FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   293  
294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   >>   >|  
was always the prevailing one, was indeed the view held by the Church. _Schroeder observ. ad origin. Hebr._ c. viii. Sec. 10, raised some objections which were eagerly laid hold of, and increased by the rationalistic interpreters. Even some sound orthodox expositors allowed themselves to be thereby dazzled. _Stier_ declares "that, for this time, he must take the part of modern Exegesis against the prevailing tradition of the Church." Yet his disrelish for the doctrine of the atonement held by the Church has no doubt exercised a considerable influence in this matter; and _Hofmann_, too, in so decidedly rejecting this explanation, which rests on such strong arguments, and is not touched by any weighty counter-arguments, seems not to have been guided by exegetical reasons only. But let us submit these objections to a closer examination. 1. "The verb ought not to be construed with the Accusative of the thing to be sprinkled, but with [Hebrew: el]." _Reinke_ (in his Monograph on Is. liii.) brings forward, against this objection, the passage Lev. iv. 16, 17; but he is wrong in this, inasmuch as [Hebrew: at] is there not the [Pg 270] sign of the Accusative, but a Preposition. [Hebrew: at pni] in the signification "before," is, elsewhere also, very frequently used. But even _Gesenius_ is compelled to agree with _Simonis_.[2] and to acknowledge that, in the proper name [Hebrew: izih] the verb is connected with an Accusative. The deviation is there still greater, inasmuch as the _Kal_ is, at the same time, used transitively. But even apart from that, such a deviation cannot appear strange. It has an analogy in chap. liii. 11, where [Hebrew: hcdiq], which everywhere else is construed with the Accusative, is followed by [Hebrew: l]; and likewise in [Hebrew: rpa], followed by [Hebrew: l] in chap. liii. 5. The signification of the verb, in such cases, undergoes a slight modification. [Hebrew: hzh] with [Hebrew: el] means "to sprinkle;" with the Accusative, "to sprinkle upon." This modification of the meaning has the analogy of other languages in its favour. In the Ethiopic, the verb [Hebrew: nzH], which corresponds to the Hebrew [Hebrew: nzh], is used of the sprinkling of both persons and things; Heb. ix. 19, xi. 28; Ps. li. 9. In Latin, we may say: _spargere aquam_, but also _spargere corpus aqua_; _aspergere quid alicui_, but also _re aliquem_, _conspergere_, _perspergere_, _respergere quem_. "Why should not this be allowed to the J
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284   285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   293  
294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Hebrew

 

Accusative

 
Church
 

analogy

 
sprinkle
 

modification

 

arguments

 

construed

 

deviation

 

spargere


objections

 
allowed
 

signification

 

prevailing

 
strange
 
frequently
 
Gesenius
 

greater

 

acknowledge

 
proper

connected
 

Simonis

 

transitively

 

compelled

 
corpus
 
aspergere
 

respergere

 

perspergere

 

conspergere

 

alicui


aliquem
 

meaning

 

slight

 

undergoes

 

languages

 

persons

 

things

 

sprinkling

 

favour

 
Ethiopic

corresponds

 
likewise
 
Reinke
 

declares

 

dazzled

 
orthodox
 

expositors

 
modern
 

Exegesis

 
exercised