Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets :—would he then have answered him by this woman?

But Saul's words, 3x25x3 910p (v. 8), prove beyond all possibility of refutation, that he desired and expected interdicted practices; and the whole shows that the woman resorted to them. That the ob,* which in some parts of our version is rendered a familiar spirit," was ventriloquism, is very strongly indicated by the application of tyyaorpíuv oc to it in the Septuagint and Josephus, and demonstrated in Isaiah xxix. 4,-|782 2183 7.71 720p, and thy voice shall be LIKE OB from the earth. The powerfully imitative word goen, at the end of the verse, leaves nothing wanting to the argument.

The woman had doubtless seen Samuel, and therefore could perfectly describe him; and the author well remarks, that On758 at ver. 15, should not be rendered gods, but a ruler, or mighty one. “ Then the question would be natural: what form is he of?” This criticism is decided by the woman's reply, in which the Subx is called “ an old man with a mantle.

In connexion with this inquiry Dr. Russell states, that “the immortality of the soul is not taught in the books of Moses, nor in any way connected with the doctrine of future reward and punishment, but that the separate existence of the spiritual part of man after death is distinctly admitted, even as an article of popular belief." Upon this he founds the origin of necromancy. But with respect to people believing a separate state after death, whose priesthood undoubtedly studied their legal types, it is impossible to fix the extent of this doctrine, or to show, whether or not from the temporal rewards and punishments of the law they argued to those of a future state. We, indeed, can scarcely imagine the ancient Hebrews to have been absolutely ignorant of this tenet, notwithstanding the ingenious arguments which Bishop Warburton has indulged on the contrary opinion. In Job and the Hebrew poets, Sheòl (5100, Qồns) is described as a palace with gates and bars (xvii. 16, xxxviii. 17; Ps. cvii. 14-16); it is represented mighty and insatiable, and absorbing all men into it, whilst God is exhibited exercising authority over it, bringing men into it or delivering them from it, according to his good pleasure. (Cf. 1 Sam. ii. 6j; Ps. xxx. 3; xlix. 15). The language, in which the arrival of the

Neither the Hebrew nor the Arabic offers us a satisfactory etymology of 218. Jablonski imagined it to be discoverable in the Coptic OTHB, a sacrificer-a priest given to incantations. The word was probably borrowed from the pagan inhabitants of Canaan, and it is not unlikely that the Sanskrit Ja ab, to sound, may contain the force of its root.

king of Babylon in Sheòl is pourtrayed (Is. xiv. 9, sqq.), however it may be clothed in poetical imagery, unequivocally shows the popular belief of a future state; and expectations of a resurrection or resuscitation to conscious life, may be seen in Is. xxvi. 19; Ezek. xxxvii. 1-14, and many passages of the Psalms. In accordance with this, Job was persuaded that his Redeemer lived, or was the living one, and that after his release from the flesh (W22, xix. 26), he should see God.* But on this subject the Jewish notions became more definite after the Babylonian captivity; for in the second book of the Maccabees, and in the book of Wisdom, which was probably written by an Alexandrine Jew, the soul's eternal reunion with God, the resurrection, the final judgment, and its retributive sentences are very clearly set forth.† The Pharisees, it is well known, blended this doctrine with the metempsychosis and the revolution of Æones; and hence it was, that our Saviour's promulgation of the resurrection was so directly at variance with the opinions which they cherished and taught. "Reviewing, therefore, this article of faith, as far as we can, in the several periods of Jewish history, we perceive nothing which will assure us, that the Israelites were entirely ignorant of future rewards and punishments.

.

.

.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

* Not in my flesh, which would destroy the parallelism in the preceding part of the verse. The word is literally è carne meå, as many foreign scholiasts have rendered it.

+ The following comparison of the apocryphal books with the New Testament may be worthy of the reader's attention :Wisdom iii. 1

Luke xxiii. 46. 3

vi. 23. 4, 5

Rom. viii. 18; cf. 2 Cor. iv. 17, 18; Heb,

xii. 10, 11. 7.

