Language of which Perescius testifies himself to have one in his Epistle to Morinus Pestellus also makes mention of their Grammar Which Writings were they Printed would give great Light into the Samaritan Language and how the Samaritans pronounce the Hebrew and what signification they give to some more difficult words CHAP. XII Of the Bibles of the Sadduces and Karraeans Of the Bibles of the Sadduces CErtain it is that the Sect of the Sadduces in the time of Christ's being upon Earth was the most noble Sect and one which had the chief management of the Publick Affairs among the Jews But after the Destruction of Jerusalem and that the Jews were scattered into several parts of the World that famous Sect became so entirely extinct that there is not the least footstep of it There only remain'd the Sect of the Pharisees whose Room the Rabbanists and Talmudists vulgarly so call'd in after-times usurped For they are the same with the Pharisees whose Traditions the Jews so greedily swallow'd and ador'd as if proceeding from the mouth of God Therefore the Scriptures of the Old Testament came to the Christians from the Pharisees and not from the Sadduces Vossius de Septuagint Interpret c. 17. But in this Isaac Vossius and several others seem to have been deceiv'd St. Jerom himself being their guide and directer while they affirm that the Sadduces in imitation of the Samaritans translated no more than the five Books of Moses For what reason was there why the Sadduces who were but a late Sect among the Jews after the Volumes of the Prophets were confirm'd by the publick practice of Reading should only believe in Moses Therefore there is no question to be made but the Sadduces receiv'd all the Books of Sacred Text or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all that was written rejecting only the Traditions of the Pharisees which seem'd to them to be only the Figments of idle persons More notoriously do they mistake who believe the Carraeans to have followed the Samaritans in this particular And which seems almost incredible Isaac Vossius otherwise a Learned Person places the Carraeans among the Ebionites Nazareans and other Sects of the Jews who retaining the Ceremonies of the Mosaick Law believ'd the Gospel Therefore it behoves us to relate in short what the Sect of the Carraeans was and what was their Opinion concerning the Sacred Scriptures The word Karrai from whence the Carraeans derive their name signifies a man exercis'd in the Reading of Scripture But that name which was formerly reverenc'd became to be hated by reason of the Sect of the Carraeans that first began to spread it self toward the beginning of the 10th Century They like the Rabbanists allow of twenty four Books of Scripture with the Tittl'd Vowels and other Masoretick Marks In expounding the Sacred Scriptures they follow the Masoretick Lection every where esteeming it no less than Aben Ezra Kimchi or any other of the Jewish Grammarians and in imitation of them are great searchers after Grammatick Quirks Therefore was Buxtorf horribly mistaken where he writes We have read of the Carraeans who rejecting all the Traditions only adhere to the Text that they not only differ extreamly one with another De pâ—nctor Antiquitat as to the understanding and Exposition of things but also in the Reading of Scripture as refusing points which they look upon as a piece of Oral Law or Tradition Buxtorf had had a quite contrary Opinion concerning the Carraeans if he had lighted upon those Books which he seems not to have been furnish'd withal For they do not altogether reject the Talmud and Traditions of the Jews but they presume not to compare them with the Sacred Scriptures as the Rabbanists And therefore laying those aside they endeavour after the manner of the Criticks who are free from all prejudice to draw forth that which seems to them to be the truest sense of Scripture by comparing one place with another taking little notice of the Talmudick Expositions which many times make large Excursions far from the matter And therefore if the Jewish Rabbanists speak ill at any time of the Carraeans as Corrupters of the Biblick Context it proceeds out of meer Envy and Malice not from heat of Dispute All which things may be more perspicuously seen in the Books of the Carraeans themselves Aaron the Son of Joseph of the Sect of the Carraeans who wrote the Commentaries upon the Law An. 1294. at the beginning of his Book deplores the lamentable state of the Jews and their being scattered into all parts of the World asserting that Vision and Prophecy was taken from them and that they had almost forgotten the Hebrew Language But saith he several Doctors appear'd among the Israelites who searched out the Scripture which contains the 24 Books in use among us Therefore the Carraeans do not agree with the Samaritans upon this point but with the Rabbanists allow the whole Scripture to be Canonical and Regular And they also frequently call it a Prophecy thereby to distinguish it from those other Traditions which the rest of the Jews are not afraid to obtrude upon us In the same place he rebukes the Cabbalick Doctors who many times propound for Scripture the Figments and Fables of their own Brains and to use his own expressions depend upon the Cabbala and tattle idle stories and boast their Cabbala or Tradition to be above the Scripture However the Carraeans do not reject all manner of Tradition but they separate the ridiculous and uncertain from that which has some appearance of Truth as the same Carraean openly testifies in these words Nor let any one object to us that we are Enemies to the Writing Reason and Doctrine deliver'd to us by our Ancestors For this Tradition which we make use of was not lost and is comprehended in true Scripture not seated in variety concerning which the Israelites in all things agree This is that Tradition which caus'd them to approve by their Authority the Masoretick Scripture receiv'd by all the rest of the Jews with the Points and Accents which will be still more apparent from the above quoted Commentary of the Carraean It is a wonderful thing how studious this Carraean was of Modern Lection and Grammar when they appear useful to the Explication of Scripture Sometimes he appeals to the most celebrated Masters of the Jewish Rabbanists to confirm his Opinion by their Testimonies sometimes he refutes them especially the Cabbalistick and Allegorical Doctors But much oftener he has recourse to the Analogy of Grammar than to the Testimonies of others Thus at the beginning of his Exposition of Genesis he has these words Bereschith is of the same form as Scherith only that Aleph is not pronounc'd Now it is known that the word Reschith is a word that signifies time and that it denotes the time that precedes or that which is first of all as Exod. c. 23. The first of the Fruits of thy Land he adds in
