Arrow Against the Separationists, Admonition · Chapter 4
CHAP. IV.
A Fourth Scandall, is your forgerie in the allegation of theſe Rabbines, and this in divers kindes.
Firſt, in that you joyne with the Iewes in making divers of their traditions to be part of the authentique word of God: and namely, in canonizing the divers readings that are in the line and in the magine of the Maſorites Bible: for example, in … not, … to himſelf: not betrothed her, and yet betrothed her to himſelf: of theſe you ſay, “Annot. on Exo. 21 8.Moſes hearing it of God, did by his ſpirit, write both. Before this time, I never heard of any Chriſtian, that durſt avouch ſo peremptorily, this preſumptuous or rather blaſphemous aſſertion, by which you make God like vntounto Ianus Bifrons the Idoll with two faces, to look two divers vvayes at once, in theſe divers and contrary readings of the ſame text. Do you not remember what a fearfull kProv. 30.6. Rev. 22.18curſe is pronounced againſt thoſe that adde vntounto the book of God? why then do you bring theſe additions and maintaine them, as the worke of Gods ſpirit? It is great ſin to adde vntounto the vvritings of men, and to put forth things in their name, whereof they are not authors: but much more to deale ſo with God. It is a poynt of treaſon againſt the King to counterfait his hand, his ſeale, his coyne: how much more to counterfait the hand and writing of God, to coyne new ſcripture, and to ſet the ſtampe of the Rabbines vponupon the coyne of the Lord, by adding their traditions vntounto his word, and giving divine authoritie vntounto them? But it is the leſſe marvell that you who erre ſo ſtrangely in diſcerning the Church of God, ſhould alſo erre in diſcerning the ſcriptures of God.
You %Annot. Ibid.plead, that the Hebrew hath both readings, the first in the line, the later in the margine: I anſwer. 1. There be many Hebrew Bibles: which do want theſe readings that you ſpeak of: That ancient edition of the Hebrew Bible by Sebaſtian Munſter haththem not: That great edition of the Hebrew by Plantine hath not theſe additions in the margine: The moſt excellent and divers editions hereof by Rob. Stephanus both in 4o and in 16o, have them not. A new edition of Raphelengius hath them not. The late edition by R. Iſaak Bar Shimeon hath thē not: ſo that we may ſay with as good reaſon as you, that the Hebrew hath them not. 2. That Maſoriticall Bible of Bomberg, that hath theſe divers readings, hath alſo ſo many other traditionall obſervatiōs, in the margine thereof round about, that I think you wilbe loth to afme them to be receyved from God & written by his ſpirit: & yet that Maſoriticall bible which mainteyneth theſe divers readings delivers one ſort of traditions as well as the other, and puts no difference betwixt them. 3. There are alſo ſundry editions of the new Teſtamēt, which have divers readings, one in the line, an other in the margine, yet can we not hence conclude that both theſe readings are receyved from God: and yet may we ſay of theſe as well as you do of the other, that the Greek hath both readings, &c. though onelyonly one of them were delivered by the ſpirit extraordinarily from God. And even ſo, Arias Montanus in his edition of the Hebrew Bible, though he have noted the divers readings in the margine, yet not as if they were delivered by the ſpirit of God; but as “In apparatu Bibl. praefat. ad lect. var.falts growne by the calamitie of times, the negligence and ignorance of ſcribes, or otherwiſe, &c.
You alledge further, that the writing differeth in the eye, (*…lo, not; and “…lo, to himſelf) but hath no difference in the eare: ſo Moſes hearing it of God, did by his ſpirit, write both. Anſw. 1, how know you that there vvas no difference of ſound in Moſes his eare, when he heard thoſe words whoſe letters do differ? vvant of a diſtinct ſound, in words that ſignify diſtinct and ſeverall things is an imperfection of ſpeech, and a defect in the language: but now the language ſpokē vntounto Moſes being Hebrew which is the perfecteſt language: the Lord that ſpake, ſpeaking after a moſt perfect maner: and Moſes that heard being prepared therevnto of God, after the moſt perfect maner that wasneedfull for the receyving of that law; who is it now, that can juſtly affirme, that at this time diſtinct words had an indiſtinct & confuſed ſound without any difference in the eare?
2. Though the common rule of grammar at this day teach that thoſe two “Aleph, vau.letters are quieſcent or ſilent and not pronounced in the end of vvords, yet are there ſtill ſome exceptiōs made by ſome, and the other “He, jod.two being of like nature for the pronunciation are by many learned men pronounced in like caſe in the end of vvords.
Some write that theſe quieſcent letters as they are called, do cauſe a different pronuntiation, in making the vowelles vntounto which they are joyned to be drawne out with a longer ſounde and therfore are by them called aVal. Schind. Inſtitut. Hebr. lib. 1. p. 12.literaeflatus & protractionis. Others tell vsus that bIoa. Druſius de recta lectione ling. Sanct. cap. 8.Cholem hath ſix or ſeven differēt kindes of ſounds according to the diverſitie of letters with which it is joyned, and in particular what diſtinct and peculiar kinde of ſound it hath in lo, not: and how it differs from Cholem in other places. And if this be ſo, how can any man affirme that there was no difference in the eare betwixt lo, not, & lo, to himſelf, whē Moſes heard them of God?
3. This your diſtinction of difference in the eye, and no difference in the eare ſeemes to be very idle, and of no vſe to give any light vntounto the matter that you are ſpeaking of: you can not pretend the like diſtinction to bring in ſome other of the divers readings noted by the Maſorites, ſeing many of them do manifeſtly differ in the eare, as much or more then in the eye. To vvhat purpoſe then ſerveth this diſtinction?
4. If there be litle or no difference of ſound betwixt theſe words, this is the more againſt you: and helpes to make it more apparant that theſe and the like divers readings did ariſe from the errour of the ſcribes that wrote out the copies of the Bible, which might eaſily be deceyved in thoſe words, which by their ſound were not diſtinguiſhed from one an other. And thus alſo from the likenes of the figure in divers letters, as in van & Iod, it is obſerved that cIo. Buxtorf. Theſaur. gram. lib. 1. c. 28in writing of them one hath degenerated into the other. And if we look vponupon thoſe ſeven claſſes or rankes, wherevnto dMaſoreth hammaſoreth in Tabulis ſecū dis, Orat. 1.Elias Levita hath reduced theſe divers readings, we may thereby plainely obſerve that they are all ſuch, as through ſome ſimilitude either in ſound, in figure, or in ſignification or through tranſpoſition, coniunction, or diviſion of the letters, or the like occaſion the pen of the ſcribe might quickly ſlip and miſſe therein: for example to give inſtance in two like letters: he telles vsus that in 52 places of theſe divers readings, jod is written in the beginning of a word, and the Maſorites will have it be read vau: And on the contra in 56. places vau is written in the beginning of a word and they read it jod: Againe in 70. places jod is written in the middes of a word and they read it & pronounce it as vau, &c. And hence as it ſeemeth, Rabbinicall ſuperſtition and curioſitie meeting with theſe divers readings have turned humane ſlips and errours into ſacred myſteries, & given divine authoritie vntounto the faults of men. As the Pope in his Kalender many times canonizeth thē for Saints, who are the Children of Hell: ſo have the Iewes in their Maſorah turned the errours of men into Canonicall ſcriptute. VVhy do you follow them herein?
FOr confirmation of your opinion, you produce witneſſes, & ſay, The Hebrew Doctours (in Thalmud Bab. in Nedarim, Chap. 4 Fol. 37. B) ſay, The words read and not written, and written and not read, were the tradition of Moſes from (mount) Sinai: that is, as the Hebrew Scholion on that place noteth, ſo Moſes receyved in Sinai, & delivered to Iſrael. I anſwer,
1. Theſe witneſſes being already convicted of falſhood, dotages and blaſphemies are not to be admitted to ſpeak in this controverſie, their teſtimonie is not to be receyved. This Thalmud which you alledge, is that bed of ſlumber into which the Lord had lEſa. 29.10 Rom. 11.8threatned to caſt the Iewes: in this bed of errour do your Hebrew Doctours lye ſnorting in the ſpirit of ſlumber: vvhat meane you to waken them and call them vp to come and tell vsus their dreames? You may as well alledge their teſtimonie, to make vsus beleeve that their Thalmudicallcanons and conſtitutions, are from God as well as the holy ſcriptures, and that we are bound to exerciſe ourſelves in them, rather then in the ſcriptures: for this they affirme as I ſhewed before. And there is no tradition ſo impious or abſurd, but the Thalmudiſts commend the ſame vntounto vsus, even with the ſame phraſe, that is here vſed in this your allegation. At every turne they ſay, fThalmud in Menachoth. c. 1. Fol. 29. Maimony in Tephillim, cap. 1. Sec. 3. R. Alphes in Tephillim, fol. 78. a. b, & 79. a. b, &c.Halacah lemoſhe miſsinai. i. a tradition of Moſes from (mount) Sinai. VVith this cloak they aray their ſuperſtitions, and with this falſe boaſting they ſell their Rabbinicall wares. How great is the ſcandall which you give vntounto the Iewes by this your dealing? how may they be encouraged to drink more deepely of that ſpiced cup of their Thalmud, when as they ſee the wine thereof to go downe ſo pleaſantly with you, by receiving their teſtimonie and their traditions in ſo great a meaſure?
