Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

with a sincere desire to know and perform the will of God, and, laying aside all prejudice, to follow the Scriptures wherever conviction may lead our minds. For it is indubitable, that persons of piety, who are anxiously desirous of the knowledge of divine truth, are aided by the Spirit of God in searching out the meaning of Scripture, particularly in such subjects as have an especial reference to faith and religious practice. In order, however, to study the Scriptures aright, it should be recollected that they are not to be contemplated as one entire book or treatise. "The knowledge of divine truth is, indeed, perfectly distinct from human science, in that it emanates immediately from the fountain of Infinite Wisdom. Yet has it this in common with human science, that it is made by its heavenly Author to flow through the channel of human instruction. While, therefore, we receive it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth the Word of God (1 Thess. ii. 13.), we must nevertheless examine it as it is delivered to us, clothed in the language of men, and subject to the general rules of human composition. The deference due to it as a divine production does not interfere with this province of human learning; it only exacts submission with respect to the subject matter of the revelation, to which the critical investigation is entirely subordinate."2

But besides the paramount importance of the contents of the Holy Scriptures, a further motive to the diligent study of them presents itself, in the facilities that are offered to us for this purpose by the numerous publications on the criticism and interpretation of the Bible, which have appeared at different times, and whose most valuable precepts it is the design of the present work to concentrate. In fact, "a willingness to know and to do the will of God, implies a willingness to resort to all necessary helps for advancement in the truth, and for security against error."3 The value of such helps was never questioned, except by those who chose to despise what they did not possess. They are of distinguished value in theology; but then, like every thing else that is excellent, they have their province. While they are supreme in the concerns of human investigation, they are subordinate in those of divine. They cannot communicate a right disposition of heart, nor can they compensate for its absence. Like the armour of the ancient warrior, if the native vigour of the frame can wield them with alertness and skill, they are his defence and ornament: but if this vigour be wanting, they are of no advantage whatever; they become, on the contrary, a burden and an incumbrance."

[ocr errors]

With regard to the order to be pursued in reading the Scriptures, it may be sufficient to remark, that it will be desirable to peruse those books first which are written in the plainest style, and, consequently, are best adapted to the capacity of the mind; and afterwards to proceed gradually from the easier books to such as are more difficult, and especially to read those in succession which are of parallel argument; from the New Testament to the Old, and from the simpler books to such as are more abstruse.

Further, as it is of importance to understand the several dispensations given by God to mankind, besides this elementary reading of the Scriptures, it is necessary that they be studied according to the historical order of time. This mode of reading the Bible will at once help both the memory and the judgment: it will also discover to us those connections and dependencies which are otherwise undiscernible. Many chapters and books of Scripture are out of their proper place, according to the order of time; which if put in their proper chronological order in the course of our reading, would reflect not a little light upon each other.

Thus, in the book of Genesis, with which the Bible commences, we have a continued history from the creation of the world down to the death of the patriarch Joseph. Next to that, in order of time, lies the narrative contained in the book of Job (if, indeed, it be not the first written book), in which we meet with several vestiges of the patriarchal theology, as recorded in Genesis, but with no references to any of the

eyes, may still be as a book that is sealed (Isa. xxix. 11.), and be as ineffective as if the characters were illegible." Lively Oracles, sect. viii. $24.

Non est dubitandum, viros pios et veritatis divina cupidos adjuvari a Spiritu Dei in serutando Scripture sensu, in iis quidem rebus quæ proprie ad fidem et mores pertinent.-Ernesti Institutio Interpretis Novi Testamenti, p. 25. Lipsiæ, 1792.-Though the truth of God receives not testimony from men, it is pleasing to observe it thus expressly recognised by men of such intellectual greatness as John Augustiis Ernesti; who is admitted to have been one of the most erudite and elegant scholars of modern Germany.

Bishop Vanmildert's Bampton Lectures, p. 22.

Ibid. p. 41. The whole of his second sermion, on the moral qualifications requisite for a right apprehension of the Sacred Word, is truly excellent.

