Chapter VIII: Part 8

[Sidenote: Isa. 3. 2.]

[Sidenote: Exod. 22. 20.]

2. They are solely condemned, because the end of all their Divinations and their other Feats, were only to draw and lead the people to Idolatry, and to serve other Gods. For it is manifest, that all ways and sorts of Divination were not in themselves evil and unlawful, for else Astronomy it self, that foretels the Entrance of the Sun and Moon into such Signs, and when Eclipses will happen, and the like, should be forbidden too, but they were not: so that the chief reason why they were condemned, was _sub ratione finis, non medii_, in regard of the end, and not of the means used, because all their Divinations, and other Arts, Crafts, or Feats, whether performed by natural or artificial means, or otherwise, had still for their chief and principal end the leading of the people unto Idolatry, and the serving of other Gods, which was above all things abominable and hateful unto God, who is a jealous God, and will not give his glory to graven Images. And therefore all Idol-Priests, or those that lead the people to Idolatry, are in the Scripture-sense Witches, Diviners, and the like. And that all Divinations were not forbidden, is most clear from that of _Solomon_, as _Arias Montanus_ translates it: _Divinatio super labiis regis_: and that of _Isaiah_, where the Lord threateneth to take away the staff and stay of _Jerusalem_, that is, the mighty man, and the man of war, the Judge, the Prophet, and the prudent, _Divinum, sive Sagacem_. For it is the same word, and from the same root קָסַם _Divinavit_: For as _Avenarius_, _Schindler_, and others say, _Est verbum medium, nam modò in bonam, modò in malam partem accipitur_, of which _Tremellius_ saith this: _Sagacitas, id est, consultissima prudentia in rebus dijudicandis, præcavendis, & veluti addivinandis: nam vox Hebræa media est sive anceps, quæ non tantùm in malam partem accipitur, sed etiam in bonam_. Therefore was the Law so strict, that if any sacrificed unto any other God, save unto the Lord only, he was utterly to be destroyed, much more those that lead and incited the people to serve and sacrifice unto other strange Gods, were to be rooted out.

2. Is the word we have named before, to wit, קֹסֵם קְסָמִים, _Kosem Kesamim, Divinans divinationes_: which, as we have shewed before, was taken _in bonam & malam partem_, and is by the Septuagint fitly rendred μαντευόμενος μαντειαν _vaticinans vaticinium_, and is almost with all Translators rendred in that sense and propriety: so that we need not complain, that it is one of them that is mis-translated; but concerning it, we may note these things.

[Sidenote: 1 Sam. 6. 1, 2. 3, 7, 8, 9.]

[Sidenote: Hos. 4. 12. Ezek. 21. 21.]

1. That there were and are almost innumerable ways, whereby men have undertaken to Divine and foretel things to come, some of which were by lawful means and ways, as all prudent, sagacious, and experienced men have done, and may do. Some by vain, trivial, foolish, and groundless ways, as by the flying of birds, their noise and motion, and so of beasts, by casting lots, dice, and the like, which have no causality or efficiency in them at all to declare things to come, but were meerly vain and superstitious, with which the Heathen World doth still abound, and they are not yet totally eradicated from amongst Christians. The most foolish of which was this, That when the Philistins had kept the Ark of the Lord seven months, they called the Priests and the Diviners, to know what to do with it, and they advised them not to send it away empty, but to send five golden Emerods and five golden Mice, and to take a new Cart and two Milch-kine, upon which there had com’d no yoke, and to tye them to the Cart, and to bring their Calves home from them, and to lay the Ark in the Cart, and the Jewels of Gold to be put in a Coffer by, thinking that if they went up towards _Beth-shemesh_ that was the Israelites Coast, that if they did so, then it was he that smote them, otherwise that it was but a chance that happened unto them. And this in respect of the Priests and Diviners was only a casual conjecture at Random, though God in his Providence did order it according to his Divine Wisdom for the best. Like unto this was that mentioned by the Prophet, a _Consulter with his staff_, as also that of _Ezekiel_: _For the King of Babylon stood at the parting of the way, at the head of the two ways, to use divination: he made his arrows bright, he consulted with images, (Teraphim) he looked in the liver_. And besides these there were others that pretended Visions and Revelations from their Gods or Idols; but how far either Idols, or Devils, or their Priests could truly foretel things to come, is very doubtful and hard to determine, of which we shall have occasion to speak hereafter.

2. We are to note, that though there were never so many ways of Divination used, and whether the means used to predict by, were natural or supernatural, lawful or unlawful, frivolous and superstitious, or taken upon sound and rational grounds, yet were they all wicked and abominable, because they were used to withdraw the people from those Ordinances that God had appointed to give answers by, and to lead the people to inquire of vain and lying Idols, and their Priests, and thereby to commit Idolatry; and so whatsoever the means were, the end was wicked and damnable.

[Sidenote: Psal. 115. 4, &c.]

[Sidenote: Jer. 14. 14.]

[Sidenote: 1 Cor. 8. 4.]

[Sidenote: _Vid. Dr. Hammond. in loc._]

[Sidenote: Isa. 41. 23.]

[Sidenote: Jer. 10. 5.]