2. If there vvere nothing els but the fooliſh traditions cō teyned in this very Chapter vntounto which you ſend vsus, touching Ben Modar with other vaine obſervations; vve might thereby be ſufficiently warned not to receive the teſtimony of this Thalmud. R. Ioſei bar Chanina gThalm. in Nedarim, c. 4. F. 38. aſaith, The law vvas not givē but vntounto Moſes & to his ſeed, becauſe it was ſayd, write thee & engrave for thee two tables of ſtone, but Moſes having a good ey: of his liberality gave it to Iſrael. &c. R. Iochanan ſrith in the ſame place, The holy bleſſed God doth not cauſe his ſchecinah or habitatiō to abide but vpō a ſtrōg mā, a rich mā, a wiſe mā & an hūble mā, & that all theſe were in Moſes: that he was a ſtrōg mā, becauſe it is ſayd, he ſpread the covering over the tabernacle, &c. Exo. 40.19. This ſame thing is alſo noted by hCommēt. on Exo. 39 33.R. Solomon from R. Tanchuma, that no mā had the ſtrēgth to do this thing but Moſes alone, &c. That he was ſtrong alſo, in that he could beare the two tables of ſtone in his hand, that he could break them, the length of them being ſix, the breadth ſix, and the thicknes thirteen cubites, &c. That he was vviſe; that all the 50 gates of vnderſtanding were given vntounto Moſes, one excepted; that they prove from pſ. 8.5. That he vvas meek from Numb. 12.3. That he was rich from Numb. 16.15. So they write of divers others: as of Ionah whom they prove to be rich, becauſe he payd the fare of the ſhip: Ion. 1.3. R. Iohanan ſaith it vvas the hyre of the whole ſhip: R. Romanus ſaith it came to foure thouſand pieces of gold, &c. vvith a number of ſuch like preſumptions.
3. There be alſo of the Rabbines themſelves that reiect this ſuperſtitious conceit of theſe divers readings delivered vntounto Moſes from mount Sinai. R. David Kimchi one of the learnedeſt and moſt judicious among them all, though he aſcribe too much vntounto their Kabalah and tradition, yet iKimchi Preface vntounto Ioſhua.he judgeth that theſe divers writings and readings came from the diſperſion of the Iewes, from the difference of copies written by divers ſcribes: and that Ezra and the men of the great congregation (as they are called) in correcting the copies vvhen they found difference, went according to their knowledge after the greateſt number, and when they did not clearely vnderſtand ſome wordes, ſometimes they wrote them and did not poynt them: ſometimes they wrote one way in the margent, and did not write ſo in the text, &c. And this is the judgement of other Rabbines alſo as of Ephodaeus, and Don Iſaak Abarbinel or Abrabinael, that this diverſity of writing and reading aroſe from hephſed, balbul & Saphek, that is, from corruption, confuſion, doubting and vncertainty of ſcribes, &c. This is acknowledged by kPreface to Maſorites Bible.R. Iacob ben Chajim, vvho in vaine labours to refute them. Had you but cleaved vntounto the ſounder ſort of Rabbines you ſhould not have gone ſo far aſtray.
4. It is worthy to be obſerved alſo, that the very ſame teſtimony alledged by you frō the Thalmud, Nedar. c. 4 f. 37. is that maine ſtone of offence, whereat the later Rabbines have ſtumbled and fallen into the pit of ſuperſtition, and therfore is it ſo oft cited by them, viz. by lPreface ad Sepher mitſvoth gadol.R. Moſes mikkotſi: by mPreface ad Bibl. maſorit.R. Iacob ben Chajim: by nMaſor hammaſor. prefat. tertia.Elias Levita, &c. Had you duely conſidered in what ſuperſtitious maner they vſe the ſame, and how it ſerves their turne, you would not ſo lightly have produced ſuch vvitneſſe.
5. To come neerer vntounto this your teſtimony itſelf: if vveconſider the inſtances and examples of the vvords vvriten and not read: and read and not written, which the oIn Nedarim. c. 4. f. 37.Thalmud propounds vntounto vsus as a tradition of Moſes from mount Sinai: we may perceive that there is never a one of them taken from the law, from the five bookes of Moſes, but all of them from later Prophets, from the bookes of Ruth, of Samuel, Kings, of Ieremie and Ezekiel. If your witneſſe had ſayd that Moſes had delivered the divers vvritings and readings of his owne bookes, there had bene ſome more colour for it, but that Moſes in mount Sinai ſhould deliver the divers writings and readings of Ezekiel and Ieremie that propheſyed ſo many generations after him: this is moſt ſenſeleſs and abſurd to imagine. Had not Ieremy and Ezekiel the ſpirit of God to direct them in the vvriting of thoſe particular vvords, as vvel as to ſet downe the maine matters of their propheſy vvhichwhich they foretold? And vvhat need vvas there then of a tradition from Moſes, for the vvriting or reading of them? And vvho can ſay that Moſes foreknew theſe things? Though the Maſorites have numbred vntounto vsus many divers writings and readings out of the bookes of Moſes, yet the Thalmud in your allegation mentions none of them, but ſuch as are in the Prophets.
6. Suppoſe all vvere true that the Thalmud and the gloſſe therevpon doth teſtify in this place: namely that theſe divers readings were the tradition of Moſes from mount Sinai, &c. yet would not this make good your aſſertion nor prove the ſame, vvhen as you ſay that Moſes by the ſpirit of God did write both; The Thalmud here ſaith nothing of writing one vvord in the text, and an other in the margine. The Rabbines here ſpeak onelyonly of receyving and delivering, but not of writing both. They pElias Levita Maſoreth hammaſoreth, praefat. 3.hold that their traditions vvere nor vvritten by Moſes, but delivered from mouth to mouth and aftervvards vvritten by Ezra and others, &c. Herein therfore you go further then your Thalmudicall teſtimonie vvill extend, & paſſe the bounds of ſobrietie in this your aſſertion, more then many of the preſumptuous Rabbines themſelves.
7. If it vvere true, as you plead, that Keri and Chethib, the divers readings (as you call them) as not betrothed her and betrothed her to himſelf, vvere both vvritten by Moſes, by the ſpirit of God: then are they both holy and divine ſcripture: then do you herein declare your ſelf to be guilty of great ſin, treachery and vnfaithfull dealing vvith the ſcriptures, in that you do leave out divers parts of the ſame at your pleaſure in your tranſlation both of the pſalmes and of theſe tvvo firſt bookes of Moſes vvhichwhich you have already publiſhed: for though ſome of theſe divers readings be noted by you in your annotations on Geneſis, yet are many of them quite left out: as namely, in Gen. 8.17. and Gen. 10.19, and Gen. 25.23, and Gen. 27.3, and Gen. 33.4, and Gen. 36.5, &c. Againe in your tranſlation of Exodus you leave out very many alſo, as in Exo. 13.11 and Exo. 16.2. and Ibid. verſ. 8, &c. And in your tranſlation of the Pſalmes, though divers be noted by you, yet are a great number left out, and paſſed by, as in Pſ. 5.9, and Pſ. 6 4, and Pſ. 10.10. and Pſ. 123.4, and Pſ. 139.16. vvith a multitude more as may be ſeene in the Maſorites Bible, onelyonly one of theſe readings are mentioned by you, and yet there is as much & the ſame vvarrant for both in ech of theſe places, as there is for both thoſe in Exo. 21,8, vvhichwhich you ſay vvere vvritten by Moſes. This being ſo, hovv great is your ſacriledge that devoure holy things, and ſteale avvay the vvord of God (ſo acknovvledged by yourſelf) from the people of God. There is nProv. 20.15.gold and a multitude of precious ſtones, but the lippes of knowledge are a precious Iewell: ech jod and title of holy ſcripture vvritten by the ſpirit of God, are in vvorth above all pearles, vvhat meane you then vvith Achan to dig in the earth, to hide theſe vvedges of gold in the ground and to bury them in your tent? Conſider your eſtate: either you are vnderunder the curſe for adding ſome of the readings vntounto the vvord of God, or els it hangs over your head for diminiſhing from the vvord of God, in taking avvay and concealing the reſt, that are of like authoritie vvith the former. The Rabbines *R. Solomon Iarchi on Gen. 17.5.vvrite that jod being taken avvayfrom the name Sarai contended vvith Schecinah, vvith God vntill ſatisfaction vvas made vntounto this Iod by adding it againe vntounto the name of Hoſea making it to be Iehoſhua: How much rather might many jods contend with you for taking them away from the holy ſcripture, if they be divine traditions as you ſay? The Iewes do alſo “R. Sol on Gen. 2.7.write, the word jitſer vſed to deſcribe the forming of man, being written with two jods, Gen. 2.7. doth ſhew vntounto vsus how man was formed both for this vvorld and for the world to come at the reſurrection of the dead: but the word jitſer vſed to deſcribe the forming of beaſts, Gen. 2.17. being in the Hebrew written with one Iod onelyonly, ſhewes that the beaſts are not formed to ſtand vp vntounto judgement in the world to come. If this be ſo, what a world of injury and wrong have you done, by omitting it ſo often? Yea ſeing Chriſt himſelf telleth vsus, aMat. 5.18.that heaven and earth ſhall periſh, rather then one jod or title of his law eſcape, &c. ſhall not heaven & earth be witneſſe againſt you that do let ſo many of thoſe jods and titles to eſcape and paſſe away in your tranſlation, when as yet you confeſſe that they vvere vvritten by the ſpirit of God? why have you not tranſlated the reading of the margent, & ſet it in the margent of your tranſlation, as wel as the reading of the text, if both be from the ſpirit of God? why have you not done it in other places, as wel as in this place Exo. 21.8? But it may be that as in many things you honour the Iewiſh expoſitions and opinions too much, that ſo you Iudaize in this alſo: that as they, ſo you think it not meet to reveale in writing many of your ſpeciall myſteries and ſecrets vntounto them that are without, but deliver them from mouth to mouth vntounto your owne people. Seing the communion of all Churches in Chriſtendome is according to your profeſsion an vnlawfull and an vncleane thing, it is the leſſe marvell that you refuſe to caſt your pearles before ſuch polluted perſons whom you dare not touch nor joyne yourſelf vntounto them in the worſhip of God. Alwayes theſe two things are evident and apparant in you, that as you make litle conſcience of the rules of your ſeparation among your ſelves, for then there would be yet more diviſions among you then there are: ſo alſo you make litle conſcience of theſe divers readings, which you ſay were written by Moſes: for if you did reverence them according your owne plea, you would not paſſe by ſo many of them in ſuch maner as you do.
