Imágenes de páginas

tainly the apostle did not mean to condemn Job 12. 22; Ezek. 13. 14, &c. Two or three the due caution now expressed by that word. other alterations of this word would have been The distinction in the uses of this word is made, had the propriety of them occured to me clearly marked in Phil. 4. verses 6, 10. In in due season. verse 6th the apostle writes "Be careful for Ask, or inquire, for demand. The French nothing;" yet in verse 10th he commends the original of this word properly signifies simply Philippians for being careful. These appa-to ask; but usage has, in some measure, altered rent discrepancies are easily removed by sub-its signification in English. In our language, stituting anxious or solicitous for careful, when the word implies right, authority, or claim to it evidently has this signification. See Jer. an answer, or to something sought. Thus in 17.8; Ezek. 12. 18, 19; Luke 10. 41; 1 Cor. Exodus 5. 14, the inquiry made, implies an au7.32, 33, 34. thority assumed by the task-masters of Egypt, Furniture for carriage. The word carriage, or a right to know the reason why the Israelin our common version, signifies that which is ites had not performed their tasks. So Daniel carried, or in our present usage, baggage; 2. 27; Job 38. 3; 40. 7. But in 2 Samuel 11. 7, such things as travelers and armies carry for David did not demand of Uriah, but simply their accommodation. It never signifies a vehi-inquire. In Luke 3. 14, the improper use of cle on wheels, although I am convinced that it demanded is more striking. That the soldiers is thus understood by men of good common ed- should demand any thing from Christ is not to ucation. I have substituted for it furniture, be supposed. So Luke 17. 20; Acts 21. 33. judging baggage not to be a suitable word to But the most objectionable instance of the use be introduced into the text. I have, however, of demand is in Job 42. 4, where Job, addressinserted an explanatory note in the margin, ing the Supreme Being, says, "I will demand Judges 18. 21; 1 Sam. 17. 22. If the word of thee, and declare thou to me." I have, in carriages, used Isa. 46. 1, was intended to sig- such instances, used ask or inquire, which is nify vehicles, it is a mistake; it is not the sense the true sense of the original. of the Hebrew. And if intended for loading, Would God, would to God. These phrases then the following words are improper. occur in several passages in which they are Revive or vivify for quicken. The latter not authorized by the original language, in word in scripture signifies to revive, to give which the name of the Supreme Being is not new life or animate. It is now used in the used; but the insertion of them in the version, sense of accelerate. Quick is sometimes used has given countenance to the practice of inin scripture for living, as the quick and dead. troducing them into discourses and public I have, for the verb, substituted revive or viv- speeches, with a levity that is incompatible ify, and for the adjective, living. Ps. 71. 20; with a due veneration for the name of God. Acts 10. 42, &c. In Job 14. 13, the same Hebrew words are ren

Terrify or drive away for fray; the latter dered O that, the common mode of expressing being entirely obsolete, and not generally un-an ardent wish; and I have used the same derstood. Deut. 28. 26; Jer. 7.33; Zech. 1. 27. words in other passages. See Ex. 16. 3; Deut. Vomit for spew. Lev. 18. 28; Rev. 3. 16, &c. 28. 67. Avenge for revenge. These words seem to God forbid, is a phrase which may be viewhave been used synonymously in former times; ed in the same light as the foregoing. It is but in modern usage, a distinction between several times used in the version, and without them is, if I mistake not, well established; re- any authority from the original languages, for venge implying malice, and avenge expressing the use of the name of God. The Greek just vindication. If so, the use of revenge, as phrase thus rendered in the New Testament, applied to the Supreme Being, is improper. I signifies only "Let it not be," or "I wish it not have therefore substituted for it avenge. Na- to be." I cannot think it expedient to suffer the phrase "God forbid," to stand in the text, for Deride for laugh to scorn. The latter phrase the reason assigned in the foregoing paragraph. is nearly obsolete. 2 Kings 19. 21; Nehem. 2. 19, &c.

hum 1. 2.

