(in which speakers are introduced without any distinction more frequently than in the other Scriptural Books,) would attempt to prove the Trinity or the deity of Jesus Christ, from the passage quoted by the Editor unless he is previously biassed by some human creed, and thereby absolutely prevented from comparing. impartially one passage with the other.

The Editor perhaps means the personality and the deity of the Holy Spirit by the phrase "the Lord God and his Spirit hath sent me,"* (verse 16) seemingly representing the Spirit of God as a co-operator with himself. He might in that case on the same ground endeavour to establish the personality and the deity of Righteousness, another attribute of the deity, as being represented with God as an agent in Isaiah LIX.

Therefore his arm brought salvation unto him and his Righteousness it sustained him;" and he might also attempt to prove the personality and deity of the breath of God which is in like manner represented as a co-operator with the Spirit of God "Job XXXIII. 4. The Spirit of

In the origina' Heb. the last phrase stands thus :The Lord Jehovah hath sent me and his Spirit" which bear two constructions ; first “the Lord Jehovah hath sent me. and hath sent his Spirit" The second is, "the Lord Je hovah and his Spirit hath sent mo.”

God hath made me and the breath of him hath given life." Is this the best of the proofs of the Trinity with which the Editor closes his testimonies? If such be his proofs, I am at a loss to guess what his illustrations will be. The second passage quoted by the Editor is what I have just examined in p. 348-352 The third is 2 Cor. XIII. 14. "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen." Here the apostle prays that the guidance of Jesus Christ, the love of God and the constant operation of the holy influence of God may be with Christians, since without the guidance of Jesus no one can be thoroughly impressed with the love of the deity under the christian dispensation, nor can that love of God continue to exist unless preserv→ ed by divine influence. A fact which I have demonstrated page 354-356 in examining Matthew XXVIII. 19. But what has this passage to do with the proof of the deity of Jesus and the personality of the Holy Spirit? Does not Paul call the Phillipians partakers of his own grace. Phil. I. 17? Is not every man pure in heart declared to be possessed of the grace of his lips; that is, verbal instructions? Pro. XXII. 11. Is not in Psalm XXIII. 6. the communion of goodness and mercy desired for all the days of life? Can such expressions be also considered

as proofs of the deity of Paul or of the personality of these attributes? I hope and pray the Editor may take all those circumstances into his serious consideration.

I now examine the remaining few of those passages, which I intended to notice in a subsequent Chapter of this Essay. The first is Zechariah XII. 10. "In that day they shall look upon me whom they have pierced" compared with John XIX. 37. They shall look on him whom they pierced," To shew the error in the translation of the verse in the English version, I quoted in my Second Appeal the verse in the original Hebrew and a translation thereof from the Arabic Bible, and another from the Septuagint, with a literal English translation; which I repeat "and they shall look toward me on account of him whom they have pierced." But in order to destroy the validity of the Arabic Bible and that of the Septuagint, the Editor says that "the Greek and Arabic versions are nothing to the original text itself." I perfectly agree with him in this assertion, but I am convinced that the Editor must be better acquainted than myself with the prevailing and continued practice among Christian theologians to have recourse to the versions especially to the Septuagint, when a dispute arises in the interpretation

of

any text of the Old Testament and to give preference to the authority of the Septuagint, even over that of Jerome's, which the Editor quotes in opposition to the Arabic and Greek versions.

As to the original text, the Editor first observes that "as to the particle Neth which the best Hebrew Grammars define a particle marking the accusative case governed by active verbs, or an emphatic particle denoting the very thing itself." I therefore think it proper to quote Parkhurst's opinion on the particle Neth from his Hebrew Lexicon, that my readers may judge whether or not the above rule laid down by the Editor is founded upon good authority. Parkhurst (p. 48) "The Lexicons say, that when joined with a verb, it (eth) denotes the accusative case, if the verb be active; see Genesis I. 1. and al. freq. but the nominative if the verb be passive or neuter. Genesis XXVII. 45, Deut. XX. 8, Josh. VII. 15, &c. al. freq. But in truth it is the sign of no particular case, that distinction being unknown in Hebrew. See Josh. XXII. 17, Ezek. XXXV. 10. Num. X. 2, I. Sam. XVII. 34. 2 Sam. XV, 23. Neh IX. 19. 34. 2 Kings VI. 5." Parkhurst gives also the second meaning of this particle.— “2, with, to, towards, Exodus I. J. Deut. VII. 8," which the Editor also partially admits.

The fact is, this particle denotes an accusative case as well as other cases and also stands for the English prepositions "with," "for," "towards," &c. and therefore the verse in question as it is found in our Hebrew copies of the Old Testament, should indisputably be, thus read in consistence with its context; 31 "And they shall look towards me for, (or on account of) him whom they have pierced" or "they shall look upon me with him whom they have pierced."*

The Editor quotes, to my great surprize, (in p. 546) some verses in which the particle requires an accusative case and consequently no preposition "for," "to," or " with," can be properly placed. But I beg to ask the

אלי

Newcome reads "and they shall look on him whom they pierced" His note on this translation is as follows: on him] Thirty-six MSS. and two ed. read : three other MSS read so originally; six perhaps read so; six read so now; and eleven have in the margin, as Keri. And yet on me, may be traced in the ancient versions and Chald. was also noted as a various lec tion by R. Saadias, who lived about the year 900. See Kenn, diss. gen. §. 43. Citant 1 Talmud et R. Saadias Ilaggaion. Poc. Append, in Mal." Secker. Dr. Owen shews that Ignatius, Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Tertullian, and Barnabas favour the reading of version Sect. IV."

66

Inquiry-Sept.