abundantly declare CHAP. VI. Other parts of the Manuscripts in reference to the Manuscript Bibles are examined Their True Original and the Masoretick Lection confirm'd MOst of the Jewish Rabbies not unwillingly acknowledge that the Sacred Manuscripts of the Old Testament do not altogether retain that Form The Antient disagreement of the Heb. Bibles according to the Rabbies which the most Authentick and Original Copies represented and they believe that this Alteration of their Bibles happen'd after they were carry'd into Captivity at what time they had no Rabbies to read to them the Mosaick Law their Form of Worship being utterly abolish'd and their Civil Affairs in that deplorable condition that they had no time to look after their Books Therefore D. Kimehi frequently asserts in his Works R. D. Kim That they perish'd in the Babylonish Captivity and they being destroy'd nothing but confusion follow'd with many other expressions of the same nature R. Ephod R. Ephodaeus is also of the same Opinion who writes That in those Seventy years of the Babylonish Captivity corruption and confusion began to overwhelm the Sacred Writings For that as Kimchi says the Doctors of the Law were dead From thence therefore that before the time of Esdras the Sacred Writings vary'd in several places they believe it may be made out that Esdras who examin'd those Books left several Lections which he met with in the Copies of his Time unmedl'd withal in the Books which he himself examin'd and for this reason they give great credit to the differing Scriptures which were mark'd by the Criticks of Tyberias as if they proceeded from Esdras who was inspir'd with the Holy Ghost than which there is nothing more idle or remote from Truth Aben Mel. in liâ— 1. Paraliâ— This Aben Melech observes upon the words Diphath and Rodanim Diphath in the Book of Chronicles is written with a Daleth and in the Book of Genesis with a Resch Rodanim is written with a Resch and in Genesis with a double Daleth because Resch and Daleth are alike in their form and they who ever viewed the Books of Genealogies written in the Antient Times some write Daleth others Resch Therefore in the Book of Genesis the word was written one way in the Chronicles after another to shew that the word was the same whether written with a Daleth or a Resch Thus Jod and Vau are written promiscuously because they are alike in their figure And the same is to be said for the mute Letters Aleph and He in the end of a word as in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a He in the end which is the same as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an Aleph in the end For Aleph and He are agreed to be both Aspirates and every one makes use of them at his pleasure Thus has Aben Melech written almost word for word from the Commentaries of R. D. Kimchi The same Aben Melech produces many other Examples of several other varieties of the same nature which he testifies to have collected out of the Tractates of R. Judas Jonas Aben Esra Kimchi c. Thus he observes Alin and Alevan to be read in Scripture promiscuously with a Jod sometimes and sometimes with a Vau. Hemeran and Hemdan with Resch or with Daleth Jaakan and Vaakan with Jod or with Vau with many others which I omit for brevities sake They never minded saith he the change of a Letter or two and he observes it to have been frequently done He also makes mention of the transposition of words and upon those words in Chronicles Bathsceva the Daughter of Amiel he makes this observation Bathsceva the Daughter of Amiel she is Bathsceva the Daughter of Eliam 2 Sam. 11. which some read Barsceba Aben Mel. ad c. 3. Chron. others Bathsceba because they are near in pronunciation In the same manner Amiel and Eliam are the same but that the Letters are transposed which transposition of Letters is to be observ'd in the first place there being several Examples to confirm it in the Hebrew Copies of which the LXX Interpreters made use R. Levi Ben Gersom makes the same observation upon the word Jabes R. L. Ben Gersom I believe Jabes with an Ain to have been one of the Judges and to have been that person who in the 12th of the Judges is call'd Abetson with an Aleph For Aleph and Ain are near in pronunciation and often changed one into another Don Joseph also the Spaniard R. Joseph Comment in Chron. in his Exposition of the Book of Chronicles inquiring why there appears so much difference in the Genealogies between that Book and the Books of Moses Joshua Samuel and Kings unfolds this question in these words That Esdras seem'd to have found those words or hard names in some Compendium and so wrote them down as he found them Then observing a vast difference of names and things he presently 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 Esdras wrote down those Families in the same manner as he found them scatter'd in little Manuals some out of one place some out of another and in words abbreviated And therefore the Family which he mentions is described in many places without order and method Lastly The same Rabbi believes that the Jews had forgot their Genealogies and that Esdras wrote what occurr'd to his memory though it were written without order R. Jos ad l. 1. Chron. c. 9. and at several times And therefore most of the Jewish Rabbies rather chuse to accuse the Books which they believe Esdras made use of in digesting the Context of the Bible than the oscitancy and carelesness of the Scribes that came after In this indeed the Fathers of the Church agree with those Jews that both ascribe to Esdras the Title of Restorer of the Sacred Context at that time in great confusion only the Fathers believe that being inspir'd with a Prophetical Spirit he reform'd it from many faults In Prâ—fat in Psal That most admirable Esdras saith Theodoret transcrib'd those Sacred Writings which by the carelesness of the Jews and the Impiety of the Babylonians were entirely corrupted And these are rather to be believ'd than the hair-brain'd Jews who will have Esdras to publish the Scriptures deprav'd and corrupted as they were with all their faults and so they attribute all those various Lections which the Masorites denote under the terms of Keri and Cetib to the same Esdras as if those various Readings which the Criticks daily remark upon the Margins of their Books were to be attributed to men inspir'd by God We must therefore conclude that the Masorites of Tyberias by the help of the Antient Copies and assistance of good Judgments corrected what Errours had crept into the Copies of their Times through the Ignorance of the Scribes But bearing a Veneration too superstitious toward the Sacred
though St Jerom sometimes gives a reason of those Notes somewhat different Origen had added also other marks to this Work in the fashion of a small Label concerning the use of which the Criticks of our Age do not agree and which has been hitherto revealed but by a few we are to understand that Greek Edition of the Septuagint with all those illustrating and killing Notes in the Hexaples of Origen was found together with the Translations of Aquila Symmachus and the other Interpreters as the words of Rufâ—inus seem to prove Oâ—igen's Intention was to shew us what manner of Reading the Scriptures was observed among the Jews and wrote the several Editions of them every one in his proper Columes and whatever was added or taken away in any of them he noted with certain marks at the beginning of the Verses and in that which was another mans and not his own work be affixed his own marks only that we might understand what was wanting or superfluous not in respect of our selves but of the Jews that disputed against us Moreover the same Origen illustrated that vast work of his Hexaples with Scholiasts of several sorts which he placed in the Margent of the Book that he might give some Light to that Edition of the Septuagint which appeared in the midst between all the rest For first you might easily apprehend what was the distinction between the Antient or Vulgar Edition of the 70 and his own new Edition by the benefit of this Mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which stands for 70 in Greek that Mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denoting the common Lection Then in the same Scholiasts the Interpretations of Aquila Symmachus and Theodosion were every one demonstrated by their proper Letter A' denoted Aquila Σ ' Symmachus and Θ Theodotion The fifth Edition was marked with E ' and the sixth with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He also set Notes in the Margent of his Book for the verbatim exposition of the words of sacred Scripture which are Printed in his works under the Title of Scholiasts And more then this if we will believe Vossius it is not improbable but that Origen marked in his Hexaples the various reading of the Samaritan Codex If any one will rather choose to believe that Origen did not insert the Samaritan Exemplar into his Hexaples and Tetraples but only marked the various Readings I will not much dispute the Business Thus Vossius fickle in his Judgment sometimes avers sometimes denies and whereas before he had so confidently asserted that the Exemplar of the Samaritan Pentateuch was extant in the Hexaples written in the Samaritan Characters now in a doubt he dares not be positive in a thing wherein he has so little of certainty to make out But as it is no way probable that the Samaritan Exemplar which was the same with the Judaick was extant in the Hexaples so it is very likely that Origen might transfer into his Scholiast the different reading of the Samaritan from the Judaic which he did not take out of the Samaritan Exemplar written in those Original Hebrew Letters but from the Greek Version of the Samaritan Pentateuch corrected by the Samaritans themselves This is the Oeconomie and Disposition of the Hexaples of Origen which Persons the most learned could not comprehend while they do not mind that the Greek Interpretations of Aquila Symmachus and Theodosion were twice set down in one and the same work that is entire in the work it self and part in the Scholiasts in the Margent but Origen who was desirous to be beneficial to all Persons reduced into a Compendium that vast Pile of the Hexaples by the help of Notes and Scholiasts to the end that they who could not buy the Hexaples entire might Transcribe at least the substance of the Text out of the Hexaples themselves and by the same art he published the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or common Edition of the Septuagint together with the new Edition which because he thought more corrected he inserted whole into his Hexaples adding in the Margent of the common and the various Sections under the mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherefore some are grosly mistaken who not understanding this disposition of the Hexaples undertake to maintain that there is in them a double Edition of the 70 Interpreters as well the vulgar as that corrected and pure one of which Origen and St. Jerom so often make mention placed in two distinct Pages and for that reason that the Hexaples did not derive their name from the distinct Columns but the several Versions but these things are apparently untrue and proceed only from the Ignorance of the order of the Hexaples to the Margent of which the ancient reading of the 70 was transferred and thus both Editions of the Septuagint appeared in the Hexaples now because few could purchase those vast volums that had emptied St. Jerom's Pocket most persons transcribed that interlin'd Edition mark'd by Origen with Asterisks and Daggers and other notes of Distinction from whence arose the greatest confusion in the World in the Greek Exemplars and from that time the ancient Interpretation of the 70 was no longer read in the Churches but the interlin'd one of Origen which or another like to it was afterwards transmitted to the Eastern Church by the Care of St. Jerome CHAP. XIX Of the Antient Versions of the Latin Church THe most contentions in disputes concerning the Bible which have disturbed the Church for these many years have been hammered in the Shops of certain Criticks and Gramarians who being bred in the Schools there is nothing which they do not call to the bar of Controversie presuming to prefer their own wit before the Authority of the Church and as if their Critick Art could by no means brook the Ecclesiastical decrees they presently oppose them with all their might and main but questionless without a cause for that the Church does by no means disallow of such Critical Observations as are every day made upon the Scripture by Persons conspicuous for their Poetry and Learning nor if any one more strictly enquire into the reason of the Biblick Context then another does she reject their Labours so they do not detract from the Ancient Editions And therefore it is lawful for the Protestant Divines in imitation of the Fathers to have recourse to the Hebrew Originals and to make new Translations from them so that they learn from the same Fathers That the Sacred Scripture is the proper possession of the Catholick Church and that they have the same sentiments concerning the Church and her Books which one of their own belief wrote in these words against those who neglect the ancient Versions and long allowed by the practise of the Church Let the Authority of our Mother the Church be preserv'd entire to it self let the Fathers enjoy the honour due to them to whose venerable gray Hairs if any one refuse to rise and contradict their decrees let them not be
Vossius himself in the midst of his Prophetick Chiurme forging new Prophesies like that same famous Imposter William Postellus who writes that the Chaldaeans had the true Doctrine reveal'd to them under the first Monarchy and that it was continually renew'd like the sacred Doctrine by the ten Sybils that the world might be inexcusable before the Spirit of God and that Christ the King both of the Sacred and the Sibelline Doctrines might be known to be the Deity that was to be ador'd by the whole World Such Stories as these Vossius produces concerning the Oracles of the Sybills But Postellus yet more quicksighted asserts this Prophetical Doctrine to have had its Original from a Woman who was Princess of all the East and next of kin to Noah Who would believe that Isaac Vossius who spares for no virulent expressions against the Jews and their Talmud should introduce a Talmudic Doctor among the Prophets if it be so I wonder he should be in such a fury against a Person Learned in the Hebrew who expounded the Gospel out of the Talmud Lightfoot He seems to me saies Vossius to commit a less Sin who explains the Gospel out of the Alcoran then by the Talmud But of these things enough and too much Let us now return to the Apocryphal Books I call the Apocriphal Books when we discourse of Byblick concerns those which neither the Church nor the Synagogue has received as Canonical Hence it came to pass that of old St. Jerom personating a Jew and lately Cajetane sentenc'd many Books among the Apocriphal before they were receiv'd for Divine and Prophetic by the decree of the Church In this sence St. Jerom affirms Hieron pâ—aef in Dan. that Daniel among the Hebrews had not the story of Susanna nor the Song of the three Children nor the fable of the Bell and the Dragon Which we saith he because they are dispierced all over the World preferring the truth and withal depressing their Authority have added however least we might seem to have cut of a great part of the Volume In like manner after he had produc'd the Books of Scripture which were held Canonical among the Jews he adds Whatever we meet with besides these is to be accounted Apocrâ—phal Hieron pâ—aef in lio Reg. That is to say the Wisdom of Solomon the Book of Jesus the Son of Syrach Judith Tobit and the Preacher induc'd by this reason Africanus Africanus also believes the Story of Susanna to have been feign'd by a Greek Writer others feigned two Daniels one the Author of the Prophesie that goes under his name and the other the Writer of the Story of Susanna which in the ancient Editions of the Greek Exemplar was placed before the Prophesie of Daniel St. Jerom indeed was the first that transposed it at the end of the same Prophesie because it was not in the Jewish Exemplar which he translated And St. Jerom confirms his opinion concerning the History of Susanna by the Testimony of other Fathers I wonder saith he That certain peevish waspish persons are in wrath with me as if I had cut of part of the Book whereas Origen Eusebius Apollinarius and other Eclesiasticall Persons and Doctors of Greece confess those Visions not to be found among the Hebrews not that they ought to be answerable to Porphyrius for those things which afford no Authority of sacred Scripture Gregory Nazianzen Melito of Sardis and the Author of the Synopsis which goes about under the Name of Athanasius went farther and put the Book of Esther among the Apocryphal Books meerly because not understanding the Hebrew Tongue they found some pieces added to the Ancient History of Esther by a Greek Author for which reason they condemn'd the whole Work It happened saith Sextus Senensis that by reason of those fragments of Appendex's inserted here and there through the rashness of some Writers that Book though written in the Hebrew did not find reception among the Christians Nicholas de Lyra also Cajetan and some others denyed these Additions likewise to be Canonical induc'd as it is most probable by the same reasons These things have been discoursed more at large that it might appear to all what Books were reckon'd to be Apocriphal in the Judgment of the more Antient Fathers But Vossius abusing the word Apocryphal introduces suppositious and Adulterate Books instead of the Old Apocryphal and so imposes upon the simple and unwary For whereas he endeavours to make it out that the Books of the Sybills and others which he calls Fatidical were joyned with the Books of the Old Testament read in the Primitive Church and recommended by the Apostles it is the Fiction of one that has nothing to do but to sit and Romance in Divinity For there were no other Books read in the Primitive Church or added to the rest of the Books of the Old Testament in the Greek Exemplars of the Bible than those which are mentioned by the Fathers Though perhaps some of the Gentiles that they might press the Jews and the Gentiles more home have sometimes quoted the Books of the Sibylls and others of the same stamp which nevertheless no ingenious person will reckon among the Apocryphal Books of which we are now in discourse Vossius is very much griev'd that the Books of the Sibylls and other Sooth-sayer's Books after they were prohibited by publick Edict were made Apocryphal and forbid to be read by any Person when formerly they were openly and religiously made use of by the Jews like the rest of the Books of the Old Testament whence it came to pass that the Canonical Books were reduced to a more certain Number and the word Apocryphal was taken in an evil sense for spurious and of doubtful and suspected Credit In the mean time he never cites the Authour from whence he drew these witty conceits which are so like the Fables of the Jews so that I may presume to ask this Learned Person what the Factious Cardinal Hyppolito d'este demanded of Areosto Dove hatrovato tante cogloonare Where did he find out so many jugling Tricks But I agree with him in what he writes concerning the Apocriphal Books if by them he mean no other then those which passed from the Jews to the Christians with the rest of the Books of the Old Testament for that the greatest part of them are read in the Romish Church especially since the decree of the Council of Trent as Canonical for indeed it might be that those Books which were formerly rejected as Apocriphal because they were not approv'd by the Cannon of the Jews might have had Prophets for their Authors Nor is the Authority of Josephus contrary to this opinion who affirms that from the times of Artaxerxes there was no certain Succession of the Prophets and therefore that these Books which were reckon'd after that were not to be accounted Cononical Nor is it probable that the Function of the Prophets was altogether taken away