8. Suppoſe that yow would go about to ſet downe all the divers readings, how could you come to any certainty, to know which be they? In the place of the Thalmud quoted by you, there be not above twelve or thirteene mentioned: and this of lo, not: and lo, to himſelf is none of them▪ VVhere vvill you find thoſe other hundreds of them? If you betake yourſelf vntounto the Maſorites Bible, from whence many have taken them you may as wel take a thouſand ſuperſtitions more which by like warrant are there recorded vntounto vsus as divine traditions. VVhereas you tell vsus here of the Hebrew ſcholion confirming the teſtimony of the Thalmud: had you looked well vponupon the ſame, you might further have ſeene this alſo, that the very ſame hebrew bR. Niſsim gloſs. in Talm. in Nedarim. c. 4. f. 37.gloſſe doth there diſſent from the Thalmud, touching ſome of theſe divers readings: Touching eth dehuggad (as they call it) in Ruth; though the Thalmud note it to be read and not written, yet the Hebrew ſcholion ſaith, In the bookes or copies which we have it is both written & read: neither is it mentioned in the Maſorah among the words that are read and not writtē. Againe, touching eth dehammitſvah (as they call it) though the Thalmud notes it among the words written and not read, yet R. Niſsim in his cIbidem. f. 38.gloſs herevpon doth ſhew, that how ſoever ſome ſay this is found in the ſection of the law which they name ethchannan, yet it is not found there in any copies which they have, nor yet in the Maſora, &c. R. Iacob ben Chajim dPraefat. ad Bibl. Maſorit.relates the ſame thing, and addes further a different opinion of R. Solomon Iarchi about the ſame. And Elias Levita in the warning which he fMaſor. hammaſ. praefat. 3.gives concerning the Bibles printed at Venice both in greater and leſſer volumes, anno 278 (according to the Iewes leſſer computation,) ſaith that the Maſoriticall traditionsabout the divers readings there ſpecified are full of errour, that he which added them was vnlearned, had no judgement touching divers copies, that he put that in the text which ſhould have bene in the margent, and contra, &c. From whence then vvill you get a juſt and ſufficient warrant of all theſe divers readings, which you hold to be divine traditions written by the ſpirit of God?
9. VVhen you think that you have found out theſe divers readings, & are reſolved of the number of them: what vvill you do to finde out the meaning of them? every vvord of God is for the aedification of his Church: and gProv. 8.9they are all plaine to them that will vnderstand & ſtraight to them that would finde knowledge: God hath taught vsus how to hNeh. 8.8expound the ſcripture by the ſcripture itſelf, by comparing one part thereof vvith an other. But where is the rule of interpretation, by which we may finde out the myſteries of theſe divers readings? for example, vvhen Zeboim Gen. 10.19. go…im, Gen. 25.23. and Iouſh, Gen. 36.5. are written in the text vvithout vau and in the margine with vau: vvhen the vowelles for the word Perath are vvritten and not the letters, 2. Sam. 8.3. VVhen the letters of the vvord Iidroch are vvritten and not the vowels, Ierem. 51.3. by vvhat found kinde of interpretation can both theſe writings be ſo expounded that the conſciences of Gods people may reſt therein, and be edifyed vntounto the Kingdome of God? If we go vntounto the Iewes Cabala, they will give vsus new and ſtrange kinde of expoſitions vponupon the want or change of a letter; becauſe iR. Solomon Iar. on Gen. 25 24. & on Gē. 38.27.theomim the word that ſignifyeth twinnes Gen. 25.24. is written in the text with defect of the letter which is in the margine, that is a ſigne that one of Rebekahs Children was juſt and the other wicked: but becauſe the vvord theomim for twinnes is written full in the ſtory of Thamar, Gen. 38.27. that was a ſigne that both her Children ſhould be righteous. They expound kIoan. Rainol. cenſur. lib. apocr. tom. 1. praelec. 27.the vvant of Iod in the laſt ſyllable of Tanninim ſignifying the whales Gen. 1.21. to be a ſigne vntounto vsus how God gelded the male Leviathan to hinder the procreation of them leaſt they ſhould devoureall, &c. From the defect of vas in doroth Gen. 9.12. they teach that the Rainebovv ſhould not be ſeene in ſome generations, as I noted lPag.before: But vvhat vviſe man is there that vvill not reiect theſe vanities? And yet vvhether you or any other can dravv any ſounder obſervations from theſe changes of jod and van and ſuch like divers readings, it is much to be feared. If theſe vvere vvritten by the ſpirit of God as you vvill have it, then muſt they be for our mRō. 15.4learning and inſtruction, for encreaſe of our comfort and hope: but if you cannot ſhevv that there is a certaine and ſure vvay to gather neceſſary doctrine from them for our edification, then have vve no reaſon to think vvith you that they are any part of the ſcriptures of God, or vvritten by the ſpirit of God.
