F. Simon Reponce anx cent. fur la (7.) P. Fagius, Vatablus, Malvenda & Menoch, after Abenezra. See Pf. 104. 11. 20. 25. Ezekiel 1. 5. & 7. 13. (8.) The Hebrew word Aiit fignifies a Bird, or Beast of Prey, and Tepoa, a thing of divers Colours. See Fuller Mifcel. lib. 6. cap. 29. Beref chit Rabba cap. 7. Epift. Heb. M.S. Holmie de Animalibus, Elias Enthisbi. (9.) Levit. 4.5. Deut. 14. 7. Pf. 104. 18. Prov. 30. 26. (10.) See Pineda Bockart. Hieroz. Tr. 2. lib. 5. cap. 12. Horneus Bartholinus, a Caftro Ribera, G. a Lapide Drufius, F. Simon, &c. CHAP. IV. CHAP. IV. That the Ambiguous Words of the Ori ginal, have often given occafion to Tranflators to be deceived themselves and to deceive others. IT we T cannot be denied, but that when we meet in an Author with equivocal Terms, or which is the fame, with terms that fignifie feveral things; must take them in the fenfe which comes nearest to the defign of the Subject that is treated of. If this Rule had been obferved in Tranflating the Scriptures, instead of confulting the Systems of every Party, Tranflators had certainly fucceeded much better than they have done. We might have obferved, in the precoding Chapters, a confiderable number of Examples whererein the Verfions are not exact enough, with respect to this Rule; and there are a great many more which have not been mentioned; fome of of the chiefeft of which fhall make the Subject of this Chapter. I. The Verfions manifeftly make St. Paul Lie, when they make him fay, in the presence of the Jewish Council, speaking of the High Prieft Ananias, I wift not Brethren that he was the High Priest, Acts 23. 5. For it is almost impoffible but that Paul must have known the greateft part of the Members of that Council, and especially the High Prieft, who made a particular Figure in that Affembly, whose Garments alone were enough to diftinguish him from others. 'Tis true,that for fome years before, Paul had not been at Jerufalem, and that Ananias was exalted to that Dignity in his abfence; befides that, there was then fuch a confufion in the Jewish Government, that fometimes three different High Priests were chofen in one year. But fince he had lived at Jerufalem a great many years before, and in a Capacity of becoming himself a Member of the Council, having been brought up at the Foot of Gamaliel, Prefident of the Council, and being already an Officer of it, fince he had a Commiffion to Perfecute the Christians at Damafcus; it is not to be prefumed, that he had so loft the Idea of of those Perfons that made up that Coun cil, that he could not diftinguish them, when he returned to that City. It is likewise observed in the following verfe, that Paul perceived that one part of the Council were Sadduces, and the other Pharifees; but how could he have diftinguished those Perfons, unless he had had a particular knowledge of them? and how could he have taken the High Priest to witress, Acts 22. 5. that he had perfecuted the Chriftians unto death, if he had not known him? But let us suppose that he did not know that Ananias was High Priest, or Prefident of the Council, yet he could not, at least, be ignorant, that he was one of the Senators or Princes of the People; fo that he had still equally violated the Law which he adduces for his Juftification, which strictly prohibited any Perfon to curfe the Ruler of his People: Besides,it can be no very advan tageous opinion of the Apostle,that he pronounced those terrible words against Ananias, without knowing him,God fhall smite thee thou whited wall; and to think that he was fo transported with Anger, that he did not know who he was against whom he denounced this Prediction, nor what was his Character. Is it not much more natural to acknowledge that Ff. the : he spoke wifely, and by the Authority and Direction of the Holy Ghoft, as became an Apostle, than to imagine that he retracted and excufed his pretended Rafhnefs, by his want of knowledge? However it be, if this Ananias was the (1) High Priest of the fame name, whom the Talmud affirms to have been killed with the Son of Gamaliel, and R. Ishmael, at the time of the Deftruction of Jerufalem, the Apofties Prediction wanted neither Apology nor Retractation. (2) (3.) Interpreters alledge, that the Apostles Declaration of his Ignorance, in respect to the Character of Ananias, was not a formal Retractation, but an Irony. But how can we imagine, that the Apostle's Gravity, and the Circumftance in which he was, could fuffer him to ridicule his Judges, at the very time when he acknowledged, that God had commanded to Refpect them. Thefe Confiderations have obliged feveral Learned Expofitors to have recourfe to another Signification of the Term of the Original that the Apostle makes use of, which feems much better to exprefs his Defign. They obferve that this Term does oftentimes fignifie to acknowledge; fo that St. Paul is fo far from |