Imágenes de páginas

rison of Corfu. Four more vessels with corn were captured the same evening.—About the end of last month, the boats of the Sabine sloop of war succeeded without loss in cutting out, from the roadstead of Sibioma (a place - at the mouth of the Guadalquivir, to the north of Cadiz), five privateers which had greatly annoyed the commerce of Cadiz, although they were moored under a battery, and were defended by their crews, amounting to twenty-five men each. The crews, it is stated, had been marched from Antwerp for the purpose of manning privateers. It is some abatement of these advantages, that, as appears from the French papers, a British sloop of war, called the Alacrily, has been taken near Corsica by a French vessel. An unfortunate renceunter has taken place between an American frigate, the President, and a British sloop of war, the Little Belt, in the American seas. They met in the night time, and, it is said, mutually hailed, but received no answer A shot was fired; the shot produced a broadside, and the hroadside an action of about a quarter of an

hour before the mistake was discovered. It does not clearly appear from which vessel the first shot proceeded. Thirty men are said to have been killed and wounded on board the Little Belt, but only one man on board the President. The High Court of Admiralty proceeded a few days ago to the adjudication of a case, on which twenty-two others depended. A vessel, called the Fox, had sailed from Ame. rica for a port in France; but was detained by British cruizers, on the ground of her violating the blockade established by our orders in council of April 1809. On the part of the claimants it was contended, that the Milan and Berlin decrees of Bonaparte having been repealed, our orders in council fell to the ground of course. The judge consented to admit proof of such repeal, if it could be given, and allowed the claimants time to procure it. None, however, could be produced. The Fox was therefore condemned, and all the other vessels share the same fate.

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

The case of One of our distressed Readers, we would recommend it to him to lay open to some pious and experienced Christian friend.

The best account of the Herculaneum MSS. is given in a work of the Rev. Mr. Hayter, lately published.

[ocr errors]

We intend writing a few lines to the Correspondent who has done us the honour to notice our remarks on his poems.



Number for May–p. 274, col.2, line 14 from bottom, for Ireland read Îeelano.
p. 376, col. 1, 1. 29, for circumstances read circumstance.
l. 32, dele and. -
1.2.from bottom, for Maletem read Meletem.
p. 379, col. 1, 1.12, for conquest read conquests.
* p. 280, tol. 2, 1.46 and '47, for translators read-transcribers.
- p. 281, col. 3. l. 16, for interpretation read interpolation.
‘p. 284, col. 1. l. 9, for particular read practical,

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

auls just; lašousy.: “And by his stripes healing to us” (literal from the Hebrew.) The Apostle, in applying it, uses the second person, not the first. . iii. 10–12. The Septuagint translates the Hebrew throughout in the second person singular; but the Apostle, in quoting it, uses the third person singular, “Let him,” &c. This is the only variation which need be noted. The Septuagint is an exact translation of the Hebrew (Ps. xxxiv. 12–16.) —. 1 #, 15. Toy 3e Cotov aulay wo poore, Hyos raga;&#'s. Kugio, 3e roy Geov ...oft. ls. viii. 12), Toy 3s počov awls a un QoSoKvetov avloy aylagals. Either rendering gives the meaning of the Hebrew. Avlwy (1 Pet.) seems to give the sense better than the singular awls (Sept.); but the Hebrew will admit of either. The Hebrew is, Jehovah Sabdoth. The next verse of the Septuagint differs materially from the Hebrew. iv. 8. This is a translation from the Hebrew, and widely different from the Septuagint (Prov. x. 12.) “ All sins,” is translated, “ The multitude of sins.” (See on James v. 20.) “Friendship hideth all who are not contentious.” (Sept.) 18. Almost verbatim from Septuagint (Prov. xi. 31.) “Be

hold, the righteous shall be recom

pensed in the earth; much more the wicked and the sinner.” (Trans. of Hebrew.)

[merged small][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

In all these places the Hebrew is, “The first and the last,” which, no doubt, the Apostle quoted, or literally translated. . . * *

ii. 23. The Apostle evidently re

not from the Septuagint.

xviii. 4. This verse refers to several passages in Isaiah and Jeremiah, but it cannot be called a quotation.