succeeding parts of the sacred history. Then comes the book of Exodus, which gives an account of the deliverance of the Jews from their Egyptian bondage, and the erection of the tabernacle for the service of God; from which tabernacle He gave those ordinances for his service, which are related in the book of Leviticus. After these ordinances had been issued, the Israelites performed those journeyings of which we have an account, together with the incidents that befell them in each, in the book of Numbers. When their wanderings in the Desert of Arabia were drawn to a close, Moses, shortly before his departure, recapitulated and explained the preceding laws and ordinances to them, as recorded in the book of Deuteronomy. The settlement of the Israelites in the land of Canaan, and the coincident circumstances, under the command of Joshua, the successor of Moses, are narrated in the book which bears his name; and of their succeeding history we have an account in the book of Judges. But the history contained in the two books of Samuel, of the Kings, and of the Chronicles, is so interwoven, that it requires very considerable attention to develope it; and, unless the different synchronisms be carefully attended to, and the several psalms and prophecies, previously to the Babylonish captivity, be also interwoven in the order of time, it will be extremely difficult (not to say impractica ble) critically to understand the sacred history. After the captivity, the affairs of the Jews are continued by Ezra, Esther, and Nehemiah, in whose narratives the predictions of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi (by whom the canon was closed), ought in like manner to be interwoven, together with such of the psalms as manifestly appear, from internal evidences, to have been composed subsequently to the captivity.

In the New Testament, the four evangelists have given us, in so many memoirs, an historical relation of the life and actions of Jesus Christ, which is the same in substance, but different in many particulars. Now, if their several narratives be digested and arranged into one, in the order of time, this would throw much light upon various passages, which in a detached state appear difficult to be understood. The book of the Acts of the Apostles also gives us a short history of the Church, from Christ's ascension, together with the propagation of the Gospel by the apostles, and especially of the sufferings and labours of Peter and Paul. The insertion of the different apostolical epistles according to the several times and seasons when they were written (so far at least as we can collect them from attending circumstances), would further be of great use, to enable us the better to understand them. The book of the Revelation of St. John, which closes the canon of Scripture, gives a prophetical history of the church to the end of the world; and, of course, must be studied by itself.

"I can speak it from experience," says the celebrated Erasmus,' that there is little benefit to be derived from the Scriptures, if they be read cursorily or carelessly; but if a man exercise himself therein constantly and conscientiously, he shall find such an efficacy in them as is not to be found in any other book whatsoever."-"The genuine philosophy of Christ," says the same eminent scholar and critic, "cannot be derived from any source so successfully, as from the books of the Gospels and the Apostolic Epistles; in which, if a man philosophize with a pious spirit, praying rather than arguing, he will find that there is nothing conducive to the happiness of man, and the performance of any duty of human life, which is not, in some of these writings, laid down, discussed, and determined, in a complete and satisfactory man

ner."8

In the second volume of this work the prophetical books are arranged in order of times. The author had it in contemplation to have attempted an arrangement of the entire Scriptures, on the plan above noticed; but he has happily been anticipated in this laborious undertaking, so far as respects the Old Testament, by the Rev. George Townsend, in his work, entitled "The Holy Bible, arranged in Chronological and Historical Order." LonBibliographical Appendix to vol. ii. [Note to the third edition.]

don, 1821, in two volumes, 8vo. See an account of this work infra, in the

For an account of the various Harmonies of the Four Gospels, see the Bibliographical Appendix to vol. ii.

Cradock's Apostolical History, Benson's History of the first planting of Christianity, and Bevan's Life of the Apostle Paul, and especially the Rev. Geo. Townsend's New Testament arranged in Historical and Chronological Order, may here be noticed as particularly useful helps for studying the apostolic epistles in the order of time.

Præf in Paraphr. in Luc.

• Existimo purain illam Christi philosophiam non aliunde felicius hauriri, quim ex evangelicis libris, quam ex apostolicis literis: in quibus si quis piè philosophetur, orans magis quàm argumentans, nihil esse inveniet, quod ad hominis felicitatem, nihil quod ad ullam hujus vitæ functionem pertineat, quod in his non sit traditum, discussum, et absolutum. ERASMUS, cited in Dr. Knox's Christian Philosophy, p. 295, 2d edit.

ON

THE CRITICISM AND INTERPRETATION

OF

THE SCRIPTURES.

The FIRST PART, which treats on Scripture-Criticism, will be found to comprise a concise account of the Languages in which the Sacred Volume is written; together with a Sketch of the Critical History of its Text, and of the several Divisions and Subdivisions of it, which have obtained at different times. The Sources of Sacred Criticism are next discussed, including a particular account of the Manuscripts of the Old and New Testament, and the History of the Ancient Versions of the Scriptures. The nature of Various Readings, and the means of determining genuine readings, are then considered, together with the Quotations from the Old Testament in the New, and the nature and different kinds of Harmonies of the Old and New Testament.

