', by rendering it qui de Maacath, and ex Maacath; and it has been already observed in pages 82 and 192, that the noun Ged. 34 ELIPHALET BEN-AHASBAI, a Maachathite. ELIAM BEN-AHITHOPHEL, a Gilonite. Ken. 1 Chron. xi. 37; 2 Sam. xxiii. 35. .Chron חצרו הכרמלי Chron. Ασαραι ο Καρμηδι, Sam. Ασαραι ο Καρμήλιος. prefixed to a name does not always imply, that the name following expresses the father of the person preceding; but that it sometimes expresses the place or division of the country, in which the person before mentioned was born or dwelt. Wherefore it seems more likely, that this last name was here intended to express Eliphelet's or his father's local name, than the name of his The proper name is 1, Hetzro, in both grandfather; the mention of whom does the Hebrew copies at present; but probably not seem to be particularly necessary in this was originally, Hetzrai. For it is at place. As to the present corruption of the present in the text of the Complutensian letters here in Chronicles from their corre- edition; it is in the margin of the spondent letters in Samuel; if we compare Bomberg, and the other editions of the them, we may easily trace the manner of the Hebrew Bible; it is not only in the several alterations, the at the end of the Targum on Samuel, but also in the first word in Chronicles, is in Samuel omitted Chaldee Paraphrase on Chronicles, published -the and in are parts of the two by Dr. Wilkins; it is rendered Hetzri or letters and in 2, the word is cor- Hetzrai, in all the ancient versions, except rupted from p, and in the last word the the Vulgate, which reads Hezro; and we is mistaken for and transposed. That find it Asra among the various readings of the corruption here has been properly attri- the Latin translation by St. Jerome, lately buted to Chronicles, will be farther evident; published by Blanchini, in his Vindicia when we consider the next words, and find Canon Scripturarum Vulg., &c., Romæ, the corruption continue to be in the same 1740. copy. We may observe here, that the Alex The English version is, Eliphelet, the son andrian and Vatican editions of the LXX of Ahasbai, the Maacathite. 1 Chron. xi. 36; 2 Sam. xxiii. 34. Chron. הפלני : אחיה .Sam אליעם בן אחיתפל הגלני : agree in reading the local name here with a A in Samuel (which is right) and with a d in Chronicles; and it may be proper to remark the cause of this mistake, as it will frequently lead us to discover the cause of Chron. Αχια ο Φελλωνι, mistakes in the present copies of the LXX Sam. Ελιαβ υιος Αχιτόφελ του Γειλωνιτου· in other places. Montfaucon, in his preface The three long words here in Samuel oc- to Origen's Hexapla, tells us, page 44, that curring regularly, and being expressed in in Origen's time and for some ages after, other places with the very same letters; we the Greek Bibles were writ in capital letters may presume them to be properly preserved without accents; and in that large character in this place. Chronicles also, having here there being many letters very similar, they less in its copy, is probably, on that account were frequently mistaken for each other; also, corrupted; since it is a confessed and hence arose a great number of various maxim with all good critics, that a sentence, or a word, or a letter, may much more easily be omitted than added; and especially, where there can be no particular reason to influence the transcriber. It need only be added, that the proper name here, which has been changed in the Alexandrian edition to Exaß, is in the Complutensian edition Ελιαμ ; as it is in the Hebrew text, and in all the other ancient versions. The English version is, Eliam, the son of Ahithophel, the Gilonite. readings. The letters, which he mentions as most similar, and consequently most frequently mistaken, are, A ▲ ▲—¤ O C—and M N. Thus as to the three first, in Judg. i. 31, 178, Aaλaß was writ in some copies, Aaλap; Psalm xxxi. 16, 'nny, oi Kλŋpoi μov, was by some transcribers writ of Kapoi pov; and hence Kapunλi has been changed into Καρμηδι in our present text of Chronicles. The English version is, Hetzrai, the Carmelile. 1 Chron. xi. 37; 2 Sam. xxiii. 35. .Chron נערי בן אזבי : הארבי : .Sam פערי Chron. Noopa vios AČßi, tractis e medio syllabis, in unum vocabulum cogunt; vel e regione unum nomen, propter latitudinem suam, in duo vel tria vocabula dividunt. And if this should not be the genuine epistle of St. Jerome, as there are some who question it; yet, in that undoubted epistle of his to Chromatius, by way of preface to the same Book of Chronicles, he begins with asserting the great corruption of the several copies of the LXX, Si Septuaginta interpretum pura, et ut ab Sam. Papael Αραχείεις. The proper name of this mighty man is probably corrupted also in Samuel; principally because the Syriac and Arabic versions of Samuel call him Gari, which is a strong presumption that the copies, which they were translated from, read ; and the eis in Græcum versa est, editio permaneret ; and the are so much alike, that it is diffi- seperflue me, Chromati, impelleres, ut Hecult to distinguish them, unless they are bræa volumina Latino sermone transferrem. very accurately expressed. Besides, the But let us return