Writings they durst not insert into the Context the various Lections though the truth of their Authority were past controversie but plac'd them in the Margin of their Bibles with this mark Keri The Original of the various Lections in the Margins of the Heb. Bibles which is as much as in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 write intimating thus the true Lection of the word For Keri is the same as in Latine Lectio or Reading And that this is true the Manuscript Exemplars of the Bibles prove especially the Spanish which are Printed without the greatest part of those Alterations which are mark'd Keri So that by the help of those the Masoretick Bibles now extant might easily be reduc'd to their former form Nor will it be amiss here to produce some Examples of those various Lections compar'd with the Spanish Exemplar elegantly set forth about some 10 years since to which purpose let us make use of the Book of Joshuah The Masorites have mark'd the word * My Sisters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Josh 2.10 with a censorious mark by putting Keri in the Margin to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but erroneously for that in several other places of the Law as in the plural Achoth in the 16th chapter of Ezekiel it is written without any Masoretick mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thy Sisters and so in Joshuah it is truly written Achothai my Sisters and needs no emendation For that way of writing is not erroneous from the Masora it self In the 4th verse of the 3d chapter of Joshua in the Context is written * Between it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Keri in the Margin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as if the Letter Jod had been omitted in the latter end of the word which is really read in the Spanish Copy whence we may manifestly perceive the Original of the Masoretick Annotation In the same chapter v. 16. as well in the Manuscript as Masoretick Edition it is written in the Context * The proper name of a City 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Keri in the Margin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the City Adam In which manner the sense teaches us it should be read so that that fault might easily be corrected without the help of other Copies by reason of the similitude between the Letters Mem and Beth especially in some Manuscripts where the Letters are dotted at the top like the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the 4th chap. v. 18. the word is in the Context Bagnaloth the Keri against it is Cagnaloth as they ascended out as it is really written in the Spanish Bible with the Letter Caph and not with the Letter Beth. But in other Spanish Exemplars which I have consulted I find it written Bagnaloth with a Beth though without the Masoretick note Wherefore in this place the Masorite Exemplars vary which is evident by the absence of the Keri upon this place in some of the Bibles extant Chap. 5. v. 1. in the Context it is Gnal Gnabranou the Keri reads it Gnabram till they passed over as it is without emendation in the Spanish Edition Chap. 6. v. 8. the Context reads the word Thok'gnau the opposite Keri reads it Thok'gnei as if Vau had crept in instead of Jod which Reading the Spanish admits without any more trouble Chap. 8. v. 16. the Context reads Ba Gnair the Keri alters it Ba Gnai in Ai as if the Resch were to be cast away which the Spanish Edition does to their hands Chap. 10. v. 8. the Context reads it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 over against which Jathir Jod cast away Jod which the Spanish Copy does without intimation which confirms the exactness of the Masoretick Corrections Chap. 15. v. 47. the Context reads Hajam Hagabol the Keri alters it Hagadol the Great Sea as it is read in the Spanish Edition So that the Doctors of Tyberias did not make their Corrections out of their own brains but took them from the choicest Manuscript Exemplars The rest I omit for fear of being tedious For thus it is manifest what we may think of the Keri and Cetib or the written and read being the marks of the Doctors of Tyberias And that it may be more manifest we shall add some few more Examples to shew that they made use of the most Antient and most Authentick Copies they could get and these out of the Chronicles with other Spanish Manuscripts Lib. 1. Chron. c. 1. v. 11. the Context read Ludiim with a double Jod therefore the Masora in the Margin adds Jathir Jod leave out Jod and reads it Ludim as it is in the Spanish Copy V. 36. In some Copies of which one was accurately Printed at Amsterdam by Judaeus Manasses over against the name Tsephi the Keri reads Tsephu with a Vau not with a Jod as it is in the cited Edition which confirms the Masora The same Edition also reads Dodanim with a Daleth as in the Pentateuch not Rodanim with a Resch as in the Vulgar Editions For Shephi v. 40. with a Jod this Edition read Shephiu with a Vau. V. 46. the Context reads Gnaiuth with a Vau after the Jod the Keri alters it Gnavith or Avith as it is corrected in the Spanish Edition Lastly V. 51. the Context reads Duo Gnaljah the Masora corrects it Gnalvah as it is in the Spanish Copy So that the Spanish Edition above recited observes no other than the Masoretick Emendations In the last verse of the 3d chap. the Context reads Hodijahu the Keri Hodavaihu as if the Jod and Vau had been transpos'd which Emendation of the Keri is observ'd in the Spanish Edition Chap. 4. v. 7. The Context reads Jetsochar the Keri alters it Vetsochar which the Manuscript Copy follows V. 41. the Context reads Hamgninim their Habitations the Keri in the Margin writes Hamgnonim as if the Jod had crept into the place of the tittled Vau. Which Masoretick correction is observ'd by the Manuscript Copy Chap. 6. v. 26. the Context reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Vau instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a Jod nor is it otherwise written in the Spanish Edition In the same chapter the Context reads Tsiph instead of Tsoph corrected by the Masorak and confirmed by the Authority of four Manuscripts In the 7th chap. v. 1. the Context reads Jashib the Keri Jashub and in one Manuscript the Masoretick Emendation is followed But for these particulars let this suffice For it may seem superfluous to note the rest seeing there is the same reason for the one as for the other For if those Lections which are added in the Margin of the Hebrew Context in most Bibles under the Directions of Keri and Cetib were but compar'd with five or six of the Spanish Manuscripts which are to be preferr'd before the rest we should find all the Masoretick Corrections to agree with them Whence it appears that the Criticks of Tyberias in imitation of the other Criticks made
no alterations at least in this particular without the assistance of the Manuscript Copies And first it is worthy observation that the more of Antiquity and Exactness those Manuscript Copies appear to have the more they agree with the Masoretick Emendations Therefore as Eye-witnesses we may perceive the genuine Original of Keri and Cetib But in vain do some Learned men seem to labour while they enumerate these varieties of Lections thence to make out that there are varieties of Readings to be also found in the Hebrew Context For that no man of judgment ever deny'd even among the Jews though they bring all variances of Scripture to the Masora as to a certain standard It would be much better therefore to examine the Masoretick Corrections of Keri and Cetib by the Manuscript Copies of the Bible than to extend them out into a long series and multiply their number by all manner of ways Whenas it is apparent that the greatest part of them are the manifest Errours of the Transcribers which might be easily reform'd without the Manuscript Copies But in this the Doctors of Tyberias seem'd to be more devout who durst not put their Emendations in the Context though they were certain they were only the manifest Errours of the Scribe but either they referr'd to them in the Margin or put them apart in sheets by themselves Which Religion if not rather Superstition of the Masorites carry'd headlong the Jews that followed them into several Fictions concerning those Critical Annotations While they adventur'd to spend their judgments not so much from the truth of the thing or the Rules of true Criticism but out of their own brains accustom'd to imagine Miracles and Stories Besides those varieties of Lections already by us repeated there are also others that may be referr'd to Keri and Cetib such as are those words which the Masorites mark under the directions of Keri and Cetil or read and not written in regard that really they are not inserted in the Text it self only there is a vacant space left and the Vowels mark'd with Points which are erroneous in those words and written whole in the Margin with this note Keri velo Cetib read but not written But these things will be made much plainer by Examples and their Original will be the more easily found if they be examin'd by the Copies of the Manuscript Bibles In the 20th chapter of Judges v. 13. the Text is thus Printed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to which the Masora supplies Benei in the Margin with this note Keri velo Cetib that is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or sons were to be read though it were not written Though in a Spanish Manuscript and that of good Authority the whole Sentence is writ at length without any interruption which a Jewish Criticaster was so impatient to see that after he had added the Masoretick note in the Margin he ras'd out the word Benei out of a most lovely Copy to make way for the void space and the mark of the Masorites which you shall often find done by those Idolizers of the Masora especially in the Spanish Manuscripts which they strive to reform according to the Masoretick Corrections Thus in the 3d chapter of Ruth v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He shall tell is read in the Text with a gap and over against it in the Margin Keri velo Cetib to be read but not written because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thee is omitted which the Spanish Exemplar supplies 2 Sam. c. 18. v. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 opposite to which stands Keri velo Cetib which however is right in our Manuscript The same passages may be observ'd 1 Sam. c. 14. 2 Sam. c. 20. and in other places which nevertheless are written in the Manuscripts as the Masora directs them to be read In 2 Kings 29.31 The Zeal of the Lord hath done this Tsevaoth of Hosts is omitted and therefore the Masora makes this note in the Margin The word Tsevaoth ought to be read but let it not be written yet it is written down in the Manuscript Copy Now what has been said concerning Keri velo Cetib to be read and not written is likewise to be said of the quite contrary Masoretick note Cetib velo Keri to be written not read Thus Ruth c. 3. v. 12. The Text reads Chi ' im Goel Anoki That I am thy near Kinsman Where the Masorites note that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Im is not to be read though it be written This is then the difference between Keri and Cetib and Cetib and Keri that the one supplies the defect of words in the publish'd Editions with words of more Authority out of the Manuscripts the other cuts off such as are deem'd superfluous So that there is nothing at all of Mystery as the Jews vainly dream in the Animadversions of the Doctors of Tyberias which in this mâ—tter has not been before perform'd by other Criticks in the Greek and Latine Bibles and that with more success and less Superstition The same is to be said of certain words which the Masoretick Criticks thought fit to expunge out of the Text as seeming to them to be somewhat obscene For as R. Moses testifies the Hebrew is called the Holy Language which will not admit any words that carry any semblance of obscenity But the falshood of this is easily proved Besides that alteration is not easily discern'd in the Manuscript Copies and therefore is to be little regarded And therefore I would be a means that what words are left out of the Text without any cause should be again restor'd to it Now from what has been said it may be concluded that many of the various Lections are unprofitably mark'd by the Masoreths which were the palpable Errours of the Scribes In which thing Cappellus and Morinus shew themselves the more inveterate against the Jews while they multiply the number of the various Readings out of sundry Editions of the Bible compar'd together whereas the manifest Errours of the Scribes ought not to be accounted various Readings On the other side John Viccars lessens their number more than he ought affirming that in several Manuscript Bibles which he found in sundry Libraries of Italy he met with no such thing as Keri and Cetib True it is there are much fewer in the Manuscript Copies especially the Spanish but I never met with any Manuscript yet where diversity of Reading was altogether absent CHAP. VII Some things unprofitably and superstitiously noted by the Masoreticks are illustrated out of the Manuscript Copies of the Bibles The Superstitious writing of the Hebrew Bible in some places 'T IS a very strange thing how laboriously if I may not say superstitiously the Masorites have preserv'd in the Hebrew Context certain Letters differing in their shape from the rest of which they have most sedulously form'd an Alphabet The Jews vulgarly believe some Mystery lies conceal'd under these things And Buxtorf who solely depends upon
Criticks of Tyberias in vain turmoil'd and weari'd themselves in counting how many times this or that word was full and how many times defective For example they diligently consider how many times the word Otham is written at large in the Text they observe that it was written in the Law thirty nine times full or with the Letter Vau and thus they run through all the Books of Scripture But upon comparing the Manuscripts together they could never once agree among themselves after what manner the said word was to be written Moreover this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being fully thus written does not only signify them or those which is its true and genuine signification but sometimes with them as if it were written Ittham and were defective in the writing So true it is that in these words the sence and not the Character is to be regarded But above all there is nothing like the Superstitious niceness of the Jews in writing the word Ieruschalaim while they diligently observe all the places of Scripture where it is to be writ at length with a Jod and where without And yet neither the Hebrew Manuscripts nor the Masoretick Examplars agree one among another How many fictions have they raised about the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Meoroth or Lights which in the Beginning of Genesis is written without a Vau contrary to the rules of Proportion and because the Jewish Rabbies have raised a thousand fictions from this manner of writing such a Notable word hence the Scribes have been very careful to observe that manner of spelling True it is that the Insertion or Omission of those letters which depend upon the pleasure of the Scribes seldom prejudice the sense and therefore in such cases neither the one nor the other is of any moment But sometimes it happens that they alter the sense As 2 Sam. 20. In the third of Sophonia where we read Nogue Sad as the Interpreters vulgarly render it from Jaga Rabbi Solomon expounds it remote or forraign as if it came from the Root Haga without any regard to the Masoretick reading There are not wanting some Rabbies who derive the word Nechiloth in the Title of the 5. Psalm from Chalal as if it were to be written without a Jod not much heeding the Rules of the Masorites for full and defective words I omit above six hundred of this nature frequently to be met with in the Commentaries of the Jews by which the Greek Translations of the LXX