S. Matthew alledges out of the Old Testament is from Isai vii 14. This in the Hebrew runs strictly enough according to our Translation Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel In the Septuagint it runs thus Behold a Virgin shall receive in her womb and then word for word as in the Hebrew But in the Greek of the New Testament Behold a Virgin shall have or carry in her womb which sense our Translators in the New Testament Matth. i. 23. well express shall be with child I say to conceive and to be with child 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are different Phrases if not things and of more signification perhaps here than at first thought of Had our Lord according to the opinion of the old Valentinians or later Mennonites in Germany had only a Celestial body which meerly passed through the Virgin Mary not being formed of her substance she might have been said to have received it in her womb But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be with child being according to common use of the Phrase properly of Women who are truly gravid does more emphatically assert the Verity of our Lord 's Humane Nature by implying his being carried the full time in the womb and therefore that his body was nourished and consequently formed of his blessed Mothers substance which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 does not And it may be no wrong to the Holy Ghost to conceive he guided S. Matt. thus in Greek to word his Text rather than as the Septuagint do But besides this variation whereas the Septuagint keeping close to the Hebrew have it Thou shalt call namely Thou O Virgin shalt call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Matthew here also recedes and that from both saying They shall call And in truth in the former point he may be thought also to have a little left the Hebrew as well as Septuagint for to receive in the womb which was the Septuagints phrase more properly expresses what we mean by Conception than being with child In short his receding from the A. Septuagint in these two points is a proof of the first Proposition his receding both from Septuagint B. and from Hebrew a proof of the second The second Allegation by S. Matthew is out of Micah v. 2. which is again very well and naturally translated from the Hebrew in our Bibles thus Thou Bethlehem-Ephratha though thou be little amongst the thousands of Judah yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel The Septuagint here render it Thou Bethlehem the house of Ephratha art the least c. In the rest nearly enough to the Hebrew But S. Matthew especially in his Greek recedes from both strangely Thou O Bethlehem the land of Judah art in no wise the least amongst the Princes of Judah Matth. ii 6. Besides the Variation here is a plain contradiction to the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sept. greater difference both in Sense and Phrase cannot well be And in the latter member excepting the contradiction the variation is not much less For out of thee A. shall come forth a Ruler 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Matth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sept. Who shall feed my people B. Israel Except the proper names here is nothing alike What in the name of God did he think who asserted a perpetual consent The third Old Testament text is Hosea xi 1. which we render faithfully word for word out of the Hebrew thus Out of Egypt have I called my son But the Septuagint I have sent for his children out of Egypt S. Matth. ii 15. agrees exactly with the Hebrew A. the Septuagint being as foreign to his purpose as it is to the Original A fourth Text is out of Jerem. xxxi 15. in which again the faithfulness of our Translators to the Hebrew as well as to S. Matthew is to be commended In Ramah was there a voice heard Lamentation and weeping and great mourning Lamentation and weeping of bitterness Hebr. Rachel mourning for her children and refused Hebr. would not be comforted because they were not Matth. ii 17. He who reads the xxxi ch of Jerem. in the Septuagints Version of that Edition at least which Bishop Walton judging most correct put into our Polyglott shall find in the whole chapter nothing nearer this Text than ver 3. A voice of people crying out of Oronaim destruction and great breaking in pieces But in truth this was not designed by the Interpreters as a Translation of what is cited by S. Matthew as belonging to ch 48. 3. For here the Copy is all in confusion and this which stands in order the xxxi is indeed the xlviii And that which stands the xxxviii is legitimately the xxxi And so besides the Hebrew and our Bibles from it even the vulgar Latin and some later Editions of the Septuagint have it Now in the said xxxviii chap. v. 15. we have the text we look for which is there rendred thus Rachel all in A. weeping 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 simply without any adjection not as S. Matt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which perfectly answers the Hebrew and would not cease over her children because they were not A fifth Text is out of Isai xl 3. where first we find S. Matthew to follow the Septuagints Version But the reason may well be presumed to be because they here follow the Hebrew so that in CC. this text all three accord especially if we render 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the sense our Translators very properly as I conceive take it The little difference there is is of S. Matthew from both the