Defense of Heinsius’ Position, Part 1

It makes for this interpretation, 1. that the Division of the Garments after the Crucifixion was just now mentioned, verse 24, and that this history of the division of the garments of our crucified Lord immediately precedes in that very place, when it follows in our verse 25, ἦν δὲ ὥρα τρίτη, καὶ ἐσταύρωσαν αὐτόν, and it was the third hour, and the crucified Him.  2.  It could appear somewhat incongruous, if Mark after the relation of the division of the garments, which came after the Crucifixion, should return to determine the time of the Crucifixion itself:  but these words of Mark in verse 25 are able to be referred to the time of the division of the garments without any scruple; since this time is no where expressly determined in the Gospels, but it is related in a general way with other circumstances that this division of garments followed after the Crucifixion.  3.  The particle καὶ/and, which joins two members of a sentence, is best translated by the Hebraism After; as NOLDIUS,[1] in his Concordantiis Particularum Hebræo-Chaldaicarum on the letter ו, number 42, pages m. 295, 296, confirms this use of the letter ו by many examples in the writings of the Hebrews. For example, thus we have it in Judges 4:1, and the children of Israel proceeded to do evil in the eyes of Jehovah,וְאֵה֖וּד מֵֽת׃, and Ehud was dead, that is, AFTER Ehud was dead, as it is also translated by the Dutch, and in Greek, καὶ Ἀὼδ ἀπέθανε, and Ehud was dead.  In Job 14:10, וְגֶ֣בֶר יָ֭מוּת וַֽיֶּחֱלָ֑שׁ, And man dies and is weakened, that is, AFTER WHICH, AFTER he is weakened.  HEINSIUS chiefly appeals to Joshua 7:25, in which, after the stoning of Achan was related, upon whom it is then said, verse 26, that a great heap of stones were erected:  between which in the plural number it is related concerning the entire family and possession of Achan, וַיִּשְׂרְפ֤וּ אֹתָם֙ בָּאֵ֔שׁ וַיִּסְקְל֥וּ אֹתָ֖ם בָּאֲבָנִֽים׃, and they burned them with fire, and stoned them with stones; which he explains of a Burning following after the stoning, since one that has been burned with fire is not then able to be stoned:  in which Heinsius follows the Targumist, who translates it, בתר דרגמו יתהון באבניא, after they stoned them with stones.  Thus we read in Exodus 34:4, and he hewed two tables of stone like unto the first, and Moses rose up early in the morning,וַיַּ֙עַל֙ אֶל־הַ֣ר סִינַ֔י כַּאֲשֶׁ֛ר צִוָּ֥ה יְהוָ֖ה אֹת֑וֹ וַיִּקַּ֣ח בְּיָד֔וֹ שְׁנֵ֖י לֻחֹ֥ת אֲבָנִֽים׃, and he went up into mount Sinai, as Jehovah had commanded him, and he had taken, καὶ ἔλαβε, and he took, in the Septuagint, that is, AFTER he had taken in his hand the two tables of stone:  in which manner hasty judgment of LE CLERC concerning disturbed order vanishes. Likewise, in verse 33, וַיְכַל, and Moses finished speaking with them, וַיִּתֵּן, and he had given upon his face, and he had imposed upon his face, that is, AFTER he had imposed a veil upon his face, in comparison with verses 34, 35.  In Amos 7:9, and the high places of Isaac shall be desolate, and the sanctuaries of Israel shall be reduced to wilderness, וְקַמְתִּי, and I will rise, Drusius translates, after I will have risen up against the house of Jeroboam with the sword.  Perhaps it is thus to be read in the midst of Zechariah 3:5, וַיָּשִׂימוּ, and the set a clean mitre upon his head, וַיַּלְבִּשֻׁהוּ, and they had clothed, or after they had clothed him with garments, by comparison with verse 4:  see the Commentarium of MARCKIUS and the notas of MICHAELIS.  This Hebraism CONSTANTIN L’EMPEREUR[2] also recognizes in his notis ad Middoth, page 69, although perhaps less opportunely he applies the same to the text in 1 Samuel 7:6, judging that the ו/and in וַיָּצוּמוּ, and they fasted, here signifies after.  BOCHART likewise establishes this use of the particle ו/and, Hierozoico, part I, book III, chapter X, column 823, although again we are unwilling to undertake to support the application of this manner of speaking to the text in Genesis 49:27, concerning which MARCKIUS is to be consulted in his ad præcipuas quasdem partes Pentateuchi:  but this even now does not so much make for our matter.  Thus BOCHART:  “In Genesis 49:27, Benjamin is a ravening wolf. In the morning he eats the prey, and at evening he divides the spoil.  Which two time there signify, not the entire day, as they maintain, but the entire night, of which one part is evening, and the other morning.  And so the copula AND here is Ordinative, and it is the same as after, as if the Prophet had said: The Tribe of Benjamin shall be like a rapacious wolf, which has prey to be eaten unto the morning time, after he divided that about the time of the evening.  For the division of the prey is prior to the eating of it.  Such also is Joshua 7:25, and they burned them with fire, and stoned them with stones, that is,בתר דרגימו, after they had stoned them, as it is found in the Chaldean.  Job 14:10, and man dies, וַיֶּחֱלָשׁ, and is weakened, that is, after he has been weakened.”

[1] Christian Nolde was a professor of theology at Copenhagen.  He published his Concordantias Particularum Hebræo-Chaldaicarum in 1679.

[2] Constantin l’Empereur (1591-1648) was a Dutch Hebraist and Orientalist.  He served as Professor of Hebrew and Theology at Harderwijk (1619-1627), and then at Leiden.

Leave a Comment