« 上一頁繼續 »
Gehenna, as used in the New Testament; but lest some doubts should remain on the mind of any one, I shall consider it more particularly. Your twelve facts, as you are pleased to call them, I consider to be nothing but twelve miserable subterfuges: the first four are founded on a falsehood, viz. that Gehenna is used in the Old Testament, and the other eight have no direct bearing on the subject. Your asserting that apokteino 'to kill,' in Matt. x. 28, means to 'torture,' 'torment,' and that in direct contradiction to Parkhurst, Bass, and Grove, is one of the most barefaced absurdities I have seen, and shows to what lengths a man will go, rather than acknowledge himself in error. Your pretended illustrations of the texts where Gehenna is used, I consider to be perversions and misapplications which go much farther to darken and confuse than to explain and elucidate. Your assertion, that the discourse attributed to Josephus is universally considered the work of some Christian of the second or third century, whether taken from a Boston or Baltimore or any other work, I consider to be an impudent forgery, carrying its own refutation in its front. This is one among the many lies and falsehoods invented and propagated by the Universalists to injure the truth and establish error. In confirmation of this, I shall observe that Mr. Whiston, the translator of Josephus's works, says of the discourse on Hades, in a note (Balt. edit. 1333, 8 vo. page 458 ) Of these Jewish or Essene, and indeed, Christian doctrines concerning souls, both good and bad, in Hades, see that excellent discourse or homily of Josephus,
concerning Hades, at the end of the work."This note proves that the translator attributes the discourse to Josephus, and that he considers it as containing the sentiments of the Jews respecting a future state of happiness and misery. Here then is direct testimony in favour of my sentiment, and as long as this one exists your position must be false.
Your saying that the Targums furnish no proof whatever, that Gehenna was used to sig nity endless woc, in the days of Christ, is another erroneous statement, and contrary to the opinion of the most learned men.
But the most absurd assertion, perhaps, n all your letters, is that wherein you declared that the opinion that the Targums of Jonathan and Onkelos were written in the second or third century, had the sanction of the most eminent writers. Whether you declared this, as a deliberate falsehood, which had been propagated by others to deceive, or through ignorance of the true state of the matter, I am unable to determine, but shall incline to the charitable side. As I consider it of the utmost importance to prove that the Targums, which use Gehenna as I do, were written before the time of Christ, I shall lay before you the following testimony on the subject, which settles the matter beyond dispute.
1. Luesden, in his 'Philologicus Hebreo-Mixtus' (p. 44, edit. 1673,) says that, 'In the time of Hercanus, about forty years before Christ, Onkelos, author of the Targum, became a proselyte to the Jewish religion.' Again, (p. 50,) Jonathan Ben Uzziel, the Targumist, was one
of the eighty renowned disciples of the celebrated Hillel. That Jonathan translated the prophets is believed and asserted by the Jews."'
2. If ttinger,in his Thesaurus Philologicus (p. 557,553. ed. 1649,) says,' Onkelos, whose Targum ou the Pentateuch was so celebrated, was contemporary with Gamaliel, who was the instructor of Paul.' And again, (p. 259) ‘Jonathan Ben Uzziel, author of the Targum on the prophets, was a disciple of the renowned Hillel.'
3. Brewster, in his Encyclopædia (Phil. ed. 1832, Art. Theology) says, 'But the most deci ded evidence on this subject (the doctrine of the Trinity) is to be found in the Targums of Jonathan and Onkelos, the one being a commentary on the prophets, the other on the books of Moses. They are both written in Chaldee; that of Jonathan, according to Calmet, about thirty years before Christ; that of Onkelos not long after it, and they are both, till this day, held in the highest estimate among the Jews.'
4 The Edinburg Encyclopædia, (Phil. ed. 1798. Art. Targum,) states that, 'the Hebrews had no written paraphrases or Targums before the era of Onkelos and Jonathan, who lived about the time of our Saviour. Jonathan is placed about thirty years before Christ, under the reign of Herod the Great. Onkelos is the most of all esteemed, and copies are to be found, in which it is inserted verse for verse with the Hebrew. * * * These Targums are of great use for the better understanding not only of the Old Testament, on which they are written, but also of the New.'
5. Hartwell Horne, in his introduction to 'A
Critical study of the Scriptures,' says, (vol. 2. p. 159, Phil. ed. 1525,) The generally receiv ed opinion is, that Onkelos was a proselyte to Judaism, and a disciple of the celebrated Rabbi Hillel, who flourished about fifty years before the Christian era: and consequently that he was contempory with our Saviour. The Targum of Onkelos comprises the Pentateuch, or five books of Moses, and is justly preferred to all others, both by Jews and Christians, on account of the purity of its style, and its general freedom from idle legends. Again, (p. 160,) According to the Talmudical traditions, Jonathan Ben Uzziel, author of the Targum, was chief of the eighty disciples of Rabbi Hillel the elder, and a fellow disciple of Simeon the Just, who bore the infant Messiah in his arins; consequently he would be nearly contemporary with Onkelos. Wolfins, however is of opinion that he flourished a short time before the birth of Christ, and compiled the work which bears his name from more ancient Targums, that had been preserved to his time by oral tradition.'
6. The American Encyclopædia, (Phil. ed. 1832, Art. Targum,) states, that the oldest Targum is that of Onkelos, which comprises only the Pentateuch, the second one that of Jonathan, is a version of the prophets. These are supposed to have been written about the time of our Saviour.'
7. Dr. Clarke, in the general preface to his Commentary, (p. 1.) says, 'Perhaps the most ancient comments of this (explanatory) kind, were the Chaldee Paraphrases or Targums, particularly those of Onkelos on the law, and
Jonathan on the prophets; the former written a short time before the Christian era, the latter about fifty years after the Incarnation. These comments are rather glosses on words, than an exposition of things; and the former is little more than a verbal translation of the Hebrew text in pure Chaldee.'
8. Buck, in his Theological Dictionary, (Art. Targum,) says, 'But though the custom of making these sorts of expositions in the Chaldee language, be very ancient among the He. brews, yet they have no written paraphrases or Targums before the era of Onkelos and Jonathan, who lived about the time of our Saviour. Jonathan is placed about thirty years before Christ, under the reign of Herod the Great. Onkelos is something more modern.'
9. Prideaux, in his Connexions of the Old and New Testaments, (vol. 2, Balt. edit. 1833, p 343,) says, 'As the Targum of Onkelos is the first in order of place, as being on the Pentateuch, which is the first part of the holy scriptures, so, I think, it is not to be doubted but that it is the first also in order of time, and the most ancient that was written of all that are now extant. The Jewish writers, though they allow him to have heen, for some time of his life, contemporary with Jonathan Ben Uzziel, the author of the second Targum above mentioned, yet make him much the younger of the two; for they tell us that Jonathan was one of the prime scholars of Hillel, who died about the time when our Saviour was born, but that Onkelos survived Gamaliel the elder, Paul's master, (who was the grandson of Hillel, and