Зображення сторінки
PDF
ePub

may be summed up as the perpetual age, will be in every sense THE SUPREME AGE. That age will justify the risks, realise the hopes, garner the fruits of all past ages. It will glorify the age-abiding God, who emphatically dwells in perpetuity. (Isa. Ivii. 15.)

EXAMPLE: Dan. vii. 18. "But the saints of the Most High shall

take the kingdom, and possess the kingdom unto the olam, even unto THE OLAM OF OLAMS."

We can ask no more, so far as the interrogating of this part of our subject is concerned, than to find that the age which shall be perpetually extended shall also be supremely blessed.

IT

(To be continued.)

JOSEPH B. ROTHERHAM.

DYING THOU SHALT DIE?

T has become common among a section of the advocates of "Life in Christ," to quote the above words, which are found in the margin of our Bibles at Genesis ii. 17, in preference to the reading in the received text itself, "Thou shalt surely die."

I think we shall not be far mistaken in attributing this preference to a wish to escape from an objection often urged by the followers of popular theology against the idea that the penalty threatened against sin was merely a resolution of the living man into his original elements. The objection is-" But he did not die in your physical sense on the day in which he transgressed;" to which the frequent reply on our side is, that the marginal reading indicates a process of mortality, and that this process began the very day of transgression, although not completed till long years after.

With all deference to the judgment of the many advocates of such a plea, I may be allowed to express great doubts as to the correctness of such an appeal to the margin, and the tenableness of such a defence against the enemy.

First, I question the security of the refuge taken up, because, if the marginal reading does really imply a process of death other than appears in the words of the text, then the enactment, "In the day thou eatest ... dying thou shalt die," seems to me still to speak of the process, both beginning and ending on the day of transgression. So that there does not seem in the margin any escape from the dilemma presented, except by an arbitrary distinction between the beginning and the end of the process which the language does not seem to warrant.

But a further and more radical point of inquiry arises: does the margin really imply any such process of dying as is founded upon in the appeal referred to ? I think not.

It is assumed that the text and the margin are in this respect at variance, and that the margin more correctly conveys to the English mind the force of the original Hebrew, by indicating a process, be it long or short, not apparent in the text, and is therefore to be preferred. Now there are marginal readings and marginal readings. Some may imply what, in the opinion of at least a minority of our translators, is

a more correct translation of a particular passage, but not necessarily therefore preferable by us; while others merely give some supplementary information as to the form of the original phrase, or some other explanation of the translation embodied in the text. To this latter class belongs the marginal reading of Genesis ii. 17. It was not intended as an alternative translation. It simply tells us that the Hebrew words, literally translated, might read "dying thou shalt die." But it by no means follows that this more literal rendering will more correctly convey to us the true force of the language than the textual version, "thou shalt surely die." Any one the least conversant with lingual studies is aware that there are cases where in translating from one tongue to another, a literal rendering might not only fail to convey any sense whatever, but might even give a sense exactly the opposite of that intended. Hence in translating care has to be taken to grasp the idea that underlies the idiomatic form of speech in one language, and then use for translation the form of speech which will most clearly convey the idea in the other language.

A

Now our translators in this passage were of opinion that the idea which, to a Hebrew mind, was conveyed by doubling the word die would be more truly conveyed to an English mind by adding the word surely to the one occurrence of the verb, and it does not seem necessary to know anything of Hebrew to believe that they were correct. careful examination of the margins of our English Bibles will suffice to show that this Hebrew idiom of doubling the principal verb or word is by no means uncommon, and that it is almost uniformly rendered by our translators by the addition of some adverb of emphasis. Here are a number of these occurrences, selected at random :

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

Are we to believe that our translators were such veritable tyros at their task that they were utterly incompetent to deal with an idiom of such frequent occurrence in the language they professed to interpret ? and that they treated its occurrence with a bewildering uniformity of ignorance? I cannot think so. And accepting their scholarship on this point as correct, what is the result to our question?

The double negative in French or Greek, for example, is still negative in force; but, if literally transferred to English, would become an affirmative.

In all the above occurrences it is evident that the idea is one of emphasis and intensity, whereas the understanding of the marginal reading in Gen. ii. 17, on which I am commenting, would require the idea rather to be the opposite. We are asked to believe that in Gen. ii. 17, the effect of the verbal repetition is not to strengthen but to weaken and dilute the solemnity of the threat that would be conveyed in the words, "In the day thou eatest thou shalt die." Some good evidence must be forthcoming that this is a legitimate conception ere we can be expected to set it against the ordinary force of the idiom referred to. Moreover it must be borne in mind that there are numerous instances in which the same idiom is used with the very term that occurs in Gen. ii. 17. I have before me a list which shows that in one form or another this emphatic threat of punishment by death occurs in the Old Testament at least forty-seven times, and in all these occurrences the emphasis is expressed in the one language by repeating the principal term, and in the other by employing the adverb surely." If then the idiom in Gen. ii. 17 is to be understood as conveying a lengthened process of death, consistency surely demands that we apply the same understanding to all occurrences of a similar threat; but that would be impossible. Is it well to overlook this in our eagerness to grasp a defensive weapon in behalf of the true doctrine of immortality?

In confirmation of the objections thus deduced from the common version itself, I may now quote the authority of Dr. J. Pye Smith (Kitto's Biblical Cyclop., Art. Adam):- -"The awful threatening to man was: 'In the day that thou eatest of it, thou wilt die the death.'. . . The verbal repetition is a Hebrew idiom to represent not only the certainty of the action, but its intensity and efficacy. We therefore think that the phrase die the death would more exactly convey the sense of the original than what some have proposed: dying thou shalt die.'"

