Page:Anacalypsis vol 1.djvu/99

 Cristna or Vishnu, and Siva; in Persia, it was Oromasdes, Mithra, and Arhimanius; in each case the Creator, the Preserver, and the Destroyer.

I shall now proceed to shew that, in this particular, the religion of Abraham and the Israelites was accordant with all the others.

3. But before I proceed, I must point out an example of very blameable disingenuousness in every translation of the Bible which I have seen. In the original, God is called by a variety of names, often the same as that which the Heathens gave to their Gods. To disguise this, the translators have availed themselves of a contrivance adopted by the Jews in rendering the Hebrew into Greek, which is to render the word יהוה Ieue, and several of the other names by which God is called in the Bible, by the word Κυριος or Lord, which signifies one having authority, the sovereign. In this the Jews were justified by the commandment, which forbids the use of the name Ieue. But not so the Christians, who do not admit the true and evident meaning adopted by the Jews—Thou shalt not take the name of Ieue, thy God, in vain. And, therefore, they have no right, when pretending to give a translation, to call God by any other name than that in the original, whether it be Adonis, or Ie, or Ieue, or any other. This the reader will immediately see is of the first importance in obtaining a correct understanding of the book. The fact of the names of God being disguised in all the translations tends to prove that no dependence can be placed on any of them. The fact shews very clearly the temper or state of mind with which the translators have undertaken their task. God is called by several names. How is the reader of a translation to discover this, if he find them all rendered by one name? He is evidently deceived. It is no justification of a translator, to say it is of little consequence. Little or great, he has no right to exercise any discretion of this kind. When he finds God called Adonai, he has no business to call him Jehovah or Elohim.

4. The fact that Abraham worshiped several Gods, who were, in reality, the same as those of the Persians, namely, the creator, preserver, and the destroyer, has been long asserted, and the assertion has been very unpalatable both to Jews and many Christians; and to obviate or disguise what they could not account for, they have had recourse, in numerous instances, to the mistranslation of the original, as will presently be shewn.

The following texts will clearly prove this assertion. The Rev. Dr. Shuckford pointed out the fact long ago; so that this is nothing new.

In the second book of Genesis the creation is described not to have been made by Aleim, or the Aleim, but by a God of a double name—יהוה אלהים Ieue Aleim; which the priests have translated God. By using the word, their object evidently is to conceal from their readers several difficulties which arise afterward respecting the names of God and this word, and which shew clearly that the books of the Pentateuch are the writings of different persons.

Dr. Shuckford has observed, that in Genesis xii. 7, 8, Abraham did not call upon the name of the as we improperly translate it; but invoked God in the name of the Lord (i. e. Ieue) whom he worshiped, and who appeared to him; and that this was the same God to whom Jacob prayed when he vowed that the Lord should be his God. Again, in Gen. xxviii. 21, 22, והיה יהוה לי לאלהים erit Dominus mihi in Deum; and he called the place בית אלהים (Bit aleim), Domus Dei. Again, Shuckford says, that in Gen. xxvi. 25, Isaac invoked God as Abraham did in the name of this Lord, יהוה Ieue or Jehovah. On this he observes, “It is very evident that Abraham and his descendants worshiped not only the true and living God, but they invoked him in the name of the Lord, and they worshiped the Lord in whose name they invoked, so that two persons were the object of their worship, God and this Lord: and the Scripture has distinguished