from this hint, or rather corruption will be the more easily admitted from this unanswerable authority, as to the in the first word in Samuel, because the corruptions in the Greek translation of the second word seems to be corrupted there LXX; which it may have been the more also. For if the family or local name of proper to observe, on account of the conthis worthy was really Arbite, it would then fidence with which some would securely have been writ, not ', but NT, as we depend upon it, as truly expressing at prefind the place Arba writ, Joshua sent the sense of the divine original. xxi. 11. The English version is, Naarai, the son of Azbai. The copies of the LXX are very confused in Samuel. The Alexandrian translates 277, Apaɣeleis; and the Vatican renders the two names by a very strange conjunction of letters in one word του Ουραιοέρχι ; from both which versions we may learn, that the authors of them read another letter different from what it is at present, and that is a for But that the present reading Ged. 35 HEZRAI, a Carmelite. NAARAI BEN-ARBAI, an Arabite. 1 Chron. xi. 38; 2 Sam. xxiii. 36. אחי .Chron יואל בן .Sam יגאל .Chron הגרי : .Sam הגדי : . הארכי-בa נתן מבחר בן with a beth is right, we may infer from its נתן מצבה בני being a beth in the word in Chronicles ; and Chron. Ιωηλ αδελφος Ναθαν, Μαβαρ from its being rendered Aoß in the Ald. copy of the LXX we may infer also, that the resh in Samuel was originally a Zain; which makes the two words the very same, excepting, that here again we have the word Sam. Taaλ υιος Ναθαν πολλης δυνα, filius in one copy answering to the article prefixed in the other; as has been frequently before observed. Chron. υιος Αταραι, μεως, υιος Γαδδι. In these words are evidently included the The preceding extraordinary version of names of two mighty men, concerning the words by one barbarous term whom it is difficult to know what to deterOvpaιoepxi makes one apply to many of the mine; since not only the two original proper names here and elsewhere that severe copies, but the versions also vary consicensure, which St. Jerome (in his epistle to derably. The safest rule, when two copies Domnio and Rogatian) has passed upon the disagree in a case of so obscure a nature (as transcribers of the Book of Chronicles, the bare mention of a warrior's name in the Liberè enim vobis loquor: ita in Græcis et days of David must be to us at this distance Latinis codicibus hic nominum liber vitiosus of time) seems to be, to determine in favour est, ut non tam Hebræa quam barbara quæ- of that copy, which has the agreement of a dam et Sarmatica nomina conjecta arbi- greater number of the ancient versions. trandum sit. Hoc scriptorum culpæ adscri- This seems to be the safest rule in all cases, bendum, dum de emendatis inemendata where the names are not elsewhere repeated scriptitant; et sæpe hic tria nomina, sub-in the Hebrew text; and where we are not VOL. II. 4 U contradicted by the nature of the original | the two last words were originally incomlanguage, or by some accidental circum-plete, as at present in Chronicles, the son of stances in the history. Haggeri; the word in Chronicles must be then the proper name, and precede the two words following. The proper name of the first mighty man in Chronicles, Joel, is in Samuel, Igal; two words, which differ only in one Let us begin with the last word; which in letter; the vau being mistaken for the similar Samuel is, the Gadite, but in Chroletter gimel, or the contrary. Joel is a com- nicles, Haggeri, which perhaps occurs mon scriptural name; one, the prince of the no where else in the Bible as a proper name. half tribe of Manasseh, Joel, the son of The ancient versions unanimously (except Pedaiah, 1 Chron. xxvii. 20; and another, the Ald. copy of the LXX) declare for the Joel, the son of Jehieli, one of David's lords present reading in Samuel. But in Chroof the treasury, 1 Chron. xxvi. 22. Joel nicles the versions are very disagreeing; then being the name of some considerable and (which seems sufficient to determine men in David's time; and Igal occurring in favour of Samuel) the Syr. and the Arab. (perhaps) but once, as the name of a con- versions of Chronicles evidently read the temporary with Joshua, Numb. xiii. 7; it is last word as in Samuel: for the Syriac probable from hence, that the former was version of these three words is so the true name of the hero here celebrated. And another circumstance in favour of Joel, and the Arabic, is, that all the ancient versions agree in ومكحد الذي من ומכחר אלדי מן גרו reading Joel in Chronicles; but they varye yo sill sing, 172. very much as to Igal in Samuel, the Alex- These two versions of Chronicles agreeing andrian and Vatican copies of the LXX with the several versions of Samuel, in the Taal, both omitting what is now the first present reading of the last word in Samuel letter, the Ald. Iyaλλa, and the Complu-, the Gadite; we may conclude that to tensian Iyaaλ, the Vulgate Igaal, and the have been the originally true word. Chaldean Igal, but the Syriac and Arabic versions read it widely different Neael. Syriac and Arabic versions read it, But if this last word be the Gadite, the two preceding words cannot