10. In the laſt place, that all may ſee how dangerous a thing it is to regard the teſtimony of theſe Thalmudiſts, touching theſe divers readings, I vvill propound vntounto the reader one other vile practiſe of them, viz. their al tikri in changing and altering the reading of the ſcripture according to their luſt, which is done on this maner: They nThalmud in Menachoth, c. 1. Fol. 29.teach from thoſe words in Eſay, 26.4. bejah jehovah tſur ghnolamim, that God created two vvorlds vvith the two letters of the vvord jah; with jod and hè: but being in doubt whether the world to come was created with jod and the vvorld preſent vvith hè; or on the contrary: for help in this doubt they go to an other place of ſcripture Gen. 2.4. vvhichwhich they do thus corrupt: whereas it is there ſayd in the text touching heaven and earth, behibbaream, when they were created: they ſay al tikri, read not, behibbaream, but behèbaream: that is, he created them with hè: and then alſo they give other reaſons why the world to come ſhould be created vvith jod, & this world with he; viz. becauſe the righteous which belong to the world to come are litle in their owne eyes, and alſo bowed downe, as the letter Iod in this forme (…) is litle & bowed alſo, &c. Theſe collections, (beſide the corruption of the text) are like vntounto the oDe… …inghe. Fol. 20. B.collections of Thomas Lea…ar once one of your ſeparation, but now an Arian, who by his cabala from the letters &characters of the Hebrew Alphabet profeſſeth to ſhew vsus the courſe of the ſun, the waye to the Indies, vvith other ſecrets of Aſtronomie. Againe, they pThalmud in Beracoth c. 9. Fol. 54.write that the ſtone which Og the King of Baſhan ſought to caſt at the Iſraelites, vvas three miles long according to the length of their campe: that when he had lift this ſtone vponupon his head, God ſent a piſmire vvhichwhich made a hole in this ſtone, ſo that it fell downe about his neck: and that while Og ſtrove to get it from about his neck, his teeth preſently grew out into ſuch a length, that he could not lift vp the ſtone nor deliver himſelf from it: for proofe of this miracle, they alledge the qPſal. 3.7words of the pſalmiſt, thou haſt broken the teeth of the wicked: but vvithall they bring their al tikri, and ſay, read not ſchibbarta, thou haſt broken: but ſcherababta, vvhichwhich ſignifies the quite contrary, to vvit, thou haſt encreaſed or augmented, namely the teeth of Og, that the ſtone could not be got from his neck. R. Meir *Thalmud in Sotah, c. 7. f. 37.ſaith, vvhen Iſrael ſtood by the Sea, (Exo. 14.) the tribes did ſtrive one vvith an other, one ſayd I vvill go dovvne firſt into the Sea: an other ſayd I vvill deſcend firſt into the Sea; but the tribe of Beniamin lept forth & vvent dovvne firſt into the Sea; their proofe there is from the words of the Pſalme, There was litle Beniamin, Rodem, their ruler: But ſay they, al-tikri, read not, rodem, but radiam he deſcended into the Sea. This proofe is ſome thing like vntounto your ovvne “Annot. on Pſal. 68 28.expoſition of this very vvord, vvhen as you alſo from the corrupt Greek verſion, vvhichwhich tranſlateth this vvord rodem to ſignify in a traunce, do there tell vsus that theſe things applyed to Chriſts times and after one very myſticall; from hence you ſhevv hovv Paul of Beniamin was converted in a traunce or ecſtaſie, &c. that Beniamin the leaſt is here put firſt: ſo in the heavenly Ieruſalem the firſt foundation was a Iaſper, on which Beniamins name was graven, &c. Of this your revelation, ecſtaſy or Phantaſy more is to be ſayd “Cap. 7.hereafter. This kinde of corrupting the text is ordinary vvith them: ſome examples hereof I noted before out of the rPag. 370.Thalmud and ſPag.Maimony; and an 100. more might eaſily be alledged to ſhevv the ſame. Elias Levita tMaſor. hammaſor. prefa. 3.bringing anexample or tvvo hereof Eſa. 54.13. & Pſal. 50.23, vvhere they ſay al-tikri, read not banajic thy Children: but bonaijc thy builders: read not ſam deres he that diſpoſeth his vvay, but ſcham deres, there is the vvay: he giveth this judgement herevpon, viz. that if the pricks or vovvels had bene given before from Sinai, that then this ſhould have bene a heynous practiſe. And therfore ſeing the vowels are ſo ancient … and ſeing alſo that they have preſumed to make this change as vvell in letters as in pricks, as the examples firſt mentioned do ſhew, it doth therfore follow from his grant, that this al tikri or changing of the reading hath bene a heynous corruption of the ſcripture. And therfore howſoever otherwiſe, they have bene ſuperſtitious in keeping a reckoning of all the vvords and letters in the ſcripture: and that God alſo hath vſed their ſuperſtition vntounto our good in ſome things: yet their boldnes and licentiouſnes in theſe kind of depravations makes that their teſtimony about the reading of the ſcripture is not to be reſted vponupon.
BVt you bring yet more vvitneſſe for the countenancing of your aſſertion, and ſay, uAnnot. on Exo. 21.8.The Chaldee verſion in this and other the like places, tranſlateth according to the margine: an evident proof that theſe divers readings were not added by the Maforites, as ſome think: ſeing the Maſorites were not ſo ancient.
I anſwer▪ Firſt, this teſtimony is againſt yourſelf: for if the Chaldee verſion in this and other the like places, tranſlate according to the margine, and that onelyonly (as it doth) or els according to the text onelyonly: then doth it afford vntounto vsus, not both the divers readings, but one onelyonly: and ſo is contrary to your tranſlation that yeelds two. Had the Chaldee paraphraſt thought, that Moſes by the ſpirit of God, had written both theſe divers, readings, (as you ſay he did) then it had bene ſacriledge in him to have ſuppreſſed and kept back one of them from vsus. This vve ſee alſo in the Arabique verſion, which though it ſometimes tranſlate according to the readings vvhichwhich the Maſorites have ſet in the margine, as in 1 Sam. 2.3. and ſometimes according to the reading which is ſet vvithin the line of thetext, as in Pſal. 100.…, &c. yet ſtill it hath b…t one reading, and muſt therfore be guilty of perfidie and treachery againſt the holy Ghoſt, if it had acknowledged two readings appoynted of God. The like is to be obſerved alſo in the Perſian Thargum, which ſtill followes not a double reading, but keepes to one onelyonly, as in gardan o, Gen. 33.3, & peraſaue…, Deut. 33.9, & ſo in other places. And this alſo is that vvhichwhich is commonly practiſed in other vulgar tranſlations vſed in the Churches of Chriſt this day, who are therfore vvitneſſes againſt you in this matter, vnleſs they vvill condemne themſelves of vnfaithfulnes in keeping the ſcriptures.
Secondly, though the Chaldee verſion do ſometimes follow that reading vvhichwhich now ſtands in the margine: yet vvho can affirme that it ſtood in the margine of that copie which this paraphraſt then vſed, rather then in the text itſelf? The Maſorites though coming after the Chaldee paraphraſt might finde divers copies of the ſcripture, differing one from an other: from theſe might they gather the divers readings, and to write ſome of them in the text, and ſome of them in the margine: even as many Printers of late, having gathered and noted divers readings from ſuch as vvere ancienter then themſelves, do now adde them to the margine of the new Teſtament. And therfore that vvhichwhich you call an evident proofe of the Maſcrites not adding them: is no proofe at all. It is one thing to invent or deviſe divers reading; an other, togather, compile and adde them to the ſcriptures.
Thirdly, ſuppoſe the Chaldee verſiōs had followed & mainteyned both the divers readings, & that they had placed the partly in the text & partly in the margine: yet is not their authoritie ſo great, that we might therevpō ſay with you, that Moſes did by the ſpirit of God write both. Theſe Chaldee paraphrasts in their verſions do inſert many fabulous things, & oftē go aſtray in moſt groſſe maner: ſo that ſuch vveighty poynts are not to be built vponupon their credit. The xOnkelos Targum on Gen. 4.23.firſt and ancient teſt of them, and freer frō errour then the reſt, tranſlates the vvords of Lamech quite contraryto the text: whereas the ſcripture makes Lamech to ſay, I have killed or would kill a man, &c. this paraphraſt makes him to ſay, I have not killed a man: This his errour is yAnnot. on Gen. Ibid.acknowledged by yourſelf: and herein I do agree with you, for how ſoever zAnimadv. contra Bellar. de verbo dei, lib. 2. Cap. 3.Iunius ſayth, that the vvords in the Chaldee paraphraſt are to be read interrogatively, have I not killed? that is, I have: according to the meaning of the Hebrew text: yet ſeing the other words of the paraphraſt which follow immediately in that place do not ſo fitly agree with ſuch an interrogation: I do therfore take the paraphraſt his meaning to be according to the Rabbinical expoſition of that ſtory, vvhichwhich I noted aPag.before; viz. that he had not killed a man, preſumptuouſly but by errour not ſo that I ſhould beare ſin for him, or that my ſeed ſhould be conſumed for him: for ſo the paraphraſt explanes his meaning, and ſo R. Solomon bCommēt. on Gen. 4.23.would have Lamechs meaning to be: though the ſcripture ſeemes to teach an other thing. Againe this paraphraſt tranſlating the ſtory of the well which the Princes of Iſrael digged, doth quite pervert the text, and turnes it into a fable, and ſaith that this cOnkelos Targum on Numb. 21.18.19.20.well being given vntounto them from the wildernes, went with them downe into the vallies, and aſcended with them vp vntounto the hilles and high places, and followed them ſtill, &c VVhereas it is ſayd in the bleſſing of Gad, that there was a portion of the law giver hid: this he turnes into an other fable, and ſaith, that dOnkelos Targum on Deut. 33 21.Moſes the great ſcribe of Iſrael was buried in the inheritance of Gad, vvhichwhich is directly contrary vntounto the ſcripture, vvhichwhich ſhewes that Moſes was eDeut. 