|
2 Timothy 3:16 |
|
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for
reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; |
|
Kenneth Gentry |
|
"In fact, one of the finest intellects of the
Westminster Assembly was a strong preterist: John Lightfoot." |
|
Philip Schaff |
|
On two points I have changed my opinion—the second
Roman captivity of Paul (which I am disposed to admit in the interest
of the Pastoral Epistles), and the date of the Apocalypse (which I now
assign, with the majority of modern critics, to the year 68 or 69
instead of 95, as before).
History of
the
Christian Church
8 Vol. |
|
Adam Clarke |
|
“I do not think that he refers to the resurrection of the body, but to
the resurrection of the soul in this life; to the regaining of the
image which Adam lost.” -
Commentary |


Youngs Literal Translation
King James Version
The 1599
Geneva
Study Bible
American
Standard
ASV-1901
Historical Book
Flavius Josephus
Philip Schaff
History of
the
Christian Church
8 Vol.
The
Parousia
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY
by, Charles Hodge
|
|

John Lightfoot D.D.
Published by John Strype and George Bright in Two Folio Volumes
1st Ed. 1684 |
 |
Then shall they
see the sign of the Son of man, &c. Not any visible appearance of
Christ, or of the cross in the clouds [as some have imagined,] but
whereas the Jews would not own Christ before for the Son of man,
or for the Messias, then by the vengeance that he should
execute upon them, they and all the world should see an evident sign,
that he was so. This therefore is called his coming, and
his coming in his kingdom, Matth. 17.28.
From The Talmud And Hebraica
By John Lightfoot
John:
Chorographical Inquiry
A Commentary on the New Testament
from the Talmud and Hebraica
John Lightfoot
(1602-1675)
Chapters
1 | 2 | 3 |
4 | 5 | 6 |
7
A Chorographical Inquiry
into some places of the land of Israel,
particularly those which we find mentioned
in the Evangelist St. John.
Chapter 1
Bethabara;
John 1
1. Different readings, Bethany and Bethamara.
2. The noted passages over Jordan.
3. The Scythopolitan country.
4. The Great Plain: the Scythopolitan passage
there.
5. Beth-barah,
Judges 7:24.
Chapter 1
Bethabara,
John 1
1. Different readings, Bethany
and Bethamara.
It is observed by all that treat
upon this evangelist, that the reading doth vary in some copies; and
this instance is alleged for one:
"These things were done in
Bethabara; but in other copies it is in Bethany."
But Drusius; "The Vulgar Greek
copies have it in Bethabara, which Epiphanius, in the place
above mentioned, calls Bethamara. Of this reading Petavius is
silent."
Nor indeed is it much wonder, that
Bethamara should change into Bethania, since
Bethamara signifies a place of wool; and Bethania
signifies a place of sheep.
But it seems very strange how
Bethabara should ever change into Bethany, unless upon some
such occasion as these:
Either that Bethabara might
be taken for the same with the house of exposition, or the
school; whence for explication it is annexed, by some hand or
other in the margin, the house of tradition, or doctrine:
as if the evangelist were to be understood in this manner; "These
things were done or disputed in a certain school beyond Jordan, where
John was baptizing." And so that word the house of tradition or
doctrine might steal from the margin into the text and common
use...
2. The noted
passages over Jordan.
Among the various ways of writing
Bethabara in Hebrew, these two especially deserve our
consideration at present: 'Beth-barah,' which we meet with in
Judges 7, and Bethabara, or a place of passage,
where they passed over Jordan. They must both come under our inquiry,
whiles we are seeking the place in hand; and, first, of the latter.
Doubtless there was no part of
Jordan but might be passed by boat from one side to the other, as
men's different occasions might call them; but we are now considering
the public and common passages that led over that river from one
country into another.
I. There is a bridge over Jordan,
betwixt the lake of Samochon and Gennesaret in the way that leadeth to
Damascus, which hath the name of "Jacob's bridge"; of which our
countryman Biddulph, who hath himself travelled over it, speaks to
this purpose:
"At the foot of this rocky
mountain runs a pleasant river called Jordan, which divideth Syria
from Galilee. Over this river is built a goodly bridge, which bears
the name of 'Jacob's bridge,' upon this twofold account: 1. Because in
this place Jacob met with his brother Esau; 2. Because here he
wrestled with the angel."
As to matter of fact, that there
is and was such a bridge, I do not much question; but for the reasons
why it is so called, as it is not much to our purpose to examine, so
they seem to have little else but conjecture in them.
II. Jordan also had a bridge over
it at Chammath, near Tiberias, at the very efflux of the river out of
the sea of Gennesaret; as we have elsewhere shewn from the Talmudic
authors, against the mistake of the tables, which place Tiberias at a
great distance thence. "As well the lord the king, as all the princes,
come even unto Tiberias, and pitch their tents near the bridge, where
the streams of Jordan from the sea do divide themselves."
"With his army he pitched his
tents near Tiberias, by the bridge, from whence the streams of Jordan,
from the lake of Gennesaret, do divide themselves." Read this, and
view the situation of Tiberias in the tables, and correct the mistake.
III. That was a most known and
frequent passage from Jericho, which we so often read of in the Holy
Scriptures; which yet seems rather to have been by boat than bridge.
See
2 Samuel 19:18, and
2 Kings 2:8.
3. The
Scythopolitan country.
There was a fourth, and that the
greatest, passage betwixt Chammath and Jericho, but at a great
distance from either; for the finding out of which, we are to consider
what is intimated,
1 Kings 4:12: "And all Beth-shean, which is by Zartanah beneath
Jezreel." And again,
1 Kings 7:46: "In the plain of Jordan did the king cast them, in
the clay-ground, between Succoth and Zarthan." We will begin with
Beth-shean.
I. Beth-shean, or Scythopolis, was
in the lot of Manasseh,
Judges 1:27. "Neither did Manasses drive out the inhabitants of
Beth-shean, which is Scythopolis." So that it was within the limits of
Samaria, though indeed one of the Decapolitan cities, and within the
jurisdiction of the Gentiles, as we have shewed elsewhere.
II. It was the utmost bound of
Samaria towards Galilee. "The bounds of Galilee on the south is
Samaria and Scythopolis, as far as the river Jordan."
III. The city was half a league's
distance from Jordan, saith Borchard, and yet extends its jurisdiction
beyond Jordan. That of Aethicus, in his Cosmography, is well known:
"The river Jordan hath its head in mount Libanus, runs about the lake
of Tiberias; from whence going out, hath its current through the midst
of Scythopolis, and issues in the Dead Sea." Jordan divided
Scythopolis in the midst; not the city (for that was at some
considerable distance from the river), but the country itself; so that
part of the country was on this, and part on the other side Jordan.
It was a noble city of the Syro-Grecians,
and had considerable jurisdiction, not only within the confines of
Manasses, but extended itself beyond, even to Perea.
4. The great plain:
the Scythopolitan passage there.
Of this great plain, which took in
the whole breadth of the country of Manasseh from Jordan towards the
west, a very long way, Josephus frequently speaks. Describing the
situation and portion of Ephraim and Manasseh, he thus expresseth
himself:
"The tribe of Ephraim extended
itself in length from the river Jordan to Gadara" [Gazarah, or Gezer,
Joshua 16:3, and 21:21]; "in breadth, from Bethel, and ends at the
Great Plain."
"The half tribe of Manasseh
extends itself in longitude from Jordan to the city Dor. But in
latitude [from Ephraim] it reacheth to Beth-shean, which is now
called Scythopolis." So that that 'great plain,' to those that
were journeying from Galilee, began from Beth-shean, and extended
itself in latitude to the confines of Ephraim. Hence that which we
meet with in the same Josephus, "They that passed over Jordan came
into the great plain, before which the city Bethsan lies"; or as it is
in
1 Maccabees 5:52, "They went over Jordan into the great plain
before Beth-shean."
In the Book of Judith, chapter
1:8, it is called "The great plain of Esdrelom": that is, in truth,
"the great valley of Jezreel." Insomuch, that when it is said of Judah
and his army (for he it is whom this passage concerns), that in his
return from the land of Gilead he passed over Jordan into this "great
plain," and that (as it should seem) not very far from Beth-shean; it
is evident that the great and common passage over Jordan was
hereabout, by which not only the Scythopolitans went over from their
country on this side Jordan to that beyond, but those also of Samaria,
and those of the Lower Galilee, passed over here to Perea.
Here would I seek for Jacob's
Bridge, where he passed over "Jordan with his staff," when he went
into Mesopotamia, and returned back with a family; and not where it is
commonly now shewn. At least, the mention of Succoth,
Genesis 33:17, which had its situation on the bank of Jordan,
exactly opposite to Zartanah, a town near Beth-shean, puts it out of
all question that Jacob returned that way. And, indeed, whether
Scythopolis might not derive something of its appellation from the
word Succoth, I cannot well tell: methinks the name of
'Scythians' hath some smack of such a kind of original for they always
dwelt, and removed from one place to another, in tents.
5. Beth-Barah,
Judges 7:24.
Neither was this Beth-barah at any
very great distance from this passage. For so we have it,
Judges 7:24: "Gideon sent messengers throughout all mount Ephraim,
saying, Come down against the Midianites, and take before them the
waters unto Beth-barah and Jordan." And this they did.
It is hard to say whether Kimchi
with more reason said, that "these waters were not the waters of
Jordan"; or Jarchi, more absurdly, that "they divided Syria from
Canaan." There were, no doubt, some waters in the valley of Jezreel:
for there the battle was,--at least, if that may be called a battle,
where there was not one sword unsheathed by the conqueror. See
Judges 6:33--When the Midianites fled, Gideon summons the
Ephraimites by messengers, that they would take those waters
beforehand, which the routed enemy in their flight must necessarily
pass through before they could arrive at the bridge or ferry over
Jordan (spoken of even now), that lay in their way home. When both
armies had pitched the field, the Midianites lay on the north, towards
Galilee, and the Gideonites on the south, near mount Ephraim, chapter
7:1. There was a river in the vale, (at which waters, probably, Gideon
distinguished betwixt his followers, that lapped like a dog, and those
that did not). This river at length discharged itself into Jordan,
above the bridge or passage that led into Perea. When, therefore, the
Midianites lay on the northern bank of this river, and so were not
capable of attaining the passage over Jordan, till they had made
through these waters first, it was the Ephraimites' care and business
to maintain the opposite bank, and that indeed all the whole space
from the place where the fight began, to Beth-barah and Jordan, that
the enemy might be blocked up from all possibility of escape or
retiring.
Whether, therefore, this passage,
of which we have spoken, was called Beth-barah from that place
so near Jordan, or Beth-abara, from the etymology before
mentioned, it is no absurdity for the further bank of Jordan, which
lay contiguous to the bridge or passage over it, to be called "Beth-barah
beyond Jordan," either upon the one or the other account. For (however
the learned Beza comes to question it) the Lexicons will tell you
beyond Jordan: especially that common three fold division, "Judea,
Galilee, and beyond Jordan." "On the east of the river Jordan"; as
Ptolemy expresseth it: and Beza himself confesseth, that beyond
Jordan, is the proper signification of the Greek word beyond,
Matthew 4:15.