CRITICISM, in the more extensive sense of the term, is the art of forming a correct judgment concerning any object proposed to our consideration. In a more restricted sense, particularly with reference to the works of ancient authors, it was fashionable, for a considerable time, among the literati on the continent of Europe, to employ this term as indicating merely that kind of labour and judgment which was employed in settling the genuineness of the whole or part of the text of any author. But the term is now generally used in a much more enlarged sense, viz. to indicate any kind of labour or judgment, which is occupied either in the literary history of the text itself, or in settling or explaining it. To the former the German philosophers have given the appellation of lower criticism; while the latter has been termed higher criticism, because its objects and results are of a much In the SECOND PART the principles and subsidiary means more important nature. In this latter sense, the term is taken of Scripture Interpretation are discussed, together with the in the present volume, which is devoted to the consideration application of them to the exposition of the Sacred Volume, of the Criticism and Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures. both exegetical and practical. excording is another, dis lise tion, Louis tion as evidence of the

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

intinal evi

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

PART I.aracter
102 time lo

accordions

style of the

[ocr errors]

Writie to a crised to sed. of the

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

ON THE LANGUAGES IN WHICH THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS ARE WRITTEN.

[blocks in formation]

THE languages of Western Asia, though differing in respect to dialect, are radically the same, and have been so, as far back as any historical records enable us to trace them. Palestine, Syria, Phoenicia, Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Arabia, and also Ethiopia are reckoned as the countries, where the languages commonly denominated Oriental have been spoken. Of late, many critics have rejected the appellation Oriental, as being too comprehensive, and have substituted that of Shemifish, a denominative derived from Shem. Against this appellation, however, objections of a similar nature may be urged; for no inconsiderable portion of those, who spoke the languages in question, were not descendants of Shem. It Muntinghe, Brevis Expositio Critices Vet. Fed. pp. 1, 2. Jahn's Disser

tations, by Prof Stuart, pp. 64, 65. Clerici Ars Critica, pp. 1, 2.

188

is matter of indifference which appellation is used, if it be first defined.

The Oriental Languages may be divided into three principal dialects, viz. the Aramaan, the Hebrew, and the Arabic. 1. The Aramaan, spoken in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia or Chaldæa, is subdivided into the Syriac and Chaldee dialects; or, as they are sometimes called, the East and West Aramæan.

2. The Hebrew or Canaanitish (Isa. xix. 18.) was spoken in Palestine, and probably with little variation in Phœnicia, and the Phoenician colonies, as at Carthage and other places. The names of the Phoenician and Punic dialects are too few, and too much disfigured, to enable us to judge with certainty how extensively these languages were the same as the dialect of Palestine.

semblance, has, in modern times, a great variety of dialects, 3. The Arabic, to which the Ethiopic bears a special reas a spoken language, and is spread over a vast extent of country. But, so far as we are acquainted with its former state, it appears more anciently to have been principally limited to Arabia and Ethiopia.

The Arabic is very rich in forms and words; the Syriac, so far as it is yet known, is comparatively limited in both; the Hebrew holds a middle place between them, both as to copiousness of words and variety of forms.

Besides the preceding dialects, there are many slighter variations of language, sometimes distinguished from the general names by local appellations. Thus, the Ephraimites could not distinguish between the letters (s) and (sh), as the Hebrews did, in speaking: hence the Ephraimites pronounced Sibboleth instead of Shibboleth. (Judges xii. 6.) Nehemiah was indignant that part of his countrymen should speak the language of Ashdod. (Neh. xiii. 23—25.)

The Samaritan Dialect appears to be composed (as one

might expect, see 2 Kings xvii.) of Aramæan and Hebrew: | being appellative, and from other facts in respect to the and the slighter varieties of Arabic are as numerous as the formation of this dialect. Thus, the West is, ín Hebrew, provinces where the language is spoken. (YUM), which means the sea, that is, towards the Mediterranean Sea. As the Hebrew has no other proper word for west, so it must be evident that the language, in its distinctive and peculiar forms, must have been formed in Palestine.3

All the Oriental or Shemitish languages are distinguished from the Western or European Tongues, in general, by a number of peculiar traits, viz. :—

(1.) Several kinds of guttural letters are found in them, which we cannot distinctly mark; and some of which our organs are incapable of pronouncing after the age of maturity.

(2.) In general, the roots are tri-literal, and of two syllables. By far the greater part of the roots are verbs.

(3.) Pronouns, whether personal or adjective, are, in the oblique cases, united in the same word with the noun or verb, to which they have a relation.

(4.) The verbs have but two tenses, the past and future; and, in general, there are no optative or subjunctive moods distinctly marked.

(5.) The genders are only masculine and feminine; and

these are extended to the verb as well as to the noun.
(6.) For the most part, the cases are marked by preposi-
tions. Where two nouns come together, the latter of which
is in the genitive, the first in most cases suffers a change,
which indicates this state of relation; while the latter noun
remains unchanged; that is, the governing noun suffers the
change, and not the noun governed.