Original and Septuagint for he putting the Pronoun for the Noun contracts the latter clause thus Make straight his paths instead of make straight the paths of our God which word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of our God very material as B. it might seem is in both but omitted by S. Matthew The sixth and seventh Texts S. Matthew produces out of the Old Testament if we wave one which is mangled by the Devil as I am apt to think it not disagreeable to do inasmuch as his authority will not much credit any Translation are such wherein Hebrew Septuagint and Evangelist CC. CC. are all at sufficient accord The places are Deut. viii 3. and vi 16. in S. Matt. iv 4 7. The Eighth is Deut. vi 13. alledged by S. Matth. iv 10 where both Hebrew and Septuagint and so indeed in parallel texts read Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God but S. Matthew glosses the word more to his purpose and receding from both saith Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God. A. The Temptation was To fall down B. and worship the Tempter v. 9. And the word Worship which is comprised in the fear of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was more pertinent to oppose to the temptation than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
concerning his son thus He shall go before him that is John the Baptist before Christ in the Spirit and power of Elias to turn the hearts of the fathers to the A. children 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strictly according to the Original Not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Septuagint have ordered it and B. the disobedient to the wisdom of the just A free paraphrase as to this latter clause The Second Text alledged by S. Luke is in Chapter ii 23. where he tells us It is written in the Law of the Lord every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord. Now who would not expect to find this text in the Law Hebrew or Greek word for word Yet is the sense only not the words written there The first-born that openeth every matrice as the Septuagint exactly according to the Hebrew render it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is commanded to be sanctified to the Lord. Exodus xiii 1. wherefore it may be justly said 't is called Holy. Let us look further and verse 12. we find that Law repeated as to Beasts thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So again verse 15. So Numbers viii 16. But the Text as S. Luke reports it and seems to say 't is written so I no where find but in him Wherefore we plainly see him use a liberty to depart from the words both of Septuagint and B. Hebrew The Third indeed is of small moment yet to be just to our proposal we must take notice of it A pair of Turtles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says S. Luke Chap. ii 24. two Turtles say both Hebrew and Septuagint In the Fourth Text there is a Concord betwixt all except only in one word What the Septuagint CC. call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Plains nearer the Hebrew Isai xl 4. S. Luke stiles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chap. iii. 5. smooth ways I do not esteem this difference worth the accounting In the Fifth S. Luke varies a little both from the Hebrew and the Septuagints and S. Matthew's Greek The Hebrew runs thus Deut. viii 3. But upon all that proceeds out of the mouth of God shall man live The Septuagint gloss it thus upon every word that proceeds c. and S. Matthew as we have seen follows them S. Luke takes it shorter Chap. iv 4. But by every word of God. I esteem not this variation worth reckoning and therefore here again account an Accord of all C C. In the Sixth I cannot but take notice of the same Variation made by S. Luke both from the Hebrew and Septuagint which S. Matthew also made Thou shalt A. worship instead of Thou shalt fear B. Luke iv 8. I refer my Reader to the note on S. Matthew In the Seventh which was also the seventh out of S. Matthew we find S. Luke to accord with the Hebrew Septuagint and S. Matthew C C. 'T is Luke iv 12. and Deut. vi 16. The Eighth passage has in it considerable both agreement and disagreement to the Septuagint 'T is Isai lxi 1 2. Where the Septuagint render what is in the Hebrew The opening of the prison to them that are bound by recovery of sight to the blind This C. so different rendring depends upon a Criticism in the Hebrew word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To open properly say the Masters the eyes and ears However S. Luke follows it Chapter iv 18. But withal presently adds another rendring which plainly shews he had the Hebrew text in his eye To set at liberty or send away them that are bruised This I say is not in the Septuagint and evidently answers though it does not strictly express the Hebrew Opening of the Prison to them that are bound So that considering both he may be said here to have followed both Septuagint and Hebrew taking out of the Septuagint what was there emphatical to his purpose and yet not neglecting what in the Hebrew was not so fully translated by the Septuagint but giving a gloss B. of it according to his liberty And yet again in this text he most plainly recedes from the Septuagint in the very next clause rejecting their translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was A. not pertinent to the scope of the text and rendring it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is both pertinent to the scope and strict justice to the word The Ninth Old Testament Text which I have observed produced by S. Luke is the same with S. Mark 's first 'T is in Luke vii 27. and out of Malachi iii. 1. The two Evangelists exactly accord but both recede widely A. from the Septuagint on which B. for the present I make no other note than there I did In Luke viii 10. there is a short touch upon Isai vi 9. as indeed there was in S. Mark but it occurs again more largely in S. John we will therefore at present wave the examination thereof and for the Tenth Testimony produced out of the Old Testament by S. Luke we will take that which next follows in him Chapter x. 27. which is so much the more worthy of our notice because it is repeated by the two former Evangelists but our measure did not reach to it 'T is Deut. vi 5. