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
has a large Masora in the Margin under the several shapes of Bears Dogs and Bulls and sundry other creatures But indeed more fit to be expos'd for Children to play with for the sake of the Pictures The Spanish Copies which are of best repute shew the Masora barely and plainly written neither are there any Lines therein that are drawn into the shapes of living creatures as in the last mention'd And therefore the plainer the Copies of the Hebrew Bibles appear so much the chaster from Errours and more corrected thy are For under these shapes of Beasts and Plants the Writer conceal'd his own Errours and Imperfections neither are they more accurate in the Text it self than they are in the Masora CHAP. III. Several of the Manuscript Copies of the Bibles are examin'd Their various Readings are approv'd by the Testimony of the Learned Jews Supposititious Copies of the Bible VVHat the Jews have invented concerning some Copies of the Bible wrote by the hand of Esdras there is no man surely in this Age but believes to be all meer stories As also what is related of other Copies preserv'd at Bononia according to Tinus of Ferrara or at Cabilo if we may credit others No less supposititious may we imagine that Chimerical Piece of Antiquity to be which the Samaritans attributed to the Copy of the Mosaick Law found at Sichem Several other Copies have been also found among the Christians who to defend the Latine Interpreter have very much commended erroneous and counterfeit Copies Thus Lindanus extolled the Copy of an Hebrew Psalter which was preserv'd in England and agreed exactly well with the Latine Edition But that it was plainly an adulterate piece Isaac the Levite sagaciously discover'd meerly by his knowledge of the Hebrew Language Lindanus stifly maintain'd that many things were corrupted by the Jews of set purpose and out of their hatred of the Christians and this he endeavours to make out from the credit of that English Copy which he did not scruple to affirm did formerly belong to Austin the Archbishop But Arias Montanus after he had long sought and at last found out that Copy expresses his grief to find that a person so judicious and learned should write and teach such Stories upon Forein trust Neither Ar. Montan. ad appar B. 6. reg saith he is the Copy Antient nor writ by one that understood the Hebrew Language but by some Latine Scribe that knew how by the command of his men to make a well-shap'd Hebrew Character and this not above fourscore or a hundred years ago A short Book in a short Hebrew Character commendable rather for imitation and neatness of Writing than the knowledge of the Writer where every word was so corrupted that scarcely one could be said to be true Whence we may collect that there is no credit to be given not only to the Jewish Rabbies while they vaunt the Antiquity and Integrity of their Sacred Books but also neither to the Christians though eminent otherwise for their Piety and Learning while they go about to obtrude false and counterfeit Copies upon the World instead of true The feign'd Antiquities of some Copies Lib. Juchasin seu Fanul Among the Jews also there were some true and real Manuscripts of the Bible which were not of that Antiquity to which they pretended Such was that famous and highly reputed Copy of Hillel concerning which there are these expressions in the Book Juchasin In the year 584. there was a great Persecution in the Kingdom of Leon at what time they brought away thence a Copy of the Books of Scripture which Hillel had wrote out by that they corrected all other Copies I saw a part of it which was sold in Africa many years after it seem'd to have been written R. D. Kimchi makes mention of this Exemplar as well in his Grammatical Discourse as in his Commentaries upon the Scripture and in his time he affirms that there was a Pentateuch drawn from that Copy which was kept at Toledo Also R. David Ganz and several other Jews applaud that Copy as being a piece of great Antiquity and Exactness And that same celebrated Name of Hillel impos'd upon persons of great knowledge in the Hebrew Language and Sacred Criticism R. David Ganz in Tjenach David p. 56. Cun. l. 1. de Rep. Heb. insomuch that Cunaeus calls Hillel's Copy a Book of Venerable Antiquity which R. Hillel Chief Priest or Governour rather of the Jews wrote with his own hand who came from Babylon into Syria 60 years before the Birth of our Lord Christ Schickardus also wonderfully extols the Antiquity and Exactness of that Copy and brings Elias the Levite for his Witness as if it had been the Opinion of that same Learned Jew that Hillel returning from the Captivity of Babylon had written that Copy with his own hand Yet for all this Elias the Levite was of a contrary Judgment in this particular who had slain himself with his own Sword had he pronounc'd that Judgment concerning Hillels Copy which Schickard would falsly make him guilty of For in that Exemplar of Hillel there are several Vowel Points Accents and other things of which Elias makes the Rabbies of the School of Tiberias to be the Inventors whom he believes to have liv'd after the Talmudists and St. Jerom. As vain and idle also are all those things which Buxtorf crowds into his Book concerning the Antiquity of Points to prove that Hillel was Contemporary with Epiphanius and before the Masorites of Tiberias As little to the purpose also does the sharp-witted Capellus teaze himself with sundry conjectures concerning Hillels Exemplar But these men through the want of Manuscripts seem incapable to determine any thing concerning Hillel his Bible though had they consulted the Books of only one David Kimchi who is universally read they might easily have apprehended that Hillel was after the Rabbies of Tiberias For that the chiefest differences of Hillels Copy from the rest lie in the variety of Point Vowels Mapphick and Dagesh and other niceties of the same nature which no person conversant among the Monuments of the Antients will affirm to have been invented in the time of Epiphanius And indeed both Cappellus and Buxtorf might have consulted the Comments of John Mercer who sometimes also commends the Hillelian Exemplar Nor would it be a difficult thing to produce many readings of the Hillelian Codex different from the Masoretick collected out of five Manuscript Bibles and those Spanish besides and of the best repute But in regard they are for the most part of little moment I shall pass them over in silence Only some few I shall select from the Book of Joshuah placed in the Margin of a very fair Spanish Copy written about five hundred years since though the Annotations or rather Variations seem to be of a later date Joshuah chap. 6. in the Masoretick Copies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is written at large Classicum or
the warlike noise of the Rams-horns in the Hellelian more contracted the Vau being left out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 C. 10. of the same the Hillelian Copy reads v. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without a Schurec In the same chapter for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Vowel Segol under He it is written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Camets under He. The rest are more trivial excepting one place of the Book of Joshuah C. 21. where in the Masoretick Copies two whole Verses are wanting which that venerable Exemplar written for the use of Nassi or the Prince has supply'd again But in the Margin of the said Copy these words are to be read as being added by him who corrected that Exemplar in many places according to the Masoretick Lo Matzinou Elau Hashenin Pasikim Be Hilleli We cannot find those two Verses in the Hillelian by which the Masoretick Lection is confirm'd though it seems to be faulty enough We have some reason to suspect Hillel to be a Spaniard by Nation and a famous Rector of some Academy who reformed the Masoretick Edition in sundry places according to the Antient Copies After his death his Copies as being more corrected than the Vulgar became to be high in esteem especially among his Country-men and as Antiquity swells Mole-hills into Mountains after Death Thus the Name of Hillel being become famous was soon made use of to gull the more ignorant afterwards also his Name seduc'd the more Learned Jews less wary than they ought to have been And why I should thus think the very nature of the Hillelian Codex which varies in very few things and those very slight from the Masoretick which at that time was approv'd by the publick Practice and Authority of all Schools which seems to be confirm'd from hence for that then several of the Rabbies especially in Spain even after that tedious Labour which the Masorites undertook scrupled not to write down in their own Books the Variations of Scripture taken out of Antient Copies And hither ought we to refer the Animadversions of R. R. Judas Jonas Kimchi and others who have oft recourse to the Sepharim Midvikim or corrected Copies and hither also belongs that note frequent in the Margin most especially of the Spanish Manuscripts B' Sepher Achar in the other Copy But that Hillel was a Spaniard is not only to be proved from hence that his Biblick Copy was found in Spain and first extoll'd by the Spanish Jews but because I find several of the Spanish Lections quoted in the Spanish Exemplars quite otherwise than in the German and others In like manner we may affirm that the Exemplars of the Bibles which the Jews extol under the names of Ben Ascer and Ben Narthali were written out by such persons who being Presidents of Publick Academys made it their business to reform Erroneous Copies But in what time they liv'd is a thing not well known to the Jews themselves very little curious of their own Chronology However common fame reports them to have liv'd about the year 1034. long after the Tyberian Masorites R. Moses Tephil c. 8. And this was the Opinion of R. Gedalia R. David Gans and several others among the Christians It cannot be unknown what R. Moses has written concerning Ben Ascer's Manuscript which as he asserts was very well known in Egypt by which the Hierosolymitan Jews corrected their own Books That is the Examplar saith he which they all use because Ben Ascer corrected it labouring at it for many years and correcting it many times quite thorough For the Governours or Presidents of the Academies formerly according to the Custom of the Jews wrote out Copies which afterwards were made use of by the Provinces of which they were Chief Rulers and Princes especially if they were in any esteem for being Learned whence