at that time from the Jews for while the State of the Jews continu'd there were publick Scribes who committed to writing the Affairs of the Nation and they were called Prophets because they were inspir'd with the Holy Ghost though they did not Prophesie of things to come However it is not necessary to believe that they who wrote the publick Affairs of the Nation at that time should be Prophets for that the Senators of the Grand Council who as we know were inspired overlook'd their works but seeing that the publick Authority of the Jewish Senate never Register'd those Books among the Canonical 't is no wonder that most of the Fathers would not receive them as Divine but only as Apocryphal and of suspected credit especially in respect of those other Books which were allowed to be of undoubted Reputation For that Book which was of suspected Credit was not the same with them as that which was spurious adulterate as Vossius seems to think only under this Title they distinguish certain from uncertain otherwise those Books had ne'r been read in the ancient Ages of our Forefathers had they apprehended any thing spurious and adulterate in them Only they were of less moment then the sacred Books and therefore the Fathers call'd them rather Ecclesiastical than Divine They would have them read in the Churches saies the Author of the Exposition of the Creed attributed to Rufinus but not to be Cited as Authentick Confirmations of Faith and only upon those Grounds it is that the Church of England reads those Books in their Congregations yet I doe not beleive that ever any one here except Vossius ever dreamt of introducing the Books of the Sybills to be read in the Church I know indeed that some of the Fathers have in great Veneration the Book which is called the Preacher and that Tertullian endeavour'd to obtrude the Book of Enoch as of Divine Authority and that the Jews also earnestly laboured to remove several Books from the sacred Context which illustrated the Christian Religion To which opinion also Origen seem'd to adhere who in the Epistle which he wrote to Africanus concerning the History of Susanna asserts that the Jews had withdrawn several passages out of their Bibles to prevent their being read by the common People But these things and others of the same Nature which are own'd but by a few and which are produc'd rather to support their own opinions than to maintain the Truth are not to be look't upon as the general judgment of the Fathers For Tertullian himself seems to confirm that common sentence of the Church by his own words in this place The Book of Enoch is not admitted by some because it is not admitted into the Collection of the Jews Therefore in those days it was adjudg'd Apocryphal because it was not admitted among the Canonical Number of the Jews Origen also thought otherwise in other places than what he wrote to Affricanus But in this place he could not defend the History of Susanna and the other Additions in the Greek Edition of the 70 Interpreters by any other means than by having recourse to the Apocryphal Books and supposing that the Jews in Transcribing their Copies concealed many things from the knowledge of the vulgar sort which were set down in those Apocryphal Books Origen perhaps had learn't from the Jews with whom he was frequently Conversant that Esdars and his Companions did not suffer all the Books which were extant to go abroad and hence he presumed it might be inferred that the Greek Interpreters had taken those things which are not to be found in the Hebrew Copies But this opinion does not agree with the General consent of the Ancient Jews who have acknowledged a perfect and acurate Concord of the Hebrew Text in all things Neither does it seem to have been invented by Origen and some others for any other reason but that the Hebrew Truth might be reconciled to the Greek Exemplars of whose Syncerity there was sufficient reason to doubt To this we may add that Origen in this Epistle to Africanus did not speak so much his own Sentiments but only that he might defend the Books which were then read in the Church Moreover the learned Vossius objects that a person of unexhausted Erudition Clemens Alexandrinus writes that the Apostle Paul referr'd to the Oracles of the Sybills and the Prophesies of Hystaspes and recommended them to be read But if it should be enquired of Vossius where St. Paul said this he presently answers that it ought to be sufficient for us that Clemens Alexandrinus a Holy Person and Conversant with many Apostolick Persons affirmed it for Truth but if any regard be had to that Answer of necessity it follows that all the Ancient Fathers were free from all Errour then which there is nothing more absurdly Fictitious For they know well who have any knowledge of Ecclesiastial Affairs how craftily those Ancient Fathers and Clement of Alexandria in the first place disputed with the Jews and Gentiles Vossius also earnestly maintains that the Book of Enoch and other such Books are not to be rejected for that reason only because that many Superstitious and Magical Fragments are contained in some Fragments that are extant seeing that Balaam was a Magician and Inchanter yet manifestly foretold many future Mysteries concerning Christ as if those things which are register'd in Scripture concerning Balaam could be wrested to the present Argument or that it were lawful by this Example to defend and justifie those Books which we find not only to be stuft with Lies and Superstitious Fables but to be written by Impostors assuming to themselves the Names of famous Men. By the same Art the Dreams of the Feavourish Jews are maintained in Midras Zohar and Rabboth to be inspired by the same Spirit from whence the Gospel proceeded as William Postellus declares De Orig. cap 17. who did not scruple to affirm that the Gospel was produc'd from the Doctrine of Zohar as that which had its rise from the Holy Ghost and Spiritual Authors The Chalans also saith the same Postellus the Syrian Indian Caldaean Magicians the Egyptian Gymnosophists and Prophets are from the same Original from whom the worthy Vossius seems not much to swerve whom I would advise to place among the number of Soothsayers Lib. Zorob the Prophesie of Zorobabel which speaks very plainly concerning the Messiah and was published by the Jews in a Prophetic Stile and in none of the meanest sort of Language But leaving these things let us prosecute our intended Subject Besides what has been hitherto alledg'd concerning the Apocryphal Books we are to observe that the Jews did not only frame to themselves a Canon of Scripture but that the Church has also her Canon who by her own Authority has restor'd several Books which the Jews expung'd Thus St. Austin asserts that the Book of Maccabees were not received by the Jews but by the Church for Canonical
Lib. 18. de civit Dei c 36. which is to be understood only concerning the two first Books of Maccabees for the third is rejected as well by the Church as by the Synagogue To which opinion St. Jerom seems to adhere though frequently in his works he shews himself a most stout defender of the Judaick Canon For when Ruffinus objects Lib. 2. Apoll. adversus Rufus that Jerom in his own Edition of the Bible would allow no Authority of Scripture to the Story of Susanna the Song of the three Children and the Story of Bell and the Dragon which he had called Fables the learned Father answers that he did not speak his own Sentiments but only explain'd what the Jews were wont to urge against the Christians but Jerom had said that Origen Eusebius Apollinarius and other Doctors of Greece would make no answer to Porphyrius for those Visions which had no Authority of Scripture and the same Jerom thus writes concerning the Book of Judith This Book the Synod of Nice is said to have numbred among the Holy Writings upon which Erasmus thus observes He does not say it was approv'd in the Synod of Nice but the Synod is said to have numbred it and really St. Jerom in his Preface to the Book of Kings had denied both Judith and Tobias to be Canonical Now the question is whether St. Jerom do not seem to contradict himself when he affirms the same Books of Judith and Tobias to be read by the Hebrews among the Hagiographers who nevertheless both here and in another place had written that these Books are not extant in the Canon of the Jews and therefore to be accounted Apocryphal But what those Hagiographers of the Jews that were mentioned by St. Jerom in these places Joseph Scaliger confesses he does not understand because the Hagiographies were received by the Jews into the Canon of Holy Scripture long before St. Jerom liv'd But Huetius believes St. Jerom to be deceiv'd in this particular in that he thought the Jews had no Hagiographies without the pale of the Canon and he brings against Scaliger the famous Bath Kol or the Daughter of the voice by whose assistance the Jews set forth their Hagiographies and their inspir'd Scripture But they are the meer dreams of idle triflers which the Circumcised Doctors have invented concerning Bath Kol Then it is certain that they never receiv'd among their Canonical Authors the Books of Judith and Tobias Therefore they are all fictions which Huetius and others alledg concerning the twofold sort of Hagiographers among the Jews and they may be refuted not only by the Testimonies of Josephus and Jerom who positively witness that Tobias Judith and other Books set forth in Greek now comprehended within the Canon of the Roman Church were never reckon'd by the Jews among the Prophets or Hagiographers but also by the Authority of the more Modern Jews who when they number up the Sacred Books make no mention of them at all but only cite them as sententious Writings wherein however they did not believe there was any thing of Divine Inspiration If therefore in this our Age nay in the ancient Ages of the Church they were numbred among the Canonical Books that is to be attributed to the Judgment of the Church and not of the Synagogue Therefore there is a double Canon to be allowed that of the Church and that of the Synagogue And by the first Rule they may not erroneously be called Ecclesiastic Books which the Church taking no notice of the Jewish Canon have thought fit to admit into their Canon and to be read in their Congregations For it is certain that even from the very first Infancy of the Church these Books were accustom'd to be read and sung in the Congregations of the Faithful which Erasmus admires to hear so frequently sung and read in Churches at this day But that it was so Eras Schol. in Prefat Jerom in Dan. Erasmus might have learnt out of the Invictives of Ruffinus against St. Jerom. All these things Sixtus Senensis egregiously illustrates at the beginning of his Bibliotheca where he divides the Books of Holy Scripture into two Classe's Sixtus Senens l. 1. Bibl. S. In the first he reckons those which he calls Protocanonical or Canonical of the first Order And these are they which are received beyond all Controversie by the unanimous consent as well of the Jews as Christians In the other Classis he places those which he calls Deutero Canonical or Canonical of the second Order which formerly saith he were called Ecclesiastic That is to say those of which there was for some time a dubious Opinion among the Catholicks and which came late to the knowledge of the whole Church Among the Books of the first sort he only numbers those which the Synagogue admitted into their Cannon Into the next Classis he admits those which in the ancient Ages of the Church were reckon'd by most among the Apocriphal Writers to which he adds the Book of Esther in regard that some of the Fathers were doubtful of its Authority the only difficulty arises from the Authority of St. Jerom who in contradiction to the belief of all the Jews and his own Testimony has written that the Books of Tobias and Judith are extant with the Hebrews among the Hagiographies I admire that Scaliger and others so well skill'd in Critic Animadversion did not observe that in the Prefaces of Jerom upon Tobias and Judith we were not to read it Hagiographa as it is now read but Apocripha For though I want written Manuscripts to maintain that Lection yet the words of St. Jerom himself manifestly make it out The Book oâ— Tobias saith the Learned Father which the Hebrews pruning off from the Catalogue of Divine Scripture have condemn'd among those which they call Hagiographa Who does not presently apprehend from hence that the word ought to be read Apocripha not Hagiographa since it is apparently manifest that the Jews never cut of the Hagiography from the Catalogue of Divine Scripture The same observation is to be made in the Preface of St. Jerom upon Judith where instead of Hagiographa it ought to be read Apocrypha For thus the words run at this day Among the Hebrews the Books of Judith is reckon'd among the Hagiographa whose authority is not so sufficient to strengthen the convincement of those things which give occasion of dispute If the authority of that Book be not sufficient to confirm our Faith certainly it can be none of the Hagiographa which without Controversie are accounted Canonical and inspir'd among the Jews but of the number of the Apocrypha which are of dubious and uncertain Credit as St. Jerom thought the Books of Judith and Tobias to be Thus much concerning the Apocryphal Books upon which we have insisted longer then the purpose of our Subject required But we did not think it a deviation from our Argument to unfold a Dispute highly intreagu'd by the Contentions of
overcame the first restorer of the Masora But whether he wasted his Patrimony in maintaining those Centuries that Bombergh hir'd as Vossius eagerly contends I shall neither sollicitously inquire neither is it to the purpose Much more might be added to what I have already produc'd and perhaps proper enough to the business but I am afraid least the learned Gentleman should bring me to the Bar for a Semi Rabby and a Favourer of the Jews Therefore let us come to the Examination of his little Treatise concerning the Oracles of the Sybills where he disputes more learnedly of the Jews and their Books At the beginning of his discourse this Person of an unexhausted Erudition produces some things in reference to the Oracles of the Sybills which the Jews more especially in Spain made use of against the Christians And as for those things which seem to be more remote from Truth then Fiction he refers them to p. 19 or 26. where he handles that Argument but seeing that it has already been demonstrared that the Chronology fetch'd from the Books of the Jews less favours the Jews than that which is taken out from the Greek Translators there is no reason we should spend any more time in rifling the Inventions of the most learned Vossius The quâ—cksighted Gentleman had already observ'd that the Jews in the time of Aquila had for the nonce corrupted the Hebrew Manuscripts and had expung'd above 2000 Years that they might make it out that the Messiah's time was not yet come But in this place more perspicatious then before he believes that the space of that Depravation may be Comprehended within the limits of two and twenty Years at most and this he gathers from the words of Ignatius in his Epistle to the Philadelphians That most Holy Martyr according to the report of Vossius relates that he heard some say that if those things which are contained in the Gospels were not to be found in the Ancient Monuments he would not believe them Now saith Vossius since he answered and they denied it is manifest that the Jews had deprav'd the Exemplars or swerved from the Sense of the 70 Interpreters But how this Learned Gentleman can wrest the answer of Ignatius who afferts that Christ shall be to him instead of the Ancient Monuments to his opinion of the Jewish Manuscripts being corrupted about that time I confess I do not understand Neither also are those words to be found in the Genuine Exemplars of Ignatius which Vossius himself set forth Christo velut summo sacerdoti credendum potius quam aliis sacerdotibus Which however the learned Person produces as if they belong'd to the answer of Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have heard some say that unless I find the Gospel in the Ancient Monuments I will not believe To these I answer that Jesus Christ is to me instead of the Ancient Monuments But there the discourse is not of the Old Testament compared with the New as Vossius believ'd but of the Hereticks which springing up in the Infancy of the Church denied the Faith which the Exemplar of the Gospel set forth Whence it came to pass that the Ancient Fathers of the Church Tertullian Ireneus and others of the same rank did not undertake to refute the Hereticks out of the sacred Scripture but from certain Tradition or from the Doctrine of Christ propagated by the Apostles and their Successors Apostolick Persons in the Churches of several Nations In which sense Ignatius asserts that Christ or his Doctrine was to him in the place of the Ancient Monuments This unless I am very much deceived is the meaning of Ignatius's words who commends Unity of Doctrine in Christ whose Spirit ought to be preferred before any Ancient Monuments whatever Many other things also Vossius produces in this place concerning the Etymology of the word Aera and concurs with them who believe Era and the Heriga of the Arabians to be the same word nor is it improbable but that which he presently adds of the Arabick word Hegyra as if it were to be deduc'd from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hagger a Proselyte or Stranger seems not so very likely The Learned Gentleman believes that several Jews of the Sect of the Herodians forsaking Herod their Messiah who was also by them stil'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Stranger revolted to Mahomet by them also call'd Haggar When the Jews saith Vossius believed that their Messiah should be a Stranger But these things are little remote from the Fictions of the Rabbies In the next place I would fain know from what Oracle of the Sybills the Learned Gentleman gather'd that the Messiah of the Jews should be a Proselyte and a Stranger according to the true opinion of the Jews for that this Assertion is contrary to the Prophesies of the Prophets and all Evangelical History as all Men well know Certainly the Jews expect one Messiah above all the rest of whom Vossius discourses at present but he according to the common consent of all the Jews is expected to be of the Nation and one of the Tribes of the Jews But they expect other Messias's besides and for that reason they give that Title to some Kings who were well affected towards them And therefore Cyrus is call'd the Messia of the Jews so also Herod and Mahomet might have the Title of Messiah from the Jews And in our age they are ready to salute that Prince or King whoever he be with the Title of Messiah that will but take into his protection their Affairs and the Ceremonies of their Country But these things belong nothing at all to the word Heriga which most certainly is an Arabic and not an Hebrew word Much nearer does that come to the Truth which after some things thrown between the Learned Gentleman adds concerning the Genuine signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that the Apocryphal Books signifie the same with Mysterious Books and inaccessible to the understanding But who can then gather with Vossius that the Books of the Apocrypha that according to his Sentiments were formerly added by the Ancient Jews to the Books of the Old Testament were worthy to be reckon'd as Canonical with the rest of the Prophetick Books that the Modern Canonical Scripture both of the Synagogue and Church is maim'd and lame while the Books of Enoch Elias and some others are left out Prophets are become very Cheap with Vossius who not only numbers the 70 Interpreters among the Prophets but also the most famous Impostors who taking upon them the names of the Patriarchs and Prophets and other Persons of high same and repute among the Gentiles have Printed the Books of Adam Enoch Abraham Moses Esaiah Jeremiah Hystaspes Mercurius Trimegistus Zoroaster the Sybils Orpheus Phocilldes and several others In a short time if it so please the Heavens we shall have
the Disputants But now it was not enough for the most Learned Vossius to have feign'd new Prophets much more quick sighted then the ancient ones but he must now produce a new Order of the Books of Sacred Scripture hither to unheard of The Books of Moses according to his own Opinion make five Volums and not one as the Jews believe and to prevent any man from calling this in question he produces most convincing reason 's for this new Distrubution For it is manifest saith He even out of the Sacred Writings themselves that as other Nations so also the ancient Jews wrote their Books not upon folded Paper which is a modern Invention but in rolls and continued Skins What reason there was for Vossius to have recourse to the Antient Hebrews I do not understand when even in our times the Jews make use of Rolls of the same nature as to the Books which they make use of in their Synagogues yet for all that they do not divide the Law into five Volums but comprehend it in one Volum according to that ancient Custom which was observ'd even in Christs time By and by proceeding a little farther the Learned Gentleman affirms that in the time of Aquila whom he calls a most impertinent Interpreter the Jews or else Aquila himself invented a most wicked and idle division of the Sacred Books in hatred to Daniel's weeks and that they perverted the sense and order of Scripture by introducing a New Distribution that is to say of the Law the Prophets and the Hagiographers Now whether a new distribution of the Books so the Books be entire let the perspicacious judge But least I may seem to carp at small things I say it is much more probable that Aquila in his Translation of the sacred Writings observ'd that order which according to the method of that Age the Hebrew Copies set before him when there appear'd no reason for the Charge But he did that says Vossius in hatred of Daniel's weeks whom he cast into the last place almost among the Hagiographers as if the Jews did not give the same Credit to the Prophesies of Daniel concerning the Messiah as the Christians Vossius admires at their simplicity who believe the Rabbins asserting the Ketuvim or Books of the Hagiographers to have been written by the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost If you consult the Rabbins saith he they will lâ—ugh at ye as such as cannot choose but know what they mean by the Holy Ghost Why has not Vossius now become a Rabbinist cited those Rabbins that we might understand by them what they mean by the word Ketuvim I know indeed the Jews do not agree concerning the genuine signification of that word though all believe that the Ketuvim or the Hagiographers are no less Divine and Canonical then the rest of the Books of the Old Testament The most subtle Abravenâ—l unfolds this Riddle They were call'd Ketuvim because they were written by the Holy Ghost but if it be so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ramb. in More Nev. the word Ketuvim was not design'd that those Speeches were written in a book not receiv'd by word of Mouth but to denote that they were written in the Holy Spirit and in that degree neither was the Divine Spirit with them but at the vory time of their Writing in this Language and Wisdom R. David Kimchi affirms that Prophesie is divided into several Degrees of which one exceeds another Which Degrees R. Moses Ben Maimon more subtlely explains Praef. in Psal But leaving these subtleties which were taken from the Philosophy of Aristotle and Averrhoes it is certain that the Jews agree with Josephus in this particular that all the Books which are extant in their Canon are truly Divine and Prophetical because they were written by the Prophets For which reason R. Don Joseph Ben Jechaia Praef. in Psal who has illustrated the Psalms with his Commentaries and reduc'd them with his Fathers to the Classes of the Kotuvim or Hagiographers compares them with the Law of Moses and thence infers the cheifest Dignity of the Psalms Therefore saith that Rabbi the greater is the Dignity of that Book because it follows the Divine Law and imitates the form and perfection of it Which is confirm'd by the Authority of the Fathers who seem to have preferr'd the Psalms before the Prophets themselves while they joyn them to the Pentateuch of Moses Therefore by the Confession of the Rabbys themselves neither is the Authority either of David or Daniel lessen'd because they are not number'd in the Classis of the Prophets For the last quoted Joseph adds these words in the same place Nor is it a wonder that the Book of Psalms contains several Prophecies of the time of the Messiah seeing that there are several Prophecies extant in the Holy Spirit concerning future things By this means the Jews will easily be reconcil'd with the Jews And which seems to be worthy observation the Talmudic Doctors will have the Book of Job to be written by Moses which nevertheless they place in the Classis of the Ketubim or Hagiographers Who would think that Vossius of a Rabynist should become a Talmudic Doctor He earnestly maintains That the Jews by the Confession of the Ancient Rabbys expung'd many places in the Holy Writings and alter'd the Sense and Words Interest so perswading No Man shall find any thing feigned by me says the Talmudic Gentleman whoever he be that Consults the Talmudic Books wherein he shall read these words in several places It is good that a Letter be pull'd up out of the Law that the Name of God may be sanctify'd But it is not for all Men to have recourse to the Talmudic Books like the most learned Vossius I had thought that decree of the Talmudists might have been rightly explain'd by the Words of R. Moses Ben Maimon who with most of the Jewish Rabbys so far defends the Immutability of the Mosaic Law that he believes that some of its Constitutions may be for a time suspended by the Authority of the Grand Sanhedrim Ramb. More Nev part 3. c. 41. That Talmudic Rabby asserts That God indeed Deut. 4. forbad that any one should add to his Word or detract from it but that he gave permission to the Wise Men of all Ages and Times or to the Supream Judicatory to set bounds to the Judgments to be Established by the Law in some things which they desire to innovate to preserve the Authority of the Law Farther That God gave them Liberty to take away some Precepts of the Law and to permit some things Prohibited upon some certain Occasion and Accident but not to Perpetuity These were taken out of the Latin Edition of the Book More Nevochim Published by Buxtorf After the same manner speaks the Author of the Book Entitl'd Cozri set forth also in Hebrew and Latin by Buxtorf For upon Cozri's demanding the Question How that Power of Innovating any thing in the