3. Moreover, what answers soever the Priests forged and gave (for it is manifest, that the Idols gave none at all; _for they had mouths and spake not, ears and heard not, eyes and saw not, feet and walked not, neither was there breath in their nostrils_) were nothing but lyes and conjectures of their own devising, and there an Idol in the Hebrew is sometimes styled אֱלִיל _nihilum_, and therefore saith the Prophet: _The Prophets prophesie lyes in my Name, I sent them not, neither have I commanded them. They prophesie unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart._ Unto which the Apostle alludeth, when he saith: _We know that an Idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one._ That is, that an Idol taken abstractively, without regard to the matter of which it was made, as gold, silver, stone, wood, or the like, which were natural substances, or respect to the figure or shape which was artificial, and the work of the Work-man, it was plainly nothing, and had no real existence as a God or Idol, but only in the Phantasies and minds of the blinded Worshippers; for it neither could truly foretel, nor act any thing of it self, but all that was done, was the lyes and inventions of the Priests that served them, and got their living by that villanous and lying trade. For God by the mouth of his Prophet doth set down the true difference of the true God, that could infallibly foretel and declare things that were to come, from the false Gods and Idols, and doth challenge them in this manner: _Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are Gods: yea do good or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together_. From whence it is plain, that the only κριτήριον to distinguish betwixt the Divinations that are given forth by the Spirit of God in his Prophets or Apostles is, that they are plain, certain, and infallible, and the event never faileth to answer the Prediction, but those that are given forth by Satan and his juggling and lying Ministers, are always ambiguous, doubtful, and perplex, and evermore deceive such as trust in them, as was manifest in Ahab, when all the false Prophets bade him go up to _Ramoth Gilead_, and prosper, yet there was he slain. And as they never truly foretel things to come, so neither can the Idols do good or evil: all that is, or ever was done, was performed only by the cunning, confederacy, and juggling of the knavish and deceitful Priests; and therefore the Prophet admonisheth Gods people not to be afraid of them; _For they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good_.

[Sidenote: Deut. 13. 1, 2, 3.]

4. We are to note, that if a Sign or Wonder foretold do come to pass, we have no Warrant to ascribe the bringing of it to pass either to Devil or Witch, for the Lord telleth us this: _If there arise among you a Prophet or a Dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder. And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spoke unto thee, saying; Let us go after other Gods (which thou hast not known) and let us serve them: Thou shalt not hearken to the words of that Prophet or that Dreamer of dreams: For the Lord your God proveth you, to know whether you love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul._ So that what Divinations or Predictions soever be foretold by any, or what signs or wonders soever be brought to pass, if the persons that work or foretel them, perswade us to serve other Gods, or go to seduce us to Idolatry, we are not to follow them, but are to know that by them the Lord doth prove us, to try if we love him with all our heart, or not. And if there were no other means to distinguish a true Miracle from a false, yet were this infallibly sufficient to instruct and direct us.

5. We may note, that of all the several sorts of Divinations pretended, and of all the acceptations of this Hebrew word in all the Bible, there is nothing that doth imply any such kind of killing Witch, as is commonly imagined, nor none such as make a visible League with the Devil, nor upon whose bodies he sucketh, or hath carnal copulation with them, nor no such as are really changed into Cats, Hares, Wolves, or Dogs; which was the thing we undertook to prove.

3. The next word we are to consider, is עֹנֵן, which _Avenarius_, _Schindlerus_, _Buxtorsius_, and Mr. _Goodwin_ do derive from עֹנֵן _obnubilavit, nubem obduxit, item præstigiis usus est_. From whence we may note these things.

[Sidenote: _Vid. Polyglot. in loc._]

1. That the most of all the Translators do some render it by one word, and some by another, that no certainty can be gathered from them at all, as though it did signifie divers and many sorts of these kinds of Augury, Divinations, or juggling Feats, when in reason we cannot but suppose that it only comprehended some one sort, and not so many as the Translators do ascribe to it. The Septuagint render it for the most part κληδονιζόμενος, sometimes αποφθεγγόμενος, and sometimes ὀρνιθοσκοπήσεθε, which are all of different derivations and significations; some others render it other ways, as, _neq; auspicabimini, neq; observabitis horas, ne vaticinemini, ne ominemini, nec observet somnia & auguria, nec qui exercet Astrologiam, &c._ Now from such a diversity no man is able to draw a positive certainty.

2. They do not keep to one word appropriate to the Hebrew, which if they had not forgotten themselves, they would have done, and not left it uncertain. For _Arias Montanus_ in the 19. of _Leviticus_, _vers._ 26. renders it, _neq; præstigiabamini_, and in the 2. of _Isaiah_, _vers._ 6. translates it, _augures sicut Philistim_. In _Isa._ 57. 3. he calleth them _Filii Auguratricis_. And in the 27. of _Jeremiah_, _v._ 9. _Et ad Augures vestros._ Also _Micah_ 5. 11. he renders it _Præstigiatores_. Now what great difference there is betwixt any sort of Augury, and Juggling, or Leger-de-main, is known to any of indifferent reading. And the rest of the Translators are far more wild, and more wide. And _Junius_ and _Tremellius_, who of all others, one might have thought would have been more circumspect, yet fall into the same incertitude; for in Deut. 18. 10. he renders it _Planetarius_, but in the place before-cited in _Leviticus_, they render it, _neq; utemini præstigiis_, though in the Margent they mend it, with this note, _neq; ex nubibus conjicite, vel ne temporis observationi plus æquo tribuite_. And _Isa._ 2. 6. _Et præstigiatores sunt ut Polischtæi._

[Sidenote: _Vid._ _Jo. Wier. de mag. Jus._ _c._ 1. _p._ 91.]

[Sidenote: Of Divin. _lib._ 4. _cap._ 10. _p._ 183.]