It comes nearest to Jer. ii. 6, but

fers to Jer. xvii. 10; but his words is neither a quotation of the Septua

are neither a quotation from the Septuagint, nor a translation of the

gint, nor a translation of the Hebrew. to * *

Hebrew. They, however, give the “ – 7, 8. The same may be said

[ocr errors]

of these verses, as compared with

Is. xlvii. 8, 9. xix. 3. The clause, “Her smoke,”

&c. is an exact translation of the

Hebrew Is. xxxiv. lo; but whether intended as a quotation or not, is

not clear. . . . . – 15. (see on ii. 27.) xxii. 13. (See on i. 8, 11.) . . The references to the Old Testament, in this book, are numerous; but few of them can be called quotations. Dr. Randolph makes only one in the whole book (ii. 27.) Concluding observations. o - * * T- as , - . . 1. It must be evident to every one who carefully and impartially examines the quotations in the New Testament from the Old, that the number of those which undeniably accord to the Septuagint, where that translation materially differs from the Ilebrew, is exceedingly small; so small, as scarcely to bear any proportion to the whole number, amounting to much above two hundred. Dr. Randolph states that there are six, but I can only find five (MIatt. xv. 8, 9; Acts it. 25; vii. 42, 43: Rom. x. 18; James IV. 6); I mean of those which he ba" pointed out : for there are some others, in which he supposes the Hebrew text to be corrupted, of which he adduces eight; but l can: not find so many. 2. A large proportion of the quo: tations are so consonant in meaning to the Hebrew, though the words" the Septuagint are used with some variations, that it is not easy.” say, whether the sacred writers Illtended to quote the Septuagin'. " to translate the Hebrew: but being couversant in the Septuagint, the words of that version occurred to them in translating. 3. There are, however, a considerable number which immaterially disher from the Hebrew, and are evidently taken from the Septuagint. 4. But there are, likewise, several instances of an evidently intentional renouncing of the Septuagint translation, in order to adhere to the Hebrew; when the Septuagint so materially differs from the Hebrew, as to render the passage unsuitable to the purpose of the sacred writer in producing the quotation, or when it was palpably erroneous. Dr. Randolph states the number of these instances to be thirteen. 5. Many quotations contain words found in the Septuagint, and yet vary from it in other parts, agreeing with the Hebrew; yet in some respects they vary also from the Hebrew. This seems to indicate that the sacred writers did not act with that exact conformity to a preconceived plan which modern learned men suppose. 6. It is also manifest, that in the epistles, addressed in general to churches, consisting of converted Hellenists, or Gentiles, the quotations are uniformly made from the Septuagint, or with express reference to tercept where some important reason induced the sacred writer to deviate from it. For, as it appears to me, the Septuagint was the only version of the Scriptures generally known in the churches, the members of which were mostly strangers to the Hebrew. Every material deviation from it, by preferring the Hebrew in the epistles, is, on this very account, proportionably a stronger proof th t the writer did not intend to sanction the translation in opposition to the original. , 7. When any quotation decidedly accords to the Septuagint, and varies from the Hebrew, it should be considered whether the variation materially alters the general mean3, and whether it interferes with

its suitableness to the special purpose for which it is adduced. Where neither of these is the case, it may be inquired, whether, as the Septuagint alone was familiar to the readers of the epistles, and no harm would arise from the deviation, the sacred writer might not see good to take the passage as he found it: Thus the evangelists, Matthew and Luke, are generally supposed to have extracted the genealogies of the Messiah from the public records, though, in some respects, defective. This, if admitted, will reduce the deviations of quotations from the Hebrew text in the New Testament to a very small number: and there will be seldom need to have recourse to the strong measure of charging a material corruption on the Hebrew text: I say seldom, for they who would maintain that no such corruptions exist, seem to take an untenable ground. If, however, the quotations in the New Testament are to be regarded as the criteria; a candid and careful examination of them must induce the conviction, that no ancient book extant has come down to us in such complete preservation as the Hebrew text of the Old Testament:

