ft39 Josephus (Antiq. 2:10) has led some to suppose that she was Tharbis, daughter of the king of Ethiopia. Augustin, however, (Quaest. in Numbers 20.,) and the great majority of commentators, agree with C. in believing that she was Zipporah, and not a second wife, as contended by Rosenmuller, Michaelis, and others, The main difficulty arises from her being called a Cushite, which our translators have followed 70. and V. in rendering “the Ethiopian.” Bochart endeavors to prove that the Cushites and Midianites were the same people; and Shuckford (vol. 1. p. 166, edit. 1743) states his opinion that “by the land of Cush is always meant some part of Arabia.” <350307>Habakkuk 3:7, in which “the tents of Cushan,” and “the land of Midian,” are mentioned together, seems to corroborate this view.
ft40 “The Hebrew doctors make his not companying with his wife to be the occasion,” etc. — Ainsworth. So also De Lyra.
ft41 “Qu’il n’a pas eu ce bien et honneur;” that he had not the advantage and honor. — Fr.
ft42 ˆwzj, a vision, from hzj, to see, to look upon. harm, either the act of sight, or the object of sight; a seeing, or an appearance, from har, to see, to perceive. — W.
ft43 On Exodus 33:11, ante, vol. 3. p. 372.
ft45 “Veue, ou regard de quelque figure visible;” the view or look of some visible figure. — Fr.
ft46 No reference is here given by C. He probably alludes to <234325>Isaiah 43:25.
ft47Ante, vol. 2. p. 12.
ft48 Hengstenberg (Dissertations on the Genuineness of the Pentateuch, vol. 2. p. 344,) discusses this point, in opposition to Vater and De Wette, though he reminds us that “the discrepancy is no new discovery, but has been thoroughly canvassed; compare Gerhard on Deut., p. 53.” “That the contradiction is only apparent (he says) is clear from <041326>Numbers 13:26; for, since those, to whom the answer was brought back, must be identical. with the persons who sent out the spies, it appears from this passage that. not merely Moses and Aaron, but also the congregation, had a share in giving the commission. The author, therefore, cannot intend to deny this, when, in verse 1 and 2, he refers the matter to God.” “The sending out of the spies (he further argues) was a part of God’s plan, and hence was expressly commanded by Him, as soon as its indispensable condition, the proposal on the part of the people, had taken place. For one thing, it would insure to the well-disposed a strengthening of their weak faith; on the other hand, it formed a part of God’s design, that the evil-disposed should take occasion by this undertaking to manifest their unbelief, and be ripened by it for judgment, This design we learn from the result, which can never be contrary to the design. If the divine purpose was the essential point, and the proposal of the people the mere conditio sine qua non of its being carried into effect, it will be easily understood how the latter might be passed over in the Book of Numbers, although, as we have already seen, it is pre-supposed. After what has been remarked, Calvin’s view of the mutual relation of the two passages will clearly appear to be the correct one.”
ft49 “Afin que ce nom d’honneur servist a l’authoriser;” in order that this name of honor might serve to give him authority. — Fr.
Calvin here alludes to the apparent contradiction arising from the fact that Joshua had already been called by his new name in <021709>Exodus 17:9; 24:13; 33:11; and <041128>Numbers 11:28, which, as Hengstenberg remarks, was a topic of discussion as early as the times of Justin Martyr. Hengstenberg reviews the three modes of meeting the difficulty proposed, viz., 1. That he was so called in the earlier passages by prolepsis. 2. That Moses now only renewed the name. 3. That a statement is here made of what had taken place a considerable time before. To this view he himself inclines, and says, “That the author here first mentioned that he, whom he had originally called simply Joshua, originally bore the name of Hoshea, was not without good reason. What had been hitherto related of Joshua, belonged to him as a servant of God; the sacred name was, therefore, properly employed. But here Hoshea must stand; for he went to spy out the land, not as a servant of Moses, but as one of the heads of the children of’ Israel,’ — one of the plenipotentiaries of the congregation.” — Genuineness of Pentateuch, vol. 2. p. 323.
ft50 Thus the word is translated by the LXX. See note on Psalm 78. — C. Soc. Edit. Vol. 3 p. 239.
ft51 “Ils parlent a plene bouche;” they speak with open mouth. — Fr.
ft52 Corn. a Lapide has the following note on verse 33; “µylpn, nephilim, i.e., giants, who are called nephilim, that is, falling, because they were so tall, that those who saw them fell from terror, or rather falling, i.e., making to fall, (the Kal being put for the Hiphil,) laying prostrate and slaying other men in all directions, for these giants were savage men and truculent tyrants.”
