this purpose, they married again, after they were rifen from the dead.' At any rate however I think that goramas is a remnant of the old reading preferved in the Syriac verfion. But the difficulty is, to find a Greek verb, which could be ufed before yuvainas in the accufative, and at the fame time was capable of being conftrued with yuvaxes in the nominative. The common reading for will not fuit this two-fold purpose, unless the paffage fignifies, that perfons married, who had arifen from the dead. Now that examples of this kind took place I will not deny: but there are none on record among the inftances of faith, which are quoted in the Epiftle to the Hebrews from the Old Teftament. Be this as it will, yuvainas in the accufative gives a fenfe in this paffage fo very different from that of yuvXIXES in the nominative, that I cannot fuppofe it had its origin merely as a various reading in the Greek: and I think it therefore not improbable, that they are different tranflations of the Hebrew text, and that the one was intended as a correction of, or an improvement on, the other. The Hebrew verb rp, which fignifies properly cepit, has been taken in the fenfe of dedit: and in Pfalm Ixviii. 19. this fame verb has been tranflated both ways". It is therefore not improbable that the author of the Epiftle to the Hebrews ufed mph, which was capable of being rendered either by boy the coramon Greek reading, or by edwxa the reading expreffed in the Syriac verfion.

Ch. xii. 15. μη τις ρίζα πικρίας άνω φυέσα ενοχλή, και δια ταυτης μιανθωσι πολλοι. Here is a notion expreffed, which is wholly inconfiftent with the Jewith mode of thinking. According to the laws of Mofes various meats were unclean, and defiled thofe, who ate them; but no herbs, not even thofe which were poifonous, were confidered as polluting thofe, who partook of them. The original therefore must have conveyed a different fenfe, but what that fenfe was, it is difficult to determine.

See the Supplem. ad Lexica Hebraica.

* רבים

سو

determine. But, if I may be allowed to form a con-jecture on the paffage in Deuteronomy", to which allufion is here made, I think it not impoffible, that the words used in the original were 190 et addantur multi. Now in Arabic fignifies an infectious difeafe, and therefore a tranflator might eafily miftake the meaning of the Hebrew verb, and render thefe words by xa plasters who, ufing an, not in the Mofaic fenfe of defiling by unclean meats, but in a medical fenfe. However, this is a conjecture, on which I will not infift; but whatever was the cause of the mistake, piano is at any rate an inaccurate tranflation.

Ch. xii. 18. & γαρ προσεληλύθατε ψηλαφωμένῳ ορει. ver. 22. αλλα προσεληλύθατε Σιων ορει. Here the expreflion opel Inλapwμew, monti palpabili, which is oppofed to Σιων °°° is certainly a very extraordinary one: and I am wholly unable to give a fatisfactory account of it, except on the fuppofition, that the Epiftle was written. in Hebrew. But on this fuppofition the cause of the inaccuracy may be eafily affigned. Sinai, or the moun tain of Mofes, is that, which is here oppofed to mount Sion. Now the expreffion to the mountain of Mofes' is in Hebrew. The word D the tranflator mifunderstood, and instead of reading it in and taking it for a proper name, either read by mistake palpatio, or pronounced by mistake w palpatio. Hence, inftead of rendering to the mountain of Mofes,' he rendered to the tangible mountain.'

On

Heb. xii. 25. Βλέπετε, μη παραιτησησθε τον λαλεντα ει γαρ εκείνοι εκ έφυγον τον επι της γης παραιτησαμενοι χρηματιζοντα, πολλῳ μᾶλλον ἡμεις οἱ τον απ' ερανων αποτρεφόμενοι. the difficulties attending the word παραιτησαμενοι in this paffage, I have fpoken at large in my Commentary on the Epiftle, to which I refer the reader, especially to

VOL. IV.

Ch. xxix. 18, 19.

Q

P. 407.

παραιτησάμενοι,

p. 407. It has fince occurred to me, that which I confider as incorrect, may be explained as a fault of the tranflator. Where the Greek words Tov ETTS TOV της γης παραιτησαμένοι χρηματιζοντα are ufed, the Hebrew original was perhaps to the following purport, die fich den von der Erde redenden erbaten, und den vom Himmel verbaten; and the words, which I have printed in Italics, were either overlooked by the tranflator, or had been omitted by accident in the copy, from which he tranflated.

Ch. xiii. 9. Βεβαιεσθαι την καρδίαν appears to be a too literal and confequently obfcure tranflation of b Tyo, which, literally taken, fignifies to ftrengthen the heart,' but is used as denoting to invigorate the body by food,' or to partake of a meal,' as in Judges xix. and Pfalm civ. 15. See the 491ft Note in my

5.

