« AnteriorContinuar »
quòd multus esset splendor gloriæ vultus ejus. Et viderunt filii Israel quòd multa esset claritas gloriæ faciei Mosis.5 The expression of the Septuagint is as large, δεδόξασται η όψις TOŨ Xpájaros ToŨ poobrov, Glorificatus est aspectus cutis, seu coloris faciei.
And this passage of the Old Testament is well explained by another of the New ; wherein it is delivered, that “they could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses,"* dià Tùy dóčav TOŨ TPOOurov, that is, for the glory of his countenance. And surely the exposition of one text is best performed by another;6 men vainly interposing their constructions, where the Scripture decideth the controversy. And therefore some have seemed too active in their expositions, who in the story of Rahab the harlot, have given notice that the word also signifieth an hostess ; for in the epistle to the Hebrews, she is plainly termed topvn,? which signifies not an hostess, but a pecuniary and prostituting harlot, † a term applied unto Lais by the Greeks, and distinguished from étaipa, or amica, as may appear in the thirteenth of Athenæus.
And therefore more allowable is the translation of Tre* 2 Cor. ii. 13. + What kind of harlot she was, read Camar. de Vita Eliæ.
5 But the Chaldee, dc.) First added in 2nd edition. 6 another.] This is a golden rule, as necessary as infallible. Wr.
7 in the epistle, &c.] Ďr. Adam Clarke (on Joshua ii. 2), admitting that tópvn generally signifies a prostitute, contends nevertheless that it might not have been used in that sense here : he asks why the derived meaning of the word, from topváw, to sell, may not have reference to goods, as well as to person? In that sense he observes the Chaldee Targum understood the word, and in their translation gave it accordingly the meaning of a tavern keeper. He concludes rather a long article by saying, “it is most likely that she was a single woman, or widow, who got her bread honestly, by keeping a house of entertainment for strangers." He proceeds however in this criticism, on a principle which he has elsewhere laid down, “ that the writers of the New Testament scarcely ever quote the Old Testament, but from the Septuagint translation;" thus he contents himself with a rabbinical version of the LXX—and to that interpretation would bind the apostle.
Dr. Gill notices the rabbinical authorities in favour of the interpretation adopted by Dr. Clarke, but remarks that the Jews commonly take Rahab to be a harlot; and that generally speaking, in those times and countries such as kept public houses were prostitutes. He notices the Greek version and decidedly leans to the usual acceptation of the term.
mellius, quod splendida facta esset cutis faciei ejus ; or as Estius hath interpreted it, facies ejus erat radiosa, his face was radiant, and dispersing beams like many horns and cones about his head; which is also consonant unto the original signification, and yet observed in the pieces of our Saviour, and the Virgin Mary, who are commonly drawn with scintillations, or radiant halos about their head; which, after the French expression, are usually termed the glory.
Now if, besides this occasional mistake, any man shall contend a propriety in this picture, and that no injury is done unto truth by this description, because an horn is the hieroglyphick of authority, power, and dignity, and in this metaphor is often used in Scripture; the piece I confess in this acception is harmless and agreeable unto Moses; and, under such emblematical constructions, we find that Alexander the Great, and Attila king of the Huns, in ancient medals are described with horns. But if from the common mistake, or any solary consideration, we persist in this description, we vilify the mystery of the irradiation, and authorize a dangerous piece, conformable unto that of Jupiter Ammon; which was the sun, and therefore described with horns, as is delivered by Macrobius; Hammonem quem Deum solem occidentem Libyes existimant, arietinis cornibus fingunt, quibus id animal valet, sicut radiis sol. We herein also imitate the picture of Pan, and pagan emblem of nature. And if (as Macrobius and very good authors concede) Bacchus (who is also described with horns), be the same deity with the sun; and if (as Vossius well contendeth)* Moses and Bacchus were the same person; their descriptions must be relative, or the tauricornous picture of the one, perhaps the same with the other:8
* De Origine Idololatrice.
8 any solary consideration.] Solary, relating to the sun.'—The Hebrew word used in this passage signifies to shoot forth, and may be applied perhaps to 'rays of light, as well as to horns. Bp. Taylor, in his Holy Dying, p. 17, describes the rising sun, as “peeping over the eastern hills, thrusting out his golden horns, &c."-Jeff.
CHAPTER X. Of the Scutcheons of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. . We will not pass over the scutcheons of the tribes of Israel, as they are usually described in the maps of Canaan and several other pieces ; generally conceived to be the proper coats, and distinctive badges of their several tribes. So Reuben is conceived to bear three bars wave, Judah a lion rampant, Dan a serpent nowed, Simeon a sword impale, the point erected, &c.* The ground whereof is the last benediction of Jacob, wherein he respectively draweth comparisons from things here represented.
Now herein although we allow a considerable measure of truth, yet whether, as they are usually described, these were the proper cognizances, and coat-arms of the tribes; whether in this manner applied, and upon the grounds presumed, material doubts remain.
