For what if here too a sense lies hidden? But if there is none, the expression itself is to be noted, lest, found elsewhere, it impede the sense, or compel one to seek something where there is nothing to be sought. What the Latin has, 'I have heard the groaning of the children of Israel, in what manner the Egyptians afflict them', the Greek has katadoulountai autous, which might be rendered 'they reduce them to slavery'; for it cannot be done in one word. 'And Moses spoke thus to the children of Israel: and they did not hearken to Moses from faintness of spirit and from hard works': it says 'hearkened' (exaudierunt), not 'heard' (audierunt). 'For I am ineloquent', which Moses says to the Lord, the Greek said alogos ('without utterance'), not 'unskilled' as though amathes or apaideutos.
'These are Aaron and Moses, to whom God said, that they should bring forth the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt'; for so the Greek has it. 'Behold I am of feeble voice, and how will Pharaoh hearken to me?' It is to be noted that it said 'will hearken' (exaudiet), not 'will hear' (audiet). 'And Moses and Aaron did as the Lord commanded them, so they did.' What would be lacking, if it were not said: 'so they did'? 'If Pharaoh shall speak to you, saying: Give us a sign or a wonder, then thou shalt say to Aaron thy brother: Take the rod.' Did not the custom of our speech, and a certain integrity of it, demand that it be said thus: 'If Pharaoh shall speak to you, saying: Give us a sign or a wonder, thou shalt say to Aaron thy brother: Take the rod'?
What then is the 'and' added there for, unless by some property of Hebrew speech? For it is not said to be Greek either. The Latins do not seem to me to have rendered sufficiently aptly the word 'enchanters' (epaoidous) of Pharaoh, so as to say 'wise men'; for the sophoi are called 'wise men'. But the Latin translator could have said 'sophists', since there is no way of saying it in Latin; and therefore we now use this word as Latin, just as we say 'philosophy' not only in Greek but also in Latin; the most eloquent authors of Latin letters have called them 'sophists'. 'And the rod of Aaron swallowed up their rods': as if it said: the dragon of Aaron. What is said of Pharaoh, 'Behold he goeth out to the water', the Greek has 'upon the water'.
'Let my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness. And behold, hitherto thou hast not hearkened.' How often is it said 'thou hast hearkened' (exaudisti), when it is said to a man! 'And the enchanters of the Egyptians did likewise with their sorceries. And Pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he did not hearken to them, as the Lord had said': because it is the usage of Scripture 'he hearkened' (exaudivit), even when it speaks of a man. 'Let my people go, that they may serve me (serviant, plural)', not 'that it may serve' (serviat, singular): which manner of speech is scarcely found except where the singular thing itself consists of many. For a 'people' is spoken of by a singular noun, but consists of many. So too is: 'Let all the earth adore thee (adorent, plural)', because 'all the earth' is said for 'the men who are in the earth'. 'Behold I strike all thy borders with frogs;'
for so the Greek has it, by a most elegant expression, so that the frogs themselves may be understood as the plague by which the land of Egypt is struck. 'And the river shall belch forth frogs; and going up they shall enter into thy houses and into the storerooms of thy chambers and upon thy beds and into the houses of thy servants and of thy people and into thy kneading-troughs and into thy ovens; and upon thee and upon thy people and upon thy servants the frogs shall come up.' It is to be noted that, when it had said 'into thy houses' and the rest with the accusative case, 'and upon thy beds' and the rest, where it said 'upon' (super), it likewise kept the accusative; but in 'in thy kneading-troughs' and 'in thy ovens' it shifted to the ablative; for the Greek too changed the preposition, which the Latin does not change. For it has: eis;
