BIB – BOO

Volume I, pages 301–320 of the 1732 edition, from BIB to BOO: everything printed on these pages, in order.

Continued from Bible

to Spain, without reckoning those which Cardinal Ximenes made use of in his Edition of the Complutensian Polyglott. Lastly, that he had had the use of several Manuscripts out of England, and the northern Countries, and of many others, which were in Greece, &c. But when we examine F. Amelotte’s Annotations¹, we find, that excepting three or four Manuscripts consulted by him, which too are not above four or five hundred years old, he has produced no various Lections that are in any degree considerable, which had not been before taken notice of, either in the London Polyglott, or elsewhere. And when he has been pressed close upon this Point, he has made no scruple of confessing, that all which he had said of this matter was no more than a figurative way of speaking, which he had made use of to give the World a greater Idea of his Performance.

The New Testament of Mons, which was printed in 1665, with the Archbishop of Cambray’s Permission, and the King of Spain’s Licence, has made so much noise, that it deserves to be particularly considered. The first Author of this Work was M. le Maitre, who having translated the four Gospels into French, M. Antony Arnaud, and M. le Maitre de Sacy, corrected them in several places. M. de Sacy composed a new Preface to them, with the help of M. Nicole and M. Claude de Sainte Marthe: But in the Licence, Mr. Arnaud alone is taken notice of; for that informs the World, that the Translation is the work of a Doctor of the Sorbonne. The Manuscript written with M. le Maitre’s hand, with Emendations in the Margin of M. Arnaud’s and M. de Sacy’s Handwriting, was given to M. Toinard by one of the Elzevirs², who printed it; for tho’ we read in the Title Page, that it was printed at Mons by Gaspard Migiot, it is nevertheless very true, that no Copies of it were ever printed at Mons. M. de Cambout Abbot of Pont Chateau, went to Amsterdam on purpose to have it printed by the Elzevirs.

This Book has met with a great deal of Opposition, the account whereof has no relation to my Subject. It was condemned by Pope Clement IX. in 1668, by Pope Innocent XI. in 1679, and in several Bishopricks of France at several times. All which notwithstanding it has gone through many Editions, and the generality of those who, since that time, have attempted to translate the New Testament into French, have made use of this Version as a Foundation to work upon, and have endeavoured to correct and purge it of every thing disagreeable to them; and which might draw upon them the Censure of the Pope and Bishops; for both the Version which is in M. de Sacy’s Bible, and that which is published with F. Quesnel’s Reflections, and that in M. Huré’s New Testament, are the same in Substance with the Translations of Mons, revised and reformed by them in all those places, which gave uneasiness to the Censors.

M. Antony Godeau Bishop of Vence, printed his Translation of the New Testament at Paris in 1668; but it is, properly speaking, neither a literal Translation, nor a Paraphrase; but it is a medium between both, and adds some particular words to the Text, which explain the sense of it.

The New Testament published at Trevoux in French by M. Simon in the year 1702, with literal and critical Annotations upon difficult Passages, was condemned by the Bishops of Paris and Meaux, who in 1702, 1703, prohibited the use of it in their Dioceses.

F. Bouhours a Jesuit, in the year 1697, published a Translation of the New Testament, which he composed in conjunction with his Brethren FF. Michael Tellier and Peter Besnier. During the Impression of this Work, the Archbishop of Paris named Revisers of it, in order to examin and correct it. The Translation for the most part is harsh and obscure, which was owing to the Author’s Inclination to keep too scrupulously close to the Latin Text, which he translated. F. Lallemant a Jesuit, in his Exposition of the New Testament put out by him some years since, has adopted this Translation.

We have likewise a new Version of the New Testament by F. Martianay, printed at Paris in 1712, with Annotations, and literal Explanations borrowed, as he says, from the pure Fountains of the Scripture.

Lastly, Abbot Fleury, heretofore Preceptor to the Children of France, and at present Confessor to King Lewis XV. has prepared a French Translation of the New Testament, by express orders from the King and Cardinal de Noailles, which has not yet been printed. These are the principal Translations of the Old and New Testament, which have been made by Catholick Writers.

French Translations of the Bible by Pro-

The first French Bible which the Protestants published, was that of Robert Peter Olivetan, printed at Geneva in 1535, and since reprinted often with the Corrections of John Calvin, and some

others. But the first Editions of Olivetan were very defective, because the Author did not speak good French, and understood not the original Languages of the Old and New Testament. His Version is said to be the same as Dr. Nicholas de Leuse’s Bible, printed at Antwerp by Martin l’Empereur in 1534. and indeed, when we compare them together, we may observe, that they differ only in those places, wherein Olivetan thought it necessary to forsake the Vulgate, and adhere to the Hebrew of the Old Testament, translated by Pagninus, and to the Greek of the New, translated by Erasmus. Olivetan therefore might very easily boast, that in the space of one Year he had translated the whole Bible into French, the Old Testament from the Hebrew, the New from the Greek; for this is what he values himself upon, in the Edition published at Neufchatel, in 1535. at the expence of the Vaudois.

Sebastian Castalio, or Chateillon, published a French Translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew, and of the New from the Greek, at Basil, in the Year 1555. But this Translation had no manner of success, and did no honour to its Author, because he did not understand French. He made himself ridiculous by particular ways of expressing himself, which were never used by good judges of the Language; for example, instead of transgresser he put trespasser, instead of circoncision he would say rognement, instead of prepuce he would use the word avantpeau. An instance whereof we have in his Translation of the 25, 26 and 27th Verses of the second Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, which runs thus, Si tu viens á tréspasser la loi, ton rognement devient avantpeau. Que si un empellé (he means one uncircumcised) garde les ordonnances de la loi, certes son avantpeau lui sera compté pour rognement, Et celui qui de nature est empellé, et garde la loi, te condamnera, toi qui as la lettre et rognement, et si trespasses la loi.

John Diodati published a French Bible translated from the Greek and Hebrew, with Annotations of his own; this was printed at Geneva in 1644. The Reformed extremely approved it, and they still make use of it as much or more than of Olivetan’s, tho’ that has been revised so often, and both the sense and expressions have been corrected by the most learned Protestant Divines. But Diodati’s method is found fault with; he does not keep close enough to the Letter, and that he may make himself the more intelligible to all the world, he rather paraphrases the Text than translates it, and inserts words frequently in his Translation to make it more clear.

We are assured, that M. Charles le Cene and M. Le Clerc have both composed intire Versions of the Bible, but they have not yet been published.

As to the New Testament, printed separately by Protestant Authors, the principal Translation of it is that of John le Fevre of Estaples, revised and accommodated to the use of the reform’d Churches in Piedmont, and printed in 1534.

The New Testament translated into French by Peter Dolet, appeared before the Year 1545. the Year wherein the Author was burnt.

John Daillé the Son, and Valentine Conrart, printed a French New Testament at Paris, in 1671. compiled from the Translations of Mons and F. Amelotte; but the Edition was scarce finished before it was intirely suppressed³.

M. John le Clerc printed a New Testament in French at Amsterdam for De Lorme, in 1703. with Annotations taken for the most part from Grotius and Hammond. M. Bayle says, that this Edition was prohibited and proscribed in Holland, by order of the States General, and by the Decrees of several Synods of the Protestant Churches there; and in Prussia by the Consistory of Berlin, as a work tending to renew the errors of Sabellius, and foment those of Socinus.

Italian Bibles.

Sextus Senensis⁴, and after him Antony Possevin⁵, speak of an Italian Translation of the Bible, made by James de Voragine, who lived in 1270. But it is questioned with good reason, whether there ever was such a Bible, since James de Voragine himself says nothing of it in the Catalogue of his Works, published by him in his History of Genoa, in the Year 1292. and no Copy of any Translation of the Bible under his name is to be met with in the Libraries of Italy o. The Italian Bibles which are to be found in Manuscript in the Libraries there have no name of any Author prefix’d to them.

The first Italian Bible published by the Catholicks, is that of Nicholas Malerme, or Malherbe, a Benedictine Monk of the Order of Camaldulenses, printed at Venice in August 1471. There was another put out under the name of the same Author, in October of the same Year 1471. very different from the first as to the Old Testament, but much the same as to the New. There is no name to it either of the Printer or the place of Impression. Malerme’s Bible has been printed several times in Italy. It was translated from the Vulgate.

Antony

Antony Brucioli made another Version of the Old Testament from the Hebrew, and of the New Testament from the Greek, which was printed at Venice in 1532. But this Bible was placed among the Books which were prohibited by the Council of Trent. This Translation of the New Testament has been printed ever since the year 1530.

Santes Marmochinus revised Brucioli’s Edition, and printed it at Venice as a new Translation, in 1538, and there have been several Editions of it since.

Gregorio Leti⁶ informs us, that Sixtus V. ordered a Translation to be made of the whole Bible in 1590, but that Philip II. King of Spain, and the Cardinals, having made Remonstrances to him concerning it, he was pleased to suppress it. He says, that there are Copies of this Version still to be seen in the Library belonging to the Great Duke of Tuscany, in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, and in that of Geneva⁷. But this whole account is contradicted;⁸ and it is confidently asserted, that there never was such a Translation, nor that any Copies are to be found in any Library of an Italian Bible, published by the Directions of Sixtus V.

The Calvinists have likewise their Italian Bibles. An Italian Bible translated from the Hebrew of the Old, and from the Greek of the New Testament, was published at Geneva for their use in 1562. This is Brucioli’s Translation revised, and rendred much purer, and more elegant. The New Testament is taken rather from Fabius Tudesque’s Edition of 1560, than from that of Brucioli.

John Diodati published an Edition of the Bible in Italian, first of all in 1607, then again in 1641, wherein he has observed the same method, as in his French Version; that is to say, he is rather a Paraphrast than a literal Translator. His New Testament was published separately at Geneva in 1608, and at Amsterdam and Harlem in 1665.

Maximus Theophilus printed likewise an Italian Translation of the new Testament at Lions in 1551, which was dedicated to Francis de Medicis Duke of Tuscany.

The Jews of Italy have no intire Version of the Bible in Italian, the Inquisitors constantly refusing to allow them the liberty of printing one. To supply in some sort what was wanting in this particular, Leo of Modena in the year 1612, published a Dictionary in Italian and Hebrew, wherein he explains all the most difficult passages of the Bible in Italian⁹. So that this Work may serve in the room of an intire Translation of the Bible in this Language.

Spanish Bibles.

James the first King of Arragon, who died in 1276, made a Constitution, which ordered, that whosoever had the Books of the Old and New Testament in the language called Romance¹⁰, or in the vulgar language of the Country, and did not bring them to the Bishop of the place, in order to be burnt, should be looked upon as one suspected of Heresy, whether he were of the Laity or Clergy¹¹. These Books were probably translated by the Albigenses.

Alphonso King of Castille gave Directions for translating the Books of holy Scripture into the Castilian language, if Mariana is to be credited in this particular¹². Gesner says,¹³ that John King of Leon and Castille had likewise the holy Scriptures translated into his language: He adds, that these Books were still in being. We have indeed some Spanish Translations of several parts of the Bible; which are to be found in many Libraries, but the Authors of them are not named.

The first Spanish printed Bible that we know of, is that which Cyprian de Valera speaks of; and which he says was published about the year 1500. This Author declares he had seen it. Who the Translator was, we cannot tell, but it is believed, that he lived about the year 1420, and that he translated the whole Bible into Spanish, as it was then spoken in the Kingdom of Valencia.

The same Cyprian de Valera in the year 1602, printed at Amsterdam a Bible of his own translating into Spanish from the Hebrew, which in reality is the same as that of Cassiodore de Reyna a Calvinist, revised and published under Valera’s name.

In 1512, Ambrose de Montesin published the Epistles and Gospels of the whole Year, which he had translated into Spanish. I take no notice here of the Psalms.

and other lesser parts of the Bible transla­ ted into this language by several Catholick Writers: Such a particular account would carry me too far.

Cassiodore de Reyna, a Calvinist, published his Translation of the Bible in Spanish, from Pagninus’s Latin Version of the Hebrew, and printed it at Basil in 1569. Cyprian de Valera, as we have said, revised it, and had it reprinted in 1602.

Francis Enzinas, otherwise called Driander, in 1543, published at Antwerp the New Testament in Spanish, translated from the Greek, and dedicated it to the Emperor Charles V.

The Jews in Spain have the Old Testament in Spanish, translated out of Hebrew for their use. Gilbert Voetius¹⁴, and after him Henry Hottinger¹⁵ have affirmed, that the famous Rabbi David Kimchi, who lived sometime in the thirteenth Age, translated the Bible into Spanish. But this Fact we very much question, nor have we any knowledge of this Version, unless it be that, the Pentateuch whereof was printed at Constantinople in Hebrew Characters in the year 1546.

The first Bible which was printed in Spanish for the use of the Jews, was that printed at Ferrara in 1553, in Gothick Characters, and dedicated to Hercules d’Est Duke of Ferrara, whose Licence was annexed to the Translation. The Pentateuch of this Edition is almost intirely like that, which was printed at Constantinople in 1546 in Spanish, but in Hebrew Characters. Without doubt this Version is very ancient¹⁶, and was probably in use among the Jews of Spain, before Ferdinand and Isabel expell’d them out of their Dominions in the Year 1492. And altho’ the Jews in the Preface to their Bible of Ferrara, give out, that they have followed the Translation of Pagninus the Dominican, yet it is plain that they did this only to avoid Prosecution from the Inquisitors, who are very careful in prohibiting the Publication of the Bible in the vulgar tongue of their translating. The Spanish Bible of Ferrara was reprinted in 1630, at Amsterdam, under the Inspection of Manasseh Ben-Israel; and in 1661, by the Care and Diligence of Samuel de Cazéres.

German Bibles.

As the several Dialects of the German Language have made it very extensive, and it has produced very many different Versions, we do not take upon us here to mention all exactly, but those only which are the best and principal of them: They who have a mind to be more particularly informed of them, may consult those Books which treat expressly of them.

The first and most ancient Translation of the Bible in the German Language, that we have, is that of Ulphilas Bishop of the Goths¹⁷, made about the Year 360. But this Bishop did not think it proper to translate the Books of Kings, which treat much of War; because the Goths were already but too much inclined to this Exercise, and he was afraid of encouraging their martial humour still more, by a recital of the Wars recorded in these parts of Scripture. We have no more remaining of this old Version, than what was found of it in the Abby of Verden near Cologn, in a Manuscript written in Silver Letters; for which reason it is called Codex Argenteus. This Monument having fallen into the hands of M. De la Gardie Chancellor of Sweden, who bought it for five hundred Ducats; he permitted Francis Junius to take a Copy of it, and he printed it in 1665, with M. Marechal’s Notes, and a Dictionary to explain it. This Manuscript is still preserved at this day in the Library of Upsal, and it contains the four Gospels, not altogether entire, but with many Breaks and Interstices, because the old Copy has suffered by time, and the Negligence of those who have been Masters of it.

Some Authors tell us¹⁸, that Charlemain appointed a Translation to be made of the New Testament in the Frank or German Language; but these Writers produce no old Evidence to warrant what they advance. We know that Charlemain took a great deal of pains to have the Latin Vulgate corrected, and that he made use of the Greek and Syriac Texts, in order to restore the New Testament to its purity. This appears by the Historians of his time¹⁹, but they do not say, that he had the New Testament translated into the Frank Language then in use, which was the same as the German.

Others²⁰ assert, that Lewis the Debonnaire gave orders to translate the Scripture into Saxon: But this particular is not founded on any good historical proofs. We find here and there in Libraries several German Versions of the Bible which are in Manuscript, and pretty antient; but no one can assure us certainly, that they were made in the time of Charlemain, or of Lewis the Debonnaire. There was a Psalter kept in the Library of

S. Gal, which was some Years ago destroyed by the Swiss Protestants, and the Book of Job, translated by Notkar Labeon Abbot of this Abby, who lived in the reign of the Emperor Arnold, about the Year 890. And Goldast assures us, that he had in his possession at the time, when he was writing, a German Psalter, written by Ekhardus the Younger, about the Year 1004. for the use of the Empress Cunegunda, Wife to the Emperor Henry II. This is all we know of the antiquity of these manuscript Translations.

As to the German Bibles which are printed, we see some very ancient, but for the most part they are without the date of the Impression, unless it be added by some hand to them²¹; for which reason these dates are very much to be suspected. The oldest with the Year fixed to it, and most certainly known by us, is that of Nuremburg, printed in 1477. and that of Augsburg, of the same Year. Of these there were several Editions in the Cities which we have named, before the appearance of Luther, and at Strasburg in 1485. but who the Authors are of this old Translation, we cannot tell.

John Dietemberger translated the Bible from the Vulgate into German; his Version was printed at Mentz in 1534. and has been since several times reprinted. The Criticks remark, that the Translator copied almost throughout the German Translation of the New Testament made by Jerom Emzer, Chaplain to George Duke of Saxony. Emzer undertook his Translation in opposition to that of Luther, when this Reformer began first to shew himself.

John Eckius translated the Old Testament from the Vulgate, but he declares in his Epistle dedicatory, that he joined Emzer’s New Testament to it, which we lately mentioned; he being unwilling to imitate their injustice, who have put out his performance under their own name, without doing honour to him, who is the true Author of it. Eckius’s Bible was printed in 1537.

Ferdinand Duke of Bavaria, and Elector of Cologn, procured a new Translation of the Bible to be made by Gaspar Ulembergius; it was printed at Cologn in 1630. but as Ulembergius was of Westphalia, and was not master of the German Tongue in all its purity, the Divines of Mentz revised his Version, and had a new Edition of it published in 1662. These are the principal German Translations, which have been produced by the Catholicks.

Martin Luther published his Translation of the Old and New Testament from the Hebrew and Greek Originals, after having been imployed eleven Years in this work. The Pentateuch was put out in 1522. the historical Books of the Old Testament and the Psalter in 1524. Solomon’s Books are supposed to have been printed in 1527. Isaiah in 1529. the Prophets in 1531, and 1532. the other Books of the Old Testament in 1530. the New Testament in 1522. Several Editions of the whole have been since published of Luther’s translating. The Learned agree that the Language of it is pure, and the Version clear, and without any intricacies. But the Author is oftentimes rather a Paraphrast than a true Interpreter²².

Luther’s Bible was corrected several times by himself while he was living, and by others after his death. But these are particulars that do not properly come under our consideration in this place. The German Bibles which have been printed in Saxony, Switzerland, and elsewhere, are for the most part the same, as to the substance and foundation of them, with that of Luther, with very little variation. For example, that of Zurick, which is the most celebrated, and that about which the greatest pains have been employed, delivers the sense of the Old Testament almost throughout, according to the Interpretation of Leo de Juda a German Minister who translated the Bible out of Hebrew into Latin. Nevertheless in many places it copies the expressions which Luther had made use of in those Books of the Bible which he had then published, for his whole Bible was not as yet printed.

In 1604. John Piscator published a new Translation of the Bible in the German Tongue, made by him, from the Latin Version of Junius and Tremellius. He confined himself so much to the sense of these Authors, and their manner of delivering it, that it was the opinion and complaint of many, that his Translation abounded with turns of Expression, which were purely Latin, and not at all agreeable to the genius of the German Language.

The Anabaptists have likewise their German Bible, printed at Worms in 1529. and translated by Lewis Hetzerus, with the assistance of John Denkius. These Translators are said to have made great use of the Zurich Version.

John Crellius publish’d his German Translation of the New Testament at Racovia in 1630. And Felbinger printed another Translation of it at Amsterdam in 1660.

The Jews of Germany have some Versions of the Bible in their Language, part whereof are printed in Hebrew, the rest in German Characters. The objection to their Translations is, that they are too literal, and render servilely the Hebrew Text word for word in German.

Flemish Bibles.

The Flemish Bibles, which were prepared for the use of the Catholicks, are very numerous, and for the most part have no name of any Author prefixed to them, till that of Nicholas Vink appeared, which was printed at Lovain in 1548, and the same year at Cologn. The Author confesses that he was assisted in his undertaking by two Divines of Louvain, whose names he does not mention.

The Flemish Versions, which the Calvinists made use of till the Year 1636. or 1637. were copied from that of Luther, or that of Zurich in Switzerland. But their Synod of Dort having in 1618. and 1619. appointed a new Translation of the Bible to be made into Flemish, Deputies were named for this work, which was not finished till 1636. and 1637. since which time there have been very many Editions of it.

Danish Bibles.

The first Edition of the Danish Bible printed in 1550. was made by Peter Palladius, Olaus Chrysostom, John Synningius, and John Maccabæus, wherein Luther’s first German Version was the model which they followed. This Edition was revised and reprinted in 1589.

John Paul Resenius, Bishop of Zealand, published likewise in the Year 1605. a new Danish Bible, translated from the original Hebrew. The Translator has too servilely endeavour’d to render his original literally, by which means he has made himself almost unintelligible in his own Language. His Version is harsh and obscure. But in 1633. Christian IV. King of Denmark, gave orders to have it corrected, and put into a better Style.