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart Soul Might Hebr. Mind Soul Power Sept. Heart Soul Strength Mind Luc. Heart Soul Mind Strength Mar. Heart Soul Mind Matth. Where it is observable that our Evangelist first recedes from the Septuagint as indeed do both the other to keep with the Hebrew in the first term with all thine heart Secondly both from the Hebrew and Septuagint in B. making the Scheme consist of four terms as also doth S. Mark whereas Originally it has but three And thirdly he renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Septuagint Which are ample A. evidences of his not following here the Version of the Septuagint In summ Of Ten Texts taken by S. Luke out of the Old Testament we find him to recede considerably from the Septuagint 6 A. in six in three we find him to accord both with the Septuagint though not exactly and 3 C C. Hebrew In one he neither accords with Hebrew nor Septuagint as to words but only as to sense taking the liberty usual with all Writers of his own expression But besides this there are five other instances of this liberty 6 B. as to sundry members of Texts And there is only one instance and that in one clause of a Text wherein he keeps to the Septuagint apart from the Hebrew 1 C. Whence I presume both our Propositions again demonstrated CHAP. V. Texts of the Old Testament cited by S. John. THE First Chapter i. 23. Here S. John recedes both from A. the Septuagints Version which the other three Evangelists exactly followed and from them
they were then They then consisted of the Law Prophets and Psalms or Poetical books at least the third part was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or HAGIOGRAPHA wherein the Psalms are Luke xxiv 44. They consist of the same still and as far as can appear in the self-same order Act. xiii 33. It is written in the second Psalm Thou art my son this day have I begotten thee These words are in our second Psalm to this day And again he saith in another Psalm thou shalt not suffer thine Holy one to see corruption v. 35. these words are in that other Psalm viz. Psal xvi 10. And again David himself saith in the book of Psalms The Lord said unto my Lord sit thou on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool Luk. xx 42. That passage is also in our Psalms and in a Psalm inscribed to David as the Author viz. in Psal cx Not to instance in more passages as might be done abundantly Besides it is not credible as §. VIII S. Hierom in his time out of Origen answered those who objected the falsification of the Old Testament it is not credible I say that our Lord and his Apostles who so sharply reproved the other crimes and vices of the Scribes and the several Sects of the Jews should have been silent of this which was the greatest of all being false in the greatest DEPOSITUM taking from or corrupting the Divine Oracles committed to their charge And this Argument though from Negative Authority is the more considerable upon the score of S. Austin's Doctrine who gives it as a general Rule that where there is a fit place in Scripture to say a thing if it were so and it is not said the argument is good though from Negative Authority that it is not so Now what more fit places can be imagined than where our Lord appeals to the Scriptures touching his Mission and Doctrine when he commands his hearers to search the Scriptures when he tells his Disciples and the multitude The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses's seat and requires them to observe and do what they bid them but not to do after their works for they say and do not In all appearance what they said as from Moses or sitting in his seat the Scripture as reported or delivered by them was genuin and sincere enough however vitious their practices were Who here can imagin that had the Scribes then and Scribes must do it or none could had they I say then falsified corrupted or curtail'd the Scriptures we should not in some of these and like places have heard of it Would not some Caution or other have been annext to this purpose Search but take heed of corruptions in such a place Know there are defalcations in such In a word and to speak out Our Lord had not been faithful in the house of God had he not warned the family of such an evil I know a certain Person has pretended to reply to this answer but his reply is empty and frivolous Lastly as to this Objection I §. IX say 't is morally impossible since our Saviours time and indeed for many hundred years before that that the Scriptures should have been corrupted for the multitude of Copies was then such has been since much more such and so far dispersed that neither one man nor one body of men could ever get them into their hands to corrupt them and if some