebrew Co- pies let before h im, when there appear'dr.o reafonfor the Charge, But he did that, iaysfsbjfius, in hatred < f paniePs weeks, whom he call into the Lift place, almoit among the Hagiogra- fhtrt ; as if the Jews did not give the fame Credit to the Pro- phefies ot Daniel concerning the Meffi.ih, as :h Cnrifthns. Vof- jius admires at their fimplicity who believe the Rabbins aflerting the Ketuvim, or Books of the Hagigraphers h i\ e been writ- ten b, the Infpiration of the Holy Ghc ft. If you conful the Rabbins, faith he, they wffllamgh at ye, as Inch m cannot ehcof but know what they mean by the Holy Gho'i. Why h ^s not Vijfsu, now become a Rabbinift, cited thole Rabbins, that we might under- Hand by them what they mcr.n by the word Ketuvim f 1 know indeed the Jews do not agree concerning the genuine Significati- on of that word : though all believe that the Ketuvim, or the ff geographers are no lefs Divine and Canonical then the red ot the Bocks of the Old Te(t anient. The molt fnbtle Abraven d unfolds this Riddle. They were calPd Ketuv hn^becauft the) were *)&OPJ written by the Holy Ghofi.but tf it be fo, the word Kcluvim was not r-"VliirtD dc figifd that thofe Speeches were written in a book, not received by ^L word of Month , but to demote that they were written in the Holy 13 T DJt» Spirit j and in that degree, neither Was the Divine Spirit with them, rVHD but at thevoiy time of their Writing in this Language and Wifdotn R. t*HlPn David Kimchi affirms, that Prophelie is divided intofeverai De> Rimb.inMore gree>, of w hich one exceeds another. Which Degrees R. Mofes Ncv. BenM.umon more fubtlcly ex-Mains. But leaving thefe fubtleties PraE^« iQi,M which were taken from the Philofbphy of Arijfatlez id Averrhoes, ic is certain that the Jews agree with Jofcfhus i i this particular, that all the Books whrth are exraitt in . Canon are truly Di- vine and Prophetical beoaufe rhcyv. I 'Prophets. For which re a Ion R.*Don Jofeph \ tia, \\ has illultra- Vtxf* in P[*h ted the F films with his Commentaries, sad redue'd them with his Fathers to the Clajfis ot the Ketuvim or Hagrgr.-.phtrs, com- Ll [arcs 266 Animadverfions on pares them with the Law of Mofes, and thence infers the cheif- eft Dignity of the Pfalms. therefore, faith that Rabbi,f^ greater is the Dignity of that Beck bee an fe it follows the Divine L-iXV, and imi- tates the form and ft rf eft ion of it. Which is confirmed by the Au- thority of the Fathers, who ieemtohave preferred the Pfalms be- fore the Prophets thcmfelves , while they joyn them to the Pen- tateuch of Msfcs. Therefore by the ConfefTion of the Rabbys them- ielves,neitheristhe Authority either of D ividoi £>*»/>/ leflen'd, becaufe they 2re not number'd in the CUjfis of the Prophets. For the laft quoted Jofcfb adds thefe words in the fame place. Nor is it a wonder that the 'Book of Pfalms contains fever at 'Prophecies of the time of the Mefliah, feeing that there are fever al 'Prophecies ex- tant in the Holy Spirit , concerning future things. By this means the Jews will ealily be reconcil'd with the Jews. And which feems to be worthy cbfervation, the Talmudic Doctors will have the Book of Job to be written by Mofes, which neverthelefs they place in tie Clajfis of the Kctubim^ or H*giogrrph;rs. Who would think that foffiusfsf a Rabynisl, Ihonld become a Talmudic T>oBor 1 Hz earnestly maintains, That the Jews, by the ConfefTion of the Ancient Rabbys, expunged many places in the Holy Writings, and alterM the Scnfe and Words, Interefl: fo perfwading. No Man -JJjall find any thing feigned by me, fays the Talmudic Gentleman, whoever he be that Confidts the Tal- mudic Books, wherein he JJjall read thefe words in feveral places , It is good that a Letter be puH^d up out of the L.w, thtt the Nan e of God may be fnnUifyd. But it is not for all Men to have recourfc to the Talmudic Books, like the moil learned Vojfiu*. I had thought that decrefe of the Tdlmudifis might have been rightly explained by the Words of R. Mofts, Ben. Maimony who with mod of the Jewijb Rabbys, fo far defends the Immutability of the Mofatc Law, that lie believes that feme of its Conftitutions may be for a time fufpended by the Authority of the Grand San- Rawfc, Mo e hedrim. That Talmud.c Rabby afTerts, That God indeed, Deut. I pa:t 5. c.^ forbad that any one mould add to his Word, or detract from *'" it, but that he gave permiffion to the Wife Men of all Ages and 1 iraes, orrothc Suprcam Judicatory, to fet bounds to the Judgments, to be E lablilhed by the Law in fome things which they defire to innovate, to preferve the Authority of the Law : Farther, That God gave them Liberty to take away fome Pre- cepts of the Law, and to permit fome tilings Prohibited upon fome Dr. VoJJius's Oracles of the Sybils. i6j fome certain Occafion and Accident, but not to Perpetuity. Thefe were taken out of the Latin Edition o{ the Book More Nevoihim, Pi:bl,fhcd by TZhxtorf. A ter the fame manner fpeaks the Author of the Book, Eq tit I'd, Ctzjri^ let torth alio in JHc- £mvand Latin \y Buxtorf. For upon Coxjfs demanding the Qucftion, HowthatFoweroflnnovat.ni; any thin^ in the Di- vine Law o{ God could ftand with ihofe Words or DtHtronomy^ Thou \\ ah neither cddtoit, nor tie: raft from it f The Jew makes Anlwcr, That thoic Words were only fpoken in reference to the multitude, that they mould not Innovate any thing of their own Heads, or take upon 'era to be Self-wife, but not in Relati- on to the Senators of the Great Sanhedrim : tor that it was not for one Mofes only to eogrois the making of Laws, which was a priviledge belonging to other Prophets, Piiefls and Judges, who were endu'd with the fame Spirit of Gcd. This, unlefs I miflake, is the Genuine Senfc of the Tdlmudic Poftrine, which cannot be wrefted to the Extirpation of the Words ot the Sacred Contcxt,when the Depute lyes about taking away a Word, or a Letter : Nay, fometimes a Sentence in the Explication of the Context, but not of changing or eraling Letters or Words out of the Sacred Original. Morinus, from whom Voffnu has bor- rowed whatever he has in his Works that favours of R bbi>;i **, after he had omitted no fort of Fiction to prove, That the Sa- cred Exemplars were on-fet purpofe Corrupted by the Jcxrs, at length embraces the Opinion of St. Aufiin, in thefe Words : We Willingly embrace the Opinion of St. Auftin, concerning the Bcokj Lib. 1« B*- •f the Jews, by themfclves defrayed and mutilated of Jet purpofe. crcit. i c. 6. From whom however he profefles todifcgjee in this, for trrat St. jtufiin thought it to be an Aft not to be believed, in regard it could not be , that a Nation fcatter'd far and near, fhould all unanimoufly Confpire to Corrupt fo many Copies, and fo far aiTunder difpers'd. But Morimu, more quick-lighted then S:. AHflmy violently maintains the Faft not cn'y to be beleiv'd a- mong the Jews, but alio to be by them elteemed another Arti- cle of their Faith. Now, whether that were prov'd by Morinm by fufficient Ar- gument is not our bufinefs to enquire. It is enough to have /hewn, that Morimu, upon whom Pojfius depends in moil things, could not be indue'd to believe, that the Jews corrupted the Text of Scripture on fet-purpofe, tho' he were not ignorant of L 1 2 the 2 68 Animadverfions on the Opinion of Talmndijls, in taking away a Letter out of the Law upon Occafion. Now ?ro(fiH4, having left the Talmudtfj, comes to the Greeks interpreters, and makes it his chief bufincfs toaflert, tha.all the HJjrcw which we have remaining, we are beholding to xhz Seven- ty Interpreters for it -7 that without them not lb much as one word ccu^d be rightly expound: d ; that no Verlions made by the Jixvsy or to the liking of the J< m are good, which were not taken from the Seventy Interpreters : that wherever you defert them, you depart from the Truth : Laftly, Thatthe Interpre- tation of the Script ire is to be fetched from thofe Jews, who Tranflited the Scripture when the Hebrew Language rlounuYd, and was famil ariy ipoken, and not by thofe Jews who are Ene- mies to the Chriftizm Faith, and who confeffes themfelves igno- rant of their own Tongue. HoW John Morinns produces Ar- guments alrnoft iike to thefe, to teize the modern Hebrew Ex- emplars, and ; o eliablifla the Authority of the antient Interpre- ters : which in regaid they are moftfolidly refuted by Ludovi- cw Cap tins, a Copious Teftimmy in reference to this (ubject, and notu : defer vcdly applauded by Voffitu him felt j I had rather anfwer Voffim in the words of that moit learned Author, than my own. Firil, therefore fays dpelltu concerning Mirinus^ and we concerning VofftHU^ It is eafie to fell f mohe to the ignorant Capel. in vi.lg.rr, and to bo ft of gawdy Trappings to the p ople. Then co- A j 1. adverC hung tc > the Seventy Inte. prefers, he fays contrary to the fenti- fcoot. ments of Toffipti, That the fisbrew Lmgutge was natural to them, which was led in the Captivity of Babylon, after which they i:.'d above 2oo Years. He adds. That they from the near afli lity between the Ch.ddee and Syro Chald nc Languages, which the Jews then m de Life of, i night by ftud y, labour, and fi\q icnt r . adingof the Scriprnrc, attain to no mean knowledge ot the Tongue, and many things af fo neectfary to 4tit underftanding of that Language, and the Sact d W icings they might gather from the Traditions 6f nceftoFs. But f fays CapellusJ th it thry [aXV aR things, Hndc aS things, never er?'>d) tr never Were dec { v*d, no ," t'lpr to fay but fu.h a ene a< under» ft an ds no king of the Hebrew, nnd never compared their TrtmJUtt- onveiihtht Hebrew^ Text, etienin thofe places wherein th-y read no 9th rw ft then \re do at this d y. where it is eafie to fee thtir fresfmnty ah , and fh.tw. fill failings^ errors frequently from the Ce .. t ftlpifcAtit Dr. Fojfui.^s Oracles of the Syhitts. i6y ftg>:icxaton ofthewrd J s and the In: cm an J Scope of the Stcrid.Vruir^s. Thefe ;.nd :n irj) other pallageshad Capclltum- fertcd into his Sacred O it icifm} w inch M rvr.u coo!; care to have expung'dj bccaulc they did not rcl.'fh his Palate. But we took them out o{C*:t\luf> Apology again fl Biot'itf. Now, what I'jfiu can An'wcr to thefe things I d:> not apprehend, whenas he hnnielf knows, that Capiilm, when he undertook h\s Critick/^ was not overmuch prejudiced againft: the Rabbins. Nay, thole Semi-Rabkinj, whom Vojfw foofren tradu:es, have heavily com- plained of Veffim and ins Book. Let us once more hear the words of that molt learned perfon, and molt acurately vers'd in the.'e Matters, wherein he gives a Judgment of the Verfions which were made out of the Hebrew after the Seventy Interp ctersy plainly contrary to the Opinion of lroffms. Let there be att, ibu- I4.capabi£ ted ('ays Capellus) to every one of thofe ar.aent Verfans their pati- cuLir Praifc and Honjur^ Ly reajon of their Antiquity, and perpe- tual life in the Church , never, hi- fs, where they .ire manifeftly vin- ous, defective, and mutilated^ let not their imferfitlion be prefer ed before the Original I'rwb, and Aiithe/,t':ch Text : r.or through a cer- tain p rz'trf'j rvicked, wrangling and contentious envyy cr rather dam- nable ill Cjiftome re advanced o fore the much better and more at urate Translations. Therefore in the Opinion of Capcllns, there might be abater and more acurate Tranfhrion of the Sacred Text, thenthato" the Seventy To thefe many other things of the fame Mature might be added, which I omit, for fear of being trouble fottje. Dienagain, feci fig that C.pcllu* was not of that Sift of pe >ple whom the mod Facet fHJ Tcjfjis calls, Affes void In Epiff, ad ef I ding, clad W.th a littL Profiffors Gorvnyinficad Aadr> CoIv> of a ' t {Id carrying the Maibretic Bibles garnijhyd w.th all their Pants. 