Let us, therefore, place the Beth-abara
we are seeking for, where John was baptizing, on the further side of
Jordan, in the Scythopolitan country, where the Jews dwelt amongst the
Syro-Grecians, as in all the Decapolitan regions, where Christ might
something more safely converse, from the vexations of the scribes and
Pharisees,
John 10:40, being, as it were, out of their reach and jurisdiction
there. And so we find John baptizing, first, at the passage of
Jericho, because, through the greatness of the road, there was always
a considerable concourse of people; and next, at the passage of
Scythopolis, for the same reason...
1. A legend not much unlike
that of the Chapel of Loretto.
Forasmuch as our evangelist makes
only a transient mention of Nazareth in this place, not relating any
thing that our Saviour did there, we shall take as transient notice of
it at this time; by the by, only inquiring into its situation, as what
we may have occasion to discourse more largely upon in another place.
But what, indeed, need we be very
solicitous about the situation of this town, when the place we would
especially look for there, that is, the house of the blessed Virgin,
hath taken its leave of Nazareth, and, by the conveyance of angels,
hath seated itself in Loretto in Italy. Of which thing, amongst many
others, cardinal Baronius gives us this grave relation:
"That house wherein the most holy
Virgin received the heavenly message about the Word being made flesh,
doth not only by a wondrous miracle stand to this day entire; but, by
the ministry of angels, was retrieved from the hands of infidels, and
translated, first into Dalmatia, thence into Italy, to Loretto in the
province of Picenum."
Let us repay one legend with
another.
"They say of R. Chanina, saith he,
seeing once his fellow-citizens carrying their sacrifices to
Jerusalem, crieth out: 'Alas! they every one are carrying their
sacrifices, and for my part I have nothing to carry; what shall I do?'
Straightway he betaketh himself into the wilderness of the city, and
finding a stone he cuts it, squares, and artificially formeth it; and
saith, 'What would I give that this stone might be conveyed into
Jerusalem!' Away he goeth to hire some that should do it; they ask him
a hundred pieces of gold, and they would carry it. 'Alas! saith he,
where should I have a hundred pieces? indeed, where should I have
three?' Immediately the holy blessed God procured five angels, in the
likeness of men, who offer him for five shillings to convey the stone
into Jerusalem, if himself would but give his helping hand. He gave
them a lift; and of a sudden they all stood in Jerusalem; and when he
would have given them the reward they bargained for, his workmen were
gone and vanished. This wonder he relates before the Sanhedrim, in the
conclave of Gazith. They say to him, 'Rabbi, it should seem that these
were angels that brought this stone': so he gave the elders the money,
for which the angels had bargained with him."
In truth, I should easilier
incline to believe this story than that of Loretto, because there is
some reason to apprehend this R. Chanina no other than Haninah Ben
Dusa, a notorious magician. Unless you will also say, that the chapel
at Loretto took that jaunt by the help of magic.
A huge stone of its own accord
takes a skip from the land of Israel, and stops up the mouth of the
den in Babylon, where Daniel and the lions lay. But so much for tales.
2. The situation of
Nazareth.
The situation of Nazareth,
according to Borchard, Breidenbach, and Saligniac, ought to be
measured and determined from mount Thabor. For so they unanimously:
"From Nazareth two leagues eastward is mount Thabor." Nor is there any
cause why, with respect to that region of Galilee in which they place
this city, we should dissent from them, seeing there are others of the
same opinion. Now the mount Tabor was in the very confines that
divided Issachar from Zebulun;
Joshua 19:22, "And the coast [i.e. of Issachar] reacheth to
Tabor and Shahazimah." But what coast should this be? north or south?
The north coast, saith Josephus:--
"Next to Manasseh is Issachar,
having for its bounds of longitude mount Carmel and the river [Jordan],
and of latitude mount Tabor." That is, the latitude of Issachar is
from Manasseh to mouth Tabor, as Josephus plainly makes out in that
place. Mount Tabor, therefore, lay as it were in the midst, betwixt
the coasts of Samaria and Upper Galilee: having on this side Issachar
towards Samaria, and on that side Zabulon towards the aforesaid
Galilee.
Josephus describes mount Tabor,
where these things seem something obscure. We have already seen where
Scythopolis lay; and where the great plain, near Scythopolis.
But what should that great plain be, that lieth so behind Tabor
towards the north, that Tabor should be betwixt it and Scythopolis? Is
not Zabulon so called in Josephus? yea, and Issachar too, at least a
great part of it, if we consult the same Josephus. So that the
great plain of Scythopolis or Manasseh, is distinctly called by
him "the great plain of Samaria."
And the Lower Galilee is described
by the Talmudists by this character, "That it produceth sycamines,
which the Upper Galilee doth not." Now the sycamine trees were in
the vale,
1 Kings 10:27. And hence seems to arise the distinction between
the Upper and the Lower Galilee; the Lower so called because more
plain and champaign, the Upper because more hilly and mountainous.
I am deceived if the Upper Galilee
be not sometimes by way of emphasis called 'Galilee'; nor without
cause, when as the Lower might be called the great plain. So
Cana had the adjunct of 'Cana of Galilee,' perhaps that it might
distinguish that Cana which bounds both the Galilees; of which more in
its proper place. That passage which we meet with in our evangelist,
chapter 4:43,44, "He departed from thence [from Samaria] and
went into Galilee; for Jesus himself testified that a prophet hath no
honour in his country": it looks this way; that is, he would not go
into Nazareth, but into Galilee, viz. the Upper; and so came to Cana.
Nazareth, therefore, was in the
Lower Galilee, in the very confines of Issachar and Zabulon, and is
commonly received within Zabulon, itself being distant sixteen miles
or more from Capernaum; for from Capernaum, mount Tabor is distant ten
miles, or thereabouts.
3. Ben Nezer.
..."The Rabbins have a tradition:
Those that are taken out of the kingdom, behold they are properly
captives; but those that are taken by thieves, they are not to be
called captives."
"The tradition is to be
distinguished. As to kingdom and kingdom, there is no difficulty":
that is, as to kingdoms, which are equal. "But between the kingdom of
Ahasuerus, and the kingdom of Ben Nezer, there is. Between thieves and
thieves there is no difficulty; but between Ben Nezer and the
thieves of the world viz. common thieves, there is. There
[in Palestine] Ben Nezer is called a king: here [in Babylon] he is
called a robber." Gloss: "Ben Nezer was a thief, and took cities,
and ruled over them; and became the captain of robbers."
It is very suspicious to what
purpose they have invented that name for the most infamous robber, to
call him the "son of Nezer." By those very letters [nun,tzadai,resh]
they write the city 'Nazareth.' Read on, and the suspicion will
increase.
"I considered the horns; and
behold, there came up among them another little horn [Dan
7:8], This is Ben Nezer." Aruch quoteth this passage:
"There came up among them another little horn: This is the kingdom
of the Cuthites. Now what they meant by the kingdom of the
Cuthites, may be conjectured from 'The winter is past' [Cant
2:11]; This is the kingdom of the Cuthites." And a little
after: "The time is coming when the kingdom of Cuth shall be
destroyed, and the kingdom of heaven shall be revealed."
It is easy imagining what they
would point at by the kingdom of the Cuthites; the Christians
no doubt (unless they will pretend to some Samaritan kingdom): and if
so, it is as obvious whom they design by "Ben Nezer." Let them shew
whence came the name of the tetrarchy of the Nazarenes in Coelosyria;
of which Pliny: "Coelosyria habet Apamiam Marsya amne divisam. A
Nazerinorum tetrarchia Bambycen, quae alio nomine 'Hierapolis' vocatur,
Syris vero 'Magog.'"
4. Certain horrid
practices in Capharnachum.
Having spoken of Nazareth, it will
not be amiss to make some mention of Capernaum, which, however distant
many miles, yet was it the place where our Saviour dwelt, as Nazareth
was his native soil. We have considered its situation in another
treatise, being in the country of Gennesaret, a little distance from
Tiberias. There is another Capernaum mentioned by Gulielmus Tyrius,
that lay upon the coast of the Mediterranean, as this did upon the
coast of Gennesaret: "In a place called Petra Incisa, near old Tyre,
betwixt Capernaum and Dor, two sea-coast towns."
It is uncertain whether the name
be derived from pleasantness or comfort. And though our
Capernaum might justly enough take its name from the pleasantness
of its situation, according to the description that Josephus giveth of
it; yet the oriental interpreters write it the latter way. The Rabbins
also mention such a town, written in the same letters; of which,
perhaps, it will not be tedious to the reader to take this story:
"Chanina, R. Joshua's brother's
son, went into Capernaum, and the heretics" (or magicians
for the word signifies either) "enchanted him. They brought him
into the city sitting upon an ass"; on the sabbath-day, which was
forbidden by their law. "He went to his uncle R. Joshua, who
besmeared him with a certain ointment, and he was recovered." It
should seem that, by some kind of enchantments, they had thrown him
into a delirium so far, that he had forgot both himself and the
sabbath-day. There is another story immediately follows that:
"A certain disciple of R.
Jonathan's flies over to these heretics" [that himself might be
entered amongst them, and become one too]. "Jonathan finds him out
employed in castrating birds and beasts. They sent to him" [Jonathan],
"and said, It is written, Cast in thy lot amongst us, and let us all
have one purse. He fled; and they followed him, saying, Rabbi, come
and give us a cast of thy office towards a young bird. He returned,
and found them committing adultery with a woman. He asked them,
Is it the manner of the Jews to do such things as these? They
answer, 'Is it not written in the law, Cast in thy lot amongst us, and
let us all have one purse?' He fled, and they pursued him to his own
house, and then he shut the doors against them. They call to him and
say, 'O Rabbi Jonathan, go, and rejoicing tell thy mother, that thou
didst not so much as look back towards us; for if thou hadst looked
back, thou hadst then followed us as vehemently as we have now
followed thee.'"
While I read these things, I
cannot but call to mind the Nicolaitans, and such who indulged to
themselves a liberty of all obscene filthiness; nor is what we have
related unworthy our observation with respect to heresies of this
kind. Should this Capernaum be the same (as probably it is) with that
Capernaum which we meet with so frequently in the evangelists, it is
something observable what is said of it, "Thou, Capernaum, which art
exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell."
5. Some short
remarks upon Cana,
John 2:2.
It is very disputable which should
be the first letter of the word Cana, whether Caph or Koph, for we
find both.
I. Kanah, with the initial
letter Koph, is a city in the tribe of Asher,
Joshua 19:28.
II. Kene, a word not very
much differing in the sound, occurs amongst the Talmudists, "Rabbi and
his Sanhedrim, having numbered votes, pronounced Keni, clean."--Gloss:
"Keni was a place of doubtful esteem, reckoned amongst the unclean"
[that is, a place of the Gentiles]; "but in the days of R. Judah
Haccodesh, it came under trial, and they pronounced it clean."
III. We find Kana in
Josephus, but the situation not mentioned: "Antiochus being slain"
[viz. when he fought with the Arabian king], "his army fled to the
town Kana." This is hardly our Cana, as may in some measure appear in
Josephus' context.
