But for my own part (giving honour to these worthy Men, far more learned than my self) I am not satisfied, that this [Greek or Hebrew] in this Text, whatever the Etymology of the word was at first, must necessarily note the Act of the People listing up their Hands in Election of their Officers. I rather consider how the word is used, in that Age or Time when Men write. 'Tis well known that words in time do vary in their signification from what they did at first. Among divers others, we have one in Scripture, 1[Greek or Hebrew], Ephis. 5.4. Aristotle tells us how the Word was first used, and who was [Greek or Hebrew], a Man that was facetious, pleasant, Witty, but withal cleanly in his Discourse: But afterwards in his time, if a Man did seem to be Witty, tho' Scurrilous and base, he now was [Greek or Hebrew]. Divers such words we have in the Latin, and English Tongue. Philo and Paul were Contemporaries, 2and how Philo useth the Word [Greek or Hebrew]. Dr. Hammond, has given us an account out of his Works. Likewise out of Lucian, and Maximus Tyrius. Where the word is used of single persons, so that the word did not in those times signify the suffrages of the People, and the Word in Holy Writ, Acts 10.41. [Greek or Hebrew] being given to God: Plainly carry it, that the Word doth not always intend or force the Peoples Suffrage, whatever the Etymology of the Word signifies, upon which Gerhard lays his stress. I have not seen that piece of Mr. Selden, but Mr. Ranew told me he had made it clear that [Greek or Hebrew] had lost that signification these contend for, many years before Christ.
But for my own part (giving honour to these worthy Men, far more learned than my self) I am not satisfyed, that this 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 in this Text, whatever the Etymology of the word was at first, must necessarily note the Act of the People listing up their Hands in Election of their Officers. I rather consider how the word is used, in that Age or Time when Men write. 'Tis well known that words in time do vary in their signification from what they did at first. Among divers others, we have one in Scripture, 1〈non-Latin alphabet〉, Ephis. 5.4. Aristotle tells us how the Word was first used, and who was 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, a Man that was facetious, pleasant, Witty, but withal cleanly in his Discourse: But afterwards in his time, if a Man did seem to be Witty, tho' Scurrilous and base, he now was 〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Divers such words we have in the Latin, and English Tongue. Philo and Paul were Contemporaries, 2and how Philo useth the Word 〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Dr. Hammond, has given us an account out of his Works. Likewise out of Lucian, and Maximus Tyrius. Where the word is used of single persons, so that the word did not in those times signifie the suffrages of the People, and the Word in Holy Writ, Acts 10.41. 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 being given to God: Plainly carry it, that the Word doth not always intend or force the Peoples Suffrage, whatever the Etymology of the Word signifles, upon which Gerbard lays his stress. I have not seen that piece of Mr. Selden, but Mr. Ranew told me he had made it clear that 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 had lost that signification these contend for, many years before Christ.
- 1Ethis. l. 4. Cap. 14.
- 2Philo flourished in Caligula's Time, and wrote before Paul.
