ページの画像
PDF
ePub

Teftament, and firft Chriftrian writers, it is called Hebrew, I need not now enter into any critical enquiries concerning the language; only for the fake of those who are unacquainted with these things, I fhall lay down the following remarks, which, if it were neceffary, it would be no difficult matter to confirm.

1. The original or primeval language of the world was Hebrew.

2. This continued univerfal till the Flood, and fo on till the attempt of building of the tower of Babel; for then the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech, about seventeen hundred and fifty years after the Creation.

3. At that time there was a confufion of languages; and men being scattered into different parts of the earth, and not converfing with each other, formed different dialects of speech ".

4. These feem to have been no other than the various dialects, of the old Hebrew; as Chaldee, Syriack, Arabick, and the other languages of that Eastern part of the world are: just as from the Latin we fee the Italian, French, and Spanish had their original'.

5. The Chaldee or Syriack dialect was the language of Syria and Mefopotamia, and the adjacent country. This is evident from the title Laban the Syrian put upon his monument, viz. , which are plain Syriack or Chaldee words; and from Rabshakeh's fpeech to the Jews, which is expressly faid to be delivered 78, i. e. in Syriack".

6. The family of Abraham, through all their various ages, retained their old Hebrew language pure and uncorrupt till the Babylanish Captivity. This is evident, because all the books of the Old Teftament wrote before that time are in that language; and in the laft-cited place, the Jewish officers defired to communicate with Rabshakeh in Syriack, and not in Hebrew, that fo the common people in Jerufalem might not understand them.

[blocks in formation]

7. After the Captivity they forgot their own Hebrew, and learnt the language of the Chaldeans or Syrians, or rather mixed it with their own. This in that a great part of appears, the books of Ezra and Daniel, which were wrote after the Captivity, are wrote in this language; and they had need of interpreters to tranflate the other books, when they were read in the fynagogues in Hebrew, which they did not underftand, into Chaldee which they did '.

8. This Chaldean or Syriack language, or, as fome call it, Syro-Chaldaick dialect, was the language of Jerufalem and Galilee, and all the country about, in our Saviour's time. There needs no other proof of this, than the great number of Syriack words, which are now remaining in the Greek Teftament; fuch as Talitha Kumi, Ephphatha', Eloi, Eloi, Lama fabachthani"; Bethesda ", Golgotha, Gabbatha P, Raca, Cephas, Aceldama, Boanerges, Maran-atha ", Bar-Jona, Abba ', &c. Thefe are all evidently Syriack words (as they know, who are the leaft acquainted with the language), and fuch as were in common ufe among the Jews, in our Saviour's time. I would only obferve farther concerning one of these Syriack words, viz. Aceldama, that it is faid to be in Tiða danéxty autãr, i. e. in their own dialect, which they then fspake.

Those who are not acquainted with thefe ftudies will be very likely to object here, that we read nothing of the Syriack in the New Teftament, but that the words above are commonly called Hebrew; which is indeed true, as alfo that the first Christian writers commonly call the language of the Jews at this time Hebrew. But it is eafy to anfwer, that Hebrew being the old language, and the other derived from it, and not very different, it is no wonder the Jews were fond of the old name, and always retained it. And as to the Fathers, it

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

cannot be strange, they fhould call it as the Jews did, they generally being ignorant of either language; though Justin Martyr, who lived in Syria, speaks of Hebrew and Syriack, as of one and the fame language, Dialog. cum Tryph. Jud. P. 331. And the most learned of the Fathers, Jerome, who understood both, perpetually observes the difference; and Nonnius, who lived in the fourth century, in his Paraphrase on St. John's Gospel in Greek verfe, for Hebrew puts Syriack. So on John xix. 13.

Γαββαθὰ παφλάζοντι Σύρῳ κικλήσκετο μύθῳ.

And verfe 17. of the fame chapter,

Γολγοθὰ τὸν καλέεσκε Σύρων ςόμα, &c.