[ocr errors]

And it is to be regretted that a practice prevails of using it in common discourse. I have followed Macknight in using for these words, By no means.

Fornication. This word, in modern laws and usage, has acquired a technical meaning more limited than its signification in the scrip- God speed. 2 John 10. 11. This phrase must tures. For which reason among others, I have originally have been "God speed you;" that is, generally substituted for it a word of more God give you welfare or success, or it is a miscomprehensive signification, generally lewd-take for good speed. It could not have been the first, for then the whole phrase must have Uncover, make bare, open, disclose, reveal, for been, "Bid him God speed you." The fact discover. The original and proper sense of undoubtedly is, the phrase was originally good discover is to uncover, and there are phrases speed. In Saxon, good and God are uniformly in which it is still used in that sense. But its written alike; god, the adjective, we now write present signification most generally is, to find, good, and we write goodman, Goodwin, alsee, or perceive for the first time. In most pas- though the English write Godwin. In the sages in our version of the scriptures, it has phrase used in scripture, which seems to have the sense of uncover, make bare, or expose to been formerly proverbial, the Saxon god for view. In Micah 1. 6, the Lord says by the good has continued to be written with a single prophet, "I will discover the foundations" vowel, and the word being mistaken for the of Samaria. But surely the all-seeing God name of the Supreme Being, it came to be had nothing to find or see for the first time. written with a capital initial, God. The Greek The sense of the word is to uncover, to lay word is a term of salutation; the same word bare. See Prov. 25.9; Isa. 3. 17; Lam. 4. 22; is used, Luke 1. 28, in the address of the angel B

to Mary, where it is rendered Hail, and in of trouble to water or other substance, in the Matt. 28. 9, All hail. But God speed, as now sense of stirring, is wholly obsolete. John 5. used, is as improper as God welfare, God suc-4, 7; Ezek. 32. 2; Prov. 25. 26. Yet from the cess, or God happiness. In a grammatical point scriptures we retain the phrase "troubled wa of view, nothing can be more absurd; it is ters." neither grammar nor sense. And it is to be regretted, that such an outrage upon propriety continues to be used in discourse.

Travail, with this orthography, is now used only or chiefly for the labor of child-birth. In other senses, I have substituted for it labor, or toil. Eccl. 1. 13; 2. 23; 1 Thess. 2. 8.

Hungry for an hungred. Matt. 25. 35, &c. Convicted for convinced. James 2. 9. See also John 8. 46; Jude 15.

Prevent. This word is many times used in the version, but not in the sense in which it is now universally used. Indeed, so different are its scriptural uses, that probably very few readers of common education understand it. Strain out a gnat. Matt. 23. 24. The words I have had recourse to the ablest expositors, in our version are "strain at a gnat." It is unEnglish and German, to aid me in expressing accountable that such an obvious error should the sense of the word in the several passages remain uncorrected for more than two centuin which it is used. 2 Sam. 22. 6; Job 3. 12; ries. The Greek signifies to strain out a gnat, and 30. 27; Ps. 18. 5, 18; 21. 3; 59. 10; 119. as by passing liquor through a colander or a 147, 148; Isa. 21. 14. filter. It is not a doubtful point. At may have been a misprint for out, in the first copies.

Take no thought. It is probable that this phrase formerly had a more intensive signifi- Foresaw, in Acts 2. 25, is a mis-translation. cation than it has at present. In Matt. 6. 25, The sense is not saw beforehand, but before in 27, 31, 34, the phrase falls far short of the force, place, or in presence. I have omitted the preor real meaning of the original. I have ex-fix, fore. The propriety of this is determined pressed the idea by Be not anxious. So in by the original passage. Ps. 16. 8. Luke 12. 22, 26.

By and by. This phrase as used in the scriptures denotes immediately, without an interval of time. In present usage, it seems rather to indicate soon, but not immediately. Matt. 13. 21; Luke 17. 7; and 21. 9.