be supposed to The next point is, whether Joel was the have been, Mibhar the son of; for brother of Nathan, or his son; and it is what propriety is there in saying, Mibhar probable, that the former was true. First, the son of the Gadite? And it may be because it was very easy for a careless remarked, as a farther proof that the word transcriber to write son instead of brother,, Mibhar, has been corrupted; that the Joel the son of Nathan; the son of being the common connexion of two proper names; but the brother of, being a relation very seldom expressed, can hardly be imagined to have been set down by a transcriber, unless it had been so expressed in the copy from whence he was transcribing. Besides, Joel being no where recorded as the son of Nathan, but in the place under consideration; and one of the name in David's time being expressly mentioned, as the son of The famous Lud. Cappellus, in his Critica Pedaiah, and another of Jehieli: it is pro- Sacra, page 20, observes on this passage, bable on this account, that Nathan was not 1 Chron. xi. 38; 2 Sam. xxiii. 36: Qui duo Joel's father, but his brother: and so the loci paralleli medicâ manu egere videntur. second error in Samuel accompanies the first. He then mentions the disagreements of the As to the next word, the sense of that verses, without attempting to correct the will depend upon the two words that follow words that are corrupted, until he comes to it. For if the two last words completely in Samuel, which words should express the proper and local (or family) be (he says) as at present in name of another mighty man, as in Samuel, Chronicles. then the word in Samuel must belong The English version is, Joel, the brother to two words preceding: consequently, if of Nathan, of Tzobah; Bani, the Gadite. Ged. in Psalm xvi. 10; Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell, neither shalt thou suffer (thy holy one, according to all the versions; but, 36 JOEL BEN-NATHAN, from Zoba. BANIAH, a Gadite. Booth.-36 Joel, the son of Nathan; of if we adhere literally to the printed Hebrew Zobah; Bani, the Gadite. Ken. 1 Chron. xi. 39; 2 Sam. xxiii. 37. copies, which have this yod inserted, it will be) thy saints to see corruption: as the same word TD is rendered in Psalm lii. 9; lxxix. 2; cxxxii. 9; cxlv. 10. But, not to multiply instances of the improper insertion of this letter, these may be sufficient to נשא כלי יואב .Chron בחרי הברתי .Sam בחרי הבארתי נשאי כלי יואב Chron. show the reasonableness and necessity of בן צרויה : .Sam בן צרויה : Chron. Νααραι ο Βηρωθι, αιρών σKEUN expunging it in some other places, as it ought to be in the verse now under consideration. And these instances may perhaps put all serious Christians upon deliberating, whether they should any longer maintain the absolute integrity of the present Hebrew 38 Ira, the Ithrite; Gareb, the Ithrite. The proper name of this worthy is regu-text. larly the same in both Samuel and Chro- The English version is, Naharai, the nicles; and is distinguished from another Beerothite, the armour-bearer of Joab the worthy already mentioned (page 209) by a son of Zeruiah. difference in the second letter of his name. The local name being properly expressed in Ged.-39 In all thirty-seven.] Josephus Samuel, an is omitted in it in Chronicles. says they were thirty-eight: but as he names The participle has a yod very improperly only the first five, we can draw no help from added at the end of it in Samuel; and as him as to the rest. In Chronicles the numthis is the least of all the Hebrew letters, so ber is still greater, amounting to fifty-three there are many instances of its being im- at least. See the notes on 1 Chron. xi. 10, properly inserted elsewhere, the transcribers &c. It may be wondered that Joab is not of the ancient manuscripts having probably here mentioned: but, as Michaëlis well taken for a yod what was only part of some adjoining letter. remarks, it is only personal strength and superior bravery, not rank and subordination, that are here attended to. Joab was general in chief; but might be much inferior to those worthies in personal valour. Some interpreters, however, think he is to be understood as at the head of the list. See Kennicott's "Second Dissertation on the I shall mention two very remarkable places, where this yod has been inserted improperly; though in these the insertion of it may possibly have been made, not from chance, but by design. The Jewish transcribers have added the yod improperly, at the end of the noun n in that famous State of the Hebrew text.” prophecy of the Psalmist, Psalm cx. 4; Thou art a priest for ever, after the CHAP. XXIV. 1. וַיֹּסֶף אַף־יְהוָה לַחֲרוֹת בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל order of Melchizedek : which place has been וַיָּסֶת אֶת־דָּוִד בָּהֶם לֵאמֹר לֵךְ מְנֶה excellently illustrated by Mr. Langford in אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶת־יְהוּדָה : his late Objections to a Pamphlet intituled Critical Notes on Scripture. But according to the present reading, the sense and force of this text (on which the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews expatiates so much) sinks into just nothing; for the literal version of the words now is, Tu es sacerdos in æternum, secundum ordinem MEUM Melchisedek. There is also another text of equal consequence, where the strong reasoning of the apostles St. Peter and St. Paul is invalidated και προσέθετο ὀργὴν Κύριος ἐκκαῆναι ἐν Ἰσραὴλ, καὶ ἐπέσεισε τὸν Δαυὶδ ἐν αὐτοῖς, λέγων, Βάδιζε, ἀρίθμησον τὸν Ἰσραὴλ καὶ τὸν 'Ioúdav. Au. Ver.