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
authority for understanding the ** angel of the covenant" in the same sense / as the parallelism seems to requirp ; We would compare with this expression Isa . Ixiiw 9 , " the ttngel of his presence saved them , ' * where the angel of his presence is God himself , manifesting himself by some sensible sign , and cannot possibly be understood of any distinct being ; and Gen . xlviii . 15 , 16 , God before whom my fathers did walk , the God which fed me all my
life long unto this day , the angel which redeemed me from all evil , bless the lads "—where no one can doubt that the angel means God himself , in reference to his sensible manifestations of himself to Jacob . Upon the whole , we do not hesitate to pronounce our author ' s attempt to identify our Lord Jesus Christ with the angel of Jehovah , and thence with Jehovah himself , to
be-a total failure , and incapable or anording satisfaction to any inquiring mind ; whilst the general view of the nature of the passages referred to on the subject , which Mr . Belsham has given , is at once rational and consistent in itself , and abundantly established by their examination in detail .
The section on the pluralisms is highly creditable to Dr . S . for the candour and caution as well as the learning and ingenuity which it displays , and we think he has made the most that is possible of a very dubious and obscure argument . We must observe , however , that as he only contends for an intimation of plurality of persons , which may not , he acknowledges , have been understood by the majority of the Jewish people 9 which even inspired
prophets may not have fully comprehended ^ and which he cannot prove to have been so understood by any of the ancient Jews , his argument at best is only applicable in confirmation of other evidence : but we deny that he has produced , or that any one can produce , any such evidence from the Old Testament , and we feel fully authorized in contenting ourselves with the information which is directl y afforded us , without disturbing ourselves about fancied intimations ^ that is , obscure and uncertain hints , which we
find opposed to the plain and ( setting aside these supposed hints ) uniform language of the Jewish sacred writings . And , moreover , though we think Dr . S . has shewn that the rule of Hebrew syntax respecting the use of- the plural number to express dominion , dignity , or honour , is not very definitel y established , or of very general application , we can by no means allow that he has sufficiently explained on other principles all the alleged instances ,
or even satisfactorily shewn , supposing that the idiom were observable only in the names of the true God , now it can support the Trinitarian doctrine , since if plurality is at all implied , it must be plurality of beings—plurality of Gods . The notion of different persons in one essence is one which would never occur to any mind without being very distinctly expressed , and of which no conception whatever could be obtained in the way of intimation .
The explanation proposed by our author of the frequent use of the word CDO ^ TK , ( adonim , ) lords , ( the plural for the singular , ) as applied to human beings is , that the word was originally a name of God , and being secondarily applied to human possessors of authority , retained the form which belonged to its primar y use : but no reason or authority whatever can be adduced to
shew that the word was at first a peculiar name of the Supreme Being : its meaning would render it equally applicable to God and man , and it is applied to both in the singular form also ; we are therefore justified in concluding , that whatever may have been the origin of the anomaly of the use of the plural form in a singular sense , it was something not peculiar to one application , qf the word , but common to all the cases in which the anomaly is observed * The use of Baalim , ( owners , masters , husbands , ) in the . plural , with a
Untitled Article
33 $ DrJ . P . Smith ' s Scripture Testimony to the'Messiah .
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), May 2, 1831, page 336, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2597/page/48/
-