Interpreters and the Latine of St. Jerome may be Illustrated in many places Neither is St. Jerome to be commended for this that he blames the Greek Interpreters for differing sometimes from him in that sort of reading For this reason he taxes those who in the 14. Chapt of Isaiah for Angels as it is in the Hebrew Exemplar translate Kings because that in their Copies they find the word Malkim without the Letter Aleph not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Letter Aleph as St. Jerome had it But the Greek Interpreters were not to be governed so much by the reading of Copies as by the sense which was most proper to the place especially when the Manuscripts and printed Editions do not agree about the Insertion of the Letter Aleph As in Jeremy the Seventh v. 18. Where the modern Exemplars read Limleketh to the Queen without an Aleph yet in a single Manuscript it is written with an Aleph 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And hence arose those Masoretick observations of Redundant Letters CHAP. VIII Some Examples of differing Writings are produced from the Manuscripts which vary from the Masoretick Lections AFter that the Hebrew Language ceas'd to be familiarly spoken among the Jews and that the Chaldee Language became the Speech of the Country the Writers made many alterations in their Transcriptions by reason of the Affinity of the Languages Nor were they so curious of neat Letters as they were before From whence without question it came to pass that the Letter Aleph so much in use among the Chaldaeans is many times mistaken for the Letter He and added to words without any reason And from hence I suppose it happened that there are so many Chaldaeisms in the Hebrew Text as Shelechebeth Flame by the Addition of the Letter Schin according to the custom of the Chaldeans Magnath abin and Calabin instead of Magnathabim and Calabim with several others of the same nature which I omit that I may come to those other variations of writing frequent in the Manuscript Copies of most credit and Authority In the writing of these words El Elohim Jehovah Col and the like which are frequently redundant with the Greek Interpreters the Manuscript Copies do not a little vary from the printed Masoreticks Which because they are more frequent in speech are sometimes inserted sometimes omitted by the Scribes Thus in the beginning of the 16. Psalm the word Jehovah is thus repeated in one Spanish Copy Thou hast said Jehovah L' Jehovah Jehovah to Jehovah thou art my Lord but in the modern exemplar only once In the same exemplar Ezech. 30. v. 3. The word Jehovah is thus twice repeated The day of the Lord the day of the Lord approaches But the Masoretick Copy repeats the Lord but once nor does St. Jerom seem to have read it otherwise in his exemplars Neither do the Seventy Interpreters repeat the sentence saying no more then once the day of the Lord approaches On the other side in the same Spanish Manuscript Judges 1.1 The word Col is omitted and the Lection is thus The Children of Israel went forth but in the printed Editions Col Benei All the Children of Israel went forth But it is needless to repeat any more examples of these Variances which nevertheless St. Jerom writing to Sunias and Fretelas very carefully enumerates for the thing it self informs us that those sorts of words might easily have been added or omitted in the transcribing of the Copies Moreover in the Spanish Manuscript already recited toward the end of the 2d Chap. of the 1 Book of Chronicles the Lection is conformable to the Greek Interpreters and to what St. Jerom had read in his Copies Maacha Calebs Concubine brought forth Seber and Thirana The Spanish Copy reads Jaldah brought forth in the Faeminine Gender but in the Masoretick Editions it is written Jahad in the Masculine Gender he begot and so cannot be joyned with the Faeminine Concubina or Concubine Wherefore the modern Interpreters of the sacred Text who follow the Masorites over zealously for fear of erring against the rules of Grammar make use of this Periphrasis Maacha Caleb's Concubine of whom he begat Sebar and Thirana In the 3d Chapter v. 19. of the same Book where we find in the Printed Books Vben Zerubbabel with a Masoretick marking the margent denoting the Opinion of the Masorites that it should be read in the Plural Number Benei and not in the singular Ben in the Spanish Copy it appears to be Benei
Priest and the Levites and Scribes interpreting to all the people as it is most probable in the Chaldee Language Which Custom is still retain'd by the Jews in our Age dispers'd over the face of the Earth Thus the Spanish German Turkish Graecian Persian and other Jews make use of Spanish German Turkish Graecian and Persian Interpretations of the Text. And from the same Fountain I am apt to believe that all the Translations and Paraphrases of the Bible now found among the Jews deduc'd their Original For it is not probable that it should be the Original of that Translation which goes under the name of the Seventy Interpreters For the Jews of Alexandria who spake Greek made for their own use a Greek Version which afterwards fell into the hands of the Christians As for the Chaldee Paraphrases they were made at Jerusalem and other places near adjoyning whence they were transmitted into places farther remote Those Chaldee Paraphrases are highly esteem'd by the Jews even in these latter times especially those which are attributed to Onkelos and Jonathan But as to the Authority and Antiquity of those Jews the Learned are at variance among themselves and therefore because no man has handled that point more accurately than Elias the Levite a person long vers'd in the Chaldee Tongue and Writers it will not be amiss to translate so much of his words as shall be necessary for our purpose out of his Preface before his Chaldee Lexicon When the Jews were carried away captive out of their own Land into Babylon they forgot their own Language as the Book of Nehemiah testifies So that all the knowledge of the Rabbies and persons skilful in the Law was chiefly publick in the Babylonish Languages In that the Babylonish Talmud was compos'd Furthermore during the time of the second Temple their Language was for the most part Babylonish which when Jonathan the Son of Uzziel became sensible of he wrote a Chaldee Paraphrase of the eight Prophets for the use of the People Onkelos also wrote another of the Law But the Hagiography was not translated till long after in the Language of the Jerusalem Talmud as I shall afterwards relate In the mean time let us examine some things that concern the Paraphrasts themselves First why it is said in Gemara that Jonathan was long before Onkelos How Jonathan was one of the Disciples of Hillel who flourished about a hundred years before the Destruction of the Temple but that Onkelos was the Son of Titus who destroy'd the Temple And if it were so why Jonathan first paraphras'd the Prophets and did not begin with the Law Our Ancestors of blessed memory have reported indeed that he intended to have explained the Hagiographers but that a voice spake to him from Heaven saying Is it not enough that thou hast laid open the Mysteries of the Prophets Wouldst thou proceed to open the Mysteries of the Holy Ghost that is of the Books of the Hagiographers For that reason he did not paraphrase upon the Hagiography But then another difficulty offers it self why he did not expound the Law especially seeing a Cabbalistick Doctor Rabbi Menahem Rekanatensis has wrote in the Section Matzorang that he also translated the Law where he has these words And he sent a live Bird. For these are his words I found in