is not a thing lookt upon 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 who number'd twenty four Books of Holy Writ separated the Book of Ruth from the History of the Judges and the Lamentations of Jeremy from the Prophesie it self which is not contradicted by the Jews in our time who attribute these two Books to the number of the Sacred Writers but not of the Prophets But they who seem'd to have had the choicest Opinion of the Bible were the Sect of the Carraitans among the Jews who gave it the name of a Prophesie 2 Epist c. 1.19 Under which name St. Peter seems to comprehend it and indeed it may be thought to have been the Antient and Genuine name of the Scripture which was not understood by the more Modern Jews who have invented many Subtilties concerning the Books which are inscrib'd Hanbiim or the Prophets and I admire to find that some Christians also listen to these acute Doctors The Antient Division likewise of the Sacred Writings into the Law the Prophets and Cetuvim Writings or according to the Vulgar expression Holy Writings The Division of Scripture is a thing which is well known to all people Which Division wonderfully tormented the Brains of the Jews who have been very laboriously inquisitive about it and what was easie before have strangely perplexed with their Niceties Isaac Abravanel a most acute person complains that none of his Rabbies have come near the mark unless one Ephodaeus But as to what that Rabby at large discourses concerning that matter we thought fit to pass over in silence as having more of wit than solidity Taking therefore our leaves of these lighter Fancies we may have some reason to believe that the name of the Prophets was given to the Books of Joshua Judges and other Historians which were written before the Jews were carried out of their Country into Babylon because at that time the Jews called them Prophets who undertook to write the Annals of the Age wherein they liv'd Thus in the Holy Writings of the Books of Samuel frequent mention is made of Gad Nathan and other Prophets because they carefully collected the publick Transactions of their own Time and then with no less diligence transcrib'd them into the publick Register Which is the meaning of Josephus where he affirms that it was not for every one among the Jews to write the Publick Annals but only for the Prophets This Theodoret more largely explains L. 1. advers Apo. Theod. in Praefat. in lib Reg. Id. 2 Reg. where he boldly asserts That there were several Prophets among the Jews of which every one wrote the Story of their own Times and that the greatest part of the Books by them written are past recovery lost And therefore he affirms it to be past all doubt that the Books of the Kings were taken out of several Books of the Prophets With Theodoret Diodorus Procopius and others not a few eminent for their Learning agree Which seems to be the True Reason why the Books of Sacred Scripture which were written after the death of Moses before the Captivity were call'd by the name of the Prophets but that after that time they were only known by the single name of Cetuvim or Writings Not that thereby they depriv'd them of the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost for the Jews no less than the Christians willingly admit their Divine Authority but only content themselves with the single name of Cetuvim or Writings as we generally call the whole Scripture by the name of the Bible To say truth it is for men that have little to do more accurately to enquire into these names and to hunt these Mysteries of which the Antient Hebrew Writers never so much as thought For this reason the Christians who in the Infancy of the Church borrowed the Books of the Old Testament out of the Synagogues of the Jewish Hellenists neither separated the Book of Ruth from the Judges nor the Lamentations from the Prophecy of Jeremiah as the rest of the Jews do who refer those little Treatises to the third Classis of Sacred Writings which are called Cetuvim Nor is it a little to be wondred at what cruel pains that most subtle Doctor Abravanel takes where he very angrily enquires for what reason it was that the Book of Ruth was not joyn'd to the History of the Judges to which it seems to belong more especially acknowledging Samuel to be the Author of both But the Christians according to the Example of the Hellenist Jews have reduc'd the Books of Sacred Scripture into much better order which seems to be the first order and disposition of the Holy Writings which was allowed by the Antient Jews and approved by the publick use of the Synagogues Therefore the Jews commit a great folly who as well in their Manuscripts as in their Printed Copies separate the Prophecy of Daniel from the body of the rest as if the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost which was present with Daniel when he prophesied were not the same in all as that wherewith the other Prophets were inspired The same absurdities they run into concerning David whom they refuse to number in the List of the Prophets though they confess him to have uttered many Prophecies So true it is that those Rabbies who so highly value their Paternal Traditions invented many things unknown to their Fore-Fathers and which it seems much more rational to take out of the Books of the Christians than the Works especially of the more Modern Jews For the former imitated the Antient Custom of the Synagogues which does not seem to have descended entire to the Jews of later Ages And therefore that Order of the Books of Sacred Scripture is to be retain'd which is observed in the Greek and Latine Bibles of the Christians Neither are we to listen to those who following the Example of the Jewish 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 so exactly necessary in smaller Editions in regard that as to those things neither the Jews agree among themselves nor the Christians neither Cassiodorus divides his Work of Divine Readings into these three Heads The Division of Scripture according to St. Jerom The Division of Scripture according to St. Austin The Division of Scripture according to the Septuagint The Jews also though most passionately devoted to their own Traditions and wholly govern'd by the Talmudick Rabbies observe in the Disposal of the Books of Holy Writ another Method than that which is approved by the Talmudists Also the very Order of their Manuscript Copies varies in that particular CHAP. II. Of the Hebrew Manuscripts of the Context of the Bible WE may divide the Hebrew Manuscripts of the Jews into two sorts of which the
not seem to be an Amplifier of Scripture-Variances I shall forbear to repeat them especially they being publish'd at the end of the Basil Bibles However from hence we may collect that the Hebrew Exemplars do not so easily agree among themselves that there should be no variance as most of the Jews and the Christians their Hebrew followers would make us believe whenas some of those Lections though not so many Various Lections among the Rabbins produce a different sense Now let us come to the Testimonies of the Rabbies which confirm the same Opinion concerning the Discrepancy of Scripture Copies R. Jacob Haim Praef. in Mas Mag. Buxtorf in Antior There are not wanting Examples of various Readings among the Talmudick Doctors drawn from the publish'd or Masoretick Transcriptions Of which some are cited by R. Jacob Haim which Buxtorf a strenuous Champion for the Masoretick Exemplar though unwillingly acknowledges nor will he have to be other than a very few and those of no great weight not contradictory to the truth of Sense and yet they spend the greatest part of their time in writing out the words either fully or defectively as they term it However among those few which R. Jacob Haim brings by way of Example it may be plainly demonstrated that there are some which alter the sense of Scripture But I may say that we should in vain go about to find out those various Lections in the Talmudick Work now extant which formerly might more easily be gathered from it For that for many Ages together the Jews have made it their business to reform all their Bibles both Printed and Manuscript by the Masoreticks as in the Reading those Books I have often observ'd However care must be that you do not mistake that form of speech frequently made use of in the Talmud Read not so but so for a various Lection For it is a kind of Allegorical sport very familiar with those Rabbies who reserving to themselves the substance as I may so say of the word have childishly invented several ways of Reading one and the same word If any one has so much leisure to animadvert upon those places of Scripture which are extant in the Talmudick Work there is no necessity for him to turn over those immense Volumes so inaccessible to many men for we have a Table which is entitled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein all the places of Scripture which are extoll'd in the Talmud are digested in their order with the place and the page where they may be found in the Talmud But what profit or advantage a man shall reap from such a tedious piece of labour I cannot apprehend unless we could have recourse to the most Antient Copies of the Talmud which have escap'd the impure hands of the Jewish Criticasters Far more Varieties of this nature are found in the Books of the more Modern Jews although they pretend themselves most stout Asserters of the Masoretick Reading Thus R. David Kimchi does not so devoutly adhere to the Masoretick Copies but that he sometimes forsakes them and therefore upon those words of Ezekiel the Prophet Le Mickdash Megnat he makes this observation R. Kimchi Comment in Ezek. 11. the word Mickdash is a word mark'd with a Pathack underneath the Daleth Neither is Megnat a Noun Adjective but a Substantive as I have found in some corrected Copies in others I have met with Camots and so it may be an Adjective Where we read in our Modern Copies the Earth was fill'd with blood Damim Kimchi reads it in his Copy Chamas or Violence yet he observes the other Lection to be extant in some other Versions Concerning the word Elgavis in the 12th chap. of the same Ezekiel he thus discourses The stones Elgavis are stones like hail-stones for in some corrected Editions the word El and Gavis are divided in others it is all one But I make too long a stay upon these things when there is nothing more frequent in that Rabbies Dictionary and his Comment upon the Scripture than such kind of Expressions in the corrected Book in some corrected Books and the like For more frequent are those which you meet with in the Commentaries of R. Aben Melech who acknowledges that he compil'd his Treatise out of the Works R. R. Judas Jonas Aben Ezra Kimchi and other Grammarians He in the 24th chapter of the same Prophet Ezekiel upon the word Harkach which in the Masoretick Editions is read with the Vowel Pathack under the Letter He Harkach is the Infinitive or Imperative of the Conjugation Hiphil R. Jonas writes that he found the same word in the Hierosolymitan Copy noted with a Camets under the Letter He Aben Mlech ad cap. 24. Ezek. v. 10. and so it will be the Infinitive of the Conjugation Hophal He also writes that he met with the same word in the Babylonick Copy noted with a Pathack and R. D. Kimchi testifies that he found it so transcribed in the corrected Copies From this variety of Reading may those words of Isaiah be illustrated Hashmen Leb Hagnam Hazzeh which the LXX Interpreters have translated one way St. Jerom another For they reading the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Camets under the Letter He read and translated the words thus Isa c. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The heart of this people was hardened Whom the Writers of the New Testament have imitated But St. Jerom as being addicted to the Reading of the Jews in his Time translates the same words thus Blind the heart of this people Hier. ad c. 6. Isa and with much anxiety demands why St. Paul in the New Testament spake not according to the Hebrew which he knew to be true but according to the Septuagint Wherein he shews himself a more tenacious observer of the Reading which he had been taught by his Masters For the various Interpretations of that place might have been easily reconcil'd and in the same manner as Kimchi and other Rabbies have referr'd the various Interpretations of the word Harkach to the difference of Reading For the LXX Interpreters read the word Hoshman in Hophal whereas St. Jerom read it Hashmen in the Imperative of the Conjugation Hiphil I might here add several other passages out of the Works of the Eben Esra sirnamed by the Jews the Wise who as he was a very skilful Critick so would he not altogether depend upon the Copies and Readings of the Masorites but he rather minds the sense than the Letters of his Copy For which reason 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 Transcribers at their own pleasures Aben Esr Praefat. Comment in teg Nevertheless it is a wonder to see how carefully those Letters were observ'd by the Tiberian Doctors that is to say how often they were how often they were not to be made use of But that most Learned
Masoretick Labour to the Toil of Lucas Brugensis about the Latine Interpreter For he so soon as the Latine Edition by the command of Sixtus Quintus and Clement the VIII was compar'd with the most Antient best Esteem'd Translations and thereby refin'd from its Errours Bibles should be afterwards Printed with their Errours Nevertheless no man of Judgment will say that that same Latine Version is free from all mistake when Baronius Bellarmin Lucas Brugensis and others some of whom assisted at this Correction make no dispute that many Errours remain very necessary to be amended Some of the Jewish Rabbies indeed there are who highly commend the Diligence and Industry of the Masorites for that with so much Labour and Industry they took an account of the Letters Words and Verses of the Hebrew Context to prevent the future depravation of Holy Writ But who can thence think it possible to be prov'd that the Sacred Books were thereby restor'd to to their Antient Form True it is that the Doctors of Tyberias might number the Letters Words and Verses of the Books extant in their Time However those Books were only Copies and not Originals I will also grant that they were most perfect in the Hebrew Language and that they made use of the most corrected Exemplars of the Bible which by diligent search they could find out for the carrying on their Critical Design But yet their Materials were still deficient when they could have no recourse either to the Greek Interpreters nor to the Latine Version who in their Translations made use of Copies differing from the Masoretick Then again Tradition combates for the friends of the Masorites which the signification of the word insinuates as if by the assistance of Points and other Characters they had render'd the Reading and Pronunciation of the Hebrew Context receiv'd into use for many Ages certain and indubitable The Sect of the Carraeans also became strenuous Champions for the Masora of the Jews and the Exemplars set forth who though they reject the most of the Jewish Traditions as old Womens Fables yet admit of the Biblick Context in the same manner as it was reform'd by the Masorites of Tyberias together with the Titles Vowels Accents and other marks of the Masorites But though these and many other Arguments of the same nature may be brought in defence of the Masora and the Modern Context of the Bible and to prove that the Copies reform'd by the Doctors of Tyberias are no way to be despised because the correction was perform'd by persons well skill'd in the Language who determin'd the manner of reading the Hebr. Context not according to their own pleasures but the receiv'd Tradition nevertheless no man ought thence to collect that all other Exemplars of the Bible are to be reform'd and corrected after the Emendations of the Masorites as most of the Jews would obstinately maintain For the Greek Interpreters and St. Jerom had also their Masora or Tradition for the Reading and Pronunciation of the Hebrew Context who nevertheless very frequently vary from the Reading of the Masorites And which is worthy observation the most Learned Rabbies of the Jews R. Juda Jona Aben Esra Kimchi and others not a few while they illustrate the Scripture with their Commentaries are not so devoted to the Masoretick Lection but that sometimes they correct it and commend other Manuscripts which they call corrected though they differ from the Masoreticks Therefore as I do not think they are altogether to be favour'd who being offended with the Jews detract from their Copies so neither are they to be imitated who dote upon the Masoretick Structure and look upon it as a piece of Divinity For those upholders of Jewish Superstition shew themselves unskilful in Criticism Therefore the Modern Masoretick Lection of the Context of the Bible is not altogether to be contemned because it was not done by the Authority of men that were Prophets and inspired with the Holy Ghost for by that reason the Bibles of most of the Eastern Nations would be rejected there being as much to be said against the Chaldee Syriack and Arabick Exemplars as against the Hebrew There is none of them that make use of Tittl'd Vowels which confine the Pronunciation and Reading within certain bounds which were all invented by the Criticks for that without their help the Reading not being ascertained was subject to a humour fancy By this means the followers of that famous Impostor rendred the Reading of their Alcoran certain which before was dubious and uncertain And from these 't is very probable that the Jewish Rabbies had their Points and some other things which they introduc'd into the Hebrew Manuscripts to the end they might be read with more ease and readiness CHAP. V. The Parts of the Masora in relation to the Manuscript Copies are weighed and illustrated The True Original of the Masora THE great pains and labour of the Masoreticks consists in numbring up the Verses Words and Letters of the Hebrew Context for that by this means the former Variances being observ'd the Reading might be preserv'd more certain and constant for the future and the Holy Writings be free for the future from all alteration Of the Masoretick Art That the Words and Verses were numbred by the Masorites there is no question to be made The greatest Dispute arises about the Letters in regard that R. Jacob Ben Hajim Elias the Levite and Buxtorf who have with all imaginable diligence perus'd the several parts of the Masora deny that this part of it was ever made publick By whose Authority Morinus being sway'd affirms that that work was never undertaken by the Masorites which seems the more probable in regard the Enumeration of the Letters of the Hebrew Text which is already publish'd is very far from the Truth But that there was an account taken of them by the Jews before the Talmud was publish'd may be prov'd by those Arguments which are usually drawn from the Tractates Kidduschin and the Scribes where the letter Vau in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Gachon the belly Levit. 11.43 is said to be the middlemost letter of the Law Nor do I believe that part of the Masoreth to have been neglected by the Masorites For I observ'd it in turning over several Manuscript Bibles at the end of an Exemplar written about some four hundred years ago where among many other things collected out of the Masora there is the same account of the Letters which I shall set down in the same manner and words as it is there deliver'd that the Criticks may judge whether it be exact or no. The Sections of the Book of Genesis call'd Parshoth are reckon'd to be twelve the other Sections call'd Sedarim 43. Verses 75 34. Vords 20713. Letters 78100. and these words are in the middle of the Book Gnal Charbekah Tihijeh By thy Sword thou shalt live Gen. 27.40 The Parshoth of Exodus are numbred to be 11. the