seems to have risen that variety of Readings which is found among the Manuscript Copies of several Provinces and distinct Ages Nor do the Rabbies themselves seem to deny it who believe that the Western Jews follow'd R. Ascer and the Oriental R. Naphtali in the Transcription of their Copies Now they call the Western Jews those that dwell in and about Jerusalem and the Eastern Jews those that live in and about Babylon The Hierosolymitan Codex saith Elias the Levite R. Elias Levita is that which Rabbi Jonas the Grammarian found by the Testimony of R. David Kimchi and perhaps may be that Exemplar which R. Ascer corrected who liv'd a long time at Jerusalem But the Lections about which the Rabbies themselves are at variance are very slight and trivial as they are in the Hillelian Nor will it be worth while to repeat them here in regard there is a Catalogue of them annexed to the large Venetian as also the Basil and English Bibles Let it suffice to observe that the Catalogue of the same Varieties in Manuscript which are fixed at the end of some Manuscript Bibles and to which they might have recourse do not exactly agree with those that are Printed at London Basil or Venice For some which in the Vulgar Editions claim Ben Ascer for their Author belong to those Catalogues which indeed owe their publication to R. Naphtali Such is that which is reckon'd the sixth in number and those which follow Those Manuscript Catalogues also add some and other Variations they omit besides those already Printed For where the Modern Lection makes use of the Accent Maccaph the more recent Manuscripts make use of the Point Dagesh or of some such thing Nor could there be any other way to knit together the series of those slight niceties because they are of little or no use For should we observe all the Variances of this kind which might be found in turning over those Manuscripts with an intention to embody them in one heap such a Collection would certainly swell into a large Volume For I must needs say they had leisure to spare who lookt after the Edition of the English Polyglottons who have not only publish'd those Lections every one in their order as they found them in the Basil and Venetian Editions but have also added the several places of Scripture of which there was hither never any Index before So that I wonder that men otherwise Learned should have no better thought than to employ themselves about such trifles But as to those differences of Readings which before the Times of the Tiberian Rabbies commaculated the holy Text and are of greater moment should be so sluggishly careless And which is worse having little knowledge of the Books of the Ancient Writers but only accustom'd to the Varieties in those Manuscripts of later date already mention'd yet they affirm a wonderful agreement of the Hebrew Copies among themselves Here might be added also those Varieties which are Ben Magnarabei ou Madnachei between the Eastern and Western Jews But in regard they are already publick and very few that are of moment that I may
the Jewish Writings thus delivers himself concerning those Letters There is no question says he but the causes of those diversities seem'd worthy and just to those wise and prudent persons in former Ages Buxt Comment Masor but the various Exilements and grievous Calamities of their Posterity have buried them in oblivion or alter'd them into various Figments and fond Mysteries Thus Buxtorf rather chuses to make himself a Patron of Masoretick Superstition than to enquire into the cause of that Superstitious Writing which Superstition shews it self in this that the Modern Exemplars of the Bibles which were examin'd by the Doctors of Tyberias are some lesser some bigger than others some turn'd inward others hanging downward The cause of which seems to be no other than that the hands of the Scribes could not so make the Letters of Lines extended in length as to be every way equal one with another whence it happen'd that some varied in shape from the rest It might so fall out also that some Letters at the beginning of the Volume might be made bigger of set purpose as Aleph and Beth of which the one is the first Letter in the beginning of the Chronicles the other of Genesis But the Jews who knew how to fetch out a Mystery out of the least tittle of a Letter began to conceit new Fictions upon this Writing which afterwards by virtue of the Authority of the Doctors that first invented these Fables being receiv'd by the rest of the Jews were easily propagated to Posterity But though the use or rather abuse of those Letters seems to be very antient and long accustom'd by the Masorites yet have I found a vast difference in the observance of those Delineations between the Exemplars of the Manuscript Bibles and those For in those there are fewer Examples of those Letters or if you meet with any the form of the Letter is hardly discern'd to differ from the other Thus the bigness of the Letter Aleph which is the first in the Book of Chronicles and Beth in the beginning of Genesis in many Spanish Copies is scarcely to be discern'd so small is the difference between them and the rest In one Spanish Copy written about some 10 years since those trifles are altogether neglected Thus Isaiah c. 56.10 In the Masoretick Bibles the word Tsophau or Watchmen is Printed with a great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tsade but in the Manuscript Copy the same word is written without any manner of distinction from the rest and so it is likewise written in another Manuscript Thus in the 44th chapter of the same Prophet where we read in the Text 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He planted an Ark with a small Nun at the end of the word is writ as it should be with a proportionable Nun. So vain and superstitious is that Masoretick Annotation upon that place There happen three small Nuns In the 6th chapter of Daniel v. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is written in the Masoretick Bibles with the latter Pe very large whereas there is no such thing in the Spanish and other Manuscripts In other two Spanish Manuscripts there is a great Pe to be seen but with this difference that the one enlarges the first Pe the other the second In the 3d Chapter of the Prophet Malachi according to the Hebrew but the 4th in the English Translation and v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remember is written with a large Zain but in the two Spanish Copies there is not the least appearance of any such thing nor in the Bibles of Menasseh Ben Israel Printed at Amsterdam The same account is to be given of Letters turn'd and rais'd above the rest as in the Hebrew Exemplar as of Letters lesser or larger Thus in the 18th of Judges v. 3. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Manesses is written with a little Nun rais'd above the rest which is also advanc'd in the Manuscript Copies but not in that manner for only the top of the Nun is rais'd a little above the other not the whole body of the Letter Therefore the Jewish Grammarians erroneously give these Letters the Title of Rais'd Letters is it were separated and set above the other when it could be nothing but the fault of the Scribe who was not so steady at that time There is one Spanish Copy also that will not own the depressed Caph in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to weep for her Gen. 23. v. 2. nor the great Zain in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Harlot Gen. 34.31 Nor is the word Shilleshi M so written in the Manuscript with a capital Mem as in the Masoretick Editions Only one word of this Book Gen. 2.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when they were created is written with a small 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He as the other Copies have it To search the Scriptures any farther for these trifles will be a vanity since they are only the dreams of idle Fancies And I could wish that custom might be utterly rejected for the future The same fond Superstition also was the occasion of so many Figments about Aleph Jod He and Vau which were the Original Vowels of the Hebrew Language especially omitted in the writing For Example in 2 Sam. c. 9. you find the Negative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lu with a Kibbuts without the Letter Vau which should otherwise have been writ thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon which I found this Masoretick note in the Margin Jerom◠quest in Gen. Lo is twice defective because Absolom did not overcome And that this the Jews observ'd ever since the time of St. Jerom his own words sufficiently testifie As we have here put it in the Hebrew his first name is written Ephran yet after he was over-ruled to take money for a Burial-place though he were pressed to it by Abraham the Letter Vau which is read among them was taken out of his name and instead of Ephron he was called Ephran the Scripture thereby intimating that he was not a person of true and perfect generosity Here as frequently in other places St. Jerom does not speak his own but the mind of the Jews However it is probable that this variety of Character which at first proceeded only from the careless and negligent humour of the Scribes as Aben Ezra observes The method of writing the Heb. Text uncertain gave the Jews an occasion to ground many Mysteries upon it as being persons that will spring a Miracle out of a Shoe-latchet As for the writing of Aleph it was always uncertain from the very time that the Authentick Originals of the Sacred Text were lost by the Jews So that it solely depends upon the will of the Jews as may be easily prov'd by comparing the most Authentick Manuscripts with the publish'd Editions For they differ in a thousand places so that I could number above six thousand of those Letters which are not extant in the publick Exemplars Therefore the
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