IV. But further he speaks in 'His
Own Life,' of "Cana in Galilee." As for its situation, as far as can
be collected from Josephus, we discuss that in another treatise, and
shew that it is not far from that place where the river Jordan
dischargeth itself into the sea of Gennesaret; so that between this
Cana and Capernaum, there seems to be almost the whole length of that
sea.
V. But it must not be forgotten
that Canah, beginning with the letter Caph, is met with in
Juchasin; the words these: "In the end of the chapter" [it is the
seventh chapter of Bavah Mezia] "there is a tradition. Abba Chalaphtha
or Caphar Hananiah, in the name of R. Meir, saith," [they are in Bavah
Mezia, where he is brought in, and what he said], "It seems to me"
(they are the words of the author of Juchasin) "that Caphar Hananiah
is Caphar Cana; as may be proved out of the ninth chapter of the book
Sheviith: for there was the entrance of the Lower Galilee."
From that place, quoted in
Sheviith, which is Hal. 2. it plainly appears that Caphar Hananiah was
in the very outmost border that divided the Upper and the Lower
Galilee. From whence it is evident, that the entrance of the Lower
Galilee, according to our author, was not as we go from Samaria to
Galilee, but from the Upper Galilee into the Lower. And whether our
Cana of Galilee be so called to distinguish it from that Cana that so
divides between the two Galilees, or from that Cana that was in the
tribe of Asher (which may not unfitly be called 'Cana of the Sidonians'),
it is at the reader's choice to determine. As also, why the Syriac
interpreter should in this place write Katna, instead of 'Cana.'
Whether he had in his eye or mind Kattath,
Joshua 19:15, which, in the vulgar dialect, was called Katanath,
as the Seventy render it, and the Jerusalem Talmudists affirm; or
whether by a diminutive kind of word Katanah, he would intimate
the smallness of the town: q.d. "Cana the Less."
1. Certain names and places of
near sound with 'Salim.'
Let us begin with Salim,
and thence look after its neighbour 'Aenon.' We may be a little helped
in our inquiry by that passage in
Genesis 33:18: "And came to Shalem, a city of Sychem." There are
some versions, and the authors of the tables, have upon these words
built I know not what city Salem near Sychem. But neither the Jews nor
Samaritans acknowledge any such thing. For the Jews render it, and
that not without reason, "And Jacob came safe into the city of Shechem."
II. Salim, in the Greek
interpreter, according to the Roman copy is the name of a place,
Joshua 19:22; where the Hebrew runs thus, "And the coast [of
Issachar] reacheth to Tabor, and Shahazimah, and Beth-shemesh."
But the Greek "And the confines touched upon Gethbor, and upon Salim
near the sea, and Bethsamosh."
The Masorets observe that
Shahazimah, which is written with a Vau, should be written by a Jod;
which also these interpreters acknowledge (which is worthy our taking
notice of); but then they divide the word into two parts, and write it
Shahaz at the sea: but why they should turn Shahaz into
Salim, it is something difficult to guess.
It seems probable that Selame,
which Josephus, in the account of his own life, makes mention of, as
fortified by himself, amongst other towns in Galilee, is the same with
this Salim, mentioned by the Seventy; and that the rather,
because there it is reckoned up with mount Tabor.
III. Saalim, in the
Alexandrian copy, answers to the Hebrew Shaalim,
1 Samuel 9:4. In the Complut. Sallim; in the Roman
Segalim; where the Targum, instead of in the land of Shalishah,
hath in the land of the south: and instead of in the land of
Saalim, it hath in the land of Methbara. But why both here
and also
2 Kings 4:42, they should render Baal-shalisha by the
land of the south, we find some kind of reason in the Gemarists,
who upon this place have this note:
"There was no country throughout
the whole land of Israel where the fruits of the earth were so forward
as in Baal-Shalisha." Now such a country they call southern fields;
or literally, made south; "because the sun both riseth and sets
upon them." But why they should render the land of Saalim, the land
of Methbara is something more unintelligible, unless it should be
with some respect to mount Tabor, which we find mentioned in the
following chapter, verse 3; and so Methbara, should be "the
plain of Tabor."
If now the reader can pitch upon
any of these places we have already named, or any other he may have
met with in his reading, as that which our evangelist here meaneth,
let him consider whether the article near to may properly be
prefixed to it, and yet St. John hath it near to Salim which
gives some ground of conjecture that the passage is to be understood
not of any town or city, but of some other matter; which, by way of
exercitation, it may not be amiss a little to enlarge upon.
2. A 'Salmean' or a
'Salamean,' used amongst the Targumists instead of a 'Kenite.'
Every one that hath but dipped
into the Chaldee paraphrasts, must know that the 'Kenites' are called
by them 'Salmeans,' or 'Salameans.' So Onkelos,
Genesis 15:19;
Numbers 24:21,22. So Jonathan,
Judges 1:16, 4:2, 5:24;
1 Samuel 15:6, 27:10. It is likewise observable, that the 'Maachathites'
are by them called the 'Epikerites,'
Deuteronomy 3:14;
Joshua 13:13. And this, probably, from the place or country where
the Maachathites of old dwelt, which, in the time of the Targumists,
was called "Epicaerus on the east of the river Jordan," deg. 67.31.0.
Whether indeed the situation doth fall out right, I shall not at
present discourse.
But the 'Kenite' is not termed a 'Salmean'
from any place or country where he dwelt. For the Kenites in the
southern part of Judea are called 'Salameans,'
Judges 1. So also Heber the Kenite in Galilee,
Judges 4. And there were Kenites amongst the Amalekites,
1 Samuel 15; and there were of the Kenites beyond Jordan,
Genesis 15: whence so called is not to our purpose. It sufficeth,
that they were vulgarly known by the name of Salame; which, how
near akin it is to Salim, let the unbiased reader judge. Who
knoweth, therefore, but the evangelist should mean thus; "John was
baptizing in Aenon, near the Salamean, 'or Kenite'"; giving that name
to that people, which, at that time, they were commonly called by? But
supposing this should be granted us, what Kenite should we understand
here? either those that were in the wilderness of Judah, or those on
the other side of the salt sea?
3. Aenon in the
Greek Interpreter,
Joshua 15:62.
If the 'Essene' might be called
Salmean, as well as Kenite (and certainly he seems to have as much
claim to it, if the word denote perfection, or austerity
of life), then I could more confidently place our Salim, in the
wilderness of Judah; because there I find Aenon mentioned in the Greek
version,
Joshua 15:61,62: where the Hebrew hath it thus: "In the
wilderness, Beth-araba, Middin, and Secacah, and Nishban, and the city
of Salt, and En-gedi, six cities": but the Greek "And Baddargis,
and Tharabaam, and Aenon." &c. Where it is plain that
Aenon, is put for Middin; but why it should be so, is more
difficult to tell. This only we may remark, that the word Middin
occurs
Judges 5:10: which if I should render, "ye that dwell by Middin,"
I should have Kimchi to warrant me, who, in his notes upon this place,
tells us, that "Middin is the name of a city mentioned in
Joshua, Middin and Secacah." But now, when Aenon,
signifies a place of springs or waters, see what
follows: "from the noise of archers among the places of drawing
waters." The Greek is "among those that draw water." So that if you
ask the Greek interpreter why he should render Middin by
Aenon, a place of springs, he will tell you, because Middin
was a place "of those that draw waters."
The Essenes succeeded the Kenites
in their dwelling in the wilderness of Judah: and not only so, but in
strictness and austerity of life, as Josephus and others assure us.
Now if we will but allow the 'Essenes' to be called Salmeans,
as the Kenites were, then the words of the evangelist might bear such
sense as this;--"John was baptizing in Aenon near the Essenes." And it
may be supposed, that as the Baptist had already conversed with two of
the Jewish sects, the Pharisees and Sadducees, and had baptized some
of each, so he would now apply himself to a third sect amongst them,
viz. the Essenes, and baptize some of them too. But herein I will not
be positive.
4. The Syriac
remarked. And Eustathius upon Dionysius.
Whilst we are treating upon the
word Aenon, I cannot but observe that the word is divided both
in the Syriac and Arabic version: Syriac, "In the fountain Jon":
Arabic "In the fountain Nun." The words of the evangelist seem to
discover the signification of the name.
"Because there was much water
there." For we could not have rendered the word more significantly,
than a place of springs, or a watery place. So Nonnus;
Baptizing near the waters of
deep-waved Salem.
Why, therefore, did those
interpreters take the word in two, when it was plain and etymological
enough of itself?
The Syriac Jon brings to
mind a passage of Eustathius upon this verse of Dionysius:
"Some say, saith he, that that
whole sea from Gaza as far as Egypt, is called the Ionian sea, from
Io." "Indeed, some call even Gaza itself Ione, where there is a
heifer in the image of Io, or the moon."
That Gaza was ever called Ione,
is not commonly known; but grant it was, and the same, from that place
even as far as Egypt, to have been called the Ionian sea; yet should
not I have derived its name from 'Io,' but rather from the 'Iones,'
those brassy robust men, of whose coming into Egypt, and fixing their
seats there by the sea, Herodotus gives us a famous relation.
But must we seek for ein Jon
(or Javan, as some would have it) hereabout? To seek John about
Gaza, would be to seek him out of the land of Israel; at least, as the
bounds of that land were at that time determined.
5. Herodium, a
palace.
If Aenon was the place where John
baptized last, immediately before his imprisonment, then we must look
for it either in Galilee or Perea: for in one of those places it was
where he began his acquaintance with Herod. For however St. Luke,
speaking of Herod, mentions Galilee only within his tetrarchy,
Luke 3:1, yet Josephus tells us, that "both Perea and Galilee were
under his jurisdiction." Where then shall we begin his first
acquaintance with the Baptist? I had once inclination to have fixed it
in Galilee; but whilst I consider better that Herodium was in Perea,
and very near Machaerus, John's prison, that seems the more probable.
Josephus, speaking of Herod the
Great and his stately buildings, hath this amongst other things: "He
fortified a castle upon a hill towards Arabia, and called it Herodium,
after himself." Where, by Arabia, you are to understand the
land of Moab; and he seemed to have fortified that castle, as a
bulwark against the Moabitish Arabs.
The same Herod that built it is
buried there, as the same Josephus tells us; where, describing the
funeral pomp, he gives this account: "After those followed five
hundred of his own domestic servants, bearing spices. His body was
brought two hundred furlongs" [from Jericho where he died] to
Herodium, where, according to his own appointment, he was interred.
But, in Antiq. lib. xvii. cap. 10, "They came to Herodium eight
furlongs; for there he had ordered his funeral solemnities." At
first sight, here is an appearance of a slip in history: but it is to
be understood, that from Jericho to Herodium it was two hundred
furlongs, that is, twenty-five miles; but Herod's burying-place was
eight furlongs from Herodium, a common distance for burying-places to
be from cities.
6. Machaerus, a
castle.
Josephus tells us, that John
Baptist was imprisoned by Herod in the castle of Machaerus: "He [the
Baptist], upon Herod's suspicion, is sent prisoner to Machaerus."
A little before that he had told us, This place "is the frontier
betwixt the kingdom of Aretas [the Arabian king] and Herod."
Of the situation of the place,
Pliny hath this hint; "that Arabia of the Nomades [or Moab],
situated on the east of Asphaltites, fronts it on the west, and
Machaerus situated on the north, fronts it on the south"; otherwise,
you would remove Machaerus a great way from its proper situation.
