who art not only, s мY (powerful) Gon; but [alfo] mbs, bound to bear, with my humanity, the curje due to man for tin-why haft Thou for faken me!'- -"for who is mis, but Jehovah? Pf. 18, 32. Compare Gal. 3, 13." &c.—And in his Hebrew Lexicon, under bs, "to curfe," &c. Art. III. p. 24. third edit. He reprefents bs, as a participle, or participial noun paffive, (formed like maa, Pf. 138, 6.) fignifying Exaтaçar, one accurfed, or subject to a curfe: And fuch the RE DEEMER, [alfo] condefcended to become for us: For "CHRIST hath redeemed us from the curfe of the liar, being made ▲ CURSE (naτaga) for us; for it is written, CURSED (ETTINτagar) is every one that hangeth on a tree." Gal. 9, 13.-citing Deut. 21, 23.

ατ

once

So much falfe, prefumptuous, and even blafphemous criticifm, I have feldom been condemned "to cajt down" as a pioneer in the fervice of facred literature! For, 1. waiving the blafphemy of pronouncing "THE BLESSED AND ONLY POTENTATE,"-accurfed!!!-And that No one Speaking by divine infpiration, calleth JESUS, accurfed:" (avadeua). 1 Tim. 6, 15. and Cor. 12, 3.-fo derogatory to "the EVER BLESSED TRINITY," as the inconfiftent Parkhurst himfelf, pioufly and devoutly ftiles' them, just before, p. 21. the whole fabric of his hypercriticifm is bafeless and vifionary, built, 2. on a diftinction without a difference; -For the prepofition περι, "about," in Matthew, and ev or ε71, " in or at," underftood, in Mark, refer precifely to the fame point of time, as is clear from the context;-the exclamation having been but once uttered: and His laft ejaculation," in the very jaws of death"-being expreffive of the highest faith and refignation conceivable: "FATHER, into thy hands I commit my fpirit!" Luke 23, 46. in the words of another prophetic Pfalm, 31, 5.-3. On a blunder, unworthy of an Orientalift, and especially a grammarian and lexicographer: Confounding Mark's Syriac rendering, ns, Exw, of the Hebrew Ha, in Matthew; with an (imaginary) Hebrew participle paffive, ns, "accursed"- which does not occur in that fenfe, throughout the whole range of the Hebrew Scriptures; though often occurring as the proper name of GOD; (fignifying POTENTATE: as will be fhewn hereafter) no lefs indeed than fifty-two times, as well remarked by the B. C. p. 147. And which, with the affix of the firft perfon, uniformly drops the intermediate vau (according to the well known grammatical rule for its exclufion, on the acceffion of a new fyllable) being univerfally written, "MY GOD" (like the Syriac) except in two cafes, Pf. 18, 47. and 145, 1. erroneously, e, in Leufden's and Forster's editions; but judiciously corrected into, in Montanus's Hebrew Bible, of 1752, printed by Plantin; and by Walton, in his invaluable Polyglott Bible, (as Parkhurst himself admits) and confirmed, in the former cafe, by no less than fixty MSS of Kennicott's collation; and in the latter, by fifty-four MSS.-4. Befides, the Syriac rendering,, Exaz, in Mark, is now confidered as faulty, by the ableft editors of the New Teftament, by Wetstein, and by Griefbach, in his fecond edition of the Gofpels, 1796: who both give Haer, as the reading of the Cambridge MS. (formerly Beza's) and of Eufebius, fupported by feveral additional vouchers, in the latter. And furely Ha, (as in Matthew) or HA, accords better with the context of Mark, in the very next verse"He calleth Hav (Elias)" to which they bear a ftriking resemblance; but Exw, only a remote: and which might have crept into Mark's text;

excluding

excluding the true Hebrew words or Ha, by the unfkilfulness of some early transcriber; haftily concluding, that because the laft word of the exclamation was Syriac, (Sabachthuni instead of the Hebrew azabthani) the firft ought to be fo too.

Since, therefore, none of the foregoing derivations of sÆL, will ftand the fore teft of fober and rational criticism, and that no others can be substituted; we are warranted to conclude, that it is itself an elementary root; and that it is not and cannot be a derivative; but rather the venerable parent of the proper names of God, through all the Oriental dialects; of ELOH, in Hebrew; ALAH, Chaldee and Arabic; and in Arabic, with the emphatic article AL, "the" prefixed, ALALAH, ufually contracted into ALLAH; in Ethiopic, ULLAH; and in the language of the South Sea Islands, ALOH; whence Captain Cooke, found "ALO, ALO, the name of the fupreme God of Hapace," one of the Friendly Mands-Firft Voyage to the Pacific Ocean, vol. i. p. 404. cited by Parkhurst, Heb. Lex. p, 24.; who afks, "Could they have got this name from any of the Mahometans?—or must we refer it to a higher and more ancient origin?”

