« AnteriorContinuar »
and wider connections between them, and harmonizes the voice of history with that of the Scriptures, just as in geology, each new advance of the science serves to prove still more fully that the genesis of nature was exactly the same as the Genesis of Revelation.
2. The greatly determining influence in man's history, of the material, passive, and receptive side of his nature. Human language wonderfully exhibits the play of physical influences upon us in respect to our speech and our ideas, our experience and our employment, our pleasure and pain, our social state and our social progress. It almost says that man is the sport of circumstances. This it would say absolutely, were it not for the counteractive power of that gentle but ever active providence of God, which, while not disturbing at all the working of the most delicate, minute, unguarded elements of free agency in our nature, yet always broods over each individual, to influence him to the best possible development of himself, and to combine the actual results of his untrammelled choice and action, in harmony with that of every other one, in the production of that greatest possible amount of good to all. There is thus a true materialism, which philosophy must recognize as one of the fundamental bases of all her theories of man, whether indi. vidually or collectively. Not more truly is man himself a compound being, composed of body and soul, or the body itself a duality in the details of its structure, than human experience and human development are two sided, active and passive, material and spiritual.
3. The low degree of man's inventive power. The very word inventive indicates in its etymology, that he stumbles by chance upon his discoveries. The history of the arts of life, as well as that of the natural sciences, each wonderfully illustrates this fact, but neither of them more strikingly than that of language. All the new forms to be found in any language are but new combinations of elements in previous existence, and but slightly, and in the most accidental manner, generally, modified to a new use, or to a new form of expression for an old use. No new language is ever made, or was ever made by man: for the reason that man is not only incapable of such a work, but also, that from the very sense of his incapacity for it, he is immovably averse both to the effort and to the very thought of it. How amazing accordingly seems the stupefied atheistic wonder of the sceptical German philologists at the fact, so incomprehensible to them, and to any one else who does not see in language the handiwork of God, that the earlier languages were so much more complete in their forms than those of modern times.
4. The necessity, for the proper comprehension of any one language, of a thorough survey and analysis of its connections with other and older languages. Comparative philology is a science of even more interest than comparative anatomy. In its two chief departments of comparative grammar and comparative lexicography, it reveals wonderful resemblances between the older and newer languages, any and all of them, even in the most minute details. Etymology, taught and studied on thoroughly scientific and philological principles, is not only one of the most engaging, but also one of the most profitable of all studies. The time is near at hand, and may it come soon, when in our universities and high schools the languages can no more be taught in a narrow, mechanical, and profitless manner; and when mere verbal accuracy in translation, and the careful skimming off of a few facts and principles of Syntax from the surface of the lesson, shall not be deemed adequate results, to be gained in so high a department of study. A professorship of Sanscrit, embracing the whole field of comparative philology, is, as a part of the true ideal of classical instruction, an absolute necessity in every college; and it must erelong be recognized as such in every institution that aspires to the character of doing, honestly and earnestly, its true work in the world. There is surely no one department of instruction in the collegiate course that, in respect to all the elements and uses of a liberal education, can compare in importance with that of the languages. And to be found ignorant amid all the lights of modern philology, of the multiplied connections of Greek and Latin, one with the other, as well as of their connection with the Sanscrit before them, and with the modern languages behind them; to make no use, or but little use of these great facts, enlightening and inspiring as they are, in the work of instruction, should entitle him who thus dishonors his high calling, to exchange at once his false position, as a professed guide to others, for the true one, of a learner for himself in respect to its first principles. With the educated men of the country are lodged its fortune and its fate. And republicanism of the highest form claims as one of its chief supports a broad and columnar style of scholarship among them.
COMPARISON OF JEREMIAH 23: 5, 6, AND 33: 14–16.
BY S. A. WORCESTER, MISSIONARY TO THE CHEROKEES.
To see clearly the mutual relation of these two passages, let us place the corresponding parts side by side. CHAP. XXIII.
| that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the
house of Israel, and to the house of Judah.
15. In those days, and at that time that I will raise up unto David I will cause to grow up unto David a Righteous Branch,
a Branch of Righteousness, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and and he shall execute judgment and justice in the earth (or land). | justice in the earth (or land]. 6. In his days Judah shall be saved, 16. In those days Judah shall be
and Israel shall dwell safely;
and Jerusalem shall dwell safely;
Where the words are the same in the original of both passages, we have made them the same in the translation. On the two passages, thus collated, we remark:
1. It is obvious that the passage in the 33d chapter is simply a repetition of that in the 234, with some addition in the former part, and the omission of one short sentence. The few verbal differences do not affect the sense.
2. The passage thus repeated is evidently a prophecy of the reign of the Messiah. The BRANCH and the king are Christ; and Judah and Israel in the 230 chapter, and Judah and Jerusalem in the 33d, represent the Church; i. e. the people of God under the Christian dispensation.
3. The two passages being thus identical, it is obvious that, if any clause in one is ambiguous, and the corresponding clause in the other unambiguous, then that which admits but one interpretation must be allowed to explain that which admits two.
4. In chapter 23:5, in the clause - this is his name, whereby he shall be called," the pronouns his and he may grammatically relate either to the next preceding noun, Isruel, or to the word Branch, or King in the preceding verse. If the same were true in 33: 16, we suppose all would agree in referring the pronouns in both passages to the Branch, as their antecedent; and so in regarding the name Jehovah our Righteousness, as applied by the prophet to Christ. But in ch.33d the use of the feminine pronoun utterly precludes this construction, and compels us to admit that it is to Jerusalem that the name is there applied. And as the name Israel stands in precisely the same connections in the 23d chapter, as Jerusalem in the 33d, the conclusion is irresistible, that Israel, and not the Branch is the antecedent of the pronouns his and he; and that to the people of God, and not to the Messiah, the name in question is applied, as well in the 23d chapter, as the 33d. This is the prophet's own interpretation of his own words. And if commentators have not been led to this conclusion, it would seem that it must be because they have neglected carefully to collate the two passages, so as to observe their identity; for it would be strange to observe their exact correspondence in other respects, and not to infer the identity of their meaning in this also.
5. As in the name, aning, the last words of the prophecy of Ezekiel, the verb is is implied — Jehovah is there so in the name before us, Jehovah is our Righteousness.
6. In most cases where, in Hebrew the name Jehovah is made the subject, and an abstract noun the predicate, the abstract is plainly used for the concrete; as Jehovah is my Light, i. e. my Enlightener; my Strength — Strengthener; my Salvation — Saviour. And so in the present case, almost beyond a doubt, Jehovah is our Righteousness is equivalent to Jehovah is our Justifier ; ? and the thought intended to be conveyed by saying that Israel or Jerusalem shall be called by this name is, that, in the days of the Messiah, his people shall be distinguished as a people justified by Jehovah. This shall be their triumph and their joy.
i Thus many Hebrew names of persons; as, Abijah, My Father [is] Jehovah; Elijah, My God [is] Jehovah; Adonijah, My Lord [is] Jehovah; Zuriel, My Rock [is] God; etc.
2 Jehovah is our Justifier. I suppose this is the rendering which any one verscd in Hebrew, but not in technical theology, would at once give. A musician in the United States' Army, a Swede by birth and education, was once at my house. He had studied Hebrew as a classic, and asked to see a Hebrew Bible. I asked him if he could translate Hebrew. “Into Latin I can," he replied, “not into English.” I opened the Hebrew Bible, and pointed to Jer. 23: 5, which he readily translated into Latin, rendering the name, without the least hesitation, “Jehovah Justifieator noster.