Of the Divine Original Authority, Treatise 2 · Chapter 6
CHAP. VI.
1 Of the foreign 2. Their nature and Originall. The difference is in the Conſonants. 3. Morinus vaine Charge on Arias Montanus. 4. The ſenſes of both Conſiſtent. 5. Of the great Congregation. The ſpring and riſe of theſe various Readings. 6. The judgment of the Prolegomena about them, their order twiſe over in the Appendix. 7. The riſe aſsigned to them. 8. Conſiderd. 9. Of Capellus his Opinion and the danger of it.
Sect. 1. VVE are not as yet come to a Cloſe. There is another thing agitated in theſe Prolegomena, and repreſented in the Appendix, that may ſeeme to derogate from the Univerſality of my Aſſertion, concerning the entire preſervation of the Originall Copies of the Scripture. The foreign or the ſeriptio and lectio, or ſcriptum and lectum, is that which I intend. The generall nature of theſe things is knowne to all them that have looked into the Bible. One word is placed in the line, and another in the margin; the Word in the line having not the Points or Vowels affixed to it that are its owne, but thoſe that belong to the Word in the Margin; Of this ſort there are in the Bible 840, or thereabouts; for ſome of the late Editions by miſtake or overſight, doe differ in the preciſe number. All men that have wrote any Conſiderations on the Hebrew Text have ſpoken of their nature in General; So hath the Authour of theſe Prolegomena. As to our preſent Concernment, namely to manifeſt that from them no Argument can tye us to the corruption of the Originall, the enſuing Obſervation concerning them may ſuffice.
Sect. 2 1. All the difference in theſe words is in the Conſonants, not at all in the Vowels. The Word in the margin ownes the Vowels in the line, as proper to it; and the Vowels in the line ſeeme to be placed to the Word whereunto they doe not belong, becauſe there is no other meet place for them in the line where they are to be continued as belonging to the Integrity of the Scripture.
Sect. 3. Morinus to manifeſt his rage againſt the Hebrew Text, takes from hence Occaſion to quarrell with Arias Montanus, and to accuſe him of ignorance and falſe dealing; De Heb. Text. ſincer. Excer. 1. cap. 4. pag. 40.
The pretence of his quarrell he makes to be, that Arias affirmes the greateſt part of theſe Various lections to conſiſt in ſome differences of the points; for which purpoſe he cites his words out of his preface to his Collection of Various lections. Maxima in his lectionibus Varietatis pars in hujuſmodi punctorum diſcrepantia Conſiſtit, ut toto hujus Mazzoreth ſive variarum lectionum volumine demonſtratur. Whereunto he ſubjoines, mira aſſertio ne una quidem in punctis ſita eſt. Catalogum plurimorum ipſe ad finem praefationis adtexuit. Et Varietates omnes ſunt in literis, nulla in punctis. Confidentius ſcribo omnium variarum lectionum quas Judaei appellant foreign Keri & Ketib: de quibus agit Arias nulla prorſus ad puncta pertinet. Iterū confidentius, &c. Would not any man think but that the man had made here ſome great diſcovery, both as to the nature of the foreign as alſo to the ignorance of Arias, whom he goes on to reproach as a Perſon unacquainted with the Maſſora, and with the Various lections of Ben-Aſher, and Ben-Nepthali, of the Eaſt and Weſterne Jewes, at the end of the Venetian Bibles; which Bibles he chiefly uſed in the printing of his own. And yet on the other hand, men acquainted with the Ability and great deſerving of Arias, will be hardly perſwaded, that he was ſo blind and ignorant as to affirme the greateſt part of the variety he ſpoke of conſiſted in the changing of Vowels, and immediately to give inſtances, wherein all he mentions conſiſts in the change of Conſonants only. But what if all this ſhould prove the ignorance and prejudice of Morinus? Firſt to his redoubled Aſſertion about the difference of the Keri and Ketib in the Conſonants only, wherein he ſpeakes as though he were bleſsing the world with a new and ſtrange diſcovery, it is a thing knowne lippis & Tonſoribus, & hath been ſo ſince the dayes of Elias Levita; What then intended Arias Montanus to affirme the Contrary; hic nigri ſuccus loliginis, haec eſt aerugo mera; he ſpeakes not at all of the foreign, but merely of the anomalous pointing of words, in a various way from the Genius of the tongue, as they are obſerved and reckoned up in the Maſſora, of other Varieties he ſpeakes afterward; giving a particular account of the Keri Uketib, which whether he eſteemed Various lections nor no, I know not. Non ſi te ſuperis aeques. But all are ignorant, who are not of the mind of an aſpiring Jeſuite.
