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
was form'd of Clay Thus in the Latin Tongue which I believe no Man in the World ever dreamt to be the Primitive Language we might say that God call'd the first Man Homo because he was form'd ex humo i. e. out of the Ground Besides the same thing might accidentally happen in the words Isch and Ischah as amongst the ancient Latins (a) See what Fetstus in Querquetulana virae says Foeminas antiqui quas nunc dicimus Viras appellabant unde adhuc permanent Virgines Viragines St. Jerom uses this last word whom herein we had no mind to imitate because Virago neither signifies what Ischa does in Hebrew nor Vira in Latin but a Woman of a Masculine Spirit vir and vira were in use We might here produce the frequent Alterations of Names even of those we call Proper but the Reader may find them in the Learned Grotius's Annotations on Gen. 11.1 and in Huetius's Demonstratio Evangelica Propos 4. c. 13. § 4. We shall at present content our selves to give an Instance or two not taken notice of by them of an Etymology happily expressed in another Language Every one has heard of a Famous City in Egypt which the Greeks call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which name for 't is of Greek Extraction is rightly derived 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from dirt because it was built in a dirty place For thus Strabo in his Seventeenth Book Page 552. of the Geneva Edition put out by Casaubon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now if the Books of the Hebrew Prophets were all lost Who would not Swear that this City had no other Name Who would not believe that it was built by some Greeks that settled there or by the Posterity of Lagus and bore this Greek Name ever since its beginning However 't is undeniable from Ezekiel 30.14 15. that it was call'd Sin by the Egyptians which word signifies dirt as Bochart has observ'd Phaleg l. 4. c. 27. The same has happen'd in the name of another place not far distant from Pelusium Diodorus Siculus in the first Book of his Bibliotheca mightily commends Actisanes the Aethiopian who after he had conquer'd Ammoses King of the Egyptians and subdued the whole Country neither put the Guilty to death nor yet wholly dismiss'd them unpunish'd but carried multitudes of the Condemned he thus used them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cutting off their Noses he transplanted them into the farthest parts of a desart Region and built a City and called it from this accident Rinocolura Strabo in his sixteenth Book makes the same Remark and so does Stephanus upon this word Now those Persons that do not know that the Egyptians at this time did not speak Greek would easily suffer themselves to be perswaded especially seeing it named among the Cities of Egypt that Rinocolura was the very name by which this City went among the Egyptians But if any one would rather desire to see Examples fetch'd from the Holy Scriptures he may observe how the Seventy Interpreters turn the Proper Names of the Bible into Greek Gen. 11.9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Babel 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore the name of it was called Confusion Babel or Babylon because there the Lord confounded the Lips of the whole Earth See likewise Gen. 31.47 32.20 Nay what is highly remarkable Moses has deriv'd the Original of his own Name from an Hebrew word and has introduced the Daughter of Pharaoh speaking Hebrew who without question exprest her self in the Egyptian Tongue Exod. 2.10 The Child grew up and his Nurse brought him to the Daughter of Pharaoh who called his name Mosche because said she I drew him out of the Water Mishithinou And the reason of it is plain for since Moses saw he could easily imitate the Egyptian Origination in the Hebrew Tongue he made no Scruple to bring in this Princess expressing her self after that manner But in the Egyptian Tongue he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is taken out of the Water for with the Old Egyptians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signified Water and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taken out Thus in the New Testament he that was called by the Syrians Chipha or Chepha was called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Peter by the Greeks and so that Paronomasia which our Saviour used in the Hebrew or Syro-Chaldaïc was conveniently enough translated into the Greek Tongue Matt. 16.17 However I would by no means be thought to affirm that the Name of Adam and such-like were changed For it might so happen that both the Primitives and Derivatives of the first Language were often preserved in the Hebrew But we must not conclude from thence that therefore Adam spoke pure Hebrew There are some Names which with equal Felicity may be deduced out of the Chaldee as for instance the Name Hhavah for Hhai signifies Living no less in Chaldee than it does in Hebrew Nay there are some Names which cannot Analogically be derived from the Hebrew Roots although Moses deduces them from those Roots which if we should urge as the Rabbins do to support the contrary Opinion we should from thence conclude that the Hebrew Tongue has no Affinity with the Language of the Antediluvians Thus Gen. 2.1 And she brought forth Cain and said I have got Kanithi a man of the Lord. The Name Kajin according to the common Rules ought to be deduced from Koun which signifies to Lament in Pihel as Kajits the Summer from Kouts Tsaiid Hunting from Tsoud and several more of the like nature From the Root Kanah we should more properly deduce Kanovi Now as we have observed if we were minded to copy after the Rabbins and follow their Conduct we might say That from hence 't is evident that the Hebrew Tongue is not the first since Moses was not able to express in it the Etymology of the word Kain We might gather the same from Genesis Chap. 5. v. 29. where the Father of Noah calls the Name of his Son Noahh saying he will Comfort us Jenahhamenou for if we are to derive the Name of this Restorer of Mankind from Nahham we ought to have called him Nohhem that is to say a Comforter not Noahh which can be deduced from nothing else but Noahh quievit So that if a few happy Etymologies will prove the Antediluvian Language to have been the same with the Hebrew surely those of a different Nature will demonstrate the contrary But since both these Propositions cannot be true what remains but that we should own that the Hebrew Language is not indeed the first but the Off-spring of it as are likewise the Chaldee and Arabick and that some Remainders of it are still preserved in these three Dialects True it is that the Original of the Name of Tubal Cain which is neither to be traced out of Hebrew nor Chaldee is plainly found in the Arabick as we have shewn at the third (b)
