Page images
PDF
EPUB

the Scriptures, and to guard the parity of the sacred text *; and the very existence of such a body as the Masorites, during the long period of fifteen hundred years, is evidence of the care taken by the Jews, in preserving their Scriptures. Will Mr. Faber say, that equal care, and ily equal success, has been empyed in maintaining the purity of the text of the LXX. +; and that the arts readings called the Keri in the margins of our common Hebrew Bibles, and those collected by Kennicott, are equal in number, or imporRance, to those of the Greek Scrip

tures

Mr. Faber charges upon the Hebrew text in Dan. viii. 14; for the last part of the 11th chap. of Gen. contains a list of names and numbers, and we all know that in copying such lists, errors are much more apt to occur, than in copying a single and insulated number like that in Dan. viii. 14. In the third place, the integrity of the Samaritan Pentateuch is not to be compared with that of the Hebrew. For leaving out of question the well known and wilful corruption of the Samaritan text in Deut. xxvii. 4, and the forged interpretation in the 20th of Exodus; if I may believe the authors of the Ancient Universal History*, there are in the different copies, both of the Samaritan and Septuagint, many various readings in the ages of the patriarchs; while among the Hebrew copies and the Chaldee paraphrases, the most undeviating agreement exists. But in the fourth and last place, I observe, that the differences in the years of the postdiluvian patriarchs (as recorded in the 11th of Gen.) which exist between the Hebrew text and the Samaritan, are of such a nature as to exclude the possibility of their having arisen from the errors of transcribers. They have plainly originated in design. For while the sum total of the years of each patriarch is the same both in the Hebrew and Samaritan; the particulars of which that sum total is made up, differ in the two copies. Thus in the Prideaux's Connect. Parti. Book v. Hebrew, Arphaxad is said to have The reader will find an account of the been 35 years of age at the birth of the copies of the LXX. in common use his son Salah, and to have lived 403 age of Origen, in Prideaux's Connect, years after that event: these two booki.; and the preface to the Cam numbers being added together, make gection of the LXX. printed in 1663, the age of Arphaxad when he died teins the following character, both of the 438 years. In the Samaritan, Arand present state of that version: phaxad is said to have been 135 en autem hæc seniorum versio etiam years old at the birth of Salab, and Mercayai tempore corrupta fuit atque to have lived 303 danda est opera ut ei pristina puritas years afterwards. et redintegrari possit. Certum est exque babemus Complutense, Aldi Romanum plurimum inter se et ab Alex

Bot Mr. Faber says, that the idental transcriptorial mistake, which deem improbable, not to say impossible, has occurred either in the Hebrew, or the Samaritan Peneuch, in Gen. xi. 13. In this (says Mr. Faber), either sheen written for why or wow for I reply, first, that even adting the discrepancy between the Hebrew and Samaritan texts, in this sage, to have arisen from error, not design, it proves nothing nst my argument: for the ocence of a very improbable mise in Gen. xi. 13, does not render whit more probable, that the mistake should happen a ond time, in Dan. viii. 14. dly, the alleged error in the passage, does not include in e supposition of an equal degree egligence, as the mistake which

ner

These numbers being added, give life of Arphaxad as the Hebrew the same sum of years for the whole

discrepare, alios etiam codices aliqua- text, viz. 438. There is the same

S. Scripture partium satis antiquos, nunc eurum aliquo nunc cum nullo convenire." CHAIST, OBSERY. NO. 113.

discrepancy between the two PenVol. I. pp. 146. 257.

2 P

tateuchs with respect to the particulars, and the same correspondence in the sums total of the ages of all the patriarchs down to Terah the father of Abraham. The only exception is, that in the whole length of the life of Eber there is a real difference of sixty years between the Hebrew and Samaritan, which has arisen probably from the error of some transcriber. It is well known that the result of the above systematic difference between the Hebrew and Samaritan Pentateuchs is, that while the Hebrew chronology makes only 352 years from the deluge to the birth of Abraham, the Samaritan makes 1002 years. I cannot quit this subject without adding, that your respectable correspondent, Mr. Yeates, who has already favoured your readers with a very interesting account of the Indian Roll of the Pentateuch, in the Buchanan collection, would render a most important service to the cause of truth, by presenting you with a collation of Gen. xi. 10-32, from the Indian Roll.

