EXPLANATIONVerse 30. Idol. Hebrew pasel. Worthington.—Grabe’s Septuagint “the graven thing of Michas, and Jonathan the son of Gersam, of the son of Manasses.” The Roman copy omits “of Michas,” but retains Manasses, as the present Hebrew reads, instead of Moses. Bible.—It is suspected that the Jews have inserted an n over the word Mose, that it might not be known that a grandson of their lawgiver had been guilty of such impiety. They have not dared, however, to place the letter in the same rank as the others, but have suspended it, ( Calmet.) as if it were suspected, says Michaelis. Abendana relates, that by (or on) the authority of the ancients, this nun was added from the honour of Moses, lest his granson might appear to be the first little sacrificing priest of an idol. The Latin Vulgate reads the name of Moses; and I am convinced that Moses, and not Manasses, ought to be understood: for how could a Levite have Manasses for his ancestor? Got. Comm. 1753. The Jews pretend that this relationship to the idolatrous king of Juda was not real, but figurative, in as much as Jonathan acted like him. But thus the reproach would fall on Gersam, who is said to be the son of Manasses, while the idolatrous priest is only placed as the son of Gersam. It is surely very absurd to say that he was the son of Manasses, because Manasses acted like him 800 years afterwards; and Sol. Jarchi honestly confesses that, “for the honour of Moses nun was written, on purpose to change the name, and it was written suspended, to indicate that it was not Manasses, but Moses.” See Talmud Bava. fol. 109. The letter has, however, sometimes been suspended half way, and sometimes uniformly inserted, so that it has at last supplanted the genuine word. Some copies of the Septuagint agree with the Vulg. Brug.—Theodoret reads, “Jonathan, the son of Manasses, of the son (υιου) of Gersam, of the son of Moses,” retaining both words, in order to be sure the right one, as the copies varied. Kennicott, Dis. 2. see Deuteronomy 27:4. Here we have a plain proof of the liberties which the Jews have taken with their text. But the providence of God has left us means to detect their fraud, by the Vulg. and so forth In other difficulties of a like nature, the collation of ancient MSS. and versions will generally remove the uncertainty, and we may pronounce that the word of God has not been adulterated, though perhaps no one copy may now represent it in all its genuine beauty and integrity. See Prœlog. in SS. Mariana, Calmet. xxiii. Tirinus. iii. Menoch. and so forth Prot. here follow the corrupted Hebrew “Manasseh.” Bible.—Captivity, under the Philistines, when many of their brethren were taken prisoners, (Psalms 77:61. Tirinus.) and when Samuel obliged all Israel to renounce idolatry. 1 Kennicott. 7:4. E.—Serarius, (q. 7.) or the sacred penman, speaks of a captivity, the particulars of which are not recorded. Salien understands it of the captivity of Nephthali, 35 years before the rest of the kingdom of Israel was destroyed: (4 Kennicott. 15:29. Bible.) though Lyran and Bonfrere explain it of the latter event, under Salmanaser. ib. Calmet. 17. Menochius.—We may allow that some interruptions took place under Samuel, David, and so forth Salien.—In effect, Jonathan and his posterity might serve the idol of Michas till it was destroyed, at the same time as the ark was removed from Silo; (verse 31) and afterwards they might relapse into their wonted impiety, and act in the character of priests to the golden calves of Jeroboam; who, no doubt, would prefer such of the tribe of Levi as would come over to him, (Ezekiel 44:10) though he was generally forced to select his priests from the dregs of the people. 3 Kennicott. 12. In this sense they might be priests in Dan, till Salmanaser led them captives. But substituting galoth or geloth, we might translate, “till the deliverance of the land,” which was effected by Samuel; ( Calmet.) who not only repressed the Philistines, (1 Kennicott. 7:13) but also persuaded all Israel to renounce the service of idols. ib. verse 4. Bible.