(7.) To mark the comparative and superlative degrees, no special forms of adjectives exist. But from this observation the Arabic must be excepted; which for the most part has an extensive form of adjectives, that marks both the comparative and superlative.

(8.) Scarcely any composite words exist in these languages, if we except proper names.

(9.) Verbs are not only distinguished into active and passire by their forms; but additional forms are made, by the inflections of the same verb with small variations, to signify the cause of action, or the frequency of it, or that it is reflexive, reciprocal, or intensive, &c.

(10.) All these dialects (the Ethiopic excepted), are written and read from the right hand to the left; the alphabets consisting of consonants only, and the vowels being generally written above or below the consonants.1

I. ORIGIN OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE.

The Jewish Rabbins, Jonathan the author of the Chaldee Paraphrase, Solomon Jarchi, and Aben-Ezra, have affirmed that Hebrew was the primitive language spoken in Paradise; and their opinion has been adopted by Origen, Jerome, Augustine, and some other fathers, as well as by some modern critics and philologers. Huet, however, and the majority of modern critics, are of opinion, that the language spoken by Adam perished in the confusion of tongues at Babel. But it seems highly probable, that if the original parents of mankind were placed in Western Asia, they spoke substantially the language which has for more than fifty centuries pervaded that country. Without adopting, therefore, the hypothesis just stated, which rests only on bare probabilities, we may observe, that the Hebrew is the most ancient of all the languages in the world; at least we know of none that is older: that it is not improbable that it was the general language of men at the dispersion; and, however it might have subsequently been altered and improved, that it appears to be the original of all the languages, or rather dialects, which have since arisen in the world.

Various circumstances, indeed, combine to prove that Hebrew is the original language, neither improved nor debased by foreign idioms. The words of which it is composed are very short, and admit of very little flexion, as may be seen on reference to any Hebrew grammar or lexicon. The names of persons and places are descriptive of their nature, situation, accidental circumstances, &c. The names of brutes express their nature and properties more significantly and more accurately than any other known language in the world. The names also of various ancient nations are of Hebrew origin, being derived from the sons or grandsons of Shem. Ham, and Japhet: as, the Assyrians from Ashur; the Elamites from Elam; the Aramæans from Aram; the Lydians from Lud; the Cimbrians or Cimmerians from Gomer; the Medians from Madai, the son of Japhet; the Ionians from Javan, &c. Further, the names given to the heathen deities suggest an Of all the Oriental Languages, the HEBREW bears marks brew language: thus, Japetus is derived from Japhet; Jove, additional proof of the antiquity and originality of the Heof being the most ancient: in this language the Old Testa- from JEHOVAH; Vulcan, from Tubal-Cain, who first discoment is written, with the exception of a few words and pas-vered the use of iron and brass, &c. &c. sages which are in the Chaldæan dialect, and which are of Hebrew which are to be found in very many other lanLastly, the traces specified in sect. iii. p. 31. infra. Numerous appellations guages, and which have been noticed by several learned men, have, at different times, been given to this language. In afford another argument in favour of its antiquity and priority. the Scriptures it is nowhere called Hebrew. This term, as These vestiges are particularly conspicuous in the Chaldee, it is used in John v. 2. and in several other passages in the Syriac, Arabic, Persian, Phoenician, and other languages New Testament, does not refer to the biblical Hebrew, but spoken by the people who dwelt nearest to Babylon, where to the Syro-Chaldaic dialect prevalent in Palestine in the time of Jesus Christ. In 2 Kings xviii. 26. it is called the the first division of languages took place." The knowledge of the Hebrew language was diffused very language of the Jews. In the Targums or Chaldee Para-widely by the Phoenician merchants, who had factories and phrases of the Old Testament the appellation-holy tongue-colonies on almost every coast of Europe and Asia: that it is first applied to it but the name, by which it is usually was identically the same as was spoken in Canaan, or Pho distinguished, is Hebrew, as being the language of the Henicia, is evident from its being used by the inhabitants of

brew nation.2

Concerning the origin of this name there has been considerable difference of opinion. According to some critics, it derived its name from Heber, one of the descendants of Shem (Gen. x. 21. 25. xi. 14. 16, 17.): but other learned men are of opinion that it is derived from the root ay (ABER) to pass over, whence Abraham was denominated the Hebrew (Gen. xiv. 13.), having passed over the river Euphrates to come into the land of Canaan. This last opinion appears to be best founded, from the general fact that the most ancient names of nations were appellative. "But, whatever extent of meaning was attached to the appellation Hebrew, before the time of Jacob, it appears afterwards to have been limited only to his posterity, and to be synonymous with Israelite.