Sedarim 33. Verses 1209. Words 16513. Letters 63467. the middlemost words Elohim lo Tehallel Exod. 22.28 Thou shalt not revile the Gods The Parshoth of Leviticus are 10. the Sedarim 25. the Verses 859. the Words 11902. the Letters 44989 the middlemost words Hannogeang Bibsar Hazab Leviz 15.7 He that touches the slesh of him that has a running Issue In Numbers Parsheth 10. Sedarim 33. Verses 1388. Words 16707. Letters 62529. the middlemost words Ve Hajah Haisch Asher Ebchar And the man whom I shall chuse Deuteronomy has Parshoth's 10. Sedarim 30. Verses 9055. Words 16394. Numb 17.5 Letters 54892. The middlemost words Ve Gnasitha Gnal Pi Haddabar And thou shalt do according to the Sentences Deut. 19.10 As for the rest of the Hebrew Context there is no number of the words But if we compare this Enumeration of the Letters of the Mosaical Law with that which is set forth in the Venetian and Basil Bibles you will find this to be very erroneous For that allows to Genesis no more than 4395 Letters whereas the former reckons up 78100. and therefore seems to be farthest from Truth But why such an indefatigable diligence in numbring the Letters of the Hebrew Letters with the Masorites should be call'd the hedge of the Law by the benefit of which it is preserv'd entire and uncorrupted from Errour or Mistake I cannot well apprehend Whenas they who were so anxiously laborious number'd in other Letters than those of their own Books which no wise man will look upon to be so free from faults or to be compar'd with the Original Then as Aben Esra rightly observes the Letters Aleph He Vau and Jod are frequently added frequently omitted according to the fancy of the Transcribers Certainly no man that understands any thing of Critical Learning will from thence only because the Masora observes such a word sometimes fill'd up sometimes defective presently infer that all other Biblick Exemplars are not of that value because they vary in their Lections but imbracing both Lections as probable will determine nothing certain in a thing of so much incertainty as being taught by the Examples of the LXX Interpreters Aquilas Symmachus Theodotion and St. Jerom who many times not only vary from the Masoreth but from one another And therefore the Jews and the Idolizers of the Masorites are miserably deceiv'd who believe that the Holy Writ was restor'd to its Antient Form by a bare Enumeration of the Words and Letters made by the Doctors of Tyberias and cry it up in the place of the Authentick Original Than which there could be nothing more fabulously invented especially after such a long succession of years that the Hebrew Language has been as it were buried and the Traditions of the dead almost entomb'd at least most strangely interrupted And therefore the more prudent Aben Esra rightly compares the Masoreticks that have so carefully enumerated the Letters and Words of the Hebrew Context to those who should number the Leaves and Pages of a Physick-Book which would nothing contribute to the health of a sick Patient As for the Distinction of the Verses which appears in the Masoretick Editions I think the same sentence is to be pronounced as concerning the numbring of Letters and Words in regard that the Authors of this Enumeration have observ'd no other than the Rules of Criticism in distinguishing the Verses after the manner of the Grammarians But if we listen to the Talmudists they cry Every Verse which Moses does not distinguish we never distinguish But if that Tradition were receiv'd From Moses wherefore do not the Talmudists agree in all things with the Masorists in this particular Why also was not that Tradition of which Moses is feign'd to be the Author known likewise to those Jews that liv'd in Time of the Greek Interpreters and St. Jerom For they also differ in many things from the Masorites The whole Context of Sacred Writ was formerly in Antient Times written in a continu'd series of words as it had been one entire Verse as Elias Levita well observes As also were the Books of the Antient Greeks and Latines which may be collected from the Proem of Eustathius to his Commentaries Eustath in Iliad Hom. The Poem of the Iliads was and continu'd a well compacted body of words which the Grammarians so continu'd by the command of Pisistratus King of Athens and fitted as they pleas'd themselves The chief of which was Aristarchus and after him Zenodotus But because it was prolix and intricate and by that means irksom to the Reader they divided it into several parts which Sections they would not call the first second and third Book c. as Quintus did in his continuation of Homer But in regard the Composition was large enough for several Sections they thought fit to divide them into Sections under the four and twenty Letters And Illatius commends one Comatas who distinguish'd and pointed the Sentences of Homer's Poem Apud Leon. Allati animadvers in Antiq. Hetrus which never had any subdistinctions before as appears by the following Verses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cernens Comatas hos Homericos Libros Jam putrientes nullibi scriptis notis Punctis not atos Ordinans abscidit putredines Ex quo Periti non errantibus viis Discant quod par est discere In Antient times also the Verses of the Poets were not separated one from another by any such notes of distinction as we find in the Printed Editions Nor can the Grammarians themselves rightly distinguish the Odes of Pindar But why do I spend time There 's no reason why the Jewish Books in this particular should have better luck than the Greek Exemplars of the New Testament which 't is well known were but lately distinguish'd into Verses as is not only to be seen in several of the Manuscript Copies but also in many Editions that are Printed according to the Antient Copies True it is that ever since the time of Ezra the Verses of the Law were distinguish'd in Reading But for all that the Amanuenses never made any distinction in their Transcripts as was afterwards done by the Criticks of Tyberias to whose Laws the Jews are no more oblig'd than we to the Decrees of the Apostolick See which after the Correction of the Latine Interpretation decreed that no other Interpretation should be Printed for the future unless it were examin'd by the Vatican Standard Which Edict was for the procurement of Peace and Concord And to this as much as is possible they who gave the Roman Church her Name will adhere in explaining the Latine Interpretation if they be wise observing the Points and all the marks of distinction in that Edition Nevertheless that a clearer and more probable sense will rise from another manner of distinction they do not scruple to prefer it before the
in the Plural In the 6 Chap. of the same Book instead of Michael as it is in our Exemplars the Manuscript Copy reads Malachie and in another place instead of Vzziah another Manuscript reads Azaria In the eighth Chap. of Josuah v. 22. The Manuscript Copy reads Lo in the singular Number with this note in the Margent Lahem in another Copy which Lection is now observed in the modern context The Particle Lo Not and Eth which is the sign of the accusative case are not always written in the same manner in the Manuscripts as in the Printed Exemplars Of far greater moment is that difference which is found in 21. Chap of Joshua wherein there is a want of two verses which are notwithstanding both in the Greek and Latine Editions which that they ought not to have been left out the thing it self declares when in recounting the Cities allotted to the Levites out of every Tribe the Tribe of Reuben could not have been omitted Besides these verses are supplied by five Spanish Manuscripts of best note as also by the Royal Parisian the English the Venetian of Bemberg and Bragand in Quarto the Plantinian in Quarto Robert Stephanus's and that of Amsterdam and other Against all these the learned Masius opposes the Animadversions of the Masora and R. D. Kimchi From whence it is manifest that none of those verses were extant in the Ancient Manuscripts And Masius farther observes that none of those Bibles wherein those verses are to be found make any mention of Jordan Jericho or the Cities of Refuge Only in one Spanish Manuscript there is mention made of a City of Refuge which none of the exemplars hitherto printed allow But there was no need of mentioning Jordan or Jericho because the number of the Cities is made up without them Johannes Morinus who has commented more largely upon this place believes these verses to have been obliterated by the injury of time the negligence of th Jews which seems most probable But in the same place he erroneously observes that the two Comma's which were in the Manuscript by him cited were afterwards eras'd by him that transcribed it this annotation being added in the Margin we found not these two verses in the Hillelian Exemplar for in perusing that Manuscript I perceived that note to be added by some Jewish Criticaster long after the transcribing of the Copy who added to it some of the tittled Vowels and some parts of the Masora beside For that same Criticaster was desirous that his Exemplar should conform in all things to the Masoretick and to gain the more credit to his Emendation he cited the Hillelian Manuscript Therefore D. Kimchi seems more addicted then was needful to the Lection of the Masorites while he affirms that he never saw those two verses which are wanting in the Masoretick Edition in any ancient corrected Exemplar but only noted in Neither does Grotius weigh those verses with a sufficient accuratness suspecting them to have been added out of Chronicles to the Book of Josua after Kimchi's time and thence crept into the Greek and Latine versions On the other side Morinus believes them to have been translated out of the Book of Josua into the Chronicles by Esdras and afterwards left out through the carelesness of the Scribes Which mistake of the Scribes might in this particular more easily happen by reason of the frequent repetition of the word Vmematteh and of the Tribe c. Whence it came to pass that afterwards the several Manuscripts did not constantly retain the same order of sentences In a manner not much unlike to this the ancient Jewish Scribes made many more mistakes especially in the accompts of their families For the same words and the same Phrases often occurring to their fancies as they wrote great confusion by that means crept into the Books of sacred Scripture as may be easily apparent to any one that shall compare the Books of Chronicles with the other Historians For tho it be not permitted to correct the first from the latter yet is it most apparent that there are many things wanting in both that might be restored from the ancient especially the Greek Interpretations the authors of which had Copies differing from the publick Exemplars of the Bible Whose different writings I pass over in silence as being obvious to all and aiming only at those which may be taken out of the Manuscript Copies of the Jews And indeed those Errours have been in the Hebrew Codex of an ancient standing But when any Jewish Rabbi has got himself a name for leâ—rning among his Country-men presently taking a preposterous course they reformed their own Manuscripts by such a ones Copy rejecting the more ancient Books Such among the Jews were the Doctors of Tyberias R. R. Ben Ascer Ben Naphtali Hillel and several others to us unknown By this means it came to pass that the Ancient Exemplars of the Bible being laid aside the differences of writing in things of greatest moment were likewise lost All which things may be demonstrated from other Books of the Jews For if we compare the written with the printed and those which were publisht in several times and at several places 't is a wonderful thing to see how they differ one from another Thus the little Book entitled Jetsira or of the Creation which the Jews falsely attribute to Abraham the Patriarch differs egregiously from it self in several Editions and still there is more disagreement between the Printed Copies Moreover the Latine version of this little treatise in many things disagrees as well from the Manuscripts as printed Editions So that they who lookt after the Mantuan Edition found the vast difficulty of publishing that small Tract to consist as well in quantity as quality The same publishers also observed that the Interpreters who adorned it with their commentaries do very much differ in the reconciliation of the Text. And indeed in the Mantuan Edition there is extant another Copy of that Book not much different from the first In like manner if you compare the Manuscript Copies of that famous piece entitl'd Zohar either with themselves or with the printed Copies you will find a very great discrepancy among them Nor need you look any further then the Edition of that Book printed at Cremona wherein the various Lections which are almost infinite are sedulously noted The same may be observed in the various Copies of the Book entitl'd Cozri of which one was written But I shall insist no longer upon these things Certainly the extream diligence and Industry of the Jews is highly to be applauded who have so studiously observed the readings of various Exemplars On the other side 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 themselves Therefore I would have it that those places of sacred Text which bad Connexion tells us to be false or corrupted should be restored
by the assistance of the most Ancient Interpreters seeing in things of lesser consequence the Manuscripts may help For the mistakes are very ancient but the Written Copies of a later age and reformed according to the rule of the Masora So that although as well in the Manuscripts as in the printed Copies the 13. verse of the 145. Psalm be wanting it might be easily supplyed out of the Ancient Interpreters which have it in their translations It is not to be doubted says Grotius Grot. in Psal 145. but that this verse was lost out of the Hebrew Copies through the negligence of the Transcribers for there wants a verse which should begin with the letter Nun. And soon after he adds How will they answer this who would have us stand to all the decrees of the Masorites In which words he aims at our Masora worshippers by whom the Hebrew Text is lookt upon to be the same with what it was in the times of the Prophets So obstinate are they in the defence of their Masora But in these and the like defects the versions of the Ancient Interpreters as well Greek as Latin supply the place of the Hebrew Exemplar Nor is it unusual for the Criticks who Translate Greek or Latin into any other Language to have recourse to more Ancient Translations to Illustrate the Lections of those books which they translate Which was successfully observed by some in the Translation of the N. Testament who called the Latin Interp. to their ash stance Lastly That the plenty of Jewish Exemplars of the Hebrew context fell very short toward the assistance of the Jews of Tyberias is prov'd not only by the Testimonies of R. R. Judas Jonas Aben Esra Kimchi and others who sometimes quote the Manuscript Copies and those the most corrected but also by the Annotations of Ben Hajim who first collected into one Body the dispers'd parts of the Masora and set them forth in Print For he has added other Lections besides the Masoretick to the Margent of the Venetian Bible which he assures us he had gathered from most approved Manuscripts Thus upon the word Chesoos as a crane Isaiah 38.14 He has made this extraordinary annotation in the margent In some Copies it is written ch'sis with a Jod and the notes direct it to be read Ch'soos but I found not this in the Catalogue of those words which having Jod in the middle are to be read with the Letter Vau. In like manner the same Rabbi upon the word ch' Ari makes this observation which egregiously confirms the Translations of the Greeks and St. Jerome of the 22. Psal v. 13. In some corrected Copies I have seen the word spelt with a Vau with a note in the Margent that it was to be read with a Jod I search'd the Catologue of words which are written with a Vau at the end and read with a Jod but I could not find this word in the Number nor in the Catalogue of different Writings between the Eastern and the Western Copies Genebrard Comment in Psal 22. Therefore Genebrard mistook in this place who attributes this Critical Animadversion of R. Jacob Hajim restorer of the Masora to the Authors of the great or final Masora There are also many other Examples of such like Discrepancies which that Rabbi produces out of several approv'd Copies of the Bible which were never taken notice of by the Masorites I will here only add to make the business more plain what offer'd it self to his observation in perusing the Manuscripts concerning the Pronoun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ille or He. Now the Criticks of Tyberias were very accurate in their observations how many times and in what places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Feminine Gender was made use of instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Masculine But that laborious toil seem'd to be very unprofitable seeing that the Manuscript Copies so frequently differ from the Printed in that particular no less than the Antient Interpreters of Sacred Writ Thus Judges 14.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That it was of the Lord is read in the Text without any Marginal Note of the Masorites yet in one Spanish Copy it is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the 21th chap. of the same Book the Masoretick Editions constantly read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any Marginal Annotation yet in one Manuscript it is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In like manner Dan. 2. one Manuscript Copy reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas in the Printed Exemplars it is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now if these things and many others of the same nature which at present I pass by had been rightly known to most of the Protestants they had not blamâ—d the Latine Interpreter whom we have read for these many Ages rendring the words in Gen. 5.15 She shall bruise thy head for that only reason because the word is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Text but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sixtim Anam in Antibarb Here saith Sixtinus Amama it is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor is the place corrected by the Masora as if the Masorites had examin'd all the Copies in the World The Masoretick Lection seems so much the more probable indeed because that in many Copies of the Latine Interpreter and those in good esteem in other places we find Ipse He and not Ipsa She as in the modern version So that that version Ipsa She was not presently to be condemned because it differ'd from the Masoretick context For it might be that the Latin Interpreter found it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his own Copy for that in the writing of this Pronoun the Transcribers might easily mistake is apparent from the Manuscript Exemplars Now from what has been produc'd concerning the Masoretick Exemplars there is no man but will easily determine what judgment to pass of the Hebrew Bible now so generally made use of by the Christians as well as Jews But here it may not be improper to add a few words more concerning the most select Editions of those Bibles The Hebrew Bibles The most Select Editions of the Hebrew Bibles whose Editions were over-lookt by the Jews are far more corrected than those which were publish'd by the Christians Wherefore Elias Levita rejected the Bible which was set forth by Bomberg in Folio at Venice Anno 1518. Felix Pratensis leading the way as not being well corrected especially in the Masora which Pratensis seems not to have well understood Therefore that Bible was of much more credit which was publish'd by R. Jacob Hajim Restorer of the Masora at the cost and charges of the same Bomberg For in this there is not only Printed the Hebrew Text but the Targum or Chaldee Paraphrase with Commentaries of the most Learned Jews both upon the Scripture and both the Masora's as well the larger as the less The same Bibles were again Printed at Venice
Tertul. de Praescrip adv her c. 17. or if she receive any she perverts them to her own purposes by Additions and Omissions or if she receive them she does not receive them whole or if she do that nevertheless she perverts them by feign'd Expositions Adulterated Sense being an equal Enemy to Truth with a corrupted and mutilated Text. But here Tertullian plainly taxes the Hereticks not the Jews Now from these words you may give a shrewd ghess whether that Learned person had just reason to break forth into these passionate expressions after he had produc'd the Testimonies of Justin Irenaeus and Tertullian against the Jewish Bibles From hence then says he Morin Exercit Bib. that Principle or Foundation is apparent that the Jews corrupted both their own and our Bibles in hatred of Christ and the Christians and ras'd some Books out of the Canon was taken for granted by our most holy Fathers and upon the confidence of that Foundation they did sometimes unfold several occurring difficulties and answer'd the Objections of the Hereticks and Jews But with the good leave of that most learned Man I must needs say that he never consulted the Fathers in this matter but only made use of what he had read in other Authors and in the works of Leo Castro a mortal Enemy of the Jews and inserted their words verbatim into his Exercitations Nor am I one who believe an obligation of standing to the Opinion of the Fathers in this matter Their Authority is of great moment in matters of Faith but in Critick Learning it is then to be esteem'd when it agrees with Truth and for this we have the Authority of the Prince of the Latine Divines St. Austin who as he was a man of a most acute Wit and piercing Judgment was not afraid to recede from the Opinion of other Fathers upon that Argument which is now the Subject of the Controversie because he thought it less probable So that when he came to consider the difference of the Greek and Hebrew Copies in the years of Methusalem's Age he could not favour their Opinion who preferr'd the Greek before the Hebrew Copies Though St. Austin readily acknowledges with the rest of the Fathers that work to be the work of the Prophets He relates the Opinion of some persons of his Age in these words They admit not that here might be a greater mistake of the Interpreters De Civit. Dei l. 15. c. 11. rather than that it should be false in that Language from whence the Scripture was translated into our Language by the Greek but they say it was not likely that the LXX Interpreters who at one and the same time agreed in sense could err or would impose a falshood where no Interest could sway them But the Jews while they bear us ill will because the Law and the Prophets are become common with us by Interpretation have made some alterations in their Copies to lessen the Authority of ours This Opinion or rather Suspition let every one accept as he thinks good but certain it is that Methuselah liv'd after the Flood Here St. Austin seems to be guided rather by the weight of reason than a cloud of Writers who as he well knew did not make a right computation of Methuselah's Years Wherefore handling the same Argument again he openly affirms that he cannot agree with them who believ'd that the Jews had corrupted their Scripture of set purpose He denies that the Jews being a People scatter'd into all parts of the World could joyn in such an Universal Conspiracy to a Falshood that should be never discover'd At length he adds I could never doubt but that it would be well 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 Language out of which the Translation was made by the Interpreter And that St. Austin should be of this Opinion contrary to the Judgments of almost all the Doctors of his Age nothing but the Truth over-rul'd him I wish that other with St. Austin would rather consider the things themselves then the Authority of others For this Diversity in Opinion might easily be reconcil'd I pass by the Testimony of other Fathers of whose names Leo Castro gives us a long scroll to little purpose for it will be sufficient to produce them who understood the Hebrew Language For it would be an idle thing to produce Witnesses that know nothing of the business Among the Greeks only Origen among the Latines only Jerom applied himself to the understanding of the Hebrew Language For to omit all the rest Epiphanius whom Jerom cryes up for his knowledge of five Languages having a smattering of Hebrew understood nothing of the Critical Learning St. Jerome scrupl'd not to call Origen next after the Apostles Master of the Church by reason of his singular Learning especially in the Scriptures but if we seriously consider Origens Hebraick Industry we shall find him but meanly vers'd in that Language But for that he is to be pardoned that grasping at many things he sometimes speaks not so exactly imitating Philo and such kind of Authors But he was furnished with Hebrew Learning sufficient to understand the discrepancies of various Editions Origens Opinion concerning the Jewish Manuscr explained though he were inferiour to St. Jerome in that particular Therefore his Judgment concerning the Purity of the Hebrew Text is not to be despis'd These Writers that promote the Jewish Copies bring many Quotations out of Origen by which they seem to traduce the Jews for being Corrupters of the Sacred Writings Thus in reference to the words of Jeremy The Sin of Juda is written with an iron Pen he argues the Jews to have plainly falsify'd who translate the words their Sin instead of the Sin of Judah Again in the Epistle which he wrote to African concerning the History of Susanna he asserts that the Jews have cut off many passages from their Bibles lest they should be read by the Plebeians We must say that as to those things which contained the Reproach of Elders Magistrates and Judges they took away as much as they could from the knowledge of the people which are kept among their Arcana And as an example of that Corruption he brings what the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews relates of Isaiah and affirms that the words there written concerning the Prophets they were stoned they were sawed and put to several deaths are not in the publish'd Bibles but that the words concerning Isaiah's being cut in two with a Saw were taken by Tradition and preserved in some secret place Which saith he was craftily of set purpose done perhaps by the Jews some undecent words being inserted into Scripture to abrogate the belief of the whole Other Examples he adds but of the same kind in the same place and all to prove the same thing which Christ in the New Testament objects to