We furely muft refer it to the remoteft origin. And, accordingly, in the book of Job, which probably is the oldeft record, extant in the world; written above 800 years before the Exode of the Ifraelites from Egypt, (as my chronological researches have led me to conclude: fee THE INSPECTOR, p. 184.), occurs no less than fifty-three times; whereas, in the next oldeft book of Genefis, it occurs only feventeen times; as the curious reader may find, on confulting those admirable helps to the Biblical student, Romaine's valuable edition of Calafio's Hebrew Concordance, and Trommius's mafterly Greek Concordance, adapted to the Alexandrine verfion of the Septuagint. mx, its first born, is found no less than forty-one times, (as the B. C. remarks) in the fingle book of Job, out of fifty-seven paffages in all, throughout the purely Hebrew Scriptures: And its plural again, Obs, (fignifying GOD in a fingular fenfe) twelve times alfo, in the book of Job; which all critics allow to be a highly poetical compofition: But how does all this accord with the B. C.'s "fafe conclufion," p. 147.-"That the plural Elohim is the true profe word; and the other (Eloah) a word of poetry; not ufed as a name of GoD in profe, till the Jews, in their captivity, had learned to Chaldaize:" And confequently, that "the plural Elohim is the word, in the applications of which we may fearch for veftiges of the leading fenfe of the obfolete root-if it is any where to be found." And that Elohim includes the acts of making and providential care, and government." p. 148.

Non NOSTRUM eft tantas componere lites.

II. SUPPOSED DERIVATIONS OF ', IAH, and 7, IAHOH. 1. Coccius, Vitringa, James Robertfon, and the B. C. (as before remarked) deduce п', IAH, from the verb ", to be lovely, fair, or admirable : "It is a name (fays the B. C. p. 154.) defcribing Gop, not barely as pofJelling thefe perfections in Himfelf, but as putting them forth in act, for the protection and benefit of the godly. See Vitringa upon Isaiah, 12, 2. and 26, 4. It cannot be adequately rendered in any language. In the Targum, [of both paffages] it is rendered, R, ["timoris" or "terribilis" of Sionita's Latin tranflation, in the Polyglott; but more

correctly, fortitudinis or fortis; the paraphraft, giving it the adventitious fignification of 5, 5s, or its Chaldee derivative, n.] In Greek, it might be, in fome degree, expreffed by Avronanov, or Acтo nadàvтo Maxov: In English, by All-glorious" or "All-adorable."

But, on examining Buxtorf's Lexicon throughout, (which probably is fuller than either his or Schroeder's lift of verbal nouns in their grammars) I do not find a fingle inftance of the exclufion of the second radical, s, without compenfation: In fixty-eight verbals it is retained; and in fix more, it is compenfated by an "epenthetic" Vau. This derivation, therefore, fails, for want of grammatical analogy.

66

2. For the fame caufe, we hefitate not to reject the Hutchinfonian derivations of, IAH, from the Hebrew verb ', to be"; and alfo of ', IAHOН, from its third person future, '', by changing the intermediate Iod into Vau, to give it the femblance of a noun"—an unauthorized "metamorphofis" of the verb, which the B. C. juftly reprobates in Doctor Geddes, (that Mohawk in Sacred Criticism,) p. 153.

8. Equally objectionable is the fuppofed curtailment of from лn', according to the Rabbinical glofs, followed by feveral lexicographers: For furely the Jews would not dare to violate the Tetragrammaton or ineffable name. Befides, it occurs as a special name of God, Pf. 68, 5. &c. and in the primitive doxology HALLELU-IAH-(PRAISE THE LORD)—and is ufed as a diftinct name from ', being connected with it, Ifa. 12, 2. and 26, 4. and, therefore, to prevent tautology, muft contain fome fhade of difference therefrom. But it may be objected, that there is a reduplication of ', in Ifa. 38, 11. and of ', n', Exod. 34, 6.—It must be observed, however, that in the former cafe, the Syriac verfion found ; exhibiting the ufual rendering thereof, 5: which is fupported by two MSS of Kennicott's and De Roffi's collations: the reduplication might have arisen from the accidental change of the middle Vau in mm, into lod; or, perhaps, from its usual abbreviation in the Targums, a double Iod, " In the latter cafe, the reduplication vanishes before a more correct tranflation: "And THE LORD faid: [is] GOD, &c.

THE LORD Hence, feveral of the lexicographers reprefent as a feparate root, Buxtorf, Pagninus, from Kimchi, &c. And the variable B, C. allows it may be taken as a root by itself;" thus giving up its descent from the

יאה verb

4. Moft of the lexicons, Kimchi, Buxtorf, Pagninus, Robertfons, Taylor, &c. rank mm, under the verb mm, ""to be"-(the Chaldee form of п.) supposing that it is taken from the third perfon future, min', Iehveh. But befides the difference of pronunciation between this and my IAHOH; it represents the first radical Iod, of the noun, as borrowed from a fervile lod in the verb: contrary to grammatical analogy.

5. The British Critic, in queftion, ftrongly inclines to the opinion of Hutchinson, Parkhurst, and many others, that the word ', (as being a quadriliteral) is really a compound: "compounded of the divine name IAH, and m, [Hoveh] the Benoni [participle of the prefent tenfe]

of

of the root, in.” And thus, the import of Je-hovah, will be "The All-glorious Self-Exiftent." And, confequently, his paraphrafe of divine titles, Jofh. 22, 22.-EL ELOHIM IAHOVAH, &c. is, " Omniprefent [is]-the All glorious-Self exiftent Maker and Governor," &c.