will appear that he has given positive sentence in matters which he little understood I will therefore begin from the Epistle which he has affix'd to that little discourse At the first dash in this Epistle Vossius takes several occasions to traduce the person himself as learned as he was in the Hebrew Language for a Fool a half Rabbie and an Egregious Knave as one that produc'd the words of St. Jerom most wickedly dress'd and trim'd for his own turn Gen. 19.33 The place in dispute is extant in these words in St. Jeroms Hebrew Questions upon Genesis The Hebrews as to what follows And he perceiv'd not when she lay down nor when she rose up marke the words at the top as a thing incredible and as a thing not to be comprehended in nature how a Man should lye with a Woman and not understand any thing of it Vossius attests that he has consulted many Manuscript Copies and that he finds it written in all Apponunt not Appungunt they set over or upon instead of they mark with points at the top He would have said truer that he never found Apponunt in any Manuscripts that were of credit or reputation for what sence could be made of these words had Apponunt been set in the place of Appungunt Nor does he tell us where he found these Manuscripts But that we may come to the business there was no reason for Vossius to pervert the words of the Hebrew Text fearing perhaps least from that word Appungunt the Antiquity of points might be made out from St. Jeroms time For the sounder sort of Criticks confess that those points were much later then the age wherein St. Jerom liv'd who nevertheless acknowledge that that sort of points of which St. Jerom here makes mention and which are put upon some words of the Hebrew Context were done upon the same ground that the Samaritans and the Syrians fix certain cross stroaks over some words which were invented by the Grammarians or Criticks And the Jews both Ancient and Modern agree with St. Jerom in this particular Mention is also made of these points in the Talmud in Medraschim or the Allegoricall Comments of the Jews upon Scripture And they are likewise to be seen in the Modern Exemplars of the Bibles and in most upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Becumah when she arose Which is the word at present in dispute there is added this note upon the Margent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nakod gnal Vau a Point upon Vau. An. 1615. In the small Venetian Bibles set forth by Râ—ter Bragadinus in the 37th Chap. of Genesis where the same point is put upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is this note in the Margent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of the fifteen Points which are in the Law Now as for the reasons which are given for these Points by the Jews who are troubl'd with an Itch of vanity I pass them by in silence as being very frivolous It is enough to have observ'd that the Jews retain those Points in their Exemplars by Tradition from their Ancestors When Vossius in his Epistle deplores the miserable Estate of the Accademies in Germany at this day where Rabbinisme domineers without controul and no Theology but Rabbinical is admir'd The Learned Gentleman does not believe that human Learning can be taught or studyed where Rabbinism raigns and the Rabbinical Screitch-Owls bear an ominous sway Nor do I dissent from Vossius in this particular And I would be glad those pedling Priests might be expung'd out of the number of Divines who contemning the Latin and Greek Learning will admit of nothing but the Fictions of the Rabbins But that Persons eminently Learned who after the Example of Origen Jerom Chrysostom Theodoret and others of the Fathers frequent the Thresholds of the Jews should be listed in their Number I can hardly endure For though generally the greatest part of the Books of the Jews are full of frivilous Trifles yet there are not a few of the Rabbies who have wonderfully illustrated Sacred Scripture And this the Commentaries of St. Jerom alone upon the Peophets aparently make out who was not ashamed to consult the most Learned Jews of his Age. But to the nice and squeamish Mr. Vossius St. Jerom seems contemptible and Prince of the Semi-Rabbinical Divines And that Semi-Rabbie as he calls him though he have his failings has far surpass'd all the rest of the Fathers of the Church in expounding the Books of Sacred Scripture And I could wish also that Vossius had first convers'd with those half Rabbins before he began to meddle with their concerns For those half Rabbies can hardly forbear Laughter when they read in his Epistle before his Treatise of the Oracles of the Sybils that it is not above six Centuries since those Vowel points came to be us'd with which the Modern Exemplars of the Jews are loaded That three or four Ages most fiercely contended together while these were of Opinion that the Vowels were thus others another way to be introduc'd And that the Controversie would never have been at an end unless Daniel Bomberg had ended the quarrel having had some Centuries of the Jews and so those Vowels crept into the World out of Bombergs Shop in Venice That person 't is true had a Library well furnish'd with Rabbinical Books from whence he gathered most of his Fictions more Rabbinical But they who have convers'd with Books of the Jews well know that before Bombergs Edition of the Hebrew Bibles and in other parts of Italy especially at Pesaro the Hebrew Bibles were then Printed with pointed Vowels We also meet with Copies of the Bibles in Manuscript written above four hundred years since which have the same Points and Bibles are quoted by the more antient Rabbies wherein the same Points are made use of And it is plain that these Points were in use not only for six but for nine hundred years ago For the Rabbie Saadas Gaon wrote a Grammer about the Year DCCC wherein he disputes at large about the pointed Vowels which were in use among the Jews long before his time Besides those things are all feigned that Vossius affirms concerning the soare contention among the Jews how the Vowels are to be placed upon the Hebrew Context And of the same stamp is that which the Learned Gentleman urges concerning the Editions of Bomberg which according to the Opinions of the Jews are full of Faults And indeed the Jews contemn the first Edition of Bomborgh which was overlook'd by Felix Patrensis in regard the Masoretis Notes are very unskilfully added to the Margent of that Exemplar but they applaud and reverence the second and third of Bombergh's Editions In the adding the Mazoretic notes to Bomberghs Editions great difficulties arose for that there are few among the Jewish Rabbies that truly understand the Masoretic Art which however R. Jacob Ben Hajim with incessant toyl and labour
this part Simon has not only distasted the most Learned Vossius but also some other persons of no less Note who have not forbore to Vomit forth their most virulent Poyson against his Critiea Sacra it will not be amiss to clear the truth of that Argument a little more plainly In the first place there is nothing that Simon has written concerning the publick Notaries of the Hebrew Nation but what these Diminitive Saint and nice Stomack'd Scholiasticks are extreamly offended at For those publick Registers they together with Eusebius and some of the Fathers call Prophets who not only committed to Writing the Transactions of their own Times but also took care of those Books which were written by the former Prophets and were kept in the publick Registries almost in the same manner as Esdras is said to have reveiw'd the Sacred Writings after the return of the Jews from Babylon and to have put them into that method which is still observ'd both by the Jews and Christians There is nothing in this Assertion of Simon which has not been approv'd by most of the Fathers and them the most Learned amongst the Rest Read but the Preface of single Theodoret one of the most Eminent Divines of the Eastern Church to the Book of Kings where he explains the whole matter and freely and without any scruple asserts that there were several Prophets among the Hebrews of which every one was wont to Write the Transactions of his own Age and that the greatest part of those Books are now wanting as is easie to be found in the History of the Chronicles He adds that those Books which we call the Books of Kings were a long time after taken out of those Books with Theodoretus Diod. in lib. 1. Sam. Mas praef Com. in Jâ—s Sanct. praef in lib. Reg. Perer. praef in Gen. Diodorus Procopius and others not a few consent To whom I may add the most Learned Masius whom Pierius Sanctius Cornclius a Lapide and other Jesuits long and much conversant in the Sacred Writings have follow'd whose words it is needless here to cite since their Works are every where to be had But to make this matter yet more plain it may be perhaps from the purpose to run over the several Books of Sacred Scripture and to take a short hint from every one The First that appears is Moses whom the constant Tradition both of Jews and Christians make to be the Author of the five Books of the Law But as to him the Jewish Rabbies seem to be the more religious who maintain that there is not so much as one word nay not so much as one syllable which did not proceed from God and was dictated to Moses Quite otherwise the most part of the Christians who affirm that some of the Books of Moses were added a long time after either by Esdras or some others who had the overveiwing of them Neither does St. Jerom presume to attribute to Moses some words of the Pentateuch as it is now extant following in this particular the common Opinion of the Doctors of the Church who constantly affirm that the whole Law was review'd and corrected by Esdras a most learned Scribe Whether you will saith St. Jerom that Moses was the Author of the Pentateuch or Esdras the restorer I will not gain say But whether Moses committed to Writing the whole History which we have under his Name or in part commanded it to be transcrib'd by the Notaries that Register'd the publick Transactions of his time is the Question However be it how it will Moses shall still be thought the Author and Writer of the whole Law as has been most excellently observ'd by Simon because those Scribes if there were any in his time were wholly at his Devotion And indeed we find nothing in the whole Law that does fix the Authority of those sort of Scribes And yet had they not been constituted by Moses from that very time the Hebrew Common-wealth had been deficient in what neither the Egyptians nor any other Eastern Nation wanted Now that there were Writers of Annals ever since the time of Moses the most Learned Jesuit Sanctius endeavours to prove in these words Proleg 4. in Paralip I beleive there were in the former Ages the words of Dayes Commentaries Ephemerides and that there was diligent and sedulous care least oblivion of Time should obscure the Nativities and Posterity of Men considerable which seems to me to have been certain from the very time of Moses I spare the names of others who have the same Sentiments And I wonder that a late Writer of the Order of the Seraphris enflam'd with a Seraphic Zeal should condemn in his Biblic Inquisitions this Opinion as Impious and curse the Authors of it But as I am inform'd that Seraphic Doctor though he