We meet with it in the Talmudists
under the name of Macvar.
"The mountainous country of Perea
was the hill Macvar and Gedor." The Jerusalem Targum, and Jonathan
upon
Numbers 32:35, instead of "Atroth, Shophan, and Jaazer," have "Maclelta
of Shophan and Macvar": to which Jonathan adds "Macvar of Garamatha."
It is obvious enough how they came
to render Atroth by Maclelta (as also Onkelos hath
done); viz. because they translated the Hebrew word, which denotes a
crown, by the Chaldee word, which is of the same signification.
But why Jaazer by Macvar? Onkelos upon the third verse
of the same chapter, renders 'Jaazer' and 'Nimrah' by, which I should
translate, "the Atrati or denigrati of the house of
Nimrin." And Ptolemy comments thus in Arabia Petraea: "There are all
along that country certain mountains called the Black Mountains,
namely, from the bay which is near Pharan, to Judea." But whether
Macvar hath any relation with blackness from a dish
or furnace, I leave it to others to inquire.
So that we see Herodium and
Machaerus are situated on the outermost coast of Perea towards the
south, or the land of Moab, near the shore of Asphaltites, or the Dead
sea.
The nature of the place we have
described by Josephus, "There spring out, near this place, certain
fountains of hot waters, of a very different taste, some bitter some
sweet; there are also many springs of cold waters," &c. Compare the
bitter waters with the waters of Nimrin,
Isaiah 15:6, and the other with those of Dimon, verse 9; where,
query whether Dimon be not the same with Dibon [Beth and
Mem being alternately used]; that by that pronunciation it might agree
more with blood; "The waters of Dimon are full of
blood."
Whilst we are in this watery
country, are we not got amongst the rivers of Arnon? The learned Beza
commenting upon those words of St.
John 3:23, "for there was much water there," affirms it,
commenting thus: "namely, many rivers, of which also in that tract
about Aroer there is mention in the books of Moses." And the situation
of the place confirms it; when as Machaerus was the very utmost bounds
of the 'land of Israel' towards Moab, according to Josephus, as also
was Arnon according to Moses.
But here we find no place that is
called either Aenon or Salim. True, indeed; but the
place, for the very wateriness of it, deserves to be called
Aenon, that is, a place of springs; and if Salim may
be the same with Salamean, here we have also the Kenite or
Salamean,
Genesis 15 and
Numbers 24. However, in a thing so very obscure, it is safest not
to be positive; and the reader's candour is begged in this modest way
of conjecturing. The way we tread is unbeaten, and deserves a guide,
which as yet we have not obtained.
7. The hill Mizaar,
Psalm 42:6.
Let us now (however something
beyond our bounds) pass from the first entering of the coasts of Moab
towards the north, to the utmost limits of it southward.
"I will remember thee (saith the
Psalmist) from the land of Jordan, and of the Hermonites, from the
hill Mizar." Where is this hill Mizar? not to take any
notice of what we meet with in Borchard and others, concerning Hermon
near Thabor (by what authority I cannot tell), as also that the
hill Mizaar, is rendered almost by all, a little hill; or,
in a word, that the Targumist and R. Solomon tell us, it is mount
Sinai; Apollinarius, that it is mount Hermon: it seems plainly to be
the 'hilly part of Zoar,' whither Lot would have fled, if the
straitness of time might have permitted him,
Genesis 19:20; "O let me escape to this city; is it not Mizar,
or a little one?" so that the hill Mizar may be the
same, as if it had been said the hilly part of the little city Zoar.
The reasons of the conjecture,
besides the agreeableness of the name, may be especially these two:
I. As Hermonium, or Hermon, was
near the springs of Jordan, so the hilly part of Zoar lay hard by the
extreme parts of Jordan in Asphaltites; and the Psalmist, speaking of
the land of Jordan, or of the land on the other side of Jordan, seems
to measure out all Jordan from one end to the other, from the very
spring-head to the furthermost part where the stream ends.
II. As David betook himself to
the country on the other side of Jordan towards Hermon, in his flight
from his son Absalom, so was it with him, when flying from Saul he
betook himself to Zoar in the land of Moab,
1 Samuel 22:3. And so bewails his deplorable condition so much the
more bitterly, that both those times he was banished to the very
utmost countries, north and south, that the river Jordan washed.
8. Eglath
Shelishijah,
Isaiah 15:5.
With the mention of Zoar is this
clause subjoined in Isaiah, Eglath Shelishijah, or "a heifer of
three years old." So with the mention of Zoar and Horonaim, the same
clause is also subjoined in Jeremiah.
Isaiah 15:5: "His fugitives unto Zoar, a heifer of three years
old."
Greek; "In it unto Sego. For it
is a heifer of three years."
Vulgar: "Its bars were unto Segor:
a heifer in his third year."
Targum: "That they should fly as
far as Zoar, a great heifer of three years old."
English: "His fugitive shall flee
unto Zoar: a heifer of three years old."
Jeremiah 48:34: "From Zoar to Horonaim, a heifer of three years
old."
Vulgar: "From Segor unto Horonaim,
the heifer being in her third year." And so others.
I am not ignorant what
commentators say upon these places: but why may not Eglath
Shelishijah be the name of some place, and so called a third
Eglah, in respect of two other places much of the same sound...
There is mention of Ein Eglaim,
in that country,
Ezekiel 47:10; where Eglaim is plainly of the dual number,
and seems to intimate that there were two Egels, with relation
to which this our Eglah may be called Eglah the third.
So Ramathaim,
1 Samuel 1:2, is of the dual number, and plainly shews there were
two Ramahs.
The sound of the word Necla comes
pretty near it. This we meet with in Ptolemy, in Arabia Petraea: Zoar
67.20.30.30.; Thoan 67.30.30.30.; Necla 67.20.30.15.
So that here we see the
geographer mentions Zoar and Necla, as the prophet before had Zoar and
Eglah: and how easily might Eglah pass into Necla in Greek writings,
especially if the letter Tzadai hath any thing of the sound of the
letter n in it. The geographer makes the distance of Zoar from
Necla to be fifteen miles: so, we may suppose, was the distance of
Zoar from Eglah, Horonaim lying between them; from whence the words of
the prophet may not be unfitly rendered thus:
"His fugitives shall flee unto
Zoar, unto the third Eglah.
From Zoar unto Horonaim: even unto the third Eglah."
I am deceived if Agalla,
which we meet with in Josephus, be not the Eglah we are now speaking
of: numbering up the twelve cities, which Hyrcanus promised he would
restore to Aretas, the Arabian king, being what his father Alexander
had taken from him: amongst the rest he nameth Agalla, Athone, Zoar,
Horonae. Of Zoar there can be no scruple; and as little of
Horonae; but, by that must be meant Horonaim. Athone, seems
to bear a like sound with Ptolemy's Thoana; and Agalla,
with his 'Necla,' and that with our 'Eglah.'
Chapter 4
John 4:5
1. A few remarks upon the Samaritan affairs.
2. The Samaritan Pentateuch.
3. The situation of the mounts Gerizim and Ebal.
The Samaritan text upon
Deuteronomy 27:4, noted.
4. Why it is written Sychar, and not Sychem.
5. Ain Socar, in the Talmud.
Chapter 4
John 4:5
1. A few remarks upon the
Samaritan affairs.
1. Of the name of the Cuthites.
That the 'Samaritans' ware called
'Cuthites' by the Jews is unquestionable; "Those that in the Hebrew
tongue are called Cuthaeans, in the language of the Greeks are
Samaritans."
But why Cuthites rather than
Babylonians, Hamathites, Avites, &c., is uncertain: for thence, as
well as from Cutha, were colonies transplanted into Samaria,
2 Kings 17:24: nay, they were called Cuthites even at that time,
when a great part of the Samaritan nation consisted of Jews.
I am apt to apprehend there was
some virulent design even in the very name. The name of Cushites
amongst the Jews was most loathsome and infamous; as they were not
only a hostile country, but a people accursed. Perhaps in the title of
the seventh Psalm there is no little severity of reproach hinted in
the name Cush. Something of the like nature may be couched in
the word Cuthim. For it may be an easy conjecture, that the
Jews, calling the Samaritans (a nation peculiarly abominated by them)
Cuthites, might tacitly reproach them with the odious name of
Cushites.
2. Josephus mistaken.
Rabbi Ismail saith, "that the
Cuthites are proselytes of lions." R. Akiba saith, "that they are true
proselytes." The story of the lions,
2 Kings 17:26, is well enough known; which Josephus, faltering
very lamely, reports in this manner; He tells us that as every one
brought their several gods into Samaria, and worshipped them
accordingly, so the great and true God was infinitely displeased with
them, and brought a destructive plague amongst them. He makes no
mention of lions being sent amongst them, according to what the sacred
history relates. Probably the story of that horrible destruction upon
Sennacherib's army by a wasting plague, gave the first rise to
Josephus' fancy of a plague amongst the Samaritans; though it is very
odd that he should have no touch of the lions, being so remarkable a
judgment as that was.
3. Samaria planted with colonies
two several times.
There are the colonies which
Asnapper is said to have brought into Samaria,
Ezra 4:10, as well as those by Esarhaddon, verse 2.
The Jews do judge this 'Asnapper'
to be the same with 'Sennacherib,' and that he had eight names. The
first syllables of the names, indeed, agree pretty well, Sena and Asna;
but whether they denote the same persons, I leave undetermined.
However, whether this Asnapper
was the same with Sennacherib, or Shalmaneser, or some great minister,
or the king's commander-in-chief, in the transplanting of a colony, it
seems evident that Samaria was planted with colonies two several
times. The first, immediately after the taking of the city, being then
furnished with Cuthites, Avites, Sepharvaites, &c., under Asnapper; be
he king, or only chief commander in the action. And when multitudes of
them had been devoured by lions, then was it afresh planted by the
Shushanchites, Tarpelites, &c. in the days of Esar-haddon, with whom a
priest went up to instruct them in the worship of the true God. How
greatly Epiphanius confounds these things may be seen in his Haeres.
viii. cap. 9.
4. Of Dosthai, the pseud-apostle
of the Samaritans.
"When the lions had devoured the
Samaritans, the Assyrian king, hearing the news, calls to him the
elders of Israel, and asks them, Did the wild beasts ever use to tear
and mangle any of your people in your own land, when you dwelt there?
Therefore, how comes it to pass that they do so now? They answer him,
Our own land bears no nation, that is not conversant in the law, or
will not be circumcised. Send, therefore, saith he, two, that may go
and instruct the people. So they sent R. Dosthai the son of Jannai,
and R. Sabia, who taught them the book of the written law."
But is this likely? that Dosthai,
the Samaritans' oracle, should be in the times of the Assyrian empire?
whence then had he that Greek name of his? and the name of his father
Janneus was Greekish too. It is much more probable, what Eulegius hath
in Photius; "The Samaritan people, having divided into various
factions, disagreed amongst themselves, and brought in foreign
opinions. Some were of opinion that Joshua was he of whom Moses spoke,
when he tells them, 'A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto
you from among your brethren, like unto me.' Others, rejecting this
opinion, cried up one Dosthai, or Dositheus, a native Samaritan, and
contemporary with Simon Magus."
