Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

the remarks on Rom. ix. 5; and as they afford an ordinary specimen of Mr. W's ability in refutation, we shall insert the whole of his observations on the text.

• Rom ix. 5. “ Of whom (the Israelites) as concerning the flesh, " the Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.

($ , 6 χριστος, το καλά σάρκα, ο ών επί πάνων Θεός, ευλογήθος εις τες αιωνας. This seems abundantly plain; so plain, and so decisive, that if there were not another text in the whole Bible, directly affirming this great truth, I know not how I should satisfy myself in rejecting its explicit testimony.-It has accordingly been put upon the rack, to make it speak, by dint of torture, a different language.

• It might, perhaps, be enough to say, respecting this passage, that according to the order of the original words, the received translation is the most direct and natural rendering. This, so far as I know, no one has ventured to deny. All that has been affirmed is, that it is capable of bearing a different sense. And this accordingly has been attempted in no fewer than five different ways:

• Of whom, by natural descent, the Christ came. God, who is ! over all be blessed for ever."'*Whose are the fathers, and of

whom-the Christ came, who is above them all (the Fathers). • God be blessed for ever!'- Of whom the Christ' came who is • over all things. God be blessed for ever!'t-Of whom the • Christ came, who is as God, over all, blessed for ever!'1-And by a conjectural emendation, of whom the Christ came, (and) whose, • or of whom is the Supreme God, blessed for ever.'S

With regard to the last of these various modes of evading this troublesome text, the severest terms of reprobation are not too strong. Conjecturat emendation of the original text, is an expedient which all critics are agreed, nothing but indispensable necessity can in any case justify. In the present instance, the alteration is not only a most unwarrantable liberty with the sacred text, but even if on this ground it were admissible, it is liable to other objections, on principles of syntax, and of propriety as to sense. These, how. ever, it is needless to state; because the emendation itself, although still suggested, as in its nature most happy and plausible,' and spoken of in terms that shew evident reluctance to part with it?, is acknowledged to be unsupported by a single manuscript, version, or authority, and is not insisted on. I must be allowed, however, to add, without questioning the ingenwity of its inventor, that its plausibility can only be felt by a mind strongly prepossessed in favour of the meaning which it is designed to support.

The translation again, which qualifies the meaning of the term God, and to mark its being used in an inferior sense, introduces a

Placing the full stop after capxa. # In this and the preceding, it is placed after tri nav, * The received punctuation is retained.

*Ny ở is the conjectured reading here for ó ür. i Belsham's Calm Inquiry, p. 224.

particle that has nothing corresponding to it in the original whe is is as God,” c. is so completely gratuitous, so totally unwarranted by any thing that bears the remotest resemblance to principle; nay, so directly inconsistent with that ascription of supremacy and of eternal blessings, which is in the very verse connected with the name; that I should not have thought of mentioning it, had it not been for the sake of showing to what shifts a critic, even of eminent talents, (Wakefield,) may be reduced when, rejecting the plain and obvious meaning of a text, he is desirous to strike out something new, and to give it a turn that is original, and peculiar to himself,

I mention it also, indeed, as being a sufficiently convincing evidence, that this critic did not feel himself satisfied with the other expedient adopted by his friends in general, which, by altering the punctuation, would convert the latter part of the verse into a doxology. And it is not to be wondered at, that he should have felt this ground untenable. For there is not one of these three ways in which this has been attempted, which has not been shewn to involve either a violation of a principle of syntax, or a deviation from the ordinary, perhaps I should say, the invariable arrangement of the words, when an ascription of praise is intended (invariably at least in the practice both of the Septuagint and the New Testament writers), or both these anomalies together. But besides these considerations as to the construction of the words in the original, there is something in the antithetical form of the sentence, which dlearly indicates the same thing, and confirms, if such confirmation were necessary, the common translation. I allude, as you will perceive, to the phrase, “according to the flesh.is not this expression intended to distinguish what he was thus, from what he was otherwise ? Does it not immediately suggest the question" What was he else ?—What was he not according to the flesh ?”. The ordinary translation of the phrase in question conveys the precise meaning of the original :-"as concerning the flesh,” that is