understands neither Latin nor Greek is a person of most insolent ignorance and of the Sect of those who blaspheme what they understand not Jude 8. Some are offended and perhaps the more delicate Vossius for that Simon in his Critick's affirms that some of the Books of Moses were added afterwards But Simon is no Innovator in this particular as one that has to back him the most skilful Interpreters of the Sacred Scripture Masius and Pererius who has transferr'd all Masius's words into his Preface to Genesis Bonfrerius Cornelius a Lapide and many others Their Opinion also pleases me says Pererius who believe that the Pentateuch a long time after Moses was as it were fill'd up and render'd more plain by the Interlineation of many words and sentences and better methodiz'd for the continuation of the History In like manner Bonfrerius considering some words of Genesis which he suspects could not be written by Moses Com. in Cap. 36. Gen. v. 31. has these Expressions I had rather say that some other Hagiographer added somethings afterwards then ascribe all things to Moses performing the part of a Prophet Not much unlike to this speaks Cornelius a Lapide upon the same place Com. in c. 36. Gen. These words seem to be added after Moses 's time by some who digested the Diaries of Moses Nay Huetius himself in answer to Spinosa objecting that some things were added to the Books of Moses Dem. Evangel prop. 4. c. 14. so replies that he seems not to gainsay We confess says he that Esdras the Restorer of Scripture if any places more obscure or difficult then others occur'd stuft here and there into the Sacred Writings for explanations sake some things of his own Moreover seeing the Sacred Writings are propagated by so many Disputations that never so many Exemplars were ever known of any one Book no wonder if what has happen'd upon other occasions to other Books should happen to this that some Notes added by Pious and Learned Men in the Margin should at length creep into the Text. Lastly those relations at the end of Deutronomy concerning the Death and Burial of Moses by
Joshua or rather by the Senators of the Grand Sanhedrim of which Joshua was the Chief are vulgarly thought to be added to the rest of the Text. For it was the Custom that the publick Transactions should be register'd in the publick Acts by those who were appointed for that Employment in which Sence Moses is said to have written some things in the Volume of the Law of the Lord that is the Covenant which he had made with the People To say truth there are many things extant in the Pentateuch which plainly declare that the Books of the Law were written by Moses Thus we read in Exodus Moses wrote all the words of the Lord. And in Deuteronomy After Moses had writ the words of the Law Exod. 24. Deut. 31. But these and many other passages of the same kind are only to be meant of some parts of the Law of which mention is made in those places as Simon has demonstrated Whence Jerom Oleaster Prol. in Pent. a great Hebrician and perfectly read in Scripture Learning denies that it can be effectually prov'd by Scripture that Moses himself was the Author of the Law which we have under his Name Next to the Pentateuch is the Book call'd Joshua and which the following words seem to prove to have been written by Joshua And Joshua wrote all these words in the Volume of the Law of the Lord. That is Joshua after Moses's Decease Jos 24.26 or his Scribes by his Order set down in the publick Registers the Transactions of that Time in which Sense they are said to be as it were added to the Volume of the Law Nevertheless 't is strange to see how they wrangle among themselves who handle this Argument so that even St. Austin himself durst not possitively affirm Joshua to be the Author of the Book which goes vulgarly under his Name Whether that Book says he which is call'd Jesus Nave were written by him meaning Joshua or by some other person Theodoret affirms That it was not written by Joshua but taken out of some later Book and among the modern Authors the learned Massius asserts That it cannot be said that all those things which are now extant in the History of Joshua Com. in c. 10. Jos proceeded from himself He also confirms what has been already mentioned concerning the publick Scribes and their Employments and extends his Arguments to other Books of the Scripture The Opinion of the Talmudists is That Joshua wrote his own Book and eight Verses of the Law But the judicious Rabby Isaac Abravanel scrupl'd not to differ from them and asserts himself induc'd so to beleive not only by those words which are added at the end of the Book of Joshua And after these things Joshua the Son of Nun Dy'd but by reason of many other passages that frequently occur in the Context it self of which he denyes that Joshua could be the Author Of which sort the first is that concerning the twelve stones which he set up in the midst of Jordan Jos 4.9 of which it is said and they remain there to this Day To which the Author of the Book of Joshua presently adds these words Jos 6.8 The Name of that place is call'd Galgala to this present Day I pass by many other expressions of the Nature frequent in the History of Joshua and which Abravanel maintains could not be written by Joshua Had Joshua saith he wrote all these things would he have said To this present day To these things he adds what we read in the History of Joshua concerning the Danites taking Lachish by assault which nevertheless did not happen till toward the end of the Judges and consequently long after Joshua's Death But these and other passages of the same Nature do not serve so much to prove that Joshua or rather the Scribes that were under him Register'd the publick Transactions of the time as to shew that other Scribes afterwards review'd those publick Acts and added several clauses and intervening passages to unite the Sense and Series of History and for Explanations sake Nor does the Book Entitl'd Shoftim or Judges seem to be written but in the same manner as being full of the same Expressions Wherefore D. Huetius follows the judgment of Dorotheus in this particular who affirms That the Scribes of that Time Recorded in Commentaries the Transactions which happened under the Judges out of which Saemuel afterwards composed the Book of Judges Who that Dorotheus was I do not at present Dispute it is enough from thence to infer that Simon 's Opinion was not of Yesterday by which he constitutes publick Scribes in the Hebrew Nation who Recorded the publick Transactions of their Times whose Collections other Scribes or Prophets embody'd into those Histories which go now under the Names of Joshua Judges Samuel and Kings this opinion is confirmed by the Syrians For we read at the end of the Syriac Exemplar these words added But for the Book of Judges Excâ—d Usser Tom. 6. Pol Angl. though the Name of the Author be not set down it is known that it was wrote by some of the Priests of the Sons of Aaron who in the times of those Judges officiated in the Priesthood The last cited Dorotheus refers the Book of Ruth also to the same Scribes which seem much more probable then the Opinions of those wherein there is nothing of sure Foundation Concerning both thus Sixtus Senensis It is said that Samuel Collected the Book of Judges and added the Story of Ruth the Moabitess Bib. 8. lib. 3. Some think that Ezekiel others that Esdras was the Author of both Books As for the Books of Kings Theodoret has made these Remarks upon them That there were many Prophets among the Hebrews of which every one wrote the Transactions of his Age and hence it came to pass that the first Book of Kings is call'd both by the Hebrews and Syrians The Prophesie of Samuel soon after he adds They therefore who wrote the Book of Kings wrote them out of those writings long after as their leizure serv'd them And some while after he thus expresses himself concerning the Books of the Chronicles There were some other Historiographers who digested those things that were omitted by others which Book so written they call'd Parah Pomona the remainders As to the first and second Book of Kings which go under the Name of Samuel Sixtus Senensis adds these words The Book of Samuel is said to be written by the Prophet Samuel partly by the Prophets Nathan and Gad. Samuel Collected the Acts of Eli Saul David and his own which are related in the first Book of Kings to his Death Nathan and Gad wrote the Books of Kings from the Death of Samuel to the end of the second Book What Sixtus Senensis writes in this place though in general I may not think them remote from Truth yet if they be specially weigh'd they cannot be sure in every part for that as to
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
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
a Prophet But the learned person never understood the reason why or in what sence the Jews did separate him from the rest of the Prophets However concerning this matter the Christians in vain dispute with the Jews For both willingly acknowledge that in the Book of Daniel there are many Prophesies of the Messiah to come and that that Book was written by divine inspiration as the other Books of Scripture were The Jews also feign the same things of David as of Daniel however they do not deprive him of holy inspiration Quite the contrary they publickly assert that there are many things in the Psalms which foretel the coming of the Messiah so that if there be any difference in this particular between them and the Christians the controversie is meerly about the name as has been already prov'd in regard they otherwise methodize the Books of Scripture than the Christians But Vossius stabs himself with his own Sword while he goes about to prove the Jews guilty of falsifying their Chronologie in regard the modern Chronologie of the Hebrew Text presses harder upon the Jews then that which is drawn out of the version of the LXX Interpreters nor do the Jews deny in their Talmudick Books but that the time is fulfilled and past within which the Messias was expected but they add that their own sins retard his coming These are the words of the Talmudists Talm. in Tract Sanhed in Avoda Zara This is the Tradition of the House of Elia The World shall consist of six thousand years Two thousand shall be of emptiness that is before the Law Two thousand shall be spent under the Law And two thousand years the Messiah shall reign But by reason of our iniquities those years are already elaps'd Vossius endeavouring to draw this Tradition of Elias to his purpose has err'd in many places For first he seems to applaud it as being delivered by Elia the Prophet or