Addition of others But because the Eastern people rarely made use of them in writing the Criticks invented pointed vowels for the more quick and easie reading of the Scriptures But Vossius speaks very uncoheringly not so much as to the truth of the business as out of a preconceived prejudice against the Jews CHAP. XI Of the Samaritan Bibles their Targumim or Paraphrases COncerning the Nation Customs and Religion of the Samaritans who by the Jews are call'd Cutheans the sacred Text relates many things in the Books of Kings Chronicles and Esdras which afterwards Josephus explains more at large an ample Testimony in this affair In our Age Johannes Morinus in his exercitations with which he has adorned the Hebrew Pentateuch Hortinger in his Antimorinian Exercitations Walton in his Prolegomena to the Samaritan Text and other most learned men have illustrated the Samaritan affairs and therefore passing by those things in silence I proceed to their Texts of which some of the Fathers as well Greek as Latin have made mention together with the Scholiast of the Roman and Frankfurt Editions of the Septuagint That the sect of the Samaritans makes only use of the Pentateuch of Moses I suppose is known to all For at what time they revolted from the Jews there was one Law among all the Hebrews the other Books of Scripture not being yet compos'd The Samaritan Texts or if they were not yet made publick But what to think of that Samaritan Copy is a thing difficult to resolve Morinus who was the first that published it lashing out into the praise of it after his Custom extols it to the skies For which reason he is much blam'd by the learned Especially by Muisius then Royal professor of Hebrew at Paris who very severely Stigmatizes Morinus's opinion of the Samaritan Pentateuch After that Hottinger set forth his exercitations upon the Samaritan Pentateuch in opposition to Morinus And both reprove a great many things in him which he does not seem to assert he having only praised a little more than needed the Samaritan Text which was then the subject of his discourse after which manner prefacing upon his Edition of the Greek Bible he wonderfully upbraids the Hebrew Text. The most moderate of all are Ludovicus Capellus and Brian Walton who in many things do not reject the credit of the Samaritan Pentateuch But of all others Vsher of Armagh has the worst opinion of it who affirms that the Samaritan Text was of set purpose and in many places new dressed and corrupted by one Dositheus a certain Samaritan Heretick Therefore the Samaritan Codex is one and the same with the Hebrew only few little variances excepted as is observed as well by Eusebius in his Chronicles and by St. Jerom. The Samaritans saith St. Jerom In Prol. Galeat De emendat Temp. write the Pentateuch of Moses with just so many Letters only varying in the shape and in the points Which words of St. Jerom Joseph Scaliger seems not to have understood when he affirms that the Samaritans read the Pentateuch with just as many Letters as the Jews neither more or less For St. Jerom himself sometimes observes the various reading of both Codex's as in his Hebrew Questions upon Genesis and his Commentaries upon the Epistle to the Galatians wherefore St. Jerom when he affirms the Jewish and Samaritan Exemplars to be alike in all things intended only by those Words to distinguish the Samaritan Codex from the Greek and Latin Translations In regard the first is the pure and simple Hebrew context which cannot be said of the Greek and Latin Bibles In the same manner speaks Eusebius upon whom St. Jerom altogether depends That the Samaritan differs from the Hebrew Pentateuch in some things is past all dispute as may appear by the Parisian and English Polyglottons in Print Which Copy the noble Peter à Valle obtained from the Samaritans And afterward Achilles Harlay Sancy the Kings Embassador in Turkey caus'd to be brought to Paris and laid up in the Library of the Fathers of the Congregation of the Oratory near the Loure And that there are other Copies of the same Pentateuch in other Libraries of Europe the Epistles of Perescius Peter à Valle Comberus and Aleander to Morinus apparently Testifie Jerom Aleander thus wrote in the year 1628. I would have you to understand that there is here in the Vatican Library another Samaritan Copy of the Pentateuch written in the same Samaritan Letters which Scipio of Pious Memory Cardinal of Susanna then Library-keeper bought for 300 Crowns Which Copy though it be written in Hebrew Characters yet is it in the Hebrew Language like to ours Certain it is that the Samaritans though they were much inferiour in number to the Jews yet after the Destruction of their Temple at Gerizim retained the Customs and Ceremonies of their Country and read the Pentateuch of Moses in their Synagogues as they do at this day The Samaritan Copy which is come to our hands being examin'd by the Fragments of the Antient Exemplars which are extant in Eusebius St. Jerom and the rest of the Fathers seems to be a true and perfect Copy and the same with those that were read in the Antient Times by the Samaritans However I will not deny but that it is degenerated in some things from its Original Purity and Sincerity But this is the fate of all Books which are not however to be therefore rejected for illegitimate Birth because they do not exactly agree with the Originals in all things For then we could not say that any one of the Antient Authors were come perfect to our hands nor were Homer's Verses so common now-a-days to be receiv'd for his because the most Critical of men Aristotle quotes somethings out of Homer which are not to be found in our Modern Copies Nor were the Jewish Copies of the Bibles now in use to be entertain'd because they do not exactly agree with those which the Seventy Interpreters made use of in their Translations We must therefore assert that the Copies of the Samaritan and Jewish Pentateuch are real and authentick Copies though there may be some difference between them Objections against the Purity of the Samaritan Context as Aristotles Homer plainly appears to be the same Homer which was examin'd by Aristarchus although they do agree in all things However there were not wanting some especially among the Protestants who thought the Codex of the Samaritans to be rejected led thereto chiefly by this reason because the true Worship of God the Succession of the Priests and Doctors remain'd 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 Protestant Divines who make so slight of the Authority of the Church and the Succession of Priests and Doctors should enforce these 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 justifie them from being clear from all manner of faults when the Version of the Seventy Interpreters of which the Eastern and Western Church made use has not been entire from the very time of Origen However I readily grant that the Hebrew Exemplar is to be chiefly preferr'd for the Christians borrowâ—d the Books of Scripture from the Jews and not the Samaritans Only the Authority of any Assembly whatever 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 also other faults with which the defenders of the Hebrew Text load the Samaritan Copies For first they enendeavour to prove it mutilated by the Example of some few words and then they say that some words are foisted into the place of others They also object the differences of the Hebrew and Samaritan Texts one with another as also the carelesness of the Scribes who confound the Letters Aleph and Ain He and Heth and other Letters resembling in form But they kill themselves with their own weapons when the same things may be objected against the Hebrew Texts themselves In this the Patrons of the Jewish Text are deceived The Samaritan text vindicated because that out of a preconceiv'd Opinion of some of the Jews they think it to be free from all Errour which is to be only affirm'd of the Originals We have already shew'd you that the manner of writing of the Hebrew Context was very inconstant and perhaps more free than among the Samaritans who never hunted after the Trifles of Jewish Allegories Even in this the Samaritan Codex's excel the Jewish for that many things which Superstition foisted into the one are wanting in the other To this we may add that the Hand and Character of the Samaritan Text plainly proves Antiquity On the other side the Jewish Manuscripts being reform'd by several Ages at length obtain'd the name of Masoreticks Lastly the Jewish Text may in many things be illustrated by the Samaritan Thus Gen. 2. we read in the Hebrew that God finish'd his work upon the Seventh Day but in the other upon the Sixth Day which seems to be the more proper Lection Gen. 4. This Sentence which is in the Samaritan Let us go into the field v. 8. seems to be wanting in the Hebrew and many of the Jews mark this gap in the Margin of their Scriptures in these words pausa in medio versus a rest in the middle of the Verse I know that St. Jerom in his Hebraick Questions upon Genesis has observ'd this Pericope for superfluous both in the Greek and Samaritan Exemplars Superfluous saith he is that in the Samaritan and our Volume Let us go into the field But it appears that St. Jerom in these Questions where he professes himself an Assertor of the Jewish Text did not speak so much his own as the Opinion of the Jews Exod. 12. where we read that the sojourning of the Children of Israel who dwelt in Egypt was 430 years the Samaritan Exemplar comprehends Their Fathers with the Children or the sojourning of the Patriarchs in the same Egypt Which Lection agrees with the Truth but is not Jewish But it might have been that they supply'd all these things in their Books and that they might have been glosses for the Explanation of the Hebrew Text which is frequently very obscure On the other side there are several things written with more freedom in the Samaritan Codex which seem to have been added for Illustrations sake out of other parts of the Pentateuch by some of the Samaritan Doctors Which Supplements without doubt argue the Copy to be vitious In like manner the word Garizim Deut. 17. which they have put in the place of Ebal which was the Antient Reading shews that the Samaritans were not over-religiously exact in their Copies whence it is manifestly evinc'd that neither the Samaritan nor Jewish Exemplar are free from all manner of Errour so that they are to be lookt upon as Copies of one and the same Book which may be useful to one another yet so that the Jewish Copy though it have its Imperfections is to be preferr'd before the Samaritan not only because all Religion and the Scripture descended from the Jews to the Christians but because the Exemplars seem to be less obnoxious to Errours However that ought to be no impediment but thaâ— the Jewish Copy may be mended by the Samaritan where a manifest Errour shall appear and the Samaritan Lection preferr'd before the Jewish if it be more correspondent to Truth For indeed the Reading of the Hebrew Text among the Samaritans seems to be nothing near so strict in regard their Copies make no use of pointed Vowels which confine the manner of Reading the Hebrew Context And it is certain that Points were a Modern Invention of the Jews nor are they added to those Volumes which are made use of in the publick Synagogues And there I think the Samaritans rather to be commended than blam'd for retaining their Antient form of Letters The Excellenâ—y of the Samaritan Codex Besides they have a Tradition for the Reading of the Text as the Jews had before the Points were invented by the Doctors of Tyberias Lastly The Samaritans excel the Jews in this that they have retain'd the Antient or Mosaick Characters of the Hebrew Language whereas the Jews upon their return from Babylon devoted themselves wholly to the Babylonian or Chaldaean to which they had been accustom'd which was the reason why the Samaritans first accus'd the Jews especially Esdras as a corrupter of the Sacred Text of Scripture But laying these Quarrels aside let us in a few words examine what may be thought of the first Hebrew Letters For the Samaritan Characters the sounder sort of Criticks and the Antient Coins of the Samaritan Nation fairly plead so that Joseph Scaliger gives them the Title of Asses who will not subscribe to the Opinion of St. Jerom where he says That certain it is Prolog Galeat that Esdras the Scribe Doctor of the Law after the taking of Jerusalem and restoration of the Temple under Zerobabel found out other Letters which we now make use of whereas till that time the Hebrew and the Samaritan Characters were the same This Opinion of St. Jerom concerning the Samaritan Characters was renew'd not long since by Guilielmus Postellus Blancuccius Villalpandus Morinus Capellus Mayerus Perescius and among the Jews by R. Azarias and several others Postellus who had long convers'd with the Jews attributes the cause of that change to the hatred which the Jews had to the Samaritans as being Schismaticks That Party says he who intermix'd with the True Religion the Worship of Idols In Alph 12. Linguar c. de Samar is adjudged by a grave and pious person to
be Heretical and unworthy of converse or the communication of the same Letters and therefore after the Captivity he apply'd himself to the Invention of new Characters And a little after he adds When I disclos'd these Conjectures of mine to the Jews they said they were most true confirm'd in writing by most of their own Rabbies However it seems far more probable that the Jews being restor'd to their Country preserv'd the Chaldee Letters to which they had been accustom'd in their Exilement having now forgotten the former Then the same Postellus makes mention of the Silver Coins which seem to be of great Antiquity and of which he had seen not a few among the Jews who valu'd them so highly that he could not purchase one under two Crowns in Gold which they said was as antient as Solomon 's Reign and but of a base Metal Lastly he adds these words which do not a little illustrate the present Argument They affirm that among the deepest Ruines and vastest heaps of Rubbish these Coins are frequently digg'd out and are a most certain proof of Antiquity as having this Inscription Holy Jerusalem into which from Solomon's time the Samaritans never entred nor vouchsafed the City the name of Holy as they ador'd without Jerusalem and worship'd Idols half Gentiles half Jews so that it is not probable they would have celebrated a City which was in Enmity with them Concerning the Samaritan Shekles much more may be read in Villalpandus Morinus and others Villalpand Appar in Ezech. Morin in exercitat in Pentat Samar Altand in Epist ad Morin Buxtorf Dissert de Lit. Heb. Light Hor. Heb. ad c. 5. Matt. Sâ—ick in Jure Reg. Heb. sub â—iâ— Perescius had several Samaritan Coins and Jerom Aleander saith that he met with several at Rome But notwithstanding all that has been said John Buxtorf a most obstinate Asserter of the Jewish Context defends the perpetuity of the Hebrew Letters by many Authorities taken out of the Rabbies Books Lightfoot agrees with Buxtorf tho he acknowledges the Talmudick Doctors to be his opposers Shickard produces many things of the same nature Hebrew Professor in the Academy of Tubinghen together with some other Hebricians But Walton deserts this Opinion which he found to proceed rather from Rabbinical discourse than from sound Theology For which reason that famous person is but hardly thought of among some of the Rabbinists especially Matthias Vasmut of Rastoch who after many severe expressions against him Walton says he quoting the Pontificial Authors against the Divine Authority of Scripture ought not to be endur'd in a Reform'd Church But for the same reason neither ought Drusius Scaliger Casaubon Vossius Amama Bochart and several others to be sufferâ—d among those that assume the Title of Reformed seeing they have all the same Opinion with Cappellus and Walton concerning the Samaritan Letters Moreover Buxtorf seems to have condescended to this Opinion concerning the Diuturnity of the Hebrew Letters not willingly but by constraint that he might refute Cappellus's Book entitled Arcani punctationis Revelati and there he proves the Novelty of the Samaritan from the Antiquity of the Hebrew Characters Buxtorf drew many into his Opinion But they are in the number of those whom Vossius calls Asses clad in Professors Gowns who having little either of Art or Ingenuity meerly instructed by the Writings of single Buxtorf make a great noise with those Rabbies whose Books they never so much as open'd But there is no reason for the Criticks to dispute so fiercely about the first Hebrew Characters For if you more heedfully consider and compare together the Samaritan and Hebrew Characters there is not such a vast difference between them but that they may be thought to have had one and the same Original From whence also the Greek and Latine Capital Letters seem to have deriv'd their first forms Tho being subservient to Custom they have undergone several Alterations according to times and places And thus the Eastern Jews form their Characters after another manner than the Western Postâ—l in â—lphab 12 Ling. R. Azar Inre Bin. c. 56. Blanc in Gâ—am Villalâ— Appar â—n Ezech. Kircher Oâ— dip Egypt par 2. Morin Exâ—â—citat in Pâ—ntat Sam Hortin Exâ—â—citat in Morin Then the Western as the Italian French Spanish Germans c. differ one among another and from all these the Moors or Barbary Jews Nor is there less difference between the Forms of the Samaritan Characters which have lately been Printed in Europe as any one may see who diligently observes the varieties of Letters in the Samaritan Alphabets which have been put forth by Postellus R. Azarias Blancuccius Villâ—lpandus Kircher Morinus Hortinger and others Those Letters which are Printed in the Parisian and English Bibles were transcrib'd from one Copy Which things being granted it is not at all to be wonder'd at that the Letter Tau which Jerom notes to have formerly resembl'd the form of a Cross should now not bear the same figure in the Vulgar Alphabets of the Samaritans because in process of time the Letter was alter'd But Rabbi Azarias sets down in his Alphabet two sorts of this Letter Tau one of which resembles the form of a Cross Jerom Aleander likewise writing to Morinus concerning the Shekels of that Nation which he had seen in Rome has these expressions upon one piece of money You shall see upon both sides of the Coin the Letter Tau in the form of a Cross which being formerly written thus X degenerated at length into this Form Ae. To the same effect Perescius wrote to Morinus Therefore when one and the same Character at the same time in divers places admits of various forms what wonder is it that this Letter the most antient of all after so many Ages especially among several and different Nations should vary from his first figure Who so ignorant as not to know that the Roman Letters after the Goths invading Italy lost their Original and Antient Form neither were they the same with those Letters which were the true Antient Letters and were call'd Lombardick But of this sufficient has been said Now let us come to the Samaritan Targumim or Paraphrases The Scripture first wrote in the common Language of the Country Because according to the Admonition of St. Paul All things that are written are written for our instruction in Antient time both the Old and New Testament 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 Parisian Divine who has ventur'd to affirm that the Books of Moses Law seem to be compos'd in a Language which was not then familiar with the People Dr. Mallet and what is hardly to be credited that most Learned Doctor has feigned a hundred monstrous Stories of the Hebrew Language of its Characters and Grammar of which Moses was the first Author But the Paraphrases of
