RECONCILIATION. History says, the young man here mentioned was called Jonathan, who was born of Gershon, the son of Manasseh: this is incorrect, as fully explained in Part I., Question 96.-Samuel, foreseeing the future, wrote it thus, comparing one idolator to another. According to this, the ancients solve the question, saying, that the said Jonathan was of the tribe of Levi, as stated at the end of the verse, and the commencement, saying he was of the tribe of Judah, is from his conduct resembling that of Manasseh, king of Judah. Rashi, following some of the ancients, says that he was on his father's side of the tribe of Judah, and from the mother's, of Levi; whereby the two assertions agree. R. David Kimchi, R. Levi ben Gershon, and Don Isaac Abarbanel, expound the verse differently ::-" And there was a young man of Bethlehem-Judah, of the lineage of Judah, and he was a Levite, and dwelt there;" the lineage of Judah not applying to the young man, but to Bethlehem-Judah; for as there were two cities of that name, it was necessary to explain which Bethlehem it alludes to; by which no doubt remains. R. Aaron aben Haim says very rightly, that this young man, being a Levite, ought to have resided in one of the cities appropriated to his tribe, and not to have gone and dwelt in Bethlehem-Judah; but as it was a right of those who resided there to be accounted as citizens, and possess the same privileges as if they were of the tribe of Judah; although he was actually a Levite, but by repute one of Judah, therefore, the verse says, he was a Levite, demonstrating that although considered a citizen of Judah, he was actually a Levite; which exposition is very appropriate. QUESTION 6. Judges 18:30. And the children of Dan set up the graven image, and Jonathan, the son of Gershon, the son of Manasseh, he and his sons, were priests to the tribe of Dan, until the day of the captivity of the land. 1 Sam. 28:3. And Saul had put away those that had familiar spirits and the wizards out of the land. 1 Kings 15:12. And he removed all idolators from the land. These verses present no small difficulty. Because, if Saul and Asa, as stated in the preceding verses, extirpated idolatry; and besides these there were many praiseworthy judges and princes, as Samuel, David, Solomon, and Josias, who did the same, eradicating from the land all such stumbling-blocks as might prove a scandal for Israel; how then can it be understood that this idol of the children of Dan lasted until the captivity of the land? RECONCILIATION. The ancient Sages of the Jerusalem Talmud,' understand by the words, "until the day of the captivity of the land," to be the first captivity of Sennacherib; which opinion is adopted by Rashi. But as it appears incredible to R. Samuel Japhe, that such upright princes as above named, should have neglected to take from the land such an idol, he 1 Berachot, c. 9. solves it by saying, that this idol was not made for strange worship, but the intention was, to form a figure under certain constellations, that might attract to it superior influence. In Pirqué of Eliezer it says, when Micah made the image, he never intended it for strange worship, but thought it might be the means of attracting the Divine influence; as may be collected from the verse that says, "And the man Micah had a house of God;"3 but afterwards, as frequently happens, and as occurred with the serpent of Moses and the ephod of Gideon, the work became misunderstood, and some of the lower orders adored, not comprehending the purport of it. And as it is a difficult thing to eradicate habitual customs, those pious judges and governors must have considered, that as it was not positively intentional idolatry, their recognising it as such, would be to place a greater stumbling-black to those who would not abandon their better that) מוטב שיהיו שוגגין ואל יהיו מזידין old habits ; and, therefore, since a sin be committed through ignorance than intentionally); or also, as human curiosity is always anxious to learn futurity, if they had prohibited that mode, they might seek others more criminal-such as consulting the dead, witchcraft, and similar things, which are totally prohibited; they considered it better to overlook this superstition, by which the idol remained until the captivity of Sennacherib, as above. R. David Kimchi is of a different opinion; and by the "captivity of the land," understands not the entire destruction of the Holy Land, but for a part of it; that is, Shiloh, which happened in Eli's time, when the ark of the Lord was taken by the Philistines, and many thousand Israelites slain, which misfortune was considered the same as the land being completely lost. As Phinehas' wife said, "the glory is departed from Israel," and the Psalmist, "So that he forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent he placed amongst men, and delivered his strength into captivity, and his glory into the enemiy's hand, he gave his people also unto the sword."5 According to this, the idol lasted no longer than Shiloh, and was destroyed at the same time, which the Scripture itself subsequently states, " And they set up the graven image Micah had made, all the time the house of God was in Shiloh ;"6 from which it is to be inferred, that the captivity of the land, and the house of God being in Shiloh, was at the same time; which opinion is adopted by R. Isaiah. 