taken out of his Book which formerly as he says was numbered among the Books of the New Testament But this Elias was a Talmudick Doctor like Rabbi Hillell R. Schammai R. Johanan and several others whose names are set down in the Talmud Then it is a fiction to say that the 2000 years that preceded the Law of Moses ought not to be numbered from the beginning of the Creation but from the Flood or from that time that God told Noah that he would destroy the World For the Opinion of the Jews concerning the six thousand years Duration of the World according to the Tradition of R. Elias is in this place far different For the Foundation of that Prophesie is deriv'd from the six days of the Creation for that as God created the World in six days so the same World should endure six thousand years So that the computation of the years of the World must be taken from the first Creation of all things The Commentators upon the Talmud reckon two thousand years from the first man created to the time that Abraham abandoning the worship of Idols embrac'd the true Religion of one God Dissertat de Sept. Praefat At what time according to their computation he was two and Fifty years of Age. But those are frigid Arguments which Vossius produces to prove out of the Epistle of St. Peter that the beginning of the World is to be reckon'd from the Flood because the Apostle call'd that the Old World which preceded and the Earth which we now inhabit the other World I say these are very sorry Arguments and quite from the purpose But enough of Elia's Prophecy concerning the duration of the World Nor is there any heed to be given to that Book of the Prophecies of Elias which Isaac Vossius cajoll'd by the name of Elias the Talmudist believes to have been receiv'd into the number of Canonical Books Now let us examine his other proofs brought against the Jews whether they be of any more moment In the next place Vossius brings a load of Arguments to prove that the Jews have mutilated not a few Texts of Scripture and first he calls Justin Martyr for a Witness who writes that several Exemplars were corrupted by the Jews But as to what may be borrowed from Justin we have already made a plenary answer Justin never consulted the Hebrew Text neither could he as being one that understood not the Language as is manifest out of his own Writings But saith Vossius how bravely had the holy Martyr foil'd Trypho and the rest of the Jews with whom he liv'd had not those Crimes been true that were laid to their charge Vossius reproved But this way of arguing does not become a Learned man who in perusing Justin's Books might easily have perceiv'd that he had mistaken in many things But Vossius goes on The Prophecy of Christ which occurs Psal 22.16 where instead of they digg'd as a Lion is put in the room most of the Christians except Phanaticks and Semi-Jews acknowledge to have been deprav'd by the Rabbies True it is indeed that the Jews are call'd in question by most Divines for having purposely corrupted this place But far be it from me to pronounce those people Phanaticks or Semi-Jews who clear the Jews of this offence when Rabbi Jacob Ben Hajim Restorer of the Masora publickly testifies that in some Manuscripts of the Hebrews he has met with Caru they digg'd or pierc'd which is in favour of the Christians Nor is it a wonder that the Masorites chose that reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a Lion which was most for their purpose I acknowledge the Translation of the Greeks and St. Jerom to be the truer yet the Jews are not to be accus'd of falsification for having made choice out of two Readings of that which was most for their turn In the words Cari and Carou all understanding Criticks know there is but little difference and how easily and frequently the change of Jod for Vau and Vau for Jod happens Besides that there are several other Examples of the redundancy of the Letter Aleph which were not unknown to the Mazoreths so that the Letter Aleph may as well fall out to be superfluous in Carou as necessary in Cari. Wherefore the Greek Interpreters and St. Jerom past it by as ridiculous or else perhaps it might not be in their Copies but the Masorites who acknowledge it made use of it Vain are also those things which Vossius alledges out of Zachary c. 12. v. 10. as if the Jews had purposely chang'd the Antient Reading which the Old Interpreters found in their Copies But there is no skilful Critick but will discern that this diversity happen'd from the varaince in several Copies while in some it is read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they have pierced in other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they have danced by reason of the easie transmutation of Resch into Daleth and Daleth into Resch Nor do I see any reason why for that or five hundred more of
have been less polite for suppose it ever so imperfect it had been kept in the Kings Library not altogether unknown to the King with thousands of other Books I pass by other remarks of learned Men especially Joseph Scaliger's of this Suppositious Aristaeus which Gerard Vossius well versed in this matter says are very weighty from whence it may be conjectured Aristaeus to have writ this History perhaps to the Idaea of a pious and a good moral'd Prince and this History ought not to be look'd upon otherwise wherefore the Author of these Fables mistrusting his Cause as being improbable adds farther I believe says he my Readers will suspect my credit but truly as it is not lawful to relate any Vntruth which hath been received so it would be a Crime to be silent in this Affair but as they have been acted so I have related them that I might avoid all Vntruths and for that reason I have endeavoured to receive the Truth from those who were privy to the Kings Affairs Truly he leaves nothing out that may corroborate his Testimony which he feared would be suspected by all But the Authority of the Fathers and other Writers of good Note and Credit who have inserted in their Works the History of Aristaeus as true doth make for it and it will be thought rashness to defend the contrary but we are not to consider what the Fathers have said so much as the reasons of their opinion for in things purely critical Reasons are of more moment than Authorities It is evident the Fathers were moved by the bare Authority of Aristaus or Philo and Josephus who writ from him but they had no reason to examin critieally the History of Aristaeus whether true Seing the Septuagint Translation which at that time the Church used against the Jews who had recourse to the Hebrew in their Disputations with the Christians did greatly support their Cause The Fathers had been ill advised if they had laid by that Translation which the Jews could not totally reject St. Jerom Jerom. a man well versed in all Learning and had studyed this Criticism for this reason contrary to the common Opinion of the Fathers did confute the Cels of the 70. Interpreters I know not says he who first invented the Story of the 70. Cells and then laughs at Justin Martyr who affirmed he saw them and looks upon him as a simple Man easily induced to believe the Jews Stories In like manner he differed in opinion from the Fathers for from the Authority of Aristaeus himself and Josephus he asserts the 70. Interpreters to have conferr'd and not to have prophesyed For says he it is one thing to be a Prophet another to be an Interpreter the first foretels things to come the other from his Knowledg afterwards and Eloquence Translates Neither doth he esteem them more than Tully who translated with a Rhetorical not a Prophetick Spirit Xenophon's Oeconomy Plato's Protagoras and Demosthenes's Oration for Ctesiphen neither was St. Jerom ever of any other Opinion although he may sometimes say they were inspired and that the Learn'd Man did judge this to be taken in an Oeconomical Sense may appear by several Places For the like reason although St. Jerom did seem to be of the same Opinion with Aristaeus Josephus and the Jews of his time that the 70. Interpreters did translate Books of the Law only yet in his Commentaries upon the other Books of Scripture he speaks of them no otherwise than as the Translators of these and this because he would not seem to differ from the common Opinion although in his Judgment less probable But some one will say if Aristaeus's History of the 70 should be look'd upon as a Fable what Foundation had it For certainly the first Author could not invent it without some ground when even the Fables of the Poets carry something of Truth in them The Original of Aristeus's Book Heins Arist sa Exod. 24. Heinsius thinks this Story of the 70. to have its rise from the xxiv chap. of Exodus where we find that Moses Aaron and the 70. Elders went up unto the Lord and from the words which in the Latin Translation are nec super eos qui procul recesserant de filiis Israel misit manum suam the Greek electorum Israel neque unus dissensit Heinsius thinks that number of the Translators and their miraculous Agreement to have risen hence but whatever Heinsius thinks I am of the Opinion that the Interpretors were rather Jews of Alexandria than Hierusalem for there are to this day some Egyptian Words as Abrec Remphan and others and because it was of so great a consequence it is very likely it was approved of by the Sanhedrim and there called the Septuagint Translation from the 70 Elders or Senators of the Great Council for which reason the place of the Talmud otherwise very difficult where the Greek Translation is ascribed only to five may easily be reconciled with the common opinion of 72. by the same Authority it is made authentick to all the Jews especially the Hellenists as the Fathers of the Western Church in the Council of Trent have made their Translation Authentick for as the Ignorance of the Christians in the Greek caus'd Translations into the other Tongues and these Translations became Authentick to the Churches by their use in like manner the Jews Ignorance of the Hebrew Tongue did move the Jews of Alexandria to translate the Bible into Greek for their use which Translation was afterwards read in their Synagogues and Schools and because as very probable it was approved of by the Sanhedrim at Hierusalem upon whom at that time the whole Nation of the Jews had a dependance it hath acquired the Name of the Septuagint Yet I think there is no necessity to have recourse to the Senators of the great Synagogue that the number of the 72. Interpreters to whom that Translation is commonly ascribed may be the better made out but we are only to consider the Form of Speech familiar to the Jews by which they attribute every thing of moment to those 70. Senators that the things thereby may acquire the greater Authority For this reason they ascribe the Vowel Points Accents and many other things of the like nature to the Sanhedrim not so much from the reality of the thing as from that Form of Speech so that it is difficult to distinguish when they speak plain and when allegorically This way of speaking hath led many men and those Learned into various Errors when in reading the Jews Books they consider more what they write than the manner and causes of their so writing We may bring for Example what occur in the Rabbins about the Title of Holy Writ the Keris and Cetibs or various Readings entire defective redundant and six hundred of the like nature All these most of the Jews ascribe either to Moses in Mount Sinai or to the Synagogue or Senate assembled under Esdras all