From Dosthai and Sabia, the
Dostheni and Sebuei, two Samaritan sects, originally sprang.
5. The language of Ashdod,
Nehemiah 13:24, whether the Samaritan language or no?
"And the children spake half in
the speech of Ashdod, and could not speak in the Jews' language." What
language was this at this time?
I. The Arabian version tells us
it was the Chaldee. But was not the Jewish and the Chaldee tongue at
that time all one? It may be questionable whether it were so "at that
time or no"; but I shall wave that controversy.
II. As to the question in hand,
it may not be amiss to consider that passage,
Acts 2:11: "Cretes and Arabians." Who are these Cretes? who would
not think, at first sight, that, by the Cretans were meant the
inhabitants of the island of Crete? I myself have sometime fallen into
this error; but now I should be ready to say they were the
Cherethim, a Philistine nation and country. And there is some
reason to apprehend that St. Luke, in the place above quoted,
understands the same people, because he joins them with the Arabians.
Targum on
2 Chronicles 26:7: "And the word of the Lord helped them,
against the Philistines, and against the Arabians dwelling in Gerar."
Observe, Arabians dwelling in
Gerar, a city of the Philistines;--and it is well enough known
that Arabia joins to the land of the Philistines. And one may suspect
the language of Ashdod might be the Arabian, rather than the Samaritan
tongue; especially when as the name of Idumea obtained as far as these
places: and was not the Arabic the language of the Idumeans?
2. The Samaritan
Pentateuch.
In the Samaritan version (that I
may still contain myself within our Chorographical Inquiry), as to the
names of places, there are three things are matter of our notice, and
a fourth of our suspicion.
I. There are some places obscure
enough by their own names, which, as they are there rendered, are
still more perplexed and unknown. Consult the names used there for the
rivers of Eden, and the countries which those rivers ran into, and you
will see how difficult it is any where else to meet with the least
footstep or track of those names, except Cophin only, which
seems indeed to agree something with Cophen mentioned by Pliny.
II. Places of themselves pretty
well known are there called by names absolutely unknown. Such are
Chatsphu, for Assyria,
Genesis 2:14: Lilak, for Babel,
Genesis 10:9: Salmaah for Euphrates,
Genesis 15:18: Naphik for Egypt,
Genesis 26:2.
III. Sometimes there are names of
a later date used, and such as were most familiarly known in those
days. Such are Banias for Dan,
Genesis 14:14, that is, Panias, the spring of Jordan: Gennesar
for Chinnereth,
Numbers 34:11;
Deuteronomy 3:17: not to mention Bathnan and Apamia for Bashan and
Shepham, which are so near akin with the Syriac pronunciation: and
Gebalah, or Gablah, for Seir, according to the Arabic idiom.
Such names as these make me
suspect the Samaritan version not to be of that antiquity which some
would claim for it, making it almost as ancient as the days of Ezra.
IV. I suspect too, when we meet
with places pretty well known of themselves, obscured by names most
unknown, that, sometimes, the whole country is not to be understood,
but some particular place of that country only.
The suspicion is grounded on the
word Naphik for Egypt, and Salmaah for
Euphrates. By Naphik, probably, they understood, not the
whole land of Egypt, but Pelusium only, which is the very first
entry into Egypt from Canaan. The reason of this conjecture is this:
the word Anpak (as we have elsewhere observed) was writ over
the gates of that city; and how near that word comes to Naphik,
is obvious enough to any one.
It is possible, also, that the
mention of the Kinites, immediately following, might bring
Salmaah to mind; and so they might not call 'Euphrates' itself 'Salmaah,'
but speaking of 'Euphrates' as washing some place called 'Salmah.'
Ptolemy, in his chapter concerning the situation of Arabia Deserta,
mentions Salma, in degr. 78.20.28.30: and it is numbered amongst
six-and-twenty other cities, which he saith are 'near Mesopotamia.' If
this be true, the Samaritan version hath something by which it may
defend itself: for if those cities mentioned by Ptolemy were indeed
'near Mesopotamia' (the river Euphrates only running between), then
may the Samaritan version be warranted while it renders "even to the
river Euphrates," "even to the river of Salmaah," that is, "to the
river Euphrates in that place where it washeth the sides of Salma."
3. The situation
of the mounts Gerizim and Ebal. The Samaritan text upon
Deuteronomy 27:4 noted.
That Sychar is the same place
with Sychem, seems beyond doubt; which, indeed, the mount Gerizim
pointed to by the Samaritan woman, sufficiently confirms. A wily
argument, perhaps, in Epiphanius' esteem, who, in his Samaritan
heresy, give us this account:
"There are two mounts near
Jericho beyond Jordan, Gerizim and Ebal, which look towards Jericho on
the east," &c. So that, we see, he tells us Gerizim and Ebal were near
Jericho, not near Sychem.
That clause "over-against Gilgal,"
Deuteronomy 11:30, hath deceived these authors in that manner,
that they have removed the mounts Gerizim and Ebal to Gilgal by
Jericho: and it hath, on the other hand, deceived some in that manner,
that they have brought Gilgal by Jericho to Sychem, misunderstanding
the word Gilgal for that place mentioned in
Joshua 5, when this which Moses speaks of is really Galilee; as I
have proved elsewhere.
On these two mounts (it is well
known) were pronounced the blessings and the curses,
Deuteronomy 11:29, and 27:12,13;
Joshua 8:33. But mark the impudence of the Samaritans, who, in
their text,
Deuteronomy 27:4, instead of "Ye shall set up these stones which I
command you this day on mount Ebal," they have put "Ye shall
set up these stones, &c. on mount Gerizim."
Compare, with this falsification
of theirs, that in Sotah, "R. Eliezer Ben Jose saith, I have said to
you, O Samaritans, Ye have falsified your law; for ye say, the
plain of Moreh, which is Shechem,
Deuteronomy 11:30 [they add Shechem of their own]: we ourselves
indeed confess that the plain of Moreh is Shechem," &c.
Seeing he blames the Samaritans
for falsifying their text in so little a matter, wherein the truth is
not injured, namely, in adding Shechem, why did he not object to them
that greater fault of suborning Gerizim for mount Ebal.
The truth is, this very thing giveth me reason enough to suspect that
this bold and wicked interpolation of the word Gerizim for
Ebal hath stolen into the Samaritan text since the time that this
Rabbin wrote. The thing is not unworthy our considering.
4. Why it is
written Sychar, and not Sychem.
If Sychem and Sychar be one and
the same city, why should not the name be the same?
I. This may happen from the
common dialect, wherein it is very usual to change the letters. So
Reuben in the Syriac version is Reubil, and Rubelus,
in Josephus; by what etymology let him tell, and explain it if you
can. Speaking of Leah bringing forth Reuben, he thus expresseth
himself; "And having brought forth a male child, and obtaining favour
from her husband by it, she called his name Rubel, because it happened
to her according to the mercy of God; for this his name signifies."
It would be endless to reckon up
such variations of letters in proper names; but as to the letter r,
which is our business at present, take these few instances:
'Nebuchadnezzar' is elsewhere 'Nebuchadrezzar';
'Belial' is 'Beliar'; 'Shepham,' by the Greek interpreters,
Sephamar,
Numbers 34:11: so Sychem, Sychar; and this so much the rather
because the letters r and m have obtained I know not
what kind of relation and affinity one with another. So Dammesek and
Darmesek in the Holy Scriptures; and the 'Samaritans' are the 'Samatians'
in Dionysius Afer, &c.
Or, secondly, it might happen
that the Jews, by way of scoff and opprobrium, might vulgarly call
Sychem Sychar, either that they might stigmatize the Samaritans as
'drunkards,'
Isaiah 28:1, "Woe to the drunkards of Ephraim"; or (as the
word might be variously writ and pronounced) might give them some or
other disgraceful mark. So Aruch in Sochere, i.e. sepulchres.
He quotes a place where the words are not as they are by him cited;
nor is he consistent with himself in the interpretation. But Munster
hath a sepulchre. If it be thus, perhaps Sychem, might
be called Sychar, because there the twelve patriarchs were buried;
and under that notion the Samaritans might glory in that name.
5. Ain Socar, in
the Talmud.
May we not venture to render
the well of Sychar? We meet with both the place and name in Bava
Kama; "There was a time when the sheaf" [of the firstfruits] "was
brought from Gaggoth Zeriphin, and the two loaves" [those which
were to be offered by the high-priest] "from the valley of the well
of Sychar." So give me leave to render it. Gloss; "The sheaf was
wont to be fetched from places in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem; but
now, the fruits having been destroyed by war, they were fain to fetch
it afar off."
Take, if you will, the whole
story: "It is a tradition among the Rabbins, that when the Asmonean
family mutually besieged one another, Aristobulus without, and
Hyrcanus within, every day they that were besieged within let down
their money by the wall in a little box, which those that were without
received, and sent them back their daily sacrifice. It came to pass
that there was an old man amongst them skilled in the wisdom of the
Greeks, that told them, 'So long as they within perform their worship,
you will never be able to subdue them.' Upon this, the next day they
let down their money, and the besiegers sent them back a hog; when the
hog had got half up the wall, fixing his feet upon it, the land of
Israel shook four hundred leagues round about. From that time they
said, 'Cursed be he that breedeth swine: cursed be he that teacheth
his son the wisdom of the Greeks.' From that time the sheaf of the
firstfruits was fetched from Gaggoth Zeriphin, and the two loaves from
the valley Ein Sychar."
This story is told, with another
annexed, in Menachoth: "When the time came about that the sheaf should
be brought, nobody knew from whence to fetch it. They made inquiry,
therefore, by a public crier. There came a certain dumb man, and
stretched forth one hand towards a roof, and the other hand towards a
cottage. Mordecai saith to them, 'Is there any place that is
called Gaggoth Zeriphin, or Zeriphin Gaggoth?' They sent and found
there was. When they would have offered the two loaves, but knew not
where to get them, they made inquiry again by a public crier; the same
dumb man comes again, and he puts one hand to his eye, and another
hand to the hole of the doorpost where they put in the bolt. Quoth
Mordecai to them, 'Is there such a place as Ein Sychar, or Sychar Ein?'
They inquired, and found there was."
But what had Mordecai to do with
the times of the Asmoneans? One of the Glossators upon this place
makes this objection; and the answer is, That whoever were skilled
either in signs or languages had this name given them from Mordecai,
who, in the days of Ahasuerus, was so skilled.
And now let the reader give us
his judgment as to name and place; whether it doth not seem to have
some relation with our well of Sychar. It may be disputed on
either side. I shall only say these things:
Menachoth, as before; "It is
commanded that the sheaf be brought from some neighbouring place,
but if it ripen not in any place near Jerusalem, let them fetch it
elsewhere." Gloss: "Gaggoth Zeriphin and Ein Sychar were at a
great distance from Jerusalem." So is our Sychar distant far enough
indeed.
"Zariph, and Zeripha,
denotes a little cottage, where the keeper of fields lodged."
It is described by Aruch that "it was covered over with osier twigs,
the tops of which were bound together, and it was drawn at pleasure
from one place to another," &c.
