Графични страници
PDF файл
ePub

OBSERVATIONS.

8. It is very unfortunate for the cause of reputed orthodoxy, that the only passage in the Sacred Writings which bears any semblance to proof for the doctrine of a Triune God should be a manifest forgery or interpolation, and acknowledged to be such by a great majority of learned men belonging to different persuasions. Though the words within brackets should therefore be erased from every copy of the Scriptures in use, yet the generality of unlearned Christians believe them to have proceeded from the pen of the Apostle John, and to have been the dictate of divine inspiration. This belief they imbibe, in infant years, from what is called the "Scripture Proofs" cited in the Westminster and other Catechisms; they hear the passage quoted, without hesitation, in the pulpit of the fulminating divine; they devoutly read it in the popular works of such authors as JONES and SCOTT; and it forms the chief weapon which they wield in combating the heretical opinions of their Unitarian opponents.

If, however, the passage were genuine, it would afford no countenance to the doctrine of the Trinity. The Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, are indeed mentioned; but nothing is said respecting unity of number or essence, or of three persons in one God. It is more agreeable to the context to understand the disputed words-with BEZA, Calvin, and other Trinitarian commentators-as having a reference merely to unity of testimony;" and it is not improbable, that the writer may have alluded to the baptism of Jesus, on which occasion he was declared to be the Son of God, by the word of the Father, and the appearance of the holy spirit." In corroboration of this view of the passage, it may be observed, that in Scripture the word one is frequently used to indicate unity of design, affection, will, &c. See Appendix, p. 262-3.

x

[ocr errors]

9. In this passage, God, the Father, is not only mentioned as distinct from Jesus Christ and the seven spirits, but characterised by epithets which are never employed in the Bible in reference to any other being." None of the names herein applied to Christ can, with any truth, be considered as pointing out a divine nature; and with respect to the Holy Ghost, no mention is made of him at all. The hypothesis embraced by DODDRIDGE, WARDLAW, and others, that he is represented by "the seven spirits," is altogether arbitrary. In these words there is perhaps an allusion to the Jewish opinion, of there being seven holy angels, whose employment it was to present to God the prayers of the saints;" or, what is more probable, the seven spirits may signify the seven angels, or messengers, who are afterwards mentioned as having the care of the seven churches. But whatever the meaning may be, whether understood to signify seven distinct beings, or only one person, their inferiority to the Eternal One is sufficiently indicated from their being "before his throne," as expressed by St. John.

SECT. II.EXAMINATION OF THE SCRIPTURE EVIDENCE ALLEGED FOR A PLURALITY OF PERSONS IN THE GODHEAD.

ALLEGED PROOF.

1. Gen. i. 1: In the beginning Aleim (or Elohim) created the heaven and the earth.

....

This plural appellation is generally put in agreement with singular verbs, pronouns, and adjectives; as in the first sentence of the Pentateuch, Elohim creavit ;-creavit Dii;-les Dieux créa. This is the ordinary construction through the whole Hebrew Bible. What can we say upon the construction with PLURAL attributives? It is this which forms the great peculiarity of our question: it is this, upon which the chief stress of the argument is laid for an allusion or implication in favour of the doctrine of a Divine plurality.-Smith.

Those who have learned Hebrew know, that, when a plural noun is used to denote a single object (which is the case in various instances), the verb is sometimes put in the plural out of regard merely to the plural termination of the noun. .. This rule affords the true explanation of the few passages in which ALEIM, the Hebrew word for God, is followed by a plural verb; and, by consulting Exod. xxxii. 4,8 ("Let this be thy god, O Israel, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt"), the critical student will find, that a plural verb is employed, even when ALEIM is applied, not to Jehovah the only true God, but to an idol.-Yates.

Elohim, 2. as a pluralis excellentiæ, God in the singular. . . It is sometimes construed (contrary to the general rule concerning the pluralis excellentiæ) with plural adjectives; e. g. 1 Sam. iv. 8; xvii. 26; but the verb is almost constantly in the singular, as in Gen. i. 1. The exceptions are Gen. xx. 13; xxxi. 53. 2 Sam. vii. 23. Ps. lviii. 12.-Gesenius.

In my opinion, this plural [Elohim] is a proof that the Hebrew language was formed when Polytheism was the prevailing religion; on the destruction of which, this form sunk into the expres sion of majesty and dignity.-Eichhorn, as quoted by Dr. Smith.

