« PreviousContinue »
madee from en Frandad, into a the Free me
Jesus. This was the Design of the Translations of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion (of whom I shall have Occasion to speak again) as St. Ferom, who saw their Translations, informs us, qui multa Mysteria Salvatoris fubdola Interpretationt celarent. Nothing therefore is more certain than that this second Version, and the two other that followed it, which were made by Judaizing Hereticks, as St. Jerom calls them, were made out of Hatred to Christianity. This also appears in the next Place from the Jews changing the Feast, which they had kept in Memory of the Translation of the LXX unto the Time that Chriftianity began to be received, into a Feast, on Account that such a Translation had been made. For Philo the Jew, who lived in the Time of Caligula the Roman Emperor, when the Apostles were going about and publishing the Gospel in all Parts, tells us, in his Life of Moses, that to that Time they yearly kept a Feast in the Isle of Pharus, in Memory of the Scriptures having been there translated into Greek by the seventy-two Inter, preters. But after Philo's Days, the Jews turned that Feast into a Faft, jamenting that such a Translation had been made. And Dean Pria deaux, though no great Friend to the LXX, tells us, that “ As this 6 Version grew into Use among the Christians, it grew out of Credit « with the Jews. For they being pinched in many Particulars urged « against them by the Christians out of this Version, for the evading " thereof, they were for making a new one, that might better serve 66 their Purpose.”
But that which justly depreciated the Septuagint, and made it of less Authority even among the Christians as well as the Jews and Judaizing Hereticks, proceeded not from any Unfaithfulness or Ignorance in the first Translators (as some pretend) but from the Ignorance, Boldness, and Carelesness of Transcribers. An ignorant Transcriber, copying from a Book in which many marginal Notes have been written, might think they belonged to the Text, and accordingly bring them into it, A bold Transcriber, meeting with a Passage which he thought did not express the Sense he took it in, might alter the Words in order, as he Supposed, to make it plainer : And a carelefs Transcriber might heedJelly write one Word for another, and also leave out, not only Words, but whole Sentences. And as Christianity spread, 'Multitudes of Copies were written for the Use of the Numbers that were daily converted ; and as in the Times of Persecution, the Heathens destroyed all the Copies they could get, and thereupon new Transcripts were made; so many Transcripts made, sometimes by ignorant, bold and careless Copiers, caused the LXX to become so faulty, that the Christians judged it needed Correction.
Hereupon Origen, in the former Part of the third Century, put out a new Edition of the LXX, made with great Labour and Accuracy: Yet not fingly by itself, but joined with other Greek Translations. For, as observed before, Aquila, an Apoftate Christian, and afterwards a Jewish Proselyte, and, not long after him, Symmachus, a Samaritan by Birth (who first turned Jew, then Christian, then Ebionite, or Judaiza ing Chiflian), and about the same Time Theodotion (who for some Time had been an heretical Christian and afterwards became a Jew), all these made Translations of the Old Testament out of the Hebrew into
Greek. Origen therefore made a Tetrapla of these four Versions, which he placed one against the other in four different Columns. To these he added two Columns more, containing the Hebrew Text twice written, one Column in Hebrew and the other in Greek Letters. This containing six Columns, Epiphanius calls it Hexapla. Afterwards he put out another Edition of two Columns more, adding thereto two other Greek Versions ; the one found at Nicopolis, a City near Artium in Epirus, and the other at Jericho in Judea. These were called the fifth and sixth Versions, which, being added to the other, made an OEtapla in the Columns; and a seventh Translation of the Psalms being also added, made it there an Enneapla. But as the two Editions made by Origen generally bore the Names only of the Tetrapla and Hexapla, Dr. Grabe judges they were so called, not from the Number of the Columns, but of the Versions, which were fix, the seventh containing the Psalms only. How the whole was disposed in this Edition of Origen will be beft understood by the following Scheme.
The Hebrew Text The Hebrew Text The Greek Version
in Hebrew Let-i in Greek Letters. of Aquila.
The Greek Version | The Greek Version 1 The Greek Version
Fifth Greek | The Sixth Greek | The Seventh Greek
Origen himself tells us in his Comment on St. Matthew (Tom. I. Oper. Græco-Lat. p. 381.) “ That his purpose was to correct the « Differences in the several Copies of the Old Testament; using the “ other Translations for a Rule whereby to forin his Judgment, pre"s serving what he found agreeable to them. And some Pallages which " he did not find in the Hebrew Text, he noted with an Obelisk, not “ daring wholly to omit them : And some he marked with an Asterisk, 6 becaule he found them not in the LXX, but were placed there by « himself, being taken from the other Versions according to the Hé“ brew Text. And he that will, may admit of them ; but if any think " pot fit to receive them, he may do as he pleases."