1 .. d willingly believe that he will be brought to co idefcerid withqut any great trouble to the Opinion of io ex- cellent a peTjn, concerning the Verfion of the Seventy Intcrpre* . s. Again, l^fus uV tfs [ Syn.:y [jut al :ea, where from the time of Alex the Great, no other Language v ard to ba I/O Animadverfions on be fpoken but the Grceh^ efpecially in Cities and great Towns • nay that in Jcrufalem it felf no other then the Greeks Language was fpoken ; and that if the Hebrew Scripture were read firit the Greel^ Explanation followed. But fo many words as Coffin) has publifhed, fo many fictions hath he fpread abroad. For firft it is manifeft, that betorc the Ferfwn of the Seventy Interpreters from the time of Efdras, there was no other Scripture read in the JewiJJ) Synagogues then the /Hebrew Context. For the Jews had not fo far forgot their Language in the Jewijh Capti- vities, but that it remain'd among the Prophets , Priefts and Perfons of Principal Note •, as Jofephns Albo^ a moll eminent Jeivijh Divine informs us j and that not unwillingly rofiuszc- knowledges,who believes that the Seventy interpreted the Bible, at what time the Hebrew Language was in a rlourifhing Condi- tioned familiarly fpoken. Then again that ihe Hebrew Text was read at leaft in fome Synagogues after the Trandation of the Seventy Interpreters, neither can the Learned Perfon deny, who writes that Flavins Joftphns Interpreted the Law of Mofes in the Hebrew Language, and fet forth hisHiitory of the Jewijh Wars in Hebrew , before he wrote it in Greeks With which Argument Voffws had refuted thofe who objected againil him that he knew not his own Language, nor ever faw an Hebrew Exemplar, againfr whom he oppofes the words of Jofephns, who writes of himfelf that heexcell'd the reft of the Hebrews \n the Learning of his Country ^ but that he had only learnt the Greeks Tongue Grammatically, and wanted an acurate Pronuncia- tion. Therefore according to the Tefrlmony of Voffius him- felf, who fpeaks contradictions , not only the common People who liv'd in the Country and in Villages, made ufe of the Syn.ic Dialect ; but the Principal perfons, among whom was Jofephns, who calls the Hebrew or Syriac his Native Language, the pro- nunciation of which being a little harfh and rugged, was the rea- fon thai he could hardly pronounce the Greeks, which was much more fmooth and Polite. Now then if the Greeks Language were fo naturally fpoken in Citys and Greeks Towns, why did Jofepbits, who was not bred up in the Country Villages, learn the GY^Grammatically. I forbear to prove that Chrift and his ApolMes fpake Syride in Jerhfalem, as is manifeft: out of the Books of the New Teftament. Therefore it is a meer Fiction which Voffius alTerts concerning the Hnrofolymitdn Synagogues, that Dr. Voffm's Oracles of the Sy bills. 27 * that there was no other Language us'd therein then the (jrtek* For, faith the Learned Gentleman, if the Hebrew Text were re^d fir ft, the Greek Interpretation followed, hicanfe the ancient Hebrew Was only nndtr flood by the L^/W.Certainly I'offms is a molt won- derful Argumentator, who from thence, that the Learned only utidcrftood the /y^/ttvLanguage concludes that the Greek. ^Inter- pretation Icllowcd. He had fpoken much more truly,had he faid in rho!e places where 1 he Syriac Language was natural to the In- habitants, that the Sytac Interpretation followed the Hcinw Text *, but where the GV^wasmore tamiliar,tyY^!nterpreta- tion came after. Thus alfo at Jer/if: I em, in the Synagogue ot the Mtxandnmans who fpakeGV*^,I make no queftion but theSacred Texc was readfirftin Heb,ew, according to the ancient Cuftom of the Synagogue, then in G'?f*^Verfion of the 70, therein Voffm openly profefics that he cannot agree with him : Nor does he believe that any ingenious perfon will confent to Simon in that particular. Certainly Ca- peliiuy whom Coffins fo much admires may be lifted for an inge- nious Gentleman, and that defervedly too. And in this dif- pute, Simon has not fwerv'd from CapeJlus, the lcaft Tittle, who fharply girds Morinus and his Ape Vufy.us as immoderate Per- fons, who out of a perverfe and damnable ill cuftome, prefer the ancient Trai flitions to others far more acurate. In this moreover Simon difpleafes Voffius, for writing that fometimes St. Jerom receded judicioufly from the ancient Interpreters, as if thofe ancient ones had been free from all Miftake and Error. Nor does Cape lists forfake Simon in this particular. For where CapcRus in the place above cited has cbfcrv'd feveral Childifh Mitakes frequently taken notice of In the. Greek. Vcifion of the Seventy Interpreters, he compares this and that of St. Jerom to- ther, and prefers that of St. Jirom^ as that which produces bet- JnAfol.&dv* ter fence : 3nd laftly he adds thefe words. Six hundred, yea e*001* innumerable, are the places that might be produced, in which from the fame Copy with that in itfe at this day, St . Jerom has expreffed the fence of Sacred Script ;ire much cthcrwife , and much rr.ort happily then the Seventy, Interprtters, as being affifted by their Labous a d Tranjlation, as aifo with the perfionf of others , as Aquila, Sym- macnus, T! tlan, by which ??:e.ns he was allc to difcernthe failings and Ei r or s of 'thofe Men. Nor indeed do any who have "any thing of 6>\^and Hebrtb Learning think other wife of Jerom, unlefs it be fingle DcFoffius, who in . itationof Rttffi- % nns believes that St. Jerom undertook a new Verfion of the Hebrew Text, with arclbhuicn altogether Javiih and pre- en* gag'd by the Rabbics. For that fame Prophet ick Spirit attribu- ted Dr. VoffuiAS Oracles of the Sybils. 27? ted to the GreekJ>itcrprctersy\s\\idt\ our Anceftors Co much ador'd, is long fince vanihVd by the Authority of St. Jercm himlelf. But let us return to the bufinefs in hand. tro'f:H4 furioully maintains that there is nothing of folidity in the Expolitions of the late JUMwaod their Traditions, propa- gated only by the Ear, chiefly indue'd by this Argument; for that Traditions which are propagated by the Ear, rarely lad above two or three Ages. If it be fo, how came it to pals, that the Seventy Interpreters after the Hebrew Langnage being loft for two Ages, could make fuch a Verfion of the Hebrew Codex, in all things lb abiblu:c, as f^otjins feigns it /* Queftionlefs, ionic will fay he avers nothing wonderful as to this particular, while he believes them to be Prophets. But whom (hall we believe, Vojfius affirming theGVtd^ Interpreters to have been Prophets, or Jerome denying it ? But you will object, that St. Jerome was half a Rabby, who durft pre fume to make a new Transition contra- ry to the general confent of the Church: and that Foffius is a Sybilhft, who has rais'd up new Prophets and Sooth-fayers, till now unknown, nor ever heard of. That fame Jtwifh and Rabbi- nical Verfwn of Jerome has had many Applauders, Conipicuous for their Piety and Learning. But there is not one in our Age who embraces PoJpuSs Judgment for receiving the only Vrrlion of the Seventy, excepting fome Difciples ofSscimm, who greedi- ly {wallowed his Opinion. It will not be amifs to infpect the Matter a little more narrowly, and to manifeft the Nature of Tradition upon which the reading of the Hebrew Context de- pends. I grant that matters of Religion, chiefly which belong to Doctrine more remote from the Senccs, cannot be prefcrved for many Ages by the help of Tradition, without the aflii.lance of writing. B it as to matter of Diliipline and Ceremonies, there is a quite contrary Judgment to be made, for that thofe things happen to be inufe every day •, And for this fort of Tradition, the Ancient Fa:hers of the Church give their fufliages. Now, I fay there is the fame Qualification of Languages, which though they become obfolete and ceafe to be Natural, yet among the Doctors in the School, preferve their ancient Vigour and Effica- cy : and to this fort of Tradition we refer the Tradition of the Hebrew Language among the Jews. Hence without doubt it came to pais, that in thefe modern times the Samaritans have - M m t a 274 Animadverfions on the ftme Books of the Law of Mofes which the Jews have, fame fmall matter e\cepted. And from that Tradition it comes to pafs, that not only the Eailern and Weftern Jewsconfent among themfclvcs about the reading of the Hebrew Context, but alio they who bear the Name of Carraim among them : becaufe that rejecting the Talmud and other uncertain Traditions, they adhere to the Scripture, and agree with the Jews in all things, as to the Truth of reading the Sacred Context. And therefore that Tradition is not rafhly to be exploded with the Carr.eans, who reject moll of the Jewijh Traditions, entirely embracM. Here I could heap together many other things taken out of the Jew: ft Bo kj, by which they prove, that their Ancestors ever iince the ti:nes of Efdras and Zorobatel, had Schools as well among the Babylonians, as among the Hierofolymitans. But I forbear to inu'ft upon thefe things, and many other of the fame Nature, becaufe they do not pleafe the Palate of the mod learn- ed FefftMS, who does not by any means relifh Rabbinifm. I am not ignorant that many Jews, efpccially they who are of the Gram- mariansti or m, who believe that not only the Sacred Boekswere varioufly difperfed, and miferably mutilated, as Kimcioi and £/- foduis were of Opinion, but that the Language was al modioli: : and with thefe thofe Jews who are of the Seel of the Carrtani Adrcn B«ri-ree- For tnus writes Aaron Ben Jofeph upon this Argument. •fejffb, p:xi.Tbe Jfraclites were exiles out of \h:ir own in a foreign Land, and com. ia peer. y,fion and prophefie were fea'ed up, and there wanted but little, but that the Hebrew Language had been quite loft. Then certain wife £3)J !3D Jfraclites rofc up^ to whom Cod gave his Spirit, *i;d they handed this- TITVft Scripture to Vs, which contains twenty four Books. From whence it h&7? is rhanifeft, that the Hebrew Tongue was not anciently utterly ^2y loft, though after the return of the Jews from Babylon, it was no rOUO longer N atural at Jerufatem, but only preferved by the Doctors CDHE of the Law. Thus hfdras perforj ling the Office of a inoft skil- 1JV ful Scribe, is ffiid to have read the Law from a Pulpit, belore a multitude of Men and Women. And chiefly from that time fefew. c.8. the Jews deduce their Paraphrafers, who were to explain the words of the Law in the Language familiarly fpoken, that they might be underftood by all the Auditory. Nor do I believe that the Gre tkVerfvon of the Seventy, oi which afterwards the ftm fei-MiM lucli miraculous Stories, had any o her Original ; hofe Idle Dreams Vojjitts i'o greedily followed, as \f thofe Jews were Dr. Foffms's Oracles of the Sybils. 275 were only to be believed by the Chriftians, Then again in the Synagogue and Schoth belonging to luch places, where the Greek Tongue was natural, there the Greek Tranflation of the Aiexnndrinian JeWswas read,* hkh vvhithin a fhort fpacc ot time rcach'd the reft of the Jews v^ho {pake the GrrtlJLanguage, as being the Language of thofe that were in power. However, the reading of the Hebrew Text was not left eff, in whole alfinV ancethe Greeks Tranjlttion was only made ufe of. Neither will V§ifiMs deny that, who aflerts, that both Jcfephnsand PM#,who was an Alexandrinian, were learned in the H, brew. When then was the Hebrew Language loft: ? was it in the time o\ Aquila, whom rojfuis czih a mofHmpertinent Interpreter ? However, he acknowledges that in the time of Origen, there were famous Hebrew Schools at Alt xartdria, and in the time of St. Jtrom, at Tybertdi. Now, that the Schools of Tybtridt were kept up af- ter Si.Jeroms Death^ there's no M.n: bur well knows, to which at length the Family of the Critiik* cclTd Mazjcritcs was well known: And they were calPd Mnzjoruet, becaufe they bounded and regulated the Aiaz.ora^ cr Tradition of reading the Heb iw Contexnhen receiv'd by all the Jcwsby the help of certain Marks or Tittles, which fervMinftead of VoweIc. 