the Meffiah, are explained in thefe two Targums, as they are by us Chriftians; yet they are in fo great Efteem among the Jews, that they hold them to be of the fame Authority with the original facred Text. It has been already fhewn, that when the Chaldee became the vulgar Tongue of the Jews, the Weekly Leffons, out of the Law and the Prophets, in their Synagogues, having been first read in Hebrew, were, by an Interpreter, ftanding by the Reader, rendered into Chaldee. This continued for fome Time: Brit after, when Targums were made, the Interpretation was read out of them, without any more employing Interpreters for this Purpose: And the Readers did first read a Verfè cut of the Hebrew Text, and then the fame again out of the Chaldee Targum; and fo went on from Verie to Verfe, till they had read out the whole Leffon. And this Ufe of them was retained in fome of their Synagogues, even down to late Times, and in Places where the Chaldee was as little understood as the Hebrew. For Elias Levita, who lived about 200 Years fince, tells us, that they were thus ufed in his Time in Germany, and elsewhere. And agreeable to this Purpose, though only for private Ufe, they had fome of their Bibles written out in Hebrew and Chaldee together; that is, each Verfe firft in Hebrew, and then in Chaldee; and thus from Verfe to Verfe in the fame Manner through the whole Volume. In thefe Bibles, the Targum of Onkelos was the Chaldee Version for the Law; and that of Jonathan, for the Prophets; and for the Hagiographa, the other Targums that were written on them. One of thefe Bibles, thus written, Buxtorf tells us, he had feen at Straßburg: And Bifhop Walton acquaints us, that he had the Perufal of two others of the fame Sort, one in the publick Library of the Church of Westminster, and the other in the private Study of Mr. Thomas Gataker. The other Targums are all of a much later Date than those of Onkelos and Jonathan, and of far lefs Authority: However, Bishop Walton has put the most of them into his Polyglot.

Whether the Tergums of Oakelos and Jonathan were read alternately with the Hebrew Text, one Verfe in the Hebrew, and then the fame in the Chaldee, we cannot fay: But this feems certain, if not these particular Targums, yet fome other then were written for the Inftruction of the People; and were among them in private as well as in publick for this Ufe; and that they had fuch, not only on the Law and the Prophets, but also on all the other Hebrew Scriptures. For it was not the Ufage among the Jews to lock up the Holy Scriptures, or any Part of them, from the People in a Language unknown to them: For when difperfed among the Greeks, they had them in Greek; and when the Chaldee was the vulgar Language, they had them in Chaldee. And when Chrift was called out to read the fecond Lefion in the Synagogue of Nazareth, of which he was a Member, he feems to have read it out of a Targum: For the Words then read by him out of Ifaiah Ixi. 1. as recited by St. Luke iv. 18. do not exactly agree either with the Hebrew, or the LXX, in that Place; and therefore it feems most likely it fhould be read out of fome Targum ufed in that Synagogue. And when he cried out upon the Crofs in the Words of the Pfalmift, Pfal. xxii. 1. Eli, Eli luma Sabahani, he quoted them, Mat. xxvii. 46. not out of

the

the Hebrea, but the Chaldee Paraphrafe; for in the Hebrew it is, Eli, Eli lama Azabtani, the Word Sabathani is no where to be found but in the Chaldee Tongue.

The Language moft commonly ufed among the Chriftians of the Eaft, next to the Greek, is the Syriac. It is properly a Dialect of the ancient Chaldee, which the Learned divide into three different Dialects: 1. Into that of Babylon, which is the Chaldean Language in its Purity. 2. Into that of Jerufalem, which is what was used by the Jews after their Return from their Captivity at Babylon. 3. Into that of Antiochia, which was used by the Chriftians of Comagena, and fome other Provinces bordering upon Syria, when this was the native Language of the Country. This laft is that which is now more particularly called the Syriac Language. And into this Language was both the Old and New Teftament tranflated; if not before the Death of St. John the Apostle, yet certainly very foon after. The Tranflator was a Chriftian, well killed in the Hebrew, Greek, and Syriac Languages. And the Learned, who have examined this Verfion, and compared it with the Original, both of the Old and New Teftament, tell us, That of all the ancient Verfions, which are now confulted by Chriftians for the better underftanding the Holy Scriptures, as well of the New Teftament as of the Old, none can better ferve this End, than this old Syriac Verfion, when carefully confulted, and well understood. And to this Purpofe, the very Nature of the Language affifts much; for it having been the mother Tongue of those who wrote the New Teftament, and a Dialect of that in which the Old was firit given to us, many Things of both are more happily expreffed in this Verfion than can well be done in any other Language.