as far as respects the flesh;" or, “ as to his human nature,” which is thus contrasted with that higher view of his person, according to which he was the possessor of underived and independent existence. Remove froin the words this idea of antithesis, and you deprive them of all force and meaning whatever ; you convert them into a useless and unnatural pleonasm, which adds weakness instead of strength and propriety to the expression and the senti. ment: “He could not be better or greater than Abraham or Isaac “by this fleshly origin, “and to insist so particularly upon it would “ have rendered the matter more marked and certain; but there is

a magnificent rise in the climax when we come to read that this « Christ who came of the fathers according to the flesh was “ indeed, and in reality GOD BLESSED FOR EVER !” As to transłating the words in question "by natural descent,” not only is it liable to the objection in all its force, which has just been stated ; but it is likewise a most arbitrary freedom with the words themselves, which is utterly inadmissible, and deserving of the severest reprehension.' pp. 69-72.

[ocr errors]

لا لا

To a note, in which are inserted some observations on this text, extracted from one of our former volumes,* is added the following ingenious remark.

· Against the conjectural alternative of my into wró,-there is another consideration, which I do no not find adverted to by any

of the writers above referred to, but which appears to me very decisive. It arises from the situation of the conjunction rol in the fifth verse. In it and the verse preceding, there is evidently an enumeration of articles which constituted the peculiar honour of the Israelitish people. Οι τινές εισιν Ισραηλίται ων η υιοθεσία, και η δόξα, και αι διαθήκαι, και η νομοθεσια και η λατρεία και αν επαγγελία ; Ων οι πατερες KAI ́ εξ α', ο χριστος το κατα σάρκα και αν έπί πάνΓων θεός ευλογητός εις τους αιώνας, αμην. Nothing can be more evident, than that the sai here brings us to the closing particular in the enumeration. p. 420, note D.

We could with pleasure extract numerous passages equal to these in rational criticism, and conclusive reasoning. At the same time, we frankly confess, that there is not much novelty or originality in the general arguments; nor is this to be regretted. Novelty in religion is always to be suspected. It cannot be supposed, that after the lapse of seventeen centuries, during which the most ingenious, perspicuous, and devout minds, have been employed in ascertaining the sense of Scripture, that much that is radically and substantially new, can be discovered. And it is no slight confirmation of our faith, that the identical reasonings in defence of the great peculiarities of Christian truth, which appear in the masterly volume before us, may be found in a host of advocates that have preceded him. Each age, however, has its “ Jannes” and its “ Jambres ;” and it is well that each age has its powerful and eloquent defenders of the “ faith “ once delivered to the saints." We rejoice in the accession of Mr. Wardlaw to this sacred cause.

In our next number we shall willingly prosecute our analysis of his valuable discourses.

(To be concluded in the next Number.)

Art. III. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of Lon

don. For the Year 1813. Part I. 4to. pp. 156. price 14s. G. and W.

Nicholl, Pall Mall. 1. On a New detonating Compound In a Letter from Sir · Humphrey Davy, LL.D. F.R.S. to the Right llon. Sir Joseph Banks, Bart. K. B. P.RS.

extraordinary compound was first discovered at Paris ; but the mode of preparing it was very carefully kept secret. The fact of the discovery was coinmunicated to Sir H. Davy,

* E. R. Vol. V. pp. 331, 332.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

by a philosophical correspondent, who merely stated, that it was a combination of azote and chlorine.

Sir H. had made many unsuccessful attempts to combine these substances, before this fact came to his knowledge ; but on renewing his efforts after he had been made acquainted with it, he had the satisfaction of accomplishing his object; and of producing a compound, which, from its properties, there can be no doubt was the same as that made at Paris.