regard to the Chaldee Language which was familiar to most of the Jews after their Return from Captivity There was at that time neither Chaldee or Syriac Paraphrase yet long before that the Rabbies as well in their Synagogues as Schools read the Scripture Text as often in the Chaldee as the Hebrew Language whence it might come to pass that several words in the Greek Translation were more adapted to the Idiom of the Chaldee or Syriac Tongue then the propriety of the Hebrew Speech The same Vossius invented another Fiction De Sybil orac asserting that until the Time when Aquila flourished there was no other Scripture read in the Synagogues of the Jews then the Version of the Septuagint in regard the Hebrew Language was so forgotten that the Rabbies themselves did not understand it But the 70 Interpreters as Vossius will have it Vossius's Errors flourished at what time the Hebrew Language was familiarly spoken But the Hebrew Language was no more a Familiar Speech in the time of the 70 Interpreters then it was when Aquila lived For that it was abolished after the Jews were carried Captive into Babilon and after their return it ceased to be any longer the Language of the Country How then could it be that it should only continue among the Rabbies who taught it publickly in the Synagogues and Schools or if it be true that till the Time of Aquila there was no other Scripture read in all the Synagogues of the Jews but the Greek Interpretation of the 70 Interpreters How came it to pass that Flavius Josephus expounded the Law of Moses in the Hebrew Language as Vossius affirms and moreover that the same Josephus the most learned of all the Hebrews of his Age set forth his History of the Jews in the Hebrew Language before he wrote it in Greek Yet if we may believe Vossius the Hebrew Language was then wholly lost If it were so why does he call it the Country Language of Josephus He 'l never agree with any who disagrees with Himself It is manifest also from the Writings of Josephus that the Jews of Palestine and the Territories adjacent spake the Hebrew Language which they learnt by practise without any Grammatical Rules which were not invented till after six Hundred as Vossius would have it but not till after nine Hundred Years and more In which sence as Vossius relates Josephus reports of himself that he excell'd in the learning of his Country all the rest of the Jews but that he learnt the Greek by Grammatical Instructions Now he calls his Country Learning the knowledge of the Hebrew Language the Law of Moses which the Hyerosolymitan Jews read in the Hebrew Language in their Synagogues Nevertheless if we believe Vossius who frequently contradicts himself Christ and his Apostles spake Greek in Judea Wherever saith he from the time of Alexander the Great the Grecians dilated their Conquests there also the Greek Language prevailed and a little after as in Egypt Asia and the rest of Syria so also in Judea there was no other Language spoken especially in great Towns and Cities Yes there was in Egypt besides the Greek the Coptick in Syria the Syriac in Judea the Judeac or Chaldee Syriac Vossius might have learnt from the Evangelists that the Language of the Jews who Inhabited Jerusalem which ought to be numbered among great Towns and Cities was the Chaldee or Syriac and that Christ did not speak to the Jews of that City in Greek but in Syriac Which Language the Jews who inhabited that Country afterwards retained tho corrupted as may be prov'd by the Example of the Talmud which is vulgarly called the Hierosolymitan and the Language also wherein that Book is written is called the Hierosolymitan But among the Babylonian Jews as at that time so a great while after the Chaldâ—e Language was most Familiar who have also their Talmud written in the same Language For the most Ancient Books of the Jews except some very few were not written in any other Language then the Impure Chalduic But there is no reason we should spend any longer time in refelling the Assertions of Vossius which have nothing in 'em of Probability Such as are those things which he delivers concerning the Jewish Traditions Voss de Sybill Orac. which he will have to be written in the Gâ—eek Language before Justinian's Raign and of the Book Misua which was translated about that time out of the Greek into the Hebrew because by an Edict of Justinians the Jews were prohibited to read the Book of Traditions in their Synagogues Therefore saith Vossius to elude that command of the Emperor the Book was Translated into Hebrew Risum teneatis Amici But if the Learned Gentleman had apply'd his mind to the Edict of Justinian The Hebrew Text read in the Synagogues of the Hellenists Justin Novel vel Constitut 146. he might have found that the Hebrew Text was read not only at Jerusalem but in the Synagogues of the Hellenists Which is apparently evident from the very words of the Justinian Law We are given to understand That some having only the knowledge of the Hebrew Tongue are desirous to make use of that in the Reading of the Scriptures that others will also take in the Greek Edition We therefore having considered these things believe them to do best who make use of the Greek Translation also in reading the Scriptures and every other Language purely which the place makes more convenient and fitter for the hearers This Law of Justinian supposes the Jews to be of two sorts of which some being wholly addicted to the Hebrew Language read the Scripture in their Synagogues in the Hebrew Language only others because they understood the Greek made use of the Greek Translation likewise By the Edict of Justinian they are permitted to read the Scripture not only in Greek but in any other Language whatsoever Therefore all the Hellenist Jews in obedience to the Law of Moses never read the Scriptures in their Synagogue in any other then in the Hebrew Language to which soon after their Domestic Native Language succeeded Nor is this any way contradicted by the Testimonies of the Antient Jews and Fathers from whom it is apparent that the Jews of Alexandria and all those other Jews to whom the Greek was familiar read the Greek Version of the 70. Interpreters in their Synagogues In like manner it appears that there were certain Synagogues in Jerusalem in which the Law of Moses and the Prophets were read in the Greek Language All these and many other Arguments that might be here collected together serve only to prove that the Reading of the Greek Interpretation was only added for exposition's sake to the reading of the Hebrew Text. As now in our days the Jews according to their ancient Custome every Sabbath day read both in Hebrew and Chaldee because that in the Ancient Synagogues there were both Readers and Expounders which Gift or
the pure Version Translated from the Hebrew into Syriac after the coming of Christ our Lord in the time of Addaeas the Apostle or as others will have it before him in the Time of Solomon the Son of David and Hiram Prince of Tyre and then the Septuagint Translated out of Greek a long time time after the coming of Christ Now though what Abul-Pharajius speaks concerning the double Version among the Syrians be true yet no man will deny but that what he relates concerning the time of the Translation out of Hebrew into Syriac is meerly fictitious Moreover because it was very insipid to attribute some of the Books to the time of King Solomon which were not made till long after his Raign therefore Jehudad Bishop of Adria restrain'd that assertion to the Books of Moses Joshua Ruth Judges Samuel Psalms Proverbs Ecclesiastes Canticles and Job but that the rest of the Books both of the Old and New Testament were Translated into Syriac by the care of Thaddaeus and others of the Apostles in the Raign of Abgar King of Edissa Though as the same Jesudad testifies some were of Opinion that the Old Testament was Translated into the Samaritan Dialect by a certain Samaritan Preist But â—hese things are rather Fabulous then Historical for that they translated only one Book the Pentateuch into their Language which little differs from the Samaritan Then the Syriac Language which the Apostles made use of especially in Judea is far differerent from the Syriac wherein the Old and New Testament was written In Caâ—al Script Chald. Ebed-Jesu Metropolitan of Soba reckons among the Syrian Writers a certain Person by name Mar-Aba or Lord Aba Sirnamed the Great who Translated the whole Testament out of Greek into Syriac But as Alraham Ecchellensis rightly observes before this Mar-Aba there was extant another Translation of the Old Testament from the Greek Septuagint Not in Ehed Jesu as may be prov'd from the Commentaries of Jacob Nisivensis and B. Ephrem It is manifest also that the Syrians translated into their Language a Greek Edition of the Septuagint with Daggers and Asterisks out of the Hexaples of Origen or else accommodated a Syrian Interpretation to Origen's Exemplar which before these times was read in the Churches of Syria The Learned Massius had several of those Books which he never made publick In Josâ—uah except the History of Joshua set forth by him in Greek with Asterisks and Streaks and other Grammatical Marks which Origen had made use of in his Edition The Greek and Latin Fathers also make mention of a Syrian Version of Scripture of which the Christians of Syria made use wherein they take notice of several Readings different from the vulgar Exemplars That Exemplar of the Syriac Version which was Printed in the Parisian and English Polyglotts was taken out of the Hebrew Context and in some places corrected according to the Greek Text of the Septuagint so that is not absolutely the same ancient Version which the Syrians call the Simple or Pure Version This Translation seems to have been made verbatim from the Jewish Exemplar so exactly it follows it in most places But the Syrian Transcribers who being ignorant of the Hebrew could not consult the Hebrew Text from whence that was derived committed many mistakes which nevertheless may be easily corrected without the help of Manuscripts However I do not believe the Syrian Transcribers to be as often under mistakes as they disagree from the Jewish Copy seeing that the Jewish Exemplars vary themselves But I speak of those Errors at present which are without Controversie the meer failings of the Amanuensis I admire the English in their Bibles took no notice of many which they let stand For to omit several others who could have slipp'd this Error in the Syriac Version in the 14th Chapter of Genesis where the Hebrew reads Gojim Nations the Syriac Geloje which the Latin Interpreters of the Syriac renders the People call'd Gelites So in the 22 Chapter where the Hebrew Examplar has it Moria the Syriac reads Omouroje which the Interpreter renders the Amorrhaeans as if there were any thing there mentioned of the Amorrhaeans But these Errors I attribute partly to the Scribes partly to those who pointed the Syriac Version in regard that points supply the place of Vowels as well in the Syriac as Hebrew In like manner Gen. c. 32. v. 32. the Syerans who understood not the Hebrew word Nasche or shrunk have made of the Word Genesio which the Latin Interpreter translates the female Sinew and instead of the Sinew that shrunk upon which the word Genesio appears in Ferrarius's Syriac Lexicon which nevertheless seems to be some corrupted Hebrew word and not to be numbered among the Syriac But I say no more of these nor of six 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 understood the Hebrew Thus Jos 19. in instead of King Basan the Syriac reads King Mathnin Which diversity proceeds from this that the Syrian Scribe did not distinguish between B and M. In like manner for Kiriath Jearim the Syriac reads Kiriath Naarin and the Latin renders it the City of Naarin So in the 7th Chapter of Judges the Syriac reads Nedubaal for Jerubaal and Chapter 9. Neptha for Jeptha all which might easily have been mended with many more of the same nature Wherefore as to the Syrian Exemplars that have been set forth in Print we may truly affirm what St. Jerom asserted concerning the Greek Copies That some of the words are not only not Hebrew but Barbarous and Sarmatic I could also enumerate those places where the Syriac Translators forsaking the Hebrew follows the Greek Version of the 70 Elders Which variety nevertheless of Interpretation is rather to be laid upon the Scribes who strove to make the Syriack Translation conformable to those other Exemplars either Syriac or Arakick which were Translated from the Greek Edition Thus Gen. 2. both in the Syriac and Greek we find it upon the sixth day whereas in the Hebrew it is the seventh day and the Animadversions of Jerom upon this place prove this Lection of the Hebrew Text to be the most Ancient In like manner Gen. 4. This Clause let us go into the field was Translated out of the Greek Version into the Syriac while St. Jerom testifies that in his time the same was not to be sound in the Hebrew Exemplars Lastly Gen. 8. Where mention is made of the Crow which Noah sent out of the Ark both in the Syriack and Greek we do not find that ever the Crow return'd but the negative particle is not to be found in the Hebrew Context nor was it there in St. Jeroms time as may be easily prov'd from his Writings From whence we infer that the Version which the Syrians call Pure from it 's ancient perfection is much degenerated and now to be call'd
rather mix'd then Pure Those variations which arise from the different marking of the Numbers I pass by as for example Judges 16. Where the Hebrew and the Vulgar read 1100. the Syriac Version numbers 1300. 1 Sam. c. 6. for 50070. in the Hebrew Greek and Latin the Syriac reckons 5070. But no man can be ignorant that there are frequent variations of numbers in all Books of the same nature There are other Examples of different Readings of more moment in the Syriac Translation which altogether alter the Sence such are some in the Book of Joshua especially in the division of their Allotments to the several Tribes Another Alteration there is in the Syriac Exemplar where all the Inscriptions of the Psalms are left out on purpose to put others in their places The reason of which seems to be for that anciently the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Argument of the Psalm was prefix'd at the beginning of every Psalm Whence it came to pass that the Hebrew Inscriptions of the Psalms which did not explain the Psalms to the liking of the Syrians were omitted and others added by the Syriac Rabbies As to the Syriac Language and it's various Dialects I shall say nothing at present in regard that many have already learnedly handl'd that Subject We are only to discourse of those things which concern the Syriac Version Therefore what before we have observ'd touching the Jewish Exemplars to which the Rabbies of Tiberias added the Points that supply the place of Vowels that is now to be noted as to the Syriac Exemplars to which the Syrian Doctors have added the Pointed Vowels which now appear in their Coppies Therefore Walton is in an Error who believes that Gabriel Sionita the Maronite of Mount Lebanon was the first that inserted pointed Vowels into the Syriac Exemplar He was the first saith he speaking of this Gabriel who pointed it and added the Latin Interpretation of the same For before all the Manuscripts were either destitute of points or if any word or vowel happen'd to be pointed in another it was omitted one Syllable pointed and another naked as we see at this day in the Manuscript Copies That this is partly true I will not deny for that the Syriac written Copies some have more some have less points at the pleasure of the Transcribers who nevertheless seldom omit the Principal Yet I have met with Manuscripts that have been exactly pointed Abraham Echâ—llensis In Ebed Jesu a Maronite of Mount Lebanon testifies also that he had by him some Books written in the Syriac Language above 300 or 400 years before compleatly furnish'd with all the Points Then again in most Copies they never omit any Points but only such as are of no use in reading which may be easily supply'd by the Reader As we find in the Syriac Edition of the New Testament which was first publish'd by Vuidmanstadius wherein some Points are omitted which are of little use And therefore the Industry of Gabriel Sionite a most learned person is not so much to be applauded for his adding points to the Copies but he is rather to be commended for this for that with great labour and toyl he corrected the most of the Errors which are extant in those Manuscripts though that Edition does not seem to be so absolute and perfect neither Of the Arabic Translations The Arabick Translations seem to be of much less Authority which are read at this day by the Easiern Christians Nor do they seem to be so ancient as the Syriac For the most of them were made publick among the Syrians as well Jacobites and Maronites as Nestorians when the Syriac Language ceas'd to be familiar when they were subdu'd by the Saracens who introduc'd the Arabic among them The Coptic also or the Christian's that inhabit Egypt had their Bibles written in the ancient Coptic Language which they still retain but because that Coptic Language was known to very few there was a necessity to make new Arabick Versions which might be understood by all So that the most of their Books which are made use of in their Churches are written both in Coptic and Arabic Therefore it is very probable that the Syrians Translated the holy Scripture out of the Syriac into â—â—abic such as were those Arabick Exemplars at the end whereof we find the Arabic Version to have been Translated from the Hebrew that is from that Syrian Translation which the Syrian's call unmixt By the same reason we might affirm that the Exemplars of the Arabick Versions which follow the Greek Copies of the 70 were not so much Translated from the Greek of the 70 Interpreters as according to the Syriac which was Translated from the Greek though it be probable that the Sect of the Melchites took their Version from the Greek Copies as they did most of those other Books of which they make use But whether there were any Version of the Scriptures before that time I shall not now enquire it being certain that most of those Versions now us'd by the people that inhabit the Eastern Regions are not now the same which in former times were made use of in the same Country And indeed should that Arabick Version publish'd in the Parisian and English Polyglots be throughly examin'd it would be found very imperfect full of faults and Errors Thus the Arabic Book of Joshuah though toward the end it may be said to be Translated out of the Hebrew yet it appears to be a mixture of Greek and Hebrew or rather Syriac Besides the Author of that Translation many times shews himself a Paraphraser not an Interpreter and he makes no scruple of altering the Sence of his Text. In the Book of Chronicles we find the names of Greece Turkie Chorasan Sclavonia France Cyprus and the like Yet all the Errors of that Version are not to be imputed to the Arabian Translator the most without doubt being committed by the Scribes Thus Jos 11. We read in the Arabic Version Nabin King of Caesarea whereas in the Hebrew Text and ancient Translations it is Jabin King of Hasor In the same Arabic Version Joshua is said to have assail'd the City of Caesarea which was the Metropolis of several other Cities and Judges 3. instead of the Hebrew word Pesilim which signifies Idols the Arabic reads Palestine Lastly some Errors have crept into the Arabic Exemplars through the incertainty of the pointed Vowels For the points are no less defective in the Arabic then in the Hebrew and Syriac The Coptic Versions The Coptic Versions of the Bible which were anciently made by those Christians that inhabited Egypt seem to be of more Credit then the Arabic For they carry a semblance of more Antiquity And if we may believe Kircher who had by him some Exemplars of those Versions we may look upon 'em to be as ancient as the Council of Nice But not to content about their Antiquity certain it is that they were read in the Churches
of Egypt long before the Arabian which were taken from them The word Coptus or Cophtus seems to derive it's Original from a City of the same Name which was heretofore the Metropolis of Thebais of which both Strabo and Plutarch make mention And very probable it is that that same Coptic Language was the ancient Language of the Egyptians not pure but having some mixture of the Greek especially from the time that they were under the Dominion of the Macedonians so that they chang'd the ancient Characters of their Language into the Greek which they partly retain to this day But in regard that Language surceas'd by degrees to become familiar and only remain'd among those who had something of Learning and Education the Egyptian Rabbies added to those Books which were then read in their Churches in the Coptic Language the Arabic Explanation after they became subject to the Saracens They have also Lexicons and Grammars for that Coptic Language which Kircher publish'd in Print by which we find that the Ancient Coptic Tongue besides the Greek words which it had learnt under the Graecian Princes retain'd also something of the Arabic But no man ought to doubt but that the Coptic Version was taken from the Greek Translation of the 70 Interpreters in regard that the Jews of old some of the Syrian Churches excepted always read the Hebrew Text or Versions taken from thence The Ethiopic Versions As to the Ethiopic Version of the Bible written in the Ethiopic Language we shall make some few observations This Version as all other Books which are read in the Ethiopic Churches was Translated out of the Coptic into the Ethiopic Tongue Therefore the Ethiopic Bibles are the same with the Coptic render'd only into Ethiopic Neither do the Ethiopians acknowledge any other Patriarch but only him who assumes the Title of Patriarch of Alexandria being an Egyptian and the Ceremonies of their Church are borrow'd from the Egyptians or Coptics But the ancient Ethiopic Language wherein their Bible is written has something of mixture both of Hebrew Arabic and Chaldee Especially of the Chaldee so that the Ethiopians call their Language Chaldaic or Babylonian as if it were the same with the pure an ancient Babylonic from which however it differs very much But the modern Ethiopic now familiar among the Ethiopians differs little from it Nevertheless they do not use any Points like Hebrews Chaldeans Syrians and Arabians but every Letter makes a Consonant and a Vowel which is peculiar to that Nation The Persian Veâ—sions There seems to be nothing at all at present remaining of that same ancient Persian Version which beyond all Controversie was taken from the Greek Translation of the Seventy The ancient Persian Language also has admitted much of mixture by reason of it's being jumbl'd with the Arabic from whence it has borrow'd all it's terms of Arts and Sciences together with the Arabic Characters the ancient Persian Letters being lost and no where to be seen but in some Antique Copies But as for that same Version of some part of the Sacred Scripture publish'd in our Age it does not seem worthy of any great esteem as being but of late years The Armeniâ—n Translation If we will believe the Armenian Doctors the Version of the Bible which they now read in their Churches in the Armenian Language was not made by John Chrysostome as some believe out of the Greek into the Armenian but by some Doctors of their own Nation who studied the Greek Language more especially by one Moses Sirnam'd the Grammarian and one David vulgarly call'd the Philosopher and this happen'd to be much about John Chrysostomes time The Armenians also deny that John Chrysostome was the Inventor of the Armenian Characters which they attribute to a certain Hermite whose name was Mescop who invented them in the City of Balu not far from Euphrates who also liv'd much about the time that Chrysostome flourish'd But because there were hardly any Exemplars of those Bibles to be found entire and those very dear to boot in our Age Jacob Caractri Patriarch of the Armenians sent into Europe Vschan Yuschuavanchi a Bishop that by his care and industry the Ancient Bible might be printed Whereupon the Old and New Testament was Printed in the Armenian Language and Character at Amsterdam anno 1664. But certain it is that this Armenian Translation and I had it from the mouth of the Bishop himself was taken from the Greek Version of the 70 Interpreters The Versions of the Muscovites Georgians and other people Lastly the Muscovites Iberians or Georgians a people inhabiting the Regions of Câ—olchis have also their Translations of the Holy Scripture and it is not long since that the Bible was printed in the Muscovitic Language and Character But there is no question to be made but that they were all taken from the Greek in regard those Nations deriv'd their Christian Faith and their Ecclesiastic Ceremonies from the Greeks And thus much concerning the Bibles made use of by the Eastern Nations CHAP. XXII Of the later Versions of the Bible and first of all of Latin Versions done by Catholick Divines The Bibles of Cardinal Ximenius THOUGH Francis Ximenius of Seneros Cardinal and Arch-Bishop of Toledo has given us no other Latin Version of the Hebrew Text in his Complutensian Bible than the vulgar or that of St. Jerom yet he may be deservedly rank'd amongst the Catholic Interpreters of the Holy Scriptures For first of all he publish'd in that excellent work the Chaldee Paraphrase upon the five Books of Moses with a verbal Version into Latin as also the Seventies Greek Version of all the Books of the Old Testament with an interlineary Latin Translation In the year 1515. And because every one has not the perusal of the Complutensian Bibles it may not be improper in this place to give some account of the design of that learned Cardinal in this new Edition of the Bible He affirms in his proaemium to Leo the tenth that every Language has it's peculiar Idioms and Properties of expression which the most accurate Translation is not able to render and especially the Hebrew and a little after subjoins these words †In his Prologue to Leo the tenth Moreover wheresoever the Latin Translators differ or a reading is suspected to be corrupt we must have recourse to the Original in which the Scriptures were writ as St. Jerom and Austin and other Ecclesiastical Writers direct so that the sincerity of the Versions of the Old Testament must be examin'd by the Hebrew and the New by the Greek Copies But who would believe that this Cardinal who speaks so great things of the Hebrew should by and by in another Epistle to his Readers so basely detract from it so that we have reason to suspect these passages were foisted in by others We have plac'd says the Cardinal The same Cardinal in his Prologue to the Reader the Latin
