be read thus Above the Earth towards the open firmament of Heaven Or That Firmamental Heaven signifies all between the Earth and the proper Heavens mentioned v. 1. or at least to the Waters under them Thus we see passing by the necessity of the accents that is requisite to explain each of these Verses I have but pointed at one that is like a Candle giving light to the whole Context the whole Chapter and yet this is but a little one in his Office and Dignity as well as Bulk but his use is there to limit the subject of the Discourse to a particular part of what he had spoken of before Argument 7. For the sacredness of the Number I will conclude with this but it shall be a sacred Argument on a better Account i. e. for the Mediums sake viz. The sense of that Promise of Christ Mat. 5.18 Till Heaven or Earth pass one Iota or one Tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law And here I will freely acknowledge that man consonants or vowels or words might perish with out the impeaching of Christ's Fidelity The expression seems to be Proverbial and the Sence the preservation of Divine Oracles as to their Matter or Sence and therefore if these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Jews call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. be understood in the Letter the accents seem to be Christ's intent being preservers of the Sence of the Law There are Horns for flourish or superstition set upon the Consonants by the Jews if so old as Christ's time is very doubtful but that Christ should mean them is incredible Thus stand these Horns And therefore I think the care of preserving the Scripture entire has been a special Favour of Divine Providence But that care 1. Has not been exerted without Humane Means 2. Not Superstitiously as the Jews do who are so zealous for a Letter where Sense is not concerned As to the first Men were the Penmen and it was wrote in a Method customary to Men Isa 8.1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 written it with a Man's Pen that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gimel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Zajin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Teth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Caph 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hajin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tzadi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Schin is say the Jews according to the Custom and Manner of Writing among Men as legible as intelligible as what is suited to their common converse But still the Spirit of God took the over-ruling Conduct of these Men admitted to be Amanuenses For Holy Men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost And all Scripture the Chetubim as well as the Law and Prophets was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. As to the preserving of the Scripture it is enjoyned to Man committed to the Priests and Levites Deut. 31.2.4 When Moses had made an end of Writing the Words of this Law in a Book until they were finished Where on the by it s to be observed That the Pentateuch or whole Book of the Law from beginning to end excepting the last Chapter was writ by Moses himself For it is twice in this Verse Emphatically Asserted First in the same Phrase that God Asserts the Finishing of the Creation viz. Chekaloth And Secondly in a more Emphatick Ghalsepher Ghadtomim until the compleat Perfection of the Book Ver. 25. Moses commanded the Levites which bare the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord saying Take this Book of the Law and put it in the side of the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord your God c. As Moses was the Writer of the Law and wrote all the Words of it and consequently left none to Tradition So the Custody of the Law is committed to the Levites as the Persons immediately concerned And this Office continued with them while they were a Church Rom. 3.2 Vnto them were committed the Oracles of God Now indeed the Keepers are changed the Christian Church the House of the Living God is the Pillar and Ground of the Truth and especially the Levites as in the Old Timothy keep that which is committed to thy Trust Malachi 2.7 The Lips of the Priests are to be the keepers of Knowledge The People must ask the Law at their Months as Angels of the Lord of Hosts The Ark in the Tabernacle and Temple was the Repository but the Bearers of the Ark were the Persons intrusted Ver. 9. Moses wrote this Law and delivered it to the Priests the Sons of Levi which bare the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord. And to show their Fidelity once in Seven Years viz. On the Feast of Tabernacles they were to read that individual Law before all Israel Some think no Levites but they that were Priests were entrusted with this The Second Thing to be spoken to is the place where it was kept Moses expresseth it thus B. Azad Aaron in the side of the Ark but × signifies rather from or by the difficulty is whether it was in the Ark or in some Box besides the Ark. My Opinion is with the latter For First Sam. 6.8 The same Expression is used of the Philistines Presents Secondly 1 Kings 8.9 2. Chron. 5.10 There is nothing found to be in the Ark but the Two Tables of Stone Thirdly Both Jonathan the Paraphrast and the Talmud mention a little Chest at the side of the Ark wherein Moses put the Book of the Law Fourthly The Manna and Aaron's Rod was only put by the Ark. Fifthly The Ark was now covered with the Propitiatory Sixthly None but the High Priest once a Year durst go in where the Ark was but the Holy of Holies was a place sure enough and Sacred enough for this end Books that were not put in here were called Apocryphal that is not put into the hidden or secret place as Epiphan in the Book De Ponderibus saith of the Book of Wisdom and Son of Syrach they were profitable Books but not Canonical 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were not put that is saith Scaliger on Euseb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Ark of the Testament Afterwards when Prophetical Books were Wrote they were likewise laid up here 1 Sam. 10.25 When Samuel had told the People the manner of the Kingdom he wrote it in a Book and laid it up before the Lord. And the same is the Sense of Josh 24.26 Jonathan the Paraphrast being Interpreter There is a Noble Testimony to Divine Providence preventing Humane Miscarriages or repairing them A failure on the one side we find in 2 Chron. 34.14 Hilkiah the Priest found the Book of the Law of the Lord wrote by the Hand of Moses And a special care on the other Isa 34.16 Seek you out of the Book of the Law of the Lord and read one of these viz. Prophesies shall not fail neither one or other shall be wanting for my Mouth it self has commanded it may be Christ and his Spirit hath gathered them