Sect. 4. That the difference in the ſenſe taking in the whole context, is upon the matter very little or none at all; at leaſt each word, both that in the line and that in the margin, yeeld a ſenſe agreeable to the Anology of faith.
Of all the Varieties that are found of this kind, that of two words, the ſame in ſound but of moſt diſtinct ſignifications, ſeemes of the greateſt importance; Namely foreign & foreign v. 14 or 15 times where foreign not, is in the Text; the margin notes foreign to him, or his, to be read. But yet though theſe ſeeme Contrary one to the other, yet where ever this falls out, a ſenſe agreable to the Analogie of faith ariſeth fairely from either word. As to give one or two inſtances: Pſal: 100. verſe 3. foreign he hath made us, and not we our ſelves, The Keri in the margin is foreign his, giving this ſenſe; he hath made us, and his we are; The verbe Subſtantive being included in the pronounce. So Iſa. 63. 9. foreign in their afflictions or ſtraights, no ſtraightneſſe; So the foreign the foreign ſtraightneſſe or affliction was to him, or he was ſtraightened or afflicted: In the firſt way, God ſignifieth that when they were in their outward ſtraights, yet he was not ſtraightned from their reliefe; in the other, that he had Compaſsion for them, was afflicted with them, which upon the matter is the ſame; And the like may be ſhewed of the reſt.
Sect. 5. I confeſſe I am not able fully to ſatisfy my ſelfe in the Originall and ſpring of all this Variety, being not willing meerly to depend on the Teſtimony of the Jewes, much leſſe on the conjectures of late innovators. To the uttermoſt length of my view, to give a full account of this thing, is a matter of no ſmall difficulty. Their Venerable Antiquity, and unqueſtionable Reception by all Tranſlatours gives them ſanctuary from being caſt downe from the place they hold by any mans bare Conjecture. That which to me is of the greateſt importance, is, that they appeare moſt of them to have been in the Bibles, then, when the Oracles of God were Committed to the Jews, during which time we find them not blamed for adding or altering one word or Tittle. Hence the Caldee Paraphraſt often followes the foreign which never was in the Line whatever ſome boaſtingly conjecture to the contrary: and ſometimes the foreign. That which ſeemes to me moſt probable is, that they were Collected for the moſt part of them, by that foreign the men of the Great Congregation. Some indeed I find of late (I hope not out of a deſigne to bring all things to a further Confuſion about the Originall) to queſtion whether ever there were any ſuch thing as the great congregation. Morinus calls it a Judaicall figment. Our Prolegomena queſtion it. Prol. 8. Sect. 22. But this is only to queſtion, whether Ezra, Nehemiah, Joſua, Zacharie, Haggai & the reſt of the leaders of the people in their returne from the Captivity, did ſet a Sanydrym according to the inſtitution of God, and labour to reforme the Church & all the Corruptions that were crept either into the Word or worſhip of God. I ſee not how this can reaſonably be called into queſtion, if we had not to confirme it the Catholicke tradition of Jews and Chriſtians. Neither is it called the great Congregation from its number, but eminency of perſons. Now on this ſuppoſition it may be granted that the foreign on the books of theſe men themſelves Ezra and the reſt, were collected by the ſucceeding Churches. Unleſſe we ſhall ſuppoſe with Aniſworth, that the Word was ſo received from God, as to make both neceſſary. And if we know not the true Cauſe of its being ſo given, we have nothing to blame but our owne ignorance, this not being the Only Caſe wherein we have reaſon ſo to doe. Our laſt Tranſlation generally rendreth the word in the Margent noteing alſo the Word in the line where there is any Conſiderable difference. Thoſe who have leiſure for ſuch a worke, may obſerve what choyce is uſed in this Caſe by old and Moderne Tranſlatours. And if they had not believed them to have had an Authoritative originall beyond the impeachment of any man in theſe dayes, they could not fairly and honeſtly have uſed both line and margin as they have done.
Sect. 6. What ſayes now our Prolegomena, with the Appendix unto theſe things.
