On this page

• Text (1)

  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.

  • 

    Untitled Article

• 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

    arrangement of words , should bestow so many appellations upon the person by whom the name was to be given , and only one upon the individual named ? It is contrary to common sense . ( 7 ) / The LXX . have thus translated the words : "And his name

    shall be called Messenger of the great Council ; for I will bring peace upon the rulers / 1 —I think that the LXX ., terrified by the majesty of the names , durst not say of the child what are evidently names of the Supreme Being $ but for the six names have given

    what is not in the Hebrew—angel or messenger of the great council , &c . But they have taken Wonderful CounseHpr for Wonderful Council ; the wards 11 a ^ h > & , the component parts of the name Gabriel , they have understood <^* that illustrious angel , whence they have translated angel ; the rest

    they have expressed as if they had read t = nbw iu > bv K > 1 K , and what is added , and health to him , or , as Jerome reads it , and his health , is a gloss , from another interpretation of some one who for nn ^ oV , which begins the next verse , read KEHD ^ . See Cappellus and Vitringa .

    Remarks . C , ) The force of this reasoning is not obvious . The two words nina b& appear to follow . each other only twice in the Bible—Isaiah ix . 6 , and x . 21 . We cannot reason , therefore , from the regimen of the words in one

    case , that the same must necessarily be the case in the other also . Dr . Smith ' s assertion , that " wherever the two words occur together , they are invariably connected as substantive and adjective in the same order , "—

    wtaud naturally imply that there are mknysubh instances . But , with the exception of one passage , in all the imtances which he cites , either some Other adjective is employed , or some other adjective intervenes . 2

    C ) What can be more absurd than to attempt to explain passages of the Jevyish Sqriptures by the leading dogin ^ of He athenism $ to borrow , in short , from a system which denied

    the unchangeableness and unity of the Deity , illustrations of the perfections of the God of Israel , who in innumerable passages declares these to be his essential attributes ? The agreement between the doctrines of the

    Untitled Article

    Jesuit Missionaries and the religion of the Eastern nations , only proves either that , with more knowledge , they sinfully accommodated the gospel to the prejudices of those whom

    they instructed , or that their own convictions were influenced ^ by Heathenish conceptions . This is not the only example which the Christian Church presents of the combination of pure Christianity with the reveries of Pagan superstition .

    ( 3 ) iy It would be difficult-toc . prove that the metaphysical idea of duration absolutely without end , is included in this Hebrew word . Ini the following passage it clearly is not ,

    Job . xx . iv . The fact is , that it expresses indefinite future duration , arid in this respect is somewhat allied to the scriptural usage of aiwv . Mr . Wallace ^ translation does not , I

    think , come up to the force of the original . Ami / requires fuXXot >< r <* in order to express futurity , whereas the above Hebrew word does not . ( 4 ) One does not see any great propriety for the caution here ex >

    pressed by our orthodox critic . It is necessary , indeed , to the system of interpretation , to which such an analogical explication would be fatal . There would be greater propriety in the caution if the appellation had been found in the narrative of the book of

    Genesis . ( 5 ) This rule will generally hold good , because the nominative to * Op * is not usually expressed , or it consists of one noun only . The common usage of the Hebrew language , by which the verb precedes its nominative , occasions the only ambiguity of

    the passage . ( 6 ) That no implicit reliance should be placed on the Masoretic punctuation , has been admitted by critics of profound learning and sound judgment . As an argument with

    Rosenmuller , it may ]> e urged , that we may fairly presume that the Chaldee interpreter would be as well acquainted with the traditionary eiCplanation of the passage , as the IVTasorites themselves , whom he preceded by several

    centuries . Or , if it be admitted that the Masoretic punctuation reflects the sense attributed to this passage from before the time when this paraphrase was made , it must also , one would suppose , be admitted that he , as well

    Untitled Article

    12 Translation of RosenmutlerU Notes on Isaiah ix . 5 ,. ¦ -6 , v&th % R $ markgi

• Citation
  • Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Jan. 2, 1825, page 12, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2532/page/12/