Presently. This word in the scriptures nifies immediately. Matt. 21. 19.

Constrain, for compel. Matt. 5. 41. Compel may or does imply physical force; constrain implies moral as well as physical force, and this seems to be the most proper word.

Froward, Ps. 18. 26, appears to me improperly applied to the Supreme Being. In its sig-present signification, seems to be not merely harsh, but irreverent, and incorrect. I have therefore substituted for it, thou will contend. See also 2 Sam. 22. 27.

Earnestly for instantly. Luke 7. 4.

Insane for mad. In our popular language, mad more generally signifies very angry, which is not always its signification in the common version. I have therefore, in some Man for fellow. The latter word is several instances expressed the sense by insane or en times inserted in our version, without any auraged, words less likely to be misapprehended thority in the original: it implies contempt, by our common people than mad. John 10. which may have been felt, but a translator 20; Acts 12, 15; and 26. 11, 24; 1 Cor. 14. 23. should not, I think, add to the original what is Healed for made whole. When persons re-not certainly known to have been the fact. I cover from sickness, we never say they are have in the place of it inserted man. Gen. 19.9; made whole. This phrase is proper only when Matt. 12. 24, &c. some part of the body is broken. John 5. 6. Whole is not the proper word to be set in opposition to sick. It should be well or in health. Matt. 9. 12.

Body of soldiers. The troops with which Claudius rescued Paul, Acts 23. 27, cannot be called an army, as the word is now understood.

Many people are the words substituted for much people. Numb. 20. 20; Mark 5. 21, &c.

The door shall be opened. Matt. 7. 7. The word door is not in the original, but is necessarily implied in the verb.

Conversation. This word, in our version, never has the sense of mutual discourse, which is its signification in present usage. It now retains the signification it had formerly, chiefly as a technical law term, as in indentures. Its Staff Matt. 10. 10. The original Greek sense in the Bible comprehends the whole word is in the singular number. moral conduct in social life, and 1 have used Master of the house. Luke 22. 11. The in the place of it manner of life, or deport-phrase, good man of the house, is not warranted ment, chiefly the former, as deportment, in or- by the original, which signifies master of the dinary use, is, perhaps, not sufficiently com-house. At the time the Bible was translated, it prehensive. When it occurs, however, it is was customary to call men by the title, good intended to embrace all that is understood by man, instead of Mr. It is seen on the records manner of life, or course of conduct. Ps. 37. of the first settlers in New England; but if it 14; 2 Cor. 1. 12; Gal. 1. 13, &c. was ever proper in our version, which can Offend. I have, in some passages, substi- hardly be admitted, it is now improper. tuted for this word, the words, cause to sin, or Sat at meat. This phrase is improper on to fall into sin. In other places I have ex-more accounts than one. The ancients did plained it in a marginal note. not sit at table, but lay down or reclined on the

Cose vessel for bushel. Matt. 5. 15, &c. There left elbow. I have retained the word sit or sat, is now, I believe, no vessel of the measure of however, but have inserted in the margin an a bushel, in common use. The Jews used explanatory note. At meat, is obsolete, and I lamps, not candles, which such a measure have substituted at table or eating. would extinguish. I have, therefore, substituted close vessel. Vessel is used Luke 8. 16. Agitate, or stir, for trouble. The application

Foreign for strange. The latter word often signifies foreign or not native, and in a few instances I have substituted for it foreign. In

