22 GENERAL PRIM this place, ogee, ,sgovsav sar as,;a, em so, icho establisheth the thunder, andcreateth thespirit; though some copies read ss tea, the mountains. And the next words in the text, trms an =lie pm', and declaretlz Unto man what is his thought; they render ,:a, aasyysasu, us árAgwvr sor Xg,rov, 4.-a, and declareth unto men. his Christ, or his anointed, or his Messiah. For they took 1.-'s na for ;-i'a,n, by inadvertency, and not for want of points or vowels, as some imagine, seeing the mistake consists in the casting out of a letter itself. And thence the old Latin translation renders thewords, Firmans Tonitruum, et creans Spiritum, et annuncians in homines Christum swum. Which Hierom rectified into fornzans Montes, et creans Ventum, et annuncians Homini eloquium swum; discovering in hiscomment the mistake of the Lxx. But it is certain that from the ambiguity of theword nil in this place, with the corrupt translations making mention of Christ in the next words, some, who of old denied the Deityof the Holy Spirit, mightily insisted on it to prove him a creature, as may be seen in Didymus, Ambrose, Hierom, Hilarius, and theancients generally. But the context determines the signification of the word beyond all just exceptions. It is the power cf God in making and disposing of things here below, whether dreadful for their greatness and height, as the mountains; or mighty and effectual in their operations, as the wind; or secret in their conceptions, as the thoughts of men; or stable in their continuance, as the night and day, the evening and morning, without the least respect to Christ or the Spirit, that it treateth of. Sect. 4. And I cannot but observe from hence, the great necessity there is of searching the original text, in the interpretation of the scriptures, as it might be evidenced by a thousand other instances. But one we may take from two great and learned men, who were cotemporaries in the Latin church, intheir thoughts on this place; the one is Ambrose, who interpreting these words in his second book de Spiritu Sancta, cap. 1. be- ing deceived by the corrupt translation mentioned, an- nuncians in homines Christum surin, is forced to give a very strained exposition of that which in truth, is not in the text, and to relieve himself also with another corruption in the same place, where. forming the moun- tains is rendered, by establishing the thunder; and yet, when he hath done all, can scarce free himself of the objection about the creation of the Spirit, which he tie- GIFLÉS CONCERNING signs to answer. His words are, u Siquis propheticum " dictum, ideo derivandum putet ad interpretationem " Spiritus sancti; quia habet, annuncians in homines " Christum suora is ad Incarnationis DominicmMyste- " ria dictum facilius derivabit. Nam site movet quia Spiritum- dixit, et hoc non putas derivandum ad Mysteria assumptionìs humante; persequere scriptu " ras et invenies optime cougruere de Christo, de quo " bene convenit aestimari, quia firmavit tonitrua adven- " tu suo; vim videlicet et senum ceelestium scripture- " rum; quorum velut quodam tonitru mentes nostrm " redduntur attonitm; et timere discamus, et reveren- " tiam ctelestibus deferamus oraculis. Denique, in " Evangelio fratres Domini Fuld tonitru dicebantur. " Et cum vox Patris facts esset disentir ad F,lium, et ci honorificavi te, et iterum honorificabo, Judmi dice- " bent, tonitruum factum esse ille. And hereon, with " some observations to the same purpose, he adds; " Ergo tonitrua ad sermones Domini retulit quorum in " omnem terrant exivit sonus; Spiritum autem hoc lo- " co, animant quam suscepit rationabilem et perfectam intelligimus," The substance of his discourse is, that, treating of Christ (who indeed is neither mentioned nor intended in the text) he speaks of confirming the thunder, (which no where here appears) by which the sound of thescrip- tures, and preaching of the word is intended; the Spi- it that was created being the human soul of Jesus Christ. Nor_was healone in this interpretation, Didym. lib. 2. de Sphinx Sancto; Athanas. ad Serapion. Basil. lib. 4. contra Eunom. amongstthe Grecians, are in like manner entangled with this corruption of the text; as was also Concil. Sardicen, in Socrat. lib. 2, cap. 20. The other person intended is Hierotn, who consulting theoriginal, as he was well able to do, first translated the words, Quia ecceformans Mantes et creans Ventura, et annutztians Homini eloquium scum, declares the mistake of the Lxx, and the occasion of it: " Pro Montibus " qui Hebraice dicuntur ntn, soli LXX /ggovrav, id est, " tonitruum verturunt. Cur autem lilt Spiritum et nos " dixerimus Ventum, qui Hebraice nt't vocatur, causa " manifesta est. Quodque sequitur annunciates homini " eloquium suum, LXx transtulerent isaeyyaaov sis äv9gv- aas roe X sor lase, Verbi similitudine, et ambiguitate de- cepti. So he skews that it is not rouan in the text, but m'wna that is, saith he, junta Aquilani ioratgr lens;
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=