and modern.' Whatever we might be disposed to wish on the subject, we are quite convinced that there is authority for the sense which the Translators have given to the narrative, not only in the Hebrew, but also in the Greek of the New Testament, which this vain and random Author, in his haste to run down the Translators and Commentators, appears to have forgotten. "The filthy conversation of the wicked," 2 Pet, ii. 7, TT ἀθέσμων ἐν ἀσελγειᾳ ἀναστροφῆς; : fornication and going after STRANGE FLESH Jude 7, εκπορνεύσασαι, και απελθούσαι οπίσω σαρκος Eripas, seem very positively to determine the case: Mr. Bellamy, must, therefore, first set aside the authority of the Apostles. Nor has the writer of the Pentateuch left it doubtful in what sense the verby is to be understood in such an application as the present. The word o saneerim, which has been rendered to mean external blindness is so translated,' Mr. B. informs us, ' only in one place, except this (Gen. xix. 11.) in all the Scripture.' Does he not know that the word occurs only in these two passages in the whole Bible? Again: The word in hikon, The tells us) in this verse (Gen. xix. 11.) which is rendered, they smote, is also applied by the sacred writers to the mind." 'See Prov. xv. 13;-xvii. 22;-xviii, 14.' The reader will have long to look, before he finds 12 hikon, in these passages. Another and very different verb is used in all of them.

Ch. xix. 30. Then Lot ascended from Zoar, and he dwelt in 8 mountain, also both his daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and both his daughters.

31. Now the first born said to the younger, our father is old; moreover not a man is in the land, to come to us, as is the custom, of all the land.

32. Therefore we will drink wine, with our father, then we will abide from him: thus we shall preserve posterity, after our father.

33. So they drank wine with their father that same night: when the first born went where she abode from her father, but he knew not where she abode, neither when she married.

34. Now it was in after time, that the first born said to the younger; Behold, I abode in time past, from my father: we will drink wine also this night, then go abide from him; thus we shall preserve posterity after our father.

35. Then they drank wine also that night, with their father: and the younger married, and abode from him; but he knew not where she abode, neither when she married.

36. Thus both the daughters of Lot conceived unknown to their father.'

If our readers wish to see a perfect specimen of the ridiculous, we recommend them to peruse the notes appended to our Author's translations of these verses. Who but he could ever bave ventured on such assertions as the following? Lot was a priest of the ancient church which was established by Noah.' Lot retired to a place of worship on a mountain not far from Zoar

< where he dwelt in a meadow.' The meadow, or glebe land <of the tabernacle on this mountain was the place to which Lot retired.'' Here it was that at the evening oblation the daughters of Lot contrived successively to leave their father, and to < marry with the idolaters of Zoar.' Passing over these rhapsodies, we proceed to examine his Hebrew criticisms.

6

,is rendered in the Common Version לכה נשקה את אבינו יין

"Come let us make our father drink wine:" Mr. Bellamy renders it, Therefore we will drink wine with our father." The obvious translation of npw' he says, 'is not, let us make drink, as in the Public Version, but we will drink and then the word n eth, which is omitted in the Common Version, has its reading, viz. we will drink wine, neth. with our father.'

The obvious translation of pw, is not-we will drink: that might have seemed obvious' if the verb had been in the kal conjugation; but the verb is in Hiphil, and cannot be translated as he has done. 5 is a particle of exhortation, come; it cannot be rendered therefore.'