Elohim: its explanation is Possessor of all powers..... So also, He is the Holy God (Elohim kedoshim, Josh. xxiv. 19), because he perfectly comprises all holinesses.-Rabbi Bechai, as quoted by Dr. Smith from Buxtorff.

[blocks in formation]

SECT. II.EXAMINATION OF THE SCRIPTURE EVIDENCE ALLEGED FOR A PLURALITY OF PERSONS IN THE GODHEAD.

OBSERVATIONS.

1. It has been contended by many Trinitarians, that those names of the Deity which are used plurally in the original of the Old Testament denote a Trinity or a plurality of persons in the Godhead.

To this argument Unitarians reply, that, in the Hebrew language, many words of a singular meaning have a plural termination; being used, probably in most of the instances, to indicate the greatness or the excellence of the subjects and qualities mentioned;"-that individuals of eminence, such as prophets, men in authority, and false divinities, are frequently in the Jewish Scriptures called ALEIM, Gods; ADNIM, Lords, or Masters; &c.—and, that according to the admission of Trinitarians themselves, both Jesus Christ and the Fatherd are singly addressed or spoken of by the Hebrew plural of God. These considerations we deem amply sufficient to overthrow the argument for the doctrine of the Trinity, derived from the application, to the Deity, of ALEIM, and other words of a similar formation. For no one will have the hardihood to assert, that Abraham, Moses, Solomon, and other distinguished men, consisted as individuals of a plurality of persons; and no Trinitarian can possibly believe, that God the Father, and his Son Jesus Christ, are severally more than one person: such an admission necessarily implying, that there are, at the very least, five or six persons, if not five or six beings, in the Godhead. Hebrew grammarians have therefore very properly laid it down as a rule, that "words expressing dominion, dignity, majesty, are commonly put in the plural,”—termed by GESENIUS and others, the plural of excellence. (Wilson's Heb. Grammar, third edit. p. 275.)

The mere English scholar need not be surprised at this anomaly in that ancient and venerable language. Those versed in Greek and Latin have been able to point out in these languages a considerable number of nouns having a plural form and a singular signification; an irregularity which may also be observed in the English words means, news, alms, pains, metaphysics, odds, &c.

Several learned men belonging to the Trinitarian body have acknowledged, that the argument drawn from the application of plural nouns in Scripture to the true God is by no means solid, but weak and vain, if not silly and absurd; that the plural number is frequently employed by the Hebrew writers, not to signify any divine mystery, but merely to express the superior dignity of persons of distinction; and that the Christian Fathers, who were eager enough to discover proofs of a Trinity in the Old Testament, never dreamed of seeking one in ALEIM, or ELOHIM. See Appendix, page 264.

REMARKS-continued from page 102.

The Hebrews, in order to aggrandize the persons and things of which they treat, speak of them in the plural number, although in their nature they are singular.-Macknight.

ILLUSTRATIVE TEXTS.

b 'N (ADNI), owners, lords, masters, applied to

Abraham
Potiphar.
Pharaoh
Joseph
Shemer

A cruel lord

Gen. xxiv. 9, 10, 51.
Gen.xxxix.2-20; xl. 7.
Gen. xl. 1.

Gen. xlii. 30, 33; xliv.

1 Kings xvi. 24. [8,9. Isa. xix. 4.

See also I Kings xxii. 17.

applied to

Exod. vii. 1.

Instances of the plural being used for the singular, both in the Old and the New Testament, are innumerable. Thus, the ark rested on 66 the mountains,” i.e. on one of the mountains of Ararat. "Hex (ALEIM), or 7X (ALEI), gods, was buried in the cities," i. e. one of the cities of Gilead. "Hananiah, the son of the apothecaries," i. e. of one of the apothecaries. "A foal, the son of she asses," i. e. of a she ass. "When the disciples saw it, they had indignation," i. e. when one of the disciples, viz. Judas, saw it, &c.— Drummond.

To those who are tolerably versed in Hebrew and Arabic, which is only a refined Hebrew, it is a well-known fact, that, in the Jewish and Mohummudan Scriptures, as well as in common discourse, the plural form is often used in a singular sense, when the superiority of the subject of discourse is intended to be kept in view.-Rammohun Roy.

There seems good reason for believing that the use of a plural for a singular was one of the various modes of giving emphasis, or marking eminence, resorted to by the Hebrews; and that, though not applied generally to all words expressive of authority or dignified office, but confined by early custom to a small number, selected in a way which appears to us arbitrary, it does occur in cases where the

sense is indisputably singular, and might be used by the people to whom the idiom belonged without suggesting any idea of plurality-Hincks.