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
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
Version by the command of Philip the Second was had in esteem beyond all others and was likewise approv'd of by an unanimous consent of many Parisian Divines in the praise of which they spake as follows we saw the holy Bible of Philip the Second set forth in Hebrew Syriac Greek and Latin after the manner of the Complutensian Bibles formerly Printed in Spain We approv'd of the same and in a word thought it fit to be read by all Catholicks in opposition to all false and heretical Translations with which men endeavour to impose upon those that have not arriv'd to the knowledg of the Tongues This Work was likewise approv'd of by two Popes as Franciscus Luca Burgensis relates and Gregory the 13th in his Epistle to Philip the Second of Spain calls it opus verè aureum a work truly great This is farther corroberated by the Authority of 42 Spanish Divines notwithstanding all which Arias Montanus has but an ill repute among many of the Clergy in Spain particularly for that he set forth a Chaldee Paraphrase not only on the Pentateuch as Cardinal Ximenius had done but on all the rest of the Bible except some few Books Of this Andrews de Leon Zamorensis a Minor of the Regular Clerks complains in an Epistle which he wrote to those that Printed a new Polyglot at Paris where concerning the Chaldee Paraphrase publish'd in the Royal Bibles he speaks thus What shall I say of the Chaldee Paraphrase which the Rabbins call the Targum T is vitiated and extreamly corrupted 't is degenerated from it's ancient purity and candour full of Talmudical Fables and Sacrilegious Impostures In this all men agree even Cardinal Ximenius himself in his Preface to the Complutensis asserts it Nay Cajetan himself gives a free account of his method of Translating Hebrew in these words I assure you that whilst I was about this work Interpreters would tell me the Hebrew word sounds thus In his Preface to the Psalms but the Sense thereof is not evident unless it be chang'd into this having heard all the significations I answer'd do not trouble your selves if the Sense be not clear because it is not your Province to explain but interpret as the words lay before you and commit the care of understanding the Sense to Expositors The Cardinal confesses ingenuously that though he was ignorant of the Hebrew yet he Translated the Old Testament into Latin out of the Hebrew Cajetan's method in translating the Bible and in order thereunto made use of two very learned men in that Tongue the one a Jew and the other a Christian and gives this as the principal reason why he did so because unless the Text be just as in it's Original the Text is not expounded but by guess but the Text is expounded as 't is understood by such or such an Interpreter And at last wishes the Fathers had had such an Interpretation though it be lame and imperfect because then says he we should have the genuine Text of the Scripture explain'd and not a Text of Interpreters making But Cajetan who says almost all the Hebrew words are aequivocal could never arrive at a perfect and compleat Interpretation and yet I dare affirm that that most learned Cardinal though an utter Stranger to the Hebrew Tongue has been very happy in expressing the words of the Text and that there is less barbarism in his Version than that of Arias Montanus Gabriel Prateolus who is very free in bestowing the name of Heretic ranks the judgment he has pass'd of the ancient Interpreters as being a little too bold amongst the Heresies Nor was Cardinal Palvacino a little dissatisfied therewith who animadverts thus upon it quel grand ' intelletto alfre opere fuamâ—â—mirato History of the Counsel of Trent l. 6. c. 17. in questâ— per la sciaersi egli trasportar dalla guida di ehi meglio intendeva laâ—grammatica Hebrea chi misteri divini resto in gloriosâ— Malvenda's method I omit the Dominican Thomas Malvenda's Version of some Books of the old Testament who so rigidly affects the Grammatical Sense that it looks like one entire piece of barbarism and had been utterly unintelligible had he not a little illustrated it by his Notes Melchior Canus openly declares against Isidorus Clarius Melchior Canus of wheol places l. 2. c. 13. whose emendation is nothing but a reprehension of the old Interpreter For in the Front of his Works he promises says the same Melchior the old Edition correct and after he has thus excus'd himself from the odium of Novelty he inserts a great many things adds some and changes others the humour and Interpretation of Isidorus Clarius The Bible of Isidorus Clavius Monk of Cassinum who in many places which he corrects in the Latin Interpreter shews himself ignorant of the Hebrew Tongue could not be more oppositely described But this Edition of the Bible is prohibited at Rome and is extant in the Index of prohibited Books under this Title the Vulgar Edition of the Old and New Testament the one whereof is most dilligently corrected according to the Hebrew the other according to the Greek Original so that a new Edition need not be desired and yet the old One may here be found in the year MDXLII The Version extant under Vatablus his name Lastly there are several Latin Copies of the Bible extant under Vatablus his name which yet all the World acknowledg are not his Robert Stephens has put upon the unwary Reader under the name of that learned and most understanding Professor of the Hebrew Tongue in the University of Paris For the Edition which Stephens gave us in the year MDXLV as if it had been exactly taken from the Lectures and Notes of Vatablus affords us only the Version and Annotations of Leo Judah a Zuinglian which for the most part were borrow'd from the Jews particularly Rabbi David Kimchi from John Calvin and other Protestants this Interpretation of Leo Juda Robert Stephens has preferr'd before all others and especially before that of Santes Pagninus because 't was more clear and done into purer Latin Yet the same Stephens in an Edition which he Publish'd in the year MDXLVII chose Pagnine's Translation before all the rest but such as if we may believe him was revis'd and corrected by Pagnine himself therefore neither was Vatablus nor Stephens Authors of any Version of the Bible Yet both of 'em great Masters of Hebrew Learning CHAP. XXIII Of the Latin Translations of the Bible made by Protestants THere are yet greater differences betwixt the Protestants in their Translations of the Bible than the Catholicks Sebastian Munster who turned the Old Testament out of Hebrew into Latin shews the reasons and method of his Translation at the very beginning of it where he plainly tells us how that he followed the Rabbins therein and not the old Interpreters So that if there happened to be any faults in it they were to be imputed
to the Jewish Doctors who were the first Authors of them Sextus Senensis gives us his opinion of this Translation in these words Munsterus ubique horridus senticosus asper usque adeo Hebraici sermonis horrorem sequutus est ut cum multa Latinis auribus molliter accommodare potuisset omnes tamen Hebraici sermonis proprietates phrases adeo servare studuit ut nec ipsos Hebraicorum nominum stridores pretermittere voluerit ingerens Latinis auribus ubique pro Ozia Uzzijah pro Ezechiele Jechezohel c. But I wonder that Sixtus should be so nice and critical seeing he so highly commends Cajetan Pagnin Oleaster and some others who affected a far more barbarous and unpolite Style Likewise Gerebrard treats him with as little candor and moderation passing a sharp and severe censure upon him Munsterus saith he neglecta vocum propria notatione sepe Lutheranisabat a sue Franscisci institute discedebat Certainly none of the Modern especially Protestant Translators have more fully and emphatically express'd the genuine sense of the Hebrew Text than Munster who cannot deservedly be blam'd for any thing but for slighting the antient Interpreters of the Holy Scripture and adhering too closely to the late Jewish Doctors neither is he so rough and harsh in his stile abating some proper names as Sixtus and some others fancy him to be Huâ—tius who seems the most impartial and unbiass'd in his Judgment gives him this Character Sebastianus Munsterus Bibliorum Interpres sane doctus in Hebraica semper stilum collineans ad eaque nunquam non se componens Yet without doubt he had gained greater applause if according to the advice of Conradus Pellicanus his Tutor in the Hebrew Tongue he had chiefly followed the Rabbins in Grammatical niceties consulting in other things as well the Antient Interpreters of the sacred Text as the modern Jews and then he had not disagree'd with the Latin Translators in so many particulars as he did For what necessity was there that for Crescite multiplicamine implete aquas Maris which we find in the vulgar Translations he should put Fructicate augescite implete aquas in fretis which words carry a far harsher sound with them than the former Likewise Leo Juda a Zuinglian Translated the Old Testament or at least the greatest part of it out of the Original Hebrew into Latin and because he died before 't was quite finish'd Bibliander and P. Cholinus completed it Bibliander turned the eight last Chapters of Ezechiel and also Daniel Job Ecclesiastes the Canticles and 48 Psalms out of Hebrew and Cholinus translated the books which the Protestant Divines call the Apocripha out of Greek This Translation was first published at Zurich in the Year 1543. and afterward in the Year 1545 there came forth a second Edition of it by R. Stephanus but without the name of the Author and with the vulgar Translation on one side as we have intimated before But the Parisian Divines rail'd and inveigh'd bitterly both against the