And verfe 20. concerning the infcription on the cross,
Αυσονίη γλώσση τε Σύρῳ καὶ ̓Αχαΐδι φωνῇ.

b

It is plain then, that Syriack was the language of Judea in our Saviour's time, that in which himself and his Apostles conversed and preached. Mr. Voffius is the only one I know of a contrary opinion; he thinks the common language of Jerufalem and that country was Greek; but it is plain from Acts xxi. 37. the common Jews did not understand that language; and Jofephus exprefsly tells us, that it was a strange language to him and his countrymen. If any one has a mind to fee more of this controverfy, he may fee it warmly managed between Father Simon and Voffius, in the books cited in the margin. All that I fhall farther add, is, that inasmuch as I have promiscuously above used the words Chaldee and Syriack, the reason thereof is, because those two dialects are fo very much alike, and indeed almoft the fame, as every one knows, who is acquainted with the very rudiments of them, and may be very eafily perceived by thofe, who have not learnt the languages, if they will but caft their eye upon Buxtorf's Chaldee and Syriack Grammar; or perhaps more clearly, if they confult that incomparable Harmonical Grammar of the Orientals compiled by Erneftus Gerhardus, founded upon Schickard's He

2 Voff. Refponf. ad iterat. P. Simon. Object.

a Præfat. in Antiq. Jud. & Præfat. in Bell. Judaic.

Critical History of the N.Test.

Par. 1. c. 6.

Lib. jam. cit.

brew

brew Rules. The truth is, there is scarce any difference at all between them, fave only in a few words, and the punctuation. There would be but little difference vifible between Chaldee and Syriack (fays the learned critick in these language, Lud. de Dieu '), if thofe who affixed the points to them had thought it fit. I distinguish them, fays he, because others do; and fome little difference there is in forming the words; elfe for my part I own them to be one and the fame language. So Amira, and to the fame purpose our celebrated countryman Fuller; the Chaldee and Syriack dialects are not so properly faid to be alike, as to be almost the fame. And in another place accounts for it by a learned proof, that the Syrians and Chaldeans were one and the same people. And I cannot but obferve here, that what the prophet Daniel in one place calls, i. e. the language of the Chaldeans', in the next chapter is called л, i. e. Syriack *.

CHA P. XVI.

Several Obfervations, which prove the Syriack Verfion made in or near the Apostles' Times.

Obf. 3.

I

T was abfolutely needful, that a Verfion should be made; and therefore very probable, a Verfion was made of the books of the New Testament into the Syriack language, in or near the Apostles' times.

This Obfervation naturally arises and follows from the two foregoing; for if, as has been proved, an innumerable multitude of perfons were converted to Chriftianity in Jerufalem and Galilee, in Cæfarea, Damafcus, Samaria, Joppa, Lydda, Antioch, and all over Syria; if the language of all

[blocks in formation]

this country was Syriack, there can be nothing more unreafonable than to fuppofe, they were for any long time deftitute of thofe inspired books, which contained the foundations of their new Religion. To suppose this, would argue them either to have very little knowledge of, or very little zeal for, their profeffion; neither of which was the case we are sure. Nothing can be more reasonably concluded, than that upon the foregoing hypothefis, either the Apostles or themselves would take care to have a good Verfion as foon as might be.

1. It may with a great deal of reafon be supposed, that fome one or other of the Apofiles would take care to have the facred books of Chriflianity published among the Churches of Syria in their own language. This would be the best and most likely means of preferving and propagating those doctrines and that faith, which they had declared among them. Without this, I cannot fee, how they could expect any other than the speedy decay of the Chriftian Religion after their time, even when it made the most flourishing figure in their time. On the other hand, a Verfion (made by themselves, or a person of their appointment) of their writings into the language of the country, would be a very probable method of advancing the work they had been fo long labouring in, of keeping up those truths, which elfe must have been forgot, and of preventing thofe errors and herefies, which they faw springing up in the Church, &c.

2. If we fuppofe the Apoftles thus negligent of the interests of Christianity, it will be very abfurd to imagine the faithful Chriftians themselves to be negligent in a matter of fuch importance, in which they could not but fee themselves so nearly concerned. The zeal for the Chriftian Religion, which they evidenced in forfaking all on its account, and expofing themfelves to the rage and malice of the world, would fure make them folicitous to have the genuine and authentick memoirs of it in their own language. For inftance, the converts at Jerufalem, in whom there must needs be by education the greatest esteem for all those books, which they believed did come from God; can it be thought, they would not endeavour to have the Hiftory of the Life and Doctrines of Christ, as well as the Old Teftament tranflated into their known

language,

« 前へ次へ »