This Syriac Verfion of the whole facred Scripture is still used by the Maronites, a Number of Chriftians dwelling about Mount Libanus, called fo from Maron, the Head of a large Monaftery in that Place; where alfo the Syriac is in fome Villages the vulgar Tongue. They have a Patriarch, whofe Seat is for the moft Part in Mount Libanus, and fometimes he refides at Tripoli. Their Liturgy is alfo in this Language. It is used alfo by the Neftorians, fo called from Neftorius the Heretick, condemned in the Council of Ephefus; but whofe Herefy (Bishop Walton fays) they seem now to have forfaken. Their Liturgy is alfo in this Language. Thefe Chriftians are spread (though mixed with Mahometans, to whom they are fubject) through the Regions of Babylon, Affyria, Mefopotamia, Parthia, Media, in all which Places they are numerous, they extend northward to Cathia, and fouthward to India; their Patriarch lives at Muzal, on the Tigris. The Jacobites alfo, fo called from James, a great Zealot for the Eutychian Herefy, condemned. in the Council of Chalcedon, (though Bishop Walton fays, they have now relinquished that Herefy) ufe this Syriac Tranflation of the Scriptures, and have their Liturgy alfo in the fame Language. They are difperfed in Syria, Cyprus, Mefopotamia, and Babylon. Their Patriarch calls himfelf Patriarch of Antioch, but refides at Caramit, an old Metropolis of Mefopotamia. There is another Syriac Verfion of the Qld Teftament, made from the Greek of Origen's Hexapla; but that is not much efteemed.

The Arabic Language, which, until about A. D. 600, was little known beyond the Confines of Arabia, was foon after, by the Victories of the Saracens, fpread over a great Part both of the East and Weft, and is to this Day much in Ufe among the greatest Part of the Eafern Nations. This Language is very ancient, exceeding copious, and of great Ufe for the well understanding the Hebrew Text, they having many Roots in common betwixt them, from whence it comes to pafs, that Recourfe must often be had to the Arabic, for the better explaining fuch Hebrew Words as are of a doubtful Signification. There are likewife many ufeful Obfervations, and fome Ceremonies mentioned in the Bible, which may be beft explained by Arabic Books.

We know not of any more ancient Tranflation of the Bible into the Arabic Language than one, that was made by Saadias Gaon, a Jew of Babylon, about A. D. 900. But there have been feveral Tranflations made fince into that Language, both by Jews and Chriftians. The Eaftern Chriftians have (I think) all of them fome Arabic Translation of the Scriptures, both of the Old and New Teftament, made for the Ufe of their People, fince that became the vulgar Language amongst them. Thefe are moftly made from the Septuagint, or from the Syriac, and are neither very ancient, or of any confiderable Authority. The beft Ufe to be made of them is, that they may ferve to illuftrate fome difficult Paffages. Among the Arabic Tranflations, made by Christians, there is one printed in the Polyglots of Paris and London. Both the Author, and the Time when it was writ, are uncertain.

There are alfo in the London Polyglot, published by Bishop Walton, and (I think) in that of Paris, alfo publifhed by Mr. De Jay, an Ethiopic and a Perfic Verfion of the Scriptures. But as thefe Tranflations. are not of all the Books of Holy Scripture, but of fome only, and likewife of no great Antiquity, I fhall fay nothing more of them.

And now you may reafonably atk what Occafion for thefe Polyglots? For after all this Variety of Translations, all Chriftians, at leaft in thefe Parts, whether they be Papifts or Proteflants, are agreed in that Rule which you quoted from the Canon-Law, (Diftinct. 9.) Ut veterum librorum Fides de Hebræis voluminibus exominanda eft, ita novorum veritas Græci fermonis normam defiderat. And therefore when Origen, Hefychius and Lucian propofed to publifh new Editions of the LXX, which had been corrupted by Tranfcribers, they corrected it by the Hebrew Original. And notwithstanding the Council of Trent declared the Latin Vulgate to be authentick; yet two Popes, one after the other, got it corrected by the Hebrew for the Old Testament, and by the Greek for the New. And all Proteftants have tranflated the Scriptures into their feveral Languages from the Hebrew and Greek in like Manner, without Regard to thofe old Tranflations. Why then, if upon any Occafion we defire to be fully fatisfied of the Faithfulnefs of our prefent Englif Tranilation, fhould we trouble ourfelves further than to confult the Hebrew for the Old Teftament, and the Greek for the New?

I anfwer, that although the Original is always to be preferred to the best and most exact Tranflation, and therefore, if we had the original Hebrew Text, as written by the infpired Penmen, the Matter would 1.ct bear a Difpute; yet, as this authentick Original has been loft for

many

many Ages, and there are only Copies remaining in this original Language, ali which have fuffered by the Overfights, Ignorance, or Boldnefs of Tranfcribers, an old Tranflation may be of great Ufe to fettle the true Reading, by informing us how the Text itood in that old Copy, from whence that Tranflation was made. For where the LXX, and other ancient Tranflations, differ from the prefent Hebrew Copies, (except there be fome plain Reafon to the contrary) it is Proof that it was fo written in the Copy from whence that Tranflation was made, and ought to be received as a various Reading: And where there is a various Reading, the true Reading will be belt difcovered, by confidering which is moft agreeable to the Context, and to the other Parts of Holy Scripture.