1. We have them in the Appendix repreſented unto us in their own order according as they are found in the bookes of the Scriptures; And then over againe, in the order and under the heads that they are drawne and driven unto by Capellus; A taske, that learned man tooke upon himſelfe, that he might in the performance of it, give ſome Countenance to his Opinion, that they are for the moſt part Criticall Emendations of the Text, made by ſome late Maſſorites, that came no man knowes whence; that lived no man knowes where, nor when. Thus whereas theſe Keri Uketib, have the only face and appearance upon the matter, of Various lections upon the old Teſtament, (for the Jewes Collections of the Various Readings of Ben Aſher and Ben Nepthali, of the Orientall and Occidentall Jewes, are of no Value, nor ever had place in their Bible and may be rejected) the unwary Viewer of the Appendix is preſented with a great Bulke of them, their whole Army being muſtered twice over in this ſervice.
Sect. 7. But this inconvenience may be eaſily amended, nor am I concerned in it. Wherefore 3dly for the riſe of them it is ſaid that ſome of them are the amendments of the Maſſorites or Rabbins, others, Various lections out of diverſe Copies. That they are all, or the moſt part of them Criticall amendments of the Rabbins is not allowed; for which latter part of his determination, we thanke the learned Authour; and take leave to ſay that in the former we are not ſatisfied, Prol. 8. 23, 24, 25: the Arguments that are produced to prove them not to have been from Ezra, but the moſt part from poſtalmudicall Rabbins are capable of a very eaſy ſolution which alſo another occaſion may diſcover; at preſent I am gone already too far beyond my intention, ſo that I cannot allow my ſelfe any farther digreſſion.
Sect. 8. To Anſwer briefly. Ezra and his Companions might be the Collectours of all thoſe in the Bible, but their own Books; and thoſe in their own books might be added by the ſucceeding Church. The Orientall and Occidentall Jews, differ about other things as well as the Keri and ketib. The Rule of the Jews, that the Keri is alwaies to be followed, is novell; and therefore the old Tranſlators might read either, or both, as they ſaw cauſe. There was no occaſion at all why theſe things ſhould be mentioned by Joſephus, Philo, Origen: Hjerome ſaies indeed on Iſa. 49. 5. that Aquila rendred that word, to him, which is written with foreign and foreign not foreign and foreign. But he makes it not appear that Aquila read not as he tranſlated, that is by the foreign. And for what is urged of the Caldee and 70, making uſe of the keri and ketib, it is not intended that they knew the difference under theſe names, but that theſe differences were in their daies. That the word now in the margin was in the line untill the daies of the pretended Maſorites, is not to be ſaid nakedly but proved, if ſuch a novell fancy expect any Credit in the world. That the Judaicall Rabbins have made ſome alterations in the Text of their own accord, at leaſt placed words in the margin, as to their Conſonants, ſupplying their Vowells in the line, where they ought not to have place; that there were various lections in the Copies after the Talmud, which have been gathered by ſome obſcure Jews, no mention being made of thoſe collections in the Maſora, or any of their Grammarians, is the ſumme of the diſcourſe under Conſideration. When all this, or any part of it is proved by Teſtimony, or evident Reaſon, we ſhall further attend unto it.
Sect. 9. In the meane time I cannot but rejoice, that Capellus his fancy about theſe things, then which I know nothing more pernicious to the truth of God, is rejected. If theſe 100ds of words were the Criticall conjectures and amendments of the Jews, what ſecurity have we of the mind of God as truely repreſented unto us, ſeeing that it is ſuppoſed alſo, that ſome of the words in the margin were ſometimes in the line; and if it be ſuppoſed, as it is, that there are innumerable other places of the like nature, ſtanding in need of ſuch amendments, what a door would be opened unto Curious Pragmaticall wits, to overturne all the certainty of the Truth of the Scripture, every one may ſee. Give once this liberty to the audacious curioſity of men, priding themſelves in their Criticall Abilities, and we ſhall quickly find out what wofull ſtate and condition the Truth of the Scripture will be brought unto. If the Jews have made ſuch amendments and Corrections of the Text, and that to ſo good purpoſe, and if ſo much worth of the like kind yet remaine, can any man poſſibly better employ himſelfe, then with his uttermoſt diligence to put his hand to this plow. But he that pulleth down an Hedge, a Serpent ſhall bite him.