2. Gen. iii. 22: Jehovah God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil, &c. See Appendix, page 264. And the Lord Gods said.-Burgess. Behold, the man is from it become as one (or, as one [of those]) knowing good and evil.-Abauxit.

REMARKS.

IDD (měmnu), from us, from him or it.Hebrew Grammar.

It is impossible to apply this plural expression to any but the persons of the Godhead.-Jones.

I.. think that here there is a reference to the angelic order of beings, supposed to be more perfect and more knowing than man.-Lardner.

Moses...

Samuel
Solomon, or Christ
An angel.

False Deities, viz.
The golden calf
Baal-berith

Dagon

1 Sam. xxviii. 13, 14.
Ps. xlv. 6.
Judges xiii. 21, 22.

Exod. xxxii. 3—8, 31.

Judges viii. 33.

Jud. xvi. 23, 24. 1 Sam.

[blocks in formation]

See the above passages in the original; also, Smith's Script. Test vol. I. p. 501-523. Wardlaw's Disc. p. 488-492. Yates' Reply, p. 135-138, and Sequel, p. 58. Hincks's Review of Script. Test. p. 45-47.

c Ps. xlv. 6: Thy throne, O God! (ALEIM), [is] for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom [is] a right sceptre.

d Ver. 7: Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness: therefore, God (ALEIM), thy God (ALEIK), hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

e See page 1, No. 1, and note.

f Mark xii. 29-34: Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments [is], Hear, O Israel! the LORD our God is ONE LORD. See page 7—21.

g Gen. iii. 5: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened; and ye shall be as GODS, knowing good and evil.

sicut dii.-Calvin, Fagius, Grotius.
like God.-A. Clarke.

as God.-Wardlaw, Wellbeloved.

2 Sam. xiv. 17-20: As AN ANGEL of God, so [is] my lord the king, to discern good and bad, &c. Ps. viii. 5: Thou hast made him a little lower than the angels (or, gods).-See Job xxxviii. 7.

h Gen. iii. 3: But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it. -See ver. 5, 17, comp. ver. 11.

[blocks in formation]

It may be further observed, that, in all ages of the world, the Jews themselves, undoubtedly well acquainted with the language in which their Scriptures are written, have not considered any of the plural names of Jehovah as intimating the existence of more than one divine person. Notwithstanding the most laborious exertions, the reputedly orthodox have been totally unable to discover, in the books of the Old Testament, clear traces of a plurality of persons in the Godhead; nor have they been more fortunate in the attempt—if, indeed, they have made anyto establish this doctrine as the opinion of the Jews, from any word or remark made use of by that people, in their conversations with Christ and the apostles, as related in the New Testament. It is well known,

[ocr errors]

that the doctrine of the Trinity has always proved an invincible obstacle to the conversion of the Hebrew race to Christianity.

But the great and paramount objection to the Trinitarian argument is derived from the consideration, that if ALEIM, ADNIM, &c. when used in reference to the Deity, were to indicate plurality in the Divine Nature,— the fair and obvious inference would be, that the Hebrew Scriptures contain unambiguous intimations of a plurality or multiplicity of Supreme Beings; since these names or appellatives are, as admitted even by Trinitarians, literally rendered Gods, Lords, &c. This translation, however, cannot correspond to the signification of the original; for the doctrine of two or more self-existent, eternal, and omnipresent Spirits is evidently at war with the dictates of enlightened reason, and with the solemn voice of revelation as heard in the declarations of Moses and the prophets, in the teachings of the Lord Jesus, and in the discourses and writings of the apostles.

Hence may we justly conclude, that the doctrine of a Trinity in unity is totally unsupported by those Scripture passages, the phraseology of which has been now under consideration.

2. This obscure text has generally been thought one of the strongest and clearest proofs for the doctrine of a Triune Deity. But, though the expression one of us evidently implies the existence of more than one being, it does not follow that it affords the slightest evidence for a plurality or a Trinity of self-existent or almighty persons. In the words referred to, there is probably an allusion to those superior intelligences who are in the Bible called gods or angels," and who faintly resemble in wisdom the infinite Source of life and light. If, however, according to the suggestion of "the wise and modest ABAUZIT," the Hebrew particle, translated of us, be rendered of it, as in other places of the same chapter," the passage will be found to contain a reference to the "tree of knowledge," by the eating of which our first parents acquired the notion of "good and evil."

« ПредишнаНапред »