few or many Copies had been corrupted but not all the sincere number would have detected the corrupt To give a parallel instance which will easily be understood by all who can read English Our English Bibles in sundry impressions of this age are corrupted in Act. vi 3. Chuse seven men whom ye may appoint YE falsly for WE 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The corruption may be found in the later Edinburgh Cambridge and since very ordinarily in divers indeed most London Editions Now this being done not till the Faction had crumbled it self into several minute parties all pretending Scripture for their several distinctive little opinions 't is not improbable it might be done at first with design and particularly of those who would establish the peoples power not only in Electing but even in Ordaining their own Ministers Mean while let it be done by whom it might Take an Edinburgh Edition of 1636. a Cambridge one of 16. a London one of 1642. being it was not possible for the Faction to get all these Copies and a multitude more in as being so vastly numerous the true old Copies examined and compared discover the Variation from them that is the Corruption and a more Authentick one than any of them that is the Original Greek if any doubt remain decides the whole Controversie In like manner there were amongst the Jews even in our Saviour's days and much more since a vast number of Copies of the Old Testament for they read in their Synagogues every Sabbath day both Law and Prophets Act. xiii 27 xv 21. wherefore besides what they had for private use they must at least have as many publick Books as Synagogues and Synagogues they had divers in every City 'T is incredible almost what their Authors report of the number of Synagogues in Jerusalem it self And there were amongst them several Sects too and Scribes of every Sect all sufficiently watching over one another had there been any false dealing of this kind Nay the very Ten Tribes upon their Secession and in probability much more after their dispersion had Copies of the Law to which we owe the present Samaritan Hebrew Text. But it is certain the Jews and Samaritans were mortal enemies would not eat converse discourse together Now that all their several Sects and Synagogues that these two last named adverse and mutually incensed Nations should conspire to bring all their Copies together to vary or corrupt them all alike and the world never hear of this combination and the reconcilement of the Parties in order thereunto is not morally possible But if all were not brought together and altered alike as before said one must convince another of falshood And there being as shall be presently made out no Variations of any considerable moment betwixt the Copies of the Old Testament which we now have in common use and the most antient or sincere ones that can be produced at least none having made it appear there is any such Variation but in the stead thereof a marvelous agreement there can be no such corruption as the Objection pretends And this brings us to the Second Objection There are in §. X. the Hebrew Originals actually produced say some different Readings and both cannot be true for truth is but one therefore the one of them must be corrupt Answ There are indeed different Readings and some too as pretended from famed different Traditions Rabbi Ascher setting up one way and R. Naphthali another and from them the Oriental Jews observing one Lection the Occidental
another And all these are collected by diverse and particularly are now extant in the Appendix to the English Polyglott But yet all these Diversities make only a great noise are indeed of no considerable importance For the instances of Diversity are such as no one but a superstitious Jew or some person who had a mind to unsettle foundations and for want of Arguments were concern'd to catch at any shadows of Probability would contend about them They are such mighty matters as these Whether the same word should be written with a long E or a short A whether another should be written with their longest O or with one somewhat shorter whether it should have an Accent of this kind or of that whether a supernumerary which they call a Quiescent letter should be written or whether being it might without dammage be spared it should be omitted Not much unlike hereto is also the noise made with what they call the Keri and the Ketib that is the Marginal and the Textual Reading as if there were some great repugnancy betwixt these Whereas in brief the thing or matter is still the same in both the manner of expression a little different And this occasioned partly by the Superstitious modesty of some Rabbies putting into the Margin certain words which they thought more honourable to be read instead of some other broader term in the Text as 2 Kings xviii 27. they would not read it Pisse but the water of their feet forsooth partly by reason of some letters or words dubiously written in some venerable antient Copies and so variously read From which Antient Copies out of reverence they would vary nothing in transcribing but copying the text exactly and entirely as they found it that which was by the most learned in ages of old judged the more correct reading they put in the Margin and called it Keri So that the summ of the difference is 't is one way in some Copies 't is otherwise in others and which way soever we take the matter is of no great moment we have liberty without danger to take either reading which pleaseth us best Now