Page images

morrow who Jehovah will do this thing in the land. And • Jehovah did this thing on the morrow nanoo. What, in Exod. xv. 23 ? To-morrow who is the rest of the holy sab6 bath.

Again, Exod. xix. 10, ‘Go unto the people and sanctify them ' to-day and to-morron ano, 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 ninao wbich 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 ; 7177278712 on the day following.'

op to arise, is opposed to ibe verb 23w to lie down. Thou • shalt speak of them in thy lying down, and in thy rising up,' Deut. vi. 7, 70127 3w21.

- When í lie down nasw I say when shall I arise 1px' Job viii. 4. “Man lies doron 300 • and rises not' DIPN), ch. xiv. 12. It is equally evident that the words noipa and 723v. in Gen. xix. 33, 35, are thus opposed; the one meaning “ to lie down,' the other ' to rise up.' bip 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.'

379289 by their father.' 'Unknown to their father,' says Mr. Bellamy, in his usual manner. o prefixed to a noun is never used to signify unknown. The true and primary meaning ofo is correctly said by Mr. B. to be ' from,' a sense wbich is strictly proper in the present instance. The efficient cause is frequently signified by a word with o 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 warrative 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. Tbe 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.

[ocr errors]

never means

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

• The word Ort'un 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 mean. ing, See Job xxx. 4, 7.-Now whether we take on'w sichim, under now siyich, or now 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 sup, port, and for information.-nin tachath, because of.--And on 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 enw 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 fru

communication, nor 778 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.

Gen. xxii. 2, has universally been considered as containing. a command from the Deity to Abraham, to offer up bis 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 moun. tains 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 suhverts 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 my 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 3 lamed rendered for! In the other five instances in which ys it occurs in this chapter, Mr. B. has himself rendered it, for a burnt offering ; although for some capricious purpose, be has rendered it in verses 3d and 6th of the offering ; and mp3 sobem, v. 13, a phrase precisely parallel with ny bymn 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 18th verses : Now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou 6 hast not withbeld thy son, thine only son from me.' To what can this refer but to the antecedent requirement, whicb was intended to try the faith of the Patriarch ? and where is this to be found but in the 2d verse, according to the correct tran-de ,בנך relates to the preceding noun והעלהו afix in the verb

slation of the Common Version ? That this translation is accurate, will most satisfactorily appear to every person competent to the investigation of the text. my gnalah means a burnt

offering; when it occurs with a s lamed prefixed, its signification is, ' for a burnt offering,' and whien a noun or pronoun precedes the word with or without a verb, the person or thing signified by the noun or pronoun, is the subject offered, the by gnalah, or 'burnt offering.' Lev. ix. 2, mbys been and

a ram for a burnt offering.' In Gen. xxii. 13, the word gnalah bus with a lamed 3 prefixed occurs, and is rendered by Mr. B.' for a burnt offering ;' the subject of this burnt offering was a ram, 3o, to which the pronoun in the compound word 103 en relates, which is correctly rendered and he offered it for a 'burnt offering? The construction in the 2d verse is identically the same. mbys gnalah with 3 lamed prefixed, cannot have any other meaning than, 'for a burnt offering ;'--the pronominal

, noting the subject of the my gnalah, burnt offering,' the entire clause therefore can only be construed and read as in the Common Version, and offer him ( i. e. 732 thy son) for • a burnt offering.'

• V. 12. For now I know that thou fearest God. The translators have rendered the word say yerea, thou fearest, which is wrong. It is the third person singular preter in kal, literally, he feareth, or reverenceth, viz. that Isaac feared God.'

Mr. Bellamy should have consulted his grammar (from which he has much to learn) before he pronounced the translation of this word in the Common Version, to be wrong.' Hy in this place is not the third person singular preter in kal; but the participle present construed with the second personal pronoun nu thar, and is correctly translated in the Public Version, • thou fearest God.' The translators knew their business a great deal better than Mr. Bellamy.

Ch. xxv. 8. ' He wus gathered unto his people.' From this expression, Mr. Bellamy attempts to silence the objection that the writings of Moses do not say any thing concerning a future state.

• But were this passage attentively read by them (the objectors,) they would be obliged to acknowledge their error. Abraham, as to his mortal body, was not gathered to his people; he was a Chaldean, and his ancestors were buried in his native place in Chaldea ; thus it plainly means that the soul of Abraham was gathered to those just men the patriarchs, who in succession had taught the people to worship God; who like him received the divine commands from the mercy-seat; also to all those who had departed in the true faith : hence the propriety of the expression, and was gathered unto his people.'

Mr. Bellamy is a very unfortunate man. In this very chapter he has inforined us, that the sacred writer is silent respecting Ishmael's having any thing to do with the true worship of God; that Ishmael did not labour in establishing the true worship of God'; and yet this same expression is used in reference to him! he (Ishmael), was gathered to his people, ch. xxv. 17: What becomes of his attempt to convince objectors of their error? and here we cannot help referring to Mr. Bellamy's insolent declamation against the authors of the Common, Ver. sion, whom he charges with rendering ch. iii. 22, so as to encourage the belief that death is an eternal sleep.' King James's translators have presented us a Bible replete with proofs of a future life. A resurrection both of the just and the unjust, and a judgement to come, occupy a prominent place in their Translation, as the solemn doctrines of inspired men, fidels reject the whole Bible, disputing its Divine authority. Do they reject it, under the idea that it teaches an eternal sleep in death and impunity for sin ? Our Author knows that their reasons for rejecting it are of a totally different nature, and his insinuations are therefore most disgraceful to him. Men of the greatest seriousness, men full of Christian hope as to futurity, have professed themselves unable to perceive in Gen. iii. 22, the doctrine of a life to come; nor, bold as he is in declamation, does it appear from Mr. Bellamy's capricious and incorrect version of the passage.

• Ch. xxvi. 29, That thou wilt do us no hurt. 1794 raagnah, is translated hurt, but this vowel form of the word has no such meaning in scripture. It signifies to feed, Jer. i. 19; Ezek. xxxiv. 23, he shall feed; Mich, v. 4, and feed, so that the translators have mistaken the meaning.'

For the translation in the Common Version Mr, Bellamy substitutes, * If thou wilt procure supply before us.' Had be been able to distinguish a noun from a verb, he would have discerned the correctness of the Common Version, and seen the.. futility of his reference. “This vowel form of the word, occurs in numerous instances, in all of which, evil, or hurt, or injury, is unquestionably its meaning, and this meaning Mr. Bellamy himself gives to this vowel form of the word' in ch. xxxvii. 2, evil!

Mr. Bellamy, we bave already seen, opposes the representations of two Apostles ; he is hardy enough to contradict a third, the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who informs us that “ for uias Bpwoews one meal Esau sold bis birth-right." But, says, our Hebraist, it is absurd to suppose that Esau

could sell bis birth-right for a mess of pottage. The text says, that Esau being faint and ready to die, acceded to Jacob's solicitations to part with his birth-right for an immediate supply of food. Mr. Bellamy says, that Esau had rendered himself ineligible to succeed to the office of the priesthood, and this is

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »