Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

slation of the Common Version? That this translation is accurate, will most satisfactorily appear to every person competent to the investigation of the text. by gnalah means a "burnt offering; when it occurs with a lamed prefixed, its signification is, for a burnt offering; and when 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, by and a ram for a burnt offering. In Gen. xxii. 13, the word gnalah by with a lamed prefixed occurs, and is rendered by Mr. B. for a burnt offering;' the subject of this burnt offering was a ram,, to which the pronoun in the compound word by relates, which is correctly rendered and he offered it for a burnt offering.' The construction in the 2d verse is identically the same. by gnalah with blamed prefixed, cannot have any other meaning than, for a burnt offering;'-the pronominal affix in the verb my relates to the preceding noun 72, denoting the subject of the by gnalah, burnt offering,' the entire clause therefore can only be construed and read as in the Common Version, and offer him (i. e. 72 thy son) for ' a burnt offering.'

V. 12. For now I know that thou fearest God. The translators have rendered the word Nyerea, 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.' in this place is not the third person singular preter in kal; but the participle present construed with the second personal pronoun A 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 was 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 informed 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. Infidels 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. ny 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 he 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!

[ocr errors]

Mr. Bellamy, we have already seen, opposes the representations of two Apostles; he is hardy enough to contradict third, the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, who informs us that" for as Bowσews one meal Esau sold his birth-right." But, says our Hebraist, it is absurd to suppose that Esau 'could sell his 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

the meaning of his being faint! The ineligibility of Esau, he informs us, was the consequence of his having married the daughters of the idolaters of the land. And then after this Mr. Bellamy, in the very next note, asserts that

Esau, who was evidently at that period considerod as the rightful heir to the priesthood by Isaac and Jacob, and who must for this reason, have been in the exercise of the office, declared to Jacob that he was weary of rites, ceremonies, offerings, and sacrifices; and entreated him to accept of it, that he might join the spurious worship of those who had adopted a state of things under Adam, or under the Adam c primeval state, viz. offerings of the fruits of the ground without sacrifice.'

If Esau had rendered himself ineligible to the priesthood at that period, how could Isaac and Jacob consider him as the rightful heir to it, and how could he be in the exercise of his office, when, on his defection, which had already taken place, Jacob, as Mr B. informs us, had succeeded to it? Mr. B.'s fictions are not even consistent. The history affords no evidence of Esau's being married at this period, nor does it contain a particle of information on the subjects with which Mr. Bellamy has embellished his Bible. His Hebrew is of the usual kind. The word halgniteeni, is rendered, feed me. But this word cannot be thus understood, it is only translated so in this passage; for in no part of Scripture is it "ever rendered to satisfy hunger.' The fact is, that the word is used but once in the Hebrew Bible, namely, in this very passage!

which Mr. B. affirms, means, not pottage,' but a sacred ♦ sacrumental repast,' denotes the article or substance from which a repast was prepared, and in all the instances of its use in the Bible, signifies the matter of a common meal for the purpose of satisfying hunger. y means faintness from exhaustion, having reference to Esau's answer, "I am going to die;" so the word is used in 2 Sam. xvii. 29: "The people is hungry "and weary (exhausted) and thirsty in the wilderness."

[ocr errors]

The preceding extract affords a fair specimen of the style and spirit of the Notes. Mr. Bellamy every where descries tabernacles, and priests, and sacraments, and preaching. When Jacob rested at Bethel, (Chap. xxviii. 11.) he was,' says this gentleman, as the representative head of the Church, well known to the officiating priest at this tabernacle at Bethel. The offerings, sacrifices, rites, ceremonies, statutes, ordinances, ' and laws,' as described in the book of Leviticus, 'were always the same from the beginning.' p. 109. The refreshment provided for Isaac, (Chap. xxvii. 17, 25.) was a sacred sacramental repast which,' says our Author, is retained in Christian 'churches to the present day!' p. 110. Chap. iii. 24, according to him, describes the institution of a place of worship, with the sacred fire with the incense in the censer which was taken VOL. X. N.S.

2 B

[ocr errors]

'by the high-priest within the vail, in the Holy of Holies before 'the Cherubim !'