Matt. xiii. 43; cf. 1 Cor. xv. 40. 8

2 Tim. ii. 12; cf. Rom. viii. 17; 1 Cor.

xv. 24, 27. 13, 18

Rom. ii. 5,6; cf. 2 Cor. v. 10; Acts xvii. 31. 14

Luke vi. 23. iv. 7

Apoc. xiv. 13.

Matt. xxv. 26.
16

Apoc. ii. 26, 27.
vi. 20, 21 Matt. xix. 28; cf. Luke xxii. 29, 30,

xvij. 21 ; cf. ver. 14 2 Pet. ii. 17.
2 Macc. vii. 9. 36 John v. 28, 29.
11

Matt. xvii. 8. 29

John xiv. 2, 3. xii. 44

29. xv. 12, 14 1 Tim. ii. 5; Heb. vii. 24, 25; cf. ix. 24;

1 John ii. 1. Siracides vii. 17

Mark ix. 44. of. Judith xvi. 17)

[ocr errors]

.

[ocr errors]

v. 15

.

[ocr errors]

.

.

.

Cor. xv.

.

.

. }

was the ארבעה שנה ,at the periodls to which we have referred

Dr. Russell adverts to the difficulty in 2 Sam. xv. 7,. which is presented by the proper period, from which the forty years should be computed. But, as the Syriac and the Arabic versions, Josephus and Theodoret, reduce this number to four, we are bound to conclude that they had an authority in the text of their day; and as Josephus (Ant. vii. 8) says, that these four years should be reckoned from the time of Absalom's reconciliation with his father on account of his former conspiracy, we have an easy and reasonable solution of the chronological difficulty. Dr. Russell, indeed, appears inclined to sanction it. The words in our present copies are 70 Dya7x; now, if we suppose, that

, reading, we may readily imagine, that a careless transcriber might have inserted in his copy for 7, and that a corrector, or a subsequent transcriber, finding it there, may have inserted the ', without consulting other MSS., knowing that there was some error in the text before him; and thus have occasioned the variation from four to forty. *

We think, that in the explanation given of David's sin in numbering the people, the two reasons, which the author has suggested, should be combined. Josephus is certainly correct, when he supposes that the particular law, which David violated, was that which exacted half a shekel from every male of mature age, who was subjected to a census; and this idea is considerably strengthened by the contrite king's unwillingness to accept as a present Araunah's threshing-floor, oxen, and implements, and his determination to purchase them, lest he should offer unto the Lord that which cost him nothing.For the price which he paid was one hundredfold more than that which the law demanded from an individual. But it was not merely this infraction of the law which constituted his sin, and caused Joab and others to attempt to dissuade him from the census; it was also the motive;t--which was a vain-glorious and presumptuous desire to contrast the flourishing state of the kingdom under his reign with its humbled and crippled condition under Saul.

The author conjectures, that the Cherethites and Pelethites,

Some MSS, read Ov instead of 70. In this case, the computation will be from the beginning of this second conspiracy, as it is mentioned in the first verse of the chapter. The reading of forty days for forty years will, in this view of the subject, remove every difficulty.

† A perusal of 2 Sam. xxiv. 3, will confirm this idea ; for each of the modes of punishment, which God proposed to David, was directed against his presumptuous pride, and was calculated to diminish the number of armed men, on whom he relied. . We certainly observe in Sanskrit fatta kīrātă, a barbarous tribe, inhabiting mountains and woods, which lives by the chase; and

whom David enlisted when he resided among the Philistines, were archers and slingers. We do not exactly see the authority on which he has pronounced them to be such, although we have offered corroborative etymologies in the note. As in 2 Sam. xv. 18 they are associated with the Gittim, or men of Gath, it is possible that their names may have been derived from some places in Palestine. The Arabic roots ls and Sabi, both indicative of swiftness, also offer an explanation of the words. He certainly is wrong in identifying the latter with the velites, or light troops of the Roman legion,

as it regards the etymology of the terms; because with the proofs of a connexion between the Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit, which we now have, there cannot be a doubt, that arq, vēl, or amt, vål, to move, whence a vălă, an army, unfolds to us the origin of the appellation.