1 his is the J. mjh Tradition to which Simon attributes mod credit; but upon which he does not wholly depend, while he does not p t a fmall value upon the Tradition, or reading of the Htbrtw Context which the GreeJ^Interpreters fcllow'd. Niy, fometimes he does not fcruple to prefer it before the Maforetic, becaufe he did not fet himfelf to write with a mind pre-cngag'd by the Cjrcek Inter- prefers as Iroflius ; nor by the Latinos moftof the Divin. sot the RomifiiChnrch^ nor by the Jews, as the Cro: d of Protefta?its. But, fays the mod learned Fcffius, the Jews are Enemies to the Chnftians) and therefore the reading of the Sacred Scrip- ture ought not to be fctch'd from them : as it any Art could be bett-er learnt from any other then they who profefs it. But then Voffuu urges again, and Confvffes that the reading of the Scrip- ture ought to be fetchM from the Jews indeed, but from thofe ancient Jevos, who preceded the time oi Chnft, not from the latter Rabbins^ who urdcrftood it not at all. And in this alio Simon agrees with Vojfws, that the Tradition of the Hebrew reading is to be taken from thofe ancient Jevcs :, only in this he differs from him, in faving not only from thofe, but from A- M m 2 qniLi, 2 - £ Animad verfions on cjnila,Symmachus,Thcodotion, Jerome, and all other Interpreters of the Sacred Scripture •, for that no Art can be brought to perfection by one or another, but by many together. Simon pro- fefleshimfelf under the Laws of no Mailer: he denyes that a perfect knowledg of the Hebrew Tongue can be attained by the vulgar Rules of the Grammarians y as being con hVd within too narrow limits. Furthermore, he believes it necelTary to have recourfe to the ancient Interpreters in imitation of St. Jerome, who not only Confulted the Rabbys of his own Age, but fome- times the Seventy Interpreters, lometimes Aqmla, fometimes Theodotton, or any other, whofe Interpretation feerriM moft to the Purpofe. And we have no reafon in our Age, of making another Tranflation of the Bible, which may excel all the reft : For it is not true, as Pojfius often inculcates, that only one St. Jerome durft prefume to vary from the Seytuagim. For you Jhall find the reft of the Fathers have frequent recourfe to the Verfions of Aquila, Symm.zchns, or Th:odotion.t becaufe their fenfe fometimes appears to be better. To fay Truth, they dif- fer more from f^ojfius, who believes, that the Seventy Interpre- ters being taken away, all the remaining knowledge of the He- brew Language is utterly loft, and that without them no one word can rightly be expounded. That AquiU and other Inter- preters, faiPd wherever they departed from the Ancient Verfi- on*, that he was an Idle Interpreter, who being learned in the Hebrew, did not give the Hebrew words new fi^nifications from the Grtck Tranflation of the Seftuagint, but only retained thofe flgnifications usM by the Greef^ Interpreters, though in a dif- ferent Order, and accommodating other Notions to other pla- ces. And yet Ongen frequently commends that fame AquiU, whofe Veifmn p'ojfius affirms to be fo full of trivial words: fpeaking of Aqnila, as of a pcrfon,who fearching out the Pro- prieties of woids, and diligently adhering to their flgnifications, ftudyed to give them the molt proper Interpretation, o aweta-mm iffAMvvJsiv $iKo]iuovuwo; 'AKv\dL$ AqmU labouring to Interpret by words t) atcarryed molt Authority. But if Aqatlaapply'd the fame Notions of the Hebrew Language \ mow y in feveral and different places, thofe places are ro be weigh\I,and Judgment is tobegivenjWhether he have fwervM truly or falfly from the In- terpreters* Certain it is, that St. Jerome fometimes preferred AquiU before the Seventy Inter preterjy becaufe they feemM to favour Dr. Voffius's Oracles of the Sybills. %yj favour the Jews. In like manner Origen thought that AqmU had in feveral places more properly exprcis'd the words ot the tic- brew Context then the 70. There it is a fiction o Vs$ftwP%^ that there was no man a- mong all the ancient Cliriftians, upon whom a clearer light of Htb,ew truth (hone, then upon all the ChrifcanRabbies and Semi» Rabies of our Age. For as it was in oft excellently oblerv'd by Xjwtwkw C-ipeHus, there is nothing that was c\er begun and perfected both atone time. The Tranilaticn of the 70 Inter- preters was corrected by AamU, Symmachns^l hiodotton and Jer*m, and as St. Jenins, lb is that mended every day by per- fens learned in the Greel^and Hebrew Languages. In this alone the Septuagint exedh z\\ the othgr Verfionsof Sacred Scriprure, tor that it was the firfr of all theTranflations, rrom which all the fucceeding Interpreters drew many th;n; s proper for their pur- pofe. Nor do Iqucftion but that in the time of Pbilv, there were extant LcxUonsof tiebiew words taken out ot theVerfion of the 70, both at Alexandria and other places. Nor will I de- ny but that JUadU might make ufe of them as great helps in compiling his Tranflation. But for me to believe that he who in the Opinions of Ongen, Jerom and other Fathers, did not confult the Jews of his time, is athngalmolt impoilible-, and why Foffius fhould think fo there feems to be no other induce- ment then a pre-engagM Opinion that the7ol;iterpieters are the only perfons, with whom the knowledge or the Hebrew Lan- guage was buried. And indeed whatever Voffius throws upon j*cjUiU, may be faid of St. Jerom, though it be moil certain that he confulred the Jewifh Doctors of his time, when he was compiling his Tranflation^ and very often rather chofe to de- pend upon them, then upon the Greek Interpretation. For he often declares in his works that he was inftructed by the molt learned Doctors of his Age. The fame is Actinia's cafe, whom he calls iometimes contentious Interpreter, becaufe he (licks fometimes too clofe to the fignification of the words, more eager uuon the force of the word then the Scnce ot the Sen- tence. For which reafon Jerom accufes him of deprav'd affe- ctation^but never of Ignorance-, which affectation Qngen afcribes to his too much dilligence. Now Voffihs pafles to other matters. He denies that the Sence of Scripture can be ploughed forth ot a Mute Codex y which neither 178 Animadverfionson neither any man knows how to read or under ftand, 2s being half maim'd, and furnihYd with no other Vowels then what theE- nemies of the Chriftian Faith have fi:Al to it. And thus he thought it not enough to traduce the Interpreters of Holy Writ, unlels he accufe the Books themfelves. Every Foot and even to loathing he cbjifts in his little Treatife, that the Hebrew Co- dex is mute:, as if it had been lefs mute in the Age of the 70 Interpreters then in our time. This is the manner of Writing among the Orientals, to tollow Compendium's: Nor is the He- brew Language more fubject to this vice,than the Arabic, Chaldee and Syr ia.c, wholemanner of writing is Compendious likewife. The Condition of the Exemplars which the 70 Interpreters madeufeof was no better. But there was a certain manner of writing confirmed by life and Cuftom amongft the Hebrews and the reft of the Orientals, efpecially the Rabbies as now it ap- pears. For after the Invention of points molt of the Oriental Bocks were fet forth without 'em \ neverthelefs they who un- derstand their Languages read with no lefs accuratenefs, then if the points were added. The Samaritans never burden'd their Exemplars with points, nor are they to be feen in the Ex- emplars of the7untain •, 1NL3t^N,E/?4r, to ftand, or be rTV'tt nS N U?1V1 •tt37*"1 Nn'Nn, Peediadelantedevos alaFierra, fee before ye the Land. 1NH nnj S'N Elgrandt Rio, the Great River. ^mS3 ^1^,kl X, a vxeftros Padres ,to your Fathers. From hence 'tis manifeit, that the Hebrew Lan- guage does not want its Vowels -, and I could here produce o- ther Specimens of leveral Languages exprefled in Hebrew Cha- racters without any Point- Vowels, yet are eafily and quickly read by the help of the Letters ; Elpecially N, Aleph.Vau and Jod; which the Jews call the Mothers of reading 5 But it hap- pens, as has been already obferved, that the Tranfcribers fre- quently omit thofe Vowels , from whence arofe at length no lmall difagreement between theManufcript E\eraplars,which is fiillto befeen in thofe of belt repute, and which was much more before the Critical Annotations of the Malbreth, accord- ing to which they are now moll; of them corrected. The Thing it felf may be nlfoilluftratcd by the Example of other Languages in affinity with the Hebrew,as the Arabic,Chal- dee and Syriac. Of late the Per pans and Turks ufe no other Let- ters than the Arabic, which thofe Nations have accommodated Hift. Pcrf. c. to their own Ufe. Oi the Perpans thus Texeira. Q^ando los 22« Ara.be senrar on en Per pa, y la fennorcaron,ir;trod:(xeron en el la fa char a^t ere y modo dy efcrivir, al qxal las Perfes fe applicaron y ac- commodAron, de forte cjuc Olvid.iron, y fe perdio total menteel pro- prio fuyo. c When the Arabians enterM into Perfia and m^de ' thcmfclves Lords of the Country, they introduced into it their c Character and manner of Writing} to which the Perpans ap- tply,d and accuftom'd thcmfclves in fuch a manner, that they 1 forgot and totally loft their own. But we fpend time in vain upon Dr. VoJJius's Oracles of the Sybils. 1 8 1 upon thefe things, for no man is ignorant that the PerfiAnj and Tmk* rmke oft of no other than the Arabian Characters, which as to the Subject of the preient difpute altogether refemble the Hebrew. Nor is that Example any more to the purpole , which Vofiuu annexes from the written Works of Homer and lrirgil> had they come to our Hands without Vowels, in regard there is a vaft difference between the Greek , Latin and the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syri c and Arabic Langugcs. The Learned Gentle- man adds another Ficlion, that this manner of Writing that is in Greek Letters, was in u(e among the Jews, foralmofta Thoufand Years, that is to fay to the time of the Afafontes, who almoft: fix Hundred Years berore, neglecting this double manner of Writing, imitating the Arabians and Syrians, in- trodue'd Points and Tittles, which they made ufe of inftead of Vowels* But as to that, 'cis now eight Hundred Years ago, that R Saadtas wrote certain little Treatiles of Grammer, whence it appears, that before thofe times Point- Vowels were added to the Exemplars of the Bible. To what end does he mention the AU^orites,w horn I do not deny to have been the In- ventors of points,when they themfelvesliv'd long berore R [Sao- dim ? But, faies yo'fins , that points area late Invention is ma- nifeft from hence , for that there appears no Book, no Monu- ment of them that is more ancient than five Hundred Years. By the famereafon I irfght fay, that before fix Hundred Years ago, there were no Hebrew Exemplars or the Bible, which are not to be found in our age,whichjpretend to a higherj Antiquity. But I blufh to fpend more time in refuting thefe things which are fo openly falfe. F. Simon, has predue'd Monuments much more Ancient, wherein the Pcints are to be fee n. After this Voffiiu violently Affatls the Jews, and infers that they have