describing, as Eichhorn, Jahn, etc., con- | mon's Song can be proved to be include, "the chaste mutual love of two young persons antecedent to marriage," 'having no natural historical foundation." Many commentators, with the Targum, Cocceius, Luther, and St. Bernard, have looked upon this book as either figurative or allegorical, or as an elegant fable. Dr. Pye Smith, however, who, with Eichhorn, Bauer, Jahn, etc., entirely rejects the allegorical meaning, seems inclined to exclude the book from the canon. He considers it to have been written, not by Solomon, but by a far happier person among his contemporaries, yet unknown to posterity. And that, although the mystical sense may not have been designed by the author, or authors, yet by those who introduced the book into the canon, it was the only one that was regarded.-See Dr. W. Wright's note to Seiler, pp. 243-246. Rosenmüller, with Jarchi, regarded it as "a dramatico-allegorical poem." Theodorus of Mopsuesta, in the 4th or 5th century, held that it was aphrodistic, or libidinous, and, with Josephus, rejected it from the sacred books.-Caucissius, vol. i., p. 577. "Had it been a prophetical book," he says, "there would have been some mention in it of the name of God." "The public reading of it was never allowed by the Jews." Le Clerc calls it "a pastoral eclogue." The time of its authorship is also greatly disputed. Its canonicity has been questioned in all subsequent ages. spired, it is not, we apprehend, on the ground of either external or internal evidence, but on that of the inspired character attaching to their royal author. That God was the author of his wisdom we know, as the Holy Spirit is the author of all true wisdom, the inspirer of 'all good counsels,' as well as of ‘all holy desires and good works.' But whether he was 'moved by the Holy Ghost' in penning these compositions, or rather in speaking the proverbs ascribed to him, is not so certain as to rank among articles of faith. There appears to us far stronger grounds for believing that 'Ezra, the priest and scribe,' acted and spake under the guidance of inspiration; but it is observable that he is never spoken of as a prophet, nor does he lay claim to that character. Even, however, admitting both Solomon and Ezra to have been inspired men, it would be very difficult, we conceive, to prove that this character attached to the anonymous authors of the book of Esther and the book of Chronicles. We must, therefore, still contend that these books, though very properly included in the canon as both 'authentic and true,' are possibly not inspired; and that the question whether they are so or not comes within the proper range of human wisdom."-Eclectic Review, Nov., 1825. "Of the books of the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon, Rabbi Nathan observes that in former times it was said of these books that they were apocryphal."-Michaelis, In On its structure there has been a great diversity of opinions. Horne considers that the most probable which refers it to the idyls of the Arabian | trod., vol. i., p. 71. poets. Stuart thinks that Solomon is Of Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song the subject of the book, but that there of Songs, Dr. Davidson says, "they preis great difficulty in regard to Solomon sent perplexing anomalies which have being the proper author.-See Old Tes-never been cleared away. Manfully," tament Canon, Dr. Davidson's ed., pt. iii., he adds, "has he [Moses Stuart] endeavored to solve them. But that he scarcely be p. 354. "If the books of Proverbs and Solo- has been successful will IV. THE APOCRYPHA. The Apocrypha includes a number of books, generally placed between the Old and New Testaments, none of which were ever received by the Jews as of divine origin. They are not inserted in Melito's Catalogue in the second century, nor does Origen, in the third century, or Epiphanius, in the fourth, acknowledge their authenticity. Of these books, however, the Romish council of Trent, held in the 16th century, decreed that the two books of Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the two books of Maccabees, with which are mixed up, or to which are appended, additions to the books of Esther and Daniel, the Song of the Three Children, the Story of Bel and the Dragon, the History of Susannah, and the Epistle of Jeremiah, should thenceforward be held as canonical or divinely inspired. "The books not admitted into the canon of Scripture were called 'Apocryphal,' a word derived from the Greek, which means to hide, because of their not being submitted to public inspection as the inspired books were; or, according to others, because they were not admitted into the ark, the place where the canonical books were deposited."--Burnett's Exposition of the XXXIX. Art. of the Ch. of England, revised by Page, p. 89. V. RABBINICAL LITERATURE. The Chaldee paraphrases are translations of the Old Testament, made di rectly from the Hebrew text into the dialect of the Chaldean language, anciently spoken throughout Assyria, Babylonia, Mesopotamia, Syria, and Palestine; and were made, after the Babylonish captivity, for the use of those who had forgotten, or were ignorant of, the Hebrew. They were called TARGUMS, from a word which means to explain, to expound, or to interpret. Eight of these have descended to our times, but the last, or the two books of Chronicles, was not known till 1680. The important use of these Targums has been to vindicate the genuineness of the Hebrew text. The Jews were persuaded that the Oral or Traditionary Law, which originated in the interpretation of the Scriptures by the Scribes, was a code of divine origin, as well as the plenarily inspired Law of Moses. Hence arose numberless Rabbinical glosses and opinions, which became, in process of