I shall perhaps be asked how then I would answer the objection stated at the outset, viz., that the threatened penalty could not be physical dissolution, because that did not happen on the day of transgression. In reply, I would point out in the first place that this plea can be turned against those who urge it, a circumstance apparently overlooked by our opponents. If the penalty threatened was, as orthodoxy maintains, threefold in its nature, viz., physical and spiritual death, and, in addition, eternal torments, we may well ask, how about the fulfilment ? seeing neither the first nor third (comprising surely the very essence of the punishment) was inflicted on the day of transgression. Let our opponents exercise their ingenuity on their own position, and when they have given a satisfactory explanation of their double difficulty, they may perhaps have supplied also an answer for our single one.

But, having found that there is no explanation in the marginal reading, seeing that, when properly understood, it really but confirms the textual rendering, "thou shalt surely die," we are by no means left without reasonable defence. Of the solutions which have been offered I may be allowed to mention four:

*The following are some of the passages :-Gen. xx. 7; Num. xxvi. 65; Judges xiii. 22; 1 Sam. xiv. 39-44; xxii. 16; 1 Kings ii. 36-45; 2 Kings i. 4, 6, 16; Jer. xxvi. 8; Ezek. xviii. 13, &c.; also Gen. xxvi. 11; Exod. xxi. 12, 15, 16 17; Lev. xx. 9, 15, 16; Judges xxi. 5, &c.

1. That the penalty threatened was deferred in the execution.

2. That the penalty was commuted in consideration of extenuating circumstances. (See RAINBOW, 1871, pp. 213, 253.)

3. Others are disposed to read the enactment much as if it said :"In the day thou eatest thou art a dead man;" i.e., doomed to die, as good as dead. This has much to recommend it, not only in the fact that a man is, in the eye of the law, dead the moment his sentence is pronounced, but that there scems a direct scriptural warrant for understanding the words, "thou shall surely die," in the way proposed. In Genesis xx. 3, 7, Abimelech is warned of impending death, first by the statement, thou art but a dead man," and afterward by the words, "thou shalt surely die."

4. Another simple solution is that suggested by a statement of Dr. J. Pye Smith in the article referred to. He says that the Hebrew word, translated literally in the day, "was also used as a general adverb of time, denoting when, without strict limitation to a natural day."

I am disposed to find in a combination of these last two the true solution of the difficulty. It may be observed that such a solution leaves the time of execution unspecified, but there would have been no straining of the language of the enactment if the penalty had been inflicted on the very day of transgression. We may therefore believe that God chose to put a less stringent interpretation upon its terms, having in view ultimate purposes of mercy towards the race that should in due course be born of this clemency.

These considerations are submitted to the impartial judgments of all advocates of "Life in Christ." They are prompted solely by a desire to have what appears an untrustworthy weapon of defence in this great controversy laid aside, and a persuasion that the cause of truth will in the long run gain nothing by such protection. M. W. STRANG.

Hillhead, Glasgow.

GLEAMS OF APOCALYPTIC LIGHT.

(Continued from page 300.)

CHAPTER III.

The Elders,-What are they?

"And round about the throne were four and twenty thrones; and upon the thrones four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment, and on their heads crowns of gold."-Rev. iv. 4.

IT

T was not for the first time in human experience that heaven had become pervious to mortal vision when John, in the isle of Patmos, heard the trumpet-toned voice which said, "Come up hither, and I will show thee things which must be after these." Nearly two thousand years before, Jacob at Bethel had had a wondrous dream in which he beheld " a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven and behold, the angels of God ascending and descending upon it. And, behold, the Lord stood above it, and said, I am the God of

Abraham, thy father, and the God of Isaac. . . . And Jacob awaked out of his sleep, and he said, Surely the Lord is in this place, and I knew it not. And he was afraid, and said, How dreadful is this place! this is none other but the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven." (Gen. xxviii. 10-17.) A thousand years passed away, and in the year that king Uzziah died, Isaiah again "saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and fifted up, the skirts whereof filled the temple. Above it stood the seraphim: each one had six wings; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. And one cried unto another, and said, Holy! holy! holy is the Lord of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory." (Isa. vi. 1-3.)

66

Again, B.C. circa 595, at the opening of Ezekiel's sublime prophecy, we have the heavens opened," and the description of a "vision of God" of transcendent grandeur, which not only presents several interesting points of comparison with the apocalyptic vision with which we have here to do, but is moreover the great passage on the subject of the cherubim. "I looked," says the prophet, "and behold a whirlwind came out of the north, a great storm-cloud, and a fire catching itself; and a brightness was about it, and out of the midst thereof as the colour of amber, out of the midst of the fire." As this awful cloud approached him, borne by the whirlwind, it gradually opened out, or became transparent: "Also out of the midst of the fire came the likeness of four living creatures." These "living creatures," which are in the tenth chapter declared to be "the cherubim," are then minutely described, to which description we may have occasion presently to refer. He then proceeds: "And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creatures was as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above. And under the firmament were their wings straight, the one toward the other.... And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man above upon it. And I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, and from the appearance of his loins even upward, and from the appearance of his loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about. As the appearance of the bow that is in the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. And when I saw it, I fell upon my face, and heard a voice of one that spake." (Ezek. i. 4-28.)

And so once more, later still, Daniel had a similar vision of the Divine glory: "I beheld till the thrones were placed, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hairs of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. A fiery steam issued and came forth from before him thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.... I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like a son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and lan

« НазадПродовжити »