The origin of the Hebrew Language must be dated farther back than the period, to which we can trace the appellation Hebrew. It is plain, from the names of persons and places in Canaan, that, wherever Abraham sojourned, he found a language in which he could easily converse, viz. the Hebrew or Phoenician language." That this was originally the language of Palestine, is evident from the names of nations

Stuart's Hebrew Grammar, pp. 1, 2. (first edition) Robinson's edition of Calinet's Dictionary abridged, pp. 605-607. Hodge's Biblical Repertory, vol. ii. p. 293.

that country from the time of Abraham to that of Joshua, who gave to places mentioned in the Old Testament, appellations which are pure Hebrew; such are, Kiriath-sepher, or the city of books, and Kiriath-sannah, or the city of learning. (Josh. xv. 15. 49.) Another proof of the identity of the two languages arises from the circumstance of the Hebrews conversing with the Canaanites, without an interpreter; as the spies sent by Joshua, with Rahab (Josh. ii.); the ambassadors sent by the Gibeonites to Joshua (Josh. ix. 3—25.), &c. But a still stronger proof of the identity of the two languages is to be found in the fragments of the Punic tongue which occur in the writings of ancient authors. That the Carthaginians (Poni) derived their name, origin, and language from the Phoenicians, is a well-known and authenticated fact; and shown from the situation of their country, as well as from that the latter sprang from the Canaanites might easily be their manners, customs, and ordinances. Not to cite the

Stuart's Heb. Gram. p. 5.

Huet, Demonstr. Evang. Prop. IV. c. 13. Calmet, Dissertation sur la
premiere Langue. Alber, Hermeneut. Vet. Test. tom. i. p. 321. Stuart's
Heb. Gram. p. 6.
Dr. Gr. Sharpe's Dissertations on the Origin of Languages, &c. p. 22
et seq.
Grotius de Veritate, lib. i. sec. 16. Walton's Prolegomena to the London
Polyglott, prol. iii. $6. (p. 76. ed. Dathii.)
Walton, Prol. iii. $7,8. (pp. 76, 77.)

testimonies of profane authors on this point, which have been accumulated by Bishop Walton, we have sufficient evidence to prove that they were considered as the same people, in the fact of the Phoenicians and Canaanites being used promiscuously to denote the inhabitants of the same country. Compare Exod. vi. 15. with Gen. xlvi. 10. and Exod. xvi. 33. with Josh. v. 12., in which passages, for the Hebrew words translated Canaanitish and land of Canaan, the Septuagint reads Phoenician and the country of Phoenicia.

century."3 From the academies at Tiberias and in Babylonia, we have received the Targums, the Talmud, the Masora (of all which an account will be found in the course of the present volume), and the written vowels and accents of the Hebrew language. The Hebrew of the Talmud and of the Rabbins has a close affinity with the later Hebrew; especially the first and earliest part of it, the Mishna.