34,6.buryed in the land of Moab, a place which none of the tribes poſſeſſed: and the tribe of Reuben was alſo ſituate betwixt this place and the tribe of Gad. From this paraphraſt do other of the fRaſi on Deut. 33.21.Rabbines borow this fiction alſo. And a number of other errours and falſe tranſlations might be ſhewed in him. As for the other Chaldee Paraphraſt, R. Ionathan ben vzziel whom the Iewes do ſo highly extoll, he is yet more full of errours: They ſay of him, that gThalmud in Succa, c. 2. Fol. 28. Ain the houre that he vſed to fit and ſtudy the law, every bird that flew over him was preſently burnt: And the gloſſe thereon doth give thisreaſon, that the vvordes of the law did then reioyce, as vvhen they were given at Sinai, vvhere the law vvas given with fire. And to make the matter the more credible, hEn miſhpat, ibidemthere are brought the like examples of R. Eliezer, and R. Iehoſhua compaſſed vvith flames of fire round about them. The other iIbidem.gloſſe vponupon the Thalmud, giving a reaſon why the birds were burnt, ſaith that the miniſtring Angelles were about him, and gathered themſelves vntounto him to heare the words of the law from his mouth. Theſe vvords of the paraphraſt his mouth are ſuch, that even the fabulous Papiſts themſelves, do juſtly reiect many of them: & therfore ſome of theſe inſtances which I bring, are not to be found in the King of Spaine his great Bible printed by Plantine, but in the Maſorites Bible: This I thought good to advertiſe the reader of, leaſt any ſhould be deceyved in ſeeking them there, vvhere they are left out and omitted. Touching the army of Siſera, this paraphraſt faith, kR. Ionathan ben vzziel Targum on Iudg. 5.8.that he came vp vvith 40000. heads or cheeftaines of his campe: lOn verſ. 5vvith 50000. men armed vvith ſvvords: vvith 60000. armed vvith ſpeares: vvith 70000. armed vvith targets: vvith 80000. ſhooters of ſtones or bolts: beſide the 900. charets of yrō, &c. And there he telles vsus of commotion & contention betvvixt the mountaines, Tabor, Hermon, & Carmel ech of them perſvvading themſelves that the Majeſtie of God ſhould abide vponupon them and be revealed vntounto them: and how mount Sinai being a litle and weak mountaine the glory of God vvas revealed vponupon it, &c. VponUpon the ſong of Hannah he ſaith, mTargum on 1. Sam. 2.1.2, &c.that ſhe was endued with the ſpirit of prophecie, and how in particular ſhe prophecied of her Sonne Samuel and divers wonders to be wrought by him: of Heman her Sonnes ſon who with his 14. Sonnes ſhould ſing praiſe with violes and harpes in the ſanctuary of the Lord: of Sennacherib, of Nebuchadnezzar: of the Kingdome of Graecia, of the ſonnes of Haman; of Roome, &c. Touching Goliath the giant of Gath he nTargum on 1. Sam. 17.8.bringeth divers fictions, how it ſhould be he that ſlew the two ſonnes of Eli, that tooke the arke, &c. Touching Solomon, he oTarg. on 1. Kin. 4.33.feigneth, that he prophecied of the kings ofthe houſe of David, vvhichwhich ſhould beare rule in this vvorld and in the vvorld to come, (the world) of the Meſſias. Touching the army of Sennacherib, he ſaith, that pTargum on Eſay, 10 32.he brought with him fortie thouſand guſpanin or charets or coaches of gold for the Princes clothed with robes to ſit in: that he brought with him two hundred thouſand armed with ſwords and ſpeares: and two hundred and ſixtie thouſand ſhooters of ſtones: and an hundred thouſand valiant man to run before him: that the length of his campe vvas foure hundred miles: that his horſequarter vvas fortie miles: that the number of his hoſte vvas two hundred and ſixtie thouſand millions vvanting one: that ſo they came vp againſt Abraham when they caſt him into the middes of the fiery furnace: and that ſo they ſhall come vp when Gog and Magog come, &c. Touching the viſion of the 4 creatures ſhewed vntounto Ezekiel, vvhereas the ſcripture mentioneth onelyonly foure faces, which ech of theſe creatures had: this Chaldee paraphraſt qTargum on Ezek. 1.6,addes further that ech of them had ſixteen faces, and that ſo the number of faces vntounto theſe 4. creatures were in all ſixtie foure faces: VVhereas the ſcripture mentions onelyonly foure wings vntounto ech creature, this paraphraſt addes furthet by a ſtrange kinde of reckoning, that there were ſixteen wings to every one of the faces: & that the number of the wings of the foure creatures were two hundred fiftie & ſix wings, &c. And in many other places doth this paraphraſt pervert the prophecies concerning Chriſt, and miſinterpret the ſcriptures quite beſides the meaning of the holy ſpirit. VVhen this paraphraſt had thus tranſlated the firſt and latter Prophets, the Iewes ſay rThalmud in Megillah Cap. 1.that there vvas an earthquake, and that the earth vvas mooved for the ſpace of 400. miles: that there came a voyce, (a bathkol) ſaying, who is this that reveales my ſecret to the ſonnes of men? And after that an other voyce, Let it ſuffice thee: it is enough, and they give the reaſon why this Ionathan might proceed no further in his paraphraſe vvith the other bookes of the old teſtament, leaſt he ſhould reveale the time of Meſsias his coming noted in Daniel: But after him riſes vp a third chaldee paraphraſt, R. Ioſeph the blinde, as he is commonly called, even that blinde guide vvhom you do ſo often and ſo abundantly alledge in your annotations on the pſalmes. And this paraphraſt is full of Thalmudique fables, and wreſteth and profaneth the holy ſcriptures to confirme thoſe fables: as for example, the ſR. Ioſeph Caecus, Targum on Pſ. 50.10.fable of Behemoth before noted, vvhichwhich dayly devoures the graſſe of a thouſand mountaines: the tIbid. on verſ. 11.fable of Tarnegol, the vvilde cock vvhoſe feet reſt vponupon the earth, and his head toucheth the heaven, and there crowes or ſings before God: the uOn Pſ. 69 31.fable of that fat Oxe which Adam offred having hornes before hoofes: the vvOn Pſal. 104.26.fable of Leviathan reſerved for the ſport and play at the banket of the righteous at the coming of Meſſias: In Pſal. 57.3. this paraphraſt ſaith that God commanded a ſpider to make a vveb in the mouth of the cave for Davids defence. In pſ. 78.49. he addes vntounto the text, that God layd two hundred & fifty ſtrokes vponupon thē in his great anger, by the hand of wicked devilles. In Pſ. 137.4. he ſaith that the Levites bit of their thumbes with their teeth, when thoſe that led them captives required ſongs of them. And the whole pſalme is turned into a dialogue: and the words of the pſalme are attributed to five ſorts of perſons: ſome to the Babylonians; ſome to the Iewes, ſome to a voyce of the holy Ghoſt ſome to the Angel Micael called the Prince of Ieruſalem: ſome to the Angel Gabriel called there the Prince of Sion. And Micael is ſayd to pray againſt Edom: and Gabriel is feyned to pronounce a bleſſing vponupon thē that deſtroy the Babylonians. Touching Iob he feigneth that his xTargum on Iob. 1.3.ſubſtance was far greater then the text ſheweth he putteth yOn v. 15.Lilith queene of Zemargad for the ſhabeans: he zOn Iob 2 9.feigneth Dinah to be the wife of Iob: he telles a miraculous wonder touching the three frends of Iob, noted before. He alludes vntounto the aOn Iob. 3 7. & 38.36 & 39.16.fables of the cock: and a number of other fictions he hath in that book. As for the paraphraſe on Pſter, it is full of vaine and preſumptuous fictions: as, that bTargum on Eſter. 1.a decree was made concerning Vaſhti that ſhe ſhould be ſlaine naked, becauſe of her counſaile to hinder the building of the temple: that King Ahaſuerus ſought to ſit on the throne of Solomon which was brought from Ieruſalem by Sheſbak King of Egipt; and from thence was taken by Sennacherib and from thence returned to Ieruſalem in the dayes of Hezekias: & from thence was brought againe to Egipt by Pharaoh: and from thence to Babel by Nebuchadnezar: and from thence to Elam by Cyrus: and that now Ahaſucrus ſought to ſit vponupon this throne, but could not, that he ſent for workmen from Alexandria to make an other like vntounto this, and that they could not: but made an other worſe then it in two yeares ſpace, and that in the third yeare Ahaſucrus did ſit vponupon it: that with the ſix hundred & foureſcore braſen Cheſts full of gold and pearle found by Cyrus in a haven of Euphrates he made that feaſt for a hundred and foureſcore dayes: that in his ſecond feaſt he appoynted them to drinke in the golden Veſſels of the ſanctuary brought from Ieruſalem by the wicked Nebuchadnezzar, and that the other veſſels of the King did change their ſhape before the veſſels of the ſanctuarie: that Mordecai abſteyned from that feaſt and prayed & faſted vntill the ſeventh day; that the King ſent for vaſhti to come naked before the people to ſhew her beauty that this was, becauſe ſhe had made the daughters of Iſrael naked, and ſo to carde wool & flax vponupon the Sabath day: and a multitude of ſuch like preſumptions and pervertings of the holy text are there to be ſeene throughout that whole ſtory from the beginning to the end thereof. In Ruth likewiſe the Chaldee paraphraſt telleth vsus of ten famines: of which cTargum on Ruth, 1.one was in the dayes of Adam, an other in the dayes of Lamech, &c. he ſaith that Ruth was the daughter Eglō King of Moab: that Boaz dOn Ruth 2.ſayd vntounto her at the firſt finding of her in his field, that it was told him by prophecie that Kings & Prophets ſhould come of her: that whē Boaz meaſured vntounto her eOn c. 3.15.fix meaſures of barley, ſhe obteyning ſtrēgth from God to cary the ſame, did then forth with prophecie that ſix righteous perſons ſhould proceed from her, whereof every one ſhould be bleſſed with ſix bleſsings, to wit, David, Daniel, and his companions, and the King Meſsias: And fIſaak ben Arama on Ruth, 3.15other of the Rabbines ſay, thatthoſe ſix bleſſings were the gift of the ſpirit mentioned with ſix names or attributes in Eſay. 11.2. But they differ about the perſons, ſome reckoning Hezekias and Ioſias among thoſe ſix. Sundry other ſuch things doth this paraphraſt there record. In the paraphraſe vponupon the Lamentations it is ſayd, that gTargum on Lam. 5.5.vvhen the wicked Nebuchadnezzar ſaw ſome of the captived Princes of the Children of Iſrael, to go empty without burden, he commanded them to ſow the bookes of the law together, to make ſackes of them, to fill them with gravell from the ſhore of Euphrates, and then to lay them vponupon their neckes; that then there was no reſt vntounto their eyes. As for the Chaldee paraphraſe on the Canticles ſo often alledged by you, it is all over in every Chapter repleniſhed with Thalmudique fictions: And vvhat vvorth is there then in theſe witneſſes, if they had given teſtimonie vntounto thoſe divers readings that you maintaine? If their tranſlations according to the margine or line be of authority, you may thereby bring the Rabbinicall fables into the text and prove them to be divine ſcripture, written by the ſpirit of God, as wel as you may juſtify lo, not; and lo, to himſelf.