a- dapted wrong and depraved Vowels to mod words from the proper Names which we frequently meet with in the Gofpels and other Writings of the Antient Jews. That of nece/Jity , faith the Learned Gentleman, the modem points mre added fil- Uly andinjudicioufly , or that Chrift and all the Affiles and An- tient Jews were ignorant of the Names of the Prophets and their Fore Fathers. But the molt excellent V*ffm does not obferve that tliofe very Names are pronoune'd and written at this very day by the Jews ot various Nations, after a different manner. The Italians write 'em one way, the Germans another, the Spa- N n ma ds 28: Animad verfions on nLirds another way. The Spaniards come ncareft the Ancie manner of Writing and Pronouncing , becaufe their pronunci- ation is more pure. But the German Jews are farther off then all the reft , from the true manner of Writing and Pronoun- cing, which ismanileit from the Books which they have feve- rally written in the Italian t Spanijh and German Languages, wherein the Hebrew words are written after a quite different manner, and in other Letters. But it is certain that they did not derive that variety of Writing from the various Lections of the Hebrew Exemplars. But the fault of Pronunciation which arifes from the vulgar Speech, draws along with it the crrours of Spelling and Writing. Whence it comes to pafs, that moft of the Hebrecians who learn Hebrew from Buxtorps Hebrew Grammar, pronounce the Hebrew words very ill, and after the German manner. All which has been obferv'd in few words by Leo Modena^ who in favour of his own Nation pre- rcoMod.Hift. iersthe Pronunciation of the Italians before all the reft. NeHa deRicHtb.f. Trovincia di eja lingua Hebrza , faith that great Matter, font s. i' talmtute foi tra di loro differently cbe a penafeno intefi Tedefcki da gli Italianit Levantini. Nevi e chi pin chiaro e csnforme a lie re* gole ddla vera GrammaticafavelUche Italiani. i In the Province * of the Hebrew Language , they are fo abfclutely different c from o^e another, that the Dutch are hardly undcrflood by 1 the Italians and Ealterly People. Nor are there any who fpeak 4 more clearly and conformably to the Rules of true Grammar 1 then the Italians. That this was the chance of all Languages we may lea.n from the Ancient Grammarians. And this Ar- gument has Erafmus molt excellently handPd in his Dialogue concerning the true Pronunciation of the Greek and Latin Tongues ; where he obferves that Maximilian Ctfar being con- gratulated by theEmbafTadors of leveral Nations, all that heard thembelievM that not one Oration was pronouncM according to the Latin Pronunciation , but every one according to the vulgar Pronunciation of the Country; The lame Erafmus re- lates, that the Oration of a French man, no bad Latin neither, was pronounced fo much alter the French Mode, that the (lan- ders by believVl him rather to fpeak French then Latin. To which Oration of theFrench,a Court Doctor anfwcr'd fo much after the German manner, that no German could have pronoun- d his own Mother Tongue more German like ; For he began thus Dr. Voffius's Oracles of the Sybills. 282 thus, Ceforea Aiigheftas ftne caudit fidcre fosy & horationem j c- Jfr.tm lij enter andtfit \ inltead of Cefarea Majcfiat bene gaudct vi- dere vos, CT Or.it tonem vtjiram libentcr andtvit. l His Cdfarean ' M ajefty rejoyces ruuch to fee you, and has gladly heard your 4 Oration. Not much unlike to this do the German Jews pro- nounce and write the Hebrew Language after the German man- ner:, and thence has arifen that ft range difference in proper Names, which is to be obferv'd in the Vcrfions of lKigninns , Mnnfttr and other Interpreters, if they be compared with the Gofrelsand other Antient Writings of the Jews. But now the Learned Gentleman contends that the Expofi- tion of the Hebrew words becomes nnccrtain, by reafon of the defect ot the Vowels, and believes F. Simon to be of the fame opinion, who alio believed , that thence it happened that the Rabbtns affirmed that the Hekrew Codex"** had 72 Faces. True it is indeed that Simon docs attribute in part . the diveriity of Interpreters ot the Hebrew Context, to the hwonfbincy of the Vowels fbmetimes added , fometimes omitted. But he ex- plains after a different manner, the 72 Faces, which according to the opinion of the Jews the Hebrew Codex's feern to wear. Nor is there any reafon that Viffim mould ib frequently object that Proverb of the Jews, which he fee us not to have under- flood. For one pureSenceof Scripture is no iefs appro\\l by the Jews , then by the mod Learned Coffins. But under the Name ot 72 Faces are comprehended thole Allegorical Senfes, which are as many as there are idle ofcltzntRabbies to invent'em. it is a common faying, not only among the Jews of the Cartan Sect, but among the Rabbiniits who have any Learning or Judg- ment, IttttfS *VQ HKV N"tp2 IX, The Scripture dees not go beyond the Literal Senfe \ which the Learned Aben Ezjra profeues to be that wh"ch he always embraces , i corning the Seventy Two Faces or Allegorical and CabbalickScnlcs , which moil of the Jews fuperftitiouflyobferve that inhabit theEafteru Counties. Therefore to mcthey fectn more (Illy than the Jews themfcl.es , who have collected fbndry Mon Iters ofFables out of the Books of the Rabbinr, to bring an Odium upon thole cin Do- ctors : ! he Talmudk Bocks and [ icient Medrafchim, or Al- legorical Commentaries-, are full of thofe por: Id thisS • ?theRabbi< ,tKat Afo/escWd not dye. Lhat while R, Simeon Ben Jocbm liv'J , and all the Reign of Ez.ekiab t'-cre N n 2 was 1 84 Animadverfions on was no Rain-bow , becaufetbey were juft men. That when Jo- nathan began his Chaldee Paraph rafe, the Birds that flew over bis Head were burnt in a moment. I pafs by fix hundred more of the fame Scamp, which the wifer Jews believe to have been fpoken in an Allegorical Senle ; hither are all thofe Fables to be referred, all thofe Fables which the Rabbins have invented con- cerning the LXXil. Faces of Scripture. Let Voffms therefore forbear to object againft them , that there can be no Truth , where the Senle is fo manifold. After much wrangling in the fame place , the Learned Gen- tleman offers many things concerning the name of Prophet, which are altogether from the purpofe and of no ufe : For, as if he were alham'd to have numbered the Greik^ Interpreters among the Prophets,he affirms them to be truly Prophets, whoright- ]y interpret the Scripture , feingtfnt Prophet is the fame with Interpreter, and nr^o^mvav to interpret : As if the prefent Difpute were concerning this Sort of Prophetic. foffiHS was de- rided by Simon for endeavouring to fet a foot again his ftaleand rank Opinion of the Prophetfhipof the LXX. Interpreters, in- duced thereto by no other Arguments, than out of a hatred to thofe whom they call Semi-Rabbies : But wherher thofe things- tend, which the mod acute Gentleman more prolixly feigns, to fhew that not only among the Greeks but alfo among the t^£- gyptijms, the Interpreters and Fore-tellers of Dreams and fu- ture things were called Prophets , I am not fo Argtu E^ 'd as to perceive. He alfo vehemently maintains that God cenferi'd the gift of Prophefie upon the Worfhippers of Idols. But what is all this to the prefent purpofe ? He calls the Greek Verlion d.vinely infpired , and labours very hard to prove that the Authors thereof were infpir'd with the Holy Ghofr, and tomakeiheir af*rrWyn'd, as Coffins has feign'd. Aga;n he malicioufly objects againft Simon, that the Writing of Ar Fix*; was by him treafur'd up afftofig the Fictitious Wri- tings for that reaibn , be.aufeic was a folemn cultom of the Jews to feign and write things Incredible 5 when as thofe things which are contain'd in Mofcs and the Prophets, are more incrc- dible,as if Simon had only prov'd from the folemrCuftom of the Jews to feign and write Incredibilities, that the Hiftot y of An- ft*Hs was Fictitious. Whereas he produces mofb folid Reafbns ta- ken from the work of Arijitus himfelf, and fhews upon the Tcftimony of Phylo Here?mlus, which Origtri Reports , that the Jews of that time feignM many things very improbable. But I do not wonder that Coffins compares fuch fort of Impoftors frith j\;'ofis and the Prophets , who had already feated them a- rmng the Prophets. Neverthelefs in the fame Treatife,where« as for the molt part always he fpeaks thofe things that hardly hold Water, the learned Gentleman Writes , that Truth is a Stranger to the Writings of the Jews, that there is fo much Ig- norance, fo much Barbarity, fuch a World of Fictions, that there is nothing more true then that Satyrical Sarcafm. 'Are minnto QualicunqHe volant Judei [omnia vendnnt. Malicioufly alfo, and quite contrary to the meaning of Simon, VoffiHS adds fome other things,to which it is needlels to anfwer, feeing 286 Animad verfions on feeing that Simons Book it felf is now every where publick both in Latin and French, tho the new French Edition, and the Latin which is taken out of it, is very full of faults of the Preis. But now FefjiKs to prefs Simon the more home,demands from whence Demetrius F alarms had his ftory of the Kings of the Jevrs^ if in his time there were no Greek Verfion. This alfo Vfifpus feigns to fancy iL'mfelf an Adverfary, For Simon will readily acknow- ledge, that the Hiftory of Demetrius was taken out ef the Greek Verlioa, which is vulgarly attributed to the 70 Elders: Nor does he ever difpute of the Age wherein the Authors of that Verfion livM , but of the Authors themfelves, and believes that what is reported by Ariftens concerning them, to be a Fa- ble. As to the time wherein that Verfion was began and finifh- ed, foffius will not find F. S:mon differing from the Alexandri- an Jews. But he can hardly be inducM to believe fo many Fa- bles as are vulgarly reported concerning them. In the mean time let the molt delicate Coffins enjoy his own judgment, who fo greedily catches at dreams more than Rabbinically, and be- caufe the Learned Gentleman, now grown more pcrfp'cacious, has entei'd the Lifts, he now no longer doubts, thai net only the Pentateuch but all the Hiftorical and Prophetic!^ Books were Tranflated by the 70 Interpreters, though he confefTes he doubted it before, Neverthelefs , the rcafons of his doubting are very ponderous, which are to be fetched from the Teftimo- niesof Jifefhns, J^wandthe Ancient Jews. F. Simon had denied that the words of Arifiem were underftood by Foffitu ; now the Learned Gentleman appeals to all that underhand Greek, to whole determination I think we ought to ftand ; and I could wi(h that the fame Judges were to coniider what Fojjius has transferred out of Eufebitu and other Writers , into his Treatife, with a new Tjranflation of the Greek ; f ich an Inno- vator is that incomparable Gentleman in all things, who again devifes new Hexaples of Origen, whi h were never yet feen. More pn b ble are thole thinj hich he by and by adds con- cerning Or/Vr», wh :rre;> whole Verfion of the 70 \ n- jrpreters taithfully tranfcribMinto his ffexJ/les \ not akcr'd in fome places as Simon (lifpects. Yet we may fufpecl with SY- \on, that Origtn did nor fo < !y correct the GrCck Inter- pi on, which he Pelf .-. .-. edges to have been over- Errours an faults, ,er'd lorn, es 1 of An *nt 3 whenas he did not only exa- mine Dr. Voffius's Oracles of theS . 