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.
Vid. Jo. Wier. de mag. Jus. c. 1. p. 91.
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.
Gen. 30. 27.
Gen. 44. 5, 15.