Gloss in Erubhin: "They that
dwelt in those cottages were keepers of sheep; they abode in them
for a month or two, so long as the pasture lasted, and then they
removed to another place." Gaggoth Zeriphin, therefore, signifies
the roofs of little cottages: and the place seems to be so called
either from the number of such lodges in that place, or from some
hills there, that represented and seemed to have the shape of such
kind of cottages.
Such cottages may come to mind
when we read,
Luke 2:8, of the shepherds watching their flocks by night. But
this is out of our way.
Chapter 5
Bethesda,
John 5.
1. The situation of the Probatica.
2. The fountain of Siloam, and its streams.
3. The pool Shelahh, and the pool Shiloahh.
4. The Targumist on
Ecclesiastes 2:5, noted.
5. The fountain of Etam. The Water-gate.
1. The situation
of the Probatica.
It is commonly said that the
Probatica, or the Sheep-gate (for let us annex the word
gate to it, out of
Nehemiah 3:1), or, at least, Bethesda, was near the Temple.
Consult the commentators, and they almost all agree in this opinion.
With their good leave, let it not be amiss to interpose these two or
three things:
I. That no part of the outward
wall of the city (which this Sheep-gate was) could be so near
the Temple, but that some part of the city must needs lie between.
Betwixt the north gates and the Temple, Zion was situated; on the
west, was part of Zion and Millo; on the south, Jerusalem, as it is
distinguished from Zion; on the east, the east street, whose gate is
not the Sheep-gate, but the Water-gate.
II. The Sheep-gate,
according to Nehemiah's description, should be situated on the south
wall of the city, not far from the corner that pointed southeast; so
that a considerable part of Jerusalem lay betwixt the Temple and this
gate.
We have elsewhere made it plain
that Sion was situated on the north part of the city, contrary to the
mistake of the tables, which place it on the south. Now, therefore,
consider to how great an extent the wall must run before it can come
to any part of Zion; to wit, to the stairs that go down from the city
of David, verse 15, which were on the west; and thence proceed to the
sepulchres of David, verse 16; till it come at length to the
Water-gate, and Ophel towards the east, verse 26: and thence to the
corner near which is the Sheep-gate, verse 31, 32; and this
will plainly evince that the description and progress in Nehemiah is
first, of the south wall, from the Sheep-gate to the west
corner; then of the west wall; and so to the northern and the eastern;
which makes it evident that the Sheep-gate is on the south
wall, a little distant from the corner which looks southeast, which
could not but be a considerable distance from the Temple, because no
small part of Jerusalem, as it was distinguished from Zion, laid
between.
2. The fountain of
Siloam, and its streams.
Our inquiry into Bethesda (if I
be not greatly mistaken) must take its rise from the fountain of
Siloam.
I. The proper and ancient name
for the fountain of Siloam, was Gihon,
1 Kings 1:33; "Bring ye him [Solomon] down to Gihon." Targum, to
'Siloam': Kimchi, "Gihon is Siloam, and is called by a twofold name."
The tables that describe Jerusalem speak of a 'mount Gihon'; by
what warrant I cannot tell: if they had said the 'fountain
Gihon,' it might have pleased better.
II. How that name 'Gihon' should
pass into 'Siloam,' is difficult to say. "The waters" of it are
mentioned,
Isaiah 8:6, to signify the reign and sovereignty of the house of
David. So the Targum and Sanhedrin. "Rabh Joseph saith, If there had
been no Targum of this Scripture, we had not known the sense of it,
which is this: Forsomuch as this people is weary of the house of
David, whose reign hath been gentle as the flowing of the waters of
Siloam, which are gentle," &c. Therefore it was not in vain that David
sent his son Solomon to be anointed at Gihon or Siloam, for he might
look upon those waters as some type or shadow by which the reign of
his house should be deciphered.
III. The situation of it was
behind the west wall, not far from the corner that pointed towards the
southwest. "The wall bent southward above the fountain of Siloam, and
then again inclined towards the east."
The waters of this spring, by
different streams, derived themselves into two fish-pools, as seems
hinted in
2 Chronicles 32:30: "Hezekiah stopped the upper water-course of
Gihon, and brought it straight down to the west side of the city of
David"; where a MS of the Targum, "He stopped up the upper waters of
Gihon, and brought them in pipes." But to let this pass, that which I
would observe is this: that there was a water-course from Gihon or
Siloam, which was called the "upper water-course," which flowed into a
pool, called also the "upper pool,"
Isaiah 36:2; and, as it should seem, the "old pool,"
Isaiah 22:11; by Josephus "the pool" or "fish-pool of Solomon";
for so he, in the place before cited.
"The wall again inclined
eastward, even to Solomon's fish-pond, and going on to the place
called Ophel, it came over-against the eastern porch of the Temple."
From whence we may gather that Solomon's fish-pool was within, hard by
the east wall of the city, and on this side the place they called
Ophel: which does so well agree with the situation of Bethesda within
the sheep-gate, that it seems to me beyond all doubt or question, that
Solomon's pool and the pool of Bethesda were one and the same.
3. The pool
Shelahh, and the pool Shiloahh.
By another stream the waters of
Siloam are derived into another pool, which is called the Lower Pool,
Isaiah 22:9, and the King's Pool,
Nehemiah 2:14; near the west wall of Sion.
We have the mention of it also in
Nehemiah 3:15: the pool of Siloam by the king's garden.
Where we may observe that it is here written Shelahh different
from Shiloahh,
Isaiah 8:6; by a difference hardly visible in Bibles not pointed:
indeed, sometimes overlooked by myself, and so, as is evident, by
others. For Shelahh is rendered in the very same sound with
Shiloahh, in the Complutensian, Vulgar, English, and French
Bibles. And, in St.
John 9:7, where there is mention of the pool Siloam, some
commentators refer you to that text in Nehemiah.
The Greek interpreters did,
indeed, observe the difference, and thus render the words of Nehemiah,
"The pool of skins by the king's wool." Nor doth the Italian overlook
it; for that renders it thus: "The Fish-pond of Selac hard by the
garden of the king."
It is observable in the Greek
version, that whereas they render the word by the king's wool
or hair, they may seem to have read a fleece of wool for
a garden. And whereas they translate the pool of skins,
they follow the signification of the word as it is frequently used
amongst the Talmudists.
Now, therefore, here ariseth a
question, whether that pool be the pool of Siloam or no: which as yet
hath hardly been questioned by any, and, for some time, not by myself.
But I am now apt to think that it was so distinguished betwixt the two
pools, that the lower pool retaining its name of the 'Pool of Shelahh,'
the upper pool obtained that of 'Siloahh.'
For,
I. How otherwise should that
distinction of the Greek version arise, but that the interpreters
followed the common pronunciation of the word Shelahh, when they
render it of skins.
II. Those words of St.
John 9:7, "in the pool of Siloam, which is by interpretation,
Sent," seem to intimate that there were two pools of a very near
sound, whereof one signified Sent, the other not.
III. The Jerusalem Talmudists
seem to say that the upper pool was called the 'Pool of Siloam' in
these words: "He that is unclean by a dead body doth not enter into
the mount of the Temple. It is said that they appear only in the
court. Whence do you measure? from the wall, or from the houses? It is
Samuel's tradition, from Siloam: now Siloam was in the midst of
the city."
The question here propounded is,
whether he that is unclean by a dead body may be permitted to enter
the Temple: and the stating of it comes to this, that inquiry be made
within what measure he is to be admitted; whether within the wall of
the Temple, or at that distance where the houses next to the Temple
end; especially where the houses of Siloam end.
Now, whereas they say that
Siloam is in the midst of the city, it must by no means be
understood of the fountain itself, for that was plainly without the
city; nor yet of the lower pool Shelahh, for that also was without the
city, or scarce within it. There is, therefore, no third, unless that
this upper pool be called 'the pool of Siloam,' and that it give
denomination to the adjacent part of the city, to wit, to the five
porches and the buildings about it: which though they were not in the
very centre of the city, yet they might properly enough be said to be
in the middle of it, because they were situated a good way
within the walls.
Luke 13:4, "The tower of Siloam," was amongst these buildings.
4. The Targumist
on
Ecclesiastes 2:5 noted.
It is an even lay, whether the
Targumist on this place deal more cunningly or more obscurely. The
passage is about the king's gardens: and he, "I planted me all trees
of spice, which the goblins and the demons brought me out of India":
and then goes on, and the bound of it was from the wall that is in
Jerusalem, by the bank of the waters of Siloam. Render by the
bank for illustration's sake; for to the bank (as the Latin
interpreter renders it), although it might signify the same, yet it
may also signify something else, and so become a difficulty not to be
resolved. Besides, it is to be observed, that it is upon, or
above, not unto.
The meaning of the Targumist
seemeth to be this; that the king's gardens were bounded in this
manner. They extended from the descent of Zion, until they came
over-against Shelahh, or the lower pool; even to the beginning of the
wall of the city, which is in Jerusalem: which wall runs near to the
bank of the waters of Siloam.
That passage in
Nehemiah 3:15 illustrates this; "the gate of the fountain repaired
Shallum, and the wall of the pool of Shelahh by the king's gardens."
'The gate of the fountain,' whether that was called so from the pool
of Siloam, or otherwise, was at some distance from the king's pool,
Nehemiah 2:14: and by the wall of the city, that ran between the
gate and the pool, there was a rivulet, drawn from the fountain into
that pool.
The words of the Targumist,
therefore, are to be so rendered as that the king's gardens may not be
said to extend themselves to the bank of the waters of Siloam; but
that the wall of Jerusalem ran along by the bank of those waters, and
the garden to the first part of that wall. So that he does not call
the lower pool by the name of Siloahh; but by 'the waters of
Siloahh' he understands the stream that came from the fountain and
fell into that pool.
5. The fountain of
Etam. The water-gate.
The collector of the Hebrew
Cippi, Grave-stones, hath this passage concerning the fountain of
Etam: "In the way betwixt Hebron and Jerusalem, is the fountain Etam,
from whence the waters are conveyed by pipes into the great pool at
Jerusalem." It is so translated by the learned Hottinger, who also
himself adds, "I suppose here is meant the Probatica, or the pool by
the Sheep-gate."
The Rabbins often and again tell
us of an aqueduct from the fountain of Etam to Jerusalem. But it may
very well be doubted whether that fountain be in the way to Hebron; or
whether those waters ran into the pool by the Sheep-gate. For,
I. If the fountain of Etam be the
same with the waters of Nephtoah, mentioned
Joshua 15:9; which the Gloss supposeth (where it is treating about
the fountain of Etam), then it lieth quite in another quarter from
Hebron; for Hebron lies on the south, and Nephtoah on the west.
II. The waters streaming from the
fountain Etam were not conveyed into the city, but into the Temple:
which might be abundantly made out from the Talmudists, if there were
any need for it. And probably Aristeas hath respect to this aqueduct:
"There is a confluence of water that never fails [speaking of the
Temple]; as if there were a great spring within naturally flowing: and
for the space of five furlongs (as appeared everywhere about the
Temple), there were certain receptacles made, under the earth, by a
wondrous and unspeakable art." And a little after: "They led me out of
the city above four furlongs, where one bade me lean down my head at a
certain place, and listen to the noise that the flow of waters there
made," &c.
