66

MELCHIOR CANUS, de Locis Theol. II. c. 9. p. 27. ed Venet. 1769. says, To reject the book of Baruch from the canon of the Holy Scriptures, is not only rash, but erroneous. I call it erroneous (which is a word of various and ambiguous meaning) because, although near to heresy, I dare not call it heretical."*

[This quotation illustrates the extreme unwillingness of Jahn to admit the authority of the apocryphal books. His submission to the dictates of his church extorted an acknowledgment of their empty title as deuterocanonical; but on every occasion he shows his conviction of their inferiority to what Protestants rightly consider the only genuine Scriptures. Tr.]

(a) DE WETTE, Einleit. † 323. adds, as evidence of the spuriousness of the book, the contradiction between c. i. 1. as interpreted by him, and the history of Baruch, Jer. xliii. 6.; the mention of the altar i. 10. and of the house of God, v. 14; (but if the preceding objection applies, these do not;) the contradiction between i. 3. and II Ki. xxv. 27; and that between i. 7. and I Chron. v. 36. (vi. 10), II Ki. xxv. 18. Jer. xxix. 25. Comp. also i. 9. with the LXX. of Jer. xxiv. 1. from which it is evidently copied. Tr.]

§ 220. Language of the Book of Baruch.

There is no mention made by the ancients of any Hebrew copy of Baruch. The Hebraisms of the Greek text might originate with a Jew writing Greek. It can by no means be inferred from the expression Tomoare μavva, prepare (or make) ye manna, i. 10, that the text was originally Hebrew; for the Alexandrine translation has rendered in Jer. xli. 5, by pavva, so that μavva might be used in

T:.

Jewish Greek to express n, as it is explained by Suidas; comp. Yet as

SUIDE et PHAVORINI Glossæ Sacræ ex ed. ERNESTI, p. 86. there are not any orations inserted in Baruch, after the Grecian custom, as there are in the book of Judith, although there was a very fit opportunity for so doing, the book seems not to belong to the modern age, in which the Jews were accustomed to write in Greek. This, connected with the circumstance of the occurrence of the word μavva,

* ["Baruch a canone sanctarum scripturarum eximere, non solum temerarium, sed etiam erroneum est. Erroneum vero hic appello, (quia varia et ambigua est hujus nominis significatio,) id, quod haeresi proximum, haeresim non andeo vocare.”

and with the frequent Hebraisms, renders the opinion of those who suppose it to have been written in Hebrew, rather probable than otherwise. But if the Greek text were allowed to be the original, the book must have been written under Ptolemy Lagus, or Philadelphus, and the author must have attributed his own ideas to Baruch the scribe of Jeremiah, and represented the latter as writing in Babylonia, in order the more effectually to confirm the numerous body of Jews then residing in Egypt, in the religion of their forefathers. That the book must have been useful at that time any one will readily allow, although it is not evident why the author should speak of the return from Babylon.

§ 221. Of the Epistle which is contained in c. vi. of the Book

of Baruch.

The epistle in c. vi., attributed to Jeremiah, is an imitation of the letter of that prophet in Jer. xxix, so constructed as to purport to have been written to the Jews who had been carried away to Babylon after the destruction of Jerusalem. It is not a part of the book, as even the difference of the style attests; nor was it written by Jeremiah, who constantly limits the time of the captivity to seventy years, whereas the author of this letter, probably with reference to the exiles of the ten tribes, extends it to seven generations, and thus to a period of 233 years. Besides, it is written in Greek, and there are no observable traces of any original Hebrew text; for what BENDTSEN has remarked to the contrary, in his Exercitationes Criticae, 1788, is not satisfactory. Even the method of reasoning manifests Grecian learning, and a Grecian Jew or Hellenistic author. It was, nevertheless, the writer's intention to represent Jeremiah as the author of the epistle, unless the title has been erroneously added by some other hand.The age of the epistle cannot be determined. It is only certain that it was written before the second book of Maccabees, comp. II Mac. ii. 2. with Bar. vi. 4.