66 R. Levi ben Gershon, with some probability, solves the doubt: saying, it may be, that during the interregnums between one judge and another, Israel was driven from their land; as it says in the time of Jabin, king of Canaan, the tribe of Dan abandoned their lands, and went to the opposite side of Jordan, as Deborah and Barak say in their song, " And why did Dan remain in ships ?"7 Or, it may be, this superstition lasted until the destruction of the Temple : as it says in Seder Olam, that although Samuel, Saul, David, Solomon, and Josias took away all the idols, yet still after their death the people returned to the same superstition; by which the verse conciliates, and these holy men remain blameless. Making the account of those who fell in the camp of Benjamin 25,100, as stated in verse 35; and although verse 46 only says 25,000, is it from reckoning the thousands only, adding the 25,100 to the 600 that fled to the wilderness, there is 25,700: that being the case the difficulty is clear, for, yet 1000 men are deficient, according to the first verse which states there were 26,700 warriors, what then became of these 1000 men? RECONCILIATION. According to Rashi the 1000 fled and collected in the cities, and the next day Israel desolating and destroying every thing in the land of Benjamin (as the history relates) were then killed; therefore the verse says, "all that fell that day were 25,000," not including the 1000 who were killed on the next, reckoning only those slain on that day. R. David Kimchi, who is followed by R. Levi ben Gershon and Don Isaac Abarbanel, say that the 1000 were slain in the first two battles they had with Israel; for, although victors, it must be supposed some fell: these were the 1000; and in saying "On that day" excludes those who died previous. R. Abraham Zacuto, in his Juchasin, says that the 1000, although reckoned with the rest, repented and would not go to the war, but retired to Rimmon: if that were the case, the doubt is also solved. QUESTION 8. Judges 20:28. And Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, stood before it in those days, saying, Shall I yet go up to battle with the children of Benjamin my brother, &c. 1 Chron. 9:20. And Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, was the ruler over them from before, the Lord was with him. Whoever considers the length of time will find no small difficulty in these verses; for, if Phinehas lived even at the time of the event of the concubine, and the wars between the Israelites and Benjamites, how is it said in Chronicles that he lived in David's time a period upwards of 140 years? RECONCILIATION. Some of the ancients hold that Phinehas was the prophet Elijah; this they gather from its being said of Phinehas that he was zealous for the honour of the Lord, which is also observed of Elijah. The Lord in reward for his zeal in slaying Zimri, promised him, "Behold, I give to him my covenant of peace," 1 that is, an exact combination, conformity, and proportion of the four qualities, so that they should not disunite either by war or intemperance; therefore it is not extraordinary that, without even suffering the pangs of death, he should be transported alive to heaven. As Phinehas was one of those who came out of Egypt, he must have been at the time of the event of the concubine 300 years of age, and in David's 440. According to this, I explain the verse thus, " And Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, was ruler over them from before; the Lord was with him;" that is, this was not the first grace Phinehas had received from the hand of the Lord, for before, long previous, the Lord was with him, and prospered him in every thing. Numbers 25:12. Some of the Sages in Bereshit Raba, and the learned Aben Ezra, entertain the opinion that Phinehas was not the prophet Elijah from the sacred text saying, "And he shall have it, and his seed after him, the covenant of an everlasting priesthood;" says after him, ergo, he died; although this argument in my eyes is not sufficient, for after him may be understood after he was transported to heaven; yet Tosaphot on the Guemara of Mezia, and Zacuto in his