But the B. C. is equally unfortunate in his explanations of IAH and IAHOH, as of ÆL and ELOHIM, before; and his infertion of the verb fubftantive" is," (which is wanting in the original) is rather injurious to the connexion, in this most fublime and animated, but difficult and involved paffage; containing the folemn appeal to heaven of the Transjordanite fettlers, and vindication of themselves against the charge of idolatry. The whole paffage, I apprehend, may more correctly be rendered, and the divine titles, more fimply explained, thus:

"THE GOD OF GODS, THE LORD! THE GOD OF GODS, THE LORD! Himfelf knoweth, and Ifrael alfo fhall know; whether [we have done this] through rebellion-(and if, through tranfgreffion against THE LORD, fave us not this day!)-to build ourselves an altar, in order to forfake THE LORD; (and if, to offer thereon burnt offering or oblation, or if, to offer thereon peace offering, let THE LORD himself judge!):- Or whether we have not [rather] done it, through a religious fear of [this] thing: that is to fay, Left your children might fay unto our children, hereafter: Whut har ye to do with THE LORD, THE GOD OF ISRAEL, ye children of Reuben and Gad? For THE LORD hath made Jordan a boundary between you and us; Ye have no share in THE LORD: And fo, your children might caufe our children to cease from worshipping THE LORD: Therefore, we faid, Let us build ourselves an altar,-neither for burnt offering nor for facrifice, but for a witnefs between you and us and our pofterities, &c.for a pattern, &c.

This moft noble paffage contains an admirable and authentic fpecimen of the purity and the fimplicity of primitive faith: The leading idea of IAH, I take to be "fameness" or immutability; of its immediate derivative, IAHOH," oneness" or unity; of L, "power"; and of ÆLOHIM, its defcendant, "dominion." And furely these moft ftriking and obvious attributes of the Deity, were moft admirably and judiciously felected, to repel the charge of Idolatry and Polytheifm; by profeffing their belief in the universal fovereignty of " the only true GOD." "The pow erful (GoD) omnipotent (OF GODS) the one (LORD)." As the fame. auguft titles fhould be rendered, Pf. 50, 1. in that moft magnificent fummons of all the nations of the earth, to attend the general judgment; fo finely and awfully illuftrated, Matt. 25, 31-46. and Rev. 11, 17-18. and 15, 3-4. and 19, 6. and 20, 11—15.

And that thefe indeed, are the genuine and fcriptural "notions involved radically in the DIVINE NAMES," I fhall endeavour, with God's help, to prove, in the next communication of

March 23, 1802.

INSPECTOR.

.

THE TARGUMIM, OR CHALDEE PARAPHRASES,

Of ONKELOS, of JONATHAN BEN UZZIEL, (falfely fo called) and of JERUSALEM,

ON THE LAW OF MOSES.

Genefis, Chap. 1, v. 1.

Onkelos. IN the beginning, the Lord created the heaven and the

earth.

Pfeudo-Jonathan. From the beginning, the Lord created the heaven and the earth.

Jerufalem. In wifdom, the Lord created.

0.

2.

And the earth was wafte and empty; and darkness* was upon the face of the abyss. And a wind from before the Lord breathed over the furface of the waters.

P. J. But the earth was confufion and emptinefs, deftitute of the fons of men, and bare of all cattle; and darkness was upon the face of the abyfs; and the spirit of mercies from before the Lord breathed over the furface of the waters.

J. And the earth was confufion and emptinefs, both devoid of the fons of men, and deftitute of every beast; and the spirit of mercies from before the Lord breathed upon the face of the waters.

3.

0. And the Lord faid: Let light be: and light was.

P. J. And the Lord faid: Let there be light, to give light above: and inftantly there was light.

4.

0. And the Lord faw the light that it was good: and the Lord separated the light from the darkness.

P. J. And the Lord faw the light that it was good and the Lord made a divifion between the light and between the darkness.

5.

0. And the Lord called the light day, and the darkness he called night and it was evening, and it was morning, one day..

P. J. And the Lord called the light day, and made it that the inhabiters of the world might work therein; and the darkness he called night, and made it that his creatures thould rest therein. And there was evening, and there was morning, one day.

J. And evening was, and morning was, in the order of the work of creation, the first day.

6.

0. And the Lord faid: Let there be a firmament in the midft of the waters, and let it form a divifion between the waters and the waters.

P. J. And the Lord faid: Let there be a ‡ firmament in the midft of the waters, and let it make a feparation between the upper waters and the lower waters.

* In forming this tranflation, great care has been taken to render the Chaldee in as literal English as the refpective idiom of the two languages would admit. The words in italics in the text are supplied to complete the fenfe: while those fubjoined to the bottom of each page are a literal and clofe tranflation.

+ Between the light and between the darkness.

+

An expanfe.

J. And