According to the original, errare fecerunt me Deus; but the plural verb is used for the singular. Some, with too much subtilty, deduce from this expression the doctrine of a Trinity of persons. VATABLE. Here, because the noun has a plural termination, the verb is put in the same number; as in chap. xxxv. 7, and in 1 Sam. xxviii. 13, where, according to the Hebrew, the witch uses the verb plurally, "I saw gods ascending (adscendentes) out of the earth;" though, from the narrative, it is evident that she speaks merely of one person; for it is said, that she saw Samuel, and that Saul inquired what form he was of. CASTALIO. When on, which is in the plural number, denotes the one God, it is commonly joined with a verb in the singular number; but whenever regard is had to the number rather than to the signification, a plural verb is used, as in this passage, which evidently treats of the true God: see chap. xii. 1. A similar construction elsewhere occurs, as in chap. xxxv. 7. 2 Sam. vii. 23, comp. 1 Chron. xvii. 21; and even an adjective in the plural number is joined to the word D's, when the discourse relates to the God of Israel, as in Josh. χχίν. 19. - LE CLERC. XXXV. .... Nothing being more usual in the Hebrew language than for the plural number to be put instead of the singular, especially when they speak of God, as BOCHART observes in many places: Gen. 7. Exod. xxxii. 4. Ps. cxlix. 2. Eccles. xii. 1: see Hierozoic. p. i. 1. 2, c. 34. Nay, HACKSPAN hath rightly observed, that there are nouns of the plural number in their termination, which in signification are singular, with which it is usual to join a verb of the plural number, because of the plural termination of the noun; a plain example of which we have in Gen. iv. 6, " Why is thy countenance (in the Hebrew, faces) fallen." The like he observes in the Syriac language, John i. 4, "The life (in the Syraic, lives) was the light of men." - BISHOP PATRICK. [Similarly, MERCER, BUXTORF the Father, Dr. J. ROBERTSON, SCHROEDER, STORR, E. F. C. ROSENMÜLLER, and Dr. LEE, who think that the plural verb in construction with ons, as in the text, is the true reading; and that it is thus occasionally used, not according to the sense or signification, but for the sake of agreement with the plural form of nouns called by GIBBS, STUART, &c. pluralis excellentiæ. This remark of the most distinguished Hebraists should be deemed a sufficient reply to such writers as lay considerable stress on the plural verbs, for the doctrine of the Trinity.] GEN. xxi. 1: "And Jehovah visited Sarah, as he had said," &c. That is, the angel, who addressed Abraham, was sent by God, and spoke as his representative. TOSTAT, and many other writers. The word [visited] denotes the providence of God, whereby he fulfils what he before had said. - BISHOP KIDDER. Chap. xxii. 2: "And he said, Take now thy son, thine only [son] "Isaac, whom thou lovest," &c. 77, Thy singularly beloved son. - GEDDES. Only son. Yet he had also Ishmael. CASTALIO. [Of course, many other commentators.] Only son, μovoyevn, that is, ayanŋrov, beloved, as interpreted by Aquila. For it was usual with the Hebrews and Greeks to blend these two significations. Thus Solomon is called an only son, that is, most beloved, 1 Chron. xxix. 1. See note on John i. 14. GROTIUS. [Similarly, E. F. C. ROSENMÜLLER.] '', in the Septuagint, ayaπηTоv, here and in ver. 12, 16. Zach. xii. 10; and ayawμɛvos, Prov. iv. 3. Aquila, Symmachus, and Josephus, have μονογενης. In the same sense, ayаπηтоs, Matt. iii. 17. Mark i. 11. Luke iii. 22. 2 Pet. i. 17; nyanμevos, Eph. i. 6; and μovoyevns, John i. 14, 18; iii. 16, 18. SCHULZ. Take now thy son, thine only son Heb. '', only. Greek, αγαπητον, beloved. As an only son is usually the object of a very intense affection, the epithets only and beloved came to be used interchangeably. Thus, Prov. iv. 3: "I was my father's son, tender and only (beloved) in the sight of my mother;" where the original Heb. T', only, is also rendered by the Sept. ayanwuevos, beloved. The term μovoyevns, only-begotten, applied to Christ in the New Testament, is of equivalent import. - PROFESSOR BUSH. Thy only begotten, or thy most beloved, as if he had been an only child; in which sense the word is often taken, 1 Chron. xxix. 1. — G. L. HAYDOCK. [These remarks are introduced here, as elucidatory of the term μovoyεvns, only-begotten, applied to our Lord in John i. 14, 18; iii. 16, 18, and 1 John iv. 9; and to which, reference will be made hereafter.] Chap. xxii. 14-16: "14. And Abraham called the name of that "place Jehovah-jireh, &c. 15. And the angel of Jehovah called "unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, 16. And said, By "myself have I sworn, saith Jehovah," &c. '', Jehovah-jireh. As, in proper names of men, a part of the word ', Jehovah, frequently occurs, as in Joshua, Jehoiakim, and Jeremiah; so also, in names of places, the entire word is inserted, as here. - E. F. C. ROSENMÜLLER. Saith Jehovah. Here the angel speaks, not from himself, but from God; as if he said, "I do not speak in my own character, but only what I am commanded." - TOSTAT. These are the words either of the angel, declaring a message from the Lord, or of the Lord himself, speaking by the angel, in whom the patriarchs recognised the majesty of God. - MERCER. Chap. xxiv. 7: "Jehovah God of heaven, who took me from my "father's