these Sections were for Yearly Order that all the Law might be once Read every Year on the Sabbath but here they read every Day Three Hours in a Day for at least the space of Twenty Four Days 2. The intent was that the People might understand Now the Order of Sections did contribute nothing to that end but the Order of Accents did very much But a second Opinion refers it to the Translation in Chaldee or Syrian the People having forgotten the Old Hebrew in the Captivity which they confirm from Neh. 13.23 24. Their Children spoke the Language of Ashdod and could not speak the Jewish Resp 1. Elias Levita grants it was not lost in 200 Years Captivity in Egypt Why should we think they lost it in 70 Years Twenty whereof was gradual So that the Bulk were in Babylon about 50 only 2. Daniel with some others that were Noble had Masters to Teach them others had not 3. Jeremiah and Ezekiel the Prophets in that Captivity wrote taught and conversed in the Jewish Language Jer. 10.11.29.50 51. Ezek. 14.33 20. And what Daniel wrote in Chaldee concerned the Empire the rest is Hebrew even his Prayer 4. They lived by themselves Ezek. 11. using their own Customs keeping their own Genealogies not mixing with the People of the Land Ezra cap. 2.8 9. The Marriages complained of Neh. 13. were not Mixtures with Chaldeans but Moabites and Ammonites 100 Years after there were a few of both kinds but both rejected Ezra 9.10 Neh. 13.3 5. The Books wrote after the Captivity viz. Two Books of Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther Haggai Zechariah Malachi and some Psalms Psal 137.126 83.89 44. were wrote in Hebrew 6. Ezra cap. 5 7. mentions the Arabian Tongue as a thing Foreign to them both Letters and Words As to the Samaritan Character it is not my business for it is sufficient for my purpose that the Bible was put in the Quadrate Letter by the posteriour Prophets But I desire him that believes the Change to read Wasmuth's Vinditiae where he demonstrates Capellus's Chief Arguments to flow from his not understanding the Quotations he brings which are directly opposite to him I do not think that the Prophets taught the People the Art of the Points or made use of Grammatical Arguments as Jac. Alting in his Dissertations says the Talmuds and Rabbin whom he quotes do understand the meaning of it to tend But that one read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lev. 24.12 Num. 15.34 that the Mind of the Lord might be distinctly understood not through prudential conclusion but distinct Revelation in opposition to Traditions beginning to come in Value which in Christ's time overflowed the Nation And put the sense this was the Interpreter's Work there were several in the Pulpit says Maimonides in Ihlcoth Tephilla From the days of Ezra it was a Custom that there be an Interppreter by the Reader to give the Sense to the People Now I assert so far with the Jews That it was by help of these Points they did interpret for what follows Junius very well expounds thus And made them understand by the Scripture it self 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mikra is the usual Title for the Scripture therefore they contained a Key within themselves Their Tongue began not to be corrupted until about the end of the Grecian Monarchy Argument 5. Is from heaps of Humane Testimonies from all the Ancient Writings of the Jews Zohar and Bohaz the Talmud and Masora not that I pretend to be a Rabbi but what I have collected in Quotations for other purposes by other Authors For Instance Majus Gewss in his Dissertation on Deut. 6.4 Hear O Israel the Lord our God is one Lord But nearer the Original in Words thus Hear O Israel the Lord our God the Lord one or Hear O Israel Jehovah our Adori or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jehova One R. Simeon Bar Jochas Author of the most Ancient Book Sohar viz. in Adrian's Time about 100 Years after Christ says Majus he observed the Stop made by the Accents between Jehovah and One when he renders it thus The Lord our God the Lord they are One for Pesik with Merca or Munah makes a Dominum Nay he adds Sohar I mean sol 72. These Three are one that John Ep. 1. cap. 5. v. 7. seems to Quote this Text These Three are One. And he adds weigh this great Mystery of Faith penetrate into this Secret if thou study not this it were better thou had never been Hear O Israel that they Jehova our adorable One Jehova they are in one Vnity and confirm it from Deut. 4. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lord he is the God Or He is these Adori's and v. 37. They are expressed He brought them out in his Sight by his mighty power Power is an usual Epithet for the Spirit of God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is translated Sight is the usual Title of the Messiah in Deut. 8. its said My Presence shall go with you In Isaiah its called The Angel of his Presence And among all the Titles given to Modes Properties or Degrees in the Divine Essence among the Rabbies viz. Havajeth Dargin Middeth Parzuphin this Phanim this great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the most Sacred Aben Ezra says on this Text the Principal or Antecedent to which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is referred is our God And on that Text Zech. 14.9 On that day the Lord shall be one and his Name One says he One is to be referred to King not Lord for a Proper Name cannot admit of a Numeral without Aequivocation We say not one Thomas or John This Text is quoted Marc. 12.29 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 understood I hope the Reader will distinguish between the intent of the Author to prove a Trinity out of this Text and the intent I bring it for viz. to prove the Author of Zohar expounded the Scripture by these Points Again On Dan. 12.3 They that be wise shall shine the wise says he are the Letters of the Law and the Luster are the Points like the Soul in the Body for the Accents of the Law are like a Crown over the Head of the Letters Hence Arcuvolti says Surely what is wrote in the Book of Zohar about the Points was hid from Elias Lev. for he says in Mas Hammas If any could convince me that my Opinion was contrary to the Sentence of the Rabbi's or the Truth of the Cabbala that is in the Book Zohar my Opinion should go for nothing Let us to him add Bohar Cotemporary with Jonathan the Paraphrast 40 Years before Christ on Gen. 18.3 The Points are to the Letters what the Soul is to the Body But what Answers the Antagon to such Authority Alas says Bishop Walton If the Authority of those Books were as great as is pretended our Cause were utterly lost Therefore says Capellus on the Antiquity of the Points The Jews are not to be credited in