doubtful cases, no change is made. Heb. 11.9; my sight." Mark 10.51. So Luke 8. 9. What Acts 7. 6. See Ezra 10. 2; Acts 26.11; 1 Kings might this parable mean? This mode of ex11. 1, 8. pression is still common among a certain class Boat for ship. In the New Testament, the of people, who ask a stranger, "Pray, sir, what words designating the vessels which were used might I call your name?" There are many on the lake of Tiberias, are generally rendered examples of this improper use of might, where ship. This is wholly improper. Those ves-the sense is more correctly expressed by the sels were boats, either with or without sails. present tense, may. See John 10. 10. No ship, in the present sense of this word, The old word yea is used, in some cases, could be used on a small lake. Besides, we where it is not warranted by the original; and have evidence from the facts stated in the when the original authorizes some word in this evangelists, that the vessels were small; other-sense, it would be better to substitute for it wise they would not have been "covered with even, indeed, truly, or verily. Yes is used in the waves," Matt. 8. 24; nor "rowed" with oars, the New Testament, in two or three passages, Mark 6. 48. In Luke 5, it is said that both and I have introduced it for yea, in several ships were filled with the fish taken in a net, passages of both Testaments.

so that they began to sink. Surely these were Deut. 20. 18. The present order of words in not ships. In John 6. 22, 23, these ships are this verse may give a sense directly opposite to called boats, which is the most proper word, that which is intended. The Israelites were and that which I have used. directed to destroy the Hittites and other heaGo thy way, he went his way. These and then nations, to prevent the Israelites from similar forms of expression occur often in the adopting their idolatries and vices; but the version; but in the New Testament, and some-passage, as it now stands, is, that they, the times in the Old, the words thy way, his way, heathen, may teach the Israelites not to do afyour way, are not in the original, which is sim-ter their own abominations. Surely the heaply go. The additional words were introdu- then would not teach the Israelites to avoid ced probably from the Hebrew phraseology, or their own practices. By transposing not and in conformity to popular use; but they are placing it before teach, the ambiguity is rewholly redundant. I have not been very par-moved.

ticular in rejecting the superfluous words; but Holy Spirit. The word ghost is now used have done it in some instances. almost exclusively for an apparition, except in Luke 9. 61. The words at home are redun-this phrase, Holy Ghost. I have therefore dant. The phrase in Greek is simply at my uniformly used Holy Spirit. house.

Demon. In the scriptures, the Greek daimon Scribe's penknife, Jer. 36. 23. The transla- is rendered devil; but most improperly, as tors have omitted the word scribe or secretary, devil and demon were considered to be different which is in the Hebrew. It is supposed that in beings. I I have followed the commentators on former times, no person had a penknife, but a the New Testament, in substituting demon in secretary; or the word pen was supposed to in- all cases where the Greek is daimon. I cannot clade or imply the word scribe. I am surprised think a translator justified in such a departure however that men, so careful generally to trans-from the original, as to render the word by late every Hebrew word, should have omitted devil. The original word for devil is never this. In the present age, the omission would plural, there being but one devil mentioned in doubtless be a fault. the scriptures.

Safe and sound. Luke 15. 27. This is an- Hell. The word hell in the Old Testament, other instance in which the translators have and sometimes in the New, is used, not for a followed popular use, instead of the original place of torment, but for the grave, region of Greek, which signifies simply well or in health. the dead, lower or invisible world; sheol in HeLiving beings. Rev. 4. 6, 7. &c. The word brew, hades in Greek. I have in most passages beast, in the low sense the word has in present retained the word in the text, but have inserted use, is considered to be very improper in vari- an explanatory note in the margin. In Ezeous passages of the Apocalypse. The word kiel 31, I have rendered the word grave in two signifies animals or living beings; and I have or three verses, to make the version conformaused the latter word as more becoming the dig-ble to verse 15. nity of the sacred oracles. Master. This word is frequently used in the Passover for Easter. Acts 12. 4. The ori-New Testament for teacher; doubtless in conginal is pascha, passover. formity with the popular or vulgar practice of Men, brethren. Acts 13. 15. &c. The trans-calling teachers of schools masters. I have relators have erred by inserting and between tained the word, but have added an explanathese words, which tends to mislead the reader tory note in the margin.. into the opinion that these are addressed as dif- Provoke. This word formerly had, and ferent characters; whereas the sense is men, sometimes still has, the sense of incite, excite, brethren, men who are brethren. or instigate. In modern usage, it is generally How that. These words are frequently used used in the sense of irritate. This requires the very improperly, where manner is not express-substitution of another word for it in 1 Chron. ed in the original. The original is simply that. 21. 1; Heb. 10. 24; 2 Cor. 9. 22, in which I This is another instance of an inconsiderate have used incite or excite. use of popular phrases. 1 Cor. 10. 1; 15. 3. Ps. 4. 8. The word only is misplaced, and A still more objectionable use of popular thus it gives a wrong sense. I have placed it language occurs in employing the past tense next after thou. might instead of may. When Christ asked Lord for Jehovah. When the word Lord is the blind man what he desired to have done for in small capitals, it stands for Jehovah of the him, he replied, "Lord, that I might receive original. I have not altered the version, ex