the Targum of Jonathan the Son of Vzziel of happy memory and he let go a live Bird nor does he write otherwise in many other places If this be true it is a wonder how it should be lost in so short a time and not the least remainder of that Translation be to be seen We may also enquire why Onkelos did not translate the Hagiographers and why they continu'd unparaphas'd till the time of a certain Hierosolymite who explained them paraphrastically But who he was or what his name was or when he liv'd is not certain Thus the Hierosolymitan Interpreter who translated the Law is to us unknown whether he be the same who interpreted the Hagiographers or whether they were two Interpreters that liv'd at two several times Some say that Aquila the Proselite was the Author of both Paraphrases others there are affirm Joseph the Blind to be the Author of both And in truth I have found in Bereschith Rabba taken out of the Hagiographers and Prophets under Aquila's name as that Verse Life and Death are in the power of the Tongue Prov. 12. c. See in the Root Matztar Also upon these words of Ezechiel The Brides of their Adulteries Aquila's Targum reads 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Antient Whore See the Root 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thus Aquila also interprets some of the Garments of which Isaiah makes mention But there is no mention of Rabbi Joseph 's Paraphrase in Bereschith Rabba for he was not yet alive But there is mention of it in Gemara upon certain Verses of the Prophets and Hagiographers which are not found in the Verses of the Law Know however that the Language of Onkelos 's Paraphrase differs in nothing from the Language of Jonathans For both speak the Babylonish Idiom as do the Books of Daniel and Esdras yet their Language is much more pure and elegant than that of the rest of the Targums As for the Hierosolymitan Targum it differs very much from the Babylonish in regard it is compos'd of several Languages the Greek the Roman and the Persian And because so many Languages are found to be in it this mixture seems to me to have begun from that time when those Empires had the Dominion over Jerusalem Therefore is that Language call'd the Jerusalem Targum for that in that same mixture Rabbi Jonathan compos'd the Jerusalem Targum about 300 years after the destruction of Jerusalem At what time every body knows that Jerusalem was subject to those Nations as we find in the Book of Josephus Goronidas But at what time the Jerusalem Targum was compos'd upon the Law and the Hagiography is unknown to us whether before or after the Hierosolymitan Targum was finished I aminduced to believe that the Hierosolymitan Targum was never extant but only upon Job the Proverbs and Psalms and not upon the five Volumes for the stile is not the same although in these there are many words taken from the Hierosolymitan Author Thus far Elias the Levite who at length confirms his Opinion concerning the difference of the Targum of Job the Proverbs and Psalms which he calls the Hierosolymitan from the Targum of the Five Volumes by the example of the double Targum upon the Book of Esther of which the second bears the name of the Hierosolymitan And that he again confirms by the Authority of Rabbi Solomon and after a short discourse concludes that the Author of the Targum of the Five Volumes is no more known than the Author of the Targum of Job the Proverbs and the Psalms For first who Onkelos and Jonathan were is utterly unknown
which if not taken Allegorically after the manner of the Cabbala as the Jews themselves write are manifestly false for the same reason if we are not as attentive to the words as to the manner of writing proper to the Jewish Nation the History of the 72. Interpreters not improbably will seem to spring from the same Fountain whether it really was approved of by the immediate Authority of the Sanhedrim or whether through connivance publickly read in their Synagogues it at length by long use became Authentick which truly seems more agreeable than what the false Aristaus says of the Approbation of the Greek Translation in these words Arist of the 70. near the end The Translation being finished Demetrius did first read it to all the Jews who were assembled in the place where it was perfected the Translators were also by who were complemented and caressed by the Body of the Jews as Authors of so great a good and in like manner they gave Demetrius his due Praise and earnestly requested that he would grant a Copy of that Translation to their Rulers As soon as that Volumn of the Law was read the Standers-by the Priests the Interpreters Elders and Governors of the City and the Rulers of the People said thus because that Interpretation was throughout so exact accurate and divine it is reasonable it should remain so and that no alteration be made therein But if the Men of Alexandria were as skilful in the Greek as in the Hebrew that they could judge from a bare Reading of the goodness and exact Agreement of the Greek Translation with the Hebrew Context why did their King so earnestly desire Strangers when he might have made use of their help And then who can believe that the Hellenist Jews but indifferently versed in the Hebrew could be competent Judges of the Translation from a superficial reading when the Learned of our times well skill'd in both Tongues dare not pretend to it Wherefore what is commonly quoted out of Josephus Philo and others in the behalf of the sincerity of the septuagint Translation is of no Moment neither can it make against the Hebrew Originals because there is nothing of the Greek Translation of the 70. in these Writers but what was first taken out of the false Aristeus Judgment of the Greek transl Although I reject the Story of the 70 Interpreters which goes under Aristeuâ—'s Name as an Invention of the Hellenist Jews yet I would not detract from that Translation which for a long time hath had a Reputation in the Synagogue and Church For I know how much the Antients esteemed this Translation since it was praised by the Apostles and the Christian Religion by no other Testimony propagated through the whole World most Churches do to this day retain it perhaps the Sea of Rome would use it to this time if St. Jerome had not made a new Translation from the Original Hebrew these and other reasons easily to be produced manifestly declare this Translation to be of great moment but it doth not hence follow as is the opinion of Isaac Vossius and some others that this Translation is the only true and least Corrupted Peice of Scripture and to be preferred before the Hebrew Copies It hath been a receiv'd opinion among the Ancient Fathers of the Church that they could have nothing sound in Scripture but what they had had Translated from the LXX because the Church owe its Birth and Growth to their Translation Origen dared not Dissent from this opinion although he hath acknowledged a great difference between the Greck and Hebrew Copies and as he hath testified of himself and hath exercised his ingenuity upon all the Editions of the Bibles and their differences There is no need says he that I speak of Exodus Orig. Epist to African where the Appurtenances of the Tabernacle its Court and Ark where the Vestments of the High Priest and Priests are very much altered insomuch that the Sence doth not seem to be the same let us take heed therefore that we do not imprudently and ignorantly abrogate the Copies which are in many Churches In this passage Origon favours the Septuagint Translation more than the Hebrew Original for this reason least he should be thought to bring Novelties and Corruption into the Church