plant a Repugnancy as Absurd as Transubstantiation in their minds For we Assert them to be Orthodox in Pointing tho Erronious in their Judgment and yet this Pointing is a Declaring their Judgment The Prophets wrote what they understood not may be what was contrary to their present Sentiment but then it is supposed they knew not what they wrote but these Masorites were Directors of the Sense for if it should be said at that Juncture they were blinded or over-ruled by Divine Influence it would follow God was Author not they and then the Question is gain'd For to say they were the Pointers is to say they believed that to be the Sense of the Text which the Rules guides us in and that which they then believ'd and believ'd not I have the more largely insisted on this because it was Objected by a Person of worth Let me tell him that is a little acquainted with and exercised in the Hebrew Language that the Bible needs such a Key to determine its Sense As to the next the Gain I dare aver He that counts the furnishing his Head and his Heart with Divine Truth Gain that values Wisdom as Solomon did will soon gain more than the India's can afford But Comparisons are most proper among things of a kind therefore I assert Thou shalt find as great a difference between this and other methods of Comments and Systems as between Reaping and Gleaning But this I speak to grown understanding Christians and Ministers Comments especially Criticks are necessary it is a Contempt of God who has been pleas'd to continue his Oracles in these Tongues not to Study them as far as our Callings and Necessities admit God gave these Tongues to all the Gifted Brethren we read of in Scripture certainly his Scholars are the best it is extraordinary Excellency that marks his Disciples and yet I do not think it an Essential where God has made other useful Induements shine as Urim and Thummim I should be far from Vncharitable Thoughts of his Calling but he is unfit to expound Scripture We have Eusebius Josephus c. in Latine and English but no Man knows when he reads Truth or when Falshood when he reads them There are many Translations he knows not which to prefer how shall he then Expound And yet this Man may write a Treatise excellently curious Chains of Thoughts that never enter'd into the Critick's Mind I could mention a great Name for instance but need not But when thou hast exercised thy self in both these Gifts thou here enters a Third Form where thou may try the Solidity of these curious Thoughts and where thou makest the Spring it self thy Drink and not only so but thou enterst this Palace with the Key of Knowledge the Church was robb'd of in the Pharisees time by which thou wilt spy Pearls where others see nothing but Pebles For this end I made choice of Gen. 1.1 2. for a Specimen a Path beaten like the Street and yet made Discoveries I challenge thee and I dare challenge any to bring me the Text out of which I shall not make new Discoveries by it that he saw not before Thou will be a Gainer in every Verse If we value this Art by the Testimony and Judgment of Men it is not fit we make the Blind Judges that understand it not nor the World that love Darkness more than Light But if we value it by the Judgment either of Jews or Christians who either knew this Art or tho they knew not the Art believ'd it serv'd for this end they count it the only Measure and Standard for Interpretation all other Means are very mean in their esteem But this is the Key of Knowledge whose Loss they bewail though the Pharisees would not use it nor suffer others which its like Christ respected when He said such Points should not be lost though disused This they call Queen of Criticism this they call Compass of Translations all before were Coasters Reader I propos'd the common places as a Medium to prevent the Bulk of this Book and its Abstruseness for nothing Teaches like Example But here my Discouragement is doubled Some are so Curious some so Jealous whether these Points will prop their System or not Are they Socinian Arminian Amyrald Calvinistic Antinomian There are many more Origens Papists and Dr. Goodwin's Curious Cultivation of some School-men in his Knowledge of God and Christ There are different Rivulets of those and many more may be invented But I have been always Jealous of measuring Infinite Models by Humane Policies and Divine Wisdom by the short Thoughts of Man I always had my Faith to my self and no Foundation but Thus saith the Lord. And since Maturity a readiness to profess it My Business is to go from place to place with this Key of Knowledge and to try how much of that Mysterious Wisdom that Text contains and how much the other wherein we may find the Scriptures a sufficient Perfect Canon without School Terms A Second is Expences But I Conjecture when Experience has taught how needful this Art is as well as useful and how necessary Examples are to Instruct in this Art without a Living Master for nothing that is rare precious of great use is usually easily obtain'd many for the publick Good and their own will wish they had born all the Charges when it is not to be purchas'd However I advise thee to the best supply in its room these Books who have practically and applicatory wrote on the Subject that is Comments who have taken measures from them as Geierus Coccejus c. but above all Varenius in whom thou wilt see at large most of the Examples that are but just hinted at in my Book thou wilt find considerable Parts of the Bible exemplified and in Reinbeck some of them apply'd to his Rules but be sure to use thy Bible in reading my Book and if a Latine Reader only use Arias Montanus if an English only use Hutterus and bring the Points on the correspondent Words If thou intends to taste only and satisfie Curiosity pass the first Chapter but if a Disciple get it by Heart comparing it with the first Table Vale. A Detection OF THE Taghmical Art CHAP. I. Of the Etymology Names Figures Kinds and Vse of the Hebrew Points in their various Sounds WAS MVTH the most Famous Author of this Particular ART fronts his Institutions with two proper Sayings out of Plinius to Vespas viz. That most Men rather despise the best of things than undergo the Pains that is needful to attain them His other Saying is That it is a difficult thing to restore an Ancicient Art that is lost to create Authority to a thing that is new to strike a Light to things in Darkness to beget Faith in things that are doubtful and favour to things that are loathed All this Difficulty do I now encounter while I am Undertaking to prove That the sensual Points are a Divine Comment or next