was nothing formless and darkness covered the abyss and that the Spirit of God hover'd over the waters God said let there be Light doing it word by word out of the Latin Translation wherefore Theodore Beza mightily complained of it as likewise of the Latin and inveighs bitterly against the Divines of Basil that they should suffer Castalio's French and Latin Bible to be published at that place condemning both those Versions as prophane and the Author himself as no great Proficient in the Hebrew which Beza tells you he Learned from the most Expert Hebricians tho he himself had no skill in the Language And yet Castalio was not so meer a Child in the Hebrew as not to outstrip the Geneva Translators which he did in several places hundreds whereof I omit tho I cannot pass by the Hebrew word Tannanim in the beginning of Gen. render'd by the Latin cete grandia and by those of Geneva Grandes baleines which this Gentleman translated very well and most significantly grands poissonnars The Spanish Translation Here I had almost forgot the Bible Translated into Spanish by Cassiodorus de Reyna and Cyprianus Valerius Reformadoes The one of these men telleth you in his Preface that he followed Pagninus and the Jews The other Gentleman sheweth Himself not so much a Translator as an Animadverter upon Cassiodorus his Endeavours To speak plainly neither of these pretending Translators understood the Hebrew That there was a Translation of the Bible done in Italian by the Protestants may be probable The Italian Translation since Robertus Olivetanus speaketh of two Bibles in Italian whereof he was an Eye-witness That the Author of the one was Antonius Brucciolus we have before observed tho the Author of the other Translation is not yet known CHAP. XXVII Of the Polyglott Bibles BIBLES have the appellation of Polyglott from the several Tongues wherein they are penned Now the Jews of Constantinople are said to have published two Copies of Moses his Law in serveral Languages the first whereof gives you the Hebrew Text the Chaldee paraphrasely Onkelosius the Targum or Arabic Paraphrase by R. Saadius Sirnamed Gaon or the excellent and the Persian Version by Tausus The other presents you with not only the Hebrew Texts and Chaldee Paraphrase but a Translation in the vulgar Greek and another in Spanish and both of them writ in Hebrew Characters with the Rabbinical points which supply the places of so many Vowels And some points may be found both in R. Saadias and Tausus his Persic Translation though it may be worth our while to observe that the Jews who pointed R. Saadias his Translation did therein have a greater regard to the vulgar Arabic Translation than the true and Grammatical which may be seen by the Alcoran and made apparent from these first words in Genesis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Compare these with R. Saadias 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 published at Paris and you may easily see the difference of the Judaical method of pointing from the true and Grammatical And I will give you a small Specimen of the Vulgar Greek and Spanish Translations because you cannot meet their true Copies in any Europaean Libraries drawing my example from the 6 Version of the 1 Chap. of Deuteron placing the Hebrew as an unprejudiced impartial Arbitrator between the Spanish on the on side and the vulgar Greek on the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first Polyglott was published by Fran. Ximeniuâ— of Sineros Cardinal and Archbishop of Toledo and was vulgarly called the Complutensian Bible Here you may take a prospect of the Hebrew Text the septuagint and a Latin Translation supposed to be St. Jeroms together with a Chaldee Paraphrase upon the Pentateuch Now the reason of this Illustrious Cardinals attempt is laid down in his Preface to Pope Leo the 10th since that every Language hath its proverbial proprieties whose full energie may not be expressed by the most compleat Interpretation which more especially happens in the Hebrew Tongue it must likewise come to pass that where there is so great variety of Latin Books and so many false readings there must then an appeal be made to the Original Language as St. Jerom St. Austin and other Ecclesiastical Writers are pleased to tell us so that the right reading of the Books of the Old Testament is to be tryed by the Touchstone of the Hebrew-truth and those of the New-Testament by the Greek Copies and yet in another of his Prefaces to the Reader he seems to deny the Hebrew verity to recriminate the Jewish Books an useful method whereby he might with lesser difficulty bring in vogue the Old Translations of the Church for he declares that when he had placed St. Jeroms Latin Translation between the Greek and Hebrew Tongues he fancied he beheld our Saviour or the Catholick Church between two Thieves Certainly a most unworthy similitude and not fit to come out of the Lips of so eminent a Cardinal touching the Chaldee Paraphrase He saith he only published that part which related to the Books of Moses and as for the remainder upon the rest of the Old Testament he looked upon it as corrupt and unworthy to be bound up with the Holy Scripture This is the method observed in the Complutensian Bible and the Author Cardinal Ximenius is to be commended that he did not compose a New Translation different from St. Jeroms and yet would certainly have been more applauded if he had taken notice of the places where the Translatour follows St. Jerom a little too hard and deviates from the Hebrew Text. For truly Criticks go about to remark that St. Jerom's Translation as we have it now is not all of a make but hath some little mixture of the Ancient or Italian Herein I quote the most Learned Cardinal that he rectified the faulty Latin Edition which yet he had the happiness to perform in general namely where he endeavoured to correct the Latin Translator without the help of Latin Books neither came he well off in reforming the Greek Copies with the Hebrew though he solemly declares he had nothing to do with the Vulgar surreptitious Copies but the most ancient and least faulty He published a Book of the words in the New Testament and professes that his sole aim herein was to present the Reader with the bare Letters only without spirit or tone He saith 't was an easie case to mannage That the ancient Greeks never troubled their heads with such like punctillâ—'s Now why he did venture upon the Septuagint after the same method he giveth this reason namely that it was bare Translation and not Text as is the Greek Edition of the New Testament In fine Cardinal Ximenius superadded to these his abovementioned works an Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary which he did not take up upon trust at the Shops of the Rabby's
but had it at the best hand of the Ancient Interpreters Arias Montanus at the expences and by the Authority of Philip the 2d King of Spain republished the Complutensian Polyglot with no small augmentation which in process had the spacious Title of Kings Phillips Bible A Book which beside the Hebrew the Septuagint and St. Jerome's Latin Translation of the Complutensian Edition gives you a fair prospect of the Chaldee Paraphrase upon the remainder of those Books in the old Copy which Cardinal Ximenius gave to the Library at Complutensian together with the Syriac Translation of the New Testament done into Latin Neither would Arias Montanus influenced by Ximenius his example suffer his Book to contract acquaintance with any Translation save that of St. Jerome's and yet that a Latin Translation might not be wanting to render the Hebrew Text verbatim he inserted in the end of his Book San. Pagninus his Latin Translation with his own animadversions whereby the Hebrew might be better understood This grand elaborate and princely undertaking tho it was approved of by the Divines of Spain Lovaenium and other learned and pious Men nay even by the Universal Bishop himself Gregory the 13th yet it groaned under the common fate of all Books was carp'd at and pinched by the men of Leeth These were the detracting sort of People who objected that Arias Montanus had put in Execution a most bold rash and nefarious attempt in daring to publish that corrupt and monstrous Paraphrase which Ximenius had ordered to be laid up in the Colledge Library at Complutensia And there were some Jews who thinking that the Chaldee Paraphrase was a great Pillar to keep up the superstitions of their Religions wished all health and happiness to King Philip the 2d a Defender as they supposed of their Rites and Ceremonies In the mean time one Franciscus Lucus of Bruges a great Divine and a man of vast Learning took up the Cudgels ägainst these impertinent Detractors and made an Apology for the Chaldee Paraphrase Besides Arias Montanus declares that Cardinal Ximenius himself had thoughts of publishing the same Chaldee Paraphrase and that he had thoughts of adding a Latin Translation to it only putting out the Fables Doubtless that princely Work deserves to be had in estimation with all Divines though it be defective in some particulars as carrying along with it all those deformities which we took notice of before in the Conplutensian Bible For the Greek and Latin Copies are the same that were published by Cardinal Ximenius Arias Montanus did not so much reform San. Pagninus his Latin Version as he did corrupt and spoil it for pressing the Hebrew which too closely he frequently commits toto casu and making a great noise about a little Sense does often miss of the proper import of the words Besides Arias caused a better method and more Copious Index to be published as containing more Lexicons and Grammars than that of the Complutensian Bible though many unnecessary things might be left out which make nothing for his purpose The liberal expences of Cardinal Ximenius and Phillip the Second were far exceeded by an Eminent Person of this Age Michael Le Jay of Paris who undertaking to Publish the Polyglot Bible at his own charge spent his whole Patrimony in Printing of it before he had finish'd so great and wonderful a work First then they took care to have all that was already extant in the King's Bible reprinted in a fairer Character and to these he joyn'd the Samaritan Books viz. the Hebrew Samaritan Pentateuch with the Samaritan Translation and the Syriack and Arabick Versions of the Old Testament distinguished by points with their Latin Interpretation a thing scarce credible ever to have been attempted In this business he was assisted by a very Learned man Gabriel of Sion that came from Mount Libanus in the Holy-Land and in some few Volumns by Abraham an Ecchellensian one of the same Nation But that part which contains the observations of several worthy men upon the various Editions of the Bible is wanting in this work and through the negligence of those that were intrusted with it it happen'd that the Copies of the Greek Translation by the Seventy Interpreters and the Latin one by St. Jerom were both composed anew the very same with those in the Kings Bible the Greek Edition after the Vatican Pattern though corrected and amended was omitted and the Copies of the common Edition were laid aside though they had been by Commissions from the Popes strictly examined after the most ancient and best approved Books and that by the Hands of several Excellent Persons and judicious Criticks However I pass by those faults which occasioned by the Transcribers oversight in the Syriack and Arabick Books do yet in great part remain Besides that the Latin Expositors not perfectly understanding the Syriack and Arabick words have often sailed in expressing the sence Lastly to this vast Work are perfixed certain Prefaces which recommend it's usefulness But in this the brave Mr. Le Jay proves his own Enemy for depending totally upon such men as were partly byass'd in their Opinions by prejudice especially John Morin otherwise a man of competent Learning he extolls the Jewish Books and sticks not to prefer them before the ancient Translations of the Church but what seems scarce 0 credible he possitively asserts that it ought to be granted as a certain and undoubted truth that that common Edition which passes about in the vulgar Tongue of the Catholick Church is the true and genuine Original of Holy Scripture But the Fathers themselves at the Council of Trent durst not pass any such decree concerning the Latin Books To no purpose has that Liberal Gentleman drained his Purse in Publishing such voluminous peices of the Polyglot Bible if it appear that the Latin comprehends the proper and Primitive Scripture and that we must have recourse to him as the true Fountain In like manner vindicating the interpretation of the Seventy Elders he draws an Argument solid enough in his Judgment from a Mahometan Author who as to matter of Chronology rejected the Hebrew Books of the Jews and Samaritans and adhered to the Greek Interpreters from whence Mr. Le Jay concludes that the Seventy Interpreters were in the highest esteem not only amongst the Christians but Mahometans too Indeed 't is very probable that Mr. Le Jay to credit the antiquity of the Arabick Versions which he himself first published would not stick to say that by the help thereof St. Jerom had restored the seven or eight hundred Verses of Job which were lacking in the old Translation and this his assertion he confirms by St. Jerom's own Testimony who before his Translation of the Book of Job had premised that in it were missing about seven or eight hundred Verses and that in compiling it he had not followed any of the ancient Translators but had collected sometimes the words sometimes the sence and often both at once out
much more happily then the Seventy Interpreters as being assisted by their Labours and Translation as also with the Versions of others as Aquila Symmachus Theodotian by which means he was able to discern the failings and Errors of those men Nor indeed do any who have any thing of Greek and Hebrew Learning think otherwise of Jerom unless it be single Dr. Vossius who in imitation of Ruffinus believes that St. Jerom undertook a new Version of the Hebrew Text with a resolution altogether Jewish and pre-engag'd by the Rabbies For that same Prophetick Spirit attributed to the Greek Interpreters which our Ancestors so much ador'd is long since vanish'd by the Authority of St. Jerow himself But let us return to the business in hand Vossius furiously maintains that there is nothing of solidity in the Expositions of the late Rabbys and their Traditions propagated only by the Ear chiefly induc'd by this Argument for that Traditions which are propagated by the Ear rarely last above two or three Ages If it be so how came it to pass that the Seventy Interpreters after the Hebrew Language being lost for two Ages could make such a Version of the Hebrew Codex in all things so absolute as Vossius feigns it Questionless some will say he avers nothing wonderful as to this particular while he believes them to be Prophets But whom shall we believe Vossius affirming the Greek Interpreters to have been Prophets or Jerome denying it But you will object that St. Jerome was half a Rabby who durst presume to make a new Translation contrary to the general consent of the Church and that Vossius is a Sybillist who has rais'd up new Prophets and Sooth-sayers till now unknown nor ever heard of That same Jewish and Rabbinical Version of Jerome has had many Applauders Conspicuous for their Piety and Learning But there is not one in our Age who embraces Vossius's Judgment for receiving the only Version of the Seventy excepting some Disciples of Socinus who greedily swallowed his Opinion It will not be amiss to inspect the Matter a little more narrowly and to manifest the Nature of Tradition upon which the reading of the Hebrew Context depends I grant that matters of Religion chiefly which belong to Doctrine more remote from the Sences cannot be preserved for many Ages by the help of Tradition without the assistance of writing But as to matter of Discipline and Ceremonies there is a quite contrary Judgment to be made for that those things happen to be in use every day And for this sort of Tradition and Ancient Fathers of the Church give their suffrages Now I say there is the same Qualification of Languages which though they become obsolete and cease to be Natural yet among the Doctors in the School preserve their ancient Vigour and Efficacy and to this sort of Tradition we refer the Tradition of the Hebrew Language among the Jews Hence without doubt it came to pass that in these modern times the Samaritans have the same Books of the Law of Moses which the Jews have some small matter excepted And from that Tradition it comes to pass that not only the Eastern and Western Jews consent among themselves about the reading of the Hebrew Context but also they who bear the Name of Carraim among them because 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 rashly to be exploded with the Carraeans who reject most of the Jewish Traditions entirely embrac'd Here I could heap together many other things taken out of the Jewish Books by which they prove that their Ancestors ever since the times of Esdras and Zorobabel had Schools as well among the Babylonians as among the Hierosolymitans But I forbear to insist upon these things and many other of the same Nature because they do not please the Palate of the most learned Vossius who does not by any means relish Rabbinism I am not ignorant that many Jews especially they who are of the Grammarians Form who believe that not only the Sacred Books were variously dispersed and miserably mutilated as Kimchi and Effodaeus were of Opinion but that the Language was almost lost and with these those Jews who are of the Sect of the Carraeans agree Aaron Ben Joseph praef com in pent For thus writes Aaron Ben Joseph upon this Argument The Israelites were exiles out of their own in a forreign Land and Vision and Prophesie were sealed up and there wanted but little but that the Hebrew Language had been quite lost Then certain wise Israclites rose up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to whom God gave his Spirit and they handed this Scripture to Vs which contains twenty four Books From whence it is manifest that the Hebrew Tongue was not anciently utterly lost though after the return of the Jews from Babylon it was no longer Natural at Jerusâ—lem but only preserved by the Doctors of the Law Thus Esdras performing the Office of a most skilful Scribe is said to have read the Law from a Pulpit before a multitude of Men and Women And châ—â—stâ— from that time the Jews deduce their Paraphrasers Nehem. c. 8. who were to explain the words of the Law in the Language familiarly spoken that they might be understood by all the Auditory Nor do I believe that the Greek Version of the Seventy of which afterwards the Jews feign'd such miraculous Stories had any other Original whose Idle Dreams Vossius so greedily followed as if those Jews were only to be believ'd by the Christians Then again in the Synagogue and Schools belonging to such places where the Greek Tongue was natural there the Greek Translation of the Alexandrinian Jews was read which whithin a short space of time reach'd the rest of the Jews who spake the Greek Language as being the Language of those that were in power However the reading of the Hebrew Text was not left off in whose assistance the Greek Translation was only made use of Neither will Vossius deny that who asserts that both Josephus and Philo who was an Alexandrinian were learned in the Hebrew When then was the Hebrew Language lost was it in the time of Aquila whom Vossius calls a most impertinent Interpreter Hâ—wever he acknowledges that in the time of Origen there were famous Hebrew Schools at Alexandria and in the time of St. Jerom at Tyberias Now that the Schools of Tyberias were kept up after St. Jeroms Death there 's no Man but well knâ—ws to which at length the Family of the Criticks call'd Mazeries was well known And they were call'd Mazorites because they bounded and regulated the Mazora or Tradition of reading the Hebrew Context then receiv'd by all the Jews by the help of certain Marks or Tittles which serv'd instead of Vowels This is the Jewish Tradition to which Simon attributes most credit but
