Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

from any other quarter was, from Independent notions, maintained under the auspices of. JOHN GLAs; But ås his system was remark, a bly obscure, and fome of his followers travelfed ftill farther into the land of darkness, it has not proved a hurtful inftrument.: Opposition from another quarter has been more successful: The fame of WHITEFIELD induced feverals to invite him into this country; but, as he formed a systein of religion fuited to the universal taste of mankind; and, as he knew the avenues of human nature remarkably well, he discarded the plan of a Covenanted Reformation, as by much too narrow. This needs to be no matter of surprize : The Covenanters have uniformly represented Episcopal government and worlhip as corruptions which required reformation; and called such as have been corrupted by theme into repentance, huiniliation, and amendment. Though the spostle Paul saw the propriety of being IN FASTS OFTEN, yet Mr WHITE FIELD scems to have reckoned them wholly unnecessary. Mourneing for fin he confined to CONVICTS before conversion : Humiliation he found diametrically opposite to that flow of affection which was the life of his cause. His principles were embraced with avidity by many who had forinerly signalized themselves on the side of Covenanting: For liis fake, a WILLISON and a ROBB were ready to run down what they had formerly established. From this period, vari

ous parts of a Covenanted Reformation, and Covenanting itself, were looked on with an evil eye, by many who laid strong pretensions to fuperior degrees of sanctity, in Scotland. Strong attempts are made to have it utterly exploded. Covenanters are a feet every where spoken against : But, from small beginnings, it has diffused itself far and wide over the land; and, “ having obtained help of God, they continue unto this day, WITNESSING both to finall and great." Amen.

THE END.

No 1.

[See page 3.]

HE derivation of 1992 from 0793 elegit, is most a-,

greeable to the genius of the Hebrew language;

for verbal nouns which terminate in n, ny, ni,
ni, &c. are derived from verbs in the form of Kal, which
have ni quiescent for their last radical. Vide WASMUTH,
Append. No. I. ad Gram. Heb. Class ii. § 2. BUXTORF,
Thesaur. Gram. cap. LVI. The Hutchinsonians, are far
from being facisfied with this derivation : But the term
which is usually translated COVENANT in the Old Testa-
inent, is, by theni, derived from another, which fignifies
toʻPURIFY (72, or 972]: Hence they conclude, that the
term PURIFIER ought to be substituted in place of
the word COVENANT, throughout the translation of the
Old Testament at least. Calcot's Sermon on the Elo-
him, p. 15. ROMAINE apud vocem.--Mr RICCALTOUN,
and the rest of the Hutchinsonians are not quite consist.
ent with themselves : In one part of Mr Riccaltoun's
writings we are taught, that the words Carath Beritli
express that which we call MAKING A COVENANT, Vol.
III. p. 217: But, in Vol. I. p: 321-324. we are in-
formed, that the fame words signify to cuT OFF A PURI-
FIER. But it is easy to fhew, that the Hutchinsoniajı
derivation is uncertain and irregular.--The proposed
translation absurd and unjuft..

1. The Hutchinsonian derivation of Berith must be
absurd, even on their own principles : For their rule,
refpecting derivation, is, That the primitive idea of the
root is conveyed to all the derivatives. Now, the idea
of purification is incompatible with the term Berith in
many places of Scripture : For example, If. xxviii. 15.
“ And ye have said, we have made a Covenant (Berith)
with death, and with hell we are at agreeinent.” What
purifier, or what purification can be here intended ?

The

The proposed derivation is also irregular, as it confounds
Berith (covenant) with Borith (soap). Things fufficient.
ly different indeed : Blit, perhaps, these men will reply,

That all the distinction between these two words origi.
nates in the vowel-poin:s. It might be answered, Be it
fo ; their divine original has, Leen fusliciently demon:
strated by P. Whitefield, in our own language, as well
as Dr Owen and Dr Gill; not to mention what has been
attempted in other languages.