In a word, to any one that is
conversant in the Talmudic authors, nothing can be more plain than
that the aqueduct from the fountain of Etam was into the Temple, and
not into the city; and it is plain enough in Holy Writ that the
aqueduct into the sheep-pool was from the fountain of Siloam: which
also from that spring, from whence it was derived, is called the 'Pool
of Siloam'; and from him that first made it, the 'Pool of Solomon';
and from the miraculous medicinal virtue in it, 'the Pool of
Bethesda.'
As to the Water-gate, we find it
mentioned
Nehemiah 3:26, situated on the east wall of the city; called the
'Water-gate' because through that the waters flowed out of the Temple;
and perhaps those also out of Bethesda. For, whereas the waters ran
incessantly out of Etam into the Temple, and those that were more than
needed flowed out of the Temple, they all fell down into the valley
that lay between the Temple and Jerusalem, and emptied themselves by
that gate which bore the name of the 'Water-gate' upon that account.
And it is probable that the pool of Bethesda, which also had its
constant supply by the aqueduct from the spring of Siloam, did also
continually empty itself along the descent of the hill Acra, through
the same gate, and so into the brook Kedron.
Chapter 6
Solomon's Porch, 10:23.
1. Some obscure hints of the Gate of Huldah, and the
Priest's Gate.
2. Solomon's Porch; which it was, and where.
3. The Gate of Shushan. The assembly of the
Twenty-three there.
The tabernae, or shops where things were sold for the Temple.
4. Short hints of the condition of the second Temple.
1. Some obscure
hints of the Gate of Huldah, and the Priest's Gate.
From Solomon's Pool proceed we to
Solomon's Porch; which we have also recorded,
Acts 5:12. Possibly it is 'the King's Gate'; both the title and
the magnificence of it make it probable. For, as Josephus tells us, it
was "one of the most memorable works under the sun."
That king's porch was situated on
the south side of the Temple, having under it on the wall the two
gates of Huldah. At which gates I rather admire than believe or
understand what I meet with concerning them; "Behold, he stands behind
our wall, that is, behind the west wall of the Temple; because the
Holy Blessed One hath sworn that it shall never be destroyed. The
Priest's gate also, and Huldah's gate, were never to be destroyed
till God shall renew them."
What gate that of the priest's
should be, I am absolutely ignorant; unless it should be that over
which was "the conclave of the counsellors," where was the
bench and the consistory of the priests.
But be it this, or be it that,
how do these and the rest agree with what Josephus relateth?
"Caesar commanded that the whole
city and Temple should be destroyed, saving only those towers which
were above the rest; viz. Phasaelus, the Hippic, and Mariamne, and the
west wall. The wall, that it might be for the garrison soldiers; the
towers, as a testimony how large and how fortified a city the Roman
valour had subdued. But as to all the rest of the city and its whole
compass, they so defaced and demolished it, that posterity or
strangers will hardly believe there was ever any inhabited city
there." Which all agrees well enough with what we frequently meet with
in the Jewish writers; that Turnus Rufus drew a plough over the city
and Temple. He is called in Josephus Terentius Rufus.
2. Solomon's
Porch; which it was, and where.
Through the 'Gate of Huldah' you
enter into the Court of the Gentiles, and that under the King's
Gallery; which, from the name itself and gallantness of the
structure, might seem worthy of such a founder as Solomon. But this is
not the porch or gallery which we seek for, nor had it the name of
royal from king Solomon, but from king Herod.
Josephus, in this inquiry of
ours, will lead us elsewhere; who thus tells us, "At this time was the
Temple finished" [i.e. under Gessius Florus, the procurator of Judea
about the eleventh or twelfth year of Nero]; "the people, therefore,
seeing the workmen were at leisure" [the work of the Temple being now
wholly finished], "being in number more than eighteen thousand,
importune the king" [Agrippa] "that he would repair the eastern
porch." Here are some things not unworthy our observation; partly,
that the Temple itself was not finished till this time; and then, that
the eastern porch was neither then finished, nor, indeed, was there
any at all; for Agrippa, considering both how great a sum of money,
and how long a space of time would be requisite for so great a work,
rejected their suit. Herod, as it should seem from Josephus, finished
the Temple, and the Pronaon, the porch before it, and the
Royal Gallery. But what he finished further, about the courts and
cloister-walks, it does not appear. It is manifest, indeed, that there
was a great deal left unperfected by him; when the whole was not
finished till the very latter end of Nero's reign, and scarcely before
that fatal war in which the Temple was burnt and buried in its own
ruins: which observation will be of use when we come to
John 2:20, "Forty and six years was this Temple in building."
Josephus proceeds, as to the
eastern gallery: Now that was the gallery of the outward Temple,
overlooking a deep valley, supported by walls of four hundred cubits,
made of great square stone, very white: the length of each stone was
twenty cubits, and the breadth six. "The work of king Solomon, who
first founded the whole Temple." There needs no commentary upon these
words; the east gallery was first Solomon's work: which
plainly points which and where was Solomon's Porch; namely, upon the
outer wall of the Temple, towards the east, as the Royal Gallery
was upon the south wall.
3. The Gate of
Shushan. The assembly of the Twenty-three there. The tabernae, or
'shops,' where things were sold for the Temple.
There was but one gate to this
east wall, and that was called the Gate of Shushan. "Because
upon that gate was engraven the figure of Shushan, the metropolis of
Persia."
It is no wonder if they
cherished the memory of Shushan and the Persian empire, because it was
under that empire that the Temple was built; nor had they, indeed,
ever received much damage thence. But it is something strange, that
that sculpture should remain after so long a time that that kingdom
had been abolished; and, after them, first the Greeks, then the
Romans, had obtained the universal monarchy.
"Upon this gate the priest
looked when he burnt the red heifer." For, slaying the heifer upon the
mount of Olives directly before the Temple when he sprinkled the
blood, he looked towards the holy of holies. The Gate of Shushan,
therefore, was not of height equal with the others, but built
something lower, that it might not hinder his prospect.
Upon this gate was the assembly
of the Twenty-three held. "There were three assemblies; one upon the
Gate of the mountain of the Temple" [that is, upon the Gate Shushan]:
"another upon the Gate of the Court" [that is, upon the Gate of
Nicanor]: "a third, in the room Gazith."
Going into the court by the Gate
Shushan, both on the right hand and on the left, there was a portico,
upheld by a double row of pillars, that made a double piazza. And
either within or about that portico were the tabernae, or
shops, where salt, and oil, and frankincense, with other necessary
materials for the altar, were sold; but by what right, upon such
sacred ground let the buyer or the seller, or both, look to that.
"The great Sanhedrim removed
from the room Gazith, to the shops, and from the shops into
Jerusalem." Not that the Sanhedrim could sit in the shops where such
things were sold; but the lower part of that was all called by the
common name of the Tabernae, or shops.
4. Short hints of
the condition of the second Temple.
The Jews, upon their return from
Babylon, at first made use of an altar without a Temple, till the
Temple was finished under Darius the Second. And then they made use of
the Temple without the ark, a priesthood without the Urim and Thummim,
and sacrifices without fire from heaven. In some of these things they
were necessitated by present circumstances; in other things they were
directed by the prophets, that flourished at that time.
Under the Persian empire, they
went on quietly with the Temple, little or nothing molested or
incommoded by them, unless in that affair under Bagos, mentioned by
Josephus.
But under the Greeks happened
the calamity of the Temple and nation; and all those dreadful things
which are spoken concerning God by Ezekiel the prophet, were fulfilled
in the tyranny of this empire. For Gog, in that prophet, was no other
than the Grecian empire warring against the people and sanctuary, and
true worship of God. It was a long time that the Jewish nation
suffered very hard things from that kingdom; the relation of which we
have, both in Josephus and the books of the Maccabees. The chief actor
in those tragedies was Antiochus Epiphanes, the bloodiest enemy that
the people and religion of the Jews ever had: who, besides other
horrid things he acted against their law and religion, profaned the
Temple and the altar, and made the daily sacrifice to cease for "a
thousand and three hundred days,"
Daniel 8:14, or 'one thousand two hundred and ninety days,'
chapter 12:11: a round number for "a time and times, and half a time,"
chapter 7:25, 11:7; that is, "three years and a half."
Of the insolences of the Greeks
against the Temple, we read in Middoth: "In the railed place" [that
divided the Chel from the court of the Gentiles] there were
thirteen breaches which the kings of Greece made upon it, &c. And
that of the impudent woman; "Mary, the daughter of Bilgah,
apostatized, and married a certain Greek soldier. She came, and struck
upon the top of the altar, crying out, O wolf, wolf! thou that
devourest the wealth of Israel; and yet in the time of her extremity
canst not help her." The same things are told of Titus.
But the heaviest thing of all
was, when Antiochus profaned the Temple and the altar, nor would allow
any sacrifices to be offered there but heathenish and idolatrous. Of
which persecution consult
1 Maccabees 1 and Josephus, Antiq. lib. xii. cap. 7. Indeed, this
waste and profanation of sacred things lasting for three years and a
half, so stuck in the stomachs of the Jews, that they retained that
very number as famous and remarkable; insomuch that they often make
use of it when they would express any thing very sad and afflictive.
"There came one from Athens to
Jerusalem, and stayed there three years and a half, to have learnt the
language of wisdom, but could not learn it. Vespasian besieged
Jerusalem for three years and a half; and with him were the princes of
Arabia, Africa, Alexandria, and Palestine, &c. Three years and a half
did Hadrian besiege Betar. The judgment of the generation of the
deluge was twelve months: the judgment of the Egyptians twelve months:
the judgment of Job was twelve months: the judgment of Gog and Magog
was twelve months: the judgment of the wicked in hell twelve months.
But the judgment of Nebuchadnezzar was three years and a half: and the
judgment of Vespasian three years and a half. Nebuchadnezzar stayed in
Daphne of Antioch, and sent Nebuzar-adan to destroy Jerusalem. He
continued there for three years and a half."
There are many other passages of
that kind, wherein they do not so much design to point out a
determinate space of time, as to allude to that miserable state of
affairs they were in under Antiochus. And perhaps it had been much
more for the reputation of the Christian commentators upon the Book of
the Revelation, if they had looked upon that number, and the
"forty-and-two months," and the "thousand two hundred and sixty days,"
as spoken allusively, and not applied it to any precise or determinate
time.
By the way, whilst we are
speaking of the persecution under the Greeks, we cannot but call to
mind the story in the Second Book of Maccabees 7, of the mother and
her seven sons, that underwent so cruel a martyrdom: because we meet
with one very like it, if not the same, only the name changed.
"'We are killed all the day
long, we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter,'
Psalm 44:22. Rab. Judah saith, This may be understood of the woman
and her seven sons. They brought forth the first before Caesar, and
they said unto him, Worship idols. He answered and said to them, It is
written in our law, I am the Lord thy God. Then they carried him out
and slew him. They brought the second before Caesar," &c. Which things
are more largely related in Echah Rabbathi, where the very name of the
woman is expressed: "Mary, the daughter of Nachton, who was taken
captive with her seven sons. Caesar took them and shut them up
within seven gates. He brought forth the first and commanded, saying,
Worship idols," &c.