tous oikous，「進諸房屋」；但在「你的摶麵盆」處作 en tois phyramasin：此處若不僅是說法、也含有某種意義，那就令人稱奇了，或許是要表明：摶麵盆和烤爐中滋生的青蛙，並非從外面爬上或衝入的；而既然經文預言河要把牠們噴吐出來，牠們便由此充滿萬物。「亞倫向埃及的水伸手，青蛙就上來了；那青蛙（單數 rana）上來，遮滿了地」：這是從複數轉為單數的重述；因為「青蛙」無疑是代表眾多的青蛙。然而不知何故，因著習於言語、心思受此浸染的緣故，單數所言往往比複數顯得更多；因為當人說（如下例）時，所理會的反而更多：
tous oikous, 'into the houses'; but in 'thy kneading-troughs' en tois phyramasin: where it would be remarkable if there were not also a sense, not merely an expression, so that in the kneading-troughs and ovens the frogs that arose there might perhaps be meant not to have climbed up or rushed in from without; and because it foretells that the river will belch them forth, thence to fill all things. 'And Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt and brought forth the frogs; and the frog (rana, singular) was brought forth and covered the land': a repetition transferred from the plural to the singular number; for surely 'frog' is put for the multitude of frogs. But in some way, through the habit of speech in men's imbued perceptions, that often seems more which is said in the singular than in the plural; for more is understood when it is said, for example:
'there is a soldier there' than 'there are soldiers there', and 'there is a fish there' than 'there are fishes there'. 'And they gathered them in heaps, heaps (acervos acervos)': this repetition signifies the multitude of heaps and is familiar to the Scriptures. What the Latins have, 'Stretch out with thy hand thy rod and strike the earth (terra, ablative)', not 'strike the earth' (terram, accusative), the Greek has: 'the mound of the earth' (to choma tes ges); if however it is rightly rendered by this word. 'And the enchanters likewise did with their sorceries, to bring forth gnats, and they could not.' It is to be noted that 'they did' is said for that which is: 'they attempted to do'. For surely, if they did likewise, without doubt they brought forth gnats; but because it follows:
'to bring forth, and they could not', therefore they did not do likewise, but attempted to do likewise. Or if perchance they too, although they acted with sorceries, yet stretched out the rod with the same kind of action — which Scripture did not express — to this is to be referred: 'they did likewise'. 'And in the land over which they are upon it.' 'And I will make glorious in that day the land of Goshen, in which my people is upon it.' 'And Moses said: I will go out from thee and will pray to God, and the dog-fly (cynomia) shall depart from Pharaoh and from his servants': as if he were speaking to one and 'I will go out from thee', and concerning another Pharaoh it should follow, from whom the dog-fly was to depart. 'Let my people go, that they may serve me. Behold I will rain this hour tomorrow very much hail.'
'But very, very much hail.' 'And the voices and the hail shall cease.' It is to be noted that Scripture is wont to call thunders 'voices', which Pharaoh above also called the voices of God, saying: 'Pray for me to the Lord, that the voices of God may cease to be' — where there is also that expression, that it did not say 'let the voices cease to be' (subjunctive). 'That you may tell in the ears of your sons and of your sons' sons whatsoever things I have mocked the Egyptians (inlusi).' It is to be noted how 'I have mocked' is said, lest perchance it be so said as: 'this dragon, which thou hast formed to mock him', and that in Job: 'this is the beginning of the Lord's fashioning, which he made to be mocked by his angels'. 'Behold I bring this hour tomorrow much locust (locustam multam).'