and from long and patient investi

gation of other documents, I am persuaded that this is really the case. 8. One thing more has powerfully impressed my mind on the subject, which I do not recollect to have met with in any writer, and which appears to give a higher and stronger sanction to the Septuagint, in one material point, than alumost any other consideration. The original names of the one-glorious, self-existent, and eternal God have been generally considered as replete with meaning and instruction: nay, some have formed theories, which seem to imply that they are essential to correct views of Christianity; at least they build very much upon them. I am far from denying that the able student of the sacred lan* 3 G 2

guage may derive much instruction himself from this source, and communicate it also to others: indeed, I am fully convinced that this is the case. The undeniable fact, however, is this: that the Septuagint scarcely ever uses any of these Hebrew names. Jehovah, Jah. Elohim (or Aleum), Shaddai, &c. are not found in that version, but of: Kopios, 980s, with epithets of Greek derivation (except Tsabaoth in a few instances). Now, in this respect, the sacred writers of the New Testament have uniformly followed that version. In no quotation do they substitute the Hebrew name; not even where the other parts of the quotation vary from the Septuagint: Nay more : the whole New Testament is written on the same plan; and the Hebrew names and titles of Jehovah are seldom even referred to, except “I AM that I am,” in a few instances. This, at least, shews that the Greek translators did not act materially wrong in that part of their plan, and that the Hebrew names are not essential to a right understanding of the Christian covenant, Thus I close my remarks, which I have endeavoured to make with impartiality. I confess myself to be comparatively a novitiate in these studies, and shall be thankful for correction or information on the subject from my more learned brethren; and especially to be informed, whether any other translation of the Old Testament, or any part of it, except the Septuagint, is supposed to have been extant when the New Testament was written. T. S.

To the Editor of the ChristianObserrer.

AN highly esteemed Christian friend sent me, some time ago, a passage of a very singular nature respecting the prophetical numbers 2300 and 1260, from the French of Monsieur Count de Gebelin, which would seein to shew that these numbers are

of a very peculiar astronomical nature, and (to make use of the words of the friend who sent me the extract) that it is hardly possible but that 2300 must be the true number given by the Holy Spirit, in Dan. viii. 14. The passage is as follows: * Extrait du Caractère de Daniel par Monsieur Count de Gebelin. “Ajoutons à ces traits, la parfaite harmonie qu'offrent les nombres prophetiques avec ce que la nature astronomique a dé plus exact; harmonie qui auroit été inconnue, si un savant de nos jours, Pun des plus grands astronomes de no. tre siècle n'avoit rapproché la Revelation de la Nature; etude qu'on dedaigne, et qu'on devroit faire cependant, lors même qu'on ne verroit que l’homme dans la Revelation, puisque ce seroit l'effort le plus prodigieux de l'esprit humain, l'effor 3. Thomme's plus prosond dans la connoissance de la nature, l'effort d'un homme divin dont jamais aucun mortel n'approcha; en sorte que se vouer à l'ignorance de ces, choses, c'est ce priver de très belles connoissances. “. La decouverte de ces Cycles parfaits dont nous parlons ici est consignée dans les Remarques His' toriques, Chronologiques, et Astrono. niques, sur quelques Endroits do Livre de Daniel qui sont à la tele des Memoires posthumes de M. de Chesaur, imprimées a Lausanne on 1754. Cet auteur plein de genie et de savoir demontre, que les nom. bres prophetiques de Daniel 2300 et 1260, ainsi que leur difference 1040, etoient autant de Cycles parfaits. Cycles qui sont harmonises, tout a la fois l'année solaire, le * lunaire, et le jour, qui jusqu' " avoient été cherchés en vain, “ qu'on avoit fini enfin par regarde: pour chimériques au impossible"; de la meme nature, en unmol, ** la pierre philosophale et le mo". ment perpetuel". Il ajoule, q" ce • By consulting Prideaux's Cono Part is. Book iv. the reader will find *

« AnteriorContinuar »