287 j vine it by the raoftapj rov'd C es of that \ erfion, but by the Hebrew Exemplars and the Ti iti ns of nth and fur rounded with fan :d ons cf ' is own, he fomettmes Jcikj the did of Forrstign Language. O igen therefore carried himielf one way with Learned Men , ano:her with the Ignorant Multitude, and as the Proverb is, Wife with i few, fpake thofe things which were in common. With this a- grees what he writes againft Celftu , for after he has produ.'d fbme things out of the Book of Exodus, according to the vul- gar Exemplars of the Greek Verfion, he prefer. t'y adds the Sc- ftion of the Hb;ew Text with this AnimadverH >n, Afoa-mvm ukv 7i%zx%iy'iyT%ocf. mof llVcti JbKWnt y^ a yj>iti tyiv tbv -ro't}.cov etxo.ir. But thefe things wh:ch fcem to be more nice , and not ib fit for vulgar Ears. Therefore the Learned Gentleman is in an Er- rour, who believM that Origin approved no other Exemplars but thofe of the Septuagint. He is ignorant of the Laws of that management which molt of the Fathers, efpecially Ongen, obferv'd, to the end they might accommodate themfelves to the already received opinions of the People; which prudence of Origen in our Age, the molt Eminent Divines of the Roman Church do imitate, who granting to the People the u(e of the Latin Edition, referve to themfelves the knowledge of the He- brew Truth. Now becaufe Simon gives no credit: to the Pro- dig'ousdifcourfes of Ariftans, concerning the ~o Interpreters, while he endeavours to give a reafon why it was fixed upon the 70, he confelTes that he adheres to the opinion of thofe, who believe it to have born that name from the 72 Senators or the Hicrofolym.it an Sanhedrim , who approved it by their Scfferage and Authority. Yet he affirms nothing, but only makes a con- jecture upon a thing ib obfcjre and lb far remote from or times. But notwithstanding all his Modefty Voff.ns falls fierce- ly upon him, and demands if that Greek Verfion were appro- ved by the »» hole Sanhedrim, how it came to be lb full of faults, as 2 8 S Animadverfions on as if of neceflky the Authority of the Grave Sanhedrim, which Siir.on fufpects to have allow'd that Verfion to be publkkly read in the Synagogues and Schools, had been fufficient to exempt iE from all Errour t Certainly it could derive no greater Autho- rity from the Decree of the Hierofolymitan Senators, then was a- fcrib'd to the Latin Edition, after the Fathers of the Ounal of Trent had authoriz'd it by their Conflitution. Was the Latin Interpreter therefore purg'd from all the faults with which it formerly abounded f No. In this alfo appears the grcarefl: e- quality between both decrees, that as it came to pafs in the We- ftern Church, through Ignorance of the Greek and Hebrew Languages, that the Bibles were Tranfiated and read in the La- tin Tongue, fo alfo the Ignorance of the Hebrew among the Hellenift Jews , was the reafon that the Alexanditan JiWj Tran- ilated lor their own life the Sacred Writing into Greek , which Greek Tranflation afterwards grew to be currant among all the Jews that underflood Greek, and was perhaps approved by the Hierofolymitan Sanators; 1 fay perhaps , becauie there is no need to have recourfe to their Authority, for the Exposition of the reafon why this Veriion was attributed to the 70 Elders. Buc only we are to obferve the form of Speech fo familiar a- mong the Jews, whereby they uPd tojreferjall things which ieemed to . be of any moment n?"Qn DDDD Wixhlo the Men of the great Synagogue. Which kind of Phrafc has lead many Learned Men into feveral Errors while they turn over the Booksof the y*ir.f with a Circumfpection too remifs :, whereas we are to heed not fo much what thofe Doctors fay, as how and for what reafon they fpeak it. So the Rabbics eagerly maintain, that the Points of the Holy Scripture and fuch other things de- rive their Original from the Men of the Great Synagogue,fpeak- ing according to the Phrafe of the Country, not according to the Truth of the Thing. And thus it is more proper to con- jecture that the Greeks Verfion was attributed to the Seventy In- terpreters , than with Vojfm to give credit to the Fictions of A- ri/Unj. Then again the Learned Gentleman is difpleas'd that Simon endeavour'd to reftore the Hellemftick Language exploded by the Learned men, and to obtrude it under the name of the Language mod currant in the Synagogue-, as »F among them there had been any more peculiar Language, which was neither Gr*k Dt.VoJJhts's Oracles of the Sybtlls. 289 Grt\ nor Hebrew, that by that means he might make it out that the Seventy Interpreters undcrftood neither Greel^not He- brew. Certainly Simon knew What had been already written by the Defenders of theHetteniflicl^Languageybut with the good favour of that Learned Gentleman. 1 may fay, that while lie difputed about the fhadow of an Ais , he did but raiie Conten- tions about a Nai ne, Simon does not lay ignorance to the charge of the Greek Interpreters of the Hebrew and Greel^, but only K*x0$?Ai«r or a depravM affe&ation natural to the Jews, elpe- cially Id Tranflating the Scriptures , who while they labour to exprefs the Hebrew words too curioufly and literally, turn a little afide from th« common and more received Idiome and to fome words give particular and dilHncl Notions frcm the Vul- gar. This is to be obterv'd almoll in all the Verfions of Sacred Scripture compiled by the Jews y as Simon truly demonftrates .* bywliom it was alio moft excellently obferv'd, that the Greeks Interpretation of the Stvtnty Seniors was hardly underftood by moll: of the Greeks Fathers , becaufe it retainM fomething of the Idiom of the Synac or Hebrew Language. And thus the Spanifh Tranflation let forth at Fcrrara, which was done by the Jews, can hardly be read by thefewhounderftandnot Hebrew, though well vers'd in theS/?^/«/fr.And this was the reafon why the ancient Interpreter of t he GVa^Verfion has but ill rendred not a tew Gree\ words, not having attain'd the force and propriety of their fignification. Some alfo, Jerom himfelf feems notto have underftood, though both HebrecUn and Grecian ; while he feems to adhere more to the GreekjAm) Hebrew whence the Greek were taken. Voffms alfo objects againft Simon that he under- ftood not what the HtRenifts were. I confefs that Simon under- ftood net before what I 'off ins had feign'd contrary to the Opi- nion of the moft Learned men, who to (hew his Greek F.rud t:on, expounds the word 'emuk'^w, to fide with the Cjreeks , as P»(M.i^Hv, Ui^n^ttv, Mifeft'^W., cAv77y ovl^Hv, fignifie to imitate the Manners and Cuitoms, and lids with the Romans, Mida, Per- fians and Antigonnt. Now confidering the prefent Argument where the Dilputewith rvjjlnsis about Critical Learning, this is as much as if I fhould fay, That KoJJim is not only a skilful Ciitick, but a Canon o W'ndfor, who quavers forth the £»/. lift Liturgy moft fweetly in trie Chappel. It is certain that the Jews were cf two forts, and JW?Mr/^5^y0;r,and other Neighbouring Reg'ons ipoke the Syriae Language, and made ufe of the Hebrew Exemplars. They becaufethcy were difpers'd amongNatior.s where ihcGreek tongue wasiamiliar,fpake Greik^znd read the Scripture in Greek are call'd in the Atls of the Jpoftles 'EXkmsai HiUenifts. And in refcrercetothemare thefe words of the Jivps to be expounded in the Gofpel of St. Jobn^n As rnv c/W^-o^*? twv Etonrar /ufoi»*»- {iv'iSut , will h; come to the feat teririg of th: Hc.lernfts ? Now 5;- mon, mending his own fubjeeT:, afTerts that the Greek Interpre- tation of the Seventy, was cheifiy appro\\l by the HelUmfi Jews, who underflood Greel^: not fo by the reft cf the Je\rs9 to whom the Greeks was not lb familiar, as the Inbabitantsof Babylon, Paleftine, Syriae and Jttdea, who all fpoke either Ch«l- dee or Syriae. Neverthelefs Simon does not deny but that there were fome Hellenifls among them •, and fo there was a Syna- gogue of Ahxandr ans at]e>ufa!em1 and feveral Hcllevift Jews liv'd at Antiochia, as appears from the Atls of the Apofles. So that the difpute being only concerning the Hebrew Context and the Greeks Interpretation of it, therewas no necelTiry for Vofftut to run out of his way, in imitation of Voffius, to call the HJ- lentft Jiwsjxho being of a peaceful difpofiuon readily paid their Tribute, and admoniuYd others that the Yosk impos'd by God was to be born with patience, and therefore fubmitted to the Greeks. As if at Jerufdem and in ether places where the Jews did not go by me Name of Hellenifts , there wrere none that carry'd themfelves peaceably, and readily piid their Taxes. Why therefore were not they call'd EWw/?ai HeU;nifts, or $Atoft»rtf, Lovers of the Greeks- But let /^/7«jhughimfeJf in his conjecture, and give fentence that HtUcmfm is not to be referred to Speech alone, fo it may be any way referr'd to his Verfion, Vis enough. Chrifl was alfo a Hcliemft, if you will be- lieve yoffipu, becaufe he underflood the Greeks Language, and becaufc he commanded to give to CaTar that which u Cxfar's. As to what the Learned Gentleman adds concerning the de- fign'd corruption of the Hebrew Chronologies, we fhall not need to exam jn. the matteragain, it having been fufficiently demon- strated in the foregoing Treatife that Vcffitu was molt heavily deceived in this particular; nor to repeat what has been faid before torching the Prophcfie of Daniel, already known to the Jem Dr. VojjiHs's Oracles of the Sybilis. ivuv . J\ia\et tothyfelf an Arch of fonr fcfnare Wood- He denys in oppofition to ShnoHj that any Ship can be built of Planks or flat Boards, but of Q o 2 fquare 2 r and Vines which are VoJfiuPs four fquare Trees may be very proper to Build a Ship, but why he mould deny that Plank or flat Boards are not to be iaftned to the Ribbsof any Veffd 1 do not apprehend. But let us proceed to fomewha: of more moment. Laftly, that draws towards an end, FoffiHs out of his malicious fpirit igzinft Stmon, endeavours to bring an Odium upon him, while he equals him to Spinrf* the Jtw, in thofe things which he aflerts concernig the uncertainty oi the Old Teftamem. However, by and by, as it were correct- ing himfelf, he confefles ingenioufly that Spinofa was defer vedly condenm'd by Simon as unlearned, and with frivolous Argu- ments denying the received Authors to be the real Authors of thofe Books. But they (hew themfelves more unlearned then Spinoff who prefently think the Books of Scripture new writ- ten by the PerfonswhofeN2raes they bear. The vile and erro- neous part ofSpincf* is to be condemned ; but therefore all that he fpeaks concerning the Sacred Scripture is not prefently to be condemned •, becaufe he agrees in fome things with men or con- spicuous Piety and Learning. But whereas in this part S mon has not only diftafted the mod: Learned froffms, butalfo fome other perfons of no lefs Note, who have not forbore to Vomit forth their moll virulent Poyion againft his Critic* Sicra, it sviU not be amifsto clear the truth of that Argument a little more plainly. In the firfr place, there is nothing that Simon has written con- cerning the publick Notaries of the Hebrew Nation, but what thefe Diminitive Saint and nice Stomack'd S:holiaIticks are ex- treamly offend sd at. For thofe publick Regifters, they toge- ther with Eufebws, and fome of the Fathers call Prophets, who not only committed to Writing the Tranfatlions or their own Times, but alfo took care of thofe Books which were written by the former Prophets and were kept in the publick Registries, almoft in the fame manner as Efdra* is faid to have reveiwM the Sacred Writings after the return of the Jews from Babylon, and to have put them into that method which is ftiU obferv'd both by the Jews and Christians. There is nothing in this Aflertion of Sur.on, which has not been approved by moltof the Fathers and them Dr. VoJ pus's Oracles on the Sibylls. ly^ them the mofu Learned amongft the Reft. Read but the Prc- iace of (ingle