Behold, just as above it said 'frog' (singular), where we said that more is often understood when something of this kind is said in the singular than if it were said in the plural. For it is manifest that 'much locust' sounds more than if it said: 'many locusts'. 'But who and who are they that shall go?' We say daily, by a more familiar usage: 'which and which shall go?' 'There is not left any green thing — nothing (viride nihil) — in the trees.' It should have been said, in the manner of our speech: 'there is not left any green thing (viride aliquid) in the trees.' Pharaoh to Moses: 'I have sinned before the Lord your God and against you; receive therefore my offence.' By this expression his brethren also used it toward Joseph, where they said: 'Receive the iniquity of the servants of the God of thy father.' What the Latins have:
'and no one saw his brother for three days', the Greek has: 'and no one did not see his brother' (double negative). It is also to be noted that any man whatsoever is called a man's 'brother'. Pharaoh says to Moses and Aaron: 'Go and serve the Lord your God; apart from the sheep and oxen, leave behind': for so the Greek has it. It is a very unusual expression, unless after a pause 'leave behind' is inserted and 'these' is understood, so that the sense be: 'Go, apart from the sheep and oxen, and leave these behind'; for such an ellipsis is wont to occur frequently in the expressions of the Scriptures. 'And we will not leave behind a hoof': as though, when the flocks were led away, a hoof could remain. For what else is 'we will not leave behind a hoof' but 'we will not leave behind even a hoof'? Pharaoh to Moses:
'Take heed to thyself, to add no more to see my face': for that which is: 'Take heed to thyself, that thou see my face no more.' 'And let each one ask of his neighbour, and the woman of her neighbour, vessels of silver and of gold and raiment': it is to be noted that the Egyptians are called the Hebrews' 'neighbours'. 'And there shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as has not been the like, and such shall not be added (repeated) any more. But among the children of Israel not a dog shall mutter with its tongue, from man even to beast.' It is a most elegant expression; for by the 'dog' it signified the utmost, whether of men or of beasts, thus commending how great a quiet there would be among the Hebrews, while the Egyptians were crying out in bitter bereavement. 'Let each take a sheep by the houses of their families (patriae).' What it may call 'families' (patrias) is not easy to understand:
whether the cities in which they dwelt together, or rather the numerous families propagated from the paternity, as it were, of each one; for this latter is said to be more signified in the Greek. 'But if those who are in the house be few, so that they are not sufficient for the sheep — that is, that the fewness itself be not sufficient to consume the sheep — he shall take to himself his neighbour who is next to him', that is, the house itself shall take a neighbour. It put 'the man next to him' for 'men', and the singular for the plural — for not one, but as many as suffice. When Scripture was speaking of consuming the sheep, it says, 'according to the number of souls, each one what suffices for himself' — 'souls' for 'men', the whole from a part.
'They shall take of the blood and shall put it upon the two posts and upon the lintel in the houses, in which they shall eat them (illas) in them.' When it had said 'in which', it also said 'in them', by a most customary manner; but as to 'they shall eat them (illas)', it is asked which, and 'the flesh' (carnes) is understood. For this follows: 'and they shall eat the flesh this night, roasted with fire': which the Latin codices have as 'who shall eat the flesh' (carnem, feminine singular), but the Greek has krea, that is 'flesh' (fleshes, plural), but of neuter gender; therefore in the Greek it is: 'in the houses in which they shall eat them (illa, neuter) in them.'
But this expression — that it should first say 'them' (illas) before it foretold what should be understood in what follows as to which it had said 'them' — is similar to that expression which we expounded concerning the son of Moses, when the angel wished to kill him, and we adduced the example from the Psalm: 'Its foundations are in the holy mountains; the Lord loveth the gates of Zion': for whose foundations we do not understand except from what follows. So here too 'in which they shall eat them (illas) in them', that is, in which houses they shall eat them, is understood as the flesh, of which it speaks consequently. 'And you shall take for yourselves a little bundle of hyssop and shall dip it in the blood that is by the door and shall smear it upon the lintel and upon both posts with the blood.'
Here too 'a little bundle of hyssop' surely signifies several bundles, just as 'frog' signifies several frogs and 'locust' several locusts; but this trope, when it occurs in things which are not usually so spoken of by us, produces obscurity. 'And it shall be, when your sons shall say to you: What is this service? then you shall say to them: This is the sacrifice of the Passover to the Lord': even if it did not have 'and' (et), it would be complete: 'you shall say to them.' 'And the children of Israel coming did as the Lord commanded Moses and Aaron, so they did': it would not add 'so they did', were it not the custom of the Scriptures. 'And it came to pass on that day the Lord brought forth the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt. And the Lord said to Moses, saying. Every one that openeth the womb, the males.'