these Members are indicated by the variety of these sub-distinguishers Rule 6. A Parenthesis is either of two Words and then it begins with a Minor and is concluded with a Major if it end 4 or 5 Words before a Dom. absolutum Or 2dly Of more Words than two and then it begins with a Major and is concluded as the former for if either ends but in 2 or 3 Words before a Dom. absol they are concluded by a Minor But if a Minor or an absolutum Dom. come in the room of a Major or Minor there is an Emphasis as the Matter will manifest If more than a Verse or if a whole one be a Parenthesis the former Rules are sufficient Rule 7. There remains another Rule for Emphasis viz. Maccaph 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it accelerates the Word so as to make it one in Construction with the following and signifies Haste for that Word has no Accent whereas on the contrary many have Two Accents which makes that one Word Two in consecution Gen. 35.22 is a most noble Instance of this kind where there is a whole Sentence each Word having two Constructions and two Senses and both pertinent and Emphatick This Argument is to me Demonstration and tho treated with Variety is omitted by none lying so obvious spun out of the very Bowels and Essentials of the Art I thought it worth while to enquire what had been or could be said against it and I found Capellus in his Vindiciis Anno Dom. 1689 much despising and contemning of it p. 906. cap. 17. but most weakly refuting it tho I shall at this time shun Controversie I cannot but give an account of this because it strikes at the Root of my Tree First Says he Ledeburius in his Preface to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1647. indirectly proves the Antiquity of the Points from their admirable Order that savours more of Divine Wisdom than Humane Industry It is wonderful that he should not once meddle with Wasmuth who so fully answers all his Arguments returns them as opposite Arguments on him and falls foul upon Ledeb's Preface Wasmuth was Printed 1664. 24 Years before this Vindiciae Secondly He says it is a Work of Herculean Labour aptly to reduce these Accents to their several Classes and Dominions but of very little Use Resp That shall be seen in the Chapter Of the Vses of the Accents Thirdly Four or Five of the great Points he says are useful the rest are Trifles 2. One may do better by comparing Contexts and Versions or by prudential Conjecture than by them Points 3. Suppose Sense and Reason can be better made contrary to them Rules than by them I will yield to Reason and slight Masoretical Authority Resp It 's certain all are of the same Authority and Antiquity the fruit of the same Wisdom and that the Momentousness of the Matter may be more Marked by a little Point than what is marked by a great one Prov. 1.1 I would know of Capellus whether Solomon or David be called there King of Israel Gen. 11.20 If Shem or Japhet be the elder if Habbak 2. the just by Faith shall live or just shall live by faith And I would have the Reader try if by all his Critical Comments he can suit the Point Resp 2. That is the Question if the Authority be Masoretical 500 Years after Christ or before Resp 3. He cannot know nor understand the Proposition Antecedent or Consequent without knowledge of the Points and can he understand the whole by unknown parts Resp 4. The preferring Versions to the Original and Conjecture to certain Rules are both of a piece I interpret French the one way and Latine the other way which renders me liable to filthy Blunders in the one when I am sure of the other Resp 5. Suppose the Masorites the Authors can we pretend or he to such Skill in the Hebrew as they had And suppose he can make a coherent Sense Piercing contrary to the Points by his own value of the Tiberians I ought to prefer that Sense for Instance Psal 30.6 Clop translates it thus Many Lives are but a Moment in Divine Wrath In his favour weeping lodges but a Night there is rejoicing in the Morning Our English thus His anger endureth but a Moment Lives are in his favour weeping may endure for a Night but Joy cometh in the Morning The Question is which of these Senses are preferable Clop against the Points not allowing to an absolute Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the power of a Comma against his constant Use or our Translators that follow a common Rule I have given to this Vindiciae of Capellus but a cursory View for Three Hours time The General Cry of the Learned of that Opinion is it ought to be answered None has Answered it My Answer and Opinion is It was Answered 24 Years before it was Printed by Wasm Vinditiae And if he had not been conscious of Impotency or self-condemned he would never have suffered such a Famous Adversary the greatest Master that ever wrote in this Art to pass without one Blow one Reflection one Answer once Naming If I find one more serious Perusal more worth in this Author it may be more easie to retract a mean Sentiment than one honourable one as Rivet and Spanheim those great Names did who once admired and after abhorred him when they read Buxtorf's Answer how much more would they seeing Wasmuth's The Fourth Argument I shall bring is from Divine Testimony to prove that in Ezra's time the Priests and Levites made use of them for Interpretation when they read the Law to the People the Text is Neh. 8.8 They read in the Book of the Law distinctly that is saith the Talmud in Megilla cap. 4. with the Targum others by Sections and gave the sense say they samu taghum they put the Accents to it and made them understand the Reading viz. by them Aben Ezra says the same in Mozena haleskon hakkodesh about the time of building the Holy House the second time The Spirit of the Lord rested upon the Men of the great Synagogue And they did restore the Accents and taught their Posterity the sense of every Word by the Means of the Accents the Kings and Ministers They taught their Posterity i. e. the two kinds of Accents Hence the usual Title given to Ezra by the Rabbies is Hammappesick Hamaphsick that is he who Pointed or the Pointer I wonder says Aben Ezra that any should charge the Author of the Stops and Distinctions with Error since it was Ezra the Scribe Kimchi in Amos 1.1 expounds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 observing the Stops and Distinctions and Grotius on the Text agrees with him rendering it distinctis vocabulis for the Words are distinguished by them only Most of the late Interpreters refer it to the 52 great Sections of the Law which were like to the Gospels in the Book of Common Prayer and gave Original to them But I oppose it First Because