ft53 By the old interpreter, C. does not here mean, as he generally does, the V., which accords with his own view, “in hac vasta solitudine utinam pereamus;” on these words Corn. a Lapide says; “Ita haec legunt et conjungunt, Hebr., Chald., Septuaginta, et Latina Romana. Tollenda ergo est negatio non, et distinctio quam habent Biblia Plantiniana.”
ft54 “D’une audace tant diabolique;” of such diabolical audacity. — Fr.
ft55Addition in Fr., “Quand on ne se soumet point a luy;” when they do not submit themselves to Him.
ft56<053211>Deuteronomy 32:11. The last sentence of the paragraph in omitted in Fr.
ft57A.V., “How long will this people provoke, me?” V. “Usquequo detrahet mihi populus iste?” Ainsworth says, “provoke me, or despite, blaspheme, contemptuously provoke me. So the Apostle expoundeth this word blaspheme, in <450224>Romans 2:24, from <235205>Isaiah 52:5; and it implieth also a contempt or despising, <200130>Proverbs 1:30; 15:5; <230524>Isaiah 5:24.”
ft58 “Et quelle punition luy seroit apprestee, si Dieu se vouloit venger d’une revolte si detestable;” and what punishment would be prepared for them, if God chose to take vengeance on so detestable a revolt. — Fr.
ft59 See Exodus 34:6, 7. Vol. 3. pp. 386-388.
ft60 See ante, vol. 1. p. 421, on Deuteronomy 6:16.
ft61A.V., “Followed me fully.” “Hebr., he fulfilled after me: so in <050136>Deuteronomy 1:36, and <061408>Joshua 14:8.” — Ainsworth. “Implevit, subaudi, verbum meum, vel voluntatem meam.” — S.M.
ft62 “This other spirit was the spirit of faith, which the Law cannot give, (<480302>Galatians 3:2) — the spirit of adoption of sons, not of bondage to fear again, <450814>Romans 8:14, 15. By the guidance of this spirit, Caleb constantly followed the Lord, and obtained the promised inheritance.” — Ainsworth.
ft63 “The Lord spoke therefore to Moses,” etc. — Lat.
ft64 “Pathetica interrogatio.” — Lat. “Or, Dieu use d’un proeme vehement a la facon d’un homme passione;” now, God uses a vehement exordium, after the fashion of an angry man. — Fr.
ft65 “Si introibunt in requiem meam.” — Lat. See Margin A.V., and <580403>Hebrews 4:3, 5.
ft66 See ver. 30, Margin A.V.Item, vol. 1. p. 131, on Exodus 6:8.
ft67Lat., “shall be shepherds.” Margin A.V., “or feed.”
ft68 “Il entend qu’ils seront errans comme estrangers, ayant tousiours un pied leve, et nul arrest;” he means that they shall wander as strangers, having one foot always lifted, and without any stay. — Fr.
ft69 A.V., “Mine age is departed, etc.” A. Barnes’s translation pretty nearly agrees with that of C., which he defends in the following note: “The word yrwd, which is here used, means properly the revolving period, or circle of human life. The parallelism seems to demand, however, that it should be used in the sense of dwelling, or habitation, so as to correspond with the “shepherd’s tent.” Accordingly, Lowth and Noyes render it habitation. So also do Gesenius and Rosenmuller. The Arabic word has this signification; and the Hebrew verb rwd, also means to dwell, to remain, as in Chaldee.” C.’s Latin is here hospitium; in his Commentary on Isaiah, habitatio.
ft70 “Ayant porte la paste au four (comme on dit) pour le peche de leurs peres;” having carried the dough to the oven (as they say) for the sin of their fathers. — Fr.
ft71 A.V., “My breach of promise. Margin, Or, altering of my purpose.” Fr., “Mensonge.”
ft72 “Sinon qu’on aimast mieux prendre ce mot en temps passif, Vous cognoistrez men aneantissement: pource que le peuple s’estoit efforce d’abolir Dieu;” unless it be preferred to take this word in a passive sense, You shall know my annihilation; because the people had striven to annihilate God. — Fr.
ft73 It will be seen that C.’s own translation is, “coram Deo;” but the V. renders the words, “in conspectu Domini.”
ft74A.V. concludes the denunciation of the Almighty at ver. 35. C. continues it to the end of ver. 38; and hence arose the necessity for changing the tenses. Vatablus and the Geneva version agree with C.; Dathe with A.V.
ft75 Sous ombre qu’il ne prend point garde a ce qui ce fait ici bas;” under the pretext that He pays no attention to what is done here below. — Fr.
ft76 Added from Fr.
ft77 “Ne laisse pas d’estre cachee en nous;”Does not ceaseto lie hid within us. — Fr.
ft78 “En laquelle les pecheurs tournent a l’entour du pot;”whereby sinners twist round the pot. — Fr.
