Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

are made to appear in all the translations, the last, as well as the preceding, would have been joined by the conjunction."*

"The Greek verb Kupw to be, to exist, expresses precisely the sense (havah) the Hebrew radix of; and I am therefore inclined to think with the learned Bishop Pearsont and some other critics, (indeed I have no doubt of the fact,) that the authors of the Septuagint version considered Kupios as standing in a similar relation to kvpw, as 7 to 17. That is, they did not employ Kupios as 'Lord,' when translating 7, but as a term expressive of existence or being, like the Hebrew term itself. Though Kupios be used both for Jehovah and Adonai in the Septuagint, a difference is sometimes made, as in Gen. xv, 2, 8, where 778 (Adonai Jehovah) is rendered dεσπота Kupiɛ, and in other places. It is also deserving of notice, that the Greek scribes were wont to distinguish the one word from the other, by writing on the margin the Hebrew word, when that was the one intended. From this circumstance the unmeaning word IIIIII had its origin, which is only a defective copy of the Hebrew word, read as Greek from left to right. According to Jerome this was common in the copies of his age; (Ep. 136;) and in some of the antient copies the word Jehovah was preserved in the Greek translations in its own Hebrew character. (Ep. 130.) It is curious enough that Origen's Hexapla underwent a similar metamorphosis, from the ignorance of transcribers. One of his columns exhibited the Hebrew words in Greek characters, of which some fragments have come down to us as quotations. In one of these the word Jehovah, in Malachi ii, 13, has been converted into πITI. We meet with the same change in the text of Isaiah printed by Curterius with the commentary of Procopius.-The method adopted by John precluded the possibility of such errors as arose from writing the word Jehovah on the margin. Like the Authors of the Septuagint he expresses this Hebrew name by the Greek word Kyrios; but, to prevent the possibility of being misunderstood, he instantly adds, as already noticed, a periphrasis of the word Jehovah, as a definition of the Greek term." Pp. 229 and 233.

הוה of

[merged small][ocr errors]

"Of the introduction of definitions I have already had occasion to take some notice; but it is necessary that we should here bestow some farther attention upon this subject, as the change of construction, with which these definitions and explanations are accompanied, has led critics who were not aware of their existence and use to charge the inspired penman with violations of grammar. In Rev. i, 4, John wishes the benediction of "grace and peace to the seven Churches in Asia, aπо 78 Ò ων και ὁ ην και ὁ ερχομενος,’—rendered in the common version, " From him which is, and which was, and which is to come." The Greek reader will at once perceive that the preposition aπo, which never governs any case but the genitive, after being here followed by an article in the genitive, is followed by three articles in the nominative case; and this will perhaps strike him with the more surprise from seeing, that the next words, kai Twv etta TWV ETTA πνευματων, and from the seven spirits,'

(C

[ocr errors]

follow the usual Greek construction: but his surprise will lessen when he reflects that ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ην και ὁ ερχομενος, represent here the indeclinable Hebrew noun

, Jehovah. The Hebrew not admitting, like the Greek, inflection in the oblique cases, the writer puts these defining terms in what a Grecian would call the nominative; but takes care to intimate, that they are to be taken as a genitive, by prefixing to them the article 78 in the genitive case."

"Instances of this kind occur frequently in the Apocalypse ; that is, words put in the nominative, where, from the intention of the Writer not

*The Reader will find in this Work a compendious but complete view of the important discussion which took place between Granville Sharp, Bishop Middleton, and others, on a particular rule which concerns the Greek article and the conjunction war; and the application thereof to the doctrine of the Trinity.

† On the Creed, p. 147, note. Fol. 1741.

having been understood by critics, they have objected to their accuracy in a grammatical point of view, insisting that they should have been put in another case. Thus in the 5th verse of the first chapter we read και απο Ιησε Χριστε ὁ μαρτυς ὁ πιστος, "and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness." Here the nouns Ince Xρiors are, according to regular usage, put in the genitive, being preceded by aπо, which never governs any other case; but the words that follow are in the nominative. The reason, though at first sight not so apparent, is at bottom the same as in the preceding example of this kind of construction ; ὁ μαρτυς ὁ πιστος representing here the indeclinable Hebrew noun 1p8, Amen, as may be seen in ch. iii, v. 14, where, having expressed the Hebrew word