John Michel translated the New Testament into Danish, and printed it at Lipsick in 1524. and at Antwerp in 1529. and Christian, Son to Peter Canon of Lunden, put out a Translation of it likewise in 1531. Upon the first Edition of this Version it was thought very barbarous, but in the following Editions it was corrected.

Swedish Bibles.

The Author of S. Bridget’s Life²³ says, that this Saint who lived in the fourteenth Age, was a diligent reader of the Holy Bible; and that she procured it to be translated into her mother Tongue. Matthias Canon of Lincolp, and Confessor to this Saint, is said to be the Author of this Translation; but there is now no Copy of it that we know of, to be found any where.

In 1534. Olaus, and Lawrence the Son of Peter, published a Swedish Bible which they had translated from the German Version of Martin Luther. Gustavus Adolphus King of Sweden had it revised about the Year 1617. so that afterwards it was almost generally followed; for tho’ it has been since frequently corrected, yet the substance of it is still the same.

English-Saxon, and modern English Bibles.

We are assured that Adelmus Bishop of Sherburn²⁴, who lived in 709. made an English-Saxon Version of the Psalms, and that Eadfridus or Ecbertus, Bishop of Lindisferne²⁵, who lived about the Year 730. translated several Books of Scripture into the same Language²⁶. It is said likewise²⁷, that venerable Bede, who died in 735. translated the whole Bible into Saxon. But Cuthbert, Bede’s Disciple, in the enumeration of his Master’s Works, speaks only of his Translation of the Gospel, and says nothing of the rest of the Bible²⁸.

Some will have it that Alfred King of England, who lived in 890. translated likewise a great part of the Scripture into his own Language, at least that he set about a Translation of the Psalter²⁹, which he did not live to finish. Balæus cites also William of Malmesbury, who says, that King Ethelstan directed a Translation to be made of the Old Testament out of Hebrew into English-Saxon. It is very probable that some Jew converted to Christianity had the care of this Work.

We find an old Version in this Language, of several Books of the Bible made by Elfrick Abbot of Malmesbury. William Lille an Englishman, in the Year 1638. printed the Fragments of the Bible translated by this Elfrick, at London; but Edmund Thwaits published Elfrick’s genuine Translation at Oxford, in 1699. There are several manuscript Translations of particular Books of Scripture in this Language but without the Authors names, which are to be seen in the Libraries of England³⁰.

Matthew

Matthew Parker, in the Year 1571. published at London the four Gospels in the English-Saxon Language. They were of some very old Translation, the Author whereof was not known. Thomas Marefchal reprinted them in 1665. in English- Saxon Characters, with remarks of his own added to them. Dr. Mill observes, that this old Version was made from a Latin Copy of the old Vulgate, which was in use over all the western part of the World, before S. Jerom published his new Translation; for which reason the Author of it is believed to be very antient.

As to the English Versions of the Bible, the first Author of them is thought to have been John Trevisa, who finished his Translation in the Year 1357³¹. The second that we know of, who undertook a Work of this kind, was Wickliffe, the Manuscript of whose English Translation is in several Libraries in England; but we do not know that it was ever printed. Several other Manuscripts of English Versions are to be met with, but generally without the name of any Author affixed to them.

The first English Bible printed for the service of the Catholicks, is that which was published at Doway in 1609 and 1610. and at Paris in 1635. This Bible contains only the Old Testament, and is translated from the Vulgate, with Notes by some Divines of Doway. The New Testament was published at Rheims in 1582. with the Annotations of the English Divines in this place.

The English Bible was translated for the use of Protestants, partly by William Tindal, and partly by Miles Coverdale. It was published at London in 1535. This Book, as well as the Authors of it, had very unaccountable fortune; but at last after much contradiction it passed, and King Henry VIII. commanded it to be printed, and placed in all the Churches in England, in order to be there publickly read³².

Thomas Matthew’s or John Rogers’s Version, which was published at London in 1537. scarce differs in any thing from that we have been speaking of. That which was put out at London in 1541. by the authority of King Henry VIII. was revis’d and corrected by Cuthbert Tunstal and Nicholas Heath, the first, Bishop of Durham, the second, Bishop of Rochester. The Year following, this very Version was prohibited by Act of Parliament and the King’s Proclamation³³; so that during the remainder of Henry VIII.’s reign, there was no Version of the Scripture in the vulgar Language publickly approved and authorized in England. But as soon as Edward was seated on the Throne, Cranmer procured a new Edition of the Bible translated by Tunstal and Heath, to which he added a Preface of his own. It was published at London 1549.

In Queen Mary’s reign, several of the English, who had lived in exile at Geneva³⁴, undertook to make an English Translation of the Bible from that of Geneva. It was put out in 1561. and dedicated to Queen Elizabeth; it was afterwards several times reprinted. But all the English were not pleased with it; for which reason Matthew Parker’s Bible, called the Bishop’s Bible, was³⁵ reprinted in 1568. Vid. le Long Bibl. Sacr. t. 2. p. 264.

Lastly, in 1612. in the reign of James I. the Bible, called the King’s Bible, was published: This was translated from the Greek and Hebrew by Andrews Bishop of Winchester, and several other Divines, to the number of seven and forty, who shared the Work among them, and took great pains about it. These are the principal Editions of the Bible in English.

Sclavonian Bibles.

It is believed that S. Jerom, who was of Dalmatia, translated the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testament into the Language of his own Country³⁶; but this opinion is not supported by any good proofs: for first, S. Jerom was of Dalmatia, and not of Sclavonia; and secondly, when this Saint tells Sophronius in his Letter to him, that he had translated the Scripture suæ linguæ hominibus, for such as used his Language; we are to understand the Latin Tongue, which was very familiar and as it were natural to him.

Others are of opinion, that the Sclavonian Version was the Work of S. Cyril and Methodius, who were imployed in the conversion of the Sclavonians, about the Year 880. and this opinion is supported by two Historians of Bohemia, one of whom lived in 993. the other in 1200. This old Version was printed by the Muscovites in 1581.

The first Bible printed in this Language, is that which was translated by John of Glogow, and printed at Cracow. This Author died in 1507. and we have not the whole Bible of his Translation, but several Books of it only, printed as we have said at Cracow. Nor do we believe that there is an intire Version of the whole Bible printed in this Language; but only the Psalter, and the Epistles and Gospels for the whole Year.

Bohemian, Polish, Russian, or Muscovite Bibles.

The Taborites, a sort of Bohemian Hereticks, procured a Bible to be printed in their Language at Venice, in 1506. This they had themselves translated from the Vulgate; it has been several times reprinted. But as the Text from which it was taken, did not please the new Reformers, their Brethren in the year 1579, printed the whole Bible translated from the Greek and Hebrew, by eight of their own Doctors, whom they had sent to the Schools of Wittemberg and Basil, particularly to study the original Languages in these places. This Bible was printed at the Castle of Cralitz in Moravia. The first Part, or Tome was published in 1579, and the sixth and last not till 1593.

The first Version of the Polish Bible that is any where known, is, they say, that composed by Hadewich Wife to Jagellon Duke of Lithuania, who imbraced Christianity in 1390. We are told likewise of a Polish Version of the Bible by Andrew de Jassowitz, and written in 1455, by the Order of Sophia, wife of Jagellon King of Poland. But these Bibles are in Manuscript only.

In 1599, there was a Polish Translation of the Bible published at Cracow, which was the Work of several Divines of this Nation, wherein James Wieck a Jesuit had a principal Share. Another was published in 1608, at Hanovia, probably Hayin in Bohemia, in the Province of Silesia, translated by Jerom of Leopolis, or as Sixtus of Sienna calls him, John of Leopolis.

In 1596, the Protestants published a Polish Bible from Luther’s Version. It was reprinted in 1632, and dedicated to Uladislaus IV. King of Poland.

The Socinians have likewise their Bible in this Language, it was translated from the Greek and Hebrew, and printed at Brestia a City of Lithuania, in 1562. Some time after, viz. in 1572, another was put out by them at Caslaw, a City of Lithuania, revised and corrected by Simon Budneus. They have besides the New Testament translated by Martin Czechovick, and another by Valentine Smalcius.

The Russians or Muscovites in 1581 published the Bible in their Language at Ostrowick, translated from the Greek by S. Cyril the Apostle of the Sclavonians. But as this old Translation was too obscure, Ernest Gliik, who had been carried captive to Moscow after the taking of Nerva, undertook to make a new Translation of the Bible in Sclavonian; and Gliik dying in 1705, the Czar of Muscovy now reigning, gave Directions to continue the Work which he had begun, and appointed some particular Divines for this purpose³⁷. But this new Translation has never yet been published, that I know of.

I shall say nothing more particularly in this place of the several Bibles translated into vulgar Languages. This is sufficient for a Dictionary. They who would have a more exact Knowledge of this matter, may consult such Authors as have written expresly on this Subject: For example, the critical Works of M. Simon on the Old and New Testament, and F. le Long’s Bibliotheca Sacra, from whence we have borrowed almost all that we have here related.

As to the Authors of each respective Book of the Bible, the time wherein they wrote, their admission into the Canon, and other questions which are generally proposed concerning every one of them, the Reader may have recourse, if he pleases, to our Prefaces, and turn to such Articles in this Dictionary, wherein the names of these Books and of their Authors are to be met with.

BIBLIOTHECA. The Collection of the holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament is sometimes called Bibliotheca Sacra, or Sacred Library. Thus we say, S. Jerom’s Sacred Library, meaning the Collection of the Sacred Writings translated by him. We do not read that there were any Libraries formed among the old Hebrews, before the time of Nehemiah, and Judas Maccabæus. But the Annals of the Kings of Judah and Israel, which are mentioned after so summary a manner in the Books of Kings and Chronicles, may be considered as so many Libraries. Solomon complained so early as in his time, that there was no end of making Books. He Eccl. xii. 12.himself had written a great many, and among other Effects of his Magnificence, it 1 Kings iv. 32, 33.is very probable, that he did not forget to compose a large and royal Library.

Ezra, who revised and put in order most of the historical Books of Scripture, had doubtless abundance of Memoirs, Annals, genealogical and other Registers, which are cited by him principally in the Chronicles. It is particularly remarked in 2 Macc. ii. 13.the second Book of Maccabees, that Nehemiah founded a large Library in Jerusalem, composed of the Acts of the Kings, the Prophets, and of David, and the Epistles of the Kings concerning the holy Gifts. Judas Maccabæus imitated Ibid.the Diligence of Nehemiah. He collected what the War with Antiochus Epiphanes had dispersed, and repaired what that had destroyed. There is mention likewise in Prov. xxv. 1.the Book of Proverbs of several Sentences

or Proverbs collected by the command of Hezekiah. Benjamin of Tudela, a Jewish Traveller³⁸, says, That on the Banks of Euphrates, near the Prophet Ezekiel’s Sepulchre, there was a large Library, which contained the Books that were in being under the first and second Temples. Among others, there was to be seen there the Volume of Ezekiel’s Prophecy written with his own hand; there were also many other Books there; and it is the custom, says our Author, for all those who have no Children, to leave their Books as a Legacy to this Library.

