IV. It's true there are fome Readers and Writers too, who think nothing well faid that's easily understood, and to whom things appear great and admirable, only proportionably to their Obscuriy and confufion; as it happens commonly to every thing that's feen in Darkness and Night, which feems to be more great and confiderable than indeed it is. But fince the defign of Speech is to express the fentiments of our mind, it must be highly injurious to the Sacred Writers, especially thofe of the New Testament, who have unfolded the Mysteries and Difficulties of the Law and Prophets, to imagine that they have affected an Obfcure and Dark way of Speaking; They who were the Light of the World, and were exprefly fent by God, to declare his Will fully and clearly to the Sons of Men. Whoever therefore is more in love with an Obfcure and Barbarous Verfion, than with one that plainly renders the meaning of the Sacred Oracles, muft have as falfe and illHadrian. contriv'd a Judgment, as that Emperor, who admired the Obfcurities of Antimachus, and prefer'd Cato to Cicero, Cecilius to Saluft and Ennius to Virgil.

Elian in

Anno

Annotations on Chap. I.

Juftin Mart. Q. 10. ad Orthod. The (1) doret. ad Pfalm, 110. 12. Hieronim, Ep. 137. do render Hallelujah praife God. And the Jews when they fpeak of Singing Hallelujah understand by it the 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, and 118 Pfalms. Vid, Talmud. Tract. Pefack f. 117, 18. Maimon: Abarbanel.

The Etymology which Kimky, Poma- (2) rius and Aquinas have given this word, is uncertain, and contrary to the Rules of Grammar; making it a compound of Aaz, a Goat, and Azel, put back; becaufe the one is of the Feminine Gender, and the other of the Mafculine. But 'tis certain that the Verb Azal fignifies to put back or to remove, and that 'tis ufual with the Hebrews to double the first Syllable of their Nouns to denote the Superlative. The learned Bochart is of opinion, that the word Hazazel, is the fame with the Arabick word Azazil, which fignifies feparated or removed; And others in fine think that the Goat was fo called, from a Mountain of that name near Sinai, whither it was to be fent.

A$

( 3 ) 3. As the Septuagint, Symmachus, Aquila, and the Vulgar Latine.

(1)

CHA P. II.

That the threatnings of Mofes and St.
John, make nothing for a literal
Verfion. I

T

Hofe who ftand up passionately for a Tranflation, which they call purely literal, i. e. which renders the Original Text Verbatim, ground their opinion on the words of Mofes and St. John mention'd in the preceeding Chapter: But at once reading we may plainly fee that, at moft, they are only to be understood of the Copies of the Law and Revela tion, that might be tranfcrib'd in their Original Languages, in which indeed no change or alteration could be made without the guilt of Forgery; which is look't upon as Crime in Acts of the leaft importance, and confequently must be Hainous and Sacrilegious with respect to the Sacred Writings. But certainly thofe

יג

thofe who only reduce the expreffions of the Original, to ways of Speaking that are common and intelligible in the Languages into which they Tranflate them, can't, with the leaft Shadow of Reafon, be accus'd of this; otherwife we must never be allow'd to make an Author fpeak in any other Language than that in which he firft writ.

The LXX. Irenæus, Eufebius, St. Ferom, Rufinus, Valence of Antioch and Juftinian, have conjur'd those that should copy their Writings, to make no alteration in them; and yet I fuppofe that those who are for sticking fo close to the Letter don't imagine, that thofe Writers, fo famous for Learning and Judgment, were guilty of fuch fillinefs as to defire, that a Tranflator fhould use the fame conftruction and turn in his Language which they did in theirs; and truly had this been their meaning no man of Senfe could much value or regard it.

I. But left fome lovers of Religion should still be fo fcrupulous as to think, that those words of Mofes and St. John are not only to be understood of the Copies, but likewise of the Translations of thofe Books, They are intreated to take notice, thar their Scruple is occafi

oned

oned by the too literal Tranflation of thofe places of Scripture, founded on fo me foolish Rabbinical Fancies, quite oppofite to the defign and meaning of the Sacred Writers. Those who are ac quainted with the Stile of the Original of the Old Teftament, which the New has imitated in a great many places, and particularly in this, know, that to add to the Commandments of God, or to take al ny thing from them, fignifies to Violate them, by doing fomething they Forbid, or omitting something they Command to be done, as Fagius and Grotius have obferv'd. This appears plainly from the words that immediately follow this ProDeut. 4. 2. hibition of Moses; Thou shalt not add un-to the Word which I command you, neither fhalt thou diminish from it; and then he fubjoyns, That ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God; And yet more plainly and fully in annother place, What things foever I command you, obferve to do it, Thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it.

12. 32.

R. Levi.

keh Aboth.

The Jews themselves, who are but too Cozri Pir much Wedded to the Letter of the Scripture, do obferve, that this Prohibition is only to be understood of private perfons, and not at all of those whom God

had