Theodore f, one of the moft Eminent Divines of the Eaftern Church, to the Book of Kings, where he explains the whole mattei , and freely and without any fcruple aflerrs, that there v.ere fe\cral Prophets among the Hebrews, of which every one was wont to Write the Tranfacrions of his own Age, and that the grcatcft part of thofe Books arenowwant- ingj as is ealie to be found in the Hiftory of theCnronicles. He adds that thofe Books which we call the Books of ki>gs were a longtime afcer taken out of thofe Books with Thiodoretns, Dio- Died, in is. dorus, ProcopiHs, and others^not a few, confent. To whom 1 may '-sni. M.f> add the moll: Learned Aiafm whom Pitrim^ Santtiiu, Contliu, Jj *J C°m' ifl a Lavidc. and other Jefuits, lone and much converiant in the .ir?1??' Sacred Writings have followed, whofe words it is needlefs heie k^ Perer' to cite, fince their Works are every where to be had. But to pi*L in 0». make this matter yet more plain, it may be perhaps from the purpole to run over the feveral Books ol Sacred Scripture, and to take a fhort hint lrom every one T he Firft that appears is Aiofts, whom the conflant Tradition both of Jews and Christians make to be the Author of the five Books of the Law. But as to him the Jcwifh Robbies feem to be the more religious, who maintain that there is not fomuch as one word, nay not fo much as one fyllable which did not pro- ceed from God, and was dictated to Affes. Quite other wife the mod part of the Chriftians, whoanrm that fome of the Books of Mefes, were added a long time afvcr; either by Efdr,:>, or fome others who had the overveiwing of them. Neither does St.Jerom prefume to attribute to Aiofs fome words or the Tcnt*tcnchy as it is now extant, following in this particular the common Opinion of the Doclors of the Church, who con- ftantly affirm that the whole Law was reviewed and corrected by Efdra* a moft learned S.ribe, Wh-.thtr yon will, faith St. 7^0*». that Mofcsir/w the Author of /fc* Pentateuch, or Efdras the reslj- rcr, I xcitt r.tt gain fay But whether Afr/ii committed to Wri- ting the wholeHiiiory which we have under his Name, or in part commanded it to be uanfcnb'd by the Notaries that Re- gifler'd the publickTranfaftions of his time, is theQwettion. However, be it how ir will, Mofcs fhall ft ill be thought the Author and Writer of the whe ie Law, as has been moft c\ccl- lentlyobfen'd by Simw, becauie thofe Scribes, if there vvcrea- ■ 2ayes, Commentaries, Ephemerides ; and that there Was diligent and fedalom care, leafl oblivion of Time jliould ohfcn;e the Nativities and pojlcrit / of Men confiderable , which fern, to m: to have been certain from the very time of Mofes ; I fr/are the names of others who have the fame Sentiments. And 1 wonder that a late Writer^cf the Order oi the Strmphris, en- llam'd with a Straphic Zeal mould condemn, in his Biblic In- quifitions, this Opinion as Impious, and curie the Authors of it. But as lam iniorm'd, that Seraphic Doctor, though he underftands neither Latin nor Greek, is a perfon of mod info- lude 8c Jent ignorance and of the Seel: of thofe who blafpheme wh.,t they under ft and rM. Some are effended, and perhaps the more deli- cate poffuu, for that Si'wtw in his Guides affirms, that fame of the Books of Mofes were added afterwards. But Simon is no In- novator in this particular, as one that has to back him the mod: skilfui Interpreters of the Sacred S/ripttire Mjfiw,and Pererim, who has transferr'd all MnfifiPs words into his Preface to Genefis, Bo'fre; ins, Ccrnelitu a Ltp'tde and many others. Their Opinion al- fo pleifes me. fays Eereiini, who believe that the Pentateuch a long time after Mofes, was as it were f IP d up and rendered more plain by the Interlineation of many words and fentenccs, and better meth$- r j ^ dizjdfor the continuation of the Hiftory.l n like manner TZonfreriu* Gcq.v'V. conlidering fomewordsof Gene/is which he fufpecls could not be written by Mofes, has thefe ExprefTions. I had rather fay that fome other Hagiographer added fmethings afterwards, then afcribe all things to Moles performing the part tf a Prophet: Not m. in z^Q much unlike 'to this Ppeaks Corntlitu zLipide upnn the fame den. place. 1 hefe words feem to be added after Mofes'j time, by fame who digefled the Diaries cf Mofes. Nay Huetius himlelf in T v. anfwer to Sp.nofa objecting that fome things were added to the prop!w"i4 Books of Mofes, fo replies that he ieen s not to gainfay. We confefs, fays he, that Efdras/^f Rtftorer of Scripture, if any places moiC Dr. Vojfths's Oracles of the Sybifls. 295 more ebfcure or difficult then oth.rs cccu ^d, (tuft here and there, i>.to the Sacred Writings, for explanations [>ks-> fo».e things of his own. Moreover f-*i»g the S.icred \\'r. tings are prop lo-.ttdby fo m v.y Ihf- put At ions, that never fo many Exempt .irs w:re evtr ^iown if any one Book, no wonder if what h..s happened upon other occafuns to 0- ther Books Jljould happen to this, th.tt jomc A'ores add: d by Pious a>d Learned Men in the Margin, flwuld at length creep into the Text. Lalrly, thofe relations at the end of D.utronomy concerning the Death and Burial of Mofes by Jofhua, or rather by the Sena- tors of the Grand Sanhedrim, of whkh fojlj ua was the Chief, are vulgarly thought to be added to the reft or the Text- For it was the Cultom that the publkk Tranlactions ftiouid be re- gifter'd in thepublick Acts by thofe who were appointed for that Employment ; in which S:nce Mofes is faid to have written fome things in the Volume of the Law of the Lord, that is, the Covenant vht'ch he had made with the People. To fay truth there are many things extant in the Pentateuch, which plainly declare that the Books of the Law were written by Mofes. Thus we read in Exodpu, /lofes wrote all the words of the Lord. And in Deuteronomy; After Mofes had writ the words of tl:e Law. B.it -xoj 2 . thefeand many other paffages of the fame kind are only to be Deuu^t. meant of foinc parts of the Law of which mention is made in thofe places, as Simon has demonftrated. Whence Jercm OLafter, ProK u rent a great Hebrician 1 perfectly read in Scripture Learning de- nies that it can b< (Fectuafly prov'd by Scripture, that Afofcs himfelf was the Authoi of the Law which we have u;:der his Name. N^xtto the Vent at each, is the Book calPd Joy.ua, ?nd which the following words feem to prove to have been written bv fj- fliua. And Jofhua Wrote all theft Words in the Volume of the L ::v of r r the Lord. That is, Jofluu r.fcer Mofts^s Deceafe,or his Scribes by his Order fet down in the pub lick Regifters, the Ti. li- ons of that Time; in which Senfe they ire faid to be as tl were added to the Volume of toe Law. Neverthelefs, 'tis IT c to fee how they wranJe among themfelvcs who handle this Argu- ment ; fo that even Sr. Auftm himfeh durft not pcfiic.'.clv Jofljua to be the \uthoroi the Book which goes vulgarly under his Name. Whither tb.it Booi^, fays he, which is called, Jel Nave, were Wriite/: l>\ him, meaning Jofhua, or by fome othir \erfon ■ Theodorct affirms, That it was not written by j'ojhsu) but 1 il en i$6 Animadversions on out of fome later Book -, and among the moderR Authors, the Jeamed^_///V«afferrs,That itcannor be faid,that all thofe things Com. in c.which are now extant in the Hiftory of fojkaa% proceeded from lr) '9 himfelf. He alfo confirms what has been already mentioned concerning the poblick Scribes and then E nployments, and ex- tends his Arguments to other Books of tne Scripture. The Opi- nion of the Talwmdifts is, That Jofljiu wrote his own Book, and right Verfes of the Law. But the judicious R«bey Ifaac Abra- vanel, fcrupfd not to differ from them, and aflerts himfelf in- duced fo to beleive not only by thofe words which are added at the end of the Book of Joflmd, And after theft things, Jolhua the Son of Nun DyU: but by reafon of many other pafHges that frequently occur in the Context it (elf, of which he denyes that Jifbua could be the Author. Of which fort, the firfti«,that con- xrf corning the twelve (tones which he ftt up in the mid ft of Jor- dan, of which it is (aid, and they remdin thtre to this Day. To which the fin thorcf the Book of Jo(l)H* prefentJy adds thefe Jo}. 6. 8. words : The N/.me of that place is call'd, Galgala to this prefent Day. I pals by many other expreflions of the Nature frequent in the Hiftory of Jojhua, and which Abravanel maintains could not be written by Jojlma. Had Jojhua, faith he, wrote ali thefe things, would he have faid, To this prefent day f To thefe things he adds what we read in the Hiftory of Joftma, concerning the Dar.ttes taking Lachi[h by affault, which neverthelefsdid not happen t'll toward the end of the Judges, and confequently long after Jojhuas Death. But thefe and other paffages of the fame Nature, do not ferve fo much to prove that JoJhuay or rather the Scribes that were under him, Regifter'd the publick TranfadrJ- ons of the timers to (hew that other Scribes afterwards review'd thofe publick Acts, and added feveral claufes and intervening paffages to unite the Scnfe and Series of Hiftory, and for Ex- planations fake. Ncr does the Book Entiti'J, Shoftim or Judges, feem to be written but in the fame manner, as being full of the lame Ex- preflions. Wherefore D. Huetius follows the judgment of Do- rotheas in this particular, who affirms, That the Scribes of that Time Recorded in Comment dries^ the Tranfaclions which hap- pened under the Judges, out of which Samuel afterwards com- pofed the Book of Judges. Who that Borah, us was, I do not at prefent Difpute: it is enough from thence to infer, that S /Kon^s Dr. Voffins's Oracles of the Sybills. 297 HJorPi Opinion was not of Yellerday, by which he constitutes publick Scribes in the Hebrew Ka>tcp, who Recorded the pub- I;ck rrcnfacliors of their Times, whole CcHeclibl s other Scribes cr Prophets cmbod'yM into thofe Hiftories which go now under the N.imcs of Jofliua, Judges. Samuel, and Kings •, this opinion is confnmcd by the5/ri*rtj.?of Wc icr.d at re end of the Syriuc EximfUr, thele vvoids added : Tw for the Booi of Judges, freed. Uflef though the Name of the Au Lor be pot ft t d ron, it u l^totin that a Tom, 6. Pol t.? \xre:e by feme of the CP, it] s of the Sops of Aaion, who in the Angl. timei of thofe \udgts officiated in the Tricftbect. 1 he I a ft c i cd Borotheus, refers the Bock of Kuth aflb to the Cane Scribes, which feem much more probable then the Opinions of thofe wherein there is nothing of fure Foundation. Concerning both, thus Sixties Se/.epfis. It is f. id that Samuel Cdletlcd the -ff^^.Bib.8-lib.j» of Judges, and added the Sto>y of R ith the Mc abirefs -, Seme thinly that Ezekiel, ethers that Efdias was the Author of both B<*is. As for the Books of Kipgsf Theodorct has made thefe R^ra irks upon them ; That there were many Prophets among the He- brews, of which every one wrote the Tranfactions of his Age, and hence it came to pafs, that the firft Bock of Kings is cal 'd, both by the Hebrews and Syriaps, The Prophcfie of Samuel : ib on after he adds, They therefore who wrote the Bcol^ of Kings, write them out of thofe writings lopg after as their leisure fervd tl.em. And fume while after he thusexprefles himfclf, concerning the Books of the Chroptcles. There were fome other Hiftorto^ra- phers, who digeiled thofe things that were omitted by others, which Book ib written they ca&'d, Tar ah Porrona> the remain- ders. As to the firft and feci nd Book of Kipgs, which ro under the Name cf S*p.uel, Sixtus Senepfis adds hefc words : The Bool^ of Samuel is faidto bewritten by the prophet Samuel, partly by the Prophtts Nathan apdGid. Samuel Co!!ettedtheAtl>ofE\\,S2u\, David, d Gad wrote the Eo'\f cf King* from the De.