-1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he [Satan, see 1 Chron. xxi. 1] moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah. Pool. He moved David. He who? by the improper insertion of this same letter, Either, 1. Satan, as is expressed, 1 Chron. xxi. 1. Or, 2. God; who is said, in like whether the number of fighting men in his manner, to stir up Saul against David, empire was sufficient for the work which he 1 Sam. xxvi. 19, and to turn the hearts of had projected. See more on ver. 10. He the Egyptians to hate his people, Psalm therefore orders Joab and the captains to cv. 25, and to make men to err from his take an exact account of all the effective ways, Isaiah lxiii. 17, and to send strong men in Israel and Judah. God is justly delusions, &c., and to harden their hearts. displeased with this conduct, and determines All which expressions are not so to be under- that the props of his vain ambition shall be stood, as if God did work these sinful dis- taken away, either by famine, war, or pestipositions; which neither was necessary, lence. because they are naturally in every man's Ged. He set David against them, &c. In heart, nor possible for the holy God to do; Chronicles, it is Satan (the adversary) who but because he permits them, and withdraws suggests this idea to David. It comes, howhis grace and all restraints and hindrances ever, to the same thing. In the Hebrew from them, and giveth occasions and advan- theology, God is immediately, or mediately, tages to them; and directs their thoughts to the author of every event good or bad. The such objects as may indeed be innocently writer of Chronicles seems only to have thought of, which yet he knows they will softened the expression by making Satan wickedly abuse; and give them up to Satan, the immediate agent. For the rest, it is not who he knows will deceive and entice them easy to see in what David's guilt consisted. to such and such sins; which being tempted It is plain, however, from the context, that to do by Satan, and being effected by their the measure was unpopular, and disagreable own wicked hearts, he so orders and over- even to the courtiers themselves. Perhaps rules, that they shall be punishments for David wished to wage new wars, and make their former sins. Against them, i. e., for new conquests, at the expense of the people's Israel's punishment. To say, or, saying. tranquillity; and may be to impose a capitaFor this may be referred, either, 1. To God, tion tax. of whom the same expression is used 2 Sam. xvi. 10, The Lord said to Shimei, Curse David; which in both places is not to be understood of any command or impulse of God, but of his secret providence disposing things in manner here above expressed. Or, 2. To David; he moved David to say, to wit, to Joab, as he did, ver. 2. Bp. Patrick. He moved David against them.] Or, "David was moved; " that is, by Satan, as it is expounded in the first book of the Chronicles xxi. 1. But Abarbinel thinks it is as if he had said, The anger of the Lord, which was kindled against Israel, moved David, &c. That is, the same sin which made God angry with Israel, was the cause that David was seduced in this thing, that they might be punished. Booth.-1 And the anger of Jehovah was again kindled against Israel, because an adversary stood up against Israel, and moved David against them to say, Go number Israel and Judah. Because an adversary.] It is not usual to mention the anger of God, without stating the cause of it; but as the text now stands, God is angry, and his anger leads him to move David to number the people. The words preserved in the parallel place give us this cause. "Because an adversary," perhaps one of David's wicked counsellors, moved him, and he complied with the suggestion, so as to say, "Go, &c." Prof. Lee's Gram., Art. 230, 13.-It ought to be remembered, that the Orientals of this family generally enounce their proDr. A. Clarke. He moved David against positions vaguely, and then add the restrictthem.] God could not be angry with David ing or defining terms (Art. 216, 4.). When, for numbering the people if he moved him therefore, the leading term happens to be a to do it; but in the parallel place (1 Chron. verb, its qualifying term or nominative will xxi. 1) it is expressly said, Satan stood up immediately follow; as, against Israel, and provoked David to num- created, i. e., God. If, however, it be inber Israel. David, in all probability, slack- tended to leave the passage indefinite, as in ening in his piety and confidence toward English, SOME ONE said, or in French on God, and meditating some extension of his dit; no such nominative will be added: dominions without the divine counsel or and the greatest care ought to be taken in command, was naturally curious to know supplying it: e. g. Isaiah ix. 5, in, and he |