« PoprzedniaDalej »
just noticed. The Prophet having there described Jehovah as protecting Jerusalem, in like manner as mother birds protect by hovering over their young; and this being impossible to be conveyed by a term which merely implied passing over, and which, so far from indicating an overshadowing protection, on the contrary necessarily induced an exposure of the defenceless young, and this only the more sudden the more rapid was the transition: the commentators deemed it indispensable to extend the meaning of the word na (here employed) beyond the latter sense, and to give to it such a signification as would admit the former ; and perceiving a strong similarity between the application of the term here, and to the deliverance in Egypt, they endeavoured to explain it in such a sense as would embrace both transactions; and were accordingly led to that interpretation of the term which required the twofold agency of which we have spoken. But why recur upon every occasion to the primary sense of a word? Are there not in every language numerous words, in which the derivative becomes the prevalent and appropriate sense? And if we suppose the deliverance from Egypt to have been alluded to by the Prophet, (which, as well from the general similitude of subject, as particularly from
-which are con הציל and פסח the use of the terms
jointly used in speaking of the passover and its effect in Exod. xii. 27, seems scarcely to admit of doubt), what could be more fit than to adopt that form of expression, which, from its familiar association with the deliverance from Egyptian bondage, had long been employed to designate that deliverance without any reference whatever to its primary acceptation. In other words, was it not most natural, that any providential preservation or deliverance of the Jewish people should be called by the word Pesach, the term used to denominate that recorded act whereby the first great preservation and deliverance of Israel was effected? Might not then the Prophet have properly and beautifully employed the word thoa, in the
passage referred to, in the sense of God's acting again as a protector and deliverer of his people, in like
? פסח manner as he had done at the time of the
This gives new beauty to the original passage, and relieves the comparison between its subject and the deliverance in Egypt from all embarrassments; whilst it retains all that attractive imagery, with which the prophet embellishes the original idea. The passage would then stand thus,
As the mother-birds hovering over their young ;
OVER) and rescuing her.
Bishop Stock, in his translation, has much disfigured the beauty of this
neither display ing taste in the expression, nor judgment in the
criticism:-Birds protecting the winged race, being neither elegant nor quite intelligible: and HOPPING round and over, which is rather an odd signification of the word mon, being a still odder reason for translating the word by FLYING round.
Some have charged the Greeks with corrupting the original word na Pesach, by writing it TUTXQ; and have seemed to intimate that the word was so used by them as if it were derived from TwoXw patior, intimating the sufferings of our Lord, of which the slaying of the passover was a type. That such an allusion may have sometimes been made as might afford some apparent justification to the charge, there seems reason to admit. (See Glass. Phil. Sacr. i. 692. also Greg. Naz. Serm. de Pasch. and Wolf.Cur. Phil. i, 365.) Yet the fact is, that the ind of the Hebrew is written XTDPascha in the Chaldee, from which the πασχα
of the Greek has immediately flowed. On the subject of the word Passover, I shall only add the following enumeration of its various applications. 1. It signifies the passing over of Jehovah who spared the Israelites when he smote the first-born of the Egyptians. 2. It signifies by a metonymy the lamb slain in memory of that deliverance. 3. It signifies the feast day on which the paschal larnb was slain--viz. the 14th of the first month. 4, and lastly, It signifies the entire continuance and the whole employment of the festival, which commenced with the slaying of the lamb, and continued for seven days.
NO. XXXVI.-ON THE MEANING OF THE WORD
TRANSLATED ATONEMENT IN
THE OLD TES
Page 32. (*)—The meaning of the word 755, the original of the term atonement in the Old 'Testament, has been modelled, like that of other scripture phrases, so as to fall in with the theories of those, who are more anxious that scripture should speak their language, than that they should speak the language of scripture. The common artifice, by which the terms of revelation have been discharged of all appropriate meaning, has been here employed with considerable effect. By a comparison of the various passages, in which the term occurs, its most general signification is first explored ; and in this generic sense it is afterwards explained, in all the particular cases of its application. The manner, in which Doctor Taylor has exercised this strange species of criticism on the word atonement, in his Scripture Doctrine, has been already noticed, p. 181-186. One or two additional remarks, will more fully explain the contrivance, by which this writer has been enabled to shape this expression to his purpose.
Having laid it down as a principle, “ that those passages in the Levitical law, in which atonement is said to be made for persons by sacrifice, supply not so many different instances of a known sense of the word, atonement; but are to be considered as exhibiting one single instance of a sense which is doubtful;" (Scrip. Doct. ch. iv. 69.) he pronounces, (ch. v. § 70 ) that “the texts, which are to be examined, are those, where the word is used extra-levitically, or with no relation to sacrifices; that we may be able to judge, what it imports when applied to them.” And agreeably to these notions, he conducts his enquiry. Now what is this, but to pronounce first upon the nature of the thing unknown, and then to engage in its investigation? The meaning of the term, in the several instances of its Levitical application, though as yet supposed unknown, is presumed to be the same in all: and this, notwithstanding these cases of its application must be as different as its objects; persons, and things ; moral, and ceremonial, disqualifications.
But not content with thus deciding on the uniformity of an unknown signification, he
proceeds to discover the meaning of the term, in those passages which relate to sacrifice, by examining it in others, in which it has no such relation. The result of this singularly critical examination is, that from 37 texts, which treat of extra-levitical atonements, it may be inferred, “ that the means of making atonement for sin in different cases, are widely different; being sometimes by the sole goodness of God, sometimes by the prayers