It brought in the plural number to the singular, because the very thing that was said, 'every one that openeth', is understood not in one but in many. Similar is the expression: 'Attend, my people (populus, singular)'; such also is what follows a little after: 'everything that openeth the womb of the herds and of the flocks, whatsoever shall be born to thee' — 'everything, whatsoever shall be born to thee' is that same manner of expression. 'Every one that openeth the womb of the she-ass (asinae).' The Greek has 'of the ass' (asini, masculine) by that manner of expression — which we already noted in Genesis — where the masculine is put for the feminine, concerning the death of Sarah, Scripture saying: 'Abraham rising from the dead one (a mortuo, masculine)', and: 'I will bury my dead one (mortuum meum, masculine)', and such things are often said there of a dead woman. 'For this cause I sacrifice to the Lord every one that openeth the womb, the males.'
An expression similar to the one above. 'And it shall be for a sign upon thy hand', that is, upon thy works: where perhaps there is sense rather than expression. 'And the Lord shook the Egyptian off in the midst of the sea.' The Greek has: 'and the Lord shook off the Egyptians in the midst of the sea.' 'And Israel saw the great hand which the Lord did to the Egyptians.' 'Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song to the Lord and said to say (dixerunt dicere)': for so the Greek has it: kai eipan legein. 'And they found no water to drink.' It could have done without: 'to drink.' 'And the people murmured against Moses, saying (dicentes, plural)': not 'saying' (dicens, singular) but 'saying' (plural); for a people consists of many. 'And all the synagogue of the children of Israel came (venerunt, plural) into the wilderness:'
it did not say 'came' (venit, singular), because a synagogue consists of many. 'All the synagogue of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron': this too is the same expression. 'And the Lord said to Moses: Behold I will rain bread for you from heaven': about to rain manna, he promised bread. It is an expression by which 'bread' is put for food; and Scripture loves to say 'breads' (plural) rather than 'bread' (singular). 'In the morning', it says, 'you shall see the glory of the Lord, while he hearkens to your murmuring against God', that is, because you murmur against God: which is as much as if it said 'against God'. Then it is to be noted that here in a novel manner a 'hearkening' (exauditio) is spoken of, not of those praying but of those murmuring, although Scripture certainly reproves the murmuring.
as though it had said this — that God took cognizance of their murmuring — and it called that very cognizance of God a 'hearkening'. 'Draw near before God; for he has heard your murmuring': again it signifies a 'hearkening' not of prayers and petitions but even of the murmuring of evil men; and this God also says afterward: 'I have heard the murmuring of the children of Israel.' 'And behold, upon the face of the wilderness, something fine like coriander.' When God so often says 'the face of the earth', as here 'the face of the wilderness', it is a wonder whence men so err that, when they hear 'face', they imagine something such as a man's face is, or that of some living creature. 'According to the number of your souls; let each one gather, with those dwelling with you.'
經文何等常以「靈魂」稱人，是以部分代全體——卻不輕易以「肉體」（複數 carnes）代人，而是用「肉體」（單數 carnem），正如：「我必不懼怕，肉體能把我怎麼樣呢」，這在同一篇詩篇中說得更明白：「人能把我怎麼樣呢」。然而它不會說：「照你們肉體（carnium）的數目」，如它所說：「照你們靈魂的數目。」「他們清晨清晨地（mane mane）收取」：正如「井、井」、「堆、堆」一樣，這裡說「清晨、清晨」。「你們各人，在第七日不可出自己的地方」：所插入的「各人」一詞，原也可以不說。「百姓沒有水喝（aqua bibere）」，就是說沒有水可供飲用。「百姓向摩西發怨言辱罵（maledicebat ad Moysen）」，就是說他們以辱罵對付摩西，即他們辱罵他。
How often Scripture calls men 'souls', the whole from a part — but not readily 'flesh' (carnes, plural) for men, but 'flesh' (carnem, singular), as it is: 'I will not fear what flesh can do to me', which it says more openly in the same Psalm: 'what can man do to me'. Yet it would not say: 'according to the number of your fleshes (carnium)', as it said: 'according to the number of your souls.' 'And they gathered it morning by morning (mane mane)': just as 'wells, wells' and 'heaps, heaps', so it is said 'morning, morning'. 'Let none of you go out, each one from his place, on the seventh day': what is inserted, 'each one', could also have been not said. 'And there was no water for the people to drink (aqua bibere)', that is, for drinking. 'And the people reviled against Moses (maledicebat ad Moysen)', that is, they assailed Moses with revilings, that is, they reviled him.
