't is impossible to make a Translation of the Scripture without a Man's interposing his own Sence against his Will Though it were to be wish'd that the Sacred Volumes could be so translated that our own Conjectures might not be read instead of the Divinely Inspir'd Author's meaning whether obscure or clear But this is impracticable for the above-mention'd Reasons and therefore after we have done all that we can to explain the Sence of the Scripture as plainly as 't is possible the World must either acquiesce in our Endeavours or every one must study Hebrew in his own defence and take the best Method he can to satisfie himself We have taken that care all along in our Translation as very seldom to interpose our own Judgment where the place was somewhat doubtful but it was impossible to use this Caution every where However we have faithfully set down in our Annotations what Conjunction or Preposition was read in the Hebrew word (f) In the Hebrew 't is and Noah and he staid but M. le Clerk has translated it Noachus tamen Expectavit tamen But with our Author's leave haec videntur esse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notata Consult our Notes upon Genesis 6.8 Chap. 8.12 We have also observed that sometimes the true Signification of the Particles is wrested where the Translator did not clearly understand why the Sacred Writers have used them in certain places See our Comment upon (g) Where agreeably to the Hebrew our Author has translated it supra Firmamentum St. Jerom sub Firmamento the LXX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or juxta Firmamentum the English in the Firmament But his Reasons are too long to be set down Gen. 1.20 some have made no difficulty to use Latin Particles not such as exactly answer the Hebrew but such as they would have used if they had been obliged to express the same things in Latin after their own manner which Conduct may throw both Translators and Readers into very shameful Mistakes But we in the Translation of the Hebrew Particles have never receded from the most commonly received Signification of them unless we were absolutely forced to do it although sometimes it was none of the most proper For we are well satisfied that all Nations in the World do not connect their Sentences after the same manner and that we are not to introduce them using the same Thread of Narration if we design faithfully to Copy their different ways of Speaking If this had been duly considered by that Learned Author who has obliged the World with a laborious and useful Book called The Concordance of the Particles he had mightily lessened the Significations which he attributes to them for very often he minds nothing else but how to substitute an agreeable or a more emphatical Latin Particle in the place of the Hebrew The same ingenious Person has observed that these Particles are sometimes redundant and sometimes deficient which he has evinced by several unquestionable Examples though some of them 't is true may be call'd into question For as there are some places where 't is apparent that they either abound or ought to be supplied so there are others where they give us no small difficulty which 't is not in the power of every little Pretender to remove For instance if in Gen. 19.26 where we have render'd it And she became a Pillar of Salt we suppose the two Particles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be wanting as they commonly are then the Sence of that passage will be And she became like a Statue in a saltish Soil which seems to be the genuine Sence of the words as we have observed in our Dissertation upon that subject 'T is undoubted that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be understood Gen. 24.23 Ch. 38.11 and perhaps 't is understood in the abovemention'd place rather than express'd to avoid the harshness of the Sound which would happen there if the foregoing word terminated in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We have likewise shewn upon (h) Where Ishmael is said in the Original to be Onager homo instead of instar Onagri So Job 11.12 Pullus Onagri nascitur homo instead of rudis instar Pulli Onagri Gen. 16.12 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Similitudinis as the Grammarians use to call it is frequently wanting However least we should forcibly seem to fasten our own meaning upon Moses's words we have rendred it verbatim as 't is in the Original See a farther instance of an Ellipsis of the like nature (i) In the Hebrew 'tis The God of Abraham and the God of Nahor the God of their Father where the Particle and is wanting after Nabor Gen. 31.53 We have brought some (k) As that of Levit. Et Postridie E T reliquiae ex to comedentur Where the Particle Et is certainly superfluous See other Examples in Ch. Noldius where he handles this Particle Numb 74. Examples upon Gen. 20.16 where Vau abounds and if we did not know that it was redundant the meaning would be perplex'd and obscure It is manifestly redundant Gen. 22.4 Nay sometimes it abounds in the beginning of a Book as in the first Verse of the Prophet Jonah And the Word of the Lord c. who for all that is no more tacked to Obadiah than Obadiah is to Amos. This occasion'd a certain Person to conclude absurdly that all the Books of the Old Testament were the Collections of one and the same Man connected together after that manner VII To this may be added their everlasting way of forming their Narrations by Preterperfect or Future Tenses joyn'd together by the Conjunction Vau which gave us no small trouble 'T is very certain that no Emphasis is design'd by it and that it may best be express'd by Latin Participles or other Particles with which the Latins use to joyn the parts of their Sentences together as all Interpreters have done although some of them have used this Liberty more sparingly than others However 't is an eternal Drudgery in a strict Translation frequently to change the structure of the Phrase nor indeed can any thing excuse our so doing but mere Necessity Therefore in the first Chapter of Genesis we were often forced to omit the Conjunction and exchange it for the Latin Particles verò autem deinde tum enim postea dein quoque etiam at que and such-like At other times we used Participles as the Reader will discover in abundance of places if he comparts our Translation with the Hebrew For instance the two and thirtieth Chapter is thus joyn'd together 1. AND Jacob went AND they met him 2. AND Jacob said AND he called the name of the place 3. AND Jacob sent 4. AND he commanded them 6 AND the Messengers returned 7. AND he was afraid AND was in distress AND he divided 8. AND he said c. Which would be insupportable in Latin There are several Versions of the