cept in a few passages, where the word JE-fying to bear or carry, from which is derived HOVAH Seems to be important; as in Isaiah the sense of speaking, of which fero is an in51. 22, where "thy Lord, the LORD," seem to stance: Fertur, it is said. So from porto be at least awkward, if not unintelligible, to have report. I would suggest that, in like manan illiterate reader. See also Jer. 32. 18, ner, the Hebrew word rendered burden, may where there is a peculiar propriety in express- be rendered report or message; which, if coring the true name of the Supreme Being. See rect, would be better understood. I have realso Jer. 23. 6, and 33. 16. tained burden in the text, but have suggested this amendment in the margin.

Ezekiel 38. 5. I have followed the Hebrew in the names Cush and Phut.

Dodanim. Gen. 10. 4. I have retained this Matt. 27. 66. I have transposed the words, name in the text, although I am well satisfied in order to place the expression of security di- it ought to be Rodanim. My reasons are these. rectly before the means, that is, the watch or 1. The Hebrew Resh is easily mistaken for guard. This is in accordance with the sense a Daleth, as the letters have a near resemof verse 65. The word sure is not the proper word to be used, but secure.


2. The most ancient versions of the PentaIn 1 Thes. 1. 4, I have introduced the mar-teuch have Rodanim, particularly the Septuaginal construction into the text, in accordance gint and Syriac. with Macknight, and with the punctuation of Griesbach. See 2 Thess. 2. 13.

On, upon, for in, into. In the present version, in is often used in the Latin sense, for on, or upon so also into; as in the earth; into a mountain. Gen. 1. 22; 19. 30. This is not good English, according to present usage.

3. It is not easy to give any probable account of Dodanim. The name is evidently different from Dedan.

[ocr errors]

4. The sacred penman places this name among the sons of Javan, (Ionia, Dan. 11. 2,) which shows that the name belongs to Greece or Europe, not to Africa; and the other names Against for by. 1 Cor. 4. 4. By in this verse Elishah, Tarshish and Kittim belong to the must signify against, or the translation is erro- south of Europe; Elishah being probably Helneous. But by has not that signification in las, or interior Greece; Kittim, certain isles in present usage; I have therefore substituted the Levant; and Tarshish, being Tartessus in against. Spain. I therefore infer that Rodanim is RoThere are many passages in which the trans-dan, [Rhodanus] the original name of the lators have inserted and improperly, between clauses which are in apposition, and ought not to be made distinct. In 1 Cor. 4. 13, the words and are appear to give a sense not intended by the apostle. "We are made as the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things." So stands the original; but by the insertion of and are, the apostle is made to say not only that we are in estimation made as the filth of the world, but that we actually are the offscouring of all dividuals. things.

Rhone, with the termination of Hebrew plural nouns. If so, Rodanim signifies the inhabitants of the Rhone or of Gaul, now France.