ft79 “Sed etiam contriti.” — Lat. “Discomfited them.” — A.V. The Geneva version renders the word “consumed.” — Hebr. µwtkyw,from tjk, which Taylor renders, “contundere, conterere. To beat, to crush, to knock, and mash all to pieces.”
ft80 “Quibus antea manseratis.” — Pagninus in Poole. The V. has only “Sedistisergo in Cades-barne multo tempore.” On this Corn. a Lapide has the following note: “In Hebrew it is added, according to the days that ye abode, which Vatablus thus explains, Ye remained in Kadesh-barnea as many days after the return of the spies, as ye had remained there before their return. Again, the Hebrews themselves, in Sealer Olam, thus explain it, Ye remained in Kadesh-barnea as many days as ye afterwards remained in all your other stations together, viz., 19 years: for twice 19 make 38, to which if you add the two years that had elapsed before they came to Kadesh-barnea, you will have the forty years of their journeyings in the desert. Nothing like this, however, can be gathered from our version, nor from the Hebrew either; for the expression, ‘according to the days that ye abode,’ is merely a Hebrew form of repetition, explanatory of what had preceded, and meaning ‘ for a long time.’ — Hence our interpreter has omitted this Hebrew repetition as redundant, and strange to Latin ears.”
ft81 See vol. 2. p. 431, on Leviticus 24:15, 16.
ft82 See vol. 2. p. 431, and note. “La similitude de transpercer le nom de Dieu convient tres bien; pource que nous disons deschirer par pieces ou despiter.” — Fr.
ft83 Vol. 2. p. 83, on Deuteronomy 13:9.
ft84 Vol. 2. p 434.
ft85 Martial, lib. 4, epigr. 4, speaks of “jejunia Sabbatariorum,” in a connection which makes it highly probable that it was a kind of nickname for the Jews.
ft86A.V., “took men.” There has been very much discussion among the commentators respecting this word. Holden says, “There is nothing in the Hebrew answering to the word men, and the verb is in the singular number; the received version, therefore, can scarcely be correct. The most easy and natural construction of the original is, ‘And Korah took (i.e., won over, or drew into a conspiracy with him) both Dathan and Abiram,’ etc. This agrees with other parts of Scripture which attribute this rebellion to Korah, chap. 27:3; Jude 11.” And this appears to be the general opinion.
ft87A.V., “famous in the congregation.” S.M. Vocabantur ad concilium. — W.
ft88 hd[, A.V., “of the assembly.”
ft89 “Sat sit vobis;” let it be enough for you. — Lat.
ft90 “Telle humilite a prier;”such humility in prayer. — Fr.
ft91 “Comme si Dieu en l’honorant luy avoit dresse une banniere d’orgueil;” as if God by honoring him had raised for him a banner of pride. — Fr.
ft92 Addition in Fr., “comme dit Sainct Paul.”
ft93 In the clause under consideration, la, El, is immediately followed by yhla, Elohey, the form given to Elohim, when it is to be used in connection with the next word. The different roots of El and Elohim seem to indicate that El has an especial reference to the power of the Deity, and Elohim to His authority as a judge. There being no practicable equivalent distinction in Latin or English, and the word Almighty being appropriated to rendering ydç, Shaddai, C. and our A.V. do but repeat the word God, whilst the V. and S.M. have fortissime Deus; but C. saw in S.M.’s notes, Aut sic, O Deus, Deus. — W.
ft94C.’s supposition, that the preposition l prefixed to all, is equivalent to b or in, would not facilitate the version. Noldius, giving instances where, the l prefixed has the effect of a genitive, cites this passage amongst: others. — W.
ft95 “Le mot de chair;” the word flesh — Fr.
ft96 Addition in Fr., “Moyennant qu’il soit prins des hommes, comme e’est le plus vray-semblable;” supposing it be taken as having reference to men, as is the more probable conjecture.
ft97 “Lesquels pensent que les ames procedent de la substance de Dieu;” who think that our souls proceed from the substance of God. — Fr.
This doctrine of the Manicheans is often referred to in the writings of Augustine. The Benedictine Editors, in their index to his works, point out by citations the following particulars: “Manichaeorum error circa animam. Docent animam nostram hoc esse quod Deus est; esse partem, seu particulam Dei; animas non solum hominum, sed etiam pecorum, de Dei esse substantia, et partes Dei asserunt.”
The word which I have translated transmission, is in the Latin ex traduce, a well-known metaphor in theological controversy, derived from the practice of inarching, or grafting by approach, when twoneighboring branches are tied together so as to cohere and form one, whilst the parent stocks, to which they belong, continue still to possess a separate and individual vitality. Thus Prudentius, Apoth. 919-921.