under favour such various readings as these are not Arguments of the Scriptures corruption but of Gods Providence and Humane industry to preserve Scripture from corruption And in conclusion of this point I may boldly aver there is not one Article either of Faith or Christian practice concern'd in all the various Hebrew Lections in the World. The knowledge of them to use the Rabbinical phrase is only an Hedge about the Law and our care to read aright in matters of the smallest concern keeps us from reading amiss in the greater The Third Objection is The Original §. XI is insignificant For besides that None no not the very Jews themselves can read it the words of that Language are Equivocal and so the Translations all vain and not to be credited as being taken from an Original which is in a manner whatsoever people will make it and much different from what it was as used by our Lord and his Apostles while on earth To be as brief and distinct as may be in Answer to this Objection as to its several parts First It is a pleasant thing to §. XII perswade men they cannot read when actually they do read and themselves know and others hear them so to do Or that now of old that way of Reading has been lost which yet has been transmitted as all Ordinary Arts are but with infinitely more care from hand to hand by people who have in their Generation made it their whole business as to this day many Jews do meerly to read and write their Law. It is sure and some of the fiercest of our Contradictors confess the true way of reading was known in Origen's time for he transcribed the Hebrew text both in Hebrew Characters and exprest again as well as it could be in Greek letters into his Hexapla It was known in Hierom's time For he had that Hexapla and amended his Copy of it by the more Authentick one in the Library of Caesarea and out of the Hebrew text by help of that Copy made his Translation Thus for at least 400 years after Christ we are as I think it must be acknowledged secure About the year 1000 at furthest if not sooner all men confess the Tradition of the present reading to have been in use and sithence at least to have been currant in the world by the industry of the Masorites of Tiberias In the interval then of 600 years this the old Art of Reading must be lost and a new one invented by that people whose Original native Language this Hebrew was Which negligence first and afterwards most laborious Artifice of the Jews how improbable it is especially seeing we have left to us the several Prophecies at least so many several Prophecies of the Messias and of the Jews dealing with him so intire in the text even against the supposed inventors themselves is so notorious that I need not speak Besides what cause or even appearance and likelihood of any cause can in any History be shewn why in that Period of time rather than any other the Jews should lose the Reading of their Language Indeed considering that their Law that is their Religion was written in this Language considering they ever were and to this day are a Nation so stubbornly tenacious of their Religion and Law considering lastly that no small numbers amongst them as just now was said made the Reading and Copying of their Law the business of their life did so in our Saviours time have done so since it is not credible the Reading of it should in that period have been lost And if not then lost never Secondly As to Hebrew words §. XIII having several significations 't is very sure some of them have but so have the words in all Languages which are known to have been commonly spoken upon the face of the Earth at least 't is notorious the same may be said of either Greek or Latin. And we know even in them as well as in the more modern Lingua's we are daily put to it from the juncture of some words with other c. to determin the true acceptation or sense Which in our Translating the Hebrew text if we cannot do we ordinarily set down both or all the senses one in the Text and the other in the Margin of our Translations So that this is no just plea either against the Hebrew or our Translations thereof We may take the Hebrew where dubious in all senses it will bear and our Translations the modern ones especially and above others the English set down the several senses So does not the Septuagint however highly contended for by some which always confines us to one of the several senses and sometimes misses all of them In a word our Translations have or may have all the Senses the present Originals can bear and besides them any which
also Where they all have Prepare ye the way Isai xl 3. Matt. iii. 3. Mark i. 3. Luk. iii. 4. He says B. Make ye strait the way which was one sort of preparing it but not at all that intimated in the Original Hebrew word The Second I have observed S. John to produce is out of Psalm lxix 9. which he reports Chapter ii 17. exactly according to Hebrew and Septuagint C C. The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up The third Text by him produced for of little glances and allusions no judgment can be made in this case is out of Isai liv 13. which the Septuagint supplying the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as very properly they might out of verse 12. render And I will make all thy children taught of God. This Text S. John thus reports Chap. vi 45. It is written in the Prophets And they shall be all taught of God. A new Verb a Pronoun for a Noun departing herein both from Hebrew and Septuagint and yet the text brought in abruptly as if it had been written in so many words or syllables And they c. 