There is another Ufe alfo to be made of thefe ancient Verfions. The Hebrew is not only a dead Language, and has ceafed to be the vulgar Language of any Nation for above 2000 Years; but is also a Language in which we have only one Book.remaining, that is the Scriptures of the Old Teftament. And in this Book there are fome Words which occur but once or twice in the whole Book; which makes it very difficult, not to fay impoffible, to know the true Meaning of them without the Afliftance of fome Tranflation, for the Context will not always help us. Whereas the Greek and Latin, though dead Languages alfo, are preferved in a great Number of Books; fo that if we are at a Lofs, to know the Meaning of a Word in one Book, the Construction of it in others will inform us. Therefore the old Tranflations, made before the Hebrew had been fo long out of vulgar Ufe, may greatly help us. And we may reafonably believe, that the Tranflators of the LXX were better fkilled in the Hebrew Tongue than any now can pretend to be, and fo were Onkelas and Jonathan, who made the Targums, and those who made the old Syria Verfion. The Arabic Tranflations, though modern, compared with the former, yet it is still a living Language, and has fome of thefe Hebrew Words in it, which but once or twice occur, and whofe Meaning the Jews confefs they received from the Arabians.

There is yet another Reafon for which the LXX deferves our Regard; and that is, that it was, together with the Tranflations made from it, the only Scripture of the Old Teftament, (except in fome Parts of Syria) which the primitive Chriftians had for their Inftruction; and even the Apoftles themselves quoted it, and that often in Places where it differed from the prefent Hebrew, and confequently from our English Tranflation. To give an Inftance or two, Rom. x. 18. St. Paul quoting the Words of Pfal. xix. 4. fays, Their Sound went into all the Earth. But in the prefent Hebrew, and our Bible Tranflation made from it, it is, Their Line is gone out through all the Earth. And Rom, XV. 12. Again Efaias faith, There fhall be a Root of Fisse, and he that shall rife to reign over the Gentiles, in him fhall the Gentiles truft. So it is in the LXX, Ifai. xi. 10. But in the Hebrew, and from thence in our English Bibles it is, There fhall be a Root of Jeffe, which shall stand for an Enfign of the People, and to it fall the Gentiles feek. There may many fuch Inftances be given, which you may cafily find, if, when you meet with a Paffage in the New Teftament quoted from the Old, you

D 3

will

compare

compare it with the LXX, and with your English Bible. There are alfo feveral Paffages of the Old Teftament quoted in the New, where the Sense only is given, but the Words differ both from the Hebrew and the LXX.

The Latin Vulgate, in which the Pfalms and Hymns, translated from the LXX at the Beginning of Chriftianity, are still continued, may in thofe Places be of great Ufe to afcertain the true Reading of the LXX in any doubtful Paffage: And the other Part being of St. Jerom's Tranf lation from the Hebrew, may discover fome various Reading, wherein his Copy, from which he tranflated, differed from the prefent Hebrew Copies. And the fame may be faid of the Syriac, and other ancient Versions, made immediately from the Hebrew Original,

But here it may be faid, if the LXX, and other ancient Versions, are fo different from the Hebrew; and this be a Proof that the Hebrew Copies from which thofe Tranflations were made, was different from the Hebrew Copies we now have; and there is no Original or Autographum of the facred Penman by which thefe Copies may be corrected, nor has been fince the Destruction of the Temple by the Romans; and that we must depend upon the Judgment and Care of the Maforites, as the only Evidence we have of the Authentickness of the present Hebrew Text of the Old Teftament; and that as they lived not till above 400 Years after the original Copy of thofe Scriptures was destroyed, how fhall we be fure that we have the true Scriptures which were written by Mofes and the Prophets? Befides, as to the Books of Mofes, there is the Samaritan Pentateuch preferved in the Hebrew Language, only written in a different Character, which in many Places differs from the Pentateuch we have received from the Ferus; and that all thefe, whether Originals or Tranflations, have fuffered much by Copiers, how fhall we be affured that we have the true genuine Scriptures of the Old Teftament, or indeed of the New? For that has fuffered alfo by the Overfight, Ignorance, or Boldness of Tranfcribers.

I answer, the Cafe is the fame as to all the Books that have been written or copied from Time to Time by feveral Hands. The fame may be faid as to Ariftotle, Plato, Demofthenes, Virgil, Horace, &c. there are various Readings which have been found in MSS. of those Books, even as to whole Sentences, as well as fingle Words: And if we had Tranflations of thefe Books near as old as the Originals, no Question but various Readings might be gathered from them alfo. Shall we therefore fay, we have not the Works of thofe Authors, at least not their true genuine Works? Or that fpurious Works are put upon us instead of those which they wrote? And if there be net fo many various Readings to be found in thefe Authors as have been found in the Bible, the Reafon is, because there have never been fo many Copies of those Books written as there have been of the Bible. Therefore, though we cannot fay that either the Hebrew or the Samaritan, the Chaldee of LXX, or the Latin Vulgate or the Syriac, or any other ancient Tranflation, are without a faulty Reading; yet there is no confiderable Fault as to Faith, Doctrine or Manners, in any of them. Most of the Differences between one Copy and another, or between the Original and the Verfions, confist only in the different Expreffions, which