« AnteriorContinuar »
flers with an address to the Jews which appeared in the last number of Israel's Advocate: otherwise than by paragraph, accompanying its answer. Assuring our readers, that, in that way, the whole is given literally. "To The Jews. — I am aware that Israel's Advocate is intended to prove, by
works of kindness, that those who are ians, love their elder brethren the
Jews. I have been well pleased with the friendly spirit manifested in the answer of the Jew to Camden and G. F. The Editor of the Jew is commendable for candour."
"I am poor in thanks,"—Candor! is a compliment which may with truth be paid to Judaism, not to the Jew. Moses, informs us Deu. xxxii. 8-9. "When the Most High caused the nations to be inherited ; when he parted the children of men; he placed the bounds of the people against the number of the Children of Israel. For the Lord's portion is his people, Jacob is the line of his inheritance." Here we arc taught, that mankind were divided into inheritances, of which the Lord took Israel as his portion, to serve him. But we do not therefore hold, thinkor believe, that our being chosen, works the exclusion of the Gentiles; far from it. Of all nations he who worketh righteousness, is assured of acceptation to life everlasting. And our being chosen was not for our exclusive benefit, but for the general benefit of all mankind: that through us all may, (and they certainly will,) be brought to the knowledge of Truth. Jezvs mast become teachers of righteousness, A Kingdom Of Priests. Ex. xix. 6. And therefore our sufferings were necessary: that we might teach by example as well as precept, and will tend to the glory of God, and the salvation of the world.
The gods of the Gentiles, those to whom they were severally divided, may by them, be worshipped, at present, without their committing any sin thereby. And we would only warn them, for their own safety, not to join the God of the Jews, in fellowship with other gods: they may acknowledge him alone, and serve him without the covenant of Israel, they may serve others as mediators, if they are inclined, (those to whom they were divided,) but the Eternal Self Existent! the God of the Jews, must be worshipped alone. Thus much of the Candour of Judaism.
"Camden, and G. F. seem indisposed to reply to objections made by the Jews; because controversy is liable to be unpleasant, and do more hum than good. And the pacific disposition of the editor of Israel's Advocate has declared himself opposed to controversy in a paper devoted to the information of those who are favourable to ameliorating the state of the Jew!."
Camden and G. F. should have considered this before they suffered their productions to appear before) the public as addresses to the Jews. When they did ap pear they of course elicited an answer; for if none had been given, it might hare been supposed there was no answer to give. Their not replying may proceed from the unpleasantness of controversy, or rather, as I should suppose, from the satisfactory nature of the answer: of this our readers must judge.
As to the works of kindness and pacific disposition of the editor of Israels Advocate, we would with pleasure acknowledge, if we could see any thing like it; if such are his feelings, he has the strangest of all methods to shew them.
You my brother have no such fear, and in my humble opinion you are correct; there can be no unpleasantness in the controversy of love, the search of truth can do no harm, even should neither party be convinced, the arguments will be before the public, who are the only legitimate judges. Let us say controversy is the sieve of vanity; we ought not to fear its shaking, the principal wheat, the heavy grain will not thereby receive damage: the foul seed will indeed fall through, the chaff and light grain, may be carried away by the wind, and should the heavy grain come in contact by the shaking of the sieve no farther harm can happen than the loosening the dust and rust which by time all have contracted. Vital religion is not endamaged by the loss of superstition, and thus all parties may be gainers by the controversy without harm to any.
"But, perhaps the editor will permit me to say a few things for the purpose of showing how the son, according to human nature, may, as it respects the divine nature, be the everlasting father, or prince of peace; and consequently, as to the new covenant, a most holy prince of his spirtual Israel, whose circumcision is of the heart, and whose sacrifices are broken hearts and contrite spirits. That the son in one sense, is the father in another, is proved by Isa. ix. 6, and xi. 10."
H-.»nce arises another question, if the son in one sense, is the father in another, then the father and son are one person ; how then do you teach three persons? why not three senses in one person ? for the whole difference (according with the above) is in the sense, and not in the person: and in this case, a plurality of senses, instead of the plurality of persons, should be taught. "That the son in one sense, is the father in another," is not proved from Isa. ix. 6. even allowing your reading of that text; because, as I have heretofore shewn, that among Jews, children are commonly called by such names.
I am thankful for this opportunity of explaining Isa. ix. 6. having lately read that strange production, called, "Memoir of the Rev. Joseph Wolf," wherein, the Jews' readings, explanations, and arguments, are invariably misrepresented. Wolf, as is usual in desultory conversation, appears to have paid too little attention to the arguments of his opponents, or, had not a sufficient quick apprehension of the language used. and consequently, he gives us the Jew side, in a disguised, awkward, and weak state. The question on this text, stands thus.
Bible translation. Isa. ix. 6. "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given : and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."
: ah&-*w ~\% ♦?« nai Sn }>yi' *6§ 1a?
^rad which the Jews translate "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the Wonderful, the Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, HAS CALLED his name the Prince of Peace.'' And this child, the Jews say, was king Hezekinh, who was a child at the time of the delivery of this prophecy; and who, afterwards, was made king, and consequently, the rule was on his shoulders. And they
object against the ian explanation that the whole; fore part of
the prophecy is in the present and past tense, IS BORN, IS GIVEN: and thej' say that Kip"! is not as translated in the English Bible, And bis name shall be called, but that it is, and should have been translated, And he called his name.