BIBLUS, a City of Phœnicia. See hereafter Byblos.

BICHRI, the Father of Sheba, who was remarkable in his Rebellion against David, 2 Sam. xx. 1, 2, &c.

BIDKAR, Captain of the Guards to Jehu King of Israel: He was commanded by this Prince to cast the Body of Jehoram Son of Ahab into the Field of Naboth the Jezreelite, 2 Kings ix. 25.

BIGTHAN. An Officer of the Guards to King Ahasuerus, or Darius the Son of Hystaspes, who having conspired against the King his Master, was discovered by Mordecai, Esth. ii. 21. The term Bigthan or Bagathan is not very different from Bagoas, which signifies an Eunuch. The Chaldee, and some Copies of the Septuagint imply, that Bigthan and Teresh his Companion conspired against the King, because they feared the future Elevation of Mordecai the Queen’s Uncle. Others are of opinion, that they being very closely attached to Haman and his Interest, had formed a Design of setting him upon the Throne, and murdering Ahasuerus. This is certain, that the cause of their Discontent was not known.

I. BIGVAI and his Children returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel, Ezra ii. 2. 24.

II. BIGVAI returned from Babylon with Ezra, Ezr. viii. 14.

BILDAD, the Shuhite, one of Job’s Friends, descended from Shuah the Son of Abraham and Keturah. Shuah’s Family lived in Arabia Deserta, eastward of the Holy Land.

BILEAM, a City in the Tribe of Manasseh, on the other side of Jordan. It was given to the Levites of Kohath’s Family, 1 Chr. vi. 70.

BILGAH, Principal of the fifteenth Band of Priests established by David, 1 Chr. xxiv. 14.

BILHAH, Rachel’s Handmaid, given by her to her Husband Jacob, that at least through her means, she might have Gen. xxx. 3, 4, 5, &c.a Son. Bilhah conceived and brought forth Dan, which word signifies Judgment. She had a second Son also called Naphtali. The Testament of the twelve Patriarchs³⁹, an antient but Apocryphal Book, says, that Reuben Jacob’s Son committed that act of Incest with which he is so sharply reproached in Gen. xlix. 3. with Bilhah his Father’s Concubine; and that Rachel dying in labour of Benjamin, the Child was given to Bilhah to be brought up⁴⁰.

BILHAN, the Son of Jediael, and Father of Jeush. 1 Chr. vii. 10.

To BIND and loose, are taken in Scripture for condemning and absolving: I will Matt. xvi. 19.give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven.

By binding and loosing, in the language of the Jews⁴¹, is understood likewise permitting or forbidding, or declaring any thing in a judicial manner to be permitted or forbidden; and in the Promotion of their Doctors, they put Keys into their hands, with these words, Receive the power of binding and loosing.

Mat. v.17.I am not come to unloose the law, but to compleat it, says our Saviour; that is to say, I am not come to destroy the Law, but to perfect it. Religion has perfected the Law of Moses, discovered the true Spirit of it, unravel’d all its secret Meanings, and accomplished all the Figures of it; and if it has abrogated some of its ceremonial Institutions, it was only with a design of making the essential points of it observ’d the better.

Deut. xxv. 4. Judg. xv. 10.Ye shall not bind or muzzle the Ox’s mouth that treadeth out the corn. See to Thresh. To Bind is used for putting in Bonds, and in Prison. We are come to bind Samson, to make him our prisoner.

To bind the Law upon one’s hand for a Deut. vi, 8.sign; to wear it like a Bracelet on one’s arm. And Prov. vi. 21. Bind my precepts about thine heart, and tie them about thy neck. And again, vii. 3. Bind my Commandments upon thy fingers, and write them upon the table of thine heart. In Isai. viii. 16. Liga testimonium, signa legem, is to be understood in another sense. Seal what thou hast been writing, bind it about with thread or ribband, and put thy seal to it.

It is said that Daniel was found to be the most learned of the Diviners, Magi, and Interpreters of Dreams, and things hidden. Spiritus amplior—, & interpretatio somniorum, & ostensio secretorum & so

lutio ligatorum inventæ sunt in eo. And lower, Quod possit obscura interpretari & ligata dissolvere, &c. Where we see, that loosing things which were bound, is used as an expression to explain things concealed. Dan. v, vi. 16.

BINNUI, an Israelite, who separated from his Wife, he having married her contrary to the Law. Ezra x. 30.

BIRD, or Fowl. It is a disputed Point, whether Birds come out of the Earth or Water; and whether as to the use of them, they may not be placed in the Category of those Fishes, which are permitted to be eaten on fast days, when the Church forbids the use of Flesh; or whether they are really as much flesh-meat, as the four footed beasts. Opinions are divided on this question. Moses speaking of the Creation Gen. i. 20.of Birds, says, Producant aquæ reptile animæ viventis, & volatile super terram, sub firmamento cœli. Let the Waters produce living Fishes, and Fowls upon the Earth, under the Firmament of Heaven. The literal construction of the Hebrew runs thus, Let the waters produce creeping things that have life, and let the birds fly upon the earth. This Text does not clearly prove, that Fowls proceed from the Waters, as well as Fish. And Chap. ii. v. 19. of Genesis, seems to intimate, that Birds are taken from the Earth; Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air. As to the Consequence which some would draw from it, viz. That the use of Fowl as well as Fish is allowable on Fast-days, it is manifestly wrong, since Fowls are more delicate than the Flesh of four-footed beasts, and are neither less juicy, nor less contrary to the Spirit of fasting, which is Abstinence, and the Mortification of the Senses. Nec ideo te carne vesci non putes, says S. Jerom, si suum agrestium, leporum atque cervorum, & quadrupedum animantium esculentias reprobes; non enim hæc pedum numero, sed suavitate & gustu comprobantur. Hieron. Ep. 9. ad Salvinam.

The opinion of Birds proceeding from Water as well as Fish, seems to be better founded on Scripture and the Fathers. The Text of Moses very much favours it. He relates in the same place, Chap. i. v. 20. the Creation of Fish and of Fowls. He says not a word of Fowls on the sixth day, where he speaks of the Production of terrestrial Creatures, Gen. i. 24, 25. And in the Recapitulation of the Works of the fifth day, Chap. i. v. 21. he says expresly that God created Fishes, and Sea Monsters, and all the winged Fowl, according to their species. Lastly, he says, that God blessed what he had created the fifth day, and said to the Fishes, Multiply and fill the waters in the seas; and to the Fowls, Multiply in the earth. The Fathers, and the generality of Interpreters⁴² have understood the Text of Moses in this Sense. They believed Fishes and Fowls to have had the same Original, and to have been created the same day.

Another proof which shews, that the Antients believed Fishes and Fowls to have sprung both from the Waters, is this, viz. They allowed themselves the use of Poultry upon days of Abstinence and Fasting; as appears in Socrates the Historian⁴³, and Nicephorus⁴⁴, who say, that formerly many did eat indifferently of Fish or Fowl, upon this Supposition, that both proceeded from Water. There were several Examples of holy Persons who used Fowls, tho’ they professed Abstinence from Flesh. Epiphanius having served up a Fowl before S. Hilarion, this holy Monk refused to touch it⁴⁵, saying, that he never eat any thing which had had life. S. Epiphanius was not, certainly, unacquainted with the rules of a monastick life, and was far from tempting S. Hilarion that he might violate them. S. Jerom in his Letter to Salvina, supposes Fowls to be sometimes used on fasting days, tho’ he did not approve the abuse which some made of this Permission, in giving a loose to their Sensuality. Bede⁴⁶ relates, that S. Cuthbert one day put a Duck before some Monks, who came to visit him. Altho’ S. Bennet forbids his Monks to eat the Flesh of four-footed Beasts,⁴⁷ he does not expresly prohibit that of Birds; and there are several Examples which prove, that in his Order they did eat it without scruple upon certain days in the year⁴⁸; for example, four or eight days at Christmas, and as many at Whitsuntide; and this at such times, when his Rule was most strictly observed. Concerning this matter, see the Commentators upon Genesis, Chap. i. v. 20, 21, 22. and the Authors, who have explained S. Bennet’s Rule, Chap. xxxix. See in particular F. Haeften in his monastick Disquisitions, and F. Martenne in his Comment on S. Bennet’s Rule.

Some Interpreters⁴⁹ have asserted, that Birds were made of the Earth as well as fourfooted Creatures; and others have maintained,⁵⁰ that they rather proceeded from the Air, because the Air and Water

are something related; and it is natural for animals to live in the Element, whence they sprang, as we see that animals produced from the Earth, live upon the Earth, Fishes as they proceeded from Water, live in Water. Thus they say, Birds living in the Air, is a strong presumption that they were made of Air. These things are treated more at length in the Commentators, as may be seen by those who have a mind to consult them.

If any one would know what Birds were clean or unclean, according to the Law, he may have recourse to Leviticus xi. 13---24, and Deut. xiv. 11, 12. and we have said something of each of them in particular under their proper titles in this Dictionary.

Birds were offered in Sacrifice upon many Occasions; for example, in the Sacrifices ordained for sin, he who had not a Lamb or a Kid, might offer two turtles or Lev. v. 7, 8. Lev. i. 14 15, 16.two young pigeons, one for a sin-offering, and the other for a burnt-offering, these he presented to the Priest, who offered that first which was for the sin-offering, and wrung off his head from his neck, but did not divide it asunder: the other he was to offer for a burnt-offering, according to the manner: In another place Moses relates more at length Lev. i. 15the manner wherein the Sacrifice of Fowls was performed. The Priest took that which was appointed for the Burnt-offering, brought it unto the altar, wrung off his head, and burnt it on the altar: and the blood thereof he wrung out at the side of the altar: and he pluckt away his crop with his feathers, and cast it beside the altar on the east-part, by the place of the ashes: and he clave it with the wings thereof, but did not divide it asunder; and he burnt it upon the altar, upon the wood that is upon the fire.