K

in Greek letters-" thus saith THE AMEN" (ò any)—the writer instantly gives a Greek translation of the Hebrew term, adding ὁ μαρτυς ὁ πιστος ; 0 πιστος ; thereby intimating, that wherever he uses this Greek expression, he speaks of him, who, in the Old Testament Scriptures, is called "THE AMEN." It is owing to a similar cause that the words which follow these in the text, (namely о πрототоKOL.. o T τροτοτοκος. o apxwv, the first-born from the dead, and the prince or ruler,) are also found in the nominative. The Apostle here applies other two indeclinable Hebrew nouns to Jesus Christ, viz. bechor and by elioun, thus informing the reader that these epithets, applied to the Messiah in Psalm lxxxix, 27, belong to Jesus Christ, -or, in other words, that he alone is the Messiah; and by the other words which he introduces," from the dead," explaining the sense in which he is called "the first-born," in the Psalm from which John takes the epithet." Pp. 306, 309.

III. We have reserved for this head a distinct argument, which the Author advances for assigning an early date to the Apocalypse. It is derived from references to the Book of Daniel; which references, as he supposes, are to be found in all the Apostles.* This Book of Daniel, the Author argues, was "to be sealed till the time of the end;" and therefore previous to the end (which he considers the termination of the Mosaic dispensation, when

[ocr errors]

"C

Messiah made an end of sin; see Heb. ix, 26) it must have been unknown to the Apostles. Consequently, if the Apostles quote this Book, or indicate that its contents were understood by them, it could only be because this Book of Daniel is the identical little Book" of the Apocalypse, which the Lion of the tribe of Judah prevailed to open; and as it must have been opened and expounded to them anterior to their references to it, so by a necessary inference the Apocalypse must have likewise been prior to the Epistles containing such references.

The identity between the two Books he endeavours to establish by the following coincidences. 1st. The little Book was "written inside and outside." He supposes the outside characters to have been a something visible and intelligible to the Church; and he asserts it to be the subject of the song-“ Thou

C

hast made us unto our GoD kings

and priests, and we shall reign on the earth" and this also he conceives to be borrowed from Dan. vii, 25—27, in which it was promised, that the saints should possess the kingdom. 2d. He notices, that Daniel was commanded to seal his prophecies, and that the Book in the Apocalypse was sealed. 3rd. That as this sealing is seven times repeated in Daniel, so the little Book has seven seals. 4th. From the "little Book" being covered with writing, he infers its completeness; which denotes, that nothing could be added to the prophecy contained in it; and that the removal of the seals from Daniel was all that was wanted to give this knowledge. We doubt if some of these points of coincidence will be very obvious to our Readers; and we doubt still

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

* Take as an example 1 Thess. v, 2, and 2 Thess. ii, 3-5.

[ocr errors]

r

< C

""

more in regard to the seven times repeated declaration in Daniel to seal the Book. He considers it once sealed in chap. viii, 26; twice in ix, 24; twice in xii, 4; and twice in xii, 9. Thus the declaration, that seventy weeks are determined to seal up the vision and prophecy," he makes two seals. "Shut up the words and seal the book" are two more distinct sealshut up ings, being read thus: the words' "seal the book. “The words are closed up and sealed, &c." are two more! Such criticism as this is very unsatisfactory to our own mind: for who would conclude, were he ordered to shut or close up a letter and seal it, that he was to seal it twice, or that he had been twice commanded to do one thing? We greatly question likewise, whether the end," unto which the sealing is to continue in chap. xii, 4 and 9, be the termination of the Mosaic dispensation instanced by the Author. For first, Daniel is to rest till that end, which again is synchronous with the completion of the prophetical days named in the Prophecy;" (see chap. xii, 13;) and unless it can be shewn that Daniel rose from the dead and those days terminated with the close of the Mosaic dispensation, the Author's hypothesis must fall to the ground. There appears more cogency in the instance cited from chap. ix, 24-" seventy weeks are determined to seal up, &c."-since most commentators are agreed, that they terminated at the period above named: but then the first verse of the tenth chapter seems to justify the conclusion, that an entirely different vision and prophecy commences here.