accents i. e. for teaching them And Mur Zutra is recorded deciding the Controversies of the Law by these accents And R. Ihuda in the Mischna says It s not lawful for us to make any distinctions in the Verses which Moses has not made And Zohar to the like purpose ' If all the Prophets were equal to Moses they had no power neither to alter Letter nor Point of the Law Observe further Many Copies of the Misna are Poinetd both with vowels and accents I shall conclude this Branch from the Talmud with a Story out of Raban who says In his time i. e. Anno Dom. 1000. There was a great Book of punctation in their Library which had been wrote by Raffe Asc or Ashe in Babylon about Anno Christi 360. This was the First Author of the Babylonian Talmud and therefore no late additament The Book might have been of more Use to us than all their Talmud And shall conclude the whole Argument with some Observations on Aben Ezra and Jerom Two Authors that the two contending Parties contend for As to the first I find Capellus is content to divide him and allow that he contradicts himself and therefore of no value as the Woman was that wanted Motherly Affection she was willing that the live one should be divided tho it died for the Quarrel But to save him alive I will produce one clear and plain Proof of his Opinion in this Case which is neither used by Buxtorf nor Wasmuth on Exod. 18.3 The Name of Messias Jer. 33.23 comprehends all that The Lord our Righteousness That excellent Doctor says Aben Ezra says That the Name Jehova is the Name of him that Names the Messias so that the Name of the Messias is only Our Righteousness Thus the Name by which Jehova shall call Messias is our Righteousness But this Interpretation adds he arises from an Error about the accent Tirha or Tiphcha which is under the Word he shall call and not upon the Word Jehova It is worth observing that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is none of the great Lords that Capellus grants to be of use but a little Lord on which he builds a weighty Argument in a Momentous Matter Whether Messias is truly Jehova or not 2. I shall observe upon what Quotations they Dispute viz. if from Neh. 8.8 Aben Ezra believes that Ezra was the Author of the Accents whom he mentions alone and asserts he could not Err. Capellus first grants that Ezra taught the same Reading of the Sacred Book by the Accents which we have now from the Tiberians and that Education and Tradition preserved it between them for that 1000 Years Walton thinking that incredible yields they might be written in some other Book and added to the Bible by the Tyberians 2. He proposes the Question thus Whether Ezra actually wrote those Points or little Notes Or Whether he was so morose and scrupulous in the least punctilio's that we now receive in our Bible Now saith he We deny that that can be proved tho Aben Ezra seems to assert it But why saith he is Aben Ezra to be believ'd more than the rest of the Rabbinical Jews So that if we can prove never so much out of Aben Ezra we are like to gain little ground on Capellus And yet in Aben Ezra's Distinction of the former and later Masorites or Pointers he still endeavours to defend his own ground Aben Ezra says That the Pointers put Scheva under Tau in the Word Ghashit lest it should be confounded with the Masculine Form But why says he He answers It 's the Custom of the Wise Men of Tiberias who did this lest any should think the Pointer had forgot to point the Letter Tau or be doubtful how it should be read This Capellus would make it an indetermined thing by these Words whether this Pointer was before or cotemporary with the Tiberians Tho' this Pointer is some famous single Person to whom this Work is ascribed and the Jews commonly ascribe it to Ezra 2. Tho he and his Work is an Object about which the Tiberian Masorites do converse and therefore must be before The Second Author contended about is Hieronimus the Father who after Origen gave most pains in the Hebrew and therefore if the Points and Accents were in his day he would certainly have made some mention of them in his Works But his silence saith Walton makes it clearer than the light that there was neither Points nor Accepts in his Age. Resp This Argument would prove that the Points were not invented by the Masorites for neither Jewish nor Christian Historian has recorded it then or since for 1400 Years But 2dly The thing seems really false since Hierome so often blames the Lxx as corrupt and prefers the Hebrew Truth as he calls it In Gen. 19.33 he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is irregularly pointed Jer. 3.4 both the accents and syllables of the Hebrew Text are repugnant to the Lxx. In Psalm 90.8 it is to be read Gholaumenu our negligence according to the Hebrew but the Lxx has render'd it our Ages as if it had been Gholamenu Gen. 47. last Verse it is not in the Hebrew Mittah a Scepter but Mattah a Bed On Eccles 12. in the beginning of Jeremy says he if you change the Points of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ″ ′ it signifies a Nut but change 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies Watching Lyranus who lived in the 1300 Century and wrote a most large Gloss on the Bible was perswaded that Jerom's Latine Translation was after the punctuation of the Hebrew Bible because he corrects both the Lxx and the Chaldee Paraphrases by the Points of the Hebrew But let us try what Influence it has on Capellus He hath indeed a very subtile Refuge but brings no reason for its Credibility He says That Origen in his Octupla put the Hebrew Bible in Greek Letters and expressed the Hebrew Sound in Greek Vowels and from that Hierom corrected the Lxx. and Chaldee This he says was that Hebrew Verity he saw the vowels and accents in It is not to be expected of him that he should give some Reasons for this to deny is his part it 's ours to prove it But with his favour he puts us now to prove a Negative However It is my Opinion Capellus is in the wrong because he shifts his Refuge 1. It was the Hebrew the Lxx used he corrects 'em by 2. He grants then that Origen no Jew who lived in the Third Century was able and actually did point the Bible truly His Invention of Greek Vowels was as good as Points Why should they rob Origen of his Glory 3. Tom. 2. p. 198. Rufinus Origen's Friend and Interpreter thus cavils at Hierom Ps 2. in the Vulgar it is Embrace Discipline In the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in my Comment I turned it Adore ye the Son but in my Translation Worship in purity Hierom Resp I teach the Latines what I learned of the Hebrews and how