Some Interpreters⁵¹ will have it, that the head of the Bird was pulled off, but others maintain, that there was only a hole opened with the nails between the head and the throat, without separating intirely the head from the body. The Text of Moses does not intimate what was done with the Head thus separated; and it is observed, that when Abraham offered Birds for a Burnt-offering, he did not cut them asunder, but placed them intire upon the other Victims which he sacrificed, Aves autem non divisit. In the Gen. xv. 10.other places where Moses speaks of the Sacrifices of Birds, he does not command the Heads to be pluckt off. See Levit. v. 7, 8. When a Man who had been smitten with a Leprosy, was healed, he came to the entrance into the Camp of Lev. xiv. 5, 6.Israel, and the Priest went out in order to discover whether he were well cured. After this the leprous person came to the door of the Tabernacle, and offered two Sparrows or two Birds alive, and pure, whereof it was lawful to eat; he made a Wisp with the Branches of Cedar and Hyssop tied together with a Thread, or Scarlet Ribbon; he filled an earthen Pot with running Water, so that the Blood of the Bird was mingled with it; then the Priest dipping the bunch of Hyssop and Cedar into the Water, sprinkled the Leper with it who was healed, after which he let the living Sparrow loose, that it might fly where it would.

As to what relates to the distinction of clean and unclean Birds: See the distinction of them above in the Article Animal.

Dead Bodies were sometimes left in Palestine, exposed to Birds of prey, as appears from several passages of Scripture. But Deut. xxxii. 24. and 2 Sam. xxi. 10. 1 Kings xiv. 11. Jerem. vii. 13. Deut. xxi. 23. xxii. 6, 7.generally they were buried in the evening; and the very Bodies of Criminals were taken down from the Gallows. There were only some extraordinary Cases wherein dead Bodies were thrown into the common Sewers.

Moses, in order to inspire the Israelites with Humanity, requires them, if they find a Bird’s Nest, not to take the Dam with the Young, but to suffer the old one to fly away, and take the Young only; that, says he, it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days.

It appears from Scripture, that the Baruch iii. 17.Antients hunted Birds; Baruch speaking of the Kings of Babylon, says, That they had their pastime with the fowls of the air. Dan. iii. 38.Daniel tells Nebuchadnezzar, that God had made the Fowls of the Air subject to him.

The Prophets speak often of Birds of passage, of the Swallow and the Stork that Prov. xxvii. 8; xxvi. 2. Jer. viii. 7. Hos. ix. 12. xi. 12. Jer. xii. 9. 10.return to the place of their first Habitation, whereas Man does not acknowledge the Lord his God. God says, that he will recall his captive People like a Bird that cometh from a far Country.

The Lord speaking of his People, says in Jeremiah⁵², Mine heritage is unto me as a speckled bird: come ye, assemble all ye beasts of the field, come to devour. As if he said, Judah was like a Bird of charming beauty, yet have I spared him whenever he offended me: have I not given him up to Birds of prey, to be devoured by them? The Hebrew may be literally translated thus, Is not mine heritage as a speckled bird, is it not with respect to me a bird shut up? one of the most beautiful birds for a cage; nevertheless have I not given

given it to the beasts of prey? Some translate the Hebrew i, is not mine heritage become like an Hyena against me? is not all mine heritage filled with wild beast? &c.

The Hebrew word Zippor, translated generally Sparrow, is taken likewise in general for a small bird, and sometimes for a Pullet. The Preacher speaking of old men, Eccl. xii. 4.says, that they rise up at the voice of the bird, that is to say at the crowing of the Cock. The Greek, Ornis, signifies a Bird, a Hen ; and the Translator of Origen⁵³ has used pullet for bird.

BIRSHA, King of Gomorrah, who was at war with Chedorlaomer, and his Allies, Gen. xiv. 2.

BIRZAVITH, the Son of Malchiel, 1 Chron. vii. 31.

BISHLAM Mithridath, one of the King of Persia’s Officers on this side the Euphrates, who with Reum Beelteem, wrote to King Artaxerxes, desiring him to give his orders to the Jews, not to go any further with their building of the Temple, Ezra iv. 7.

BISHOP, in Greek, Episcopos, in Latin Episcopus, which signifies an Overseer, one who has the inspection and direction of any Nehem. xi. 22.thing. Nehemiah speaks of the Overseer of the Levites⁵⁴ at Jerusalem, Et episcopus Levitarum in Jerusalem Azzi filius Bani⁵⁵. Uzzi had the inspection of the other Levites. The Hebrew word Pekid, which we render Episcopus, has the same signification. The Athenians gave this name to the person, who presided in their Courts of Justice, and the Digest to those Magistrates, who had the inspection of the Bread Market, and other things of this nature. But the most common notion of the word Bishop,Acts xx. 28. is that which occurs to us in the Acts, and in S. Paul’s Epistles, where it signifies Philipp. i. 1 1 Tim. iii. 2 Tit. i. 7. 1 Pet. ii. 25.the principal and first Pastor of some considerable Church, with other inferior and subordinate Pastors under him.

Bishops are the successors of the Apostles, and chief Judges of such controversies as relate to the Faith of Christians. S. Peter calls Jesus Christ, the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls. And indeed he is the Pastor and Bishop of all those who have either of these denominations. S. Paul describes the qualities requisite in a Bishop, 1 Tim. iii. 1, 2, &c.after this manner : If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach, not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre, but patient, not a brawler, not covetous, &c. From Episcopus comes Episcopatus, which Psal. cviii. 8. of the Vulgate Translation. Acts i. 20.the Psalmist makes use of to signify office, inspection and government. And S. Peter produces the same term, to denote the Apostleship, which the traitor Judas had forfeited by his perfidiousness. S. Matthias was substituted in his room, and admitted to his charge of Bishop. Et episcopatum ejus accipiat alter, and his bishoprick let another take.

BITHIAH, the Daughter of Pharoah, and Wife of Mered, 1 Chron. iv. 18.

BITTER. Bitterness. I will send the Hab. i. Judg. xviii. 25. 2 Sam. xvii.Chaldeans against you that bitter nation; and in another place⁵⁶, take care left people, who are bitter of Soul amari animo, or, as in the Vulgate, animo concitati, run upon thee; and again, David in his flight was accompanied with men bitter of Soul, or chafed in their minds, as a Bear robbed of her Whelps. The energy of these expressions is sufficiently discernible; it denotes 1 Sam. i. 10.anger, vexation, fury. Sometimes bitterness of Soul signifies only grief. Thus Hannah the Mother of Samuel, was in bitterness 2 Kings iv. 27.of soul; and of Elisha’s Landlady, whose son was dead, it is said, her soul is vexed or bitter within her. Job complains that God wrote bitter things against him, that were matter of grief, sadness, and Job xiii. 26.affliction.

The waters of jealousy, which Women suspected of adultery were obliged to Numb. xv. James iii. Is. xxxviii. 17.drink, are called bitter waters, by reason of their effects, they produced great sorrows in those who were guilty. Bitter envying in S. James, denotes mortal and permanent hatred, the effects whereof cause abundance of bitterness to those who are the objects of it. King Hezekiah in his Hymn says, that in the midst of the peace which he enjoyed, he was attacked with great bitterness, that is to say, with a very dangerous disease, Ecce in pace amaritudo Jer. xi.mea amarissima. And Jeremiah, Learn how hard and bitter it is to be forsaken of the Lord ; to how many evils and calamities this exposes you.

BITUMEN, a fat, combustible, oily matter, to be found in many places, particularly about Babylon, and in Judea, in the lake Asphaltites, or the Dead-Sea⁵⁷. Noah Gen. vi. 14. Gen. xi. 3.did over the Ark with Bitumen, and the Builders of the Tower of Babel made use of this matter for a cement. The little vessel also wherein Moses was exposed, near to the banks of the river Nile, was Exod. ii. 3.daubed over with Bitumen.

BLASPHEMY. A man is guilty of the sin of Blasphemy, when he speaks of God or his Attributes in an injurious manner, when he ascribes such qualities to him as do not belong to him, or robs him of those which do. The Law passes sentence of death upon Levit. xxiv. 12. 16.Blasphemers. Whosoever heard another blaspheming, and was a witness to his offence, laid his hand upon the criminal’s head, to express as it were by this ceremony, that he laid the whole blame and punishment of this action upon him. The guilty Person was led out of the city, and all the people stoned him.

BLIND. Blindness. Blindness is sometimes taken for a real privation of light, sometimes for no more than a dimness of sight; for example, the blindess of the man in the Gospel who was born blind, and that of Tobit were real, and they had truly lost their sight. The men of Sodom, who endeavoured to find Lot’s door, and could not, and S. Gen. xix. 11. Acts ix. 9.Paul, for the three first days of his being at Damascus, lost the use of their sight only for a season, the offices of their eyes were suspended. The Septuagint⁵⁸ have extremely well represented the situation wherein the inhabitants of Sodom were, by expressing that they were struck aorasia, as if they had said avidentia, with an actual inability of seeing.

Levit. xix. 14.Moses forbids the putting any thing before the blind with a design of making them fall: thou shalt not put a stumbling block before the blind, which may be understood simply and literally; or as if Moses had thereby recommended that humanity and charity which should be shewn to them, who want light and counsel, to put those in the way, who are in danger of going out of it, to instruct the ignorant, not to offend the poor and weak. Moses seems to explain his meaning Deut. xxvii. 18.in Deuteronomy, where he says, Cursed be he that maketh the blind to wander out of his way.

The Jebusites in the way of insult to David and his army, who besieged 2 Sam. v. 6.Jerusalem, mocked them in these words, Thou shalt not come in hither except thou take away the blind and the lame, who defend the place, as if in reality to make their insult appear greater, they had produced people of this sort upon their walls, or as if their meaning were, that they desir’d none but the blind and the lame to defend their city. Jerusalem notwithstanding was carried, and David forgave none of those blind and lame people who insulted him, he smote Job xxix. 15.the lame and the blind that were hated of David’s soul. Job says that he had been eyes to the blind, that he had given good advice to those who stood in need of it, that he had taken pains to set Matt. xv. 14.them right who through want of light and understanding had gone astray. Our Saviour almost in the same sense says, that if the blind lead the blind they will both fall into the ditch. His design was, to describe the presumption of the Pharisees, who as blind as they were in the ways of God, yet pretended to lead others. Again he tells them John ix. 40, 41.in another place, that he came into the world to the end that they who see not might see, and that they which see might be made blind. And as the Pharisees perceived that this was said with a view to them, they replied, Are we blind also? he answered them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin; but now ye say, we see, therefore your sin remaineth. If you had been sincere and humble enough to acknowledge that you wanted light, and had you addressed yourselves to him, who is the light of the world, you might have avoided sin, &c.

