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
contains in it n ^ t rely an aHuaion to a passage in the prophecy of Zeckariah , * but also an express quotation from it , — "But said , The Lord rebuke thee . " Peter also , treating on the same subject , and in the same connexion , f evidently refers to the
same passage in the prophet : " Whereas , " says he , ' - ' . angels , which are greater in power and might , bring' not railing' accusation against them before the Lord- * It may be further observed , that in the Septuagint Version , although in general it retains the He-,
brew word Satan , yet in tins passage of the prophet , renders it Diabolos , Devil , from which Jude seems to have adopted the word . Besides this , the authors of the Improved Version tell us , that " some suppose a reference in this passage ( Jude 9 ) to Zech . iii , 1 —3 . Newcoine . " % r If this
allusion is clearly established , the prophecy of Ze-hariah will serve as a key to unlock the meaning of that mysterious passage of Jude . ; and if the observations I have made have any solidity in them , they may tend , in some measure , to remove the suspicions which have been entertained
respecting the genuineness of the Epistle of Jude , and of the second chapter of the second Epistle , of Peter , and especially those passages in them which are supposed to be the most doubtful .
The question may be asked , What has given rise to this doubt , and why has so much pains been taken to discredit these accounts , and to induce the belief that they are fanciful and spurious ? The authors of the
Improved Version have furnished us with an answer to the question ; they say . in note on Jude 6 , " Perhaps , however , the writer may refer to some fanciful account of a fall of ana els contained in the apocryphal book which
lay before him , without meaning to avouch for that fact any jnore than for the incident mentioned ver . 9 . " § And again , in note on 2 Peter ii . 4 , " If the common interpretation be admitted , it will not establish the
po-* Chap . iii . 2 . t Com pare 2 Peter ii . 10 , 11 , with Jude 8 , 9 . £ See note in loco . § See also note on yet , 9 .
Untitled Article
pular doctrme concerning fulletian * gels . Rwv ! % Ti * e Epistle itself i » of doubtful authority . 2 . From . the change ^ f style this is the most doubtful portion of the Epistle . 3 . By those who admit the genuineness of the Epistle , this chapter is supposed
to have been a quotation from , some ancient apocryphal book , and the apostle might not mean to give authority to the doctrine . The Epistle of Jude" ( they add ) ** is supposed to allude to , or to quote froin ,. the same apocryphal work . " It is here plainly
supposed , that if the passages referred to are genuine , they do in fact teach the popular doctriue concerning fallen angels , and , therefore , in order to get rid of the doctrine , it was necessary , in some way , to get rid of those passages in which it was contained ; for the
mm •• • « * * suspicion seems to have been lurking in their minds , that unless they were got rid of , that doctrine would be established . This will fully account for the pains they have taken to invalidate the authority of these Epistles , and
particularly of the above passages which they contain . Notwithstanding all this , these very same gentlemen confidently assert , that by the angels ( the messengers ) that sinned , is meant the spies who were se&t to explore the land of Canaan , as recorded Numbers
xiv ., and consequently as having no reference to fallen spiritual beings . Could they believe this , and at the same time seriously believe , what they have so repeatedly stated , that it is a fanciful account of a fall of angels taken out of some ancient apocryphal
book , and that too by an apostle ; and that he too should gravely insert such an idle tale amongst a number of references to the Jewish Scripture , he himself at the time not believing it , or mean to give authority to the doctrine ? If they were satisfied of the
truth of their own interpretation , which they give , not as the supposed , but certain meaning of the passage , what cause had they to be afraid that it would countenance a false , although
popular doctrine ? Could there be any danger that the spies , who were the twelve princes of the tribes of Israel whom Moses sent to explore the land of Canaan , should ever be
interpreted to mean apostate spirits , who , in some uqkjiown period , wexe for their sin and rebellion cast out of
Untitled Article
Attempt Iq illustrate Jude , vzv , 9 t Letter I . 60 S
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Oct. 2, 1822, page 603, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2517/page/19/
-