was before the Captivity and so corrupted the Quadrate was since and so corrected by Prophets Ergo The Samaritan is to be preferred being the primitive Yet I shall propose these Testimonies for the latter Rabbi Asarias in Meorenajim says thus In the time of the Second Temple there were two Copies of the Jewish Law both writ The one did consist in Assyrian Writing and Sacred Tongue as the Books which are true and right which we now possess the other here and there varying which was common among the People wrote in Hebrew that is the Characters used beyond the River which are left to the Idiots that is Cutheans or Samaritans To the same purpose saith the Authors of Ben Israel R. Gedaliah says The Law was given in that kind of Writing which we now call Assyrian this Figure was always kept among the Princes of Israel for the Vulgar used the Samaritan Hebrew but when Ezra came he let the People use the Figure wherein the Law was given It 's called Assyrian because the Nobles of Israel brought it from thence with them for they kept it there secret because it was the Holy Scripture Abarbynell says It is the Eighth Article of the Jewish Creed to believe the Law that now is in our hands is the same that was given in Mount Sinai without any Change Ritbam says The meaning of this Sentence in the Talm. viz. The Law was given in the days of Ezra in the Assyrian Scripture is That an Edict went forth from Ezra That all and every man should write the Book of the Law in the Assyrian Figure and no other That for the future they might use that kind of Writing wherein the Tables of the Law and Book of the Law which was in the Ark was writ And when it is said in the Talmud That in the beginning the Law was given to Israel in the Hebrew Writing that 's only meant of Books wrote for private use For the God of Mercy save us from thinking the Law that was in the Ark to be of that Character Now it seems a very probable thing That these quiescent Letters were the Vowels to the one and the Points the Vowels to the other which a further search may bring more light into At present I shall conclude with this That on a double account the Accentual Points have a priority to these Vowels 1. There are some parts of the Bible yet without Vowel-Points but no part without accentual 2. That the Accentual make a Change on the vowels but the vowels none on them 3. The accentual goes along with both Characters but the Vowels only with the Quadrate Figure 4. That the Anomala's and Irregularities are fewer in the Accents than either in Vowels or Consonants And the Reason may be good because there was a change in the one but none in the other CHAP. III. Of the Vsefulness and Necessity of this ART abstracting from the Opinion controverted about their Antiquity and Authority IT is confessed by Bishop Walton in his Prolog tho he disputes for the Tiberians being the Inventors of the Figures of these Points Yet not of their Use and Value that was before from Ezra's time and before that too and so Capellus and they think that either in Writing or by faithful Tradition it was preserved in that Integrity That they deny any more to be humane but the Figure of these Points in that Syllogisme against them What the Masorites are Authors of is humane but the Masorites are Authors of the sense of the Old Testament Prob. Minor The form of Words are their Sense but they are Authors of the form viz. the Points They distinguish and say They are Authors of the Figure not Sound nor Use in Signification The English Translators are as much Authors of the Bible Sense by their Invention of English Signs to Communicate the former Divine Sense before kept in Hebrew Signs to English People So the Tiberians Invented only these more fit Signs for preventing Mistakes and Errors creeping into that Sense which the Vocal and Traditional Signs were liable to let in And when they are urged with the Improbability of keeping entire such a Multitude of various Sounds Senses and Uses for a thousand Years They Answer may be though they were not Inserted in the Bible yet they were in a Book by themselves and then the Masorites work is only Application the Authority of the Points is Prophetical But to pass this by too and not to urge Concessions at a strait too much though Elias Levita the only Jew and the first Author of Tiberian Masorits always Asserted their Divinity Let us suppose their most Genuine Sense that the Masorits were excellent Criticks and Grammarians there were no Men such Masters of that Language and by these Points they have conveyed to us the true Sense of the Old Testament in their Day which before was kept by Tradition And though they did not believe nor understand the Evangelical Doctrines or Mysteries wrapt up in the Grammatical Sense of the Words yet the Grammatical or Oratorical Part of it they did well understand As a Latinist can Construe or Pierce Euclid and when he has done cannot find the Sense nor make out the Demonstration But an English Mathematician sitting by him and hearing the Latinist can easily but without his help knew not a Syllable of it The Tiberian Masorite in this case is the Latinist and the Christian the English Mathematician But now supposing the Matters of the greatest Moment and Concern that this Christian has it kept and lock'd up in this Book and that there is not a Book in the World beside that discovers and reveals this Matter there are indeed many Translations but through Time they are either altered and corrupted or the Translators were unskilful and were more guided by these Old Translations that very much contradicted one another than by an exact Knowledge in the Original Now it this case we will suppose some Men not Infallible But the greatest Masters of the Language in the World when the Language began to be Corrupted they put Marks of Sound and Sense Marks to guide in the Distinction of Equivocal Words and Marks to guide in Syntax upon this Book But the Natives being satisfied with this Book as they used it before made no great Matter of it and when they taught the Christians they taught that part of it they used and the other part they knew not so much of it is lost But a thousand Years after this the World turns Inquisitive for during that time the whole Book much more its Critical Art was sunk in Oblivion and Religion by Church Authority comes in Fashion until the Priests not only Imposed on their Consciences and carved an Hell or Heaven for them as they thought fit but on their Reason and Senses they would have the Laicks live on Hay and give to them the Meat and the Bread This awakened the Indignation of some the Pity of others and