If. xxix. 18. xxxv. 5. xlii. 16.One of the principal characters of the Messiah taken notice of in the Prophets is, that the blind shall be enlightened by him. This therefore Jesus Christ proposed to the observation of John’s Disciples, who came from their master to be inform’d whether he were the person whom they expected. Tell John, says he to them, what ye have seen Matth. xi. 5.and heard; The blind see, the deaf receive their hearing, &c. The Evangelists have preserved the memory of more miraculous cures than one which were wrought by our Saviour on the blind.

Mark iii. 1. Isa. vi. 9. 16.Blindness of Heart in the obdurate Jews is often taken notice of, particularly in the Books of the New Testament, our Saviour saw and was afflicted at it. Isaiah foretold it, and God speaking to him of it said, Go, tell this people, see ye indeed but perceive not, make the heart of this people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes. That is to say, prophesy and tell them, that they will be blind and obdurate, that they shall neither see nor understand what is designed in order to procure salvation for them.

Gen. ix. 4, 5, 6. Levit. xvii. 11. Deut. xii. 23.BLOOD. God from the beginning of the World forbad the eating either of blood alone, or of blood mixed with flesh, that is to say, creatures suffocated and killed without drawing their blood from them; because the soul of the creature is in its blood; that is to say, the animal life does so depend upon the blood, that no creature can live without it⁵⁹. From hence proceed the several acceptations of the word Blood.

1. It is taken for life. God will require the blood of a man, that is to say, he will punish murder, in what manner soever it shall happen. His blood be upon us, let them impute his death to us. The

voice of Abel’s Blood crieth unto the Lord. The Murder committed in his person crieth Numb. xxxv. 24. 27.for Vengeance. Propinquus sanguinis ultor sanguinis; he who is to revenge Murder committed in the Person of his Relation.

2. Blood, means Relation. No one shall come near to any Woman who is near of kin to him. Ad proximam sanguinis sui. Lev. xviii. 6.Haman was a Stranger from the Persian Esth. xvi. 10.Blood; he was of a foreign Race.

3. Blood is taken for that which commonly happens to Women. Qui coierit Lev. xx. 18.cum Muliere in fluxu menstruo, ----ipsaque aperuerit fontem sanguinis sui, interficientur ambo. And, Si coierit cum ea vir tempore Lev. xv. 24.sanguinis menstrualis, immundus erit septem diebus----. Si pepererit masculum, Lev. xii. 4.triginta tribus diebus manebit in sanguine purificationis suæ. 4. Flesh and Blood are often set in opposition to Wit and Reason. Flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in Heaven. Flesh and blood Mat. xvi. 17.cannot inherit the kingdom of God. We 1 Cor. xv. 50.wrestle not against flesh and blood, against visible Enemies composed of Flesh and Blood, but against principalities and the powers of this world, against Devils, &c.

4. Wine is also called the pure Blood of the Grape. Sanguinem uvæ bibent meracissimum.Deut. xxxii. 14. Gen. xlix. 11. And Judah shall wash his Garments in the Blood of the Grapes.

5. The Priests are established by God to judge between Leper and Leper, between Blood and Blood; that is to say, to judge in criminal matters, and where the Life of a Man is at stake; whether the Murder be casual, or voluntary; whether it deserves Death or Pardon.

6. David said, he would not drink the 1 Chr. xi. 19.Blood of his Heroes, who had exposed their Lives to bring him Water from the Well of Bethlehem; that is to say, he would not drink of that Water, which had been so near costing them their Lives.

7. God reserved to himself the Blood of all Sacrifices, as absolute Master of Life and Death. The Blood of Animals was poured upon his Altar, or at the foot of his Altar, according to the nature of the Sacrifices; and if the Temple was too remote, it was poured upon the ground, and covered with dust. This Blood of the Sacrifices in the Old Testament, was only a figure of that Blood which Jesus Christ has poured forth for us, and which merits for us the forgiveness of our Sins.

Blood. A Man of Blood: An Husband of Blood; that is to say, a cruel and sanguinary Man, a Husband purchased with much Blood, or who is the occasion and innocent cause of the effusion of his Son’s Blood; thus Zipporah called her Husband Moses, when she had circumcised her Sons, in order to preserve them from Death, with which they were threatned. To build one’s Hab. ii. 12.house with Blood; that is to say, with Oppression, and the Blood of the unhappy. To wash one’s Feet in Blood, to obtain a signal Psal. lvii. 11.and bloody Victory. The Vulgate reads to wash his hands; but the Hebrew imports, he shall wash his feet. The revenger of Numb. xxxv. 27.Blood is he who, according to custom, had the charge, as nearest Relation, to pursue the Murderer of his Kinsman, and seek Blood; that is to say, to take vengeance on him.

Ps. l. 16. Hos. i. 4. Hos. iv. 2. Joel ii. 31.Libera me de sanguinibus, deliver me from Blood, forgive me the Murther of Uriah, whom I slew. I will visit the Blood of Jezreel, I will revenge the Blood which Jezabel hath shed there. Sanguis sanguinem tetigit; they committed Murder upon Murder: The Blood was no sooner wiped away, but more was shed. The Moon shall be changed into Blood, it shall appear red like Blood. I said unto thee Ezek. xvi. 6. Zech. ix. 11.even when thou wast in thy Blood, live. I saw thee all over polluted with the Blood of thy Birth, and I said to thee, notwithstanding this Impurity which is upon thee, I will give thee Life. As for thee also, by the Blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit, where there is no water. He speaks of Jesus Christ. Thou hast delivered thy Captives the holy Fathers, who were in Hell; thou hast redeemed them with the Blood of thy Covenant, which thou hast shed for them. Some explain it of the Deliverance of the Hebrews out of Egypt; God relieved them out of this Prison by the Blood of his Covenant, of his Paschal Lamb. It is said, that his Blood crieth from the Ground, Gen. iv. 10, 11. Is. xxxiv. 7.that their land is drunken with Blood. That Blood is in any one’s hands, upon any one’s head, &c. All which Expressions are better understood by the particular Energy that goes along with them, than by all the Comments that can be made to explain them.

The Blood of Jesus Christ is the Price of our Salvation; it is by his Blood that he has Acts xx. 28.purchased his Church. Quam acquisivit sanguine suo. It is by the Merit of his Blood that we acquire Justification, and the remission Rom. v. 9.of our Sins. We are justified in his Blood. And again, We have redemption through his Blood. By his Blood he hath Eph. i. 7. and Colos. i. 14. Colos. i. 20.pacified all things in Heaven and Earth; Pacificans per sanguinem crucis ejus sive quæ in terris, sive quæ in cœlis sunt. By his Blood he hath entred into Heaven and procured admission for us: By his own Blood he Hebr. ix. 12.entred in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. His Blood is the Blood of the new and everlasting Covenant,

Heb. xiii. 20. Luke viii. 43.shed for the Sins of Mankind, which is drunk by us, and is an earnest to us of Immortality.

The woman having an issue of Blood; she is mentioned in the Gospel, and said to have had this Indispolition twelve years, and to have spent her whole Fortune on Physicians, without any Succels. She came behind our Saviour and touched the border of his Garment, and immediately her Issue of Blood stanched. Hereupon Jesus said, who is it that hath touched me? S. Peter answered, Master, the Multitude throngs and presses thee, and thou sayest, who touched me? But Jesus said, Some body hath touched me; for I perceive that vertue hath gone out of me. Then the Woman came trembling all over, and declared before all the People what had induced her to touch him, and how she had been healed; and Jesus said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort, thy Faith hath made thee whole; go in peace.

Saint Ambrose is of opinion, that this Woman was Martha⁶⁰. John Malala and Codinus call her Veronica. But Eusebius assures us, that she was a Gentlewoman of the City of Paneas, near the source of Jordan, who, in acknowledgement of this Miracle, erected a Statue to our Saviour, which Eusebius affirms, that he had seen with his own Eyes. Sozomen⁶¹ and Philostorgius⁶² relate, that it was in being Psal. lxxx. 13.till the Emperor Julian’s time.

BOANERGES, that is to say, The Son of Thunder. This is the name given by our Mark iii. 17.Saviour to the Sons of Zebedee, James and John, upon the occasion probably of their request to him, that he would call for Fire from Heaven, and reduce a certain Village belonging to the Samaritans to Ashes, Luke ix. 53. 54.which had refused to entertain them. The term Boanerges is neither Hebrew nor Syriac. There is some reason to believe, that the Greek Transcribers have not copied it exactly, and that instead of Baneregem,⁶³ Son of Thunder, or Bane-reges,⁶⁴ Son of Tempest, they wrote Boanerges. Or lastly, Boanerges may be an ill way used by the Galilæans of pronouncing Banereges.

BOAR, Aper, or singularis ferus. This Beast was unclean, as well as the Hog. The Prophet complains in the Psalms, that the wild Boar of the Forest hath rooted up the Lord’s Vine. Singularis ferus depastus est eam. Which is understood either of Sennacherib, or Nebuchadnezzar, or Antiochus Epiphanes, who ravaged Judea. The Hebrew word Sis, is taken in general for all wild beasts. See Psalm xlix. 11. The Syriac understands it in the place cited of the wild Ass, and the Chaldee of the wild Cock.

BOCHERU, the Son of Azel, of the Tribe of Benjamin. 1 Chr. viii. 38.

BOCHIM, the place of Mourners, or of Mulberry Trees. See hereafter Clauthmon.

BODY. An Assembly or Community is 1 Cor. x. 17.called a Body; for Example, all the Faithful make but one Body: Unum corpus multi James iii. 6.sumus. S. James says, that the Tongue pollutes the whole Body, maculat totum corpus, the whole Body of our Actions; or that in all the Sins which we commit, it influences us by the other Members of the Body. Thus our Saviour in the Gospel, If Matt. vi. 22.thine eye be single, thy whole Body shall be full of light. If thy Intentions are right, thy whole Conduct will be agreeable to God. Or otherwise, If thine eye be single, if thou art liberal and beneficent, all the rest of thy actions will be good; at least thou wilt avoid many Sins, which are the consequence of Avarice, and a too great fondness for earthly things.

1 Cor. xv. 44.S. Paul speaks of a spiritual Body, in opposition to one which he calls animal, Seminatur corpus animale, surget corpus spirituale. The Body which we animate, and returns to the Earth, is an animal Body; but that which will rise again will be spiritual, will be no more gross, heavy, frail, &c. nor subject to the wants which we are now sensible of.