History could not be had out of the Books of the Old Testament for as that is not of it self obscure the chief Matters relating to it are so frequently inculcated that by virtue of those Repetitions they are made plain enough Besides we do not every where meet Ambiguities and Reasons to doubt though 't is certain there are but too many of them Hence it is that nothing belonging to the Religion or History of the Israelites in general has been called in question though infinite Disputes have happened among the Learned concerning some particular Circumstances and other abstruser Matters which are never to be decided by any Light of the Understanding or any Application of Mind Our Commentary all along abounds with such sort of Questions wherein we cannot pretend to state Matter of Fact but only deliver what we think our selves and what others before us have conjectured for there are infinite places so unaccountably perplext that 't is easie to demonstrate the Impossibility of finding out the genuine Meaning of them and every Person that has but a competent Knowledge of these Matters will be soon sensible of this Truth if he does but carefully consider it For this reason those Persons that pretend to be influenced by the Truth and not by a Party will not easily condemn another for his Opinion provided it does not hurt the Sum and Substance of the Book But this is not a place to talk of these Matters In the Third place this sufficiently shews that the Hebrew Language was never cultivated with any extraordinary care for as the Culture of Ground has this end to procure Plenty of wholsome Fruits for the Tiller so are Languages for no other design cultivated but that Men may have plenty or words to serve them upon all Occasions and withal a Perspicuity of Oration without which the greatest Plenty is useless For certainly the end of Speaking is not to amuse or tire our Hearers with multiplicity of words but that we may be understood and by the Mediation of Speech to convey our Thoughts into the Minds of others Now the Hebrews not only neglected Grammar and those other Arts and Disciplines that help to enrich a Language in words but were utterly unacquainted with Rhetorick that serves to refine them Upon this account they every where trample upon the Rules of the Rhetors even those that do not depend upon the changeable Wills of Men but are built upon the everlasting Rules of Reason and ought to have the same Authority all the World over No body doubts but that Clearness is one of the greatest Happinesses any Tongue can boast of since innumerable Mistakes may arise from words not rightly understood which are not only troublesome in the common Offices of Life but extreamly dangerous in Matters of greater Consequence But the Hebrews as we find never took any great Pains to render their Language Perspicuous If 't is not it ought at least to be a Matter of Commendation among all People neither to use fewer words than are necessary to make a Man understood nor more than are requisite especially in a simple Narration that so our Hearers may fully comprehend our meaning A Narration says Cicero who was not only an admirable Orator but a great Master of Speaking lib 1. de Inv. cap. 20. ought to have three Qualifications it ought to be Concise Clear and Probable We shall not meddle with the two last as having already treated of Perspicuity and because a Dispute about Probability is impertinent here but let us see what he says of Brevity 'T will be short says he if we begin no higher than the present occasion demands and do not ramble into far-fetch'd Stories and if we relate a thing in General without mentioning every little Particular for generally speaking 't is enough to say such a thing was done without descending into the Circumstances and if we proceed no farther in the Story than things are worth knowing And if we do not make Digressions into Foreign Matters And if we so speak that from what is already said the Reader may sometimes guess at what is not said And if we not only omit whatever is destructive of Perspicuity but also whatever neither hinders nor helps it And if every thing is only told once and if we do not begin with that where we left off last Though these Rules are agreeable to Reason yet the Jews neglected them as might be proved by a thousand Instances if there was occasion for it which the attentive Reader will easily discover in our Annotations Unless we carry this along with us while we strive to accommodate the Hebrew Histories to the Precepts of Rhetorick we spoil all and do not understand what they mean They are frequently defective in what is necessary and abound in Superfluities both which unless they are supplied or else are known to be redundant 't is impossible to understand them An Emphasis is urged where there is none at all and when any thing is omitted in a Narration though 't is by no means Rhetorical that they 'll tell you against all Sense and Reason ought not to be understood Hence arise those angry Wars between the Interpreters and bold Decrees pass concerning the Sence of some ambiguous places which 't is a mortal Sin to endeavour afterwards to revoke Hence proceed Anger and Hatred and all those Mischiefs which Theological Quarrels usually draw after them There is another Rule likewise which is frequently neglected in the Narrations of the Hebrews and yet is not undeservedly commended by the Skillful in Rhetorick As we have already seen they not only advise us to make the Narration as clear as we can but also Methodical and Open That what is first transacted be first related and the Series of Things and Times so preserved that Matters be told exactly as they were done How Religiously the Hebrews have follow'd this Rule let only the Book of Genesis declare for them the good Order of which History will raise a thousand insuperable Difficulties if we do not remember that the Jews were no Slaves to the Regularities of Time and Action Thus what is said concerning the Dispersion of the Nations in the tenth Chapter ought to be placed after the ninth Verse of the eleventh Chapter The third fourth fifth and eighth Verses of the eleventh Chapter are likewise Inversions of the Narrations as also the 23d Verse of the 24th Chapter See the Notes on Chap. 20.2 Chap. 36.6 Chap. 34.1 and what we have remark'd in the Chronological Tables on this place If from these Observations that respect intire Sentences and the due ordering of them we pass to single Words and single Locutions we shall find the Precepts of Rhetorick no less neglected there But at present we will only content our selves to produce two or three Instances of words used in a Figurative Sence And here as the Rhetoricians tell us All Disparity is to be avoided because every Metaphor is or ought
to be grounded upon some likeness Upon which Score neither the Romans nor the Graecians instead of to occasion a Dearth durst have said to break the Staff of Bread Which Expression being not rightly understood has made very Learned Men fall into strange Mistakes as we shall shew in a proper place Because as the Masters of Eloquence observe the chief Excellence of a word figuratively applied consists in making a greater Impression upon the Sense therefore all gross sordid Images are carefully to be avoided that may nauseate the Hearer Therefore by this Rule it was not lawful to say That God was a War-like Man That he was roused up like a Sleeper and like a valiant Man who after he has slept out his Wine cries aloud And several other Expressions of the like nature I will instance in no more for these are sufficient to convince the most prejudiced Reader that the Hebrew Language is extreamly Rude and Impolite But before I dismiss this Article I must inform him of two things and then take my Farewel of it The First is That we by no means pretend to deny that the Hebrew Writings are here and there imbellish'd with extraordinary Sentences and that there are many sublime Passages but especially among the Prophets But this is not enough to give a Language the Denomination of Polite since no Tongue in the World can arrive to a sufficient Perfection of Purity without a long and laborious Application to Grammar and Rhetorick for some Ages at least A Book ought to observe from the beginning to the end of it all or most of the Rules of Elocution and Order to make it pass for an elegant and regular Composition For as Pliny says l. 