Learned Gentleman adds another Fiction that this manner of Writing that is in Greek Letters was in use among the Jews for almost a Thousand Years that is to say to the time of the Masorites who almost six Hundred Years before neglecting this double manner of Writing imitating the Arabians and Syrians introduc'd Points and Tittles which they made use of instead of Vowels But as to that 't is now eight Hundred Years ago that R. Saadias wrote certain little Treatises of Grammer whence it appears that before those times Point-Vowels were added to the Exemplars of the Bible To what end does he mention the Mazorites whom I do not deny to have been the Inventors of points when they themselves liv'd long before R Saadias But saies Vossius that points are a late Invention is manifest from hence for that there appears no Book no Monument of them that is more ancient than five Hundred Years By the same reason I might say that before six Hundred Years ago there were no Hebrew Exemplars of the Bible which are not to be found in our age which pretend to a higher Antiquity But I blush to spend more time in refuting these things which are so openly false F. Simon has produc'd Monuments much more Ancient wherein the Points are to be seen After this Vossius violently Assails the Jews and infers that they have adapted wrong and depraved Vowels to most words from the proper Names which we frequently meet with in the Gospels and other Writings of the Antient Jews That of necessity saith the Learned Gentleman the modern points were added sillily and injudiciously or that Christ and all the Apostles and Antient Jews were ignorant of the Names of the Prophets and their Fore-Fathers But the most excellent Vossius does not observe that those very Names are pronounc'd and written at this very day by the Jews of various Nations after a different manuâ—â— The Italians write 'em one way the Germans another the Spaniards another way The Spaniards come nearest the Ancient manner of Writing and Pronouncing because their pronunciation is more pure But the German Jews are farther off then all the rest from the true manner of Writing and Pronouncing which is manifest from the Books which they have severally written in the Itaiian Spanish 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 arises from the vulgar Speech draws along with it the errours of Spelling and Writing Whence it comes to pass that most of the Hebrecians who learn Hebrew from Buxtorf's Hebrew Grammar pronounce the Hebrew words very ill and after the German manner All which has been observ'd in few words by Leo Modena who in favour of his own Nation prefers the Pronunciation of the Italians before all the rest Leo Mod. Hist de Rit Heb. p. c. 1. Nella Provincia di essa lingua Hebraea saith that great Master sono talmonte poi tra di loro differenti che a pena sono intesi Tedeschi da gli Italianie Levantini Nevi e chi piu chiaro e conforme alle regole della vera Grammatica favâ—llâ—che Italiani In the Province of the Hebrew Language they are so absolutely different from one another that the Dutch are hardly understood by the Italians and Easterly People Nor are there any who speak more clearly and conformably to the Rules of true Grammar then the Italians That this was the chance of all Languages we may learn from the Ancient Grammarians And this Argument has Erasmus most excellently handl'd in his Dialogue concerning the true Pronunciation of the Greek and Latin Tongues where he observes that Maximilian Caesar being congratulated by the Embassadors of several Nations all that heard them believ'd that not one Oration was pronounc'd according to the Latin Pronunciation but every one according to the vulgar Pronunciation of the Country The same Erasmus relates that the Oration of a French-man no bad Latin neither was pronounc'd so much after the French Mode that the standers by believ'd him rather to speak French then Latin To which Oration of the French a Court Doctor answer'd so much after the German manner that no German could have pronounced his own Mother Tongue more German like For he began thus Cesarea Mâ—ghest as pene caudet fidere foâ— horationem festram lipenter audifit instead of Cesarea Majestas bene gaydet videre vos Orationem vestram libenter audivit His Caesarean Majesty rejoyces much to see you and has gladly heard your Oration Not much unlike to this do the German Jews pronounce and write the Hebrew Language after the German manner and thence has arisen that strange difference in proper Names which is to be observ'd in the Versions of Paginius Munster and other Interpreters if they be compared with the Gospels and other Antient Writings of the Jews But now the Learned Gentleman contends that the Exposition of the Hebrew words becomes uncertain by reason of the defect of the Vowels and believes F. Simon to be of the same opinion who also believed that thence it happen'd that the Rabbins affirmed that the Hebrew Codex's had 7â— Faces True it is indeed that Simon does attribute in part the diversity of Interpreters of the Hebrew Context to the inconstancy of the Vowels sometimes added sometimes omitted But he explains after a different manner the 72 Faces which according to the opinion of the Jews the Hebrew Codex's seem to wear Nor is there any reason that Vossius should so frequently object that Proverb of the Jews which he seems not to have understood For one pure Sence of Scripture is no less approv'd by the Jews then by the most Learned Vossius But under the Name of 72 Faces are comprehended those Allegorical Senses which are as many as there are idle oscitant Rabbies to invent'em it is a common saying not only among the Jews of the Caraean Sect but among the Rabbinists who have any Learning or Judgment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Scripture does not go beyond the Literal Sense which the Learned Aben Ezra professes to be that which he always embraces scorning the Seventy Two Faces or Allegorical and Cabbalick Senses which most of the Jews superstitiously observe that inhabit the Eastern Counties Therefore to me they seem more silly than the Jews themselves who have collected sundry Monsters of Fables out of the Books of the Rabbins to bring an Odium upon those circumcis'd Doctors The Talmudic Books and the ancient Medrâ—schim or Allegorical Commentaries are full of those portentous Stories In this Sense the Rabbies say that Moses did not dye That while R. Simeon Ben Jochai liv'd and all the Reign of Ezekiah there was no Rain-bow because they were just men That when Jonathan began his Chaldee Paraphrase the Birds that flew over
all those things which are related by Samuel to his Deaeth many passages declare that they could not be written by him For it is hardly to be believ'd that he writing of the Transactions of his own time and of which he was an eye-Witness should write these words Therefore neither the Priest of Dagon 1 Sam. 5.5 nor any that come into the House of Dagon tread upon the Threshold of Dagon to this day In like manner neither could those things be related by Samuel concerning the Ark in the next Chapter where it is said and the Stone remains in the Field of Joshua the Beshemite to this Day To this we add That Samuel could not be the Author of that Clause which we find in his History Heretofore to every one spake that went to take Counsel of God for he that is at this day call'd a Prophet was then call'd a Seer However notwithstanding all these Objections it is probable that the History which goes under Samuel's Name was written by himself till the Relation of his Death And as for those things which are alleadg'd to the contrary that there was a review of some Scribe or Prophet perhaps Jeremiah as some think who added some things for Explanations sake tho' others choose rather to add these Additions to Esdras and his Collegiates The Syrians also affirm That the first and second Book of Kings were call'd the third and fourth in the Latin Versions were written by a certain Priest whose Name was Johanan As for the Book of Chronicles Sal. Comment in Paralip Kimchi praef in paralip or Parilapomena by whom they were Collected there is some reason to question Most of the Jews will have Esdras to be the Author of them which R. Solomon and R. David Kimchi asserts to be the Tradition of their fore-Fathers making also Aggai Zachary and Malachi assistants to Esdras Yet not so that they should be said to write the History anew but only to have reformed the Antient History of the Kings of Israel and Judah rejecting those things which did not seem so proper for their purpose and adding some things which were omitted in other Books of Sacred Scripture from whence they deriv'd the Name of Paralipomena among the Greeks which word afterwards crept into the Latin Wherefore St. Jerom not improperly calls the Book of Chronicles an Epitome of the Old Testament In Epist ad Paul Nevertheless he reports the Opinion of the Jows concerning this thing with whom Grotius also agrees who believes these Books to have been written by Esdras and by the Jews to have been call'd Dibre Hajamin the words of the Days or taken out of the Kings Diaries As for the Book of Esdras the greatest part of it was written by himself as the Transactions therein contain'd do manifestly declare But Nehemiah confesses himself in the Front of the Book to be the Author of the second Book of Esdras The Book of Psalms is by the Jews call'd Sepher Techillim or the Book of Praises which sometimes St. Austin seems to believe to have been all of David's composing nor does he scruple to ascribe those to David which it is manifest were written long after his time because he was both a Musitian and a Prophet Nor could the Names of Asaph Jeduthun and other Musitians said to be the Authors of some of the Psalms beat off St. Austin from that Opinion because that David might supply the Matter which afterwards they polish'd and set to several Tunes But St. Jerome is more in the right who asserts the Psalms to be theirs whose Names they bear in the Titles that is Davids Asaph's Jeduthuns the Sons of Core's Eman's the Ezrahite Moses's Solomon's and theirs whom Esdras comprehends in the first Volume with St. Jerom also most of the Jews agree And the Prudent Aben Ezra affirms That the Psalms were made by them whose Names are prefix'd Praef. in Psalm though there are some who have no Name at all But in this that Rabby corrects St. Jerome because he does not absolutely pronounce the Psalms to be made by them whose Names are prefix'd but that those which carry the Names of David and Solomon were either theirs or compos'd from them by the Musitians Yet Christ seems to attribute the whole Book of Psalms to David where he says And David himself says in the Book of Psalms But Christ only spake according to the common Opinion of the Jews for they call'd them generally David's Psalms not that they thought them to have been all compil'd by him for the Matter it self speaks the contrary but because he was the chiefest of all the Authors and for that he is call'd the most excellent Singer of Israel Yet the above-cited Aben Ezra writes that there are some of the Rabbys who attribute the whole Psalter to David and acknowledge him to be a Prophet The Book which is called the Book of Proverbs is generally said to be Solomons whose Name it carries at the beginning though the whole Method of that Work seems to demonstrate that it was nothing but a Collection of Sentences which being first gather'd together by Solomon and others were afterwards embody'd in one Volume That Solomon composed many Parables those words prove which he speaks of himself Eccles 12 9. And because the Preacher was wise he still taught the people knowledge he sought out and set in order many Proverbs which are number'd up to be above three thousand in the third Book of Kings of which at this day no more are extant then what we find in the Holy Writings C. 4.32 To the first nine Chapters of that Work the Name of Solomon is prefix'd and other fifteen Chapters which also bear his Name And this Aben Ezra believ'd to be the second part of his Parables or Sentences The third part of the Proverbs begins from these Words of the 25th Chapter v. 2. It is the Glory of God to conceal a thing Which distinction was made by them who reduc'd the Books of Scripture into that Order which is now observ'd for it is not to be believ'd that Solomon fix'd his Name to his Proverbs but only the Scribes who divided that Work into parts And so that Verse which we read at the beginning of the 25th Chapter These are the Proverbs of Solomon which the Men of Ezekiah King of Judah Copyed out Aben Ezra believes to have been written by Sobna who was King Ezekia's Scribe And indeed I am ready to believe that Sobna and others of King Ezekia's Scribes did extract out of the whole Volume those Sentences of which the first is the Glory of God c. and this the Word which the Men of Ezekiah Copy'd clearly demonstrate The fourth part of the Proverbs of Solomon begin at the beginning of the 30th Chapter where we read in the Latin Edition the Words of the Assembler but in the Hebrew Text the Words of Agur. But who that Agur and Assembler was the Interpreters of
was only a Translation of his into Hebrew out of some Forreign Language But letting these things pass if we may conjecture in a matter so obscure I believe they are nearest the Truth who fix the Composition of this Piece in the Time of the Babylonish Captivity For the Language is hardly Hebrew and abounding in Chaldee Phrases bespeaks a Person who by Forreign Converse had corrupted his Hebrew Speech In which Sense the words of St. Jerom are to be explained when he tells us That he Translated Job out of the Hebrew Arabic and Syriac Language To which we may add that the Jews whose Affairs were then in a desperate Condition took great Delight in reading that Book as the Comfort of their Afflictions Therefore the Author relates an Action that lately happed and because he takes upon him to perform the part of a Poet tho the Argument be not fictitious yet he makes use of Figures and florid Language mixing sometimes Probabilities with Truth observing only a Decorum between the Interlocutors The Prophets by St. Austin are call'd Pronouncers or Publishers of the word of God to Men. For they Quest in ex as the Interpreters of the Divine Law preach'd to the People whom they taught the Law of Moses confirming his Authority Then what Threats and Promises Moses had only in general promulgated they applyed to the several occasions of their Times and that after the manner of Orators which is the reason that they abound in Comparisons Metaphors and Hyperboles and not content with a plain and bare Relation they amplify it in many words For saith St. Jerom the History and Order of things is not related barely by the Prophets Praef. in Lib. 18 Com. in Isai but all places are full of Riddles and Mysteries one thing is contain'd in the words another in the meaning that what you would think to run over with a plain an uninterrupted Sense you find presently involv'd in the obscurities of that which follows Nor did the Prophets so altogether foretell future things but that they frequently repeated things already done as is evident from the Prophesie of Zachariah which is a Relation for the most part of what was past or was at that same time transacted Thus that most dilligent Interpreter of the Scripture in expounding some words of the Prophet Amos blames the Exposition of the Jews maintaining in the same place a Prophesie of the future where there is nothing said but of what is past and sâ—on after he adds these words worthy observation In c. 3. Amos. We are under a scarcity of Sacred Authors for we read of many things in the Prophets which are not to be found in Sacred History In like manner St. Jerom attests that the Prophets in their Relations do not mind the Order of things as they were Transacted Among the Prophets saith he there is no order of History observ'd while we find under the same King those things that were last transacted Com. in c. 25. Jerom. first related and those things that were first in action last recorded This preposterous Order Pseudo Dorotheus attributes to the Scribes De vit mort Proph. who committed to Writing the Predictions of the Prophets as they receiv'd them from their own Lips as if the Prophets had not wont to write down the Sermons which they made to the People The same observation Cornelius a Lapide makes upon the Prophesie of Jeremy who believe that Baruch who was the Scribe belonging to that Prophet collected all his Prophesies which he had preach'd at sundry times and embody'd them into one Volume not regarding the Order of time wherein they were preach'd And John Calvin himself confesses that the Prophesies of the Prophets never came to our hands digested into that order as they ought to have been nevertheless he does not believe it any derogation to their Inspiration They Calv. praef in Isai saith he who have diligently and judiciously convers'd with the Prophets will grant me that their Sermons were never digested into that method as they ought to have been but as Opportunity offer'd so the Volume was perfected He believes that the Books of the Prophets were preserv'd by the diligence of the Preist whose Duty it was to recommend the Prophesies to Posterity though the Preists were profest Enemies to the Prophets The same Calvin writes also 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 that all people might read them which being afterwards taken away by the Officers of the Temple was laid up in the Treasury 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 Isaiah and Habaccuc whom Calvin produces for his Witnesses this one thing seems easie 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 affix'd they make no mention at all Then again he Conjectures amiss that Summaries of the Sermons were only Copyed out and not the Sermons at length Though there is no skilfull Critic who will presume to aver that the Prophesies which we have now are entire The same Calvin and the Divines of Geneva farther conjecture that the Inscriptions which declare the Names of the Prophets and the Years when the Prophesies were pronounced were added by the Priests whose Duty it was to keep them safe for the satisfaction of Posterity These are their Words Il semble che ces Tiltres ayent estez adjoustez aux Revelations des Prophetes par les sacrificateurs et Levites qui avoit charge de garder les Prophetes au Tresor du Temple apres qu' elles avoient este proposees au Peuple suivant le contume des Prophetes It seems probable that the Titles were added to the Revelations of the Prophets by the Priests and Levites who had the charge of those Prophesies in the Treasury of the Temple after they had been exposed to the people according to the custome of the Prophets To which Opinion Hugo Grotius also gives his Vote There is only this difference between him and them that he does not attribute these Inscriptions to the Priests and Levites but to the Men of the great Synagogue who collected the writings of the Prophets and set down the time of their being written This seems more probable because it is taken for granted among all that the Senate where Esdras presided did add something to the Sacred Text by way of Connexion and Explication Thus also Thomas believes that the Inscriptions fix'd to some Psalms were inserted by Esdras Com. in Psal 6. and were done partly as things were then acted partly according to what happned Lastly it is is very probable that those Histories which are inserted in some of the Sermons of the Prophets were added by the same Senators when they review'd the Sacred Books and form'd the Canonical Scripture as now we have it which is the reason some believe those words were inserted in the 51. Jeremie Thus far the words of Jeremie Which conclude the Prediction of the Prophet in regard the following Chapter is no Prophesie but a History taken out of the end of the 4th Book of Kings And in this the Rabbies agree with most of the Christian Doctors For R.D. Kimchi testifies that those words which run on to the end of the Prophesie of Jeremiah do not belong to the Prophesie only that he who Copy'd the Book inserted here the story of the Israelites being carried away Captive Com. in c. 51. Jer. as it is in the end of the Book of Kings On the otherside Abravanel conjectures that Esdras or the Senators of the Grand Assembly were the Authors of that Supplement as the History of Ezechia was tranferr'd out of the 2 Book of Kings cap. 18. into the Prophesie of Isaiah From all that has been said it may be easily discern'd who were accompted Prophets among the Hebrew People what was their Office and Function and what their method of writing Moreover this also seems worthy Observation that the Prophets did not only preach to the People and foretel future events but also digested the Histories of their times and wrote them into the publick Records And thus Isaiah who wrote the Acts of Hosea bears the Title no less of a Historian then a Prophet or rather the name of Prophet among the Hebrews comprehends all those significations So that whoever was a revealer of the Divine will or foretold future Accidents or wrote the Translations of his Time was call'd a Prophet From whence questionless it came to pass that the ancient Jews adorn'd the Histories of Joshua Judges Samuel and Kings with the Titles of Neviion Prophets because they were written by Persons who being full of the Holy Spirit were call'd Prophets In which sence Josephus affirms that in his Nation Books were not written by every one but by Prophets only Jonathan also has rightly understood the force of that word who instead of the Hebrew word Navi Prophet sometimes mixes another word in his Paraphrase which signifies only Scribe as if Prophets were the same with Scribes And thus much concerning the Sacred Writers I pass by the Apocriphal Books which the Jews do not admit into their Canonical Number because their Authors as the word Apocryphal signifies are uncertain and hidden in obscurity Let the Learned Vossius therefore forbear to bark at the most worthy Simon a Person so well deserving of the Sacred Scriptures who has publish'd nothing concerning the Writers of the Old Testament but what has been already approv'd by Persons most Grave and solid and highly Eminent both for their Piety and Learning Into a wicked Heart Wisdom shall not enter FINIS