Having, I hope, said enough to remove the objections of Mr. Faber to my arguments, I proceed to lay before you the following quotation from Jerome's Commentary on Daniel, containing his remarks on the disputed passage. I am indebted for a sight of Jerome, to the same venerable friend who procured me access to the history of Paulus Dia

conus.

“Et dixit ei usque ad vesperam et mane dies duo millia tricenti et mundabitur sanctuarium.-Legamus Machabæorum libros, et Josephi historiam ibique scriptum reperiemus, centesimo quadragesimo tertio anno, a Seleuco, qui primus regnavit in Syria post Alexandrum, ingressum Antiochum, Jerosolimam, et universa vastasse, reversumque anno tertio in templo posuisse statuam Jovis; et usque ad Judam Machabæum, id est usque ad annum centesimum quadragesimum octavum, per annos vastitatis Jerusalem sex, contaminationis autem templi tres,

duo millia trecentos dies et tres menses esse completos: post quos templum purgatum est. Quidam pro duobis millibus trecentis duo millia ducentos legunt: ne sex anni et tres menses superesse videantur. Hunc locum plerique nostrorum ad Antichristum referunt; et quod sub Antiocho in typo factum est, sub illo in veritate dicunt esse complendum."

Now, Sir, the foregoing passage shews that in the time of Jerome. 2300 was the authentic and generally received reading of the passage, Nor does Jerome affirm that any manuscript of authority, or, indeed, any copies whatever, had the reading of 2200 days; but he says that certain persons (who understand the prophecy to have been accomplished by Antiochus Epiphanes) read 2200, lest the prophetical number should seem to exceed the period of six years and three months, during which Antiochus profaned the city and Temple. In other words, these persons not being able to make their own scheme of interpretation to accord with the received reading, wished to amend the sacred text, to make it suit their hypothesis. Such, unless I misunderstand it, is the sum of what we gather from this passage.

But, further, I conclude from the foregoing passage of Jerome, and from his silence with regard to any various reading of the number in the Greek versions of the LXX. and of Theodotion, that both these copies, did at that time agree with the He brew, in reading 2300 days. My reasons for this conclusion are, that it appears from Jerome's remarks on the verse immediately preceding, viz. Dan, viii. 13. that he had before him, both the abovementioned Greek versions, and also that of Aquila; for he makes an observation, upon their all having retained the Hebrew word (in Greek characters) in translating the passage, without attempting to give the sense of it in Greek. And it will be found, that in many other passages of his commentary, Jerome refers to the version of Theodotion.

Now had that version then contained the number 2400, which we now find in it, how can we account for the silence of Jerome upon so important a difference, when we find that he notices those of less moment? My conclusion, therefore, seems quite legitimate, that the Greek copy then accorded with the Hebrew, in reading 2300 days. But if Mг. Faber can from the writings of other fathers shew that I am wrong, I shall be glad to be corrected by him. As for Mr. Faber's assertion, that the Hebrew copy which Theodotion used contained the reading 2400, it is begging the very question in dispute.

Having now closed what I had to offer in defence of the reading of our authorised version in Dan. viii. 14; I beg leave, Sir, to suggest, that a jury of Christian critics shall be impannelled,and shall find a verdict either of Guilty or Not Guilty, upon the charge brought by my respectable opponent, against the Jews, of having handed down to us a corrupt reading of the number in that verse. Thus, Sir, a solemn judicial decision shall bring to a conclusion this protracted controversy, which has, I have no doubt, appeared irksome and tedious to many of your readers; but which perhaps may have been humbly instrumental, in comforting some of those, whose hearts were ready to faint within them (when viewing the calamities which afflict and threaten the world), with the hope that they may not see death, till they shall have beheld the dawn of that glorious period for which the church of Christ has prayed, and suffered, and bled, for nearly two thousand years.

I intended with the above observation to have closed this paper, already too long. But the reasoning contained in it has since received such confirmation as I scarcely dared to hope for. By the assistance of the same friend to whom I have so often acknowledged my obligations, I have been enabled to consult the Greek versions of Daniel, both by the

LXX. and Theodotion, from the Tetrapla of Origen, printed in 1772, from the Chisian manuscript at Rome, at the office of the Propaganda; and I am enabled to state, that these copies concur in supporting the reading of our Hebrew Bibles in Dan. viii. 14; the reading in both being έως εσπέρας και πρωι ημέραι δισχιλίαι nai тpianoσial.-There is a note on the verse in the version of Theodotion, which I have copied literatim: it is as follows:

MS. Vat. και τριακοσίαι ut in Codice nostro-Alex. Ald. Compl. Et Hebr. MD ww; Juxta Vulg. trecenti; sed edit. Vat. habet xai Terpa

κόσιαι.