The translation of the tenth chapter of Genesis, by the use of the word sons, instead of descendants, has, in many instances, led to a misunderstanding of several parts of the chapter. Many of the names of those called sons are plural, and represent nations, or tribes, not in

On the east side of Jordan. Deut. 1. 1.4; Testimony is substituted for record, the lat-4. 46. The translations of the scriptures differ ter, in this sense, being entirely obsolete. in the rendering of the Hebrew word for over, Testimony is often substituted for witness, as beyond, on the other side. In the Septuagint modern usage inclines to limit the application and Vulgate, this word, in the passages under of witness to the person testifying. consideration, is rendered beyond, [peran, Ye have heard that it was said to them of old trans.] In the English and several other modtime. Matt. 5. 21, 27, 33. In our version the ern translations, the word is rendered on this passage is, was said by them." Dr. Camp-side; the translations being thus contradictobell remarks that all the older versions have ry. This difference has proceeded from the to; as the Vulgate, Montanus, Erasmus, Cas-supposed place of the writer of the book of talio, Calvin, Luther and others; and I may Deuteronomy; the early translators supposing add, this is the rendering in the Italian of Dio-the writer of the passages cited to have been dati, and in the French version published by on the west side of the Jordan; and the modern the American Bible Society. That to is the translators supposing the writer to have been true rendering, seems to be probable, from the on the east side of that river. With regard to fact, that when the original is clearly intended the author of the book in general, there can be to express the sense of by, the Greek words are no question. But it is most obvious that the a preposition followed by a noun in the geni- first five verses of the first chapter, and the last tive; whereas in the passages under conside-six verses of the fourth, were written by the ration, the noun appears to be in the dative, compiler; those in the first chapter serving as like other nouns after a verb, signifying to say or speak. Examples in the same Evangelist may be seen in Matt. 2. 15, 17, 23; 3.3; 4. 14; 8. 17; 12. 17; 13. 35; 21. 4; 27.9; 22. 31.

The affirmation however must be true, with either rendering; for what was said by one person, must have been said to another.

an introduction to the narrative of Moses, which begins at the sixth verse. That Moses was on the east side of Jordan is certain; but is it not a strange supposition that Moses, addressing the Israelites, should tell them repeatedly on which side of the river he was? In the 47th and 49th verses of chapter fourth, we Burden. Isaiah 13. 1. The verb from which are informed that the place was on the side of the Hebrew word is formed, signifies to bear, Jordan, eastward, towards the sun-rising. As and the noun, that which is borne or conveyed. there is no question with respect to the fact, But in Latin we find examples of words signi-land as the different translations mean the same


thing, I have removed all uncertainty on the phrates and the Nile, whose sources are seversubject, by using the words, on the east side of al thousand miles distant, could both proceed Jordan. from Eden. Yet so ignorant of geography Red Sea. This appellation of the gulf of were the Greeks and Jews, that even Josephus Suez, or Arabian Sea, has been so long and expressly refers the river Gihon, which generally used, that it may not be expedient to compassed the whole land of Ethiopia," to the change it. It was first used by the Greeks, Nile. But there is no difficulty in determining and introduced into the Septuagint, from this to be a great mistake. which our translators have adopted it. It is Cush in Hebrew is in Chaldee Cuth, and the probable that this gulf was formerly called the word in the passage under consideration is unSea of Edom, from the Edomites who inhabi-doubtedly the Cuthah and Cuth, mentioned in ted the country on the east of it, which the 2 Kings 17. 24. 30, the country from which Greeks called Idumea; and as Edom, in He-Salmaneser drew inhabitants to re-people Sabrew, signifies red, the Greeks translated the maria, after the captivity of the ten tribes. It word red, and gave to this gulf the appellation is very probable that the Cossei mentioned by of Red Sea; a name of no appropriate signifi- Pliny, Lib. vi. 27, were the inhabitants of the cancy, as applied to that gulf, for the waters of same country. This author informs us that it are no more red than the water of any other the Cossei inhabited the country eastward of sea, or of the ocean. the Susiani in Persia. He also mentions the Sf. Deut. 1. 1. In this passage, the Eng-river Eulæus, the Ulai of Daniel, the prophet; lish translators following the Septuagint, have and says that this river separates the Elymais rendered the Hebrew word Suf, Red Sea; from the Susiani. (not Zuph, as printed in the margin of our Bi- In Isaiah 11. 11, we read that the Israelites bles) This word signifies sea-weed, and this were to be recovered from Assyria, and from sense it retains to this day in some of the Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and Gothic dialects. The same word is used in from Elam, and from Shinar. Cush is here Exodus, with reference to the Red Sea; but named in connection with Elam and Shinar, always in connection with the Hebrew word as well as with Egypt; and Ethiopia, now so for sea. In the first verse of Deuteronomy, it called, cannot be intended by Cush, as the Isis used without the Hebrew word for sea; and raelites were never dispersed into that counof course the use of sea in our translation is not try; at least, not to any extent, at that period. authorized by the original. In Isaiah 37. 9, we find mention made of Now in the fifth verse, we are informed that Tirhakah, king of Ethiopia, or Cush, which the Israelites were then in the land of Moab, must have been the same country, as this king which was on the east side of the Salt or Dead was making war upon the king of Assyria. Sea; two, three, or four hundred miles from Now if Cush here mentioned was the modern the Red Sea, and in a different latitude. The Ethiopia, then the Ethiopians of Abyssinia had Israelites then could not have been over against made war upon Sennacherib, which cannot be the Red Sea, commonly so called. This would supposed.