Edition and the Publisher of it so that after many hot and wrangling disputes about several things belonging to the Bible Stephanus was at lenght forc'd by the prevailing party to leave his Country and to fly to Geneva for Sanctuary there he writ his Apology against the Parisian Divines and published it both in Latin and French wherein he made grievous complaints of them but in most things he showed himself to be an Innovator and a rigid follower of Calvin Yet he was defended in some things even against the Parisian Divines by P. Castellanus Bishop of Mascon and grand Almoner of France who often carried the matters in controversie to the hearing of the Kings Council for he had observ'd how the Parisians through their Ignorance of the Tongues had laid many things falsly to his charge Neither did this Translation of Leo Juda escape the Censures of Genebrard who thereby got the Favour and Patronage of the Parisian Divines he himself being one of the same faculty But Stephanus was entertained with far more courtesie and civility by the Spanish Divines who without any scrupulous enquiry after the Authors name or without any regard to the censures of the Parisians reprinted this Edition at Salamanca with some small variation of the notes and moreover judged it worthy to be read of all those who were inquisitive after the true meaning of the Scripture 'T is true that Leo Judae render'd some Hebrew words less properly than Munster but be took more care to accommodate them to the Latin Phrase So that he cannot justly be accused for any thing but his translating by way of Paraphrase purposely to avoid obscurity Sobast Castal Interp. The most famous and generally receiv'd Translation of the Bible is that of Castalio of which there are several Impressions But that is accounted the best which was made at Basil in the Year 1573. Sixtus Senensis giving us his Judgment of Munster and Castalio avers that they fall into both Extremes one of them being harsh barbarous and unpolish'd in his Stile and often inclining to the Jewish Idiom the other being as prophane as a Heathen foolishly affecting the Proprieties of the Languages of the Gentiles fancying his Latin could not be pure and elegant unless it were soft and effeminate Sixtus gives several examples of his prophane expressions Castalio saith he calls God the Father Jupiter Divus Armipotens Gradivus Caelicola likewise he calls Angels Jovis Genti Prophets Vates fatidici and holy Men Heroes Genebrard gives an excellent description of him and his Translation in these words Versio Castalionis est affectata Geneb praef in op Orig. plus habens pompae phalerarum quam rei firmitatis plus ostentationis quam substantie plus fuci quam succi plus hominis quam spiritus plus fumi quam flamâ—ae plus humanarum cogitationum quam divinorum sensuum But he is handled more severely by the Geneva Doctors and especially Theodore Beza who upbraids him with ignorance and rashness for his profane imitation of Catulus in his Translations for in the Canticles he does not use the plain word Columba but mea Columba Mea Columba saies he ostende mihi tunâ—â— vulticulum fac ut audiam tuam voculam venustulam lepidum vulticulum habes capite nobis vulpeculas parvas vinearum vastatriculas In this Book he plays the Poet rather than the Interpreter but every where he assumes the liberty of connecting the Periods and Verses that his Translation might appear more graceful and elegant as is evident in the first Chapter of Genesis which begins thus Gen. 1.1 In principio creavit Deus Coelum Terram cum autem esset terrarudis qâ—que iners tenebrisque offusum profundum divinus spiritus sâ—se super aquas libraret jussit Deus ut existeret Lux c. Beza and some other Geneva Doctors will only allow him to be a smatterer in the Hebrew Tongue but with
Now there is extant a German Translation done by the Doctors of Tigurino and chiefly of Leo Judas who was most particularly concerned therein which Translation openly opposes that of Luther And yet the same Doctors of Tigurino forged a new one as though the former Version had not been found and good The Authors of this late Translation are are as I hear Hottinger Heideker Mulerus and others who have translated the Hebrew words almost verbatim Piscator a man of great account among the Calvinists is reported to have done a Bible into the German tongue who though he relyed upon Junius and Tremelius their Latin Version yet he did not hang back but kept a full pace with the above named Translators The low German Translation which was taken into consultation at the Synod of Dort in the year of our Redemption 1618 came forth in the year 1637 and by orders of the higher Powers was done into Low-Dutch immediately out of the Hebrew and not from Martin Luthers High Dutch Translation was found errouneous Neither doth the Low-Dutch Translation want its faults arising from a more than ordinary dependance upon the Expositions of the Modern Jews who were rashly supposed by them to understand the Hebrew better then all the World beside And thereupon this Translation met with brisk opposition from some of the the Protestant Faction and Low-Germany the Country wherein it was hatcht was quickly markt out with the brand of novelty and affectation Mr. Leusden Hebrew Professour in Vtrecht a man before commended taking upon him to argue for the Low-Dutch Translation among the rest of his proofs produces as arguments the Corrections of the vulgar Latin by Sixtus Quintus and Clement Octavus Popes of Rome But the true reason why these two Prelates should Correct the vulgar Latin was far different from that of the Low-Country Protestants The former Animadversions without vain affectation desired only to make the vulgar Latin answerable to its ancient Copies whilst the latter sort of men magnifying the Hebrew varities which they pretend always to stand by set out every day and jump't up new Translations of the Bible which as soon as they come a little in vogue the Authors of them presently perkt up show their faces and ridicule the Old Translatour making it their end and aim to build up their Yesterday Opinions upon these new and unheard of Translations being the sole way they make use of to thrust their monstrous Doctrines into the Church and which they do openly acknowledge saying That the Sun of the Eastern Languages arising they betook themselves to the Hebrew Fountains the better to find out and confute the errours of Popery the better to establish their Religion That the English Protestants was cloy'd and overcharged with the numerous Translations of the Bible the bare words of the Bishop of London in his conference at Hampton-Court may be of sufficient evidence If each man begins the Bishop had his peculiar fancy we could never expect an end of Translation wherefore the good will and pleasure of his most Excellent Majesty 't is that some uniform Version be thought upon adding moreover that then he had never met with an English Bible well Translated and was very well satisfied that among the bad ones that of Geneva was the worst where he then thought expedient that the most Learned in both the Vniversities should confer notes together and make up a Translation which being first revised by the most Learned Bishops and Privy Council should at last be established by the Kings Authority The which being done the Church of England will be confin'd to one Translation and no more We may easily from hence conclude with what noyse bustle and dispension the diversities of Bibles came accompanied into England under the different Names of Tâ—ndal and Coverdale Thâ— Matthews Tonstal and Hethe Parker Archbishop of Canturbury and other Bishops the last named persons being the Author of a Bible Entituled the Bishops Translation Now the Geneva Translation which King James will have to be the worst is the same with the French Bible Printed at Geneva the which was made English and Read in Great Britain by some of the Geneva Profession As for the History of these and such like Bibles you may have it in Durel and Fuller's State of England Most wisely therefore did King James the first of the Name of the Kings of England Establish That rejecting and making void all other Translations which were then us'd in the Nation some new impartial and unaffected Translation should be composed Likewise he made a Law for Interpretation and ordered those who had the overseeing of it to go from the Bishops Translation as little as possible willing that some particular words which were in a manner Consecrated to the use of the Church should be retained as the word Church it self which signifies a public meeting and by the Decree he reprimanded the Geneva Reformadoes who had foisted in other Names commanding for these mens sakes that all Marginal Notes and Annotations at the beginning and end of the Bible should be struck out as things of bad consequence and the snares of the common People These and a great many more particulars of the like Nature were order'd by the Kings Royal Authority and accordingly effected so that to this intent there is no Translation made use of in the Church of England than the English one only set forth by his Majesties especial command To which Translation truly their Book of Common Prayer may bear some resemblance which Book except the Version of the Psalms hath been so far from the least alteration that it hath been used in their Publick Worship ever since their Reformation in the Reign of Edward the Sixth Though it be a general Opinion that the English had a Translation of the Bible in English done by Wiclift and that before the above named King began his Reign which Translation together with that which was abroad in England in the Reign of King Henry the Eighth was done into English out of the vulgar Latin Also Cochlaus will tell you that Luther's Translation of the New Testament was made English Besides all this there is a common report that a Bible was published at London in Welch that James Vsher the Bishop of Armaugh turn'd a new Copy into Irish and Mr. William Bedd an old one and that both of them are supposed to have been burned CHAP. XXVI Of the Translations of the Bible which were writ in the vulgar Tongue and their Rise from the Geneva Schools WE find not any French Translations of the Holy Scriptures and done out of the Hebrew and Greek which went not to School at Geneva neither do I omit that Translation which may seem to be composed by Renatus Benedictus one of the Parisian Divines since the Geneva Translation and the aforenamed piece are most nearly related as I shall hereafter make evident Robertus Olivetanus born in Picardie and a nigh kinsman of Jo.