3. But if there be any certainty in adhering to the primitive signification of the Hebrew root, that plainly intendeth _obnubilavit_, that it is without question most safe and genuine to translate it Planetarius, to which the most learned _Andreas Masius_ (as he is quoted by _Wierus_) doth incline in these words: _Veteres Hebræorum dicunt id verbum ad eos propriè pertinere, qui temporum momenta superstitiosè observant, atq; alia fausta rebus gerendis, alia infausta præscribunt_. To which agreeth Mr. _Thomas Goodwin_, saying: “But of all I approve those who derive it from עִנֵּן a Cloud, as if the Original signified properly a Planetary, or Stargazer.”

4. But however thus far there is no word found, that signifieth a Witch in the sense we have laid down, nor any such person that hath a real familiar Spirit, either in them, or attending upon them, ready visibly to appear at their beck, this is not yet to be found out.

5. The next is וּמְנַחֵשׁ from the root נִחֵשׁ, _nichesch, auguratus est, observavit, augurium fecit_, which our English Translators have erroneously rendred an Inchanter, which it no way signifieth, nor hath any relation unto, having in the next verse named a Charmer, as though Enchanter and Charmer were not all one, when the word plainly (as Mr. _Goodwin_ and the learned _Masius_ do confess) importeth an Augur or Sooth-sayer: That is, such an one, who out of his own experience draweth observations of good or evil to come: of which we may note these things.

1. The most of all the Translations given us in the _Polyglot_, do render the Hebrew word by _auguratus est_, and so understand it to be an Augur or Sooth-sayer, a Conjecturer, or an Observer, from whatsoever it be that he taketh his observations, as from the flying noise or motion of birds or beasts, looking into their entrails, and the like, and from thence taking upon them to foretel good or evil to come, or what was hidden and secret.

2. The Hebrew word, is by the Septuagint rendred οἰώνισμα, _Augurium, Auspicium_, that is, an Augur, an Observer, or a Conjecturer, which _Luther_ translateth: =eyn de vp Voegell geschrey achte=. And in the Low Dutch Bible it is rendred agreeable thereto; and the French render it _aux Oiseaux_, from the word _Oiseau_, _Avis, Volucris_; and the Italians render it _Auguropista_, which are all to one purpose, and no difference at all, and so the gross mistake of our English Translators is most apparent, that make it to be an Inchanter or Charmer, to which it hath no relation at all.

[Sidenote: Gen. 30. 27.]

[Sidenote: Gen. 44. 5, 15.]

3. This Hebrew word is taken _in bonam partem_, heedfully to consider, mark, or observe, as _Laban_ said, when he laboured to stay _Jacob_ from going from him: _I have learned by experience that the Lord hath blessed me for thy sake_. So that though _Laban_’s heart was not upright toward _Jacob_, nor he a sincere Worshipper of the God of the Jews; yet so far had the Lord convinced him, by the faithful and industrious service of _Jacob_ that he had experienced, and by tryal found that the Lord had blessed him for _Jacob_’s sake. And the same word is used, when _Joseph_ said: _Is not this the cup wherein my Lord drinketh, and whereby indeed he divineth, or maketh tryal?_ And again: _Know ye not, that such a man as I can certainly divine, or make tryal?_ And though _Pererius_ hath made a large Dispute about this matter, and reciteth the Opinions of many Authors concerning it; yet it is manifest, that _Joseph_ knew his Brethren before, and had caused the Cup to be put into _Benjamins_ Sack, and that all this was but done in a just and prudent way, the better to prepare his Brethren for his revealing of himself unto them, and so had reference to no unlawful conjecturing at all, though it was plain, that he had the special gift from God of interpreting of Dreams, and foretelling of things that were to come.

4. It is too hard a task to enumerate all the several ways that the Heathens used, by observation to foretel things to come, and more difficult so declare all the subjects from whence they gathered the signs of their Predictions. The chiefest that the old _Romans_ used, were _Augurium quasi Avigerium dictum, vel Avigarium, ab avium scilicet garritu quem auspicantes observabant_: And so _Auspicium, quasi Avispecium, ab avibus spectandis_. And these observations were taken, either from the feeding, flying, or noise of the birds. So they had their _Haruspices_, _Harioli_, and _Haruspicina_, which was derived _ab haruga, hostia, ab hara in qua concluditur & servatur_.

[Sidenote: Matth. 16. 2, 3.]

[Sidenote: Luke 12. 54.]

5. But all these sorts of Observations, Guessings, and Conjectures may be considered these three ways. 1. Some of them are natural, rational, and legal; as is the Prognostick part of the Art of Medicine, Political Predictions of the change, fall, and ruine of Kingdoms, States, and Empires. Some Civil taken from the course and carriage of men, as when one seeth a rich young Heir that followeth nothing but vice, luxury, and all sorts of debauchery, it is easie to foretel that his end will be beggery and misery. Some from the due observation of beasts and fowls, which live _sub dio_, may easily conjecture the alteration of the weather. And so by observing the change, or colour of the Stars and Planets, the Clouds and Elements, may easily foretel the change of weather. And we find that these predictions from the Signs gathered from natural causes, are not condemned by our Blessed Saviour, who saith: _When it is evening, ye say it will be fair weather, for the skie is red. And in the morning, it will be foul weather to day, for the skie is red, and lowring._ And again: _When ye see a cloud rise out of the West, straightway ye say, there cometh a showre, and so it is. And when ye see the South wind blow, ye say, there will be heat, and it cometh to pass._ 2. There are some conjectures that are false, groundless, and superstitious, as were, and are all the predictions taken from the feeding, flying or noise of Fowls, or the signs appearing in the intrails of Beasts; for in all such like, there is no connexion betwixt the cause and effect, and they therefore are false and vain, and this was one of the reasons why they were forbidden amongst the Jews. 3. There were some that in regard of their use and end were wicked and Idolatrous, and in this respect all divinations and predictions are wicked and unlawful, if they be used (as was and is yet among the Heathen) to lead the people unto, or confirm them in, the worship of Idols, and false Gods. And from all this it appeareth, that yet we can find no proper or fit word for such a kind of Witch whose existence we have denied and are disproving.