§ 222. Versions of the Book of Baruch.

There are two ancient Latin versions of this book, the one in the Vulgate, the other published by Joseph Maria a Caro at Rome in 1688. Both are older than the time of Jerome, who did not translate the book of Baruch.- -An Arabic and a Syriac version have been printed in the London Polyglot, and the Paris Polyglot contains another Syriac version, which differs in many places from the present text. All these versions have been made from the Greek. Their respective ages are unknown.

CHAPTER II.

ON THE DEUTEROCANONICAL PARTS OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL.

THE Alexandrine version of Daniel contains, c. iii. 24-90, a prolix exhortation to all creatures to join in the praise of God, sung by the three Jews, Azarias, Mishael, and Hananiah, the friends of Daniel, when cast into the fiery furnace. JEROME, Præf. in Dan., writes of a certain Jew, that "he raised cavils at the leisure which the three children were supposed to have to make verses in the burning furnace, and to call upon all the elements in regular order to praise God." The whole of this difficulty, be it more or less, will vanish, if we suppose that some pious writer of a later age has represented these men as singing, for the purpose of celebrating their preservation in the fire.

§ 224. Language of the Song of the Three Children.

This song shows some vestiges of an original Hebrew or Chaldee text; for instance, v. 34. arogarai, answering to D, (or 10) apostates, which means in Syriac cruel persons, and must have that signification in this passage; so also v. 37. and 40 [a] Some writers do not think these grounds sufficient to justify the conclusion that the song was originally written in Hebrew, because Theodotion did not translate it from the Hebrew, but merely copied it from the Alexandrine version. But Theodotion frequently differs from the Alexan

drine text, so that it is doubtful whether he copied the Alexandrine version, or translated from a Hebrew text.- -Our Latin version* was translated from the Greek text by Jerome.

[a) DE WETTE considers these instances, and others which he adds from v. 44, 48, 51, and 65, as proofs of the existence of an original Chaldee text. See Einleit. § 258. anm. b). Tr.]

§ 225.

The History of Susannah, Dan. xiii.

Susannah, the wife of a rich Jew of Babylon, is solicited, while in a garden, by two Jewish judges to commit adultery, and although she foresees that they will meditate revenge, is induced by her religious principles to repel their attempt. The judges or elders, enraged at the repulse, call Susannah before a public assembly, and testify that they had caught her in the act of adultery in the garden, and condemn her to death for the offence. As the innocent victim is on the way to execution, Daniel, who seems to have had a knowledge of the character of these wicked judges from some extraneous source, induces the people to institute a fresh examination of the evidence against her. He interrogates the elders separately, under what tree, or in what part of the garden they had found the supposed adulteress? The first answering that it was under a mastich or lentisk tree, o xivov, Daniel instantly pronounces his sentence in the words, ο άγγελος κυρια σχίσει σε την ψυχήν σήμερον,f the angel of God hath received the sentence of GoD, to cut thee in two.' The other answering that it was under an ilex tree, o pivov, he condemns him by saying, νυν ὁ αγγελος κυρίου την ρομφαίαν εςηκεν έχων—ίνα κατάπριση σε, δ 'the angel of the LORD waiteth with the sword to cut

* [The Vulgate. Tr.]

[The Latin of our author, by a strange mistake, has ilex here, and lentiscus after pivov. The German has divos, Mastixbaume, and pivog, Steineiche. Tr.] # [Or rather, ηδη γαρ αγγελος του Θεου λαβων φασιν παρά τ8 Θεού, σχίσει σε μέσον, MS. Al.; or, ηδη γαρ αγγελος φασιν Θεου λαβων παρα του Θεού, σχίσει σε μέσον, MS. Vat. Tr.]

§ [Or as MS. Al. ὁ αγγελος του Θεού, την ρομφαίαν έχων πρέσας σε μέσον. Τ.]