Collecting and Concluding the Canon of the New Testament that we have of the Old A Second Motive that I shall use for Diligence in this Study is That though a Man may be a good Christian without knowledge of the Original yet he cannot be an able Teacher and that not only Primis labiis gustare For he that hath only tasted of a thing is far from a Sufficiency to fill his Belly or a Plenty to Dispence to others A Man can never be an Able Minister of the New Testament without being well skill'd in the Originals By great Divines this is thought the Sense of Christ Matth. 13.52 Every Scribe which is Instructed into the Kingdom of Heaven is like to an Housholder which bringeth forth of his Treasure things new and old The Old are ex ipso fonte to drink the Waters of Life from the Original The New says Altingius are all the Translations and Explications that as so many Rivulets have flowed from thence The Treasure says another is the Holy Scriptures the Old and New are the Types and Anti-Types the Prophecies and Fulfilments the Promises and Experiences But it is farther observable here That Scribe is a Title that Christ gives to New Testament Ministers Mat. 23.34 Every Minister is to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Man of Letters a Bookish Man He is not one of Christ's Ministers that pretends to it without Learning 2. As he is to be a Disciple he is supposed to have had a Master Every Scribe who is taught saith the Text. There was never yet a Teacher in the World whom God sent to Preach but he could give account who taught him The Jews call Moses their Master Our Lord Jesus professes He received his Doctrine from his Father He had given to him the Tongue of the Learned Christ was a Man of Letters a Learned Man though the Authors differ the Effects do not How knoweth this Man Letters say the Jews having never Learned The Apostle Paul enjoins Timothy to commit what he had learned unto faithful men who might be able to teach others 3. There is a limitation upon this Learning all kind of Learning will not serve turn Learning in Arts or Trade will not qualifie Coloss 2.8 Philosophy nor Mathematicks He must be taught in Things that concern the Kingdom of Heaven John 3.31 That 's the Object he must be a Skilled Man in It is not what may fit him to be a Statesman in Athens or Rome but an Acquaintance with the Oeconomy and State of Heaven 4. He must be a Faithful Steward or Dispenser of what Knowledge he receives He is now supposed to have the Key of Knowledge at his Girdle by which he can Unlock all the Treasuries of Duties Cases Promises Threatnings Laws and Institutions of the Wisdom of God But how can he do this to whom the Book is a Sealed Book who cannot so much as a School-Boy Pearse a Sentence in it But he who has received this Furniture and Trust he must Act the part of a Faithful Steward He does all indeed at his Master's Charges but he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to throw out Copiously and Plentifully in a suitableness to the Richness of the Treasure He is not to Husband and Dress up and Adorn some Cramben Recoctum but to throw forth New and Old And yet one thing more he is to be at pains in this though the Food is the Masters the fitting of it is the Stewards To be a Plagiary among Ministers is a Theft in its kind The Stealing of the Word of the Lord one from another is a great Fault when God proposes himself to be Teacher to all I shall end this Motive with one more Text of this kind and that 's the Apostle Paul's Character of a Teacher Rom. 2.17 18. First says he thou art a Jew The Word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Thou art a Jew by Name and Profession It is not here distinctive of a Nation but of a Religion Rev. 2.9 I know the Blasphemy of them who call themselves Jews and are not but the Synagogue of Satan A be-lied Country is not Blasphemy but a be-lied Profession is Then every Teacher must be a Professor though every Professor is not a Teacher but 2. And restest in the Law This Law is the Constitutution of the Kingdom of Heaven before-mentioned He is not to be a Lawless Person nor a Person under the Law but the Law must be in him and he must live in it This Word Rest in the Law is very Emphatick and yet more so in the Greek than in the English For it imports this Law not only to be the Object of their Work but the Satisfaction of their Heart they saw all their desire in it 3. And makest thy boast of God Glorying to call Him thine and to be called by him But in an especial manner here it imports a Glorying in his Testimony and his Authority and depending on no Testimony else John 5.39 How can ye believe who receive honour one of another That is depend on one another's Testimony Have any of the Pharisees or Princes believed in him John 7.26.48 The receiving a Doctrine as an Oracle of Truth or Orthodox from Man is to pay that Honour to Man that is due to God only This seems to be their fault who profess themselves to be Paul's Apollo's and Cephas's He that can say I Profess thus Truth because I read it in the Word and Words of God he glories in God as his Teacher There follows in this Text ver 18. the degrees of Knowledge attainable under this Instruction The First is being Instructed or Catechised out of the Law that is by a Live Voice by the Mouth of the Teacher in Question and Answer to receive in the Principles of Religion in our rude Minds The Second is And knowest his Will Catechetical Knowledge depends on another's Faith but Knowledge upon a more proper bottom as the Samaritans first Believed because the Woman told them but afterwards they trusted their own Eyes and Ears The former is Credulity the latter is Firm Knowledge which can never want Desire and Delight to attend it when fixed on the Law of God The Knowledge of the Original doth mightily contribute to this Solidity and Firmness and especially this part of the Knowledge For what can a Person that is Ignorant of the Tongue determine in a Text tortured to three or four several Senses by so many various Criticks who is Skilful in no Rule by which he may Judge who is right and who is wrong Lastly And approvest the things that are more excellent or can prove what 's to be preferred where things differ This Man says the Apostle is not only able to Guide a poor blind ignorant One but is capable to be a Light to them that sit in Darkness who without Prudence that is Pharisee-like think they have Knowledge enough Capellus is offended that Ledeburius should so much exalt the