-:thof Samuel, to the end of the fecoid Btol^ What Sixtus St- nenfis, writes in thi> place, though in general, I may not think tern remote from Truth, yet if they be fpeci: 11 > weigh'd, they cannot be lure in every pai r : for that a, to; 11 thofe things which are related by S tmtel to his T)t*th,man\ (ajfagti decLre,thzt they could not be written byhimfot it is hardly to be belie/d^hat he writing of the tranfatTions oi his own timc,aT-d cf which he was P p an 298 Animadverlions on an eye-Wiiuefs, fliould write thefe words. Thrrecore wither c JAM. 5. 5. the Pricjls of Digon, nor any that come inio ths Hon ft of Digon, treaiupon the Threjheld of Dagon to ths day. In like manner neither coald thofe things be related by Samuel, concerning the ,/frxjn the next Chapter, where it is faid, and the Scone remains in the Field oL Jofluu tne Bejhemite to this Day. To this we add, That Simnel could not be the Author of that C(anrc which we find in hisHlftory. Heretofore to every one f pake that w:nt to take Cmnfl of God, for he that is at this diy calPda Prophet, Was then all" dd Scer.H owever,notwith(tanding all thefe Objections, it is probable, that the Hiltory which goes under SdmttePs Nime was written by himfelr till the Relation of his Death. And as for thofe things which are alleadg'd to the contrary, that there was a review of fo;ne Scribe, or Prophet, perhaps Jeremiah, as fome think, who added fome things for E cplanations fake \ tho* others cnoofe rather to add thefe Additions to Efdras and his C.Uegiates. The Syrians alfo affirm, That the firlt and fecond Book of Kings i were call'd the third and fourth in the Latin Verfions, were written by a certain Prieft, whofe Name was Johanan. *d £omrnr at. As for the Book of Chronicles, or Parilapomena, by whom K' !ehi n f ^ley ^ere Collected, there is fame reafon to queftion. Molt of ta^arahp. * the Jews will have Efdras to be the Author of them : which R. Solomon, and R/Bavd Kimchi, afferts to be the Tradicion of their fore-Fathers, making alfo Aggai) Zachary, and Malachi, affifta.its to Efdras. Yet not fo, that tney mould be faid to write the Hiftory anew, but only to have refbr aacd the Antient H'fto- ry of the Kings of ffratl and Judthy rejecting thofe things which d d not feena Co proper for tneir pnrpoie, and adding fome things which were ornate J in other Books of Sacred Scripture • from whence they deriyM the N"ime oiparalipomena among the Greeks ', wh'ch wrord afterwards crept into the Lat$n. % W lere- fof eSt. Jerom not i mro >erly Calls the BO)k of Chronicles an la Epift. ad Epitome of th O'.dTeftameat. NJcerthelefs he reports rhe O- Faul' pi lion of the fows concerning this thing, wuh who n Grorixs alio agrees, who believes thefe Books to have been written by Efdras ,and b/ the Jews^o have been call'd, Dibre Hajaminy the words of the Days,or taken out of the Kinu D anes. As for the Book of Efdras, the grcateft part of it wis wricten by himfelf, zs the Tcanfaftions therein contained do manifeftly declare. But Nthemiah Dr. Vofflns's Oracles of the Sjbills. lyo) A^/^wi^confcflcshimfcli in the Front of ihc Book, to be the Author of the fecord Bcok of Efdr*>. The Book of Pfdms is by the Jews^ calPd Stfhir TcchWim, or the Book of Praijes, which lometimes St. A*(tin feems to be- lieve to have been all of David's compoiing •, nor doe* he fin pletoafcribe thofeto David, which it is manifed were written long after his time, becaule he was both a Mtifitian and a Pro- phet. Nor could the Names of Afaph, Jeduthnn, and cthc Mufitiar.s, faid to be the Authors of lome of the Pfalrns, bear ofTSt. Auflin from that Opinion, becaufe that David might fup- ply the Matter, which afterwards they polifhM and fet to feve- ral Tunes. But St. Jerome is more in the right, who aliens the P films to be theirs, whofc Names they bear in the Titles, that is Davids, AfafbPs, Jtdnthnns, the Sons ot Ore's, Emans the Ezra- kite, Alcfes's, Solomon's, and theirs whom Efdras comprehends in the fir ft Volume : with St. Jtrom alio moll of the Jews agree. And the Prudent Aben Ezja affirms, That the Pfalrns were made pr*;.ia Pfsltsu by them whofe Names are prefix'd, though there are fome who have no Name at all. But in this that Rabby corrects St. Jerome, becaufe he dues not absolutely pronounce the Pfalms to be made by them whofe Names are prefix'd, but that thofe which tarry the Names or David and Solomon were either theirs, or compos'd from them by the Mufitians. Yet Chrift feems to attribute the whole Book of Pfalmj to David, where he fays, And David him* f elf fays in the Book^of Pfalrns. But Chrift only fpake according to the common Opinion of the Jews •, (or they call'd them gene- rally Davidh Pfalrns, not that they thought them to have been all compil'd by him, for the Matter it felff peaks the contrary j but becaufe he was the chiefeft of all the Authors, and for that he is calPd the mofi excellent Singer of Ifrael, Yet the above- ci- ted Aben Ezra writes, that there are feme of the Rabbys who at- tribute the whole PfJter to Davtd, and acknowledge him to be a Prophet. The Book which is called the Book of Proverbs, is generally faid to be Solomons, whofe Name it carries at the beginning ^ though the whole Method of that Work feems to demo nil: rate, that it was nothing but a Collection of Sentences, which being firft gathered togciher by Solomon and others, were aiterwards embody M in one Volume -, That Solomon compofod many Para- Ecchf.i*.*- blesthofe words prove, which he fpcaksof hiinfelr. AndbtcAnfe P p 2 the 3 00 Animadverfions on the Preacher was wife heftill taught the people knowledge, hs fought out a d ft in order many Proverbs, wv.ch are numbered up to be above three thousand in the third Bookof K ngs, of which at this day f, 4. 32. n0 more are extant tnen ^:x2X we ^11^ m L^e ^ }ty Writings. To thefirftnine Chapters of that Work the Mime of Solomon }$ prefixM, and other fifteen Chapters which alio bear his Name. And this Aben Ezs& beiievM to be the fecond part of his Para- ble^ or Seiuencesc The third part of the Proverbs begins from thefe Words of the 2)th. Ch ipier, v. 2. It U the Glory of God to conceal a thing. W.nchdifti .iclion was made by them, who reducM the Books of Scripture into trui Order which is nowobferv'd : tor it is not tobebelievM, thzt Solomon fixM his Name to his Proverbs, but only the Scribes who divided that Work into parts: And fo, that Verfe which we read at the beginning of the 25th. Chap- ter. Thefe are the Proverbs of Solomon, which the Men of Ezekiah King of Jndah Copyed out. Aben Ezj-a believes to have been wriitenby Sobna, who was King E^ha^s Scribe. And indeed, I am reaJy to believe, that Sobna, and others of King£^#Vs Scribes, did extract out of the whole Volume thofe Sentences, of which the fir ft is, the Glory of God, &c. and this the Word, •which the Men of Ezekiah Copfd, clearly demonftrate. The fourth part of the Proverbs of Solomon , begin at the beginning of the 30th. Chapter^ where we read in the L*tin Eiition, t he Wo^ds of the AJf-mbler, but in Xhz Hebrew Text, the Words of A^.ir. But who that Agur and Ajfembler was, the In- terpretersor Scripture do not agree among themfelves. The ancient Jews, as R. Sohmon teitifies, will have Solomon fo calPd, as if we ihould fay a C>ll ttor or Ajfembler of Sentences, for that Agzr in Hebrew fignifies to Coiled : the Senfe of which the La- tin lnterp:eterha> rendered in Trafl,ting it, the Words of the Colli '.cl or or Ajfembler. the fame Opinion R. Levy Ben G erf on il- lafrrates, wnere he (ays, Solomon feemt to have given himfelf the Name of \gir, in re fpecl of the Sentences which he has Col- lected int. us Bo >k. But perhaps Aben Ezra, and Groiim fol- lowing him, with more reafon fufpects this Agur, to have been the Theognes or Phocylledes of thofe Tiuaes , out of whofe wri- tings Solomov might Coll eel: fome Sentences, which he di gel ted into one Volume with other Proverbs. La Illy, ihcre is a fifth lit of the Proverbs 0: Solomon, contained within the 3 ifl. Chap- ter Dr. Vof fins' s Oracles of the Sy bills. ? o i ter which is the laft,and that under theName of K'm^Limtiei^who that Lemuel was is not known. Mod ot the Jews bclieve,that So- lomon is meant thereby, as Chi ill is intended Dy the vrord Imma- nuel^s A j en Ezjr a a He its: and the reafon of that Appellation he takes from hence, for that Lemuel lignifics God with them^ bc- caufe that in the Reign of Solomvi, as Ab.n tzjra teftifies, one God was wo; fhipt among the Hebrews. But there is no reafon we mould be iUhcitous about the Word Lemuel , efpeciaUy when the Seventy fay nothing of it, and as they read, fo they have Tranlla:ed the words of theContext quite after another manner. As !or the Book which in the H.brew is cali'd, CobaLtb, and by Us EccLfuJies, in Lain it iscaiiM Cnaonat.r, or the Treach- er\ though molt of the laLter Jews will have Cobeleth to fignifie a perfon, that Collects, becaufe that Book contains ieverai Pro- verbs upon fundry Occafions. Of this Opinion are R. Solomon and Aben Ez.ra .* and as he fays, Solomon in another place is call'd^/»r,for the fame Reafon,as£)*z//W dt Pomis fpeaks. Titolo In Ltii. H«b del Ubro nomato Eci lefiaftes comfofto dx S damme , fignifica Cong>eg uore, per Cungregare e raccore in quel trattato dtverfe opi- nioni degP hnomini la Maggior parte de cjHali-fonofalfe. 4 The c Title of the Book called Ecclefiaftes , compofed by Solomon , 4 Signifies a Gatherer together, from Collecting and gathering L together in this Volume the opinions of Men , the greateft part of which are falfe* But fome of the Jews , according to the Teftimony of R Salomon, agree with the 70 in the Interpre- tation of the word Cjbeletb, believing it to fignifie a Perfon that Preaches in fome Congregation. But as to the Author ot that Book the Robbies do not agree among themfelves. For the Td- mndic Doftorsafcribe it to Ez^echia, the later Rabbins to Solo- mon ; and thele are backM by the words of the Text j in which there are fome Pailages that cannot well be meant o: any other than Solomon -, therefore it is moft probable, that the Talma* dies only meant that that fame Writing wastak'n out of Salo- nwn^s Works by K'ng Ezjekjah^ or by Men appointed by him. The Chriftian Interpreters alfo acknowledg no other Author of Ecclefiuftes, excepting fome few, among whom is Hugo Gro- tins, who affirms thar B">ok to be of a larer date, compoled un- der the Name of Sal rr.on ; for proof whereof he ailed ges, that he has many words collected thence, which are not extant, but only in Daniel1 E{dra$2^A the Chaidee Interpreters. St. Jerom writes 5 o 2 Anirrud verfions on - writes , that the ancient Jews had fome thoughts of oblitera- ting this, among the relief SaicmorS* Works thrown by, be- cauie hesiTerts the Crtaticn cf Cod to be vanity, wherein St. feffm.Com. in Jerom agrees with the Talmudifts and later Jews •, but everyone 12. EccJef. knows that it is tbeCuflom cf thole Doftors to feign many things of their own Heads. By who the Hiftory was written , that is entituled EJlher, is uncertain ; but as to the time when it was written , alrnoft all the Jews and Chriftians agree.