For in what follows he himself said this: 'Why do you revile me?' And the people murmured against Moses, saying. 'And take in your hand the rod with which you struck the river.' He said 'with which you struck' for what we would say 'wherewith you struck,' and this manner of speech is very frequent in the Scriptures. 'And Jethro, the father-in-law of Moses, took whole burnt offerings and sacrifices to God': 'took' is used for what means 'offered.' Or perhaps it is a matter of sense rather than of speech, so that he is understood to have taken up those things which Moses had offered — although Moses is not read of above as having sacrificed, nor Aaron, nor any of the Hebrews who were led out of the land of Egypt; but it is only written above that Moses set up an altar and called it 'The Lord is my refuge.'
Now we read that this Jethro was a priest of Midian, that is, of the nation of Midian. It is remarkable, however, if Moses began to sacrifice at his coming, and not rather Jethro himself, who was already a priest. 'This word is heavy for you': 'is' is to be understood. 'And you shall show them the ways in which they are to walk in them.' Now 'they referred the heavy word upon Moses'; for so the Greek has it, which the Latins rendered 'to Moses.' By that very expression is also signified the care itself, by which it was said 'upon Moses,' as though a burden were signified as laid upon him. And 'the heavy word' is said for 'the heavy question.' Whence follows: 'but every light word they judged themselves.' This the Greek has:
'epōnomasa' — 'I shall have surnamed' or 'I shall have named-upon' is more expressly said; but which some have rendered more customarily 'I shall have called by name.' Yet 'cognominavero' (I shall have surnamed) has no necessary signification; still 'cognominavero' is said as nearer than 'nominavero' (I shall have named). For this too some interpreters have said. 'And I shall come to you and bless you.' Although above he was speaking in the plural, 'you shall make and you shall offer,' he says 'I shall come to you,' as if to Israel itself, that is, to the people. 'And these are the ordinances of justice which you shall set before them. If you buy a Hebrew servant,' and so on. The manner of speech is to be noted: how, although that was said to Moses, that is, 'these are the ordinances of justice which you shall set before them,' the rest is said as much to the people itself as to Moses:
「你若買希伯來人作僕人。」因為這話不是對摩西說的，而是他要對百姓說的，只是他正對百姓本身說。「主人要用錐子穿他的耳朵，他就永遠服事主人」——或作「直到永遠」，希臘文作「eis ton aiōna」。看哪，聖經在許多地方按這希臘詞說「永遠」或「永恆」，其中所指的永恆並非那賜給我們永生的永恆，也非那惡人反要被永火焚燒的永恆！因為那不能永遠活著的僕人，也不能永遠服事；只是「永遠」在此被理解為指那沒有終止之時的事物。再不然，這奧秘中必定指著某種永恆之事。
'If you buy a Hebrew servant.' For this was not said to Moses, but what he was to say to the people, only that he was saying to the people itself. 'The lord shall bore through his ear with an awl, and he shall serve him for ever' — or 'unto eternity,' which the Greek has: 'eis ton aiōna.' Behold how the Scripture in many places says, according to this Greek word, 'for ever' or 'eternal,' where that eternity is not understood according to which eternal things are promised to us, or according to which the wicked shall on the contrary be burned with eternal fire! For neither could that servant, who could not live for ever, serve for ever; but 'eternal' is understood to be said of that whose time has no end. Or else surely something eternal is signified by this mystery.