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
of the Hebrew Arabick and sometimes Syriack Languages But that St. Jerom hereby mentioning the Arabick Tongue did not mean the Arabick Version is a thing so well known that it needs no proof these words of the Learned Father signify no more than that the Book of Job was difficult to be understood since the Author thereof had notonly used Hebrew words but also Syriack and Arabick For the better understanding of which he avers that with a great sum he ransom'd a certain Master called Lydaeus who was thought to be of great repute amongst the Hebrecians Scarce had the Parisian Bibles got abroad when in England the famous Walton and other divers persons begun to think of committing these same Bibles to the Press again to be of less bulk and not so large a Letter that this New Edition of the Polyglots might be readier and more convenient for the use of such as studied the holy Scriptures This matter succeeded as happily as was expected so that these Polyglot Bibles appeared in publick in the year 1657 and are vulgarly called the English Bibles containing six Volums They are indeed much inferiour to the Parisian Heptaglots in the largeness and goodness of the Paper as also the neatness of the Character But they have this advantage chiefly that every context and version may be discerned by the Reader in one single glance as it were and with little trouble compared one with another which cannot be done in reading the Parisian Polyglot without turning over two vast huge Volumns together Again they are to be preferred before that of Paris in that they contain truer Copies of the Greek Versions of the Septuagint and the Latin one by St. Jerom the Greek being first borrowed from a Vatican Book at Rome was afterwards Printed at Paris the Latin purged from innumerable Errours by the Study and Authority of Pope Sixtus the Fifth and Clement the Eight Besides all this you have the Arabick and Syriack Translations of Ester Judith Tobias and some other few Books which are not extant in the Parisian Bible either in Arabick or Syriack The English Edition has likewise a threefold Paraphrase one called the Hierosolymitan another that of Pscado Jonathan both which are writ in mixt Chaldee and a third Tausus his Persian Paraphrase It has also the four Gospels in the Persian and a Egyptian Psalter all which the Parisian Polyglots want In the mean time Monsieur Le Jay having consumed his Estate in publishing the Paris Bibles complains much of his sad Fortune and inveighs against the English men as Plagiaries who had taken his Work out of his hands and had published nothing except some few things of very little importance but what he had set forth before Truly the Gentleman ought to be pitied who had lavishly wasted all his substance in hopes of future gain But the English men in publishing such Polyglots as are more convenient and better suited to all necessities do really deserve Commendation and had deserved it much more if they had set out the Versions of the Oriental Nations especially the Arabic which lay dorment in their Libraries and are of better note than those which were published in the Parisian Bibles For it had been much better to have set forth the Copies of the Arabic Pentateuch with the Obelisks Asterisks and others of Origen his Notes which are reserved in the Library at Oxon than to have composed anew that Old patched Paraphrase of R. Saadias which was extant before in the Parisian Polyglots But what seems more strange is that the infinite number of faults which the Parisian Edition is stuff'd with especially in the Syriac and Arabic Versions as also in their Latin Interpretations should yet be found in the English one nor taken notice in the critical Animadversions made upon the last Toâ—e Much more might be objected against the English Edition which I omit since nothing can be absolutely compleat and perfect But the most notable thing in it is the Animadversions prefix'd to the fore-front of the Book though this Preamble hath it's failings too for it seems to be composed by several Authors who differing in Opinion about the same matter become contrary Parties this is the cause why Walton in whose name this Book first appeared in publick sometimes talks a little incoherently ANIMADVERSIONS Upon a small TREATISE OF Dr. Isaac Vossius's Concerning the ORACLES OF THE SYBILLS AND His Answer to the Objections in a late Treatise Entitl'd CRITICA SACRA LONDON Printed in the Year MDCLXXXIV ANIMADVERIONS UPON A Small Treatise Concerning the ORACLES of the SYBILLS By ISAAC VOSSIUS D.D. And an Answer to the Objections against the late CRITICA SACRA THE Author of the Critica Sacra upon the Old Testament had bespoken Moderation in Isaac Vossius whom he look'd upon as a Person carried away with too great an affectation of the Greek Version But the Learned Gentleman who well understood that Christ in the Apocalyps had spu'd the Lukewarm out of his mouth and that God loves nothing that halts between two Mediums In Resp ad obj nup. Critic fell more obstinately to work when he set himself to write his small Treatise concering the Oracles of the Sybils wherein he seems to have argued to that one thing alone the advancement of the Greek Interpreters by applauding according to his common Custom the Exemplars of the Jews For he returns his answer to Simon in such a manner as if he had address'd himself in his work with a Mind prepossess'd by the Rabbins after the Example of St. Jerom who was the first of the Christians who fram'd a Rabbinic Version and â—ncouraged others to dare the same Vossius makes large Protestations that he does not follow the Rabbins and that he acquiesces in that Version which Christ himself approv'd and admonishes Simon to forbear from any new Translation of the Sacred Scripture in regard a purer and more genuine Version cannot be made then that which was recommended to us by Christ and his Apostles And so far indeed Vossius does well in attributing very much to the Greek Translators though he would have done much better had he not affirmed them to be altogether free from all manner of Error and that they were not to be swerv'd from in matters of smallest moment as they who were to be lookt upon as Prophets rather then Interpreters I also extol the diligence of that worthy Person in vindicating the Translation of the Seventy Interpreters from the calumnies of most slanderous persons and for correcting their Manuscripts But when he comes to discourse of the Jews and their Books the Learned Gentleman discovers a world of ignorance in those things and frequently endeavours to impose falshood for truth All which shall be made apparent by Examples To which purpose I shall select some things out of that famous Persons Treatise concerning the Oracles of the Sybills and his answer to the Objections of the Critica Sacra from whence it
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
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
Scripture do not agree among themselves The ancient Jews as R. Solomon testifies will have Solomon so call'd as if we should say a Collector or Assembler of Sentences for that Agar in Hebrew signifies to Collect the Sense of which the Latin Interpreter has render'd in Translating it the Words of the Collector or Assembler The same Opinion R. Levy Ben Gerson illustrates where he says Solomon seems to have given himself the Name of Agur in respect of the Sentences which he has Collected in this Book But perhaps Aben Ezra and Grotius following him with more reason suspects this Agur to have been the Theognes or Phocylledes of those Times out of whose writings Solomon might Collect some Sentences which he digested into one Volume with other Proverbs Lastly there is a fifth part of the Proverbs of Solomon contained within the 31st Chapter which is the last and that under the Name of King Lemuel who that Lemuel was is not known Most of the Jews believe that Solomon is meant thereby as Christ is intended by the word Immanuel as Aben Ezra asserts and the reason of that Appellation he takes from hence for that Lemuel signifies God with them because that in the Reign of Solomon as Aben Ezra testifies one God was worshipt among the Hebrews But there is no reason we should be sollicitous about the Word Lemuel especially when the Seventy say nothing of it and as they read so they have Translated the words of the Context quite after another manner As for the Book which in the Hebrew is call'd Cobaleth and by Us Ecclesiastes in Latin it is call'd Concionator or the Preacher though most of the latter Jews will have Cobeleth to signifie a person that Collects because that Book contains several Proverbs upon sundry Occasions Of this Opinion are R. Solomon and Aben Ezra and as he says Solomon in another place is call'd Agur for the same Reason as David de Pomis speaks In Lexi Heb Titolo del libro nomato Ecclesiastes composito da Salomone significa Congregatore per Congregareâ—e raccore in quel trattato diverse opinioni de gl' huomini la Maggior parte de quali sono false The Title of the Book called Ecclesiastes composed by Solomon signifies a Gatherer together from Collecting and gathering together in this Volume the opinions of Men the greatest part of which are false But some of the Jews according to the Testimony of R Salomon agree with the 70 in the Interpretation of the word Cobeleth believing it to signifie a Person that Preaches in some Congregation But as to the Author of that Book the Rabbies do not agree among themselves For the Talmudic Doctors ascribe it to Ezechia the later Rabbins to Solomon and these are back'd by the words of the Text in which there are some Passages that cannot well be meant of any other than Solomon therefore it is most probable that the Talmudics only meant that that same Writing was tak'n out of Solomon's Works by King Ezekiah or by Men appointed by him The Christian Interpreters also acknowledg no other Author of Ecclesiastes excepting some few among whom is Hugo Grotius who affirms that Book to be of a later date composed under the Name of Salomon for proof whereof he alledges that he has many words collected thence which are not extant but only in Daniel Esdras and the Chaldee Interpreters St. Jerom writes that the ancient Jews had some thoughts of obliterating this among the rest of Salomon's Works thrown by because he asserts the Creation of God to be vanity wherein St. Jerom agrees with the Talmudists and later Jews Jerom. Com. in 12. Eccles but every one knows that it is the Custom of those Doctors to feign many things of their own Heads By who the History was written that is entituled Esther is uncertain but as to the time when it was written almost all the Jews and Christians agree For whether the Authors of it were the Senators of the Grand Synagogue as the Talmudic Doctors believe or Esdras which is the Opinion of the Fathers or Mordecai as Aben Ezra more probably believes and the Book it self seems to testifie there is no dispute about the time when it was written Therefore Hugo Grotius does not conjecture amiss when he says that Esdras added to his own and the Book which Nehemiah wrote The History of Esther which happened in the middle of those Times of which the Transactions are related in those Books and which Grotius also acknowledges to have been written by Mordecai That the Song of Songs had no other Author than Salomon the very Title it self declares and it is certain from the third Book of Kings that the same Salomon composed both Proverbs and Songs But this because it was the best of Salomon's Songs was therefore called The Song of Songs that is to say the most Excellent Song Yet some do question whether it were written by Salomon as it is now extant or whether it were cull'd out of the whole Volume of his Songs However for that Song wherein Salomon is introduced discoursing with the Sunamite as a Bridegroom with a Bride is very difficult to explain not only by reason of the Expressions somewhat over confident and frequent Similitudes which our Customs will by no means endure but also because the Names of the Interlocutors are not set done for besides Salomon and his Spouse there are two Chorus's of young Men and Virgins But 't is a strange thing how the Rabbies differ among themselves about the Book of Job The Talmudics believe it to be no relation of real matter of Fact but that it is a Fiction or Parable to set forth a most exact and high Example of Piety and Patience and with these some of the Christians agree Nay there were some who did not only believe the Argument of the work to be feigned but will have the Name of Job to be taken out of those Letters of the first Verse of the third Chapter of the Book where we read Jobad Jom he curst the day For all that went before they looked upon only as a Prologue But the Testimony of Ezekiel who makes mention of Noah Daniel and Job demonstrates that the Name of Job is not fictitious and the prudent Aben Azra most sharply rebukes those who are of that Opinion He also believes him to have been of the Posterity of Esau which he gathers from the Name of the Place Com. in 1 cap. Job where he was born Besides the Names of Job and his Friends and other Circumstances plainly evidence that the story was really true according as it is related though it contains many things which are much more like Parable than Truth of History But as to the Author of it there is no certainty some apply it to Moses some to Isaiah others to Job himself and his Friends Nor do they agree among themselves who make Moses to be the Author of it some believing that it