be like saying Albany is over against Pitts- There was another Cush, which is frequentburg. In the loose way in which the Bible is ly mentioned in the scriptures. This was in often read, especially those parts of it which Arabia. Moses, when in Midian, near the do not immediately concern our salvation, this Red Sea, married a woman called an Ethiomistake may have passed unnoticed by most pian, but really a Cushite, one of that nation in readers; though not by inquisitive commenta- Arabia, which invaded Judea in the reign of tors. But our young people now study the Asa, with an immense army. These people or scriptures with maps of Syria and Egypt. Let their country are mentioned by the prophets in any person inspect a good map of those coun- connection with Egypt and Midian. Gen. 10.6; tries, and first see the position of the land of Hab. 3. 7; Is. 43. 3. With Philistia and Tyre. Moab, and then that of the gulf of Suez, and Ps. 87. 4. With the Lubims and Libyans. 2 he will perceive at once that the Israelites Chr. 16. 8; Dan. 11. 43. were not over against the Red Sea; and of course he will be embarrassed, or inclined to question the truth of the narrative.

Ezek. 29. 10. "I will make the land of Egypt waste and desolate, from the tower of Syene to the border of Ethiopia." This Ethiopia, Cush, It may be that the word Suf was intended cannot be the modern Ethiopia, for Syene was for the Dead or Salt Sea. At any rate, by in- at the extreme border of Egypt on the south, troducing this Hebrew word into the English nearly contiguous to Ethiopia, and if the word version, we are sure to be right, and not expose Cush had been intended for the modern Ethiothe scriptures to the charge of error or appar-pia, the district of country here described would ent contradiction. not have included Egypt, the country to which the prophecy was applied.

If the same word in Num. 21. 14, refers to the same place, it ought not to be rendered Red Sea. Cash for Ethiopia. Gen. 2. 13. By follow- We have then clear evidence that the word ing the Septuagint, in rendering the Hebrew Cush, in the scriptures, refers to two countries, Cush by Ethiopia, the translators have intro-one in Persia, and the other in Arabia; neither duced confusion into the geography of the Bi-of which was the modern Ethiopia. Whether ble; and laid the foundation for many mistakes the word, in any passage, refers to the modern and much skepticism. I well remember that Ethiopia, is a question that it is not necessary when I supposed Ethiopia, here mentioned, to to discuss in this note.

In 2 Chr. 21. 16, we read of Arabians that were near the Ethiopians.

be the country now called by this name, my The modern Ethiopians are descendants of faith in the authenticity of the scriptures was Arabians. This fact I can affirm from some shaken; for I could not conceive how the Eu-knowledge of their language, no small part of

« AnteriorContinuar »