house, and that sware unto me, saying, Unto thy seed "will I give this land, he shall send his angel before thee," &c. .... He will send his angel before thee. It was a received opinion amongst the Orientals, that God performs every thing by the ministry of angels. LE CLERC and E. F. C. ROSENMÜLLER. [Many writers explain чs of a guardian angel.] Nothing, we think, is more susceptible of proof than that the term angel, in scriptural usage, is employed, not only to denote those personal agents whom the Most High may see fit to make the executors of his will, but also in an impersonal sense, implying in many cases merely a dispensation of providence, whether in a way of mercy or of judgment.... The destruction of the first-born in Egypt is attributed to an angel, because such an event was extraordinary and memorable in the highest degree. In like manner, the destruction of Sennacherib's army is ascribed to angelic agency for the same reason. Thus, too, as to the present declaration : we suppose the angel to be the personification of a special providence. - PROFESSOR BUSH. [A similar explanation is given by JULIUS BATE, and by TAYLOR, editor of Calmet's Dictionary of the Bible, v. Angel.] GEN. xxiv. 9: "And the servant put his hand under the thigh of "Abraham, his master," &c. See ver. 10, 51; xxxix. 2, 3, 7, 8, xliv. 8. Also Exod. xxi. 4, 6, 8. 1 Kings i. 33; xvi. 24; xxii. 17. 16, 19, 20; xl. 1, 7; xlii. 30, 33; D'78, or '178 with affixes, a lord, master; the plural of dominion. It is true that 78, lord, and bra, husband, in the plural number, are attributed in Scripture to one person, on account of eminence. But the word 'nb, &c.— HACKSPAN: Note in Dif. Script. Loc. tom. i. p. 232. אלהים In the Hebrew is a word of the plural number for Lord, viz. D'178; ratione dignitatis, saith BOCHARTUS, because of his high authority. And so it is used, not only when he speaks of the king, but of great men, particularly of Joseph's master, xxxix. 2. BISHOP PATRICK on Gen. xl. 1. ADON, 18 (Lord, master, sovereign), both in its singular and in its plural form, is applied to the Divine Being, as well as to human possessors of authority. Instances of this plural in a singular sense : Isa. xix. 4. Mal. i. 6. Gen. xxiv. 9, 51; xlii. 30, &c. &c. — Dr. J. P. SMITH: Script. Test. vol. i. p. 469. [These we deem important concessions, proceeding, as they do, from authors who contend that the plural forms of nouns, such as D', when used of God, imply a personal plurality.] D'17, as a plural of excellence or dignity, used of one lord, and also construed with an adjective in the singular number, as 1 Kings i. 33; xxii. 17. Isa. xix. 4. Gen. xlii. 30. So also the corresponding word in Greek Kupio, Luke xix. 33, according to some interpreters. SIMON AND EICHHORN: Heb. Lex. p. 37. -- [It will be obvious that the design of introducing these remarks here is to show, that since Hebrew nouns with a plural termination are employed individually of human beings, without indicating any plurality in their nature -the same words, or those of a similar form, applied to the Deity, will not prove that that almighty Being consists of more than one person. Other observations, like those quoted above, might have been derived from VATABLE, SOLOMON GLASS, LEUSDEN, COCCEIUS AND SCHULZ, LE CLERC, E. F. C. ROSENMÜLLER, the Dutch Annotators, and recent Hebraists.] Chap. xxxi. 11-13: "And the angel of God spake unto me in a "dream, saying, I am the God of Bethel," &c. .... The angel calls himself God; that is, he speaks in the name of God. EMMANUEL SA. [Similarly, BISHOP PATRICK, and others.] www Ver. 53: "The God of Abraham, and the God of Nahor, the "God of their father, judge betwixt us." 10DW, judicent; juge; "judge," in the plural. D', erroneous. DD, Samaritan; four versions, the Septuagint, the Syriac, the Vulgate, and the Arabic. -DR. BOOTHROYD. [So also HOUBIGANT, who renders the text, Deus Abraham et Deus Nachor judicet inter nos.] In a few cases, the pluralis excellentiæ takes a verb in the plural: e.g. Gen. xx. 13; xxxi. 53; xxxv. 7. Exod. xxxii. 4, 8. 2 Sam. vii. 23. PROFESSOR STUART: Gram. of the Heb. Lang. p. 195, § 484. The original should be rendered according to the opinion of the Hebrews, who remark that on ns [the God of Abraham] is to be understood of the one true God, but [the gods of Nahor] of false divinities. They were certainly different; for it is expressly said in Josh. xxiv. 2, that the ancestors of Abraham worshipped various gods, on the other side of the Euphrates. - E. F. C. ROSENMÜLLER, who follows LE CLERC. The god of Nahor, the god of their father Terah: both idolaters, Josh. xxiv. 2. The idolater swears by his gods, his idols. - BISHOP RICHARDSON. [Similarly, either by translation or comment, MARLORAT, TREMELLIUS AND JUNIUS, ARIAS MONTANUS, PISCATOR, AINSWORTH, DIODATI, GEDDES, and Professor BUSH. CLARIUS, WILLIAMS, and Dr. J. P. SMITH, incline to the same opinion; — all regarding the plural verb as genuine.] [Whether Gen. xxxi. 53 be regarded as containing a reference to false deities, — which is the general opinion, or to the one true God, which seems to be the view of the passage taken by STUART or whether the singular verb be the true reading, according to HOUBIGANT and BOOTHROYD; the argument in favour of a plurality of persons in the divine essence is shown by these admissions to be altogether groundless.] R |