III. ANTIQUITY OF THE HEBREW CHARACTERS. The present Hebrew Characters, or Letters, are twenty II. HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE. two in number, and of a square form: but the antiquity of The period from the age of Moses to that of David has these letters is a point that has been most severely contested been considered the golden age of the Hebrew language, by many learned men. From a passage in Eusebius's Chrowhich declined in purity from that time to the reign of Heze- nicle, and another in Jerome, it was inferred by Joseph kiah or Manasseh, having received several foreign words Scaliger, that Ezra, when he reformed the Jewish church, from the commercial and political intercourse of the Jews transcribed the ancient characters of the Hebrews into the and Israelites with the Assyrians and Babylonians. This square letters of the Chaldæans: and that this was done for period has been termed the silver age of the Hebrew lan- the use of those Jews, who, being born during the captivity, guage. In the interval between the reign of Hezekiah and knew no other alphabet than that of the people among whom the Babylonish captivity, the purity of the language was they had been educated. Consequently, the old character, neglected, and so many foreign words were introduced into which we call the Samaritan, fell into total disuse. This it, that this period has, not inaptly, been designated its iron opinion Scaliger supported by passages from both the Talage. During the seventy years' captivity, though it does muds, as well as from rabbinical writers, in which it is exnot appear that the Hebrews entirely lost their native tongue, pressly affirmed that such characters were adopted by Ezra. yet it underwent so considerable a change from their adop- But the most decisive confirmation of this point is to be tion of the vernacular languages of the countries where they found in the ancient Hebrew coins, which were struck behad resided, that afterwards, on their return from exile, they fore the captivity, and even previously to the revolt of the spoke a dialect of Chaldee mixed with Hebrew words. On ten tribes. The characters engraven on all of them are this account it was, that, when the Hebrew Scriptures were manifestly the same with the modern Samaritan, though with read, it was found necessary to interpret them to the people some trifling variations in their forms, occasioned by the in the Chaldæan language; as, when Ezra the scribe brought depredations of time. These coins, whether shekels or the book of the law of Moses before the congregation, the half shekels, have all of them, on one side, the golden Levites are said to have caused the people to understand the manna-pot (mentioned in Exod. xvi. 32, 33.), and on its law, because they read in the book, in the law of God, dis- mouth, or over the top of it, most of them have a Samaritan tinctly, AND GAVE THE SENSE, AND CAUSED THEM TO UNDER- Aleph, some an Aleph and Schin, or other letters, with this STAND THE READING. (Neh. viii. 8.) Some time after the inscription, The Shekel of Israel, in Samaritan characters. On return from the great captivity, Hebrew ceased to be spoken the opposite side is to be seen Aaron's rod with almonds, altogether though it continued to be cultivated and studied, and in the same letters this inscription, Jerusalem the holy. by the priests and Levites, as a learned language, that they Other coins are extant with somewhat different inscriptions, might be enabled to expound the law and the prophets to the but the same characters are engraven on them all. people, who, it appears from the New Testament, were well acquainted with their general contents and tenor; this lastmentioned period has been called the leaden age of the language.2 "How long the Hebrew was retained, both in writing and conversation; or in writing, after it ceased to be the language of conversation, it is impossible to determine. The coins, stamped in the time of the Maccabees, are all the oriental monuments we have, of the period that elapsed between the latest canonical writers, and the advent of Christ; and the inscriptions on these are in Hebrew. At the time of the Maccabees, then, Hebrew was probably understood, at least, as the language of books; perhaps, in some measure, also, among the better informed, as the language of conversation. But soon after this, the dominion of the Seleucida, in Syria, over the Jewish nation, uniting with the former influence of the Babylonish captivity, in promoting the Aramaan dialect, appears to have destroyed the remains of proper Hebrew, as a living language, and to have universally substituted, in its stead, the Hebræo-Aramæan, as it was spoken in the time of our Saviour. From the time when Hebrew ceased to be vernacular, down to the present day, a portion of this dialect has been preserved in the Old Testament. It has always been the subject of study among learned Jews. Before and at the time of Christ, there were flourishing Jewish academies at Jerusalem; especially under Hillel and Shammai. After Jerusalem was destroyed, schools were set up in various places, but particularly they flourished at Tiberias, until the death of R. Judah, surnamed Hakkodesh or the Holy, the author of the Mishna; about A. D. 230. Some of his pupils set up other schools in Babylonia, which became the rivals of these. The Babylonish academies flourished until near the tenth

It is worthy of remark that the above practice exists at the present time, among the Karaite Jews, at Sympheropol, in Crin Tartary; where the Tar tar translation is read together with the Hebrew Text. (See Dr. Pinker ton's Letter, in the Appendix to the Thirteenth Report of the British and Foreign Bible Society, p. 76.) A similar practice obtains among the Syrian Christians at Travancore, in the East Indies, where the Syriac is the learn ed language and the language of the church; while the Malayalim or Mal

abar is the vernacular language of the country. The Christian priests read the Scriptures from manuscript copies in the former, and expound them in the latter to the people. Owen's History of the British and Foreign Bible Society, vol. ii. p. 364.

2 Walton, Prol. iii. §15-24. (pp. 84-97.) Schleusner's Lexicon, voce, Espais. Jahn, Introd. ad. Vet. Foedus, pp. 94-96. Parkhurst (Gr. Lex. voce, E6pxis) has endeavoured to show, but unsuccessfully, that no change from Hebrew to Chaldee ever took place.