"

<

[ocr errors]

We are presently afterwards startled with another bold hypothesis of the Author, concerning the Book, described in chap. v, 1,

as seen "in the hand of Him that sat on the throne." We will give it in the Author's own words :

"In the use of the prepositions John is so rigid, that unless a translator attends to them with great care, noting the case with which they are put in construction, he will often fail to express the sense of the original. In no point have translators failed more essentially than in this; giving a kind of school-boy version, which, in many instances, conjures up a false picture to the mind. Take the following as an instance: Ειδον επι την δεξιαν τε καθημενε επι τε θρονε βιβλιον. (ch.v,1.) Here the first ε is joined with an accusative, in which situation it never, in any instance, expresses position on or in place,-any thing resting in situ; yet all the versions have rendered these words thus: "I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book." Now the fact is-John did not see, nor does he say that he saw, a book in any hand whatever, either right or left. Had he meant to say so, he would, when employing the preposition ɛπɩ, have put the noun in the genitive. He tells us

επι,

Con

that he saw a book on or concerning a certain subject or topic; and informs us what this subject was, namely, "the right hand of the one sitting upon the throne." sequently the right hand' must not be taken in its proper sense, but in some other to which the Scripture is not a stranger. In one word, a little inquiry will satisfy the Reader, that he here employs the expression commonly used in the Old Testament for power :-he saw a treatise or work which had for its principal topic, "the power of the one sitting upon the throne." In fact, the text presents a strong Hebrew figure of speech, which escapes entirely the notice of the Reader, when the preposition is wrongly translated." P. 157.

[ocr errors]

This again is unsatisfactory to us. Though the rule is generally as the Author states it, the Author states it, yet we could instance several examples of επι governing the accusative when it signifies rest in situ: one however taken from this very book may suffice for the present case; viz. chap. xx, v. 1, wherein the angel is said to have a great chain in his hand," επι την χειρα αυτ8. Here there is no mention of the right hand;

" <<

[blocks in formation]

"One point in particular, respecting the structure of this remarkable prophecy, deserves great attention. A considerable portion of the particulars detailed by John, was not, as has been generally imagined, exhibited to him in dramatic action,-if, on such a subject, I may employ such a term. On the contrary, many of the things, which he states himself to have seen in the vision, were brought to his view, precisely as he intimates in the first verse of the first chapter; conμavev—they were symbolized to him: they were symbolical representations, such as he describes ; that is, pictures of some kind, contained in a book, which was unrolled before him. Had translators properly attended to the circumstance, that, in his part of the prophecy, especially from the beginning of the sixth to the end of the ninth chapter, John, besides describing the other circumstances of the vision, gives a detailed account of things, circumstances, and actions, seen by him in pictorial representations in the unsealed roll itself, they would perhaps have succeeded better in attaining the author's sense; and many of the sudden changes in moods and tenses which occur, and which hasty critics have presumed to stigmatize as arbitrary, capricious, and not to be accounted for, would have been seen to be perfectly appropriate, and absolutely required by the very nature of the detail." P. 172.

"Some commentators, mistaking entirely the nature and object of the sealed book, conceive the Apocalypse to be "divided

into two main branches; the former a 'sealed book, containing seven seals, or 'sealed and hidden prophecies; and the latter an open codicil, containing several

open and clear ones,"-thus actually converting what John plainly teaches was book that was formerly sealed, into the done for the opening and explaining of a

formation of a new sealed book, containing

seven sealed and hidden prophecies!" To treat the Apocalypse thus, is to lock it up. If these prophecies be indeed sealed, vain must be every attempt to explain them. idea that the book' of ch. v, This notion has been taken up from an 'sealed with seven seals' must be different from the 'little open book' of ch. X, 2. But had those who have embraced this opinion attended to the Greek text, they would latter imports, that the book here spoken have seen that the expression used in the of is one "that had been opened” (avɛwyMεvov,) plainly intimating, that before

having been opened,'—which is the correct sense of the Greek,-it had been a sealed book; and that having been so opened by the removal of the seals, as detailed in the preceding chapters, it has been explained in such a manner that it may now be understood: and accordingly, John was commanded to eat the book ; (ch. x, 9 ;) that is, properly to consider and digest its contents, that he might be able to prophesy still farther respecting peoples, and nations, and tongues, and many kings, or kingdoms. Nor does the circumstance of its being called a little book' (BıBλapıdıov) in ch. x, at all alter the case; for this only serves to describe still farther the book' (Bißriov) of ch. v, informing the reader that the one alluded to-the one 'that had been opened,' by removing the seals from it is not a large volume; a fact which is correctly true respecting the book of Daniel, and particularly the sealed parts of his prophecy. Every notion then of such a structure, as that which has just been alluded to, should be rejected, as quite foreign to the nature and design of the Apocalypse." P. 174.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

