Page images
PDF
EPUB

and Syriac dialects, although they retain its derivatives, of which Ali is plainly one: as also the verb Alah, in Arabic, to adore or worship. See Cocceius.

3. More exceptionable is the derivation. offered by the B. C. p. 152.-" It appears “to come from the root in its primary sense of "approaching or coming close to" -accedere: (whence also descends the preposition [El, signifying Ad, Versus, Juxta]): according to this etymology, it will more particularly express the omnipresence of GOD, under the notion of a proximity" or "coming close up to every thing." When it takes the suffix of the first person singular, it expresses the suppliant's sense of God's constant proximity to him. In Psalm xxii. 1, [The] MESSIAH prays thus: "My EL, My “EL―i. e. Thou that art usually close beside me, wherefore hast thou forsaken me ?”

66

But we may well ask, How is the relative idea of loco-motion, intimated hereby, to be reconciled with God's filling all space, or being absolutely omnipresent? And how is "constant proximity," or " perpetual closeness to the individual," to be reconciled

[ocr errors]

66

"Ne,

with the Comment:-Thou that art usually close beside me ?-These are inconsistencies, which I leave to the B. C. to reconcile. Besides, 2. His interpretation of the verb ', accedere, is imaginary, (and he grants it is "obsolete" in the Hebrew language, p. 147,) not to be found in any Hebrew lexicon : and 3. was evidently suggested by the preposition , El, Ad, juxta; which he rather unskilfully deduces from the verb; since all the lexicons, without exception, agree in representing as a distinct root itself; as well as the conjunction, Al, signifying "Nequaquam :" And surely these are as totally distinct from each other, and from the noun, (EL, differently pointed or pronounced,) as the English words Ball, Bell, Bill, Boll, Bull, consisting of the same consonants, and differing only in the vowel inserted. But, 4. The B. C. himself has inadvertently approximated more nearly to the leading signification of the word, in that of its descendant 8, p. 150.-" In Exodus, when it is said of Moses, that He should be Elohim to Pharaoh, and Aaron his prophet;" the use of the word is evidently figurative;

,אלהים

[blocks in formation]

and nothing more is meant, than that Moses should appear to Pharaoh as possessed of powers more than human: conferring blessings, and inflicting plagues, (both supernatural,) at his own pleasure, and employing Aaron as his instrument.-4. Approaching nearer to the truth, some of the ablest lexicographers, Kimchi, Nathan, Buxtorf, Pagninus, Castell, Calasio, Leigh, Robertson, Taylor, &c. rank the noun under the triliteral noun, AIL, signifying fortitudo, vis, &c. "might, strength," &c. thus tacitly relinquishing one branch of the Masoretic scheme of etymology: But, as Michaelis, and others, justly observe, the latter is more naturally descended from the former simpler root, by the insertion of a servile Iod: 8,

.אל from

5. Parkhurst, in his Hebrew Lexicon, although he relinquishes the other branch of the Masoretic scheme, exhibiting itself as a root; yet strangely and fancifully explains it "the Interposer, Intervener, or Mediator:" "it expresses the omnipresence of "God, i.e. the universal extension (I will not presume to say of his substance, but) of

and says

[ocr errors]

7

"his

"his knowledge and power."-Although he himself had given a plainer and juster interpretation, in his Greek Lexicon, under the head EAQI-taken from Aquila's rendering of the first word of Ps. xxii. 1.—N, SN,— Ισχυρε με, Ισχυρε με, “ My strong one, My

66

66

strong one." But his whole interpretation of that very important citation, appropriated by OUR LORD to Himself, in his agony on the cross, Matt. xxvii. 46, and Mark xv. 34, is so extravagant and revolting, that whatever respect I may entertain for his piety and erudition, when untinctured with Hutchin

sonian mysticism; (for surely "the man

66

66

raves when he talks of his fire, light, and

spirit," as well observed of another critic of the same school; Brit. Crit. 1800, Feb. p. 208,)—yet, to pass it by uncensured, in elementary works of such extensive circulation, would be ill discharging the functions of a SACRED CRITIC." In this dolorous "exclamation of our blessed REDEEMER," says Parkhurst, "there seems a propriety "and emphasis beyond what has been com

66

monly observed: for Matthew [says] "ABOUT (@Epi) the ninth hour, Jesus cried 6.6 out

K 2

"out with a loud voice, 48, 48, MY GOD, "MY GOD, why hast thou forsaken me !— "The name by which he then addressed THE "DIVINITY [DEITY] referring to his power :---But ‹ Ar the ninth hour, (TMḥ wpa

66

66

66

Ty EvaT, [according to] Mark)-when he was in the very jaws of death, He again “cries out― Exwi, Eλwi, Eloi, ELOI, why "hast thou forsaken me!' —[i. e.] 118,—Thou JEHOVAH, who art not only 8, MY (my powerful) GOD; but [also]

66

66

66

66

bx,

, bound to bear, with my humanity, "the curse due to man for sin—why hast "thou forsaken me !'—for who is m'78, but "Jehovah? Ps. xviii. 32. Compare Gal. ii. 13," &c. And in his Hebrew Lexicon, under 78," to curse," &c. Art. III. p. 24, third edit. He represents, as a participle, or participial noun passive, (formed like, Ps. cxxxviii. 6,) signifying EmaTapaтos, one accursed, or subject to a curse: And such the REDEEMER [also] condèscended to become for us: For" CHRIST "hath redeemed us from the curse of the “law, being made A CURSE (naтapa) for us; for it is written, CURSED (THATαρATÓS)

66

« PreviousContinue »