For first, they are not strictly made out from the prophe. tical blessing of Jacob; for Simeon and Levi have distinct coats, that is, a sword, and the two tables, yet are they by Jacob included in one prophecy ; “ Simeon and Levi are brethren, instruments of cruelty are in their habitations." So Joseph beareth an ox, whereof notwithstanding there is no mention in this prophecy; for therein it is said, “ Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well;" by which repetition are intimated the two tribes descending from him, Ephraim and Manasses; whereof notwithstanding Ephraim only beareth an ox. True it is, that many years after, in the benediction of Moses, it is said of Joseph, “His glory is like the firstlings of his bullock:” and so we may concede, what Vossius learnedly declareth, that the Egyptians represented Joseph in the symbol of an ox; for thereby was best implied the dream of Pharaoh, which he interpreted, the benefit by agriculture, and provident provision of corn which he performed; and therefore did Serapis bear a bushel upon his head.
Again, if we take these two benedictions together, the resemblances are not appropriate, and Moses therein con
* Gen, xlix.
forms not unto Jacob; for that which in the phophecy of Jacob is appropriated unto one, is in the blessing of Moses made common unto others. So, whereas Judah is compared unto a lion by Jacob, Judah is a lion's whelp, the same is applied unto Dan by Moses, “Dan is a lion's whelp, he shall leap from Bashan ; ” and also unto Gad, “ he dwelleth as a lion."
Thirdly, if a lion were the proper coat of Judah, yet were it not probably a lion rampant, as it is commonly described, but rather couchant or dormant, as some heralds and rabbins do determine, according to the letter of the text, Recumbens dormisti ut leo, “He couched as a lion, and as a young lion, who shall rouse him ?”
Lastly, when it is said, “Every man of the children of Israel shall pitch by his own standard, with the ensign of their father's house ;'* upon enquiry what these standards and ensigns were, there is no small incertainty, and men conform not unto the prophecy of Jacob. Christian expositors are fain herein to rely upon the rabbins, who notwithstanding are various in their traditions, and confirm not these . common descriptions. For as for inferior ensigns, either of particular bands or houses, they determine nothing at all; and of the four principal or legionary standards, that is, of Judah, Reuben, Ephraim, and Dan (under every one whereof marched three tribes), they explain them very variously. Jonathan, who compiled the Targum, conceives the colours of these banners to answer the precious stones in the breastplate, and upon which the names of the tribes were engraven.t So the standard for the camp of Judah was of three colours, according unto the stones, chalcedony, sapphire, and sardonyx; and therein were expressed the names of the three tribes, Judah, Issachar, and Zabulon; and in the midst thereof was written,“ Rise up, Lord, and let thy enemies be scattered; and let them that hate thee, flee before thee: I in it was also the portrait of a lion. The standard of Reuben was also of three colours, sardine, topaz, and amethyst; therein were expressed the names of Reuben, Simeon, and Gad, in the midst was written, “Hear, O Israel, the Lord
* Num. ii.
+ The like also P. Fagius upon the Targum or Chaldee Paraphrase of Onkelos, Num. i.
I Num, x. VOL. II.
our God, the Lord is one;'* therein was also the portraiture of a hart. But Abenezra and others, beside the colours of the field, do set down other charges, in Reuben's the form of a man or mandrake, in that of Judah a lion, in Ephriam's an ox, in Dan's the figure of an eagle.
And thus indeed the four figures in the banners of the principal squadrons of Israel, are answerable unto the cherubims in the vision of Ezekiel ; 7 every one carrying the form of all these. As for the likeness of their faces, they four had the likeness of the face of a man, and the face of a lion on the right side, and they four had the face of an ox on the left side, they four had also the face of an eagle. And conformable hereunto the pictures of the evangelists (whose gospels are the Christian banners) are set forth with the addition of a man or angel, an ox, a lion, and an eagle. And these symbolically represent the office of angels and ministers of God's will, in whom is required understanding as in a man, courage and vivacity as in the lion, service and ministerial officiousness as in the ox, expedition or celerity of execution . as in the eagle. * Deut. vi.
+ Ezek. i.
9 eagle.] The reasons which the fathers give of these emblems is excellent and proper. St. Matthew insists on those prophecyes in Christ, and therefore hath an angel, as itt were revealing those things to him. St. Marke insists most upon his workes of wonder and miracles, and therefore hathe the lyon of Judah by him. St. Luke is most copious in those storyes which set forthe his passive obedience, and therefore hathe the beast of sacrifice by him. And lastly, St. John, whose gospel sores like the eagle up to heaven, and expresses the divinity of Christe in such a sublime manner above all the rest, hath therefore that bird set by him. They were shortly, but excellently expresst by these four emblems at the pedestal of Prince Henrye’s pillar, each of them in a scroll uttering these four wordes, which make up a verse. Expecto, by the angel, impavidus, by the lion, patienter, by the oxe, dum renovabor, by the eagle.- Wr.
The dean's exposé reminds us of that of Victorinus, Bishop of Petau, mentioned by Dr. Clarke (in his Concise View of the Succession of Sacred Literature, &c., p. 199, vol. i.). In his Comment on the 4th chap. of Rev. v. 6, 7, the bishop remarks :-“The four living creatures are the four gospels. The lion denotes MARK, in whom the voice of a lion, roaring in the wilderness, is heard ; the voice of one that crieth in the wilderness, &c. MATTHEW, who has the resemblance of a man, endeavours to show us the family of Mary, from whom Christ took flesh; he speakes of him as a man; the book of the generations, &c. LUKE,