yet at other times among the Learned he did more highly value the Hebrew Verity neither truly the Ancient Church which suspected the Jews sincerity could or ought to have any other opinion of their Copies But the Judgment of St. Jerâ—m and the Learned Fathers of our times ought to be preferred for the Antient Fathers only skilled in the Greek or Latin Tongue could not be positive in things not understood by them but we in this Age can compare the Hebrew Originals with the Greek and pass our Judgments upon them Neither can the Authority of the Apostles who had recourse only to the Greek and not to the Hebrew be any Argument to the contrary What benefit could the Apostles who sowed the first Seeds of the Gospel through the World reap from the Hebrew Copy at that time understood but by a few Jews But as for the Greek Cicero for Arch the Poet. it was become as Cicero doth Testifie the Mother Tongue to most Nations The Apostles there did not use the Greek because they were more perfect than the Hebrew Copies but with Judgment because it was adopted to the genius of those who were to be instructed in the knowledge of the Scriptures the Authority therefore which the Greek Translation of the 70. acquired was extrinsick neither was it the more correct because praised by the Apostles in the new Testament if it were corrupted before their time In like manner the Authority of the Hebrew context it not lesâ—ed because less familiar to the Apostles and the first Fathers of the Church but as the Fathers of the Councel of Trent by their Decree by which the Antient vulgar Translation was made Authentick had left the Hebrew and Greek Copies untoucht In like manner the use of the Greek Translation in the Church time out of mind did not diminish the Credit and Integrity of the Hebrew The Septuagint hath it faults even from the Infancy of the Church many of which Sir Jerom hath marked I do not speak of those which Jerom taking too much Liberty in following his own fancy sometimes doth not so well Correct The Western Church hath patronized Jeroms Censure in leaving the Greek Translation of the 70 so long and so universally used for Jeroms new Translation from the Hebrew Nor were the reasons mean which induced Jerom to this new Translation from the Hebrew Original which afterwards was deservedly used by the Church for as he himself testifieth the many errors in the Greek were not the sole cause of the undertaking of that work which many speak of but that also he had found from his exact knowledg in both Tongues the Greek Interpreters had not
that should only be retained which was most Antient and long before any Schisms were sprung up in the Church The Holy Council considering that no small benefit will accrue to the Câ—uâ—ch of God if among all the Editions of the Sacred Scriptures which are publick in the World it should be declared which should be accompted most Authentic has decreed and does pronounce That this Ancient and Vulgar Edition which has been approv'd by the Vse which has been made of it for so many Ages in publick Readings Disputations Sermons and Expositions shall be accompted Sacred and that no Person shall dare to reject it upon any pretence whatsoever As to the comparing the Hebrew Context with the Antient Latin Interpreter the Tridentine Fathers never so much as dreamt of it only out of several Latin Versions then abroad in the World they decreed the Antient Version to be preferr'd before the rest In which respect the Decree of the Church appears firm and constant For as she formerly perceived the Translations of Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion to he false and partial so now she has embrac'd one ancient Version rejecting the rest which seemed to be made out of a Design of Innovation Nor have several Divines otherwise expounded the word Authentic which the Fathers of Trent made use of in this particular of whom there were some present in the Council But having no Design to do what others have done before I pass by their Testimonies in silence To these therefore I will only add the words of single Genebrard a most eager Defender of the Vulgar Edition out of an Epistle which he wrote to Arias Montanus Only it compares saith Genebrard speaking of the Council of Trent The Vulgar with the rest by reason of the rashness of the late Hereticks and other Innovators who covet new Versions loath the Old ones and cut off their innate Desire of Novelty reject the Antient to embrace the Newest Those also among the Heterodox who have any thing of Learning and Modesty revere the antient Latin Interpreter and sometimes believe it a matter of Conscience to depart from his Sence From whence Fagius a person learned both in the Hebrew and Chaldee Languages calls them Persons of little knowledg who foolishly and impudently believe the vulgar Edition to be rashly contrived The most learned Drusius also applauds the prudent design of the Councel of Trent and admires its Wisdom I pass by others of the Protestant Belief among whom it would be no difficult thing to give a Catalogue of many that had a good opinion of the Decree of the Council of Trent Wherefore they only think amiss of the Tridentine constitution whereby the old Edition is declared Authentic who too much addicted to the Writings of the Rabbins believe the Jewish Bibles and their own Art to be utterly at a loss unless they detract from that same ancient Interpretation Buxtorf the Prince of the Hebrew adorers whose wrath was kindled by the Critica sacra of Ludovicus Cappellus reprehends him in these words as if he had too severely undertaken the Patronage of the Latin Translator In Anticrit part 2. Let the Reader observe this That there was never a greater Patron of the vulgar Version and who affords a stronger Argument to support its authority then that same Critick not well in his Wits And yet this is that Cappellus to whom the Learned Hugo Grotius and the soundest of the Protestant Criticks always aduere For this the English Protestants are to be commended especially the most famous Wâ—lion who in his Protegonema to the Polyglot Bible forsaking Buxtorfs opinion follows Ludovicus Capellus almost in every thing Nor have they a slight esteem of the Latin Interpreter though they seem not rightly to have understood the force of the word Authentick however they are far from the wild Opinions of some of the Protestants who vent their Spleen without any consideration against the Tridentine Bishops In Mâ—ssellam Thus Fuller through the most haughty Tyranny of the Roman Pontifex it is come to pass that all other Translations excluded and exterminated even the Prototype of the Hebrew Truth the vulgar Latin Version has acquired a kind of Divine Primacy Nor has Isaac Casaubon Adaunâ—l Baron a person otherwise very learned spar'd the Tridentine Prelates who affirms that the Hebrew Truth has lost its Priviledge and Authority since the Greek and Latin Versions were made Authentick at Trent But the Protestants undeservedly complain of the Decree of Trent because they will not put a kind Interpretation upon the word Authentic and deviate from Divines who are of highest Authority in the Church of Rome The Tridentine Fathers when they made that decree consulted the Tranquillity of the Churches and designed only to obviate those who out of an Itch of Innovation beleived their Doctrines would gain no small credit if they detracted from the true Ecclesiastical Version then in the hands of every Person The Imprudent zeal of some Spanish Diviner No less was the errour committed in this particular by sundry Orthodox Divines who maintain the Vulgar Edition to be free from all mistakes