Leaving these reveries, we must devote a few more words to Mr. Bellamy's self-contradictions. His work is indeed quite a curiosity in this respect. To display in their proper light the inconsistencies and contradictions to which we refer, we shall insert a table of passages which might, without difficulty, be enlarged for the entertainment of our readers, exhibiting Bellamy versus Bellamy.

[merged small][ocr errors]

pt Zaakeen means a very old man.' p. 84.

Abraham was pi zakeen, old."' Chap. xxiv. 1.

With the Israelitish church it pleased God to communicate with his people by the URIM and the THUMMIM; but in this church which was prior to the time of Moses, we do not meet with URIM and THUMMIM; God communicated with man only from the Cherubim.' p. 76, Gen. xviii. 1.

'pi Zaakeen cannot be render ed by the words ' an old man,' in any part of scripture ! p. 102.

[ocr errors]

• We find from the translations Chap. xxiii. 6. The word recorded in this chapter that he Elohyim, is in the Common (Abraham) was a person of great Version rendered mighty but this consequence and dignity. We is evidently an error The transhave the testimony of Trogus lation, a mighty prince, cannot be Pompeius, who says, the Jews applied to Abraham at this period, derive their origin from Damas- as he was not a temporal prince, cus, a famous city of Syria; their he had not even a place to bury kings were Abraham and Israel.' | his dead.' p. 97. which is perfectly consistent with scripture authority, where it is said, he was a mighty prince. Chap. xxiii. 6.' p. 64 Gen. xiv. 13.

The word y vayigaang, rendered •he gave up the ghost,' means to be employed in a very laborious work. This word is rendered in the new translation, thus Abraham had laboured. 102. Chap. xxv. 8.

Note, p.

• Sarah heard it in the tent door, which was behind him.' These words thus rendered, are not consistent with the original, and cannot be applied to make sense of the passage. The word

So he expired, thus died Abraham.' Chap xxv. 8, text.

and Sarah heard at the opening of the Tabernacle, for she was behind him.' Text, Chap. xviii. 10.

[blocks in formation]

and he followed him;' that is, the stranger who was the speaker to Abraham, followed him.' Note, Chap. xviii. 10. p. 76.

Zekunim is translated זקנים *

pt Zekunim' is a plural noun, and means elders in all the scrip old age' by Mr. Bellamy in ture when truly translated, there- Chap. xxi. 2, pija, a son in

a son בן לזקניו .7 .does not mean a son | his old age. v בן זקנים fore

of his old age.' Note, Chap. xxxvii. in his old age.' In Chap. xliv. 20, he translates ppt, Son of his old age.'

3.

We had almost overlooked a passage which we promised to notice. Chap. xxxiii. 20. is translated by Mr. Bellamy, " he preached before him;' a strange rendering at all events: had it however been before a congregation, it might have passed; but Jacob, a mortal preaching before God, is a surprising spectacle. This very expression however he has rendered in Chap. xxxi. 47. he called it;' an intelligible phrase, according with the reading of the Common Version.

We here conclude our examination of Mr Bellamy's version, not because we have exhausted the materials which it supplies for our critical strictures, (for an abundance of them yet remain unnoticed,) but from the apprehension that the Article has for every important purpose been sufficiently extended. A version more at variance with the principles on which it was professedly undertaken, it would be impossible to mention the Author has set at defiance every rule by which a translator should be governed. While professing a rigid adherence to the . literal import of the original, he has given the Hebrew terms meanings entirely at variance with the usage of the sacred writers.

So serious and so numerous are his errors, that had preceding translators indulged in similar freedoms, the real import of the Scriptures must ere now have been quite obscured, and of all books the Bible would have been the most corrupt. For the length to which the present Article has extended, we assign no other reason than the high patronage which this new translation has obtained, and the industry employed to recommend it as an important work, both of which are most unworthily bestowed upon it. If the tone of our strictures has partaken of severity, the utmost severity is amply justified by the arrogant manner in which its Author has contemned and aspersed the most learned, the most upright, and the most pious of Hebrew scholars, not less than by the numberless errors and gross corruptions of which he has been guilty. The appropriate title to this production, would be, The Holy Bible perverted from the original Hebrew, by Mr. John Bellamy.

« ElőzőTovább »