There is great judgment in Dr. Russell's observations on the Psalms; and he has shown that little dependence can be placed on the different theories concerning their metres. Much nonsense has been written on their titles, in which some have even discerned most recondite mysteries; and men of learning, such as Bertholdt, have speculated in a most extraordinary manner on the subject. But, as Forskel and Dr. Russell remark, these titles were undoubtedly names of more ancient tunes, to which the Psalms were intended to be sung and played. In this opinion Hahn generally concurs, although his fancy has contrived to dis

, . The Songs of Degrees, nibyojiru,LXX.udai tūvåvaßaquwv, Dr. Russell ingeniously proposes to render the “Songs of the Steps,” from the probability that these Psalms were recited or sung at the vestibule of the temple, on the stair which led to the door of the holy place. Lightfoot supposed them to have been sung on the fifteen steps which rose in the courts of the temple.

Notwithstanding the ingenuity of the hypothesis, we think that this title had a different interpretation. We are convinced that they were so called, as having been the Psalms sung by the pilgrims going to Jerusalem at the great festivals ; for in this sense aby is continually used in the Old Testament (cf. 1 Kings xii. 27, 28; Ezra vii. 6, 7; Zach. xiv. 16, 17), and we are assured that the meaning of the Greek word was the same, be

may refer the word to the root, o krị, to hurt, to injure, to kill, whence afaa kritin, nom. kriti, skilful, &c. cher kråth, is also a root of the same meaning. On similar grounds, the Pelethites may be re

fom přl, to throw.

ferred to

cause avaßaívelv has this force in the New Testament (cf. Matt. xx. 18; Acts xviii. 22). The Syrians had also a sort of odes, which ; 1

We next notice the writer's remarks upon the cherubim. That they had an emblematical signification we readily allow, but what that signification was, it is impossible to determine. They have been compared to the Sphinx, to Garuda, and many other pagan compounds, but the Scriptures afford not even a glimpse sufficient to guide us in bringing the inquiry to a satisfactory result. It is a point, which we must leave as great a mystery as we have found it. It is even doubtful if the word be of Hebrew origin, because they are mentioned before the time of Abraham, in whose days we imagine the Hebrew to have arisen; and it is very certain, that the real root does not exist in Hebrew, and that the senses supplied by those in the cognate tongues are exceedingly inapposite. And, though we have shown in a note, that the Sanskrit may perchance have preserved the sense of the original root, we cannot critically avail ourselves of it, as the comparison is but hypothetical.

Josephus describes them as flying creatures; which description agrees with that of Ezekiel, Daniel, and St. John. Even if we grant, that the bovine form preponderated, we cannot, with Dr. Russell and others, allow the signification of the word to have proceeded from a root indicative of ploughing, * because it by no means answers to the character in which they are mentioned in Scripture; nor, with others, from one indicative of carving or engraving, because it would be indefinite. Nor is there validity in Eichhorn's suggestion of loja a former of images or idols; because it is far more probable, that the cherubim themselves gave this derivative sense to the Syriac.

We do not agree to the evident bearing of Dr. Russell's argument, that soon after the apostasy in worshipping the golden calf, the cherubim were ordered to be made and placed in the tabernacle, on account of the hardness of the people's hearts, and their propensity to Egyptian idolatry; because if such had been the motive, it would have been a virtual sanction to their transgression. The cause is among those things which we cannot discover; and the meaning of those, which were over the mercy-seat, may have been connected with that of the

The sense of the original root seems, from the prophetic descrip

tions, to be preserved in the Sanskrit tal ch'harb, or

ch'harb, or to garb, to

move forwards, to go; for although the grammatical forms of the Hebrew and Sanskrit are totally different, they have many words in common, which, if Vans Kennedy's theory be correct, will admit of an easy solution. Compare with this etymology 31 y 337. Ps. xviii. 11.

« ForrigeFortsett »