which opinion was patroniz'd by most of the Spanish Divines in Mariana's time so that the learned durst not be of a contrary opinion For thus he begins his Treatise in defence of the Vulgar Edition Mariaâ— pro Defens Vulg. We undertake a Troublesom work and very much perplexed a dangerous Contest then which I know not whither any in these Later Ages especially among the Spanish Divines has been maintained with greater Heat and Animosity and more Implacable hatred between the parties so that from Reproaches and Contumelies with which they have defamed one another they have at length cited one another to Tribunals of Justice and that party which was most confident of his own strength has pursued his adversaries being accused of Heresie as Impious Proud c. To which he adds that Men of great repute for learning have been forc'd to plead their causes in Chains to the no small hazard of their Health and Reputation But Mariana shews at large That there are many faults in the Hebrew and Greek Exemplars many falshoods in minute things and that not a small number of those Errours are extant in our Vulgar Edition In like manner Pedro Lopaz a Spanish Divine L. 2. Conc. Ed. Madrid in the Treatise which he wrote concerning the Harmony between the sacred Editions of the Hebrew and Greek asserts the Greek Edition of the Septuagint with the ancient Vulgar to be no less Authentick than the Modern Vulgar wherein he questions not but that there are many blemishes and failings Animad in Aâ—tiq Hetruse The same Dispute Leo Allasius tells us was started concerning the Decree of the Council of Trent which declares the Vulgar Authentick by the Fathers of a Society to whose care a certain Academy was committed and at the same time declares what the sacred General Consistory thought
the Disputants But now it was not enough for the most Learned Vossius to have feign'd new Prophets much more quick sighted then the ancient ones but he must now produce a new Order of the Books of Sacred Scripture hither to unheard of The Books of Moses according to his own Opinion make five Volums and not one as the Jews believe and to prevent any man from calling this in question he produces most convincing reason 's for this new Distrubution For it is manifest saith He even out of the Sacred Writings themselves that as other Nations so also the ancient Jews wrote their Books not upon folded Paper which is a modern Invention but in rolls and continued Skins What reason there was for Vossius to have recourse to the Antient Hebrews I do not understand when even in our times the Jews make use of Rolls of the same nature as to the Books which they make use of in their Synagogues yet for all that they do not divide the Law into five Volums but comprehend it in one Volum according to that ancient Custom which was observ'd even in Christs time By and by proceeding a little farther the Learned Gentleman affirms that in the time of Aquila whom he calls a most impertinent Interpreter the Jews or else Aquila himself invented a most wicked and idle division of the Sacred Books in hatred to Daniel's weeks and that they perverted the sense and order of Scripture by introducing a New Distribution that is to say of the Law the Prophets and the Hagiographers Now whether a new distribution of the Books so the Books be entire let the perspicacious judge But least I may seem to carp at small things I say it is much more probable that Aquila in his Translation of the sacred Writings observ'd that order which according to the method of that Age the Hebrew Copies set before him when there appear'd no reason for the Charge But he did that says Vossius in hatred of Daniel's weeks whom he cast into the last place almost among the Hagiographers as if the Jews did not give the same Credit to the Prophesies of Daniel concerning the Messiah as the Christians Vossius admires at their simplicity who believe the Rabbins asserting the Ketuvim or Books of the Hagiographers to have been written by the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost If you consult the Rabbins saith he they will lâ—ugh at ye as such as cannot choose but know what they mean by the Holy Ghost Why has not Vossius now become a Rabbinist cited those Rabbins that we might understand by them what they mean by the word Ketuvim I know indeed the Jews do not agree concerning the genuine signification of that word though all believe that the Ketuvim or the Hagiographers are no less Divine and Canonical then the rest of the Books of the Old Testament The most subtle Abravenâ—l unfolds this Riddle They were call'd Ketuvim because they were written by the Holy Ghost but if it be so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ramb. in More Nev. the word Ketuvim was not design'd that those Speeches were written in a book not receiv'd by word of Mouth but to denote that they were written in the Holy Spirit and in that degree neither was the Divine Spirit with them but at the vory time of their Writing in this Language and Wisdom R. David Kimchi affirms that Prophesie is divided into several Degrees of which one exceeds another Which Degrees R. Moses Ben Maimon more subtlely explains Praef. in Psal But leaving these subtleties which were taken from the Philosophy of Aristotle and Averrhoes it is certain that the Jews agree with Josephus in this particular that all the Books which are extant in their Canon are truly Divine and Prophetical because they were written by the Prophets For which reason R. Don Joseph Ben Jechaia Praef. in Psal who has illustrated the Psalms with his Commentaries and reduc'd them with his Fathers to the Classes of the Kotuvim or Hagiographers compares them with the Law of Moses and thence infers the cheifest Dignity of the Psalms Therefore saith that Rabbi the greater is the Dignity of that Book because it follows the Divine Law and imitates the form and perfection of it Which is confirm'd by the Authority of the Fathers who seem to have preferr'd the Psalms before the Prophets themselves while they joyn them to the Pentateuch of Moses Therefore by the Confession of the Rabbys themselves neither is the Authority either of David or Daniel lessen'd because they are not number'd in the Classis of the Prophets For the last quoted Joseph adds these words in the same place Nor is it a wonder that the Book of Psalms contains several Prophecies of the time of the Messiah seeing that there are several Prophecies extant in the Holy Spirit concerning future things By this means the Jews will easily be reconcil'd with the Jews And which seems to be worthy observation the Talmudic Doctors will have the Book of Job to be written by Moses which nevertheless they place in the Classis of the Ketubim or Hagiographers Who would think that Vossius of a Rabynist should become a Talmudic Doctor He earnestly maintains That the Jews by the Confession of the Ancient Rabbys expung'd many places in the Holy Writings and alter'd the Sense and Words Interest so perswading No Man shall find any thing feigned by me says the Talmudic Gentleman whoever he be that Consults the Talmudic Books wherein he shall read these words in several places It is good that a Letter be pull'd up out of the Law that the Name of God may be sanctify'd But it is not for all Men to have recourse to the Talmudic Books like the most learned Vossius I had thought that decree of the Talmudists might have been rightly explain'd by the Words of R. Moses Ben Maimon who with most of the Jewish Rabbys so far defends the Immutability of the Mosaic Law that he believes that some of its Constitutions may be for a time suspended by the Authority of the Grand Sanhedrim Ramb. More Nev part 3. c. 41. That Talmudic Rabby asserts That God indeed Deut. 4. forbad that any one should add to his Word or detract from it but that he gave permission to the Wise Men of all Ages and Times or to the Supream Judicatory to set bounds to the Judgments to be Established by the Law in some things which they desire to innovate to preserve the Authority of the Law Farther That God gave them Liberty to take away some Precepts of the Law and to permit some things Prohibited upon some certain Occasion and Accident but not to Perpetuity These were taken out of the Latin Edition of the Book More Nevochim Published by Buxtorf After the same manner speaks the Author of the Book Entitl'd Cozri set forth also in Hebrew and Latin by Buxtorf For upon Cozri's demanding the Question How that Power of Innovating any thing in the
