Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

CRITICAL REMARKS

ON DR. ADAM, CLARKE'S ANNOTATIONS ON

THE BIBLE.

NO. II.

Gen. 1. 26. I now come to notice one of the most difficult passages on this subject in the whole scriptures. The translation of this verse, as it has stood for ages, and as it now stands in all the European bibles, has laid a foundation for endless disputes. The Unitarian contends that God is one only; while others are led from this rendering, to believe in the existence of a Trinity out of the divinity. I am constrained to reject all the translations hitherto given of this important passage, that I have seen; and to abide by the literal meaning of the words, as rendered in other parts of scripture, which can have no other meaning or application. It will therefore be seen, that I not only reject any pre-conceived opinion of my own, but all others, when such opinions are unsupported by that unerring authority, the sacred scriptures.

The passage in the original is as follows:

[ocr errors]

And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness. Dr.Clarke says, "the text tells us he was the work of the Elhoim, the divine plurality, marked here more distinctly by the plural pronouns, us and our and to show that he was a master-piece of God's creation, all the persons in the Godhead are represented as united in council, and effort to produce this astonishing creature."

;

Alas! what a state are we reduced to, if this be the doctrine of the bible on the creation of man. Were we to tell this lame tale to the Deist, he would expel it with a blast of ridicule. He would tell the Dr. that if all the persons in the Godhead were called together, united in council and effort, to show that man was a master-piece of God's creation: then it would follow that all the persons in the Godhead were not united in council and effort, to produce other astonishing creatures, which also in their order, are master-pieces of God's creation.

T :

The word Vayomer, as applied to the Supreme, in this sense means literally, he commanded. Chron. 21. 27. N The Lord commanded. Ch. 22. 2. 77 And David commanded. 2 Chron. 14. 4. And commanded Judah. Ch. 29. 30. And Hezekiah commanded. Ch. 31. 4. And he commanded the people. Ch. 32. 12. And he commanded Judah. Ch. 33. 16.

Then וַיֹּאמֶר מָרְדְּכַי .13 ,4 .And commanded. Esth וַיֹּאמֶר

Mordecai commanded. Ch. 9. 14. And the king commanded. Dan. 2. 2. And the king commanded. I have examined upwards of 2000 places of scripture where Vayomer occurs, and I find that the word thus written was always used when God commanded, also by kings, patriarchs, and all in every situation exercising authority, in the imperative, or commanding style. Thus when any thing was to be done, which required the interference of a superior power; as when God commands Jacob to go to Bethel, and to build an altar to him; and in the next verse, where Jacob commands his household to put away the strange Gods that were among them, it is written Vayomer, and is uniformly followed Vayomar occurs,

by its corresponding noun. But when it never is understood in the imperative style, it is always used as the third person singular preter of the verb, to prevent the too frequent repetition of the noun. I have examined some hundreds of places where this word occurs so written, and I find it to be so throughout the scriptures. Thus it appears consistently with other parts of scripture, where the same word, written with the same vowels, can have no other meaning, that

Vayomer Ellioim, should be rendered וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים the words

in conformity with the above passages, taken in connection with the following word Nangaseh, of which below. From what has been said, it will be allowed by the learned, that this word Vayomer, comprehends Vayomar, but the latter does not comprehend the former: which circumstance alone proves, that this word conveys an idea of superiority, and therefore is always used and applied in that sense throughout the scriptures.

The next word in this verse which requires our notice, is y Nangaseh, which is rendered let us make. I have selected, I believe, all the passages where this form of the word occurs, which is rendered in the first person plural future of kal. I shall therefore show, that the word in these places may be rendered more consistently with the Hebrew, and more agreeably with the idiom of our language. I do not mean to contend that the word does not comprehend in its effect the plural; but I do assert, that as it is the passive of kal, it ought to be rendered in the English in conformity thereto. The following passages being rendered as the first person plural future in kal, read thus, we will do-what shall we do-through God we shall do-but as the verb is in Niphal, there must necessarily be a distinction between the futures of the two conjugations and we find that the ancient Hebrews always attended to this distinction, as is evident from the difference in the orthography. This word is properly rendered thus, let be made, which will make a material difference as to the reading of these passages. They will read thus, 2 Kings, 4. 10. Let there be MADE a little chamber-Cant. 1. 11.-Exod. 19. 8. all that the Lord hath spoken, SHALL BE DONE.-Ch. 24. 3. verse 7.-Numb. 32. 31.-Josh. 1. 16. Ch. 9. 20.—what shall be done.-Ch 20. 9. which shall be done.-Ch. 21. 7.—WHAT SHALL BE DONE for wives.-Ver. 16. 22. 26. let there be prepared.-1 Sam. 5. 8. 6. 2.-2 Sam. 16. 30.-2 Kings, 6. 15.-10. 5.-Neh. 5. 12. Psalm 60. 12. for God will do valiantly.—108. 13.-Cant. 8. 8.-Jer. 18. 12.-42. 3.-44. 17.- 44. 25. our vows SHALL BE PERFORMED.-Isaiah, 26. 18. shall be wrought.-2 Chron. 20. 12. what SHALL BE DONE.-Jud. 11. 10. if there be not done.

These, I believe, are nearly all the places where this word occurs in the Niphal form, which I have selected, to show that this reading is not only consistent with the grammar of the language, but also that it reads much better than the present translation of the above passages. This will justify me in so rendering this word in the passage under consideration, viz. Gen. 1. 26. Nangaseh, let be made. From which proofs it will be seen, that this passage cannot consistently with

the original, be read as it is in the translation, viz. and God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness, but agreeably to the meaning of the inspired writer, who was commanded to communicate to the Hebrews, and to posterity, the knowledge of the creation of the world, and of man. Now, as in this narrative Moses was speaking with the people, he informed them that God created man in their image, viz. main our image, says Moses, which image he obviously applies to themselves. So that though the word Be

[ocr errors]

tsulmeenou, be truly rendered, its application is wrong, for it is represented in the translation as though it were applied to God, whereas it was applied to the Israelites by Moses: thus, " And God commanded man to be made in our image:" or thus, "And God said, let man be made in our image.' Hence it appears that Elhoim, God, is not a plural noun, by being connected with Nangaseh, which has been rendered by the plural us ever since the time of Jerome, the first translator of the Hebrew into the Latin language, but which was understood as above by the Hebrew legislator, and all the ancient Hebrews before the dispersion. This rendering of the word Elhoim, God, as a noun singular, is also confirmed in the very next verse, where the word is connected with the third person singular of the verb, and the pronoun inbya

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

of God created HE

in HIS image, in the image him, which agreeably to our idiom may be thus rendered, as the repetition of the noun is consistent with the rules of the language-So God created man in his, (man's) image, which image was created in the similitude of God.

in

Now as it is expressly said that man was created the image of God, and as it is proved above that by Tselem refers only to the external visible image or form; it must be admitted, if scripture be allowed to decide this important matter, that

Elhoim means the external visible form of God, which is said to be that of man. If it be contended that the infinite attributes of the Supreme Being in all their distinct existence in him constitute a plurality, this must be allowed. But this was not understood by the ancient Hebrews as constituting a plura

« PreviousContinue »