YOu adde yet further in the //Annot. on Exo. 21.8.ſame place: that the Greek copies here varie, ſome having, hath betrothed her to him, other ſome, hath not betrothed: and ſo Theodotio and ſymmachus alſo tranſlated, hath not betrothed. Anſwer.
1. Howſoever they tranſlate this place in the Greek with much varietie: yet this is to be obſerved that none of the ſeverall tranſlations do commend vntounto vsus a double reading, as your tranſlation doth: ech of them ſhewes vntounto vsus but one onelyonly reading: and therfore the example of every one of them teſtifyeth againſt you. Had the Greek tranſlatours imagined that the double readings vvere a divine tradition delivered vntounto Moſes at mount Sinai, it had bene great impiety in them to have ſuppreſſed the ſame: This had bene to have clipped the Lords coyne by paring away ſo many parts of his holy word.
2: As for theſe Greek tranſlations of the old Teſtament, had they bene more direct for your purpoſe, yet ſhould their teſtimonie have litle holpen you in this matter; Their credit is very ſmall, in reſpect of the innumerable errours, falſifications and corruptions of the holy text whereof they are moſt apparantly guilty. You ſay indeed touching the Greek and Chaldee verſions, that they are, “Preface to annot. on Gen.both, of great authoritie, eſpecially the Greek, honoured even by the Apoſtles in their ſo often following not onelyonly the words but even the theologicall expoſition. And for the declaration of this, you produce divers examples, comparing the Greek verſion with the new Teſtament in Eſa. 11.10. with Rom. 15.12. In Prov. 3.34. with Iam. 4.6. In Prov. 11.31, with 1 Pet. 4.18. In Eſa 42.4. with Mat. 12.21. with ſundry others And els where alſo you “Preface to annot. on Pſalmeswrite to the ſame purpoſe I anſwer.
Firſt, for the tranſlatiō of the 72. interpreters in the dayes of Ptolomaeus Philadelphus: it is vncertaine whether they tranſlated any more then the five bookes of Moſes: for the teſtimony of ancient writers varieth much about this matter: And Ioſephus witneſſeth, that Ptolemee had not the whole ſcripture, but the %Antiq. Iud. proaen. lib. 1. c. 1.law onelyonly from theſe interpreters: and alledgeth this as a reaſon, why he vndertook a more full declaration of the Ievves ſtory. And this reaſon of his, is againſt their opinion alſo, vvho imagine that the reſt of the ſcriptures were tranſlated by other 72. interpreters in the dayes of Herod and the laſt Ptolemee for if the whole ſtorie of the old Teſtament had bene by ſuch a famous tranſlation of other Septuagints turned into Greek & publiſhed vntounto the world, then could not Ioſephus have alledged this reaſon as a ſpeciall cauſe of his enterpriſe. And then if this teſtimonie of Ioſephus be true, the moſt of thoſe inſtances which in both your forenamed prefaces you bring to countenance this tranſlation of the Septuagint as being approved in the new Teſtament, are quite beſide the matter; becauſe the moſt of theſe your inſtances are taken not from the law, but from other parts of ſcripture, vvhichwhich according to the teſtimony of Ioſephus were not tranſlated by the ſeptuagint.
Secondly, the tranſlation of the ſeptuagint whether it was of the law onelyonly, or of the whole ſcripture of the old Teſtament, is much to be ſuſpected as an vnfaithfull and maimed work even from the firſt beginning thereof: ſeing divers //Hieron. prefat. in Pētateuch.vvitneſſes do record vntounto vsus of them, that they did purpoſely adde, alter detract and change many things in their Greek tranſlation otherwiſe then they were in the originall Hebrew text. The honour that many give vntounto theſe interpreters is far too great, “Auguſt. de civitate Dei lib. 18. Cap. 43.affirming even their aberrations and contrarieties to the text, to be written by the direction of a divine and propheticall ſpirit: and tell vsus alſo of “Epiphan. de menſuris & ponderibus.miraculous things touching this tranſlation, and this both with contradiction to themſelves and apparant contrariety to the truth.
The Iewes them ſelves confeſſe that this tranſlation of the law hath bene a burden vponupon their conſciences; for which they do repent vntounto this day R. Iaakob deſcribing the divers faſts which they obſerve, ech monethmonth in the yeare, ſaith that they faſt aArba Turim, lib. Orach chajim. in in Taanith, or treat. of faſting, fig. 580.in the eight day of the monethmonth Tebeth, becauſe then the law was written in Greek in the dayes of king Ptolaemeus and that there was darknes in the world for three dayes. This their practiſe is ſutable to their auncient envy againſt the gentiles, 1. Theſs. 2.16. Act. 22.21.22. And being ſo affected, it is the leſſe marvell, if they ſought to hide or change divers things in their tranſlation.
Thirdly, that auncient tranſlation of the ſeptuagints doth not appeare at this day. Some think we have onelyonly ſome fragments thereof: and others think it to be quite loſt. Touching theſe opinions, D. Whitaker bDe ſacra ſcriptura. contr. 1. quaeſt. 2. Cap. 3.ſaith Verior illorum ſententia videtur, qui verſionem illam omnino perijſſe exiſtimant. He approves their iudgement moſt, that hold it altogether loſt. And againe in the ſame place, after many corruptions noted in it, he ſaith we may thence conclude that either we have not this tranſlation of the 70 elders; or els that it is ſo infinitely and filthily corrupted, that it is now of very ſmall authoritie.
Fourthly, as for that Greek tranſlation which is extant at this day, going vnderunder the name of the ſeptuagint, & which you honour ſo much and alledge ſo often, it appeares evidently to be a moſt corrupt thing, full offorgeries, and ſwarming with errours over all from the beginning to the end of it. All good writers at this day do generally vponupon occaſion vvitneſſe ſo much. In ſpeciall there is one “Engelbertus Engels in proaem. pentaglott. val. Schind.learned man who hath taken paines to ſet downe ſome generall heads & as it were ſtanderds vnderunder which thoſe troopes and legions of errour and falſifications might be in ſome part reduced and marſhalled. Divers examples he ſhewes of ſeverall kindes, and yet vntounto ech kinde more inſtances might be added: yea and more generall heads of ſuch errours be deſcribed alſo. Many witneſſe that it was corrupt of old: but for this time preſent, the corruptions are vnſpeakable and without number: and more alſo then the corruptions of Onkelos and Ionathan the Chaldee paraphraſts, & therfore alſo of leſſe authoritie though you in your compariſon affirme the contrary.
Fiftly, as the errours of this Greek tranſlation are for number many: ſo are they for the nature of thē very great. Some of them do directly contradict the text as in Pſ. 105.2.8. Gen. 26.32. in the firſt place affirming what the ſcripture denyes, & in the later denying that which God affirmes in his word. They impugne the truth of the holy ſtory, in deſcribing the yeares of ſundry patriarkes, eſpecially by giving ſo many yeares vntounto Methuſchelah as if he had lived 14. yeares after the flood, Gen. 5. In ſtead of 40. they put 3 dayes, Ion. 3. That moſt abſurd fable of the Iewes touching the play with Leviathā is countenaced by this tranſlatiō of the ſeptuagint Pſ. 104.26. The moſt impious errour of the Arrians denying the eternall godhead of Chriſt, doth alſo receive ſtrength from this corrupt verſion, whiles they tranſlate Prov. 8.22. he hath created me in the beginning of his wayes: in ſtead of he hath poſſeſſed me, as though Chriſte were but a mere creature. In reſpect of theſe forgeries, it is moſt vntrue which you ſay, of this Greek tranſlation, with the Chaldee: that they are both, of great authoritie. The Chaldee Paraphraſt tranſlateth that place of the Proverbs as the Greek hath it.
Sixthly, whereas you ſay, that the Apoſtles do ſo often follow not onelyonly the words, but even the Theologicall expoſition of theſe interpreters;this is alſo an vncertaine and vnwarrantable aſſertion for all the examples that you alledge who is it that cā certainely prove ynto vsus that the Apoſtles followed the ſeptuagint & that thoſe corrupted Greek verſions of the old Yeſtament were not rather corrected according to the allegations of the Apoſtles in the new; Seing this tranſlation is generally ſuppoſed to be a patchery out of many; what hinders but that the correctours of the ſeptuagint, in later editions, might follow the words of the Apoſtles, & that ſo by this meanes, that agreement of expoſitions words and phraſes which is betwixt them in ſome place might ariſe?