3. Ep. 13. Even the Barbarians now and then invent finely and discourse magnificently but none but learned Persons can dispose things fitly and paint them with an agreeable Variety The other is That whatever has been hitherto said by us concerning the Hebrew Tongue has only a relation to the Words and Stile as the People commonly used them but not to the things themselves that were revealed by God to the Jewish Prophet and by them communicated to the World No sound Christian ever denied that these things were always of the greatest Moment and sometimes to be above the reach of Humane Understanding But though God Almighty discover'd them to us by the Jews yet he permitted them to use such a Stile as was most Familiar to themselves and their own Country-men For the Spirit by which they were influenced by a wonderful Condescention accommodated himself to the received Customs of their Language Hence it comes to pass that the Apostles deliver'd the Doctrine of Christ not in an Attick Stile or with Plato's Eloquence but after their own way suitable to the People for though they were Divinely inspir'd yet they were but indifferently skill'd in Humane Learning as we are told by St. Paul 1 Cor. 2.1 and elsewhere And herein the Divine Wisdom manifestly appears that these Heavenly Truths should be reveal'd to and for several Ages preserved by a Barbarous unlearned People as the Greeks called them and yet not the least tittle of them be known to those Nations that were in full Possession of all Arts and Sciences That this was not done rashly but pursuant to the Will of God Almighty St. Paul teaches us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But this en passant least any Censorious Reader should imagine that we confound Divine and Humane things together but to carry on this Argument as it deserves would take up a greater space than the narrow limits of this Dissertation will allow VII As long as the Jewish Government stood and the People kept unmixt from other Nations we may probably suppose they preserv'd the Strength and Purity of their Language so that from Moses down to Esdras it receiv'd no sensible Alterations For while they were not debauch'd with the Manners of their Neighbours consequently they made no change in their Writings by which means their Language might have been extreamly alter'd even whilst it was inrich'd and polish'd which we know was the Fate of the Latin Tongue And therefore 't is not strange if we observe little or no difference of Stile in the Sacred Historians But after that the Tribes of Judah and Benjamin as well as the other Ten were carried into Captivity and those that went not beyond the Euphrates were scatter'd up and down the Neighbourhood among Nations that spoke different Dialects of the Canaanitish Tongue When the Jews I say after Seventy years return'd into Judea at last out of several Countries their Language could not avoid being vitiated with a mixture of other Dialects At that time says Nehemiah 13.23 I saw Jews that took to them Wives from Asdod Hammon and Moab and their Children spoke one half Hhatsi in the Speech of Asdod and knew not to speak pure Hebrew And thus they spoke after the Tongues of several People Nehemiah indeed expresly tells us he prohibited such Marriages but 't was not in his power to hinder the Jewish Language from being corrupted by that mixture Nay those that came from Chaldaea no less introduced Chaldaisms In following Ages when infinite numbers of Jews not only lived in Judea but in the neighbouring Nations as Syria Egypt nay and in remoter places and yearly visited Jerusalem upon the Score of their Religion it must of necessity follow that not only those that lived out of Judea but even the Inhabitants of Jerusalem that daily convers'd with these Strangers and married among them must strangely adulterate their Language So that at last instead of the true genuine Hebraism there sprung a Syro-Chaldean Mixture as appears by the words of that Language that are to be found in the New Testament not to mention now the Dialect of the Talmud As other Writers have demonstrated these Matters more copiously and a detail of Particulars is not our business here I will only observe that within some Ages after their return from the Captivity the old Hebrew as we find it in the Sacred Writings was no longer the Mother-Tongue of the Jews and therefore those that had a mind to be Masters of it were obliged to study and peruse the Holy Volumes Now though they had no more Hebrew Books than we have at present yet in this matter they were much Happier than we because the Tongue they spoke had so great an Affinity with the ancient Hebrew and therefore was no small help towards the attaining it For this reason we find that the Seventy Interpreters have (f) I shall give two Instances of it They have translated Gen. 1.6 Rakiah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Firmament and not expansus as most of the later Interpreters have done following the Signification of the word Rakah which in Syriack denotes the same as firmare comprimere Thus also Gen. 3.15 where we after the Hebrew have render'd it He shall bruise thy bead the Sept. have
the Reader as briefly as we can what is meant by the word Interpret for we do not here design to deliver all the Rules of that Art Now since they that speak make use of certain Words or Forms of Speaking in order to be understood by others and to raise the same Motions and Affections of the Mind in their Hearers as they feel themselves those may be said to interpret other Mens words if we take the word in a large Acceptation whoso express them in another Tongue that they who hear the Interpreter speak think altogether the same things in the very same order and manner as the Person that spoke first would have them If all Languages were equally Copious and furnish'd with words of the same Force and Energy we might safely then render Word for Word and Phrase for Phrase and consequently we should only have occasion for a literal simple Translation But since Languages do not answer one another so exactly 't is impossible to make a Verbal Translation if the Narration is somewhat long Many things must of necessity be explain'd in sewer or more words as the occasion demands if the Interpreter has a mind to be understood and to gain that Point in the Minds of his Hearers as he whose Interpreter he is desires he should Nay sometimes though we increase or diminish the number of words yet the same Notion cannot be express'd in two Languages by reason of the Diversity of the Idiom An infinite number of Words and Expressions whether Figurative or proper are so peculiar to their own Tongues that they can by no means be transfused into another without a long and troublesome Circumlocution which cannot be inserted into a Translation From hence 't is easie to conclude That no Translation can be in all Respects compleat that is to say such a Translation that after the perusing of it the Reader shall think the very same things and be affected after the same manner as if he understood the Language out of which the Version was made and was able to draw for himself out of the Original Fountain And as this holds certainly true in all Languages in the World so 't is most sensibly perceiv'd in the Latin Translations of the Hebrew Books by reason of the vast Disagreement between the Hebrew and Latin Tongues as we shall more fully demonstrate below We know indeed that the ancient Jews and Christians who were ignorant of the Hebrew Tongue thought the Greek Version of the Old Testament