The story seems wholly the same,
only the names of Antiochus and Caesar changed; of which the reader,
having consulted both, may give his own judgment. And because we are
now fallen into a comparing of the story in the Maccabees with the
Talmudists, let us compare one more in Josephus with one in the same
authors.
Josephus tells us, that he
foretold it to Vespasian, that he should be emperor. Vespasian
commanded that Josephus should be kept with all the diligence
imaginable, that he might be conveyed safely to Nero; which when
Josephus understood, he requested that he might be permitted to impart
something of moment to Vespasian himself alone. Vespasian having
commanded all out of the room, except Titus and two other of his
friends, Josephus accosts him thus, "Are you sending me to Nero?
Thou thyself, O Vespasian, shalt be Caesar and emperor, thou and this
thy son," &c.
The Talmudists attribute such a
prediction to Rabban Jochanan Ben Zaccai, in the tracts before quoted;
viz. "Rabban Jochanan Ben Zaccai was carried out in a coffin, as one
that is dead, out of Jerusalem. He went to Vespasian's army and said,
Where is your king? They went and told Vespasian, There is a certain
Jew desireth admission to you. Let him come in, saith he. When he came
in, he said, Live, O king, live, O king." [So in Gittin; but in
Midrash, Live my lord the emperor.] "Saith Vespasian, You
salute me as if I were king, but I am not so; and the king will hear
this, and judge such a one to death. To whom he, Although you are not
king yet, you shall be so, for this Temple must not be destroyed
but by a king's hand; as it is written, 'Lebanon shall fall by a
mighty one,'"
Isaiah 10:34.
To which of these two, or
whether indeed to both, the glory of this prediction ought to be
attributed, I leave it to the reader to judge; returning to the times
of the Greeks.
The army and forces of the enemy
being defeated under the conduct of Judah the Maccabee, the people
begin to apply themselves to the care and the restoration of the
Temple, and the holy things. The story of which we meet with
1 Maccabees 4:43, &c. and in Josephus, whose words are worth our
transcribing; "He found the Temple desolated, the gates burnt; and the
grass, through the mere solitude of the place, springing up there of
its own accord: therefore he and his followers wept, being astonished
at the sight."
They, therefore, apply
themselves to the purging of the Temple, making up the breaches; and,
as Middoth in the place above speaks, "Those thirteen breaches, which
the Grecians had made, they repaired; and, according to the number
of those breaches, they instituted thirteen adorations."
The altar, because it had been
profaned by Gentile sacrifices, they pull it wholly down, and lay up
the stones in a certain chamber near the court.
"Towards the northeast there was
a certain chamber where the sons of the Asmoneans laid up the stones
of that altar, which the Grecian kings had profaned": and that (as the
Book of the Maccabees hath it) "till there might come a prophet that
should direct them what to do with them."
Nor did it seem without reason:
for, whereas those stones had once been consecrated, they would by no
means put them to any common use; and since they had been profaned,
they durst not put them to any holy use.
The rest of the Temple they
restored, purged, repaired, as may be seen in the places above quoted;
and, on the five-and-twentieth of the month Cisleu, they celebrated
the feast of the Dedication, and established it for an anniversary
solemnity, to be kept eight days together. Of the rites of that feast
I shall say more in its proper place; and, for the sake of it, I have
been the larger in these things.
Chapter 7
Various things.
1. Ephraim,
John 11:54.
2. Beth Maron, and a Maronite.
3. Chalamish, Naveh, and other obscure places.
4. Chaphenatha,
1 Maccabees 12:37.
5. The Targum of Jonathan upon
Numbers 34:8, noted.
1. 'Ephraim,'
John 11:54.
Beth-el, and Jeshanah, and
Ephraim, are mentioned together,
2 Chronicles 13:19; and Beth-el and Ephraim in Josephus: "Vespasian
subdued two toparchies or lordships, the Gophnitic and Acrabatene
after which he took Beth-el and Ephraim, two little cities."
In the Targumist it is written
Ephraim with a Vau, and rendered by the Greek interpreters Ephron.
But the Masorah tells us it must be read by Jod. Nor do I question but
that it is the same with Josephus' Ephraim, and the Ephraim of
the Talmudists, of which we have discoursed in our Chorographical
Century, chapter 53.
It is probable it was a city in
the land of Benjamin, as also was Beth-el, which is mentioned at the
same time with it. Now Beth-el was the utmost border of the tribe of
Benjamin, as it lay towards the tribe of Ephraim. But where this
Ephraim should lie, it is not so plain. Only this our evangelist
speaks of it,--that it was "near the wilderness"; that is (as it
should seem), near the wilderness of Judea, in the way from Jerusalem
to Jericho.
2. 'Beth Maron,'
and 'A Maronite.'
"There goes a story of a brother
and a sister: he was in Gush Halab; she in Beth Maron.
There happened a fire in his house, that was in Gush Halab; his sister
comes from Beth Maron, and embraced and kissed him."
Now Gush Halab was in the
tribe of Asher, as appears in Menacoth: where there is a story of a
most precious oil bought in Gush Halab, in the tribe of Asher, such as
could not be bought in any other place.
And so perhaps that may be
understood of Beth Maron, being so near to Gush Halab, which we
meet with in Jerusalem Kiddushin; "There goes a story of a certain
Maronite" [for so let us render it], "who lodged in Jerusalem.
He was a very wealthy man; and, when he would have parted his riches
amongst his kindred, they told him it was not lawful for him to do it,
unless he would buy some land," &c.
It may not unfitly be rendered a
Maronite, though not in the same sense wherein it is now
commonly understood; but as signifying 'one coming from the town Maron,
or Beth Maron.' Render it Maronensian, and then there is no
difficulty.
And to this, perhaps, may refer
that passage in Rosh Hashanah: In the beginning of the year, All
that come into the world pass before God, as the sons of Maron.
Gemara Resh Lachish saith, As the ascents of Beth Maron. Gloss:
"Where the way was so narrow, that two could not walk abreast
together, for there was a deep vale on each side of the way." There
are almost the same things in Erubhin.
3. Chalamish,
Naveh, and other obscure places.
Let us take in these also for
novelty's sake.
"God commanded concerning Jacob,
that his enemies should be about him:
"As Chalamish is to Naveh.
Jericho to Noaran. Susitha to Tiberias. Castara to Chephar. Lydda to
Ono."
Gloss: "In Chalamish dwelt the
enemies of Israel; and in Naveh, a town near it, dwelt Jews; and these
were afflicted by them." And elsewhere, "These are the names of places
where the sinners of the Gentiles, of Moab and Ammon, &c., did dwell."
By the way, it is to be observed
that the word, which in other places is written Chephar, or
Chippar, in Schir Rabbathi is written Chephah. Whence in
Shemoth Rabba R. Abdimi of Chephah, or Chippah; the same
in Echah Rabbathi.
If the distance of the other
places might be determined by the distance of Susitha from Tiberias,
and Lydda from Ono, it will be the space of three miles, or
thereabouts; for so far were they from one another, as I have shewn in
another place. But as to the places themselves, where shall we find
them? Where are Chalamish and Naveh? Where are Castara and Chippar?
&c. Let us not, therefore, give ourselves a needless trouble of
searching what there is no hope of finding out; taking notice only
thus far, how miserably the face of things was changed when there was
cause for this complaint! For before, Jericho had flourished with
great numbers of Jews, there being twelve thousand of the courses of
the priests, that stood in continual readiness every day: but now it
was inhabited wholly by its enemies. So was it with Lydda once, when
it was a most famed school of the Rabbins, but now an enemy city.
These things are worthy of a chronological inquiry.
We find only this of Chippar,
that it was within twelve miles from Tsippor. "B. Tanchum Bar R.
Jeremiah was in Chippar. They asked him something about the
law; and he taught them. They say to him, Have not the masters said,
that it is forbidden to the scholar to teach within twelve miles'
distance from his master? and behold, R. Minni, thy master, is in
Tsippor. He answered, Let a curse light upon me if I knew he
was in Tsippor!"
4. Chaphenatha,
1 Maccabees 12:37.
In the days of Jonathan the
Asmonean, "They came together to build the city, and he approached to
the wall of the brook, which is on the east; and they repaired that
which was called Chaphenatha."
Where and what is this
Chaphenatha? I am apt to think it might be some part of the
outskirts of the city towards the east; called so much upon the same
reason that Bethphage was, which was the outmost part of the city
towards the east; for that was so called, viz. "a place of green
figs," from the fig-trees that grew near it in the mount of Olives: so
here Chaphenatha, some part of that outmost coast towards the
east and mount of Olives, so called from the dates growing
there.
For Chephanioth is
frequently used amongst the Talmudists for the dates of
palm-trees, that never come to their full maturity: A sort of ill
palm-trees, as the Gloss in Beracoth; "the fruit of the palm that
never ripens." So Aruch in Caphnith. By a signification near
akin to Hene, and ahene, which denotes the unripe
dates of palms; from whence, I suppose, Bethany, in the
mount of Olives, is derived. So that some outmost part of the city and
wall towards mount Olivet was called Bethphage from the figs
that grew there, and another part of it Chaphenatha from the
dates.
5. The Targum of
Jonathan upon
Numbers 34:8 noted.
Moses hath it thus; "From
mount Hor, ye shall point out (the border), unto the entrance
of Hamath, and the goings forth of the border shall be to Zedad."
But the Targumist thus; "From
the mount Umanus you shall point out your border to the entrance of
Tiberias, and the goings out of that border, tending from the
two sides, to Codcor Bar Zaamah, and to Codcoi Bar Sinegora, and
Divachenus and Tarnegola, unto Caesarea, by which thou enterest
into Abela of the Cilicians."
Every word almost in this place
must be considered; as, indeed, almost every word of it is obscure.
I. Taurus: This, indeed,
is not so obscure, but that every one knows mount Taurus, so noted by
geographers and historians. Taur both in the Chaldee and Syriac
signifies a mountain.
II. Umanus: Neither is
this so very obscure, but that all who have turned over the Jewish
writings do acknowledge it to be the mountain Amana, and who
have turned over other books, Amanus. But in the mean time, I
doubt they, as well as myself, cannot tell why the same Targumist
should call mount Hor, where Aaron died, by the same name of Taurus
Umanus,
Numbers 20.
III. To the entrance of
Tiberias: It is a strange thing the Targumist should be no better
read in chorography, than to mistake the reading of this word in this
place. For it is plain he read Chammoth, or the "warm baths of
Tiberias," when it is really Hamath, or 'Antioch.' He is a
blind geographer that brings down the borders of the land of Israel to
Tiberias, unless he means something beyond our capacity to apprehend.
IV. From the two sides:
It is plain here also, that he took Zedad, appellatively for
a side.
V. To Codcor Bar Zaamah:
If he doth not blunder, we do. We only take notice, that Zaamah,
and Sinegora, do signify indignation, and advocate,
perhaps in the same sense that accuser and advocate are
used in the Rabbinical writers: but what it should signify in him, he
must shew himself an Oedipus, or somebody else.
VI. Divachenus: I suspect
this to be Greek. By which is intimated some back of a mountain,
either lifting itself up, or stretching itself out...
Table of Contents
|