Commentary.

Ch. xiii. 15. See the 501ft Note.

SECT. XIV.

Remarks on the Greek fiyle of the Epistle to the Hebrews.

TH

HE Greek style of this Epiftle is different from that of every other book of the New Teftament. It is likewife fuperior to that of every other book, with the exception perhaps of the fpeeches of St. Paul recorded in Acts xvii. 22-31. xxiv. 10-21. xxvi. 1-21. But though the language of these speeches is equally good and fluent with that of the Epiftie to the Hebrews, it is ftill of a very different kind.

Among the peculiarities of the Greek ftyle of this Epiftle may be reckoned the particular ufe of certain

words.

* See the words of Origen quoted above, in the 10th section of this chapter.

שילח

the

words. For instance, the appellation of Arosoλos is given to Chrift, ch. iii. 1. The ufe of arrosoλos in this αποςολος fense may be ascribed perhaps to the circumftance, that' it is a tranflation of the Hebrew word . For in John ix. 7. w appears to be the name of the Meffiah, in fupport of which fenfe Wetftein in his Note to John ix. 7. has quoted a paffage from Debarim Rabba and in the books of the Sabians, Jefus is faid to have called himself, that is, first Apoftle.' Nuogo, ch. v. 11. vi. 12. an elegant Greek word, occurs in no other inftance in the wholeNew Teftament; and in the Septuagint it is ufed only in the Proverbs of Solomon, which are tranflated into better Greek, than any other part of the Old Teftament. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, vulgo is probably the tranflation of 22. Augodiva, ch. vii. 4. occurs in no other inftance, either in the New Testament, or in the Septuagint. It is here an admirably chofen word, for it literally denotes that part of the fpoil, which was allotted to the commander. The expreffion x av dɛyTERUS EZATELTO TOTTOS, ch. viii. 7. is really elegant Greek.

In quoting paffages, without mentioning the place, from which they were taken, the tranflator makes use of fuch terms as were agreeable to the manner of the Greeks: for inftance, ch. ii. 6. διεμαρτύρατο δε πε τις, and ch. iv. 4. εienne yag we. In the original was probably ufed the common rabbinical expreffion ¬ON), which a tranflator, lefs acquainted with the Greek mode of writing, would have rendered by a TE, or xxs λέγει. Alfo the plural number we,' instead of the fingular I,' occurs in ch. v. II. and is continued almoft throughout the next chapter: it occurs again

6

και

ch.

Carpzov in his Note to this paffage obferves, that Philo often. quotes in his manner.

แข

As in Matth. xix. 5. where we can have no other meaning, than the fcripture fays,' or it is thus written.'

ch. x. 15.; and perhaps ch. xiii. 18. may be added as an inftance of the plural for the fingular, though in the verfe, which immediately follows,, the fingular is used.

6

Laftly, the tranflator has feveral favorite words, which diftinguifh him from other writers, and occur more frequently in this Epiftle, than in any other part of the New Teftament. For inftance xngovoμos and xangovou, where the fubject does not relate to inheritance, as in ch. i. 2. 4. 14. xi. 7. Again, xgETT, in the fenfe of fuperior,' or nobler, or • more excellent,' ch. i. 4. vii. 7. 19. 22. viii. 6. ix. 23. xi. 40. xii. 24. On the whole, this word occurs thirteen times in the Epiftle to the Hebrews, though in all the other books of the New Teftament put together it occurs only fix times, and is ufed fimply in the fenfe of better. METEX is ufed, ch. ii. 14. vii. 13. to denote relationship, or participation of blood or tribe. It is ufed however, ch. v. 13. to denote participation of food, in the fenfe, in which St. Paul has used it, in whofe Epiftles, it occurs on the whole five times. To the preceding examples may be added the particular ufe of wugar λaubave, ch. xi. 29. 36.

χαρακτηρ,

: Whether the tranflator had read the works of Philo, with whom he fometimes agrees in his expreffions, as in xapaxτng, ch. i. 3. I will not undertake to determine. But for the opinion, that the author had ever read Philo, there is no ground what foever: fince their mode of arguing on the fame fubject, and on the fame paffages of the Old Teftament, is totally different. It was Philo's object to adapt the doctrines of Mofes to the precepts of Plato, for which purpofe he interprets his quoted paffages allegorically, and involves fimple facts in the moft profound and often ridiculous myftery but the author of the Epiftie to the Hebrews does not quote and argue in this manner. And, as the two writers have fo little connexion with each other, I do not fee how this Epiftle can be confidered even as a confutation of the allegorical dreams of Philo.

X

Neither