Juchasin, place the point in doubt, therefore every one may adopt the opinion he prefers; they then say, without Phinehas being Elijah, he miraculously lived this length of time; and its saying "from before the Lord was with him," means that, although he had the command of the Levites, he had not the prerogative of enjoying the spirit of holiness and prophetic grade; for before, but not then, God was with him and answered him, which privilege (they say) he lost in Jephtha's time, when his daughter going out to meet him; he sacrificed her, although not obliged to it; and even if he had been, Phinehas might have relieved him from his vow; but Jephtha considered that, as chief of the people, it would be below his dignity to seek Phinehas, or ask his services. On the other hand, Phinehas as High Priest would not humble himself to one he considered beneath him, and the proud fool would not go to him; so that, between these two points of honour or etiquette, the young woman perished, for which the Lord indignantly punished both, but chiefly Phinehas by depriving him of the gift of prophecy. I say the young woman perished, for although R. Levi ben Gershon and R. David Kimchi are of opinion that Jephtha's daughter was not sacrificed, but that her father shut her up to preserve her virginity during the remainder of her life, and Nicolas de Lyra, as also Vatable, consider the same, the truth is, that he did sacrifice her as the Scripture plainly states," he did to her according to the vow that he had vowed," and then that she and other young women bewailed their virginities, and that it remained a custom in Israel for the young women from time to time to go and bemoan the daughter of Jephtha, which would have been ridiculous and even insulting, had it only been to bewail that she was not married, as the learned R. Moses of Gerona, R. Bechayai, Josephus, Jerome Augustin, and a Council of Toledo, properly argue. So returning to our subject, some hold that Phinehas was not Elijah, and that living so long is no proof to the contrary, as nature sometimes performs these extraordinary excesses and wonders. Others say the Phinehas of Chronicles is not the same as is mentioned in Numbers or Judges, for it does not say the son of Eleazar the son of Aaron, but only of Eleazar, and therefore may be another; and its saying "before the Lord was with him" means that the former Phinehas had the holy spirit, but not the one here mentioned. But in my opinion this observation is unnecessary; for admitting him to have lived to the age of 300, he might also have attained that of 440.7 3 Jud. 11:39. 4 Civi, c. 2. 5 Ant. b. 5, c. 2. 2 Numb. 25:13. 6 8th, c. 2. 7 Vincent of Beauvais, Nauclerc, and others state that Jean des Temps or d'Estampes, the famous Esquire of Charlemagne died in 1128,at the extraordinary age of 362.-TRANSLATOR. I. SAMUEL. QUESTION 1. 1 Sa. 1:1. And his name was Elkanah, the son of Jehoram, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite. 1 Ch. 6:22. The sons of Kehath, Aminadab his son, Korah his son, Assir his son, Elkanah his son. If Elkanah, as stated in Chronicles, was a Levite, the descendant of Korah, how in the first passage is he said to be an Ephrathite? RECONCILIATION. The title of Ephrathite 'n, was not applicable only to those of the tribe of Ephraim, but sometimes was given to those who resided in Mount Ephraim, although not of that tribe: as it says, "Were ye an Ephrathite" to one who was of Bethlehem Ephrat; the same as David, who was of the tribe of Judah, it is said, "now David was the son of that Ephrathite.' Therefore terming Elkanah (who was a Levite), an Ephrathite, is the same as saying an inhabitant of Mount Ephraim. ניי The explanation of the verse therefore is, "And it came to pass or happened that a man, an inhabitant of one of the two Ramoths, (which were in sight of each other on mount Ephraim,) whose name was Elkanah, the son of Jehoram, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, the ancient Ephrathites who came there to reside." So that from the time of Zuph his ancestors dwelt there, and the Book of Joshua states this, for reckoning the cities occupied by the Levites, it says, "the children of Kehath (Elkanah's ancestors) occupied Shechem and its suburbs in mount Ephraim."? The ancient sages give it another interpretation, which is, that no signifies ♪ palatine, a title: in this manner also there is no contradiction in the texts. QUESTION 2. 1 Sam. 2:5. So that the barren hath borne 1 Sam. 2:21. And she conceived, and bare three sons and two daughters. seven. If by this the barren Hannah is understood, how does it say she bare seven, where the other verse states she only bare five? RECONCILIATION. Some commentators, as R. Levi ben Gershon and Don Isaac Abarbanel, |