time, uncertain, obscure, contradictory, and perplexed. These traditions, as they were rightly called (Matt. xv. 26; Mark vii. 3-9), were believed to have been delivered by Moses, and transmitted, in unbroken succession, through Aaron, Eleazar, Joshua, and the prophets, to the members of the Greek Sanhedrim, and thence to Simeon, Gamaliel, and ultimately to Rabbi Jehuda, surnamed Hakkadosh (i. e., the holy), president of the Sanhedrim (as they continued to call a council of a remnant of the people, who remained some time in Galilee, about the middle of the second century of the Christian era), who, after the labor of forty years, collected them in six books, because they were too burdensome to the memory, and called them the MISHNA, or repetition of the Oral Law. Eighteen out of the sixty-two treatises into which that work was divided, were translated into English, in 1843, by the Revs. Mr. de Sola and Dr. Raphall, Rabbins of great learning and influence, "at the true interpretation is that of the Mishna request of the Uphardim Synagogue," and Gemara. The Masoretic notes and and called by them "God's Explanation criticisms have been called "the Hedge of the Written Law." This work became of the Law," and relate to books, verses, the study of all the learned Jews, who words, vowel points, and accents. The employed their skill and ingenuity in inventors of this system of marking making comments upon it. These com- Hebrew were called Masorites or Massoments are collected together, and called rets. They counted, with the greatest the GEMARA, which means perfection, reverence, the number of each of the and were regarded as the complement, words and letters occurring in the Hebecause by them the Mishna is fully brew Bible, and marked the number of explained, and the whole of the tra- the verses of each book and section, ditionary doctrines and precepts of the and noticed the middle verse, clause, and Jewish law and religion completed. letter. They marked what they conThus the Mishna is the text, and the sidered imperfect verses, the words they Gemara is the comment or note upon believed to have been changed, and the the text, and both together make what letters which they deemed superfluous, the Jews call the Talmud, which means all repetitions, and different renderings, doctrine, disciple, and includes the civil and the various meanings of the same and canonical law of the Jewish people, word. They noted down what letters together with numberless profane state- were pronounced, what were inverted, ments and absurd fables. That made and such as hang perpendicularly. This in Judea is called the Jerusalem Tal- work has been regarded as a monument mud, and that made in Babylon is called of stupendous labor and unwearied asthe Babylonish Talmud; the former siduity, united with the greatest venerwas completed about the third century ation, and has been of incalculable serof the Christian era, and the latter in vice in preserving the accuracy and the beginning of the sixth. integrity of the original text of the Old Testament Scriptures.-(See Prideaux's Connection; Bishop Tomline's Int. to the Study of the Bible, p. 169; Horne's (Hartwell) Introd. to a Crit. Study of the Sacred Scrip., vol. ii., pp. 37, 417; Motives to the Study of Bib. Lit.; and Kitto's Cyc. of Bib. Lit.) After the destruction of Jerusalem, and the consequent dispersion of the Jews, various schools were opened, in which the Scriptures were diligently taught. One of the most distinguished of these academies was that of Tiberias, in Palestine, which Jerome mentions as existing in the fifth century. The doctors of this school, early in the fourth or fifth century, agreed to revise the sacred text, and issue an accurate edition of it; for which purpose they collected all the scattered critical and grammatical observations they could obtain, which appeared likely to contribute towards fixing both the reading and interpetration, into one book, which they called MASORAH, that is, tradition, because it consisted of remarks received from others. The true reading is, therefore, the subject of the Masorah, as the VI. THE SEPTUAGINT, OR GREEK This translation of the Old Testament into Greek, is the oldest version in existence, except the Chaldee and Samaritan. It was made at Alexandria, and is often called the Alexandrian Version. After the Babylonish captivity, the tribe of Judah alone returned to their native land, accompanied, however, by a number of mixed Jews, who were allowed to settle in Galilee. Many Jews were dispersed abroad, and had settled in the Grecian empire. It is supposed that VII. THE VERSIONS OF THE SCRIP at their request Ptolemy Philadelphus, King of Egypt, applied to Eleazar for a copy of the Scriptures in the Greek language; and that the High Priest at Jerusalem appointed seventy men, learned in the ancient Hebrew and Chaldee, to accomplish this important work. It was completed about 280 years before the Christian era. It was approved by the Sanhedrim, or great judicial council of the Jews, consisting of seventy men. From one or other of these circumstances, or from both, it was called the Septuagint, or Version of the Seventy. It was deservedly held in great estimation, and was universally used by the Hellenistic Jews, or those who spoke the Greek language, and publicly kept and used in their synagogues. This version is of inestimable value in the criticism and interpretation of the Hebrew text, determining the meaning of numerous words and phrases, throwing light upon many laws and customs, and explaining more precisely many historical facts: for it was made at a period when the Hebrew language, having suffered much decay, was no longer vernacular in Palestine, and had ceased to be understood by the Jews of the dispersion. Most of the quotations in the New Testament are made from it. It was held in high estimation, and was of immense importance, in the first ages of Christianity, and for five centuries was used and read in public worship. Some authors have asserted, but without direct authority, that there was a Greek version of the Scriptures in use 356 years B. C., but that the translation procured by Ptolemy Philadelphus was the more correct and perfect.