where the Ark was and Abraham and the Israelites from the Clouds and the midst of Fire They sometimes discover'd an Angel discoursing with them under a humane Shape by the Majesty of his Looks and the unusual Splendor of his Eyes The Wife of Manoah in Jud. 13.6 The Man of God says she of the Angel whom she saw comes towards me and his Look is like the Look of an Angel of God very terrible By this means Nebuchadnezzar seems to have known the Angel among the Children whom he commanded to be thrown into the fiery Furnace The Resemblance of the fourth says he is like that of one of the Sons of God Sometimes miraculous Actions that were above the Power of humane Performance were added as not to mention any more we may gather from the History of Gideon Jud. 6.17 I don't now speak of the Event of things foretold for the Question at present is How at the very moment when an Appearance happen'd they were able to distinguish it from a humane Trick before the Truth of those things they predicted was ratified by the Event V. The other Question is much more difficult viz. By what means they knew whether the Highest and the God of all Gods appear'd or if I may be allow'd the Expression one of the inferior Gods or good Angels dispatched for that Message by him The ancient Jews don't seem to have sufficiently considered this matter since 't is impossible to find out in any Narration of these Appearances whether God himself or an Angel speaks and God and his Angels are said to have appear'd promiscuously in one and the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Gen. ch 16.12 ch 22. v. 1.11 12. Exod. 3.2 and Seqq. So though Exod. 20. the Lord God is said to have spoken yet the old Hebrews were of Opinion that the Law was delivered by Angels as appears from Galatians 3.19 Heb. 2.2 Act. 7. v. 38.53 and the reason of it seems to be this because good Angels never tell or command Men any thing in their own name but behave themselves as the Ambassadors and Ministers of the High God Hence St. Austin Quaest in Genes 37. and elsewhere has observed that it is not so much the Angel that speaks as God in the Angel Perhaps says he of Abraham he understood it was God that spoke to him by some plain and manifest Proofs of the Divine Majesty Which being so it signified nothing to know whether God or an Angel spoke to them The Chaldeans indeed whose Doctrine Jamblichus delivers in his Book of Mysteries Sect. 2. ch 3. Seqq. pretended to know what was the certain Token of the Presence of God or an Angel or an Arch-angel or a Daemon or a Prince or a Soul This was Porphyry's Question in which Jamblichus largely endeavours to satisfy him but I shall not here cite those Passages in him not that every thing he there says is groundless and chimerical but because the Brevity of our Work will not allow us to be more prolix upon this Subject The pious Men among the ancient Hebrews don 't seem to have been very apprehensive of the Frauds of Evil Angels in this Affair because they did not question but that the Good Angels who were appointed by God Almighty to protect the Vertuous wou'd frustrate any such Design And indeed it was not agreeable to the Divine Goodness to expose those that fear'd him to invincible Temptations which he had certainly done if there were no exteriour Signs to distinguish Evil Spirits from the Good or if those Characteristicks which were looked upon by all Mankind to be infallible Indications of a Divine or Angelical Apparition might be usurped by a wicked Power Nevertheless I will not deny but that among a vicious reprobate People whom God Almighty may be supposed to have deliver'd over to the Devil it might so fall out that unclean Spirits sometimes deceived them with the like Appearances as we have mention'd But this was not the case of the Righteous Dissertation IX Concerning the Subversion of Sodom and the Neighbouring Cities I. The Occasion of this Dissertation II. The Situation of Sodom and the Neighbouring Cities III. The Sins they were guilty of IV. A Description of their Subversion V. The Lacus Asphaltites or Dead Sea an everlasting Monument of their Destruction VI. A Description of the Country about it from whence the seventh Verse in St. Jude's Catholick Epistle is explained and some other places of the New Testament VII This History gave occasion to some remarkable Circumstances in the Story of Baucis and Philemon which Observation is illustrated by several Examples VIII Whether the Subversion of these Cities situated upon the River Jordan is to be ascribed to a Miracle or is the common Method of God Almighty's Providence when he punishes Offenders I. AMong those other Punishments which the sacred Historians tell us the Divine Justice has inflicted upon wicked Men few of them are more wonderful than the sudden Destruction of Sodom and the adjoyning Cities However the Interpreters of the Scripture when they come to this surprizing Relation scarce seem to have employ'd the care they usually bestow upon other places For which reason we judged it convenient to publish this Dissertation where we have treated this Matter more amply than the narrow limits of our Commentary wou'd allow All the Translators which it has been my fortuen hitherto to see as if they imagined there was no difficulty in the case or else had nothing to remark upon so important a Scene barely tell us that this Country was burnt and subverted by fire from Heaven and having done so think they have discharged all that is required from a Translator The truth is what we have heard and imbibed from our Infancy becomes at last so familiar to us that we receive it almost without Examination But as I have read this History with no little Application so methinks I have discover'd several Particulars in it worthy of Observation by which not only this Narration may be wonderfully illustrated but many other Passages of the H. Bible conveniently expounded What we have therefore observed upon this Occasion we have thrown into the following Dissertation which if we have not handled with that Accuracy as the Dignity of the Subject seems to deserve yet since we have done it to the best of our Abilities we hope the Learned Reader will favourably receive it II. Before we examine the Destruction it self it will be necessary for us to give a short Description of the Situation of Sodom Gomorrah Adma and Zeboim because by this means we shall the better understand how we come to see nothing but a stinking Lake where this most delightful Country formerly stood Moses thus describes the Situation of these Cities Gen. 13.10 where he relates after what manner Lot and Abraham parted But Lot lifted up his eyes and beheld all the plain of Jordan that it was well watered every where before the Lord destroyed