Body is opposite to Shadow, Figure, Colos. ii. 17. Colos. ii. 9Which are a shadow of things to come, but the Body is of Christ. The Ceremonies of the Law, the Festivals of the Jews are but Figures and Shadows, which are realized in Jesus Christ, and the Christian Religion. The Jewish Passover for example, is but the Figure of the Christian Passover; the Sacrifice of the Paschal Lamb, is but a Shadow of the Sacrifice of Christ; the fulness of the Godhead resides bodily in Jesus Christ. In ipso inhabitat omnis plenitudo divinitatis corporaliter, really, essentially. God dwells in the Saints as in his Temple; he dwells there by his Spirit, his Light, his Grace, but in Jesus Christ, the whole fulness of the Godhead dwells, not allegorically, figuratively, and cursorily, but really and essentially. The Body of any thing in the Stile of the Hebrews is the very reality of the thing. The Body of Day, the Body of Purity, the Body of Gen. xvi. 13. xvii. 23. xii. 17. Lev. xxiii. 4.Death, the Body of Sin, signify broad day, Innocence itself; the substance, reality, force of Sin; or our Body begotten in Sin. The Body of Death, signifies either our mortal Body, or the Body which vio

lently engages us in Sin by Concupiscence, which fets up its Empire in our Members.

Ubicunque fuerit corpus, illic congregabuntur & aquilæ. Matt. xxiv. 28. This is a fort of Proverb made use of by our Saviour in the Gospel, and borrowed from the Book of Job xxxix. 30. where it is said, that the Eagle hath its dwelling on the highest Rocks, viewing its prey at a great distance; and that as soon as there is a dead Body any where, it immediately resorts thither to devour it. Our Saviour compares the Nation of the Jews to a Body, which God in his wrath hath given up to Birds and Beasts of prey; wherever there shall be any Jews, there will be likewise Enemies to pursue and pillage them. Corpus in good Latin Authors is sometimes used to signify a Carcase or dead Body.

Exod. xxi. 3.To come in with his Body, and go out with his Body, are Expressions, by which is meant a Servant’s coming to, and going from his Master alone, without Wife and Children. If a Slave enters the House with his Wife, he shall depart out of it with her in the Sabbatical Year. S. Jerom translates it, Cum quali veste introierit, cum tali exeat. But the best Interpreters understand it as we have just now shewn: Gaph in Hebrew signifies the Body, and the Lappet of a Garment.

Body is often used in the way of opposition Rom. viii. 10.to spirit. The Body is dead because of Sin, but the Spirit is Life because of Righteousness. We are born Sinners and mortal, but Jesus Christ restores us to Life, and merits eternal Happiness for us by his Death, and Grace if we persevere in the practice of what is good.

BOETHIUS, the Father of Simon. This last was High Priest of the Jews, from the year of the World 3981, to 3999.

BONI PORTUS, The fair Havens upon the southern Coast of Crete, near Thalassus or Lassus. See Acts xxvii. 8.

BONNETS of the Hebrew Priests. See hereafter Cidaris, and the article of Priests.

BOOK; in Latin Liber, in Hebrew, Sepher, in Greek Biblos⁶⁵. Several sorts of Materials were used formerly in making Books. Plates of Lead and Copper, the Barks of Trees, Bricks, Stone and Wood, were the first Matter imployed to engrave such things and Monuments upon, as Men were willing to have transmitted to Posterity. Josephus speaks of⁶⁶ two Columns, one of Stone, the other of Brick, upon which the Children of Seth wrote their Inventions, and astronomical Discoveries. Porphyry⁶⁷ makes mention of some Pillars preserved in Crete, on which the Ceremonies were recorded that were practised by the Corybantes in their Sacrifices. Hesiod’s Works were at first written upon Tables of Lead, which were preserved in the Temple of the Muses in Bœotia. God’s Laws were written upon Stone, and Solon’s upon wooden Planks.⁶⁸ Tables of Wood, Box, and Ivory, were likewise very common among the Antients. When they were of Wood only, they were oftentimes covered with Wax, that any one might write on them with more ease, or blot out what they had written with a Style.

The Leaves of the Palm-Tree were used afterwards in the room of wooden Planks, and the finest and thinnest Bark of such Trees as the Lime, the Ash, the Maple and the Elm. From hence comes the word Liber, which signifies the inner Bark of Trees. And as these Barks were rolled up, in order to be removed with more ease, these Rolls were called Volumen a Volume; a name given likewise to such Rolls of Paper or Parchments as we are going to speak of.

Paper, Papyrus,⁶⁹ is a kind of Reed which grows upon the Banks of the Nile. The Trunk of this Plant is composed of several leaves lying one upon the other, which are taken off with a Needle. They are afterwards spread upon a Table, so much whereof is moistned, as is equal to the Size, which it is intended that the leaves of the Papyrus shall be of. This first bed of leaves is covered with a layer of fine Paste, or with the muddy Water of the Nile warmed: Then a second bed of Paper leaves is laid on upon this Paste, and so the whole left to dry in the Sun.⁷⁰ Such was the Egyptian Papyrus, from whence our Paper takes its Name, tho’ it be so very different from it.

The Kings of Egypt having collected a great Library at Alexandria, the Kings of Pergamus were inclined to imitate their example: But the Egyptian Monarchs, either out of Envy, or for some other Reason, prohibited the Exportation

of Paper out of their Dominions, which obliged the Kings of Pergamus to invent Parchment, called Pergamenum from the City of Pergamus; or Membrana, because made of the skin wherewith beasts and the several members of them are covered. With these leaves of Vellum or Parchment, two sorts of Books were made; the one were rolls composed of many leaves of Vellum sewed or glewed together at the end. These Books were written on upon one side only, and they were to be unroll’d and spread before they could be read. The others were like ours made up of many leaves fastened to one another, were written upon both sides, and were opened like our Books. The Jews still make use of rolls in their Synagogues, and the Bibles which they read there in a solemn manner, are made after the manner of the old Volumes.

The Antients wrote likewise upon linen. Pliny says⁷¹, the Parthians even in his time wrote upon their clothes; and Livy⁷² speaks of certain Books made of linen, lintei libri; upon which the names of Magistrates, and the history of the Roman Commonwealth were written, and preserved in the Temple of the Goddess Moneta.

As to the paper at present used by us, which is made of rotten rags beaten small, and reduced to a kind of pulp; the original of it is what we are not acquainted with⁷³. We see no Book written on this paper which is above five hundred years old; and perhaps the most antient Author wherein there is any mention of it, is Peter the Venerable⁷⁴, who speaks of paper made of old rags, ex rasuris veterum pannorum. F. Bernard de Montfaucon has treated likewise of cotton paper, charta bombycina, which he shews to have been in use above six hundred years ago⁷⁵. The original of this paper is not very well known; but the matter of it is certainly cotton, and the use of it has been very common ever since the tenth Age.

Numb. xxi. 14.Book of the Wars of the Lord. This Book is cited by Moses, where he is speaking of his passing the river Arnon with the Israelites, in their way to the country of the Amorites. The particular passage which he quotes is this, What he did in the Red-Sea, and in the brooks of Arnon, and at the stream of the brooks that goeth down to the dwelling of Ar, and lieth upon the border of Moab. This description is adapted only to the brook or river Arnon, which flows round the City of Ar, and sets bounds to the land of Moab. The Book of the Wars of the Lord related some particulars which happened when the Hebrews passed this brook. It declared that this river became dry, and retired as the Red-Sea had done, a circumstance which we read no where else.

Enquiry has been made what this Book of the Wars of the Lord was⁷⁶; some think it was a work of greater antiquity than Moses, and contained a recital of those Wars, which the Israelites had begun or carried on in Egypt, or out of Egypt, before their withdrawing out of this country under Moses. Indeed it is not natural to quote a Book, which is not more antient than the Author who is writing, particularly when any extraordinary and miraculous Fact is to be supported and confirm’d. The Hebrew of this passage in the printed Bibles is perplexed. As it is written in the Book of the Wars of the Lord; at Vaheb in Suphah and in the brooks of Arnon, and at the stream of the brooks that goeth down to the dwelling of Ar, and lieth upon the border of Moab. We do not know who or what this Vaheb is. M. Boivin the elder is of opinion, that some Prince is meant by it, who had the government of the Country, watered by the river Arnon, and was defeated by the Israelites, before they came out of Egypt. Others think, that Vaheb was a certain King of Moab, who was overcome by Sihon King of the Amorites.

Grotius, instead of Vaheb, reads Moab, and translates it, Sihon beat Moab at Suphah. I should rather read Zared instead of Vaheb after this manner, As it is written in the book of the wars of the Lord, the Hebrews came from Zared and incamped at Suphah, and about the stream of the brook of Arnon, which reaches as far as the dwelling of Ar, and leaneth upon the frontiers of Moab. Zared we know; see Numb. xxi. 12, 13. from thence they came to Suphah, which too is mentioned in Deut. i. 1. and perhaps in Numb. xxii. 36. From thence they came to the brook

of Arnon, which flows down to Ar the capital City of the Moabites. All this is cited very seasonably in this place, to confirm what is said in the preceding Verses; whereas if we explain this Quotation after any other manner, we cannot find to what purpose Moses here produced it. Zared may easily be made from Vaheb in the Hebrew⁷⁷.

Jos. x. 13.Others⁷⁸ are of opinion, that the Book of the Wars of the Lord, is the very Book of Numbers, wherein this passage is cited, or that of Joshua, or Judges; they do not translate as we do, It is written in the book of the wars of the Lord, but thus only, It is said in the recital of the wars of the Lord, &c. Others assert, that this Narration of the Wars of the Lord is contained in the hundred thirty fifth, and the hundred thirty sixth Psalms. Tostatus will have it, that the Book of the Wars of the Lord, and the book of Jasher, referr’d to in Joshua, are the same. Cornelius a Lapide conjectures, that this place and citation are here added to the Text of Moses, and that the Book of the Wars of the Lord, contained the Wars which the Israelites carried on under the conduct of Moses, Joshua, the Judges, &c. that therefore it was later than Moses. S. Austin⁷⁹ supposes, that this Book might possibly be written by the Moabits, and contain an historical account of the Wars, which they had been ingaged in, and in particular what happened when the Israelites came upon their frontiers Lastly, It may be said, Moses either wrote himself, or procured a Book to be written, wherein he took care to have all the Wars of the Lord inserted. This Book was continued under the Judges and the Kings, and was called Annals; and from these Annals came those Sacred Books, which contain the Histories of the Old Testament. But however this may be, this Book of the Wars of the Lord is not now in being; and we have no reason to doubt of its being very certain and authentick, at least in the particular passage, which is here cited. The Reader may consult the Commentators on Numb. xi. 14.