5. The next word in this place of _Deuteronomy_ is וּמְכַשֵּׁף _Umechascheph_, which our Translators render a Witch, but in what sense or propriety, I think few can conjecture, for it comes from the Hebrew root, כֹּשֵּׁף _Coscheph_, which _Avenarius_ rendreth, _Fascinavit, effascinavit_, but _Schindlerus_ translates it, _Præstigias, maleficia aut magiam exercuit, mutavit aliquid naturale ad aspectum oculi, ut aliud appareat quàm est_. And by _Buxtorsius_ it is rendred, _Præstigiæ_, and the derivations from it through the whole Old Testament, which is the most certain propriety of the word, as these following considerations will make manifest.

[Sidenote: Chap. 7. 11, 22.]

[Sidenote: Chron. 2. 33. 6.]

[Sidenote: 2 Kings 9. 22.]

1. That the most of the Translators in rendering this word whether in this place, or in others, have been very inconstant, and one place not agreeing with another, as _Arias Montanus_ in this place gives it _maleficus_, but in _Exodus_ he makes it, _Præstigiatores_, and in the 22 and 16 of the same Book he makes it _Præstigiatricem_; and in another place where the very same word is used in the Hebrew, he saith of _Manásseh, & Præstigiis vacabat_. And yet in another place, he rendereth the very same word _veneficia_. So uncertain was this learned Man, and so inconsiderate in his versions, wherein he ought to have had a more special care. Now _Tremellius_ in all the places named before, doth use the words _Præstigiatorem_, and the words from the same derivation in the Latine, which sheweth certainty and constancy.

2. The most of all the translations in the Polyglott, do render this word doubtful and various: As _maleficus_, _magus_, _præstigias faciens_, _Incantator_, and the like, which are all dubious, and various, and no certainty can be produced from them. Only those we call the _Septuagint_ do keep close to words of the same signification, deducted all from φάρμακον, which properly doth signifie no more than _venenum_, poison, though the circumstances do manifest that they were but Jugling and Imposture. And the High-Dutch, Low-Dutch, French and Italian translations do all render it with the same uncertainty, so that nothing sure can be drawn from them.

[Sidenote: Moses and Aaron _l._ 4. _c._ 10. _p._ 191.]

[Sidenote: Com. upon Exod. _c._ 7. _p._ 72.]

3. But to leave these uncertainties, it is manifest that this word doth signifie as _Buxtorsius_ and _Schindlerus_ do render it, for they are best to be trusted, because they are not guilty of contradiction as the most of the others are; That is, a Jugler, or one that by himself, or the help of his Confederates, doth by sleight of hand, and such like conveyances perform strange things to the astonishment of the beholders. “And therefore doth Mr. _Goodwyn_ tell us this: A Witch, properly a Jugler. The original (he saith) signifieth such a kind of Sorcerer, who bewitcheth the senses and minds of men, by changing the forms of things, making them appear otherwise than indeed they are. And these Dr. _Willet_ saith (speaking of _Pharaohs_ Magicians) were _Præstigiatores_, whom we call Juglers, which deceived mens senses. And though learned _Masius_ (speaking of those that _Nebuchadnezzar_ called to interpret his dream) doth make this objection, that if this word be translated _Præstigiatores_, he doth not see, _quid illi ad explicandum somnium adferre suâ arte potuissent, quæ tota fallax & delusoria est_:” Yet is this of little or no force at all, for the rest that were called, were as well Impostors as these if not more, and the King and those with him knew not certainly (as the event shewed) that they could perform any such matter, but was ignorant of the manner of their delusions and cheats, and was only led by common rumour and belief, grounded upon the vain and lying boasts that such sort of people are apt to give out of themselves, and the wonders they pretend to perform. So that from his and his Courtiers opinions of either the matter, or manner, of what they pretended to do, will no consequence be drawn, from what they truly could do, because belief and action are two different things as might be manifested by the vain credulity of the vulgar, that those kind of deceivers can do strange things, but in trial and experiment they are found to be Cheaters and Impostors.

[Sidenote: Chap. 7. 11.]

4. But that this word doth bear this signification is manifest from the things they performed, for in _Exodus_ they are called כַשְּׁפִים, _and they in like manner cast down every man his rod and they became serpents_: not that their rods were really transubstantiated into true serpents as _Aarons_ was, for that could not be done but by an Omnipotent and Divine power, which they had not; It was only done as Juglers, do seemingly, by sleight and cunning, and so had an appearance of true serpents, but were not so indeed; or else in making a shew to throw down their rods, they secretly conveyed them away and threw down serpents in their stead, as might easily be done by sleight of hand, as we shall shew more fully hereafter.

[Sidenote: 2 Kings 9. 22.]