"To me it appears impossible, that the true sense can be elicited, by any system which would ascribe to the Book such a structure as necessarily to require, that the parts of each series of symbols shall be considered as following each other in chronological order, each individual part having its commencement when the events of the part immediately preceding have had their accomplishment; and each whole series, in like manner, having its commencement only after the particulars of the preceding series have been consummated. Conformably to this system, it is quite common with commentators to

consider the rider of the first seal as having not only gone forth, but finished his whole course, before the rider of the second seal is suffered to commence his journey; and in like manner to give to the third a prescribed duration subsequent in time to the second, and terminating when the fourth is sent out, &c. And thus it follows, as a necessary consequence of this mode of procedure, that the ridcrs, respectively, have finished their entire course, and ceased to have any existence, long before the events of the first trumpet have even their commencement. The absurdities that would follow from a similar mode of interpretation applied to Deniel, are apparent enough. Why then should it be held possible to render the Apocalypse intelligible by such a process?

To particularize all the varied modifications of these systems, which have been offered in elucidation of the Apocalypse, would be a waste of time. Suffice it therefore to say, that though the Revelation may be considered as having been all communicated on the same Lord's day, (and therefore, as a whole, may, for convenience, be called one vision, being, as a whole, one Revelation,) yet it is evident, that the particulars exhibited, or communicated, to John, did not follow each other without any intermission; for this is plainly intimated in the prophecy itself. Thus in the fourth chapter the Apostle states, that he heard the same voice that had spoken to him before, even the great voice "as of a trumpet," quoting his own words from chap. i, 10. On the ocasion to which he alludes he had noted that he was inspired on the Lord's day;" and now, on hearing the same voice again address him, he says, Immediately I be came inspired,”-plaiuly intimating that there had been a suspension of the inspiration; or, in other words, an interval, however short it may have been, between the former exhibition and that which be proceeds to describe in the chapter referred to." P. 179.

"¿

Having given a summary of the contents of the Apocalypse, the

Author adds :

"Respecting the structure of the Revelation, it seems evident, from so many of the details pointed out in the above summary, as all coming down to the same period, (namely, the great earthquake, which, in its consummation, is styled the great day of wrath-the finishing of the mystery of God, when time shall be no

[ocr errors]

longer-the sounding of the seventh trumpet-the time for the dead to be judged -the pouring out of the seventh vial; which are all so many different expressions of the same termination;) that several of the series must and do synchronize with each other throughout a greater or less portion of their extent. In strict language each new exhibition may be called a distinct vision in itself; and, therefore, though the different exhibitions and communications of which the Apocalypse consists, do, and must, from the very necessity of the case, succeed each other in the narration, yet these do not constitute, as has been imagined by many, one continued detail of an unbroken series of events, which are each to be considered as distinct, and which are all to take place in the order in which they are written. On the contrary, it exhibits repeated orderly details of certain predicted facts, relative to the Church of Christ and the enemies of this Church; each detail affording precisely that degree of light which suits the propriety of the symbols employed in each respectively; and the whole so managed, by means of the accompanying narrative, that every succeeding exhibition throws light upon, and receives elucidation from, all that have preceded: the instruction which the prophecy thus yields being as the shining light, which shiueth more and more unto the perfect day."

There are some other points which are treated with considerable force and ability by Dr. Tilloch; and without meaning to pass any opinion on them, we say they are at least worthy the attention of the student of the Apocalypse. For example ; the perplexity which arises from symbolical epithets, used in such a manner as to lead translators to mistake them for attributive nouns, when they are hieroglyphical proper names; and thus often to make two persons, when only one is intended. Thus at chap. vii, 10, we read—

<<

Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb" which the Author would read- Salvation to the sitting one on the throne, even the Lamb." The same observation applies to chap. v, 13, and vi, 15, 16: the Author

[ocr errors]
« PoprzedniaDalej »