but especially that of the Pentateuch commonly said to be done by the LXX Interpreters to be the most absolute thing in its kind that ever was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Whether the Chaldeans learn the Greek Tongue or the Greeks the Chaldean Tongue and light upon both Scriptures the Chaldean and that into which it is translated they admire and adore them as Sisters or rather as one and the same both in words and things not content to call them Interpreters but Prophets and Revealers of heavenly things that happily expressed the genuine Thoughts of Moses with a most pure Spirit These are Philo's words in his Book de Vitâ Mosis which we could heartily wish were as true as they are remote from Truth We should then have the best and surest Interpreters of Moses and the exemplar of a perfect Translation which they were very far from obliging the World with But since 't is evident that what Philo pretends was done by the LXX Interpreters is impossible to be performed by reason of the great difference of Languages as it has been already observed we did not therefore attempt to translate the Old Testament because we hoped that those who were only well skill'd in Latin might be able after the reading of our Translation to reach the meaning of the Prophets as well as those that understand Hebrew and hear them speak in their own Native Tongue we thought 't was enough to aspire towards it as far as the most different Idioms of the two Languages would give us leave and since without taking too great a liberty we could not bend the Hebrew Phrase to the Genius of the Latin Tongue we often express'd the Hebraisms Word for Word especially such as the Christian World has been long accustom'd to or whenever we did not certainly understand the meaning of any place Of which more hereafter But because the Hebrew Phrases and manner of Expression being different from all others would give a great deal of Trouble to those that are only acquainted with Latin we have added a plain Paraphrase more suited to the nature of that Tongue by the reading of which if they cannot attain to the very words of Moses yet since we have in the same order express'd that in Latin which Moses did in Hebrew they will in some measure comprehend his Sense and not as I imagine deviate much from the true meaning of the Text. By this means what we were not able to compass by one single Version perhaps we may perform by the help of the Paraphrase But after all we thought we should not fully satisfie the Curiosity if not of the most Learned yet of those who were not altogether Strangers to Hebrew if we did not in our Annotations explain the Hebraisms Opinions Customs Rites the Allusions to them and the nature of places as far as we could arrive to the Knowledge of them and give an account of our whole Translation and Paraphrase Thus in our Paraphrase we have in a few words shewn what our Opinion was and in our Annotations more at large why we were of that Opinion Nevertheless there is something in the Paraphrase which is not always to be found in our Annotations for in the former the Reader will discover the Connexion and Series of the whole Oration which for brevity sake we could not always attend in our Comments Besides we have observ'd both by our own and the Experience of others that especially in difficult Books notwithstanding the Annotations of Learned Men upon every word the Connexion was very often obscure so that though all the words were well enough understood yet the Force and Order of the reasoning did not appear Therefore we thought our selves obliged to obviate this Inconvenience by making a continued Paraphrase after the Example of several judicious * As the Learned Publishers of the Books in usum Delphini have generally done Authors Which Conduct if it does not seem altogether so necessary in Historical Writings as some who have not duly consider'd the Matter may imagine yet the great Usefulness of it will at least appear in the Hagiographi as they are call'd and the Books of the Prophets However I dare without Vanity affirm that several who after they have read the Translation think they understand the Series of the Oration well enough will if they cast their Eyes on our Paraphrase even in the Historical Books confess that they miss'd several things which they fansied
they understood very well But I had rather the Reader should be convinced of this Truth by the perusal of our Work than by our own Boasting In our Annotations we have only endeavoured to open and illustrate that which is called the Grammatical and by the School-men the Literal Sence We have there laid down no Theological or Theoretical no Moral or Practical Conclusions as well because it would have too much swell'd the bulk of the Work as because after the Grammatical Sence is once fully understood 't is the easiest matter in the World to find out the Theoretical or Practical Doctrines especially to those that have read any Systems of Divinity or Morality We have also meddled with no Theological Controversies because it was not our Intention to gratifie this or that Party but what all good Christians ought to agree in the lovers of the Holy Scriptures and of the Truth As for those Persons that take a delight to know these Squabbles which it were better for the Interest of Mankind that they were extinguish'd they may have Books and Comments more than enough written merely to gratifie a Faction and these they may turn over at their leisure Perhaps some People will censure me that I have not handled every thing more like a Divine but let them know whoever they be that I purposely left that Province to be manag'd by their sublimer Wits We might indeed be justly blamed if we omitted any thing we promised to perform but since it was never in our Thoughts as we have solemnly affirm'd to retail Theological Dogma's it would be hard measure to condemn us for what we never promised Nay they have our leave to despise these our Performances in comparison of Theological and abstruser Contemplations We 'll not disown if they please that we did not penetrate into the obscure meaning of the Holy Writers that lurks under the Cortex Grammaticus Let us be thought to understand no more in the Sacred Books of the Hebrews than the Authors were willing the People should understand which Antonius in Cicero speaking of the Graecian Learning frankly owns of himself If we have been able to attain but to this small Pittance every where we shall mightily congratulate our selves and others of vulgar Understanding to whose Apprehension this was suited But as we had often occasion to doubt whether our Conjectures were right and could not make out the meaning clear enough by the help of Grammar and Criticism alone or else several meanings of equal Probability offered themselves The Reader may observe that both in our Paraphrase and Commentary we use a doubtful and no Dogmatical Stile and perhaps he will there discover frequenter Reasons for suspending his Opinion than in most Writings of this nature But since every Man Believes and Doubts for himself I must inform those Learned Gentlemen that have a greater insight in these Matters that I writ for my self and such as stand upon the same level and may they hug themselves with the sweet Contemplation that they know more than their Neighbours Least we should betray any one into Mistakes we made a scruple to assert some things positively when neither by the assistance of others nor by our own Endeavours we were able to fix any certain Judgment However it does not follow that People