'T is A. plain he intended not to follow B. the Septuagints Version though he kept both their and the Original sense The fourth Testimony is very short but with such out of this Evangelist we must be content from Psalm lxxxii 6. produced John x. 34. I said ye are Gods C C. And herein all accord The fifth Testimony I have observed still I mean alledged at any length by S. John is out of Zech. ix 9. which in the Hebrew and Septuagint runs thus Rejoice greatly O daughter of Sion shout Proclaim Sept. O daughter of Jerusalem Behold thy King cometh to thee Just and having Salvation Saved Hebr. Saving Sept. is he lowly rather poor Hebr. and riding upon an Ass and upon a colt the fole of Asses upon a beast accustomed to the yoak and a young fole say the Sept. This †S. John hath varied and contracted thus Ch. xii 15. Fear not daughter A. of Zion Behold thy King cometh sitting B. upon an Asses colt There are scarce three words and those such too as could not be varied of the Septuagints Greek in the Evangelists text The sixth Old Testament-text S. John has is again a short one 'T is Isai liii 1. Lord who hath believed C C. our report John xii 38. And here all agree exactly Indeed in a text so short and plain it could not well be otherwise But in The seventh which is larger we shall find difference enough The Prophet Esaias said again saith S. John Chap. xii 40. He hath blinded their eyes and hardened their heart that they should not see with their eyes nor understand with their heart and be converted and I should heal them But Isaiah's words run thus Isai vi 10. Make the heart of this people fat and make their ears heavy and shut their eyes lest they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their hearts and convert and be healed as our Translation only making the Hebrew English excellently renders them The Septuagint varies a little from the Hebrew turning the Imperative Active into a Passive Preter which a small difference of punctation does in the Hebrew and read thus The heart of this people is waxed fat and they hear heavily with their ears and their eyes have they closed lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and should convert or return and I should heal them Which Version of the Septuagint S. Matthew follows word for word Matth. xiii 15. So does S. Luke Acts xxviii 27. Notwithstanding it is plain both from Hebrew from the Septuagint and from both those Evangelists does S. John's text A. differ 1. Whereas the text consists of two Climaxes or gradations B. one answering the other S. John cuts each short by one step 2. The Septuagints Version and the Evangelists from them impute all to the people as their own Act or Choice Their heart is grown fat they hear heavily with their ears and they have closed their eyes S. John ascribes all this following herein the Hebrew to God and his judgment 3. The principal Greek words are in a manner all diverse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith S. John. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Septuagint Matth. Luk. Further as to this Text it is worthy our notice that it is in three other places of the New Testament alledged at least in part namely by S. Luke in his Gospel Ch. viii 10. who there contracts it and otherwise varies from the Septuagint By S. Mark Chap. iv 12. who in the beginning holds with the Septuagint but in the close instead of I should heal them puts paraphrastically and their sins should be forgiven them which is one part of healing leaving herein Hebrew as well as Septuagint And lastly by S. Paul Rom. xi 8. who glosses on it differently from all thus God hath given them the Spirit of slumber instead of made their hearts fat eyes that they should not see ears that they should not hear with S. John and the Hebrew attributing the Act to God. So that to note this by the bye though not to bring it into account in one and the same place six times produced in the New Testament there seems twice a new Version clearly made viz. by S. John one and by S. Paul another Twice is the Old Septuagint followed by S. Matthew and S. Luke in the Acts but also twice again varied in a good part the very same Evangelist in terms varying from himself All an ample proof of the Latitude which is to be acknowledged in these Authors stiles In the xv of S. John ver 25. there is a transient and occasional allusion to an expression Psalm xxxv 19. And though I might reasonably say the Evangelist here seems rather to have followed some other Version or reading than that of the Septuagint for he produces the text as an intire Proposition with a causal particle in its beginning as connecting it with what in the Original context is supposed to have gone before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas it is only the subject of a Proposition or rather of a Petition both in our Septuagint and Hebrew though I might I say take notice of this difference yet I wave it and as the Eighth Testimony produced by S. John reckon that out of Psal xxii 29. touching the souldiers dividing our Lord's garments amongst them and casting lots upon his seamless coat alledged Chap. C. C. xix 24. wherein all agree Reckoning as we have done the Ninth Old Testament-text I observe alledged by S. John is Chap. xix 36. which whether taken out of Exod. xii 36. or Num. ix 2. varies considerably both in phrase and sense Ye shall not break a bone from off it in the former place They shall not break a bone from off