Divine Law of God could stand with those Words of Deutronomy Thou shalt neither add to it nor detract from it The Jew makes Answer That those Words were only spoken in reference to the multitude that they should not Innovate any thing of their own Heads or take upon 'em to be Self-wise but not in Relation to the Senators of the Great Sanhedrim for that it was not for one Moses only to engross the making of Laws which was a priviledge belonging to other Prophets Priests and Judges who were endu'd with the same Spirit of God This unless I mistake is the Genuine Sense of the Talmudic Doctrine which cannot be wrested to the Extirpation of the Words of the Sacred Context when the Dispute lyes about taking away a Word or a Letter Nay sometimes a Sentence in the Explication of the Context but not of changing or erasing Letters or Words out of the Sacred Original Morinus from whom Vossius has borrowed whatever he has in his Works that savours of Rabbinism after he had omitted no sort of Fiction to prove That the Sacred Exemplars were on-set purpose Corrupted by the Jews at length embraces the Opinion of St. Austin in these Words We willingly embrace the Opinion of St. Austin concerning the Books of the Jews by themselves deprav'd and mutilated of set purpose Lib. 1. Exercit 1. c. 6. From whom however he professes to disagree in this for that St. Austin thought it to be an Act not to be believ'd in regard it could not be that a Nation scatter'd far and near should all unanimously Conspire to Corrupt so many Copies and so far assunder dispers'd But Morinus more quick-sighted then St. Austin violently maintains the Fact not only to be beleiv'd among the Jews but also to be by them esteemed another Article of their Faith Now whether that were prov'd by Morinus by sufficient Argument is not our business to enquire It is enough to have shewn that Morinus upon whom Vossius depends in most things could not be induc'd to believe that the Jews corrupted the Text of Scripture on set-purpose tho' he were not ignorant of the Opinion of Talmudists in taking away a Letter out of the Law upon Occasion Now Vossius having left the Talmudists comes to the Greek Interpreters and makes it his chief business to assert that all the Hebrew which we have remaining we are beholding to the Seventy Interpreters for it that without them not so much as one word could be rightly expounded that no Versions made by the Jews or to the liking of the Jews are good which were not taken from the Seventy Interpreters that wherever you desert them you depart from the Truth Lastly That the Interpretation of the Scripture is to be fetched from those Jews who Translated the Scripture when the Hebrew Language flourish'd and was familiarly spoken and not by those Jews who are Enemies to the Christian Faith and who confesses themselves ignorant of their own Tongue Now John Morinus produces Arguments almost like to these to teize the modern Hebrew Exemplars and to establish the Authority of the antient Interpreters which in regard they are most solidly refuted by Ludovicus Capellus a Copious Testimony in reference to this subject and not undeservedly applauded by Vossius himself I had rather answer Vossius in the words of that most learned Author than my own First therefore says Capellus concerning Morinus and we concerning Vossius It is easie to sell smoke to the ignorant vulgar and to boast of gawdy Trappings to the people Then coming to the Seventy Interpreters Capel in Apol. advers Boot he says contrary to the sentiments of Vossius That the Hebrew Language was natural to them which was lost in the Captivity of Babylon after which they liv'd above 200 Years He adds That they from the near affinity between the Chaldee and Syro Chaldaic Languages which the Jews then made use of might by study labour and frequent reading of the Scripture attain to no mean knowledge of the Tongue and many things also necessary to the understanding of that Language and the Sacred Writings they might gather from the Traditions of their Ancestors But says Capellus that they saw all things understood all things never err'd or never were deceiv'd no Man will pretend to say but such a one as understands nothing of the Hebrew and never compar'd their Translation with the Hebrew Text even in those places wherein they read no otherwise then we do at this day where it is easie to see their frequent childish and shameful failings errors frequently from the Genuine signification of the words and phrases and the Intent and Scope of the Sacred Writings These and many other passages had Capellus inserted into his Sacred Criticism which Mâ—rinus took care to have expung'd because they did not relish his Palate But we took them out of Capellus's Apology against Bootius Now what Vossius can Answer to these things I do not apprehend whenas he himself knows that Capellus when he undertook his Criticks was not overmuch prejudic'd against the Rabbins Nay those Semi-Rabbins whom Vossius so often traduces have heavily complained of Vossius and his Book Let us once more hear the words of that most learned person and most acurately vers'd in these Matters wherein he gives a Judgment of the Versions which were made out of the Hebrew after the Seventy Interpreters plainly contrary to the Opinion of Vossius Id. cap. ibid. Let there be attributed says Capellus to every one of those ancient Versions their particular Praise and Honour by reason of their Antiquity and perpetual use in the Church nevertheless where they are manifestly vitious defective and mutilated let not their imperfection be preferred before the Original Truth and Authentick Text nor through a certain perverse wicked wrangling and contentious envy or rather damnable ill custome be advanced before the much better and more acurate Translations Therefore in the Opinion of Capellus there might be a better and more acurate Translation of the Sacred Text then that of the Seventy To these many other things of the same Nature might be added which I omit for fear of being troublesome Then again seeing that Capellus was not of that Sect of people whom the most Facetius Vossius calls In Epist ad Andr. Colv. Asses void of light and understanding clad with a little Professors Gown instead of a Shield carrying the Masoretic Bibles garnish'd with all their Points I would willingly believe that he will be brought to condescend without any great trouble to the Opinion of so excellent a person concerning the Version of the Seventy Interpreters Again Vossius stands very furiously upon it That all the Jews who preceded the time wherein Christ was upon the Earth acknowledged this Version only as lawful That till the time of Aquila no other was read in all the Synagogues of the Jews besides the Version of the Seventy Interpreters not only in Aegypt Asia