do not invent because they do not affirm As we vastly disagree from the Opinion of those Persons who believe that nothing can be made out in Scripture with the help of Grammar alone unless Tradition comes in for a share so we do not believe that it can explain and clear every thing We are sure we have found it so Now where the matter was not evident beyond all possibility of Dispute we have taken care to restrain all rash Determinations which would be an unpardonable Imposition on the World if we should affirm things false or things unknown besides that nothing can be more Scandalous than to let our Approbation run before our Knowledge III. So much we thought our selves oblig'd to say concerning our Manner of Interpreting in general now we shall proceed to lay before our Reader the Difficulties that gave us no little Pain when we first began to set Pen to Paper If we rendred word for word it was apparent that the Version would become unserviceable to those that were unacquainted with Hebrew for whose use it was principally intended For it had been utterly impossible for them to understand it unless they perpetually consulted the Comments where nevertheless many Grammatical Criticisms of small importance are omitted And frequently too those that are unskillful in Hebraisms would have wrested them in a wrong Sence And now if to avoid these Inconveniencies we had follow'd a different Conduct allowing our selves too great a Latitude it was to be fear'd lest in obscure places we might impose our own Conjectures upon the Reader instead of the meaning of the Sacred Writers I know 't will be replied to all this That a middle way is then to be observ'd whereby the Translation shall neither be made so servile and close as to become obscure and mis-lead those that are only skill'd in Latin nor too lax or redundant so as to shew the Interpreter rather than the Writer himself But so severe an Undertaking is much harder to be well perform'd than 't is easie to talk of it as we shall shew by a few Examples 'T is a frequent Hebraism And he lift up his Eyes and saw Et sustulit oculos vidit See Gen. 13.10 18.2 22.4 13. 24.62 31.10 12. 37.25 39.7 43.28 This Phrase with the Hebrews as it appears by the above-mentioned places signifies to look round about one to see things at hand and remote and the like We frequently meet with it in the other Books of the Old Testament in the same Sence so that there is no room left to doubt of its Signification Now the Latins have the same Phrase but then 't is in a different meaning Those that are afraid and ashamed we use to say dare not oculos attollere and on the other hand those People tollunt oculos that are possess'd with no Apprehensions as it were easie to prove by several Instances Therefore this Hebraism we saw was not to be verbally translated There is a like Expression Chap. 29.1 Et sustulit Jacobus pedes And Jacob lift up his feet and went into the Eastern Country Now who could make any thing of tollere pedes The Latins indeed say Efferre inferre ferre pedem but in another Sense The Reader must be forc'd to own that these Hebraisms were so to be rendred in the Translation as to have Latin Phrases substituted in their room But there are other Hebraisms too no less frequent that afford us a juster occasion of doubting The Hebrews often use to subjoyn an Infinitive to any other Mood or Tense of the same Verb as dying thou shalt die seeing I saw and innumerable
new Controversies that then employ'd the whole Christian World so that the Interpreters rather busied themselves to confute Errors than give us a plain and critical Enarration of the words I will not say that by thus inclining their Studies Men of Parts and Learning have been so far led out of the way that they have sought out Doctrines which were true indeed and agreeable to Religion in improper places though nothing be more certain however 't is manifest that by so doing they have neglected several helps necessary for the understanding of Languages since 't is impossible for a Man to grasp every thing at the same time They that have read the most celebrated Commentaries of the Divines of the last Age and examined their Translations know how true this is and to prove it to those that never looked upon them would be labour lost They that employ'd their time most this way chiefly depended upon some late Grammarians of the Jews and Modern Rabbins but were in a manner destitute of all other Assistances of Critical Learning I would fain know which of them in the last Age applied the Histories of the old Eastern People who border'd upon the Hebrews and what we find in ancient Authors relating to their Manners Opinions and their Country towards the Illustration of the Scriptures two or three perhaps and no more Nevertheless St. Jerom had long ago advised though no body would regard him That 't was one thing to compose Books of our own as for instance about Covetousness Faith Virginity Widows and upon each of these Heads to â—â—duce Testimonies from all parts of the Bible and set them off with a little secular Eloquence and make a magnificent appearance upon such common subjects and another thing to dive into the Sence of the Prophets and Apostles to know why they writ so by what reasons they support their Opinions what peculiar things the Idumeans the Moabites the Ammonites the Tyrians the Philistines the Egyptians and Assyrians have to themselves in the Old Testament For 't is necessary continues he that they should have different Causes and Arguments and Originals according to the Diversity of Places and Times and Men to whom they were written But neither in St. Jerom's time nor afterwards did any one before our Age regard this Advice as it deserved so that our Ancestors have left us a very ample Harvest for this sort of Learning upon this account we may pretend to set out more accurate Translations and Annotations upon the Scriptures than they did though we are otherwise inferior to them in Wit Learning and Industry In their times Theological and Moral Precepts could hardly be inculcated enough but now since they are known to all we lie under no necessity to dwell upon them any longer Therefore have we employ'd our selves in that way of Interpretation which we have describ'd in this Dissertation and have endeavour'd to observe the Laws we enjoyn'd our selves very Religiously How we have succeeded in our Performance let other Persons judge who have pursued these Studies out of a desire to find out the Truth to whose Censure we most willingly submit our Undertaking and shall be always ready to receive their Instructions and Emendations with all imaginable Gratitude Dissertation III. Concerning Moses the Writer of the Pentateuch and his Design in writing I. The Necessity of Treating of the Writer of the Pentateuch II. Three sorts of things we find in the Pentateuch 1. Those that happen'd before Moses 2. The Actions of Moses which were without doubt first written by himself 3. Other things which really are or at least seem to be later than the Age of Moses III. Those Passages which some People imagine to be later than Moses are examined IV. That very few places can come under that Denomination however that the Pentateuch ought not to be given away from Moses upon that account V. That 't is uncertain who made those Additions VI. That the Design of the Writer is of great Importance towards the better understanding of his Writings VII Moses's Design in writing the Pentateuch inquired into THE two former Dissertations had a relation to the other Books of the Old Testament