.עמה וישכב

rendered in the Common Version, And we will lie with him,' Mr. Bellamy translates, then we will abide from him; a most violent construction, altogether remote from the sense of the original. The verb 5 never means, to abide, nor is it ever used in any such way as Mr. Bellamy's' Translation imports. He attempts to cover his perversion of the term, by affectedly informing the reader, that agreeably to 'the idiom' it means to abide. What does he mean by idiom?" His rendering is in opposition to all idiom. The 1 vau affixed to by is the masculine pronoun in agreement with 18, and the verb 5 never is used to denote absence from the person signified by the pronoun in accordance with it, but invariably marks the greatest nearness; to lie with him,' to lie with her.' And he lay with her, Gen. xxx. 16. 'If a man 'entice a woman that is not betrothed and my lie with her,' Exod. xxii. 16. It were easy to cite numerous parallel passages. Abide from me,' would be an excellent rendering of Gen. xxxix. 7, 12; and again, he came to me to abide from 6 me,' as the version of 'py aɔwb bu xa, v. 14. If 25 with y signify to abide from,' why does not Mr. Bellamy render the expressions, Gen. xxxix. 7, 12, 14, to abide from?" We repeat that the words are never used in this manner, and Mr. Bellamy therefore stands convicted of corrupting the sacred text. 'And it came to pass on the morrow." This, we are told, is not the correct rendering of the passage: 6 to-morrow is not "the true meaning of the word nano mimaacharath :_ it signi"fies an indefinite time.' What does it mean then in Exod. ix. 5, 6? And Jehovah appointed a set time saying, To

morrow

Jehovah will do this thing in the land. And

Jehovah did this thing on the morrow no.' What, in Exod. xv. 23? To-morrow is the rest of the holy sab

'bath.'

6

Again, Exod. xix. 10, Go unto the people and sanctify them to-day and to-morrow, and let them wash their clothes, and be ready against the third day.' 1 Sam. xx. 27. When

the new moon was come, &c.-And it came to pass on the morrow which was the second day of the month, &c.' To deny that the proper meaning of the word is to-morrow, should seem to have required more than Mr. B.'s usual audacity. Onkelos, too, gives a definite and limited meaning to the expression; on the day following.'

.ובשכבך ובומך,7 .Deut. vi

6

Dp to arise, is opposed to the verb 22w to lie down. Thou 'shalt speak of them in thy lying down, and in thy rising up,' When I lie down as I say when shall I arise □ps, Job viii. 4. 'Man lies down w and rises not' p, ch. xiv. 12. It is equally evident that the words 2 and 2 in Gen. xix. 33, 35, are thus opposed; the one meaning to lie down,' the other to rise up.' p is one of the most common words in the Hebrew language, but there is not a single instance of its occurring in the sense of marrying, or, to marry.' Rising up' is the only rendering of which it admits in the passage before us. A more bold but more shameful assertion was never hazarded, than that the word op embraces in the strictest sense the act of marriage.';

6

s by their father.'' Unknown to their father,' says Mr. Bellamy, in his usual manner. prefixed to a noun is never used to signify unknown. The true and primary meaning of is correctly said by Mr. B. to be from,' a sense which is strictly proper in the present instance. The efficient cause is frequently signified by a word with mem prefixed, and this is the manner in which it is employed in this passage.

With the facts of this narrative we are as strongly disgusted as Mr. Bellamy can be; but we cannot make this disgust a reason for subverting the plain meaning of words; we cannot permit our feelings to dictate a priori the sense which any narrative in the Bible shall assume; we must take its records as they are left us, and interpret them according to the rules of sound philology, apart from all such considerations.

Mr. Bellamy meddles with the narratives of the Bible only to distort them. This mischievous propensity discovers itself throughout the whole of his progress as a translator. The story of Hagar and Ishmael is related with great simplicity and effect by the sacred writer, and the Common Version is substantially a fair representation of the original. In Mr. Bellamy's version, it is a perfect riddle.

• Ch. xxi. 15. When the water in the bottle was spent, then she left the lad for another communication.'

The word nun ha sichim, is translated shrubs; I shall confine myself to the literal meaning of the word, as I find it necessarily translated in other parts of scripture. This sense is only given in two places beside this, in neither of which can it possibly have any such meaning, See Job xxx. 4, 7.-Now whether we take on sichim, under n siyich, or an sichah; it means, to be depressed, to be sorrowful; and in this state of mind, to be left to religious meditation.-Hence it appears, that she in her trouble made an application to God by the priest of the tabernacle-to procure what was necessary for his support, and for information.-nin tachath, because of. And 8 achad the same as in Ezek. xxxiii. 30, another. The preposition then truly reads agreeably to the original, and the obvious meaning of the sacred writer thus; Then she left the lad because of another communication.'