The opinion originally produced by Scaliger, and thus decisively corroborated by coins, has been adopted by Casaubon, Vossius, Grotius, Bishop Walton, Louis Cappel, Dr. Prideaux, and other eminent biblical critics and philologers, and is now generally received: it was, however, very strenuously though unsuccessfully opposed by the younger Buxtorf, who endeavoured to prove, by a variety of passages from rabbinical writers, that both the square and the Samaritan characters were anciently used; the present square character being that in which the tables of the law, and the copy deposited in the ark, were written; and the other characters being employed in the copies of the law which were made for private and common use, and in civil affairs in general; and that, after the captivity, Ezra enjoined the former to be used by the Jews on all occasions, leaving the latter to the Samaritans and apostates. Independently, however, of the strong evidence against Buxtorf's hypothesis, which is afforded by the ancient Hebrew coins, when we consider the implacable enmity that subsisted between the Jews and Samaritans, is it likely that the one copied from the other, or that the former preferred, to the beautiful letters used by their ancestors, the rude and inelegant characters of their most detested rivals? And when the vast difference between the Chaldee (or square) and the Samaritan letters, with respect to convenience and beauty, is calmly considered, it must be acknowledged that they never could have been used at the same time. After all, it is of no great moment which of these, or whether either of them, were the original characters, since it does not appear that any change of the words has arisen from the manner of writing them, because the Samaritan and Hebrew Pentateuchs almost always agree, notwithstanding the lapse of so many ages. It is most probable that the form of these characters has varied at different periods: this appears from the direct testimony of Montfaucon, and is implied in Dr. Kennicott's making the characters, in which manuscripts are written, one test of. their age. It is, however, certain that the Chaldee or square character was the common one: as in Matt. v. 8. the yod is referred to as the smallest letter in the alphabet. It is highly

[blocks in formation]

probable that it was the common character, when the Septuagint version was made; because the departures in the Hebrew text from that version, so far as they have respect to the letters, can mostly be accounted for, on the ground, that the square characters were then used, and that the final letters which vary from the medial or initial form, were then wanting.

5. The ancient Cabbalists3 draw all their mysteries from the letters; but none from the vowel points; which they could not have neglected if they had been acquainted with them. And hence it is concluded, that the points were not in existence when the Cabbalistic interpretations were made.

6. Although the Talmud contains the determinations of the Jewish doctors concerning many passages of the law, it is evident that the points were not affixed to the text when the Talmud was composed; because there are several disputes concerncontroverted if the points had then been in existence. Besides, the vowel points are never mentioned, though the fairest opportunity for noticing them offered itself, if they had really then been in use. The compilation of the Talmud was not finished until the sixth century.

IV. ANTIQUITY OF THE HEBREW VOWEL POINTS. But however interesting these inquiries may be in a philological point of view, it is of far greater importance to being the sense of passages of the law, which could not have been satisfied concerning the much litigated, and yet undecided, question respecting the antiquity of the Hebrew points; because, unless the student has determined for himself, after a mature investigation, he cannot with confidence apply to the study of this sacred language. Three opinions have been offered by learned men on this subject. By some, the origin of the Hebrew vowel points is maintained to be coeval with the Hebrew language itself: while others assert them to have been first introduced by Ezra after the Babylonish captivity, when he compiled the canon, transcribed the books into the present Chaldee characters, and restored the purity of the Hebrew text. A third hypothesis is, that they were invented, about five hundred years after Christ, by the doctors of the school of Tiberias, for the purpose of marking and establishing the genuine pronunciation, for the convenience of those who were learning the Hebrew tongue. This opinion, first announced by Rabbi Elias Levita in the beginning of the sixteenth century, has been adopted by Cappel, Calvin, Luther, Casaubon, Scaliger, Masclef, Erpenius, Houbigant, L'Advocat, Bishops Walton, Hare, and Lowth, Dr. Kennicott, Dr. Geddes, and other eminent critics, British and foreign, and is now generally received, although some few writers of respectability continue strenuously to advocate their antiquity. The Arcanum Punctationis Revelatum of Cappel was opposed by Buxtorf in a treatise De Punctorum Vocalium Antiquitate, by whom the controversy was almost exhausted. We shall briefly state the evidence on both sides.

That the vowel points are of modern date, and of human invention, the anti-punctists argue from the following considerations :

1. "The kindred Shemitish languages anciently had no written vowels. The most ancient Estrangelo and Kufish characters, that is, the ancient characters of the Syrians and Arabians, were destitute of vowels. The Palmyrene inscriptions, and nearly all the Phoenician ones, are destitute of them. Some of the Maltese inscriptions, however, and a few of the Phoenician have marks, which probably were intended as vowels. The Koran was confessedly destitute of them, at first. The punctuation of it occasioned great dispute among Mohammedans. In some of the older Syriac writings is found a single point, which, by being placed in different positions in regard to words, served as a diacritical sign. The present vowel system of the Syrians was introduced so late as the time of Theophilus and Jacob of Edessa. (Cent. viii.) The Arabic vowels were adopted soon after the Koran was written; but their other diacritical marks did not come into use, until they were introduced by Ibn Mokla (about ▲. D. 900), together with the Nishi character, now in common use."2

2. The Samaritan letters, which (we have already seen) were the same with the Hebrew characters before the captivity, have no points; nor are there any vestiges whatever of vowel points to be traced either in the shekels struck by the kings of Israel, or in the Samaritan Pentateuch. The words have always been read by the aid of the four letters Aleph, He, Vau, and Jod, which are called matres lectionis, or mothers of reading.

