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
these preceded by the emphatic n , to render it more suitable to the dignity of the Being to whom it is applied . There ; remains , then , only one example of the application of these words to the Supreme God , and this is found in the writiags of the prophet Isaiah Cx . 21 ) , *? The * eiBnant shall return , even thei
remnant of Jacob , unto the Mighty God ? Does : » this » then , amount to a p , roof that the words under consideration are used with reference to Jesus Christ as the Supreme God ? By rt «
means . Instances , it is well known , frequently occur hi the Old Testament , in which , titles and epithets commonly applied to the Deity are transferred in an inferior sense to hu »
man beings ; and , vice versa , others , in which God is spoken of in the character of a man , endowed with human feelings , aad subject to human passions . Thus , itt Exod . xv . 3 , Jehovah
is styled " a mem of war . "' The Samaritans , offended , as it would seem , with the use of the word man as applied to the Beity > ^ have exchanged the expression , iu their copies of the
Pentateuch , for " mighty in war ;" and the Seventy , doubtless from the same fastidious motives , have ridded themselves of the , offensive epithet by a . similar contrivance . But this excess
of refinement , if generally acted upon , would , destroy the effect o £ some of the most striking passages in . the Sacred VTolume ; The expression is , no doubt ; highly figurative , and somewhat unusual ; but , though offensive to nice ears , the following reasons induce ; me to think that it was not adopted by Moses and the Israelites without some
attention to propriety * In Hebrew ,, three separate words are used to denote mam The first of these ( EDI **) relates : to his condition ? as a frail and perishable , beingv formed : out of the .
cmst oE the ; gjoouody and corresponds with the Latin word homo , darivedi frbm hwmfts , the grounds the seconds ( ittfcllfc ) s % nifte $ > * ' ijiauaa subject to inevitable distresses and . distempers , " and isdenivedifi om airoat which means ;
to be : sick ambinfifrm > $ and the third ,, < to * fi ^ , ) i whiehs denotes valouc and digr * iuty > eocmspomls with ; the JUntiw mr ^ dwriiviid ftfom vis * quod vinibus praa ^ slata Of I course , therefore , at&pding ; crompldtaly oppo&ed ,, as t ^>^ d oc ^ ; in ita ctymolli fy to czbTHt and ^ il « t , (^ ee > Tafflor x s Ifmitiw * Concordance , under ;
Untitled Article
the different roots ;) therd is a ; peculiar propriety in the epithet , as applied iir this connexion , which would not have been the case , had either of the other two words been adopted . Since , then , by a comparative mode of speaking , familiar to every reader oif' the Jewish
Scriptures , the © feity 13 regfreaeiaied ia the character of a human lwnii ^ , and sometimes actually called a man ; . vrhat should pre ^ en 4 ; stbe s ^ red writers from occasionally reversing this order of things , and applying : to human beings , in a subordinate sense * epithets
which are strictly applicable ta the Deity alone ? That such applications are , frequently made in the Sacred writing's , is a fact which stands in need of scarcely a moment ' s illustration . The general term for God in Hebrew is CD > n ^ i This teism * . teowfcvef , is frequently applied : to men iu authority , and
( Exod . xv . II , xv i . 6 &c ., ) particularly to Moses ^ who ia styled agod to Pharaoh . ( JExod * viii » l . y Another familiar appellation of the Deity is cd ^ t ^ ^ or Lord . This ^ too , i& repeatedly applied to human beings ; to Abraham , Pharaoh ,. Pol&phar * Joseph , Moses . Sisera and others . But there
are certain .- epithet ^ which are peculiarly applicable to God , and , therefore , never extended ta human beings . Among these may be enumerated Xehovuhy Jehovah God i God ofiHo $ U the Living God * the Blessed God , the Only Wise God , and the Most High God * These , and others of the same
kind , being ? , in the strictest sense , characteristk ? designations of the true God , there wouteL be the same impropriety in applying them to human he <» ings , as in extending to the Deity the terms , cm ** and t ^ j ^ , which are pecu ^ liarly descriptive of man as an > interior and- dependent bein $ ffc The Deity ^ when considered as invested with the
attribute o £ almighty power 9 is styjeid God Almighty , car God of Hmts ; aiid * accordingly , the Seventy have translated these epithets , by \ the ^ wowl . IIi » y-TOK ? paKTMt > ^ ( Almighty ^) j ! j ^ X ^\ l about a hundred and : twenty times ; : but they , are ) never , applied to any except the Supreuui B ^ ingi * There ie an
obvim >><* We have tto ^ reasb ii ^ . Yates well obsei » v ^ es , € ' to consider the wdrdi € > m $ ghip \ a « im ^^ tiie- sainie Withi ^ J 4 te migM&t ? them boiu ^ m > less a » tlifffcrenoe between die siguificsunoits of theae two
Untitled Article
96 Bfr . f ¥ atta £ tf& Remarks on Imiahix ^ 6 , x %
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1824, page 96, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2521/page/32/
-