Vniverse all things the whole World and may be confirm'd from Psal 124.8 Acts 14.15 and 17.24 By Heaven then is understood all that is not Earth But where to place the limits between them is the Question tho from what follows we may solve it viz. That Heaven is receptive of various acceptations but in the Text it is All that that is beyond or above the uttermost border of the Firmament where the fix'd Stars stand plac'd in other places following the surface of the Earth or Atmosphaere i. e. what is above either There is another Question here de casu Nominis viz. What Number it is dual or plural the accent on the penult makes it dual but the Aethiopic having the singular Schamai and the Root Schamah affording regularly Nouns of that derivation And 3dly There being Heaven of Heavens and Third Heavens I believe with Hottinger and Lud de Dieu that it is plural There remains yet one Question more about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Emphatick or ×” Notificative these Heavens and this Earth P. Simon blames Tremeliius for translating it thus but he should first blame Aben Ezra who so long before him turn'd it thus and H. G. and Paraeus and all the Hebrew Grammars and then he should prove that that is not the use of this ×” That which we learn from it is the erroneousness of them who talk of Pre-Adamites and prae-aerizits many Worlds before this For Moses informs us That the Heaven and Earth which God created in the beginning was this very Earth and these very Heavens of which Moses gave Account Fourthly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 atnach under Elohim is here Rhetorical or Emphatick by R. R. 2. M. 2. for where the Verse contains but one Proposition there is no proper place for atnah whose use is to divide the Verse into the most opposite Propositions And hence we may know wherein the Emphasis consists viz. repeating the Verb that is on one side of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the other also and shewing it to be taken in the most full and ample Signification So that to fill up Silluks Proposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bara with sakeph gadol is to be supply'd next to Elohim In English thus In the beginning God created He I say really created these Heavens and this Earth Hence we have a most strong Confirmation that the use and signification of the Word Bara in this place is to assert a production out of nothing Some may think that the Emphasis should be enquired for in Elohim not in Bara because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is under it I Answer If it were a little Lord or Minister that affects single Terms so it would But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stands under Elohim because he is the last Word of the Sentence for its the whole Sentence he affects and the Essence of the Sentence lies in the Indicative Verb. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aelohim is not truly deriv'd from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strong for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is never changed into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he mappikatum in Eloah shews ×” to be Radical nor from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strength Nor 3dly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their strength Nor 4thly Primarily from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to swear but from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet in use among the Arabians to adore or worship a part whereof swearing is in which sense the Bible retains the Word This seems preferable to Aben Ezra's Opinion who thinks it a primitive In the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the worshippable the Adori is used by Paul in the Epistle to the Thessalonians 2. In the Old Testament it is the Name God declares himself by as the Object of Love Service and Swearing And the first Command of the Law is 3dly to have no other Elohim i. e. to worship none else 4thly It is very suitable for his creating us is the most suitable foundation and founds a most just Title to all our Worship and Service A Second Question is de casu Nominis How it comes to be in the plural Number Grotius thinks the singular is to be supplied before it Eloah Elohim But then Bara would bear a third word tipcha not munah as next to it Many Papists Protestants Lutherans and Calvinists that are well skill'd in Criticism think a Plurality in the Deity is understood and such as is consistent with a singular individual Essence and therefore that the Trinity is denoted And to evade the Objections of Socinians they form the Argument thus 1. Every Word in the Plural Number 2. Having a Singular Number 3. Without analogy of Number 4. The same signification being retained 5. Carrying Verb Participle or Adjective to the Plural with it 6. In the Third Person as well as First or Second is of a plural signification But Elohim is Ergo Fifthly Of Bara already It bears Munah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Minister to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by T. 1. R. 2. M. 2. Which shews that Elohim is the Nominative to it and it being in the singular does denote that whatever plurality be in the Deity there is but one Creator one God whatever Multiplicity or Variety there is in formal objective Considerations to draw forth our Adoration toward him there is but one undivided Substance who was before all Creatures and by his powerful act gave being to them Sixthly Braesehit bears 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which well agrees with the order of T. 1. and R. 3. as also the sense for being a little Lord it denotes the distance between single Terms What makes up the Essence of the Sentence is united by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Minister and if it belong'd to another Sentence it would bear a Major that divides Propositions therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shewsthat it is an adjunct or circumstance of this Proposition and indeed tho the variety of significations attributed to this Word is great yet all agree in this ב in Braeschit is by Cabbalists counted mysterious and that two ways first Numerically to Ages Laws or kinds of Divinity Maghasche Bereschith signifying Natural Religion and Maghasche Mecchaba mysterious Divinity Others think God begins his Book with ב because that begins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blessing for × begins arurah cursing but these are Monsters rather than Mysteries John in his Gospel c. 1. v. 1. interprets both ב and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to us turning it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the beginning So the Lxx. so Onkelos and Jonath Ben. Vziel Bekadmin and so the Vulgar and so the most usual Translations Hence the others fall Hierus Targum in Wisdom Tertull. in Power Procop. in his Empire 2. In the Foundation 3. In the Head or Sum. 4. In the Foundation Philo in Order before all So R. Bechai and Castalio Maimonides with Matter And among all the most authorized in the Son which shall be examined afterwards The Root