3. The copies of the Scriptures used in the Jewish synagogues to the present time, and which are accounted particularly sacred, are constantly written without points, or any distinctions of verses whatever: a practice that could never have been introduced, nor would it have been so religiously followed, if vowel points had been coeval with the language, or of divine authority. To this fact we may add, that in many of the oldest and best manuscripts, collated and examined by Dr. Kennicott, either there are no points at all, or they are evidently a late addition; and that all the ancient various readings, marked by the Jews, regard only the letters: not one of them relates to the vowel points, which could not have happened if these had been in use. 4. Rabbi Elias Levita ascribes the invention of vowel points to the doctors of Tiberias, and has confirmed the fact by the authority of the most learned rabbins,

[blocks in formation]

Khetibh (which were collected a short time before the comple7. The ancient various readings, called Keri and Ketib, on tion of the Talmud), relate entirely to consonants and not to vowel points; yet, if these had existed in manuscript at the time the Keri and Khetib were collected, it is obvious that some reference would directly or indirectly have been made to them. The silence, therefore, of the collectors of these various readings is a clear proof of the non-existence of vowel points in their time. 8. The ancient versions,-for instance, the Chaldee paraphrases of Jonathan and Onkelos, and the Greek versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, but especially the Septuagint version,-all read the text, in many passages, in senses different from that which the points determine them to mean. Whence it is evident, that if the points had then been known, pointed manuscripts would have been followed as the most correct; but as the authors of those versions did not use them, it is a plain proof that the points were not then in being.

9. The ancient Jewish writers themselves are totally silent concerning the vowel points, which surely would not have been the case if they had been acquainted with them. Much stress indeed has been laid upon the books of Zohar and Bahir, but these have been proved not to have been known for a thousand years after the birth of Christ. Even Buxtorf himself admits, that the book Zohar could not have been written till after the tenth century; and the rabbis Gedaliah and Zachet confess that it was not mentioned before the year 1290, and that it presents internal evidence that it is of a much later date than is pretended. It is no uncommon practice of the Jews to publish books of recent date under the names of old writers, in order to render their authority respectable, and even to alter and interpolate ancient writers in order to subserve their own views.

10. Equally silent are the ancient fathers of the Christian church, Origen and Jerome. In some fragments still extant, of Origen's vast biblical work, entitled the Hexapla (of which some account is given in a subsequent page), we have a specimen of the manner in which Hebrew was pronounced in the third century; and which, it appears, was widely different from that which results from adopting the Masoretic reading. Jerome also, in various parts of his works, where he notices the different pronunciations of Hebrew words, treats only of the letters, and nowhere mentions the points, which he surely would have done, had they been found in the copies consulted by him.

11. The letters 8, 1, 1, (Aleph, He, Vau, and Yod), upon the plan of the Masorites, are termed quiescent, because, according to them, they have no sound. At other times, these same letters indicate a variety of sounds, as the fancy of these critics has been pleased to distinguish them by points. This single circumstance exhibits the whole doctrine of points as the baseless fabric of a vision. To suppress altogether, or to render insignificant, a radical letter of any word, in order to supply its place by an arbitrary dot or a fictitious mark, is an invention fraught with the grossest absurdity."

a The Cabbalists were a set of rabbinical doctors among the Jews, who derived their name from their studying the Cabbala, a mysterious kind of science, comprising mystical interpretations of Scripture, and metaphysi Jewish writings, and are said to have been handed down by a secret tradical speculations concerning the Deity and other beings, which are found in tion from the earliest ages. By considering the numeral powers of the let ters of the sacred text, and changing and transposing them in various ways, according to the rules of their art, the Cabbalists extracted senses from the sacred oracles, very different from those which the expressions seemed naturally to import, or which were even intended by their inspired authors. Some learned men have imagined, that the Cabbalists arose soon after the time of Ezra; but the truth is, that no Cabbalistic writings are extant but what are posterior to the destruction of the second temple. For an enter taining account of the Cabbala, and of the Cabbalistical philosophy, see Mr. Allen's Modern Judaism, pp. 65-94., or Dr. Enfield's History of Philosophy, vol. ii. pp. 199-221.

For an account of the Talmud, see part ii. book i. chap. ii. sect. i. § 6. infra. Wilson's Elements of Hebrew Grammar, p. 48.

« ForrigeFortsæt »