-See Dr. A. Clarke's Success. of Sacred Literature, vol. i., p. 32; Dean Prideaux's Connection, vol. iii., p. 43, ed. 1725; Nolan's Integrity of the Greek Vulgate; Grimfield's Apology; Kitto's Cyc. Bib. Lit.; Bishop Tomline's Introduction, etc. TURES USED BY SWEDENBORG. EMANUEL Augustus Nordenskjöld, in his “Remarks on the different editions of the Bible made use of by Emanuel Swedenborg," inserted in the New Jerusalem Magazine, for the year 1790, p. 87, says that "he [E. S.] possessed four editions of the Holy Bible in Hebrew: " "I. That by T. Pagnini [à Benedicto Aria] Montano, fo. 1657, in which he made no remarks in the margin, as I was informed by the person who bought it at the sale. "II. Biblica Hebraica punctata, cum Novo Testamento Græco, 8vo, of the edition of Manasse Ben Israël, Amsterdam, 1639. This was also without remarks. "III. Reineccii Biblic. Hebr., Lipsia, 1739, 4to. This I have happily found; it is filled with remarks, and with the Latin translation of several Hebrew words, as also some observations on the internal sense. The book is much used. It is added to the collection of manuscripts. "IV. Biblia Hebraica Secundum Edit. Belgicam Edvardi Von der Hooght, una cum Versione Latina Sebastiani Schmidii, Lipsia, 1740, 4to. There is no remark in the margin, but a great number of lines and asterisks, at the most remarkable places of the Latin version, the original text not being in any manner touched; because, according to the expression of Swedenborg, 'The word is perfect, such as we have it.' "Of the New Testament in Greek he had none besides that mentioned, No. II., and which is a fresh edition of that by Elzevir in 1624, made by Janson, and the edition of Leusden, Amsterdam, 1741, with the Latin version. It is probable he has followed this edition in translating the Apocalypse. "Of the Latin versions of the Bible, he made use chiefly of that of Schmidius, "The translation of Pagninus [Sanctus, an Italian Dominican] was revised by Benedict Arias Montanus, who has erroneously been considered as a new translator of the Bible in the Latin language. His chief aim was to trans Lipsia, 1740, after the time that he be- | New Testaments in elegant Latin, like gan the Arcana Coelestia, because he that of the ancient classic authors."found this to be more literal and exact Ib., p. 64. than all the others. Nevertheless, in all his quotations, and above all in the Arcana Calestia, he has more exactly expressed the sense according to the original language. He has never followed the version of Arius Montanus, either of the Old or New Testaments, late the Hebrew words by the same as I have carefully examined and found to be the case. But he had four copies of the Latin translation of Castelliano, apparently for the purity of the language, which he was very studiously applying himself to, before he learned Hebrew in 1745. In his quotations of the New Testament he only made use of Schmidt's translation, 1st ed., which he sometimes has left, the better to express the sense of the Greek. "From this it appears that he always had the originals in hand. But with respect to the author's translations of Genesis, Exodus, and the Apocalypse, they are directly translated from the originals." “Sebastian Schmidt was professor of Oriental languages at Strasburgh. Of his version, which is placed opposite the Hebrew text, and was published after the author's decease, there have been several editions. It is strictly literal; and is chiefly useful to students in the Hebrew language.”—Horne's Introd., vol. ii., part 2, pp. 7, 65. My own edition is that of 1740. To the work are prefixed:-1. A preface, by J. C. Clodius, vindicating the edition of Von der Hooght against some critical censures; 2. Von der Hooght's preface, with the testimonies of some eminent scholars in favor of his edition; and, 3. The testimony and judgment of the Theological Faculty of Strasburgh in favor of Sebastian Schmidt's Latin Translation. (E. M.) "The design of Sebastian Chahlon, or Castalio, was to render the Old and number of Latin ones; so that he has accommodated his whole translation to the most scrupulous rules of grammar, without any regard to the elegance of his Latinity. Montanus' edition, therefore, may be considered rather as a grammatical commentary than a true version, and as being adapted to instruct young beginners in the Hebrew, than to be read separately; being printed interlinearly, with the Latin word placed exactly over the Hebrew, it saves the student the trouble of frequently referring to his lexicon. In the New Testament, Montanus changed. only a few words in the Vulgate version, where he found it to differ from the Greek. This revision has been very frequently printed in various sizes."—Ib., p. 63. (My own edition is that of 1657, fo., "Impensis Christiani Kirchneii. Teppis Johannis Wittigan, Lipsia." At the beginning of the Old Testament is a MS. note which states that this translation “ was generally admired both by Jews and others acquainted with the Hebrew, for its exactness and fidelity. He is blamed by some, and particularly by Father Simon, for being too literal. Huetius, nevertheless, proposes him as a model for all translators of the Sacred Text, whether of the Old or the New Testament, for the same plan is seen in both. Luther spoke of him and his translations in the highest terms of applause. He died in 1536, aged 70 years."-E. M.) |