To the above explanation Wolf objects, that according to the construction of the Hebrew language (if it should be so explained) it should stand thus :—
Hence it appears, Wolf did not comprehend the explanation, he re fers to his dictionary and concordance, when he ought to be acquainted sufficiently with the language, to do without a dictionary; but I shall proceed as if I am speaking to an English ear, who has learnt the Hebrew by lexicon and the rules of grammar, and therefore hope to make myself better understood: the verb is topi this verb Jews invariably translate, indicative, past, third person singular—consequently, and he called; and look for a noun agreeing therewith, this they find to be the Wonderful, the Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father: and I say that Wolf's construction is not according to the idiom of the HebreSv, wherein the noun may come after the verb, to prove which, we want no concordance, nor lexicon, we have only to* open the bible, in the very first page of which we find D'pSx Xip'l and God called, here the verb iop'1 and he called, in the Hebrew proceeds its noun D'p^K God Gen. i. 5. I chose this verse, because it is the same verb Nip'! but in truth, several preceding verses have their nouns
agreeing with, and following their verbs as D'pSx S03 God created, ts'pbx intn and God said, D'pSx XTi and God saw. Indeed this is the most general method of expression. I might here give a long list of the verb jnp'i (but it must be unnecessary) translated in the Bible, and he called, where the noun agreeing follows as in Isaiah ix. 5. let the following suffice, Gen. i. 9.—11—20 xxv. 1. and lastly, Levit. x. 1. "And the Lord called unto Moses," &c. Here the verb JOpM is the first word of the sentence, and its noun " The Lord," does not appear till after the next verb in the same tense, number and person. i3T1 and he spake, so that it should have been translated, "and the
Lord called and spake to Moses." But ians with the English
translation render the verbwmp,i in Isaiah xviii. 8. imperative future, third person, shall be called, but this their Hebraists cannot, neither will they defend, no matter what lexicon, dictionary, or concordance they use. Thus my brother, you perceive how the question stands between us on that text in Isaiah.
And the context shows the Jews are correct, in saying Hezekiah Is intended by Isaiah, and not Jesus. The prophet is giving an account, or foretelling the invasion of Judea by Sennacherib and his destruction. Of this he treats in the latter part of the 8th chapter, and "his destruction in the fore part of the 9th ; and on this he sings "The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light; they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined." By the destruction of the army of Sennacherib, the Jews will see a great light and enlargement, as heretofore explained, No. 2. Vol. II. pa. 296. The Prophet foreseeing all that eventuated in consequence of the destruction of this invading armj, addressed God in these words: "Thou hast multiplied the nation, and not increased the joy: they joy before thee according to the joy in hearvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil." And here there is a karee, mvlkasib; the Bible translates as it is written, "And not increased the joy;" and this may appear enigmatical, for the joy appears perfect, since they in that day, rejoiced before God in Jerusalem, on the destruction of the besieging army, as men rejoice in harvest, and as men rejoice who divide the spoil: they did indeed rejoice with a perfect joy., and did divide the spoil of Sennacherib's army, which was destroyed : and therefore, the karee iSl which is affirmative, "thou didst to him increase the joy," and it will again be so read on the coming of the Messiah when our joy will be perfect. But at present, the English Bible is correct, as it is written,." and not increased the joy;" for after this salvation under Hezekiah, the joy of Israel has no fur
ther been increased; we have been in captivity from the time of his son Manasseh, to this our day—and therefore, also the next karee and kasib, verse 6. which is written naiD1? with a final men, making for the present reading, two words n:n D"? which is rather a dividing the rule or government Ds to, or in favour of that nation called 31 Ds Gen. xxv. 23. yDN'1 Dksd Dnsi this also, must not be altered till the coming of the Messiah our righteousness, as the English has it, when will be fulfilled, "\yi lay ail the greater will serve the lesser.
Hence may be perceived the necessity of leaving the sacred page as we find it. And the English Bible society have done wrong, by putting an open, instead of a final letter, in the word naiO1? Isa. ix. I would think it sufficient to condemn the whole edition; and although I would rather see Hebrew Bibles without English or latin notes, or crosses in the margin, I would look over the notes, and call crosses single daggars, but should require the text to remain sacred, and not allow the most trifling alteration to take place. The Jews are the proper, and acknowledged guardians of the sacred text: We therefore, enter our public protest against the edition in question ; and with the Jerusalem Jews, pronounce it a perverted, and an unfaithful copy ; and every man, Gentiles as well as Jews, all who are in favour of the sacred preserva-% tion of the original text, will no doubt, do their duty. a
Isa. ix. 4—5. "For thou hast broken the yoke of his burden, and the - staff" of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, as in the day of Median. For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise, and garments rolled in blood ; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire." The burden of Sennacherib was indeed heavy, all Judea was conquered, except Jerusalem: and his overthrow was as perfect as the defeat of the Medianites, either in the days of Balaam, or their last defeat under Gideon, Judg. viii. which is here alluded to.
The defeat of Sennacherib was not like any other defeat; for it was without noise, and without bloodshed; for they were nil slain, to appearance, in a natural way, in one night, 180,000 men, the whole army died without noise, or bloodshed; and the burning and tire, may either intend the inward fever which consumed tlftm, or that the dead were consumed on funeral piles. Then follows our'text: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and the Wonderful, the Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, shall call his name, the Prince of Peace."
And even should we concede that these names, the Wonderful, the Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, as well as the Prince of Peace, are. the names of the child, still it that child, Heze