On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
and the Editors , perhaps , too easily yielded to the scruple of his delicate mind . Hear now the critics gentle remark , p . 6 l : * ' Who but these men would hive dared to have translated yer / sw / iKa , I , have adopted ? And , as
I suppose , they consider these words as originally spoken to David . " The primate , ver . 4 , translates the word 3 cevcX 75 poyo /> c 7 jvc £ y he hath obtained a more excellent name , &c , and the Editors have retained the same word .
This also excites the pious indignation of the reverend author . * ' \\* hy , ' says he , p . 60 , •* would not the Editors translate it , he Jiath inherited , when they admit this is the meaning of the Greek word ? What reason could
influence them to use obtain instead of inherit , unless they were afraid the reader should understand that Christ were t ' n . leed the heir ? We rend of some who said This is the heir , let us kill him : but this looks like a doubt concerning the very heirship of the Messiah /* What the writer means
by the heirship of the Messiah he can best explain ; but little did the learned prelate suspect , that when he selected one out of various acceptations of a word , perhaps equally eligible , he should expose himself to the charge of undermining the gospel . Mr . Emlyn is treated with as little
ceremony as the learned primate . A note is introduced to Heb . i . 8 , by the Editors , in which Mr . Emlyn is quoted as supporting the translation adopted in the text , God is thy throne for ever and ever ; upon which this great critic remarks , p . 63 : *• So , we ark to take this bold assertion , and the reference to Mr . Emlvn as
satisfactory proofs , that the author of the Hebrews did not speak of Jesus Christ . " In this cavalier manner does this obscure writer treat critics of the highest reputation . This gentleman ' s main argument is invective . Seldom does he
condescend to reason , and still less frequently to criticise . I think , and I believe , are his current proofs . He probably thought , and perhaps justly , that his own authority would be quite sufficient for the mass of his readers , who could never allow themselves to
doubt what this great and pious man affirms with so much confidence , or at least declares that he believes . Occasionally , howeVer , he vouchsafes to
Untitled Article
exhibit a specimen of his critical powers . In page 55 , being much dissatisfied with the explanation given by the Editors of the word angels , in Stephen ' s discourse , Acts vii . 58 , he breaks out into this eloquent exclamation : ? ' Did not the Editors know
the Jewish doctrine on this subject ? Did they forget there was such a text as the following : * The chariots of God are twenty thousand , even thousands of angels ! The Lord is among them as in Sinai , in the holy ptace * ? Does this mean that the Lord was
among the priests and Levites ? Or , do the Editors supv ) Ose » because the toords might be rendered , the chariot of God is thousands , even thousands of repetition : the Lord is in or ' among them ; Sinai is in the holy place , therefore there is no reference to angels ? »
What the Editors of the Improved Version might think upon the subject it is not for me to say , but , for my own part , I am ready to confess that the text so travestied , appears tome
to be downright nonsense . At any rate , from this notable specimen , we may form some judgment of the author ' s idens , what an Improved Version ought to be , arid likewise of his own talents for the execution of such
an undertaking , and of his qualifications for a critical examination of thit which is already before the public . Upon the subject of demoniacs , this great critic does not condescend to waste much of his labour . But he
" conceives , '' p . 67 , ** that it would be no difficult task to prove" the position that " possessions are diseases , " to be false . He very judiciously , however , consigns this task to Dr . Campbell , upon whom he pronounces a merited eulogium ; and who has
exhibited an example of good sense and good temper ., in opposing a hypothesis which he disapproved , which it would have been no disgrace to the reverend gentleman to have imitated . He chooses , however , "just to state , that it is demonstrable that the writers of the Old Testament believed in a
devil . " How much would the witlings of the Improved Version have been obliged to him , if he had condescended to exhibit a few steps of his demonstration ; and particularly if he had shewn any intimation of an evil spirit in any books which could be proved
Untitled Article
536 On the Rev . Samuel Newton ' s Objections to the Improved Version . .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Sept. 2, 1819, page 536, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1776/page/12/
-