From this note it is evident, not only that the Chisian copies of the two Greek versions; but likewise the Vatican MS. of the LXX.; the Alexandrian copy; the edition of Aldus, published at Venice in A. D. 1518; and the Complutensian edition, printed in 1515; all agree in supporting the reading of 2300 days: and the Vatican edition, from which all the Septuagints published in England have been printed *, is the only copy in existence, which contains the reading 2400. Add to which, that the Vatican edition is the most modern of the whole, having been printed in 1587.

The same most important fact is confirmed by the various readings of Bos's Septuagint, which is printed from the Vatican edition, and in the Appendix to Walton's Polyglot, to which I beg leave to refer the reader. And I have to add, that at the same time that I consulted the Chisian copy, I was enabled to look into Aldus's edition of the LXX., and I found in it, in-exact conformity to the note which I have copied above, the reading pianoσiai.

I need scarcely add, therefore, that the reading 2300 is now established, without controversy, to be the genuine one. And what is of infinitely greater consequence than the mere determination of a doubtful

* Vide Prideaux's Connect, Part ii. Book i.

reading, the period in Dan. viii. 14, and also the 1260 years are certainly elapsed, and the redemption of the church (Luke xxi. 28, 31) is in all probability seventy years nearer at hand than Mr. Faber's scheme leads him to believe. I shall finish by assuring my most respectable opponent, that it is to this particular and most consolatory conclusion, I have all along desired to arrive; and not to establish a system, as he seems to insinuate: and to the above conclusion what Christian would not wish to arrive, that sees the calamities of the times in which we live, and the awful dangers which threaten us? Who is the Christian that does not, in these times, say with the beloved disciple, Amen, even so come quickly, Lord Jesus?

1 am, &c.

TALIB.

I add, for the satisfaction of the

reader, the title of the Chisian edi

tion of Daniel, which with the Aldine and some other editions of the EXX., is to be found in the library of the University of Glasgow. "Daniel Secundum Septuaginta ex Tetraplis Origenis nunc primum editus e singulari Chisiano codice annorum supra lɔccc. Romæ Typis Propaganda Fidei, clǝlǝccLXXII.

QUOTATIONS FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT IN THE NEW, COLLATED WITH THE SEPTUAGINT.

[ocr errors]

(Continued from p. 216.)

1 Cor. i. 19. This is quoted from the Septuagint (Is. xxix. 14), except the last word, aferyow (1 Cor.) pow (Sept.)

The Hebrew is passive, "The wisdom of their wise men shall men shall perish," &c.: but the meaning is the same.

31. This is not a quotation, though introduced by "As it is written," but only gives the general sense of several scriptures. (Is. xly. 27. lxv. 16. Jer. iv. 2. ix. 23, 24.)

ii. 9. Α οφθαλμος εκ είδε, και ως εκ ήκεσε, και επι καρδίαν ανθρωπος

εκ ανέβη, δ ητοιμασεν ὁ Θεός τοις αγα TWOIY aulov (Sept. Is. lxiv. 4.) Απο το αιωνες εκ ηκουσαμεν, εδε δι οφθαλμοι ημων είδον Θεον πλην σε, και τα ερχα σε, α ποιήσεις τους υποpavari EXEGY." From the beginning we have not heard, neither have our eyes seen a God, besides thee, and thy works, which thou wilt do for those who wait for mercy." It is, at first glance, evident, that the apostle did not quote from the Septuagint: but this by no means removes the difficulties attending the passage, which are such, and so great, that they have driven some learned men to almost desperate measures; namely, either to condemn the Jews of wilfully corrupting their Scriptures, or to suppose that the apostle prefixes" Thus it is written," to a quotation from the Apocrypha The Hebrew may literally be rendered, "And from the beginning men have not heard, they have not received by the ear, eye hath not seen, O God, besides thee, one who will perform for him who waiteth for him'or, who doeth so for him that waiteth for him." (Marg, reading.) men have never heard, nor perceived by the ear; nor hath eye seen a God beside thee, who doeth such things for those that trust in him.” (Bp. Louth.) It is evident, that the apostle gives the general meaning of the passage as an inspired writer; that he calls the reader's attention to it, without either quoting the Septuagint, or translating the Hebrew, or even confining himself to it. Whether any errors have crept into the Hebrew text, or not, this seems evidently to be the case.