as well as to those of Moses but now we intend to treat of the Mosaical Writings exclusive of the rest for we cannot well omit the Discussion of that celebrated Question which has been so warmly debated in this Age viz. Whether Moses writ the Pentateuch Some Authors that have made no small noise in the World have positively asserted that it was not writ by Moses or at least that such as it has come down to our hands it is not wholly his However we in our Commentaries according to the received Opinion of the most ancient Times have all along attributed it to him Therefore we must now enquire which of the two Opinions is most agreeable to Truth and this we shall perform after such a manner as not to bring the least Reproaches or invidious Reflections but only Reason and Arguments against those that are of the contrary side neither out of an unmeasurable Prepossession shall we deny those things that are evidently plain Then after we have fully proved the Pentateuch to be the Work of Moses we shall endeavour to find out his Design in writing it No Thinking Man will doubt but that both these Disquisitions are of the last Consequence towards the better understanding of these Books and since they could not so conveniently be handled in our Commentary we shall dispatch them in this Dissertation with all the brevity we can II. There are three sorts of things to be found in the Writings of Moses which we must here take into our Consideration We shall have soon done with the two first but we shall dwell somewhat longer upon the last The first comprehends those things which were done before Moses was born at least before he came to years of Maturity of which nature is the History compriz'd in Genesis and the beginning of Exodus and here if we except a few places which we shall hereafter examine we find nothing that may induce us to believe that Moses was not the Author No body doubts but that the Creation of the World and the other Matters of Fact which are there related down to Moses's Parents might be written by him Learned Men only doubt whether Moses really writ them and if he writ them whether he was the first that convey'd them down to Posterity in writing or whether he might not take what he has from ancienter Memoirs which were afterwards lost If Moses was the first that writ of these Matters and they were never consign'd in Writing before it necessarily follows that he must either have them by an immediate Revelation from God or else that they were communicated to him by Men who preserved them in their Memories for there is no other way for him to arrive to the Knowledge of them Now he no where tells us they
call it Prospicietur in monte Jehovae since the Person that added it to the Text seems to speak of it as if it were still used in his time But why might not Moses say that this Proverb was in use etiamnum hodie since perhaps this Form was used from the days of Abraham down to Moses This I am certain of that there is nothing in the whole Matter which does not fitly agree with Moses's time There was a convenient distance enough between Abraham and Moses for the latter to take notice that the aforesaid Form of which Abraham was the Author continued till his own time Nay if the Interval had not been quite so great yet Moses might very warrantably express himself after that manner since this Form is sometimes used by those that writ but a few years after of which we find two Examples in St. Matthew Chap. 27.8 Chap. 28.15 as others have observed before me To these we may add such-like passages out of St. Jerom for he speaking of the Ecclesiastical Writers of his own Age expresses himself after the same manner Saebadius Bishop of Agennum in France Vivit usque hodie lives till now or to this day decrepitâ senectute 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Greek Interpreter has rendered it Didymus of Alexandria Vivit usque hodie and has passed the eightieth year of his Age 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiphanius Bishop of Salamis in Cyprus Superest usque hodie and in his old Age is writing several Books Eunomius of the Arian Party usque hodie vivere dicitur Priscillianus Bishop of Abila usque hodie to this very day is accused by some of the Gnostick Heresie though others maintain that he was not guilty of what is laid to his Charge Priscillianus was slain by Maximus the Tyrant but seven years before St. Jerom writ this We have touched upon this somewhat largely because several places in the Sacred Historians are illustrated by this Observation 8. Likewise they object the name of Migdal Heder Gen. 35.21 that is The Tower of the Flock by which name is supposed to be meant a Tower upon one of the Gates of Jerusalem which was called the Sheep-gate but this is uncertain however if we may believe latter Ages the Tower of the Flock did not belong to Jerusalem Consult our (g) There was a Tower at Jerusalem or not far from that City of the same name as we are informed by Micah 4.8 St. Jerom following the Tradition of the Inhabitants in his time places it not far from Bethlehem in his Epitaph of Paula who after she had visited Bethlehem Not for from thence says she she descended to the Tower of Ader i. e. of the Flock near which Jacob fed his Flocks and the Shepherds watching by night were so happy as to hear Glory be to God on high c. Which as it might be true so it receives no great Confirmation from so Fabulous a Voucher as Tradition is Observations upon this place of Genesis Nor is there any reason why this place should not retain its ancient name in following Ages 9. They suppose that Moses could not possibly write Chap. 36.31 nor reckon up so many Kings of Edom. Now these were the Kings that reigned in Edom before there was any King in Israel After this follow the names of eight Kings who reign'd successively one after another and make as many Generations as there were from Jacob to Obed Grand-father to David and Contemporary to Saul the first King of Judea since from Jacob to Moses there are only four taking Moses into the account Now some answer That Moses foreknew that the Israelites would set up Kings over themselves to which purpose they cite Deuteronomy Chap. 17.14 But is it credible that God likewise revealed to him how many Kings the Edomites were to have and by what Names they were to be called before the Jewish Theocracy was turned into a Kingly Government Now Moses no where tells us that such a Revelation happened to him and indeed whoever will read over the nine Verses wherein the Succession of the Kings of Edom is contained will soon be satisfied that there is no Prophecy in the case for the Sacred Historian there speaks as of a thing past and gone that nothing can be more clearly express'd For what more evident Testimony can there be given that the thing was already past than these Phrases And he died and there reigned in his stead Some body whose name has escaped me solves it another way for he humbly supposes that these Kings reign'd at the same time in different places and for my part I humbly suppose he never read this Chapter his Head being certainly fill'd with Metaphysical Contemplations To deal ingeniously with the Reader the best way to get clear of this Difficulty will be to own frankly that these nine Verses from V. 31 to 39 were added by some one who lived after the Kingly Government was set up in Israel 10. Some have objected that Canaan is called the Land of the Hebrews Chap. 40.15 which in propriety of Speech could be said only at that time when the Hebrews had possessed themselves of it and