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
With due deference I would beg leave to refer Dt \ Jones to his friend Mr . Bellamy ' s translation of the Hebrew Bible , in which , although by an oversight in the text ( jsardonable enough , you will say , in the stupendous
undertaking of a solitary individual to translate the Bible afresh from the original ) the verb *? mn is rendered begaii , the sense is fully proved in the corresponding note to be the same as in Levit . xxi . 9 , and Ezek .
xxii . 26 , namely to prophane or pollute . Hence , the literal interpretation of the passage under consideration , both according to the vowel points and without them , appears to me to be , * Then he" ( sc . Enos ) " caused to
be prophaned" ( or , simply , prophaned ) ** in calling on the name of Jehovah ;" a sense embracing the worship of idols generally , and not that of deified mortals only , as insinuated by Dr . Jones .
With regard to the Doctor ' s version of the opening of the sixth chapter of Genesis , he will perhaps also pardon me if I again prefer Mr . Bellamy ' s translation to his , where both actually differ . It will be seen that the Doctor
virtually follows JM-r . B . in his version of the phrase crs'n ^ N * Jn , although his adoption of th € plural Gods , does not appear to be sanctioned by a single passage in the whofe Bible , and notwithstanding Mr . Bellamy ' s text again exhibits a mistake in the fourth verse , in printing " children
of God" for " children of the God ;" but I cannot persuade myself that Dr . Jones i ^ fortunate in his ch oice of the word marauders for cn ^ DJi , which Mr . Bellamy has rendered
apostates , and which in the LXX . is given by yiydvTeq , i . e . earth-born . As reference only Js inade to gross idolatry in the preceding verses , and nothing savouring of violence or violent pro ^ ceedings is intimated therein , ( for the Doctor will hardly pretend that because ihxt children of the God admired
the daughters of Adam , therefore they rmuie a violent seizure of the *** , a meaning by the bye which assuredly d <* es not attach to tAi 6 original tip ^ , ) I ihttst own , I , far < me , feel hiclfftfcll to side with Mr . Bellamy , whose quotaftioft of different pas&agea , * s . g . Mioah Tii . 8 > Arid 2 Kings xxv . 11 , appefcfrts coftctogive as to ifie signification frequently given to the root * M > £
Untitled Article
whiefc Is that of deserting 'from , or apostatizing * . Your reverend correspondent lays much stress on the propriety of rendering the word pl > shall remain , in which he is certainly backed bv the
translations which he quotes ; but , even admitting that they and he are correct , which , from the general context and sense , may reasonabl y be doubted , there does not appear any necessity for the etymological conjectures in whjch he indulges , since a mere reference to the Hebrew root
J * U would have sufficiently warranted his version as far as mere etymology goes . Indeed , if the reader will turn to that old standard of Hebrew literature , the Epitome Thesauri Linguce Sanctte Antore Sante Pagnino Lucensiy he will find the following sub
voce pJ : " Hinc deducunt quidam Mud , " Gen . vi . 3 , " Non erit detentus tanquam in vagina spiritus metis ;" but I venture to submit that the
sense which Dr . Jones gives to this passage , namely , that the principle of life should not remain in man , but that his days should be shortened to one hundred and twenty years , is not authorized by the narrative . Even Supposing that the account of Cain ' s
violeat death , prior to the occurrences narrated in the sixth chapter of Genesis , may not bear upon the x ^ ase , surely the number of deaths detailed in regular course by Moses , in the fifth or preceding chapter of Genesis , cannot warrant that
legislator ' s putting as something new into the mouth of Jehovali the words here quoted . The number of years moreover fixed by Dr . Jones for the days of man , appears at variance with history and experience . Thus in the very same book , in whioli , according to the Doctor , man ' s days are limited
to a hundred and twenty years , we are afterwards informed that several of the patriarchs of the second order , between Noah and Abraham , lived above four hundred years , and none under one hundred fi « d forty ; and whether we cotosUH ? 4 he average rate
of th « life of i ## h ?* the utmost extent of his <* to r ^ &m in " our ofrtfe rtarate day / ' we sfeiVl still find ourselves either befcftv or above tnc Dfcctor'fc standard y for in the former ease we < fere hardly l ^ dkon on more than sixW er eevenfcy years , and J «
Untitled Article
466 Remarks on some of Dr . Jones ' s Helrew f ^ erfifons .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1823, page 466, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1787/page/34/
-