initial letters of the names. Galatinus from R. Hakkadosh, (who lived about A. D. 150, or rather from Porchetus Salvaticus, or Raymundus Martini,) believes that these twelve letters were wp 1 i. e. Father,

Son, and Holy Spirit.

There is no impossibility in the existence of a name of God consisting of twelve letters, as is stated to have been the case on the authority of Maimonides, because we find different names of God, consisting of various numbers of letters. But Mr. Serle, on the authority of Galatinus, a Christian writer, represents these twelve letters as expressing the names of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. I therefore make a few remarks on this head. 1st, Mr. Serle himself expresses his doubts respecting the source from which Galatinus had obtained his information, whether from R. Hakkadosh, from Porchetus Salvaticus, or from Raymundus Martini." 2ndly, The construction of this sentence of twelve letters is conformable to the European style of writing, but is quite foreign to Hebrew idiom, which requires a conjunction before or Son; but the omission of this shews that it must have been invented by one more accustomed to the idiom of European languages than to that of the Hebrew. 3rdly, Maimonides, the original authority of Mr. Serle, owns that these twelve letters were the initials of other names; whereas Mr. Serle in the explanation of them represents them as composing in themselves three complete names, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, instead of giving a name for each of the twelve letters.

I am not aware how many arguments and illustrations of similar weight and importance to those already discussed may still remain, that have not been brought to my notice; but I trust the inquiry has proceeded sufficiently far to justify me in still adhering to the unity of God as the doctrine taught alike in the Old and in the New Testaments.

I now conclude this Appendix with repeating my

prayer, that a day may soon arrive, when religion shall not be a cause of difference between man and man, and when every one will regard the Precepts of Jesus as the sole Guide to Peace and Happiness.

POSTSCRIPT.

DR. PRIDEAUX, in the fourth volume of his "Connexion," (which has very lately come into my hands,) takes a different view of Isaiah, ch. ix. vers. 6, 7, from that which has been offered in the preceding pages. After quoting the words of the prophet according to the English Version, he says, "Christians all hold that this is spoken of the Messiah; and Jonathan, in the Targum which is truly his, doth on that place say the same.” Hereby he gives out that this prophecy, including the epithets "Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, and the Prince of Peace," is applied by Jonathan, as by Christians, to the Messiah:-I therefore give here the explanation given by Jonathan to verses 6 and 7, which will sufficiently shew the error Dr. Prideaux has committed.

אמד נביא לבית דוד ארי רבי אתיליד לנא בר אתיהיב לנא וקביל אוריתא עלוהי למטרא ואתקרי שמיה מן קדם מפליא עצה אלהא גברא קים לעלמיא משיחא ושלמא יסגי עלנא ביומוהי: סגי רבו לעבדי אוריתא ולנטרי שלמא ליתסוף על כורסי דור ועל מלכותיה לאתקנא יתיה ולמבנה בדינא ובזכותא מכען ועד עלמא

במימרא דיי צבאות תתעבד דא:

"The prophet says, to the house of David a child is born, to us a son is given, and he will take upon himself the preservation of the law; from the presence of the causer of wonderful counsels, the great God enduring for ever, his name will be called the anointed, (in Heb. Messiah) in whose days peace shall be multiplied upon us." "Greatness shall be multiplied to those who obey the law,

and to those who keep peace, there will be no end to the throne of David and of his government: for establishing and for building it with judgment and with justice. now and for ever."

Here Jonathan, in direct opposition to Christians, denies to the son so born the epithets "Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, and Everlasting Father;" and applies to him only the title of "The Prince of Peace," (nearly synonymous with Messiah,) on account of his preserving peace during his reign, as was promised of the Messiah. (2 Kings xx. 19: "Is it not good (says Hezekiah) if peace and truth be in my days?" 2 Chron. xxxii. 26: “The wrath of the Lord came not upon them in the days of Hezekiah.") This application of the term anointed (or Messiah) is made to Hezekiah in the same manner as to other eminent kings, often called Messiah in the Sacred Writings: 1 Samuel xxii. 3: "Behold, here I am! witness against me before the Lord, and his anointed, (or his Messiah,) the king." 2 Samuel xxiii. 1: "David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the Messiah of the God of Jacob," &c. Ch. xxii. 51: "He is the tower of salvation for his king, and sheweth mercy to his Messiah, unto David, and to his seed for evermore." 1 Samuel ii. 10: "The Lord shall judge the ends of the earth; and he shall give strength unto his King, and exalt the horn of his Messiah." Psalm xx. 6: "Now know I that the Lord saveth his Messiah." Isaiah xlv. 1: "Thus saith the Lord to his Messiah, to Cyrus." The reign of Hezekiah was so accompanied with peace and success, that some Jewish commentators entertained the opinion that Hezekiah was really the last Messiah promised by God.

אמר רבי הלל אין להם משיח לישראל שכבר אכלוהו,R. Hillel בימי חזקיה:

"There is no Messiah for the Israelites, for they enjoyed it (i. e. they had him) at the time of Hezekiah." If Trinitarians still insist, in defiance of the above

authorities, and under pretence of the word "anointed" or "Messiah," found in the Targum of Jonathan, that his interpretation should be understood of the expected Messiah, then, as far as depends upon the interpretation given by him of verses 6 and 7, they must be compelled to relinquish the idea that he expected a divine deliverer. Moreover, all other celebrated Jewish writers, some of whom are more ancient than Jonathan, apply the passage in question to Hezekiah, some of them differing, however, from him in the application of the epithets contained in verse 6.

Talmud Sanhedrim, ch. 11, "God said, let Hezekiah, who has five names, take vengeance upon the king of Assyria, who has taken upon himself five names also.” R. Sholomo follows the annotation made by Shammai. "For a child is born," &c. Though Ahaz was wicked, his son, who was born to him to be a king in his stead, shall be righteous, the government of God and his yoke shall be on his shoulder, because he shall obey the law and keep the commandments thereof, and shall incline his shoulder to the burden of God.-And he calls his name, &c. God, who is the wonderful counsellor, and the mighty and everlasting Father, called his name the Prince of Peace, for peace and truth shall be in his days."*

The reader will not suppose the application of the

It is worth noticing, that "to be called" and "to be" do not invariably signify the same thing; since the former does not always imply that the thing is in reality what it is called, but the use of it is justified when the thing is merely taken notice of in that view. See Luke i. 36: "This is the sixth month with her who was called (that is reputed) barren." Isaiah lxi. 3: "That they might be called (or accounted) trees of righteousness." This is more especially the case when the phrase "to be called" has for its subject not a person, hut the name of a person. See Deut. xxv. 10: "And his name shall be called in Israel, the house of him that hath his shoe loosed." Genesis xlviii, 16: "Let my name be named on them."