He speaks not at all of the ^''npl '^')\>^ but merely of the anomalous
OF THE KERI AND KETIB. 403
pointing of words, in a various way from the genius of the tongue, as they are observed and reckoned up in the Masora: of other varieties lie speaks afterward, giving a particular account of the Keri and Ketib ; which whether he esteemed various lections or no I know not. " Non si te superis seques/' But all are ignorant who are not of the mind of an aspiring Jesuit !
2. That the difference in the sense, taking in the whole context, is upon the matter very little, or none at all ; at least each word, both that in the line and that in the margin, yields a sense agreeable to the analogy of faith.
Of all the varieties that are found of this kind, that of two words the same in sound, but of most distinct significations, seems of the greatest importance, — namely, Sb and N7, fourteen or fifteen times; where iih, " not," is in the text, the margin notes Sh, " to him," or " his," to be read. But yet, though these seem contrary one to the other, Avherever this falls out, a sense agreeable to the analogy of faith ariseth fairly from either word : as, to give one or two in- stances, Ps. c. 8, ^^^^^_ ^'^] ^J^'V ^'^^, — " He hath made us, and not we ourselves." The Keri in the margin is IPI, " his;" giving this sense, " He hath made us, and his we are," the verb substantive being in- cluded in the pronoun. So Isa. Ixiii. 9, "^V ^•' '^Px^'"''??, — "In all their afflictions (or straits), no straitness :" so the^''^^ . The ''li^ [is] v , " Strait- ness (or affliction) was to him," or " he was straitened" or "afflicted." In the first way, God signifieth that when they were in their outward straits, yet he was not straitened from their relief; in the other, that he had compassion for them, was afflicted with them, which upon the matter is the same. And the like may be showed of the rest.
I confess I am not able fully to satisfy myself in the original and spring of all this variety, being not willing merely to depend on the testimony of the Jews, much less on the conjectures of late inno- vators. To the uttermost length of my view, to give a full account of this thing is a matter of no small difficulty. Their venerable an- tiquity and unquestionable reception by all translators gives them sanctuary from being cast down from the place they hold by any man's bare conjecture. That which to me is of the greatest import- ance is, that thcjy appear most of them to have been in the Bibles then when the oracles of God were committed to the Jews; dur- ing which time we find them not blamed for adding or altering one word or tittle. Hence the Chaldee paraphrast often follows the Keri, which never was in the line, Avhatever some boastingly conjecture to the contrary ; and sometimes the Ketib. That which seems to me most probable is, that they were collected, for the most part of them, by the n^n jn nDJ3 '•trjx, "The men of the great congregation." Some, indeed, I find of late (I hope not out of a design to bring all
404 INTEGRITY AND PURITY OF THE HEBREW AND GREEK TEXT.
things to a further confusion about the original) to question whether ever there were any such thing as the great congregation. Morinus calls it a Judaical figment. Our Prolegomena question it, Prolog. 8, sect. 22. But this is only to question whether Ezra, Nehemiah, Joshua, Zechariah, Haggai, and the rest of the leaders of the people, on their return from the captivity, did set a sanhedrim, according to the institution of God, and labour to reform the church and all the corruptions that were crept either into the word or worship of God. I see not how this can reasonably be called into question, if we had not, to confirm it, the catholic tradition of Jews and Christians. Neither is it called "The great congregation" from its number, but from the eminency of persons. Now, on this supposition it may be granted that the Keri on the books of these men themselves, Ezra and the rest, were collected by the succeeding church ; unless we shall sup- pose, with Ainsworth, that the word was so received from God as to make both necessary. And if we know not the true cause of its being so given, we have nothing to blame but our own ignorance, this not being the only case wherein we have reason so to do. Our last translation generally rendereth the word in the margin, noting also the word in the line, where there is any considerable difference. Those who have leisure for such a work may observe what choice is used in this case by old and modern translators; and if they had not believed them to have had an authoritative original, beyond the impeachment of any man in these days, they could not fairly and honestly have used both line and margin as they have done.
"What say now our Prolegomena, with the Appendix, unto these things?