that therefore the Sacred Historian who was later than Moses accommodated Joseph's way of speaking to the Stile of his own time But we have (h) 'T is plain enough says our Author upon this place that after Joshua had led the Israelites into Canaan all that Country might be called and really was called the Land of the Hebrews But if we should take it in this Sence it would follow that this Passage was written after the time of Joshua as some have believed If we would have it written by Moses we must only understand some part of Canaan where the Hebrews generally fed their Flocks without any disturbance For though they were Strangers and wandered from one place to another yet those Fields might properly enough be said to belong to them where they had pitch'd their Tents for several years with the Consent of the old Inhabitants Now it appears by the Book of Genesis that they sojourn'd for the greatest part about Mamre and Hebron as far as Sichem partly by the Permission of the Natives and partly by Force answered this Objection in our Commentary 11. In Exodus Chap. 6. after the Sacred Historian has inform'd us of Aaron's and Moses's Pedigree he thus goes on v. 26. These are THAT Aaron and Moses to whom the Lord said bring out the Children of Israel from the Land of Egypt according to their Armies These are THEY that spoke to Pharaoh King of Egypt to bring out the Children of Israel from Egypt These are THAT Moses and Aaron Now we do not urge the third Person here say some which 't is plain several Historians have used but the Demonstrative Pronouns that and they which Moses would scarce make use of while he was alive and writing of himself But we must here call to mind that Moses
Pentateuch belongs to Moses we have no reason to ascribe those Books to any one but him V. It has been long controverted among Learned Men who it was that made these Additions which we find in the Books of Moses and they have gone upon various Conjectures Some would have him to be Joshua others Esdras and lastly others to be the under Scribe among the Hebrews but this is only guessing for they bring no Reasons to enforce their Opinions Because Joshua succeeded Moses therefore some People fancy it was he that inserted those Passages that seem to carry Discoveries of a later Age. Again others ascribe this to Esdras who is by the Jews said to have regulated the Sacred Volumes and by some to have made them up again out of his Memory after they were certainly lost But since these different Hypotheses are supported by no competent Witnesses that is to say such as flourished in the same Times or such as might have learn'd the Truth out of the Memoirs of their Contemporaries they may be as easily rejected as they are brought upon the Stage Nor is a multitude of Authors who lived several Ages after and never cite any that are older than themselves and who do but transcribe one another of any weight Esdras is only called a Scribe and a ready Scribe in the Law of Moses in those Books that go under his Name See chiefly the seventh Chapter of Esdras and this seems to have given occasion to that Fable of his restoring the Sacred Books though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rather signifies a Learned Man as we might easily demonstrate than one that is busied in transcribing of Books Several uncertain things have been positively asserted concerning these under Scribes as we shall shew at a more proper place upon the following Books but this is the most uncertain of all viz. That they inserted the above mention'd Additions into the Mosaical Volumes And therefore after a diligent Examination of the Matter we ingenuously own that here we do not know what to conclude perhaps one of those who are already supposed perhaps some one else and perhaps several hands have at several times inserted these things into Moses Therefore we can have no surer or safer Sanctuary here than prudently to suspend our Judgments by which conduct if we do not discover the Truth yet at least it is not excluded from the Mind VI. If we were able to discover all the Designs that Moses proposed to himself in writing this would be of much greater Importance towards the better Interpretation of his Volumes for these Books are not like the Works of Mathematicians where we find nothing but general Propositions that have a relation neither to certain Places nor Times nor Men and do not allude to any thing but the business in hand Moses writ for the Benefit and Instruction of a particular People called the Jews though I do not deny that by the means of Divine Providence his Books were afterwards serviceable to innumerable other Nations Upon this account he said abundance of things merely for the use of that People which he had omitted if he had not been influenced by this Consideration He likewise had an Eye to the Opinions and Customs of the neighbouring Nations which he assented to or rejected according as they agreed with Reason and the Truth We know indeed from the nature of the thing it self that the general aim of his writing was to teach the Israelites the Worship of one God and to deliver them the Laws which he had received from him but it is to be wished that we particularly knew for what Reasons he followed one certain Method in Writing more than another and what he chiefly had an eye to in that Abridgment of the ancient History which he has left behind him From hence perhaps we might be able to comprehend why he omits several Transactions to give us a Narration of some other Events which are not as we imagine of so great Importance why he used such and such Words and Expressions why he mentions some things only en passant and treats of others in a more copious and frequent manner with other things of the same nature which would give considerable light to many obscure places Were it possible for any one so to secure his Readers before they were admitted to the perusal of Moses that they should find no rugged places or at least but few that were hard to be understood so universal an Obligation could never be requited with Thanks and Commendations enough For Example No one reads the short Prologomena which Asconius Pedianus has given us before some of Cicero's Orations against Verres but he would with all his heart be at any Expence that all the rest of his Orations were recommended and illustrated by such Prefaces For those Prefaces or Arguments are no small helps towards the understanding of Tully and would be infinitely more serviceable to the World if they were but longer Now since we are destitute of such Assistances by reason of the shortness of Moses's History and the great Scarcity of ancient Oriental Authors and can by no means supply the Defect of those things which are necessary to such a Design it remains that we must often be involv'd in the greatest Difficulties And as I often considered of this Matter when I had the Mosaical Writings in my hands so I was resolved to collect and gather out of Moses himself whatever might be pertinently said upon this occasion I flatter'd my self that I should not be so rigorously censur'd if I did not answer the Reader 's Expectation as if I only raised his Appetite and did not endeavour to satisfie him for this reason I made no scruple to set what follows before my Commentary whatever the Learned World may think of it VII That no body may mistake me or expect to find what I never promised I do not here inquire what was Moses's or rather God's Intention in delivering the Law which we shall consider when we come to the particular Laws but what was Moses's chief and principal aim in writing and publishing the Pentateuch such as we now have it All Men as we observed before know well enough that Moses chiefly writ to teach the People of the Jews that only one God was to be worshipped and after what manner that was to be done but we must more distinctly shew what method he took to reach that mark if I may be allow'd so to express my self and what other ends he might possibly have 1. We must chiefly and in the first place remember that it never was in Moses's thoughts to write the Annals of all Mankind down to his own time but only to select those Passages out of the Histories of former Ages which agreed with his general Design before mention'd or some other particular by ends Hence we find that nothing can be shorter than his History is from the Creation of the World to Abraham since