* For whether the Authors or it w7ere the Senators cf the Grand Synagogue , as the Talmudic Do- ctors believe •, or Efdras, which is the Opinion of the Fathers \ or Mordecai, as Abtn Ez.ra more probably believes, and the Book it fclf leemsto teftifie, there is no difpute about the time «hen it was written. Therefore Hugo Grotius does not conje- cture amifs , when he fa) s that Efdras added rohis own, and the Book which Nthemiah wrote, The Hiftory of Efthery which hap- pened in the middle of thole Times , of which the Tranfacti- ons are related in thole Books, and which Cretins alfo acknow- ledges to have been written by Afordtcai. That the Seng of Songs had no other Author than Salomon, the very Title it felf declares ; and it is certain from the third Book of Kings , that the fame Salomon compofed both Proverbs and Songs : But this, becaufe it was the belt of Salomon's Songs was therefore called The Song of Songs, that is to fay, the moft Ev eel lent Song. Yet fome do queltion, whether it were writ- ten by Salomon, as it is now extant,or whether it were culPd out of the whole Volume of his Songs. However for that Song , wherein Salomon is introduced, difccmfing with the Summit t,2S a B: idegrocm vyil h a B; ide is veiy difficult to explain , not only by reaionof the Exprcffions fomewhat overconfidenr,and fre- quent Similitudes , which our Cufrcms will by no means en- dure-, but alio becaufe the Names of the Interlocutors are not let done , for be fides Salomon and his Spoufe, there are two Cho* rns^s of young Men and Virgins. But 'tis a ftrange thing , how the Robbies differ among them- felves about the Book of job. The Talmudic s believe it to be norelarion of real matter of Fact :, but that it is a Fiction or Parsble tofet forth a moll exact and high Example of Piety and Patience, and withthefe fome of the Chriftians agree. Nay there were fome u ho did noijonly belie\e the Argument of the work Dr. Vo/Jlus's Oracles of the Sjbills. }cj work to be feigned , but mil havethe Mini: of Job to beta- ken >ut of thofe Letters of the firfb Verfe of the third Chapter o the B K>k , where We read J.b id fo>n, be enrji the d iy. For all that went before they looked upon mlyasa Prologue. But the Teilim >ny of E&tycl, #ho makes mention of No.ib,D w$$l and }*#(, demonstrates that the Mm: of Job is not ficticious ; and the p. rudent Abe: Vn m m ft (ha r ply rebukes thofe who are of that Opinion •• Hcalfbbclieveshim tohavebeenof the Pofte- r nty of Efati , which he gathers from the Name of the Place, ,0'Jt where he was born. Beftdes the Names of Job and his Friends , and other Gircumfhnces plainly evidence,that the fto; y was re- ally true, according as it is related, though it contains imny things which are much more like Para!) : th jn Truth of History. Bat as to the Author of it, there is no certa nty, fo ne apply it to Mofes, fome to If ui ah, others to fob^ himfelf, and his Friends. Nor do they agree among t: es, who make Mops to be the Author of ir ^ fome believing that ic w ,5 only a Tranfhtionof his into Hebrew^out offbme Forreign Lang lage. But letting thefe things pais, if we msy conjecture in a matter (b obfeure, I believe they are neareft the Ti nth, who Rx. the Com- pofitionof this Piece in the Time of the Babyiomjh Captivity. For the Language is hardly Hebrew, and abounding in Chaldee Phrafes,befpeaks a Perfon, who by Forreign Converfe,had cor- rupted his Hebrew Speech. In which Senfe the words of St. Jcrom are to be explained, when he tells us, That be T r a pla- ted Job out of the Hebrew , Arabic and Syriac Language* To which we may add, that the Je^s, whofe Affairs were then in a defperate Condition , took great Delight in reading that Book as the Comfort of their AirT.&ions. Therefore the Author relates an Action that lately happened ^ and becaiife he takes upon him to perform the part of a Poet, tho the Argument be not ficticious, yet he makes ufe of Figures and florid Language, mixing fometimes Probabilities with Truth, obfervingonly a Decorum between the Interlocutors. The Prophets by St.^«y?/»arecall'J Pronounce» s or Publijhers of the word of Gid to Men. For they, as the Interpreters or Qjeft |ner. the Divine Law, preach'd to the People, whom they taught the Law of Mofes, confirming !us Authority. Then what Threats and Promifes Afofis had only in general promulgated, they ap- plyed to the feveral occalions or their Times, and that after the. 304 Animadverfions on the manner of Orators : which is the rcafon that they abound in Companions, Metaphors and Hyperboles ^ and not content with a plain and b are under afcar- city of Sacred Authors, for we read of many things in the Prophets which are not to be found in Sacred Htftory. In like manner St. Jc- rom attells, that the Prophets in their Relations do not mind the Order of things as they were Tranfacred. Among the Pro- Corn inc. 2<. fhets, faith he, there is no order of Hi/lory obferv*d, while we find firm. under the fane King thofe things that were laft tranfatled, firfl re- lated, and thofe things that Were fir fl in atlion, laft recorded. This De vlt. & prepoftercus Order Pfeudo Dorotheus attributes 10 the Scribes, morr. Proph. who committed to Writing the Predictions of the Prophcrs as they receiv'd them from their own Lips : as if the Prophets had not wont to write down the Sermons which they mode to the People. The fame obfervation Com Urn a Lapid: makes up- on the Propheiie of Jeremy, who believe that Ba uch, who was the Scribe belonging to that Prophet collected all h "sPropheUes which he had preacrvd at fundry times and embody'd them into one Volume, not regarding the Order of rime wherein they were preach'd. And John Calvin himfelf confeffes that the Proprieties of the Prophets never came to our hands digehed into that order as they ought to have been .- neverthelefs he Cdlv. praf. in does not believe it any derogation to their Infpiration, They, V*i* faith he, who haze diligently andjudicioufly conversed with the 'Pro- phets^ will grant me, that their Sermons Were never di^efted into th it method, as they ought to have been ; but as Opportunity off er d fo the Vomme Dt.J'ofjlus's Oracles of the Syb'rils. 205 Illume was perfect, J. He believes that the Bcoks of the Pro* phets were prelerv'd by the diligence of the Preiit, whole Duty it was to recommend the Piopheiics to Poircrity, though the Preifts were profeft Enemies to the Prophets. The lame Calvin writes alfo, that after the Prophets had Preach'd to the People, they wrote out the Heads of it, which was affix'd to the Doors of the Temple ttiat all people might read them, which being af- terwards taken away by the Officers of the Temple , was laid up in the Treafury for a perpetual Monument and Record of that Sermon, from whence he conjectures that the Books of the Prophets now extant were Copy'd. True it is, that from the words of Jfnah and Habaccuc, whom Calvin produces for his Witnefles, this one thing feems eafie to be prov'd, that the Prophets wrote their Sermons plainly and legibly upon Tables, that they might be read by all the people : But of the Doors of the Temple, to which he believes they were affixed, they make no mention at all. Then again he Conjectures amifs,that Sum- maries of the Sermons were only Copyed out, and not the Ser- mons at length. Though there is no skilfull Critic who will pre- fume to aver, thgfc the Prophelies which we have now are entire. The fame Calvin and the Divines of Geneva farther conjecture, that the Infcriptions which declare the Names Ol the Prophets, and the Years when the Prophelies were pronounced, were ad- ded by the Prielrs, whole Duty it was to keep them fate, for the fatisfaclion of Potter ity. Thefe are their Words : Ilfmb.'e d:e ees Tdtresayent cflez, adjouftez. aux Revelations des Prcpl.ttes pur Its facrifi.atenrs et Levites, qui avoit charge de garder les Pr ophites art Trejor da Temple apres cjiS ellts avoient eftepropofees an Peuple, fmi* vant le c ontume des Prophet es. It feems probable ', that the Tales Wo e added to the Revel.it ions of the Prophets by the Priefls and Levitesy tcho had the charge of thofe Pr< ph ftes %n th: Treafury of the Temple, *fter they load been expo fed to the people according to the cafiome of the Prophets: To which Opinion Hugo Grotius alfo gives his Vote. There is only this difference between h.ra and them, that he does not attribute thefe Inlcriptions to the Priefls and Levites, bit to the Men of the great Synagogue, who collected the wri- tings of the Prophets, and fet down the time of their being written. This feems more probable, becaufe it is taken for granted among all, that the Senate where Efdras prefided, did add fomething to the Sacred Text by way of Connexion and Q q Explication. io6 Animadversions on Explication. Thus aKoThomas believes that the Infcriptions hVd Coman Pfal.6. Co fome pjaims were inferted by Efdras, and we e done, partly as things Were then t.ttedjArtly according to what happned* Lafily it is is very probable that thofe Hiftories which are inferted in fome of the Sermons of the Prophets were added by the fame Senators, when they reviewed the Sacred Books, and form'd the Canonical Scripture as now we have it, which is the reafon fome believe thofe words were inferted in the 51. Jeremie. Ihns far the words of Jeremie. Which conclude the Pre- diction of the Prophet, in regard the fcllowing Chapter is no Prophefie, but a Hiltory taken out of the end of the 4th Book of Kings. And in this the Rabbles agree with moft of the Chriftian Doctors. For R.D. Ktmchi teftifies that thofe words which run on to the end of the Prophefie ot Jeremiah, do not belong to the Prophefie, only that he who CopyM the Bock inferted here the ftory of the Jfraelites being carried away Cap- Com.inc. 51, tivc, as it is in the end of the Book of Kings. On the otherflde, ler jibravanel conjectures that Efdras or the Senators of the Grand AfTembly, were the Authors of that Supplement, as the Hi- ftoryof Ezecbia was tranferrM out of the 2 Book of Kings f cap. 18. into the Prophefie of Ifaiah. From all that has been faid, it may be eafily difcern'd who were accorapted Prophets among the Hebrew People, what was their Office and Function, and what their method of writing. Moreover this alfo feems worthy Obfervation, that the Prophets did not only preach to the People,and foretel future events,but alfo digefted the Hifto- ries of their times, and wrote them;into the publick Records. And thus Ifaiah who wrote the Afts of Hofea, bears the Title no lefs of a Hiftorian then a Prophet, or rather the name of Prophet among the Hebrews comprehends all thofe (ignifica- tions. So that whoever was a revealer of the Divine will, or foretold future Accidents, or wrote the Tranflations of his Time , was call'd a Prophet. From whence qneftionlefs it came to pais that rhe ancient Jews adorn'd the Hiftories of Jofhna , Judges, Samuel and Kings, with the Titles of Neviion Prophets, becaufe they were written by Pcrfons *ho being full -f the Holy Spirit, were call'd Prophets. In which fence Jofe-hus affirms, that in his Nation, Books were not written by every one, but by Prophets only. Jonathan alfo has rirhtly imdcrfcood the force of that word, who inftead of the Hebrew word Dr. rojjius's Oracles on the Sibytts, 207 word N*vi Prophet,fometimes mixes another word in his Para- phrafe which iignifics only Scribe •, as if Prophets were the fame with.Scrlbes.And thus much concerning thcSacredW; ken. I pals by the jjpteripbsl Books which the Jews do not admit into their Canonical Nu;nber,bec2ufethc;r Authors,as the word jipocrypbsl iignifics, arc uncertain, and hidden in obfeurity. Let the Learn- ed Proffins therefore forbear to bark at the mod worthy Simon, a Peiibn fo well deferving of the Sacred Scriptures, who has publifh'd nothing concerning the Writers or. the Old Teflament, but what hasbeen already approv'd by Perfons moll Grave and (olid, and highly Eminent both for their Piety and Learning, Into a wHcked Heart Wtfdomfliall n$t enter. Fiy^is. , ; n i J 4»