Book of Jasher or the Upright. There is a citation from this Book in Joshua, and in the Book of Samuel, and the same difficulties almost are proposed concerning this, as concerning the Book lately mentioned of the Wars of the Lord. Joshua, after having related how miraculously he put a stop to the course both of the Sun and Moon, adds, Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day. There is a great diversity of opinions concerning this Book⁸⁰. Some will have it to be the same with that of the Wars of the Lord, whereof we have been speaking; others that it is the Book of Genesis, which contains the lives of the Patriarchs, and other good Men⁸¹; others again comprehend under this name all the Books of Moses. But the opinion which seems most probable is this, viz. that there were publick persons among the Hebrews from the very beginning of their Commonwealth, who were imployed in writing the Annals of their Nation, and the most memorable Events which at any time happened to it. These Monuments were lodged in the Temple or Tabernacle, whither upon occasion recourse was had to them. The Book, therefore, of the Wars of the Lord, the Book of Days or Chronicles, and the Book of Jasher or the Righteous, are properly speaking the same thing differently express’d according to the difference of times. Before there were any Kings over the Hebrews, these monuments were intitled, The Book of the Wars of the Lord, or the Book of Jasher, or Right. After the reign of Saul they were called the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel or Judah.

It is matter of dispute with some, whether the citation from the Book of Jasher, were inserted by Joshua himself, or by those who digested his Memoirs, and put his Book into the form wherein we now find it. It is very credible, that this passage was inserted afterwards, and we may easily observe, that the Book of Joshua is not in the condition that he himself left it, but that some additions have been made to it. This Book of Jasher is intirely lost. See the Commentators upon Joshua x. 13.

The Book of Chronicles or Days, in Hebrew, Deberei Jamim⁸². This Book contained the Annals and Journals which were written in the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. These Memoirs or Journals are not now in being, but are cited in every page almost of the Books of Kings and Chronicles, which are composed chiefly from such old Memoirs as the Author had in his possession, and which in all probability were still subsisting even after the return of the Jews from the Babylonish Captivity. See our Preface

to the two Books of Chronicles, and those of Kings. The Authors of the Books of the Days, or Chronicles, were generally Prophets, and inspired Persons.

Book of Life, or Book of the Living, or Book of the Lord. It is very probable, that these several ways of speaking, which are Exod. xxxii. 32. Psalm. lxviii. 29. Psalm cxxxviii. 16. Philip. iv. 3. Ecclus. xxiv. 33. Rev. iii. 6. Rom. ix. 3.frequent in Scripture, are taken from the custom observed generally in the Courts of Princes, of keeping a State, a List of all those who are in their Service, of the Provinces which obey them; of the Officers of their Armies, of the number of their Troops, and sometimes even of the names of their Soldiers. Thus Moses’s begging of God rather to blot him out of his Book, than to reject his People Israel, is the same almost as S. Paul’s expression, when he declared, that he would consent in some sort to be accursed, separated from the company of the Saints, and struck out of the Book of the Lord, if thereby he might be able to procure the Salvation of his People. And when it is said, that any one is written in the Book of Life, nothing more is meant by it, than that such an one in a particular manner belongs to God, that he is in the number of his Friends and Servants. And on the contrary, when it is said, that such an one is blotted out of the Book of Life, this signifies, that he is razed out of the List of God’s Friends and Servants, in like manner as they who die, or are guilty of any sort of Treachery, for which they are dismissed the Court, are struck off the Roll of Officers belonging to the Prince.

In a more exalted sense, the Book of Life, signifies the Book of Predestination to Glory, Faith and Grace. They who are predestinated to Faith or Grace only, may fall, and be blotted out of the Book of Life, but they cannot, who are predestinated to Glory. This Predestination is absolute and irrevocable; and if the Elect sometimes incur the Guilt of mortal Sins, God never finally forsakes them, but gives them Grace to repent, and so to return to him.

Dan. vii. 10.Book of Judgment. Daniel speaking of God’s Judgment, says, The Judges were seated, and the Books opened, Judicium sedit, & Libri aperti sunt. Judgment was set, and the Books were opened. This is an allusion to what is practised, when a Prince calls his Servants to account. The Accounts are produced, and what every one owes is inquired into. It is possible he might allude also to a custom of the Persians, among whom it was a constant practice every day to write down what happened, the Services which Esth. iv. 1, 2, 3, 4.were done the King, and the Rewards given to those who had performed them, as we see in the History of Ahasuerus and Mordecai. When therefore the King sits in Judgment, the Books are opened, he obliges all his Servants to reckon with him; he punishes those who have been failing in their duty, or erases their name out of his Register; he compels those to pay who are indebted to him, and rewards those who have done him any important Services. There will be in Proportion the same way of proceeding at the day of God’s final Judgment.

Isa. xxxvii. 14.Book is sometimes put for Letters, Memoirs, an Edict, or Contract; in short, the word Book, in Hebrew, Sepher, is much more extensive than the Latin, Liber. The Letters which Rabshakeh delivered from Sennacherib to Hezekiah, are called a Book⁸³. The Contract which Jeremiah confirmed Jerem. xxxii. 10, 11, &c.for the purchase of a Field, is called by the same name. Ahasuerus’s Edict in favour of the Jews, is likewise called a Book. Job Esth. ix. 20, 30, &c. Job xxxi. 35.writes, that his Judge or his Adversary would himself write his Sentence. Librum scribat ipse qui judicat. (Hebr. homo litis meæ) ut in humero meo portem illum, &c. The Writing likewise which a Man gave to his Wife when he divorced her, was called a Deut. xxiv.Book of Divorce . See our Dissertation concerning the matter and form of old Books, prefixed to our Comment upon Genesis.

Isai. xxix. Rev. v. 1, 2, 3.The Book that is sealed, mentioned by Isaiah, and the Book sealed with seven Seals, spoken of in the Revelations, are Isaiah’s and S. John’s Prophesies, which were written in a Book or Roll after the manner of the Antients, and were sealed; that is to say, were unknown enigmatical, obscure and mysterious, had respect to Times remote, and Events that were to come; so that no knowledge could be had of them, till after that which was foretold should happen, and the Seals were taken off. In old times, Letters, and other Writings that were to be sealed, were first wraped up with Thread or Flax, and then the Seal was applied to them; to read them, it was necessary to cut the Thread and Flax, or Zech. v. 1, 2.break the Seals.

Book, or flying Roll, spoken of in Zachary, Volumen volans, twenty Cubits long, and ten wide, was one of those old Rolls, composed of many Skins or Parchments glewed or sewed together at the end. This Volume which appeared to Zachary in a Vision, in all probability never had any real existence. Tho’ some of these Volumes were very long, yet none were ever made of such a size. This was

written, and contained the Curses, Menaces and Calamities which should fall upon the Jews. The extreme length and breadth of it shew the excessive enormity of their Sins, and the terrible nature of the Evils with which they were threatned.

Gen. i. 1.The Book of the Generation of Adam signifies the History of his Life, in like manner as the Book of the Generation of Noah, or of Jesus Christ, signifies in the Stile of the Hebrews, their History, what has happened to them, and what they have done,

Nehem. vii. 5.Liber census, signifies the Roll, and enumeration of those who returned from the Captivity of Babylon. For, as has been already observed, Liber with the Hebrews signifies all sorts of Writings, Letters, Ordinances, Memoirs, Rolls, &c.

Eccl. xii. 52.Solomon said so long ago as his time, that there was no end of composing Books. Faciendi plures libros nullus est finis; that is to say, that to write upon all sorts of Subjects, and to compose Discourses upon theological as well as natural things, was an infinite Work; but that it was a grand Point, and the Sum of all, to fear God, and observe his Precepts. This cuts short an infinite number of Discourses, Writings, and difficult and curious Questions: Of making many Books there is no end. Les us hear the conclusion of the whole matter; Fear God and keep his Commandments; for this is the whole Duty of Man.

Isai. xxxiv. 4.Isaiah describing the Effects of God’s Wrath, says, that the Heavens shall be folded up like a Book, Complicabuntur sicut liber cœli. He alludes to the way among the Antients, of rolling up Books, when they had a mind to close them again. A Volume of several Foot in length, was on a sudden reduced to a very small one. Thus the Heavens should be shrunk into themselves, and disappear in some sort from the Eyes of God, when his Wrath should be kindled. These ways of speaking are figurative, and full of Energy.

Macc. iii. 48.It is said in the Books of Maccabees, that the Jews, under the Persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, laid open the Book of the Law, wherein the Gentiles endeavoured to find the Figures of Idols: Expanderunt libros legis de quibus scrutabantur Gentes similitudinem simulacrorum suorum. Some believe, that the Jews laid open before the Lord the Sacred Books, wherein the Gentiles in vain sought for something wherewithal to support their Idolatry; others, that they laid open the Sacred Writings, wherein the Gentiles were desirous to paint their Idols. Or otherwise; the Hebrews laid open their Sacred Books, wherein the Gentiles had sought diligently if they could not find some Figures which the Jews adored. The Heathens imagined that they should discover some Flourishes or Figures in the front of some Jewish Books, which would manifest to them what was the God whom they adored; for the Gentiles were very uneasy on this Article, some believing that they worshipped an Ass, or a living Man, or Bacchus, or something else which they would not own. With some small variation in the Greek Text, it might be translated thus, They laid open the Book of the Law at the same time that the Gentiles consulted the Images of their false Gods.

Ps. xxxix. 11. Vulg.We read in Psalm xl. 7. In the volume of the Book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God. In capite libri scriptum est de me ut facerem voluntatem tuam. S. Paul has left us no room to question the sense of this passage, since he applies it to the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. Some of the antient Fathers⁸⁴ have explained this in capite libri of the Book of Genesis, which imports, that in the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth; that is to say, God created the whole Universe by his Son, his Word, his Wisdom, which in this sense is the beginning of all things. Others, as Chrysostom, &c. explain it of S. John’s Gospel, which begins with these words. In principio erat Verbum. The Hebrew reads⁸⁵ In the volume of the Book it is written of me; that is to say, in the Body of the Sacred Writings in general: The Greek may receive the same sense: Kephalis i, which is rendred Caput, or beginning, signifies likewise a Roll, a Volume.

The Book of Heaven. Some of the Antients have asserted, that Heaven was as it were a great Book wherein every thing was written which was to happen upon Earth. The⁸⁶ Rabbins, and some Christian Authors have revived this opinion, and improved upon it, by saying, that there were Hebrew Characters to be distinguished in the Vault of Heaven, which form’d a certain Writing legible, and intelligible to those who understood it, wherein whatever is in Nature may be found. Picus of Mirandola⁸⁷ says upon this matter, that as the Astrologers see certain Images in Heaven, from which they draw their Consequences, the Jewish Masters have likewise their Alphabet in Heaven, and maintain that they find there the Elements and Characters of their Language. Agrippa⁸⁸ asserts the same

Book continues on the next page