[Sidenote: Chap. 21. 8. 22. 51. 9. 21. 18. 23.]

[Sidenote: Chap. 5. 20.]

5. That this is the genuine meaning of this word is manifest from the circumstances of some other places duly weighed, and compared together: for one text saith as our English Translators have rendered it, _And it came to pass when Joram saw Jehu that he said, Is it peace Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel, and her witchcrafts are so many?_ Now why they should translate it witchcrafts, cannot well be imagined, except it were to draw the Scriptures to speak according to their preconceived opinions, for the word used there is the same we speak of, to wit, וּכְשָׁפֶיהָ, which though _Arias Montanus_ rendereth, _& veneficia ejus_, that according to the Latine signification is but poysonings, or poyson making, which doth not intimate Witchcraft in that sense that is vulgarly understood, which _Tremellius_ properly renders, _& præstigæ ejus_: and _Luther_ renders it by the words =Toeverye=, and so doth the Low-Dutch: Though the proper High-Dutch word for _præstigiator_, a Jugler, be =Baucsler=, which is as _Calepin_ tells us, that _Præstigæ sunt incantationes, delusiones, cujusmodi sunt, quæ manuum quadam dexteritate alia apparent quam reverâ sunt_. Now what whoredoms or fornications had _Jezebel_ committed? Spiritual whoredoms, and not Carnal ones; for she had her self gone a whoring after Idols, and strange gods, and as much as in her lay drew the people of _Israel_ into the same whoredoms, and for this it was that so fearful a judgment fell upon her. And what Witchcrafts (if they must be so called) had she practised or followed? Was it any other than in setting up, maintaining, and defending the Priests of _Baal_ and of the groves, who practised several sorts of divination, jugling, impostures, and delusions, whereby they were seduced and blinded to follow and worship the false god and Idols? And from this it is plain that all her Witchcrafts were only impostures and delusions whereby the people were led unto idolatry: and so the true signification of this word is a deceiver and an impostor, and intendeth no other kind of Witchcraft at all. And in the same sense must the word given by those we call the Septuagint which is τὰ φάρμακα ἀυτῆς, _Pharmaca vel venena sua_, her poysons, that is her deceits and delusions that she set up by the lying Divinations, Juglings, and Impostures of the Priests, by which the people were seduced, and blinded, and poysoned with the filthy Doctrine and practice of Idol-worship. And in the same sense must the words be taken in the Revelation where the words φαρμακεία, φαρμακεὺς, φάρμακος are used. For the Text saith: _And a mighty Angel took up a stone like a great milstone, and cast it into the sea, saying; Thus with violence shall that great City Babylon be thrown down, and shall be found no more at all_. And after: _For thy merchants were the great men of the earth: For by thy sorceries were all nations deceived_. These words are spoken mystically of spiritual _Babylon_, in which Antichrist ruleth, who (as the Apostle saith) _sitteth in the temple of God, and exalteth him self against all that is called god; and this is he whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders_. So that it is plain that his working being by lying wonders, his Merchants must needs be lyers and deceivers, and it is these Sorceries, impostures and delusions by which all Nations are deceived, and caused to err: and so is no other Witchcraft but meer lying, delusion and imposture. And to this purpose doth Dr. _Hammond_ Paraphrase it in these words; speaking of the destruction of _Babylon_: “And three eminent causes (he saith) there are of this; First, Luxury which inriched so many Merchants, and made them so great. Secondly, seducing other people to their Idolatries and abominable courses by all arts of insinuation. And thirdly, the persecuting and slaying of the Apostles and other Christians.” And in the same sense must this word also be taken in the _Galathians_, which though translated Witchcraft, must needs mean imposture, deceit and delusion by which people are led from the true Doctrine and Worship of Christ, to vain and lying Superstition and Idolatry, and not bodily poysoning.

[Sidenote: 1 Sam. 15. 23.]

6. Thus far we can find no such Hebrew word as signifieth any such kind of a Witch as Dr. _Casaubon_, or Mr. _Glanvill_ intend, or labour to prove, and therefore we may proceed to the next. Only we cannot but take notice of one other text, that our English Translators have erroneously rendered, and that is this: where _Samuel_ is rebuking _Saul_ for sparing _Agag and the best of the spoil_, he saith, _For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry_: Which _Tremellius_ renders thus: _Quin sicut peccatum divinationis est rebellio: & sicut superstitio & Idola est repugnantia_. And _Arias Montanus_ gives it thus: _Quia peccatum divinationis est rebellio, & mendacium vel Idolum, & Teraphim transgredi_, which both are agreeable to the Hebrew word קֶסֶם which signifieth properly Divination. So that this place noteth, not rebellion against an earthly or temporal King, but against the King of Heaven; and to disobey his command, and to follow our own wills and judgments, and to persevere therein, is as odious and detestable, as to set up lying Divinations thereby to follow Idols and false gods: for the following the fancies of our own brains, is to follow the divinations of our own counsel, and to make an Idol, and a Teraphim of our own frail, weak and blind judgments, and to forsake the pure and perfect Law of the Lord, which ought to be a lantern to our feet, and a light unto our paths, and is spiritual rebellion, even as the divinations of Idol-priests and Idol-worship were.