Sevently, ſuppoſe the Apoſtles in their Greek writings did vſe the verſion of the ſeptuagint, in ſome allegations as being then beſt knowne there being few or none other tranſlations at that time, it doth not follow hence that it ſhould therfore be honoured above others in theſe times, when as there is not the like occaſion of writing in Greek; when as there are many other tranſlations extant more fit for vſe, and far freer from corruption.
Eighthly, as for the tranſlations of Symmachus & Theodotio, they being both of them heretiques and enimies of Chriſte, and one of them alſo an Apoſtate from Chriſtianity to Iudaiſme, yea & ſince that time alſo their tranſlations being exceedingly corrupted, it ſkilles not much, whether the margine or the line, or both be followed and obſerved in the fragments of their Greek verſions. Their credit is far too weake to procure divine authoritie vntounto both the divers readings which are in the Maſorites Bible, yea though they had plainely avouched the ſame, which yet is not ſhewed out of them: even by your owne inſtance of their tranſlation, they followed but one reading onelyonly, and therfore their example, if it be ought worth, is againſt your ſelf, who deliver two vntounto vsus, and thoſe both as from the Lord.
ANother ſpice of this tranſgreſſion is, that *Annot. on Gē. 23.2 & 33.4. & on 34.31. &c.you propound vntounto vsus for grounds of inſtruction, to be obſerved & meditatedvpon, ſuch traditions of the Maſorites as are not manifeſted to be from God, no more then thoſe divers readings before ſpoken of: as namely the great and litle letters in the middes of words and ſentences; the extraordinary prickes that are ſet over ſome words, &c. Touching theſe we may obſerve;
Firſt, that they have no other ground then the Kabala or tradition of the Maſorites: Theſe and other ſuch like traditions they hold to be the ſtrength of the law and of divine warrant, and commended vntounto vsus by the holy Ghoſt: Elias Levita in his explication of the maſora or tradition ſings on this maner: //Maſoreth hammaſoreth, in his rythmical preface.vahalo hammaſorah, hi ſig lethorah: Is not the maſora, the hedge of the law? And to this purpoſe after his owne ſong, he alledgeth the ſong of ſongs, Cant. 3.7.8. with the opinion of the Rabbines, touching thoſe 60. ſtrong men which are round about Solomons bed, the valiant men of Iſrael, all handling the ſword, expert in warre, every one having his ſword vponupon his thigh for the feare by night: theſe ſaith he are the tradition or maſoreth, “Ibid. prefat. tertia.and their ſignes, leaſt the law ſhould be forgotten in the captivity. R. Solomon in his commentaries on the ſame ſcripture teacheth the ſame. But note the vncertainty & vanitie of thē, evē from their owne vaine and perverted expoſitions: The Chaldee paraphraſt vponupon the ſame place expoundeth thoſe 60. ſtrong men, to be the Prieſts ſpreading out their hands, ſtanding vponupon their pulpits, & bleſsing the people, the houſe of Iſrael with the 60. letters delivered vntounto Moſes their maiſter, &c. By thoſe 60. letters (as I take it) they meane that forme of bleſsing preſcribed, Numb. 6.24.25.26. for by the reckoning I finde that in it there are juſt 60. letters, conteyned in thoſe 3. verſes. Aben Ezra in his comment on Cant. 3. expounds thoſe 60. ſtrong men to be the 60. myriads or ſix hundred thouſand that entred into the Land.
Secondly, whereas on Gen. 33.4. you ſay. Therfore the word kyſſed is extraordinarily noted in the Hebrew with three pricks over it, as leading the reader to obſerve well this matter: let vsus ſee what extraordinary myſteries your Iew doctours will teach vsus from hence: It is “Ioan. Buxt. Theſaur gram. Cap. 5. ex Ialkut.ſhewed vsus out of their records thus, Rabbi Iann… ſayd the pricking doth ſhew that Eſau ſought not aLenaſſcheko.to kyſſe Iaakob, but bLenaſſchec…o.to bite him: and his neck became marble, ſo that the teeth of that wicked one were ſet on edge. Therfore alſo it followeth, And they wept to wit, one for his neck, th'other for his teeth. R. Solomon in his commentaries on that place notes further the difference of the Rabbines touching this matter.
Thirdly, whereas vponupon the word harlot in Gen. 34,31, you ſay: In the Hebrewe Zonah, the firſt letter is extraordinarily great, for ſome hidden meaning, What if it be, to ſignify the ſtout and big words of theſe yong men to their father? So a litle letter is vſed before in Gen. 23.2. to ſignify moderation without exceſſe in Abrahams weeping. Your coniecture for Zonah hath ſome colour, though a trifling vanity and without ground, but your aſſertion to countenance the ſame from the litle letter in Gen. 23. to ſignify moderation is a very vnreaſonable and abſurd ſpeculation. For what colour of reaſon is there, that a moderate ſorow ſhould be ſignifyed by an immoderately litle letter, that an ordinate affection ſhould be repreſented by an inordinate extraordinary token? if the big letter in Zonah note the fault of the exceſſive ſtout and big words in the yong men to their father: why ſhould not the letter in BAcAH, WEpTE, wanting the due proportion and meaſure with the reſt, as wel note a defect and fault of the too litle ſorow in Abraham? The comparing of theſe two examples ſo vnequally oppoſed and miſmatched togather doth juſtly reprove and refute your collection from the ſame.
Fourthly, whereas you pleaded cPag. 46before, that the ſeparation of Mr. Cluſe your elder from the French church, was lawfull, becauſe of their preaching from humane apocryphal catechiſmes; even by the like reaſon may you ſee that your miniſtery alſo is to be forſaken and left, if you preach in your congregation, and expound the ſcriptures in ſuch maner as you do here. For what are theſe extraordinary prickes, that you ſpeak of: theſe formes of great and litle letters in the middes of words and ſentences, but humane apocryphall deviſes of Rabbines and Thalmudiques? what divine warrant have you for them, and for your expounding of them and of Keri & cethib, both togather in one place? It is ten times more lawfull to expound the principles of Chriſtian religion in Catechiſmes according to the maner of the French Churches, then to expound theſe Iewiſh fables and toyes in ſuch maner as you do. Theſe Iewiſh deviſes are d1. Tim. 1 4. Tit. 1.13.expreſſely condemned by the holy Ghoſt: th'other not ſo.
Fiftly, if the Lord by the finger of his ſpirit do direct vsus to take ſpeciall obſervatiō of thoſe extraordinary prickes that you tell vsus of in Gen. 33.4. to the end that we might ſearch out ſome hidden meaning therein: then are you againe guilty of great perfidie and vnfaithfullnes, which in your tranſlation and annotations alſo in other places do paſſe them over and conceale thoſe parts of the ſcripture, where divine vvarnings of meditation are propounded vntounto vsus. For whereas there are fifteene words noted by the ſcribes and by ſome printers to have ſuch prickes over their heads: five of them are by you already wrapt vp in darknes and paſſed over in ſilence, namely in Gen. 16.5. & 18.9. and 19.33, and 37.12. & Pſal. 27.13. In ech of theſe places, are theſe prickes to be ſeene, vvhichwhich you omit with out giving any vvarning of them. So do you alſo paſſe by the litle letter in “Annot. on Gen. 2 4.behibbarcam: the great letter in *Annot. on Pſal. 80.13. & verſ. 15.Cannah, and the ſuſpended letter lifted vp in the word jagnar, &c. Theſe being of like regard by the tradition of the Maſorites, ought in like maner to have bene noted by you: and ſuppoſe you could not have ſhewed the reaſon of them in theſe places, yet ſhould you at leaſt have given warning of them vntounto your readers and have left them to their conſideration. In like maner do you alſo paſſe by the crownes of the ſpeciall letters which are ſo oft noted therewith in the lavv, of vvhichwhich it is ſayd by R. Iudah, that “Thalmud in Menachoth cap. 3. Fol. 29.Moſes on a certaine time aſcending on high, he found the holy bleſſed God binding crownes vponupon the letters; to vvit, three for ech of the ſeven letters conteyned in the vvord ſchagnatnazgats, as was noted “Pag. 294before. In the ſame place of the Thalmud it is recordedhow the Lord foretold vntounto Moſes, that after certaine generatiōs there ſhould come a man evē Akibah bē Ioſeph by name, who ſhould expound vntounto vsus all thoſe crownes, prickes and titles of the letters: that the Lord alſo at Moſes requeſt did ſhew that man vntounto him: and that Moſes in admiration of him did ſay, O Lord of the world haſt thou ſuch a man as this, and doſt thou deliver thy law by mine hand? &c. Now R. Akiba being come: and you being ſo familiar with theſe Talmudiſts, is it not wonder that you have nothing to ſay for our inſtruction, touching theſe crownes and miters, eſpecially there being the ſame Talmudique warrant to prove that they are divine, holy & from God, as there is to prove Keri and cethib, the divers readings to be both written by the ſpirit of God? VVhen the Lord ſhewed the patterne of the tabernacle and inſtruments thereof vntounto Moſes, he commanded him to make eExod. 25 11.24.25. & 30.3.limbes or crownes of gold for the arke, the table and altar of incenſe: & it had bene great vnfaithfulnes in Moſes to have neglected the ſame. Now the frame of the holy ſcriptures is as precious and excellent as was the forme of the tabernacle: if therfore thoſe prickes over ſpeciall wordes belong vntounto them of right as their crownes, then is your vnfaithfulnes in the houſe of God, great in your omitting of them.