2. The proposed translation is vujuft and improper.
It must be an unjust translation which contradicts the in-
fpired writers of the New Testament. The word Be.
rith, when quoted from the Old Teitament to tbe New,
is translate:l Diatheke; but no one ever imagined that
Diatheke fignified purifier, or purification. A few ex-
amples may be adduced .te our purpose, Exod. xxiy S.
“ Behold the blood of the COVENANT which the Lord
hath made with you,'eompared with Heb. ix. 20. “This
is the blood of the TESTAMENT which the Lord hath en-
joined unto you.In the first text, the original word
for Covenant is Beritlı ; In the latt, the original word
for Testament is Diatheke. The Apostle is there treat-
ing of a teftamentary Covenant ; therefore, Diatheke is
peculiarly expreflive of the nature of it. See alto, Jer.
xxxi. 31, 32, 33. quoted by the Apoltle Heb. viii. 8, 9,
10. and x. 16. I believe there is no comparison between
the Apostle and the Hutchinsonians as tranflators : Nor
will any true Christian hefitate a moment which to pre-
fer. · But, although, the Apostle had never tranflared it,
there is abundance of light, in many places, in the con-
text, to fhew the absurdity of this newly proposed trans-
lation; as 2 Chron. xvi. 23. “ Then Afa fent to Ben-
hadad, king of Syria, who dweit at Damascus, saying,
There is a LEAGUE (Heb. Berith) between me and thee,
as there was between thy father and my father. Be-
hold, I liave sent thee filver and gold, go break thy
LEAGUE (Heb. Berithecha) with Baiha, king of Israel,”
This text is also sufficient to fet aside the force of a di-
ftinction which Mr Riccaltout makes to the following:
purpose : “ That Carath Berith are used to express
the transaction we call making a covenant may be grant:
ed; but that Berith, standing by itself, signifies a cove-

nant,

nant, will not be easily proved.” Here it stands by ito
Telf, yet it fignifies a League, or Covenant : But he fur-
ther insists, « That, when it stands by itself, and fignia
fies God's Berith, then it signifies'PURIFIER, and not co-
VENANT.” We may now give some instances of God's
Berith, which cannot be translated God's PURIFIER :
Pfal. lxxviii, 10. " They kept not the COVENANT (Heb.
Berith) of Elohim : and refused to walk in his law.”
If Berith be translated PURIFIER, in this verse, What is
the meaning of it? Or how has it any ineaning left in
it at all ? See also, Deut. xvii. 2. Josh. vii. 11. and xv. 2.
2 Kings xviii. 12, &c. It is still objected, That it is ab.
surd to say cuT OFF A COVENANT; whereas it is a pro-
per expression to say cut OFF A PURIFIER. It may be
answered, That the facrifice by which the Covenant was
confirmed was ont off, and also cut into two parts, Gen. ,
xv. 10. and the facrifice which feals the Covenant may
bear the name of it as well as circumcision. Now,
Where is the impropriéty, or absurdity, of saying cut
off a sacrifice ? Moreover, this objection strikes as much
against Mr Riccalton as against the doctrine we main-
tain : For he grants that CARATH BERITH, signify to
make a covenant ; and this is the only phrase which can
be translated, from the Hebrew, TO CUT A COVENANT :

From the above considerations it appears, Tliat the
word COVENANT has a just claim to its place in our
translation.

No II.

[See page 580.]

THE School of Alexandria is a clear proof of the ear-

1 ly conversion of Egypt unto the Christian Faith.
If we search the records of the Church, we will find,
that lsaiah's prediction received an accomplishment in
the literal Egypt. A learned Roman Catholic (HUETJ-
us) attempts to apply the oracle, if. xix. 18-25. to the
temple which Onias built in opposition to that of Jeru-
salem : But, as VITRING A justly observes, this history
cannot agree with that oracle: The oracle speaks of E-
* 0999

gyptians,

« AnteriorContinuar »