the purpose than now he does For in the first place he describes the Serpent to have been the most Subtle of all Creatures Next That he employ'd his Subtlety in Deceiving our First Parent and held a Dialogue with her as if he had been a Master of Reasoning Lastly That his creeping upon his Belly was imposed upon him as a Punishment Josephus himself could not have more fully explained his Sentiments than Moses has done II. But other Persons who were Jews likewise not being able to digest so many unpalatable things as Speech and Reason attributed to a Brute and the Serpent's losing his Feet although Moses seem'd to express as much in the plainest manner imaginable yet rather than understand him so they chose to commit Violence upon his words and betake themselves to Allegory Philo indeed in his Treatise De mundi opificio and elsewhere denies that these were Fables and Fictions wherein the Poets and Sophisters take so great a delight Nevertheless he owns them to be Figurative Documents that are to be explain'd Allegorically in order to find out the bidden meaning of them And lastly affirms That it may be rightly conjectured that the Serpent is a Symbol of Pleasure which Argument he handles more copiously afterwards Maimonides also Part 2. Mor. Nev. c. 29. supposes that these Passages are to be expounded by way of Allegory and some of the later Rabbins declare themselves to be of the same Opinion III. But others that have a just Indignation to this Libertine way of Interpreting the Scripture which wholly depends upon the Fancy of the Interpreter and yet not able with Josephus to follow the literal Sense have fallen into different Sentiments none of which labours with fewer Inconveniences than the two above-cited Opinions Some Divines of no mean Rank in the Learned World maintain that it was not a Serpent properly so called which appeared but that the Devil was signified by that name that therefore the Devil is called the old Serpent by the Hebrews and is thus described by St. John in the Revelations 12.9 The great Dragon the old Serpent called the Devil and Satan who seduceth all the Earth See likewise Rev. 20.2 For this Reason the Devil is called by our Blessed Saviour a Murderer from the Beginning And the Author of the Book of Wisdom 2.24 tells us That Death entered into the World by the Envy of the Devil See also 2 Cor. 11.3 where the Serpent is said to have deceived the Woman by his Subtilty But this Hypothesis is easily refuted for neither can the Devil be called the most subtle Beast of the Field but in a Figurative Sense neither will the Punishment inflicted upon the Serpent suffer us to doubt that a Serpent's Body at least appear'd here To remove these Difficulties some conjecture that the Devil did not put on a real Serpent but only formed the Exterior Appearance of one But the above-mention'd Objections are as directly levell'd against this Opinion as the former IV. For this reason several Persons have believed that the Devil used the Serpent's body as an Organ to act his Imposture by and that God to shew his utter Aversion and Hatred of Sin punish'd the very Organ by which this Seduction was effected But if it were so what occasion was there to say that the Serpent was the most subtle Beast of the Field For the Devil might have abused the most stupid Creature in the World to this purpose with as much Success for he did not employ the Serpent's Craft but his own to deceive Eve V. But others observing these and the like Difficulties in all these Opinions came at last to this Point as to own that all we could apparently gather from this Aenigma was that the First Parents of Mankind began to Sin from whence a Series of innumerable Evils were derived to them and their Posterity 'T is indeed certain that now and heretofore Mankind has been in a State of great Corruption nor can the beginning of this Infection be carried lower than the Original of the World But then after what manner Sin entered into the World so that we might understand plainly and without the least Reasons of doubting all the Circumstances of the first Sin none but those can signifie to us who were present at the matter if by any means they could be revived again VI. Lastly Others finding in this History frequent mention made of Discourses where none at all seem to have passed imagine that the Serpent did not speak but that Eve saw him eating the Forbidden Fruit and was seduced by his Example to eat of it her self Especially if we consider that this prohibited Fruit by its beauty and perhaps by the specious name of Knowledge might help to induce her as she was gazing on it Indeed the Serpent's Punishment below v. 14. Thou shalt lick the Dust all the days of thy Life seems to intimate that the Serpent had deceived Eve by eating of the Fruit and because he had occasioned her Ruine by eating of Fruit from a high Tree therefore he was condemn'd to lick the Juices of the Earth The Favourers of this Opinion do not deny but that some Evil Spirit might act his part in this Tragedy for which reason the Jews not rightly comprehending the meaning of this place might in after-Ages call him by the name of the Serpent But as the Sacred Historian introduces the Serpent Speaking who had no Speech at all according to the Genius of his Narration as is plain from the first Chapter of Genesis where he frequently represents God Almighty speaking to all the parts of the Creation so likewise because he was to give him his share in a Dialogue by whose Example our first Parents were deceived he therefore attributes Subtlety to him which however can be supposed to belong to a Beast no more than the Faculty of Speaking does For this reason he is said to have used both Speech and Craftiness because as the Maintainers of this Opinion alledge he as effectually ruined our first Parents as if he had seduced them by a crafty artificial Harangue And therefore both the Subtlety of the Serpent and his Conversation with Eve are considered by them not as Circumstances that can be urged but as some Oriental Ornaments of the History This was in part the Opinion of Isaac Abarbinel who denies that the Serpent could maintain any Discourses with Eve and asserts That nothing more is meant by this Colloquy but the Reasonings of the Woman from what she gathered from the Serpents action and his eating of that Tree He pretends that she inferr'd from the Serpent's Example that the Forbidden Fruit was Wholesome and Nutritive which Opinion does not well agree with the words You shall be like Gods the meaning of which could never be deduced from this single action of the Serpent In so perplex'd and obscure a Matter as this is 't is the safest way as I imagine openly to confess our Ignorance provided