'I will give you a place to which he who has slain may flee there.' 'If anyone strikes his manservant or maidservant with a rod,' which means 'with a rod.' 'The bull shall be stoned with stones' — as if it could be stoned except with stones. This expression differs somewhat from that by which one would say, after the manner of the Scriptures, 'with stoning it shall be stoned,' yet it is similar. 'But if the bull was a gorer before yesterday and the day before yesterday,' he put a part for the whole with regard to the past time, however long it had been, after the manner of the Scriptures. 'But if anyone opens a pit or digs out a pit and does not cover it, and a calf or an ass falls therein, the owner of the pit shall make restitution.' And this expression too is to be understood as the whole from a part;
for not, if a horse should fall into the pit, or a sheep, would he therefore not make restitution because this is not written. 'And what shall have been dead shall be his own,' for 'shall be of himself.' 'But if anyone grazes over a field or vineyard and lets his cattle graze another field,' that is, 'another's.' 'But if you take as a pledge the garment of your neighbour, before sunset you shall return it to him': he put the genus for the species; for it is so said as if he had given as a pledge any garment whatsoever, although from what follows the Scripture testifies that it is speaking specifically of him who has no other garment than that with which to cover himself at night. 'And behold, I send my angel before your face, that he may keep you in the way, that he may bring you into the land which I have prepared for you. Give heed to yourself and hearken to him.'
God commands his angel to be hearkened to by the people, not indeed as one asking, but as one commanding. 'And I will send hornets before you, and it shall cast out the Amorites': he turns from the plural to the singular number. It is understood, however: 'the hornet shall cast out the Amorites,' just as 'the frog,' 'the locust' — not that there is only one, but because the plural number is understood through the singular. 'By parts I will cast them out from before you.' 'You shall not make a covenant with them and their gods; and they shall not dwell in your land, lest they make you sin against me': he did not say 'against me' (in me), yet it means the same. 'And all the people answered with one voice, saying.' 'And they saw the place where the God of Israel had stood there.' 'Where he had stood' would suffice, but these are said in the Hebrew manner. 'And you shall overlay them with gold.'
The expression is similar to 'with stones it shall be stoned.' 'The cups in which they shall offer with them.' 'Two bases for one pillar on both its sides, and two bases for one pillar on both its sides': lest he should speak of all, he speaks of two after his own manner by doubling, as 'wells wells,' 'heaps heaps,' 'generations and generations,' and the like. 'And you shall overlay the pillars with gold, and you shall overlay the bars with gold. And you shall overlay them with bronze': such an expression is like 'you shall overlay with gold.' When he was speaking of the lamp to be lit 'outside the veil which is over the testimony,' he says this, that is, that it should be lit outside, where is the holy place, not within the veil, which is over the testimony, that is, the Holy of Holies.
Therefore he did not say 'over' (super) as though it were a roof, or a vault, or the firmament of heaven, or the cover of the ark, but he said 'over' also of that which was set up in place of a wall: just as we say that one reclines or stands 'higher' (superior), not that the one is carried by the other at all. 'An everlasting statute throughout your generations': 'everlasting' in that manner of which we have said much above. 'And Aaron shall bear the names of the sons of Israel upon the breastplate of judgement upon his breast, going into the holy place': it would have been consistent for him to say 'going into the holy place,' that is, 'Aaron shall bear, going in,' which some Latins, avoiding the solecism, have rendered. But because the Greek too has 'to one going in' (dative), and some Latins agree, I have thought the expression rather to be noted than corrected.
「你要把辮成的鍊子安在決斷胸牌上。」這裡有些拉丁譯者為防文法錯誤，譯作「辮成的鍊子（陰性配合）」；但希臘文作「ta chrysoun ta alysidōta（那金的、那辮成的，中性）」。當中性用於陽性或陰性時，我們慣稱這為絕對式說法，正如我們若說「屬地的公義是不穩固的（中性配陰性）」。「亞倫供祭司職分的時候，他進聖所在耶和華面前，並出來的時候，他的聲音必被聽見。」他所說「他的聲音」是指鈴鐺的聲音，那其實是鈴鐺的響聲。「對進入者與對出來者」——他以與格代屬格，即「進入者的與出來者的」。「並兩個腰子和其上的脂油」，其中「是」字須補足理解，有些譯者已加上此字。
'And you shall put upon the breastplate of judgement the fringes, chained.' Here too some Latins, guarding against a solecism, have rendered 'the fringes chained' (with feminine agreement); but the Greek has 'ta chrysoun ta alysidōta' (the golden the chained, neuter). This we are wont to call an absolute expression, when the neuter is brought in for the masculine or feminine gender, just as if we should say 'earthly justices are not stable' (neuter for feminine). 'And when Aaron begins to exercise the priesthood, his voice shall be heard as he enters the holy place in the sight of the Lord and as he goes out.' He said 'his voice' from the bells, which is rather the sound of them. 'To one entering and to one going out' — he put the dative for the genitive, for 'of one entering and of one going out.' 'And the two kidneys and the fat which is upon them,' 'is' being understood, which some interpreters have added.
'And you shall separate it with a separation.' 'And when Aaron lights the lamps, he shall kindle late over it.' He said 'late' (sero) for 'in the evening,' and therefore the expression is to be noted; for the Greek has 'opse.' 'Late,' however, is not properly wont to be said except when the time has passed at which what is said to be done late ought to have been done. 'If you take the reckoning of the sons of Israel in their numbering, and each shall give a ransom of his soul to the Lord, and there shall be no ruin among them in their numbering; and this is what they shall give you.' This expression hangs in suspense because a copulative conjunction has been interposed; which, if it were not interposed, would not hang. It is placed, however, in three places, from any of which if it were removed it would make the sentence complete. Again, where it is said:
'if you take the reckoning of the sons of Israel in their numbering, and each shall give a ransom of his soul to the Lord'; for if he had not said 'and each shall give,' but had only said 'each shall give,' the sentence would be finished and would not hang. For it would then be said thus: 'if you take the reckoning of the sons of Israel in their numbering, each shall give a ransom of his soul to the Lord.' But if this conjunction is placed here, it must be taken away below, so that it be said thus: 'if you take the reckoning of the sons of Israel in their numbering, and each shall give a ransom of his soul to the Lord, and there shall be no ruin among them in their numbering — this is what they shall give.' Or else surely in the middle, where it is said:
'and there shall be no ruin among them' — if you take away the conjunction, the sentence will not hang; for the sense will be: 'if you take the reckoning of the sons of Israel in their numbering, and each shall give a ransom of his soul to the Lord, there shall be no ruin among them.' But when the same conjunction is placed everywhere, it makes the expression hang; therefore we have thought it to be noted. 'The people rose up against Aaron and said to him.' The expression is customary, because a people is composed of many. Then it is to be noted that the whole is put for a part. For the Apostle, as it really was, said that certain of them did this, not the whole people, where he says: 'Neither let us serve idols, as some of them.' 'Arise and make us gods who shall go before us.' Were they speaking to one sitting?
Or rather is the expression to be noted, for the reason that it is often said: 'Rise up, O Lord,' or: 'Arise, O God, judge the earth'? 'And now let me alone, and being angry with anger,' just as 'dying he shall die'; the Scripture loves to speak thus. 'To whom there are golden things, take them off': he did not say what golden things. Whence the Latin interpreters said: 'he who has gold, let him take it off.' 'Who is on the Lord's side? Let him come to me.' 'They made themselves golden gods': out of one calf. Therefore he put the plural number for the singular. Thence also is that: 'These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you out of the land of Egypt.' Yet these expressions, where the plural is put for the singular, are not found except in that kind of thing in which it can also be done of, or understood of, several.
For not because that calf was one was it therefore not possible for several also to be made, nor was it therefore not like to many idols. By this expression it was said that robbers reviled the Lord, although the Scripture testifies that one did this, but he was not the only robber. Nay more, when this expression is made by means of proper names — in what manner it is made in the Scriptures we have not yet found — several are there understood, just as certain writers have said 'Phaedras and Medeas,' though there was one Phaedra and one Medea; but they called all women like Phaedra and Medea 'Phaedras and Medeas.' Thus these expressions are interposed not without cause, nor anyhow and at random as is done faultily by the unskilled, but in a certain manner and by certain rules.