7. The next Word in this place of _Deuteronomy_ is וְחֹבֵר חָבֶר _utens incantatione, vel incantans incantatione, aut jungens junctiones_, from the root חָבַר _Sociatus est, junctus fuit alteri, copulatus est_, for so _Avenarius_ renders it. And _Schindlerus_ saith, _Incantator vel qui consortium habet cum Dæmonibus, conjurator, qui incantationibus multa animalia in unum locum consociat vel congregat, vel ne lædant associat_. From whence we may note thus much:

[Sidenote: Chap. 14. 3.]

[Sidenote: Exod. 36. 10.]

1. That it primarily signifieth to joyn together, as in that of _Genesis_ speaking of the Kings that went to War, _All these were joyned together in the vale of Siddim, which is the salt sea_. And in another place, _And he coupled the five curtains together_; and in the same sense in diverse other places: by all which it appeareth, that when it is used for incantation or charming, it is because of some conjunction or coupling together.

2. It is very remarkable that in all the translations in the Polyglot, there is no variance, neither do _Arias Montanus_, _Buxtorsius_, or _Tremellius_ differ at all, and the Greek Translators do agree with them, who render it, ἐπαείδων ἐπαοιδὴν, and the Germane, Low-dutch, French, and Italian Translators do accord herewithal, and it is likewise so rendered in _Isa._ 47. 9, 12. and in other places. So that it is plain it signifieth such as took upon them by strange words and charms to prevent venemous beasts to hurt, bite or sting, and many other wonderful things; but what they brought to pass, or effected, besides deluding and deceiving of the people and leading of them to Idolatry, is hard to determine, of which we shall speak in another place.

3. There are divers opinions concerning this incantation or charming, why it should be accounted conjunction, or association; and some, as _Schindlerus_ and _Bithner_, do judge it is because they associate or bring together many Serpents or noysom Creatures into one place, and then destroy them. But this is but a conjecture, for it is by the best learned strongly disputed on both sides, whether charms and inchantments can really and truly perform any such effects, and divers instances and examples brought both ways, some for the affirmative, some for the negative, so that the matter of fact is not certainly known or granted. Others by association do understand, the league or compact made betwixt the Charmer and the Devil, by virtue of which such strange things are brought to pass by them, and of this opinion was Mr. _Perkins_ (if that Book of Witchcraft, that goeth under his name, be truly his) who strengthening his conceit with that verse in the _58 Psalm_ thought that he had found out an invincible argument to prove the Compact betwixt Witches and Devils, and therefore it is necessary and expedient to examine that text to the bottom to sift out the true translation, and sense of that place, which we shall do at large as followeth in these particulars.

1. Our English Translators render it thus, speaking of the deaf Adder or Asp; _Which will not hearken to the voice of the charmers, charming never so wisely_; and in the margent, or _be the Charmer never so cunning_, where they take no notice of the conjoyning of conjunctions, and consequently none of such a league or compact.

2. _Tremellius_ gives it thus: _Quæ non auscultat voci mussitantium, utentis incantationibus peritissimi_, which piece of Latine were very difficult to put into perfect Grammatical construction, because _mussitantium_ is the plural number, but _utentis_ and _peritissimi_ are of the singular, which we shall leave to the censure of Criticks, and give the marginal note that is there added. _Surdæ id est, calidè agentis adversus incantamenta, ut sequentia exponunt, nam aurem utramq; ab ea obturari_, &c. Of the deaf Adder “That is to say, that acteth craftily against the incantations, as the following words do expound: For she stoppeth both her ears, by fixing one to the earth, and covering, and stopping the other with her tail;” and that _Hierome_, _Augustine_, _Cassiodorus_, and others do so expound the place. Whether this be true of the Asp or not is much to be doubted, for I find no Author of credit that doth averr it of his own knowledge, and the thing is very difficult to bring to experiment, and the Psalmist might speak according to vulgar opinion, of which there was no necessity that it should be literally and certainly true. Further he goes on and saith, _mussitantium_ “That is to say, pronouncing their incantations to charm her, whispering and very low; which study of charming, lest any should think that _David_ doth approve of them in this place, he learnedly useth the very words of the prohibition, which God laid down _Deut._ 18. 11. For (he saith) these fascinators in the Hebrew appellation are said to consociate society, because they apply the society of the Devil to their arts.”

3. Those we call the Septuagint do render it thus: Ἥτις οὐκ εἰσκούσεται φωνὴν επᾳδόντων, φαρμάκου τε φαρμακευομένου παρὰ σοφοῦ. And that which is ascribed to _Hierome_ in the eight Tome of his works printed at _Basil_ 1525, gives two Latine versions to this, the one answering to the Septuagint which is this: _Quæ non exaudiet vocem incantantium & venefici incantantis sapienter_. The other according to the Hebrew thus, _Ut non audiat vocem murmurantium, nec incantatoris incantationes callidas_. So that this maketh the meaning to be, that the deaf Asp is so cunning in stopping of her ear, that she doth not hear the voice of those that murmur, and mutter charms, though it be a Charmer that uttereth the most cunning and powerful charms: So that here is no regard had to conjoyning or associating either of Serpents together, or of the society of the Charmer and the Devil.

4. _Luthers_ Translation of this place is remarkable, which is this, =Dass sie nicht hoere die stimme dess Zauberers, dess Beschwerers der wol besch weren kan=. Which in English runs thus, That doth not hear the voice of the Magicians or Charmers, the Conjurors or Exorcists, that well conjure can. And agreeable to this is the translation of the Low-Dutch. So that the sense is, that the deaf Asp stoppeth her ear against the voice of the Charmers, those that have sworn together (it may be that common error and opinion had prevailed so far with learned _Luther_, as doth appear by his exposition upon the third Chapter to the _Galathians_, that he believed that the Witch, and the Devil were in compact, and sworn together) and that were most cunning in that art. But this doth but in a manner beg the question, not prove it, for all will but amount to this, that the Asp cannot be charmed, no not by those that have the greatest skill in the matter of incantation.