The combination, however, appears to have been made, in this country, in the first instance, by Jno. James Burton, jun. in the course of some experiments on the action of chlorine on nitrate of ammonia; but he did not examine it, and it was not until Sir H. was reminded of this circumstance by his friend Mr. Children, that the coinpound was directly formed, and its properties were examined. Sir H. D. found that the combination was formed equally well by exposing a solution of oxalate of ammonia, or a weak solution of pure ammonia, to the action of chlorine, as by a solution of the nitrate ; but the combination was less permanent in the solution of ammonia, than in the others. Its preparation, under any circumstances, requires the utmost caution.

This compound has the colour and transparency of olive oil, but it is less viscid. Its smell is extremely offensive, and its effect on the eyes is pungent and distressing. When introduced under water into the receiver of an air pump, the receiver being afterwards exhausted, it assumes the elastic form, and in this state it is rapidly absorbed or decomposed by water. If warm water is poured upon it in a glass vessel, it expands into a globule of elastic fluid, of an orange colour, and which diminishes as it passes through the water.

It explodes at sa low a temperature that even the heat of the band is sufficient for that purpose; and such is the force of its explosion, that a globule noi larger than a grain of mustard seed, when warmed by a spirit lamp, broke the glass tube which contained it, into very minute fragments. A vivid light, and a sharp report, accompany its explosion. A minute globule of it thrown into a glass of olive oil, oil of turpentine, or naphtha, exploded with great violence, and shattered the glass into fragments. Its action with ether is slight, a small quantity of gas being disengageil, and a substance resembling wax formed, The action of alcohol converts it into a white, oily substance, destitute of explosive properties. A particle of it brought into contact with a small portion of phosphorus under water, produces a brilliant light, with disengagement of azotic gas ; but if the quantity of the new compound exceed the bulk of a mustard seed, the vessel is uniformly broken. With mercury it forms a substance resembling corrosive sublimate, a portion of

eause.

gas being at the same time disengaged. It has no action on tin, zinc, sulphur, or resin. It detonated most powerfully when Sit was thrown into a solution of phosphorus, in alcohol, or ether.

In muriatic acid it disappears without explosion, elastic fluid being rapidly disengaged. It exhibits no particular action with dilute sulphuric acid, but it disappears in the liquor of Libavius, to which it imparts a yellow tinge.

From these facts Sir H. Davy coucludes, that it is a combination of chlorine and azote, and is probably precisely the same as that discovered at Paris. The extraordinary circumstance of its expansion into an elastic fluid being attended with heat and light, which stands alone among chemical phenomena, Sir H. thinks has the nearest analogy with the evolution of light in the discharge of an air gun, and both have probably the same

The mechanical power produced by the detonation of this remarkable compound, and the velocity of its action, appear to be greater than those of any other body yet known. II. Observations relative to the near and distant Sight of

different Persons, By James Ware, Esq. F. R. S.

The observations contained in this paper, are rather of a miscellaneous nature, and do not involve the investigation of any particular point of inquiry connected with the subjects to which it relates. Some of the facts, however, are curious, and may admit of useful application.

Consiilerable pains have been taken by Mr. Ware, to ascertain the proportion of persons, in the different classes of society, who are affected by near-sightedness; and he finds reason to conclude, that it is very considerably greater in the higher classes, than in the lower. This peculiarity of vision is rarely met with in early life ; and, in these cases, Mr. W. condemns the early use of concave glasses, as they have a tendency to fix the imperfection, and render it permanent, while the natural efforts of the eye, unaided by glasses, are frequently capable of correeting the slighter degrees of it. He remarks also, that when the aid of a concave glass is first resorted to, it is important to select the lowest number which is suited to the eye; for, though the number above that, may afford the most perfect vision, yet, after sometime, it becomes necessary to change it for one still higher, until at last it may become difficult to procure one sufficiently concave to afford the correction requisite for distinct vision,

Mr. Ware gives an account of some experimens with Belladonna, made to determine its effects on the range of distinct vision, the results of which agreed with those obtained by Dr. Wells; these experiments, however, shed no light on the means by which the eye is enabled to accommodate itself, with such

« ForrigeFortsett »