The Obelisks which he speaks of were such a Mark as this in, either a strait line, or a little bending at each End: The Asterisk was a Cross made thus. X., with four Points. The Obelisk noted such Words or Sentences as were in the LXX, but not in the Hebrew: The Asterisk noted such as were in the Hebrew, but not in the LXX, at least not
in any of the Copies Origen inade use of. And that it might be known how much was added by Origen from one of the other Versions, agree. ble to the Hebrew, or what was in the LXX which was not in the Hebrew, at the End of the Word or Sentence, to which the Obelisk or Asterisk was prefixed, he placed this Mark V.
St. Jerom, in his Epistle to Fretela and Junia, says, that the Addi. cions which Origen made to the LXX, and marked with an Asterisk, were taken from the Translation of Theodotion. And in his Prologue to the Prophecy of Daniel, he says, Danielem prophetam juxta Septuaginta interpretes Domini Salvatoris Ecclefiæ non legunt; utentes Theodotionis editione : Et hoc cur acciderit nefcio. Which looks as if that Book had been so corrupted by Transcribers, that Origen knew not how to correct it, and therefore placed the Translation of Theodotion in the Room of it, that being the Version he seems to have best approved,
Though Origen's Tetrapla and Hexapla was of great Use to those who were disposed diligently to study and understand the Scriptures, yet neither the Hebrew Text, or more than one of all these Versions, could be read in the Church; and as the Version of the LXX was what had been read in the Church froin the Beginning, so also it continued to be read in all the Greek Churches. For which Reason, after the Publi. cation of Origen's Hexapla, the Version of the LXX, as then corrected, was transcribed by itself (with the Asterisks and Obelisks) for the publick Use of the Churches. And when that also became faulty by frequent Transcripts, about the Year 300 Pamphilus and Eusebius published a very correct Edition of the LXX, according to Origen's Hexapla. But the whole Greek Church did not seem pleased with what Origen had done ; for although all were sensible, that by the Careles. ness or Audaciousness of Transcribers the LXX was become very faulty, yet it is certain they did not receive Origen's Amendments. For Helychius, an Egyptian Bishop, and Lucian, a Presbyter and Martyr of Äntioch, did each of them undertake to make a new and correct Edition of the LXX, about the same Time that Pamphilus and Eufebius published their Edition of that which had been corrected by Origen ; and the Eastern Part of the Roman Empire, where Greek was vulgarly fpoken, as Latin was in the Western, was divided between these three Editions. For St. Jerom, in his Epiftle to Cbromatiu, prefixed to his 'Translation of the Books of Chronicles, says, Alexandria & Egyptus in Septuaginta fuis Hesychium laudat Ausborem, Conftantinopolis usque Antiochiam Luciani Martyris exemplaria probar. Mediæ inter has Provincie Palestinos codices legunt; quas ab Origine elaboratos Eusebius & Pamphilus evulgaverunt. So that at least two-third Parts of the Eastern Church would not receive Origen's Edition as worthy to be read in their publick Affemblics : But one preferred that of Hesychius, and the other that of Lucian before it. However Origen's Edition was certainly the best, on Account of the Asterisks and Obelisks: Whereby the Reader might know and distinguish how and where the Translation of the Septuagint differed from the Hebrew Copy, which he and the other TranfJators made use of : Whereas the Corrections made by Hesychius and Luiian being also made by a Comparison of the LXX with the thea Hebrew Copies, without those Distinctions, the Reader could not
But one powever Origem links: Wherebon of the
distinguish the pure LXX from the Alterations inade by them. What he added from the Hebrew Copy, he marked with an Asterisk, and what was not in the Hebrew Copy, he made Use of, he would not leave out, only marked it with an Obelisk, as not knowing but it might be in that Copy of the Hebrew from whence that Translation was made. To give an Instance, Exod. xii. 40. our English Bible, tranlated from the present Hebrew Copies, has thus given the Text, Now the fojourning of the Children of Israel who dwelt in Egypt was four hundred and thirty Pears. But the LXX has it, 'H S podpornois tūv vo Wy locaina y pazúrengan to Aiguilu (rad év gym Xarac'y aútoà xai oi aalézes aútav črn Tetpaxósis TęcxOsta. Now those Words I have put in a Parenthesis are in the LXX, but not in the present Hebrew Copies. Yet we have Reason to believe they were in the Copy from whence the Translation of the LXX was made, and were left out of the present Copies by the Care. lesness of a Transcriber. For they are in the Samaritan Pentateuch, which is but another Copy of the Hebrew : And besides, as the Text Aands in the present Hebrew and our English Bibles, it is not true : For the Children of Israel were not in Egypt 430 Years, for the Time that they fojourned there was but little more than 200 Years. I know it is said, that the Text, as it now stands, does not imply that the Children of Israel dwelt or sojourned in Egypt 430 Years, only that they were so long Sojourners, and dwelt in a Land not their own. But Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, whose sojourning must be brought into this Account of 430 Years, or there will want near 200 Years of that Number, cannot be called the Children of Israel; therefore, unlels these Fathers of the Children of Israel are brought into the Account, as in the LXX and the Samaritan Copy, the Text is not true. From whence we inay be satisfied, that this was the true original Reading, and was in that Hebrew Copy from which the Version of the LXX was made.