5. The French Translators render it thus: _Lequel n’écoute point la voix des enchanteurs, ni du charmeur fort expert en charmes_, Which will in no point hear the voice of the inchanter, nor of the Charmer that is expert in charms. And this proveth nothing at all of joyning societies, nor of compacts. The Italian version giveth it thus, _Accioche non oda la voce de glivoce incantatori, del venefico incantante incantationi di dotto_. In English thus, Which doth not hear the voice of the inchanter, of the Witch (if that be the signification of the word _venefico_, a poysoner) inchanting with the incantation of the learned: And this is most near the Hebrew of all the rest, and beareth thus much, That the Asp doth not hearken to the voice of the inchanter, of the Charmer which useth the charms that were framed and conjoyned by a learned Clerk: so that if associating be comprised, it must be understood of the framing and joyning of the charms, which doubtless was the composure of those that were very learned, especially if they work by a natural operation, of which we shall discourse hereafter.

6. But now we come to the Hebrew itself, which _Arias Montanus_ renders thus, _Quæ non audiet ad vocem mussitantium: jungentis conjunctiones docti_. And in the margent thus, _Quæ non obtemperabit voce incantantium, incantantis incantationes sapienter_. Which we may thus English, Which hearkeneth not to the voice of the mutterers, of the learned joyner of conjunctions. And the other thus; Which obeyeth not the voice of the Charmers, of the person charming charms wisely. So that it may mean, that the Asp hearkeneth not to the voice of those that mutter or mussitate the charms of the Charmer that doth wisely use them, or of him that is a wise Charmer. But it is needless and improper to make an half period at _mussitantium_, for then there will be no coherence in Grammatical construction betwixt the former and latter part of the verse: and therefore according to the order of Grammar, it should be rendered thus: _Quæ non audiet ad vocem mussitantium incantationes, docti incantantis_. And so the meaning is plainly this, that the Asp doth not hearken to the voice of those that mutter the charms of a learned Charmer. And so there is no intimation of association or compact either one way or another, but it doth meerly imply that the Asp doth resist and frustrate the charms of the mutterers that use them, though they be wise in the using of them, which doubtless is the most genuine rendring, and the true meaning of the place: or else it may be thus aptly translated: _Quæ non audiet ad vocem mussitantium conjunctiones jungentis docti_; That is thus, Which hearkeneth not to the voice of those that mutter the Conjunctions of a learned Joyner. So this way the sense will be, that she resisteth the Charms, or Conjunctions of the learned Joyner or Framer of them, and consequently that it hath not respect, either to the associating or gathering of the Asps into one place, or an association or compact betwixt the Charmer and the Devil, which are both beg’d, and too far fetcht, and cannot be intended properly in this Metaphor. But it (if thus Translated according to _Arias Montanus_) referreth punctually and properly to the cunning and wise composure of the letters and words used in the Charm, that if they had been never so cunningly contrived, or joyned together by those that had the greatest skill of all others in framing and composing of charms; yet were they utterly inefficacious against this kind of Serpent. And so we conclude this, having as yet found no such Hebrew word as signifieth a Witch in the vulgar sense and common acceptation.

7. Another word that followeth in this place of _Deuteronomy_ is וְשֹׁאֵל אוֹב _requirens Pythonem_, which what it meaneth is more obscured, and erroneously translated, than any of the rest. And this our English Translators have ignorantly or wilfully, but however erroneously rendered in all the places where it is used, to be one that hath a familiar spirit. From whence note these things.

[Sidenote: Job 32.19.]

1. This word, as _Buxtorsius_, _Schindlerus_, and _Avenarius_ observe, hath two significations, the one is, _uter vel lagena_, the other _Python_, and so saith learned _Masius_, _significat vero vox Ob utrem vel lagenam_; “From whence the Jewish Nation did call those Devils which did give answers forth of the parts of Men and Womens Bodies, _Ob_, and in the plural number _Oboth_; As it is only once for bottles used in that of _Job_, _Behold, my belly is as wine that hath no vent, it is ready to burst like new bottles_.” And to the same purpose speaketh _Schindlerus_ in these words: “From thence it seemeth to be called אוב _Pytho_, because those that had it, or were possessed with it, being puft up with wind, did swell like blown bladders, and the unclean spirit being interrogated did forth of their bellies give answers of things past, present, and to come, from whence also they were called ἐγγαστρίμυθος, _ventriloqui_, speakers in the belly, or out of the belly.” So that in the sense of these men, it was a Devil or Spirit that spoke in them, as though they had been essentially and substantially possest with a Demon; so prone were they to ascribe all things (almost) unto the Devils power, not considering that they had no other Devil, but that of Imposture and Delusion, as we shall shew anon with unanswerable arguments.

[Sidenote: Ovid. _Metam._ _lib._ 1.]

[Sidenote: _Mytholog._ _l._ 4. _c._ 10. _p._ 36. 362.]