As to an ha sichim, we would advise Mr. Bellamy to refresh his memory by looking into his own Translation, where he will find that he has himself rendered now by plant,' 'every "plant of the field,' Gen. ii. 5. We have thus his own authority for reading plant,' or shrub; we need only, add that w never means communication,' nor without dependence on a foregoing word, another; we therefore dismiss his "because of another communication,' as one of his absurd novelties, and adhere to the rendering of the Common Version.

6

Gen. xxii. 2, has universally been considered as containing a command from the Deity to Abraham, to offer up his son Isaac as a burnt offering, and this circumstance is usually represented as constituting the great trial of the Father of the Faithful. But says our great Hebrew Reformist, 'It is not possible to suppose any thing of the kind.' According to him, Abraham was directed to repair to a tabernacle at Salem, for the purpose of directing the inauguration of Isaac as the representative of the Messiah before the great congregation at Salem; the officiating priest of this tabernacle having the preparation and conducting of the sacrifices on the occasion! Now all this we might believe, had the sacred writer recorded any thing of the kind; but we cannot believe it on the simple word of Mr. Bellamy. Where is there a syllable about a tabernacle at Salem, or a great congregation, or the inauguration of Isaac, or an officiating priest, or a sacrifice prepared at Salem? Assuredly not in the narrative contained in the first nineteen verses of the 22d Ch. of Genesis. Mr. Bellamy's own translation of this part of the Bible, shall however be laid before our readers, as it will prove the matchless folly of its Author.

1. Now it was after these transactions, that God proved Abraham: and he said to him, Abraham, and he answered, Here am I.

2. Thus he said, Take now thy son, thine only one whom thou' Jovest, even Isaac, and depart; go to the land of Moriah: and cause him to ascend there concerning the offering, upon one of the mountains which I will mention to thee.

3. So Abraham rose early in the morning and girded his ass, then he took two of his youths with him; also with Isaac his son: now he had divided the wood of the offering, then they arose and went to the place of which God spake to him.

4. And on the third day, Abraham raised his eyes, and he 'saw the place afar off.

5. Also Abraham said to his youths, Abide you here with the ass, and I with the youth will go yonder: for we will worship, then we will return to you.

6. Now Abraham took the wood of the offering, which he laid upon Isaac his son; also he took in his hand, the fire, and the knife: then they went both of them together.

7. Moreover Isaac spake to Abraham his father, and he said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son: then he said, Behold the fire, and the wood; but where is the lamb, for a burnt offering?

8. And Abraham replied; God will provide before him the lamb, for a burnt offering, my son: thus they went both of them together.

9. When they came to the place which God had mentioned to him, for Abraham had built there an altar; then he laid the wood in order, and he bound Isaac his son, and laid him upon the altar on the wood. 10. Now Abraham put forth his hand, and took the knife to slay

his son.'

This translation furnishes in itself a complete refutation of the note. There were no spectators of the transaction on the mountain, exclusive of the parties themselves, Abraham and his son Isaac. Abraham took with him wood, and fire, and a knife, the materials for sacrifice, which proves that he did not know of any tabernacle, or priest, or sacrifice, already prepared, and subverts at once Mr. Bellamy's dictum, that the command to Abraham in the 2d verse, should be read, and bring him to a 'burnt offering.' As for Mr. Bellamy's remark, that the lamed prefixed to by gnalah, requires the same rendering as in Gen. iii. 21, to, the reader may look into Mr. Bellamy's Bible at Gen. iii. 21, where he will find lamed rendered for! In the other five instances in which by it occurs in this chapter, Mr. B. has himself rendered it, for a burnt offering; although for some capricious purpose, he has rendered it in verses 3d and 6th of the offering; and b, v. 13, a phrase precisely parallel with by by in the 2d verse, he translates by he offered it up for a burnt offering instead of his son!" Abraham then must have prepared to offer up his son' as a burnt offering. The original Hebrew gives us in fact no other sense than that of the Common Version: Offer him there "for a burnt offering;' which is confirmed by the 12th and 16th verses : 'Now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from me.' To what can this refer but to the antecedent requirement, which was in'tended to try the faith of the Patriarch? and where is this to be found but in the 2d verse, according to the correct tran