-.

[ocr errors]

16. This is nearly a quotation from the Septuagint (Is. xl. 13.) yap is added: xai vis aut8 ouμGeros εγενετο is omitted: συμβιβάσει 13 put for upisa. The clause, omitted here, is quoted Rom. xi. 34. The quotation varies in words from the llebrew, but not in its general' meaning.

iii. 19. Ο δρασσόμενος της σοφής εν τη πανεργια αυτων (Sept. Το

7. 13.) Ο καταλαμβανων σοφες τη φρόνησε, Either translation gives the import of the Hebrew; but few impartial judges will think this a quotation from the Septuagint.

20. This is from the Septuagint, except as it substitutes σοφων for ανθρωπων ; in which it yaries equally from the Hebrew. It appears to me that a writer, not conscious of divine inspiration, yet completely upright, would not have ventured on such a deviation.

ix. 9. Exactly from the Septuagint, and according to the Hebrew (Deut. xxiv. 4.)

x. 7. Exactly from the Septuagint, and according to the Hebrew (Exod. xxxii. 6.) The Hebrew means " to play with jests and laughter."

--.

. 26, 23. The quotation is from the Septuagint, except that yap is inserted (Ps. xxiv. 1.) It agrees with the Hebrew.

xiv. 21. This is not quoted from the Septuagint; but it agrees for substance with the Hebrew, only it puts the first person, instead of the third, and adds, "Saith the Lord" (Is. xxviii. 11, 12.)

xv. 25-27. (See Matt. xxii. 44.) The quotation is nearly from the Septuagint (Ps. viii. 6.)

-. 32. Exactly from the Septuagint (Is. xxii. 13.) The meaning is precisely the same as the Hebrew.

45. This is taken from the Septuagint, which literally translates the Hebrew (Gen. ii. 7): but the apostle, by way of explanation, adds πρωτος and Αδαμ.

- 54. "This is not taken from the Septuagint, but a literal translation of the Hebrew." (Randolph.) (Is. xxv. 8.) The Hebrew may either mean," He will swallow up death in victory," or "He will swallow up death for ever."

[ocr errors]

55. The apostle is generally supposed in the passage to quote Hos. xiii. 14; but he does not introduce it as a quotation, neither

do his words agree either with the Septuagint or the Hebrew. It is probable that he had the words of God, by Hosea, in contemplation; but that, in the ardour of his mind, he gave the challenge, as it were, to death and hades (the grave, or the invisible world), in his own words, or rather in those of the Holy Spirit, who spake by him.

2 Corinthians.

iv. 13. Exactly from the Septuagint, and a good translation of the Hebrew (Ps. cxvi. 11.)

vi. 2. Exactly from the Septua gint, which literally translates the Hebrew (Is. xlix. 8.)

Και

----. 16. Ότι ενοικήσω εν αυτοις (Sept. Lev. xxvi. 11, 12.) Kai Θησω την σκηνήν με εν υμιν. The rest is from the Septuagint, except as the third person is substisuted for the second. The Septua gint is an exact translation of the Hebrew.

17. This gives the general sense of the Scripture referred to (Is. lii. 11, 12): but it is neither made, in any part, as far as I can see, from the Septuagint, nor is it a translation of the Hebrew. The Septuagint is, verbally, much more according to the Hebrew.

. 18. This seems to be a general statement of the substance of several Scriptures, and not a quotation of any one. The first part is spoken of Solomon, and the words agree with the Septuagint and the Hebrew (2 Sam. vii. 14; 1 Chr. xvii. 13.) The passage is also introduced with race λεyei Kupios mar Tоxpaтwp (2 Sam. vii, 8; 1 Chr. xvii. 7.) But the subsequent words are so different, that little can be inferred from these circumstances. The apostle seems rather to apply to Christians the general declarations made by the Lord concerning Israel (Ex. iv. 22, 23; Jer. xxxi. 1, 9; Hos. i. 9, 10.)

viii. 15. Ὁ το πολυ εκ επλεοναε xxió To oλiyov, ex qλarlour,σë (Sept. Ex. xvi. 18.) OUX ETλEOVITEV, TO

« PreviousContinue »