of the languages of antiquity, so eminently tran scending all that I possess, that my arrogance and presumption, in supposing them ignorant of the truth, the whole truth, as it is in Jesus, ought to render me, and my arguments unworthy of the least regard. So far, however, am I from combating such a charge, that I acknowledge myself worthy of having it preferred against me, in all its force. The charge, I shall only take the liberty of saying, being personal, bears, in no one respect, against the merits of the cause at issue. It is fairly presumeable, that every man is best acquainted with the extent of his own discernment, as well as with what constitutes the extent to which his sense of public duty ought to carry him. It is from a serious consideration of both, that I feel myself called upon to exert what abilities God hath given me, in an honest and earnest inquiry after his revealed truth ; and since the sacred Scriptures are to be considered as the fountain of that knowledge which alone maketh wise unto salvation, it is from this fountain, I am not ashamed to say, that I have always had a greater desire to draw the water' of life eternal, than from any streams which have ever flowed from it. In every such case, there is risk of some heterogeneous mixture, being imbibed in the purest hu-man channel—which risk, I hesitate not to say, the life-giving doctrine of the Deity of our Redeemer, has actually incurred in its passage through the channel, by which it ought to have been transmitted pure and sound to us. Prejudice, even in the

abstract,

abstract, is an obnoxious term; yet am I not ashamed to own myself prejudiced in favour of the written word of God. Indeed I cannot well conceive how any person can attempt an examination of scriptural truth, without feeling something more or less akin to what is termed, prejudice in its favour, or prejudice against it. The man, who was a total stranger to the inspired volume, would naturally be prejudiced on the side of scepticism and infidelity; while no one who has been blessed with a knowledge of the things therein contained, can divest himself wholly of attachment to it. Thus -a Paine and a Priestley would be prejudiced against it—a Horne and a Horsley would be prejudiced for it.

LETTER XV.

HAVING in the conclusion of the preceding Letter made an open avowal of the motives, and attachments, by which I feel myself actuated, and with which, I trust, that it is impossible any

real

real christian can or will find fault, I proceed now to lay before the discerning reader the information which, as I think, the Scriptures of truth afford, on this great and fundamental article of both faith and duty, under our immediate consideration. There is, however, one preliminary position necessary to be laid down, as of first-rate importance in every enquiry of this kind, and consonant, I am convinced, with the sentiments of every true friend of revelation. The position is this-that, as soon as the Creator was pleased to enter into any sort of intercourse, or communication with man, he would notify himself to this favourite creature, by some particular name, or designation, which might discover to human conceptions, in their primary and unimpaired state, the nature and essence of that supreme Being, as in himself considered, and under the relation, in which he had vouchsated to place himself with regard to man. This we know to be necessary in all mutual intercourse, which can neither be begun nor carried on without such antecedent notification, to require which, would seem to be the consequence of a natural instinct in, or original impression upon, the human mind. This plainly appears from what occurred, when Moses was about to receive his commission to bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt-for "Moses said unto God', Behold, when I come to the children of Israel,

" and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers "hath sent me unto you, and they shall say, What "is his name? what shall I say unto them?”

Now this requisition made by Moses, I may safely affirm, has been fully complied with; as it is well known, that the earliest revelation of the Divine will and œconomy, which the Bible contains, presents us with two words, or names, strongly significant in themselves, and completely expressive of what I may, with no impropriety, call, both the intrinsic nature, and voluntarily assumed relation of that great Almighty Being, in whom we believe, and upon whom we depend. These two.emphatical words, in the primeval language of divine ” “x,” "JEHOVAH" and "ALEIM;" the one," Jehovah," a word in the singular number, denoting the self-existence, or rather the self-essence of Deity: the other, " Aleim," a word in the plural number, denoting the relation, in which he has been pleased to reveal himself to

66

"

66

י אלהים " and " יהוה * revelation, are

man.

DEUS ;'

In the Greek language, these two words Jehovah' and Aleim,' are rendered by the terms' Kv' and 'O' In the Latin language, they are rendered by the terms DOMINUS' and and in the English language, by the terms and GOD.' I must however be permitted to that in all these languages, the terms substituted for the Hebrew original, do by no means express

LORD'

say,

the

the sense of that original; and have therefore been, in a great measure, productive of all the confusion and inconsistency, so visible in the far greater part of those theological disquisitions, which exist at this day.

The word 'JEHOVAH,' for which, during so many ages, the Jews have shewn such a superstitious degree of reverence, that they will not even pronounce it, is acknowledged to be the proper name of the "SUPREME BEING :" Thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH," said the Psalmist, "art the most high "over all the earth." Indeed it is a word which seems to have been designedly framed by the Most High himself, for that very purpose, and with a restrictive view to himself alone. Thus, in its formation, and in the use, to which it is invariably applied, the word ' Jehovah' possesses a number of singularities, which belong to no other word whatever in the Hebrew language. It neither forms, nor can form a plural. It admits of no syntactic alliance with the pronouns possessive 'my,' 'thy,' 'our,'' their,' &c. It is never used in regimine, that is, governing the genitive case, as Jehovah of heaven, of earth, of Jacob, &c. In short, it is a word so peculiar in its formation, and so exclusive in its construction and application, that I have long thought that it should never have been translated; or, at least, U 2

that

1 Psal. lxxxiii. 18.