And as for the Iew doctours, they plot with theſe prickes a Crovvne of thornes for the head of the Lord directly contrary vntounto the letter and ſenſe of the ſcripture: as in Gen. 19.33. where it is ſayd of Lot touching his eldeſt daughter, that he perceyved not, neither when ſhe lay downe, nor when ſhe roſe vp: becauſe of the prick that crowneth the vvord roſe, %Thalmud de nazir. cap. 4. P. 23.they gather and teach that though he perceyved her not when ſhe lay downe, yet he percevved her when ſhe roſe vp. VVhere it is ſayd in Gen. 37.12. they went to feed the flock, &c. becauſe of the prick over the word the, R. Solomon “Commēt. on theſe places.gathers that they went not but to feed themſelves. In Numb. 3.39. becauſe of the crowne, of prickes over the word Aaron, R. Sol. gathers that Aaron was not in the number of the Levites. In Deut. 29.29.becauſe of the prickes over the words, to vsus and to our Children the ſame Rabbine teacheth that Iſrael was not vrged to do the things revealed vntill they had paſſed over Iorden & taken vponupon them the oth in mount Gerizim, &c.
ANother curioſitie of much like nature with the former is, when according to the maner of the Cabaliſts, you draw obſervations to illuſtrate your doctrine from the tranſpoſed letters of the ſcripture. As for example concerning Er and Noah you “Annot. on Gē. 38.7.ſay thus: The letters in Hebrue of this word evil, and of his name Er, are the ſame, the order onelyonly changed: the like whereof is before in Noes name and Grace, Gen. 6.8. I anſwer, 1. The letters of the ſcripture being thus tranſpoſed by men, are no ſcripture nor ground of inſtruction; if the order be onelyonly changed, it is enough to change the whole ſenſe: if accidentally it come to paſſe in one or two wordes, that there is an agreement of ſenſe, yet in hundreds it falles out otherwiſe: and therfore there is no found collections or annotations to be made from ſuch a forged order of tranſpoſed letters. 2, though the Hebrue letters that ſignify Evil, be the ſame with Er his name, yet the vowells differ, and they alſo make the ſignification differēt: 3, ſutable vntounto this curioſitie, is that preſumptuous aſſertion which in your annotations on the ſame verſe you make by occaſion of this Er and his evill, in that you ſay, as our Lord Chriſte was to come of Iudas, Heb. 7.14. ſo God would have no wicked man to be his progenitour. For where hath God revealed this vntounto you, which you do ſo peremptorily affirme? or why do you preſume above that which is written? The ſonne of God hath abaſed himſelf for vsus in wonderfull maner, and in many degrees; in that he was made man; ſuppoſe man had bene without ſin: in that he took vponupon him our nature, evē after the fall, after that our nature was abaſed and diſhonoured with ſin: in that he refuſed not to come of ſuch parents, as vvere ſtayned with notorious adulteries, as David & Bathſheba: in that he refuſed not to diſcend vntounto vsus through the loynes & vvombe of inceſtnous parents, and even at the act of inceſt, at the ſame time and inſtant, as in Iudah & Thamar begetting Pharez: in that he came of vvicked parents before their effectuall converſion, as //Ioſh. 24 2. with Gen. 11. with Gen. 12.of Terah begetting Abram, before God called him. And further, how know you that none of Chriſtes progenitours frō Arpacſhad to Terah, from Nathan to Salathiel: from Salathiel to Ieſus in ſo many generations, were vvicked men? vvhy dare you ſpeak ſo boldly, where the ſcripture is ſilent? As it is ſin to remoove the ancient bounds, ſo is it alſo a ſinfull preſumption to ſet downe ſuch bounds and limits of Chriſts humiliation as God hath not deſcribed vntounto vsus in his vvord. Beſides, is there not as much reaſon to ſay that God would have no vvicked vvoman from Evah to Marie to be the mother of Chriſte, as that no wicked man ſhould be his progenitour? And if this may be affirmed in honour of Chriſts kinred, why may it not as wel be extended vntounto others that were in the ſame loynes with him: and where ſhall the ſtay be? if modeſtie and ſobrietie ſtay vsus not, there wilbe no end of forging and preſuming above the ſcriptures.
OF this ſort alſo is that kinde of obſervation which you commend vntounto vsus when as you note the word ſleep, to ſignify, quiet ſleep without cark and ſorow: And for proofe to confirme the ſame, you adde: aAnnot. on Pſal. 127.2.Therfore alſo the Hebrue word Shena is written with, a quiet dumm letter, (otherweiſe then vſual) to denote the more quietnes. Anſw. 1. The Maſorites indeed both in Maſora magna, & parva do ſet their marke vponupon this word, for a memoriall of their tradition concerning the ſame: Elias Levita alſo in his explication of the Maſora doth bMaſoreth hammaſoreth in Tabulis primis: Orat. 9.mention this word Shena, but he doth withall in the ſame place note many other words of like nature and obſervatiō, viz. 22 words wherin Aleph is quieſcent or deficient in the middes or in the end of them: and 17 others which they call maphkin Aleph: All theſe vary from the common and vſuall maner; and do yeeld the like ground and warrant for inſtructions to be gathered from them, as doth the word Shena in Pſal. 127.2. Yea and not theſe onelyonly, but all the other formes of words, full, defective,changed, &c. which he hath noted in that treatiſe. Elias Levita there alluding to the tables of the law, in his firſt tables hath 10 words or ſections: and in his ſecond tables 10. other ſections deſcribing thoſe words from whence the Maſoriticall myſteries are collected. And if any ſound collections are to be drawne from ſuch grounds then are you to blame which paſſe by ſuch words without giving your readers any warning thereof: If your annotations on this place, pſ. 127. be juſt, then are they defective in other the like places as in Pſ. 94.5. Gen. 20.6, &c. 2. If ſome myſterie were to be gathered from Aleph in Shena, yet how ſhould we be aſſured, that it doth denote more quietnes, as you affirme? if it had bene writtē Shena with the letter hè in the end according to the vſual maner: you might as well have ſayd that hè is a quiet dumm letter: being quieſcēt in the end of a word as wel as Aleph. And we ſee the word Shenah without Aleph is els where vſed to ſignify a moſt quiet ſleep: as the cEccleſ. 5.11.ſweet ſleep of the labourer: and the dIerem. 31 26.ſweet ſleep of the Prophets; and the eProv. 3.24.ſweet ſleep of the godly. Yea and further the word fEſa. 56.10.hazah vſed to expreſs the ſleep of the greateſt ſleepers, hath in it a double hè vvithout any Aleph, as moſt fit to denote vntounto vsus a ſtrong ſleep. Moreover if Aleph in Shenah be a note of greater quietnes, then why ſhould it not ſignify the ſame in other vvords as vvell as in this? And then according to this your collection, if hè be a more quiet letter then Aleph, the thrones of earthly Princes ſhould be more quiet without cark and ſorow, then is the throne of God; becauſe the word gGen. 41.40. Iudg. 3 20, &c.Ceſe vſed ordinarily for their thrones, is written with Aleph, the quiet dumme letter, denoting (as you ſay) more quietnes; whereas the word hIob. 26.9Ceſeh whereby the throne of God is deſcribed, doth (otherwiſe then vſual) want the letter Aleph and hath hè in ſtead thereof.
MVch like vntounto this, is that kinde of inſtruction, which you iAnnot. on Gē. 1.1.vſe, when having alledged ſome ſcriptures, to prove by the heavēs & earth in Gē. 1.1. are vnderſtood, the world & all things therein: things viſible and inviſible: You adde further, that the Hebrew articles eth & ha, ſeem alſo to imply ſo much; eth, having the firſt and laſt letter of the Hebrew alphabet, and ſo being of generall comprehenſion: & ha, of plaine demonſtration. If this kind of teaching were good you might as well ſay, that when the Prophets Eſaias, Amos and Micaiah are ſayd to ſee the Lord in their ſeverall viſions; they did ſee him and all that is in him: becauſe this ſame article eth is prefixed before the name of the Lord in ech of their kEſay. 6.1 Amos. 9.1. 2. Kin. 22.19.viſions; and that it being of ſuch generall comprehenſion doth imply ſo much. But ſeing this is impoſſible, you ſhall do well to ceaſſe from the wiſedome of ſuch Cabaliſticall collections.