I have given this Instance, to shew that Origen had just Reason not to omit those Passages in the Lxx, which he could not find in his Hebrew Copy ; fince, notwithstanding it might be in a more ancient Copy from which that Version was made, and omitted in the later Hebrew Copies through the Oversight of a Transcriber, from whence it would necessarily be omitted in all the Copies taken from that. Such Omissions may, and will be often made without Design, and the most careful Copier in a long Work can hardly fail of being fometimes overfeen. But a Copier can hardly put in a Word or Sentence, which is not in the Book he Copies from, through mere Carcleiners 'or Overkght, but must do it designedly: Therefore I do not see that we need accuse the Jews of having added to the Text any of thole Words or Sentences which Origen found to be omitted in the Copies of the Lxx, which he collated. They might be in the original LXX, but were omitted by the Oversight of Transcribers, which were very numerous, as appears from the Necessity that was found in all Places to correct their Errors. Neither on the other Hand need we suppose that the Words or Sentences which we find in the LXX, which are not in the Hebrew, were added to the Text; they might be in the original Hebrew, but omitted by the Overlight of Transcribers, from whence the
of Sentences, Wo the Text wit of Tranto
Hebrew Copies, which were extant in Origen's Time, were taken. We should not accuse either the Jews or Christians of wilfully corrupting the Scriptures, when the Matter may be otherwise fairly accounted for. And for this Reason I, for my own Part, esteem those Words and Sentences which Origen has marked with an Obelisk to be genuine Parts of Holy Scripture, no less than those he has marked with 20 Aferisk, or which he has not marked at all. Nay, I doubt not but those Texts, which Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Tryphe (p. 218, &c. Edit. Jebb.) accuses the Jews of having expunged, though they are not now to be found either in the Hebrew or LXX according to the present Copies, were originally in both, and in Justin's Time, and also in that of Irenæus, and were therefore Parts of the Holy Scripture; particularly that Text which he says was in Jeremiah ; 'Eurnoon di régions ο Θεός άγιος Ισραήλ των νεκρών αυτου των κεκοιμημένων εις γην Χώμαλος, και xalen após aŭtous cia y anilasbou av.ois cò calóiçoox auto . Sylburgius, in his Notes on Justin Martyr, and Dr. Grabe, in his Notes on Irenæus, both observe, that St. Peter appears to have had this Prophecy in his Thoughts, 1 Epist. iv. 6. saying, For this Cause was the Gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to Men in the Fleth, but live according to God in the Spirit.
The Greek Versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion, are now loft, except Theodotion's Translation of the Book of Daniel, as before mentioned, and some few Fragments of all of them to be found here and there in the Writings of the Ancients, as likewise are those of the other two or three Translations in Origen's Hexapla, none remaining now intire but the LXX. The Jews, though in their Dispersion before Christ came, they read the Scriptures in the Greek Tongue according to the LXX in most of their Synagogues, yet afterwards, in Opposition to the Christians, who used that Version in the Churches, they determined to rcad their Scriptures in Hebrew only, or in Hebrew and Chaldee. But it was some Ages before they could intirely bring this to pass. This we learn from a Novel of Justinian's (No. 146.) wherein that Emperor mentions a Contest among the Jews, some of them maintaining that the Scriptures should be read in their Synagogues in the Hebrew Tongue only; and others requiring that they Thould be read not in Hebrew only, but also in Greek, or such Language as was understood by all. And accordingly be decreed, that it should be read in Greek, or some other vulgar Language, as well as in Hebrew. But notwithstanding this Decree of the Roman Emperor, made about the Year 550, the Jews, who stood for the Hebrew Language only, prevailed at last. The Jews therefore took no Care to preserve the LXX, or any other Greek Translation: And the Chrisians took care to preserve only the LXX, which was daily read in all the Greek Churches. But Bishop Walton justly accuses the Greeks of great Negligence, for not preserving that noble Work of Origen's Hexapla, and contenting themselves with only taking Copies of the LXX from it.
As there were three Editions of the LXX anciently, of Origen, Heo lichius and Lucian, ro, for near 200 Years after the Invention of Printing, there were only three principal Editions of it. The firft was printed by the Order, Direction, and at the Charge of Cardinal Ximenes,