2. The most or all the translations in the Polyglott do render it _Pythonem, vel spiritum Pythonis_ in this place of _Deuteronomy_, and other places: But what is to be understood by _Python_, or the Spirit of _Python_ is as difficult to find out, as the meaning of the Hebrew word _Ob_, because it must be digged forth of the rubbish of Grecian lies: For some will have it to be derived from the word απὸ τοῦ πυνθάνεσθαι, _à consulendi & interrogandi usu_. But that they were called so rather from the Epithete given to _Apollo_, who (as the Poets fabled) did soon after _Deucalions_ flood slay the Dragon _Python_, πύθων, so called a πύθεσθαι _quod est putrescere_, because he was said to be bred of the putrefaction of the Earth; and so he was called _Apollo Pythius_, and those that kept the Oracle at _Delphos_, and gave answers, were called _Pythii vates_, and the Oracles _Oracula Pythia_: as may be seen in _Plutarch_, _Thucydides_, and _Lucian_: and _Suidas_ and _Hesychius_ say, Πύθων _dicebatur etiam Dæmonium cujus afflatu futura prædicebant, &_ ὁι πύθωνες, _è ventre hariolantes_: From whence _Pythius Apollo_ came because of slaying the Dragon, nam πύθεσθαι _putrescere significat, ut est in his carminibus_.

——Ὁ δ’ ἐπήυξατο φοῖβος Ἀπόλλων,
Ἐνταυθοῖ νῦν πύθεν ἐπὶ χθονὶ βωτιανείρη.

——_Sic inde precatus_ Apollo _est:
Putrescas tellure jacens campoq; feraci_.

And from hence were the Pythian Games instituted:

_Neve operis famam posset delere vetustas,
Instituit sacros celebri certamine ludos
Pythia perdomitæ serpentis nomine dictos._

Though, if we will believe _Natalis Comes_ and some others, it was not a Serpent or Dragon that _Apollo_ slew, but a man whose name was _Python_, and his sirname _Draco_, and from that Victory _Apollo_ was called _Pythius_, and those that kept his Oracle at _Delphos_ were called _Pythios vates_, Pythian Priests, or Diviners of _Python_. So that all that can be gathered from hence is, that to have the Spirit of _Python_, was to undertake such Divinations, as the Priests used at the Pythian Oracle at _Delphos_, and that was no more in truth and effect, but Cheaters and Impostors.

[Sidenote: _De defect. Oracul. mihi._ _p._ 691.]

[Sidenote: _In Præfat. de defect. Oracul._]

3. Those that we call the Septuagint expressing the manner of the performance of this kind of Imposture do (as _Masius_ confesseth, and is true) constantly call them by the name of ἐγγαστριμύθους, because they did speak forth of their Breasts or Bellies, that was by turning their voices backwards down their Throats, which some of the Latines imitating the Greek word have not unfitly called them _ventriloquos_, that is, speaking in their Bellies. And that there were such in ancient times is witnessed by _Plutarch_, who saith, speaking of the ceasing of Oracles, thus: “That it is alike foolish and childish to judge that God himself, as the _Engastrimuthoi_, (that is to say, the _Genii_ hariolating forth of the Belly) which in times past they did call _Eurycleas_, now _Pythonas_, hiding himself in the Bodies of the Prophets, and using their mouth and voice as instruments, should speak.” From whence we may note these things. 1. That in _Plutarch_ time who lived in the Reign of _Trajan_, there were of these persons that could speak (as it were) forth of their Bellies. 2. That though _Plutarch_ was a very learned, sagacious person, yet he either knew not, or else concealed the manner how these _ventriloquists_ performed this speaking, in their Breasts or Bellies, it being nothing but a cheat and artificial imposture, as we shall shew anon, of whom his learned Translator _Adrianus Turnebus_, and of these vanities speaketh thus. “Therefore (he saith) we condemn all sorts of Divinations which are not received from the sacred writings, and do judge them to have been found out, either by the craftiness of men or the wickedness of Devils; but we rejoice to our selves that being Divinely taught, we here see far more than the most learned _Plutarch_ did, who beheld but little light in this his disputation of the defect of Oracles.” 3. We may note that these words (that is to say, the _Genii_ hariolating forth of the Belly) which we have inclosed in a _Parenthesis_, are not found in the Greek written by _Plutarch_, but are only added as the conjecture of _Turnebus_. 4. _Plutarch_ doth hold it childish to believe that God doth hide himself and speak in the belly of these couzening Diviners, and therein though an Heathen was wiser than many that profess Christianity now, who believe it to be some Spirit, when it is nothing but the cunning Imposture of those persons, that by use have learned that artifice of turning their voices back into their Throats and Breasts. 5. As to matter of fact it is manifest that in the time of _Plutarch_ there were those that practised this cunning trick thereby to get credit or money by the pretence of Predictions and Divinations, and such an one doubtless was the Woman at _Endor_, and the Maid mentioned in the _Acts_ of the Apostles, of which we shall speak presently.

[Sidenote: _Antiq._ _lect._ 8. 10.]

Also _Tertullian_ a grave Author, affirmeth that he had seen such Women that were Ventriloquists, from whole secret parts a small voice was heard as they sate, and did give answers to things asked. And so _Cælius Rhodiginus_ doth write that he often saw a Woman Ventriloquist at _Rhodes_, and in a City of _Italy_ his own Country, from whose secrets he had often heard a very slender voice of an unclean Spirit, but very intelligible, tell strangely of things past or present, but of things to come for the most part uncertain, and also often vain and lying; which doth plainly demonstrate that it was but an humane artifice, and a designed Imposture.

[Sidenote: _Hist._ 1.]

[Sidenote: _De Mag. Infam._]

_c._ 14. _p._ 141.