-
Articles/Ads
Article ON THE STUDY OF MASONIC ANTIQUITIES. ← Page 4 of 14 →
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
On The Study Of Masonic Antiquities.
Egyptian antiquities , feel themselves compelled to assign dates to postdiluvian facts and occurrences , which , if Usher be correct , must have preceded the deluge ; and as they all , except Mr . Gliddon , fail to enter into any explanation of the apparent discrepancy , it becomes necessary at once to grapple with the difficulty , lest it may be imagined that hieroglyphical archteology presents results at variance with Holy Writ . This it does notwhen Biblical dates are correctly understood . It
, merely corrects the errors in computation , which an uninspired human mind may have committed in common with many others , who have given their interpretation as to dates and occurrences in history , both sacred and profane . Indeed , as will hereafter be shown , our hieroglyphical researches tend to throw much light on sacred antiquities ; but it is totally impossible to reconcile the monumental evidences of remote antiquity still existing in Egypt , with Usher ' s chronology , and all
attempts to confine the early history of the land of the Pharaohs within such circumscribed limits , must be abandoned as altogether untenable . In conducting this investigation , it should be borne in mind that antiquity is merely a relative term . A thousand years are but as a drop in the great ocean of Eternity , and countless ages but fleeting moments in the estimation of Omnipotence . The period which elapsed between the deluge and the birth of Christ ,
is unquestionably much greater than that assigned by Usher . This is a fact wliich is now incontrovertible ;* and as we thus clearly perceive the existence of a discrepancy , it becomes important to ascertain in what way it originated . This was a task undertaken b y the Rev . Dr . Hales ; and we may therefore avail ourselves of the result of his investigation . Having patiently , and with great labour , weighed the various evidences in favour of the longer and shorter computations of patriarchal genealogy , he established the untenabietiess of the shortest or Hebrew computation .
It appeared that the apparent discrepancy had proceeded from a manifest corruption of the text about the time of the Seder Olam Rabba , ( the great Jewish system of chronology , ) A . n . 130 , when the Scriptures were altered , interpolated , and curtailed by the Jews themselves , to confuse the dates , because they found " their own Scriptures" turned by the Christians into arms against themselves , and were confounded by the proofs drawn from their own archives that the Saviour ' s advent at the exact time of his appearancewas prophesied from patriarchal
, times in the ancient Hebrew text . The computation , however , from this spurious source was adopted by Archbishop Usher , and the older translation of the Bible , the Greek , made about B . o . 250 , disregarded . But as Dr . Hales observes , " Usher ' s date attached to our English Bible , has been relinquished b y the ablest chronologists of the present time ,
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
On The Study Of Masonic Antiquities.
Egyptian antiquities , feel themselves compelled to assign dates to postdiluvian facts and occurrences , which , if Usher be correct , must have preceded the deluge ; and as they all , except Mr . Gliddon , fail to enter into any explanation of the apparent discrepancy , it becomes necessary at once to grapple with the difficulty , lest it may be imagined that hieroglyphical archteology presents results at variance with Holy Writ . This it does notwhen Biblical dates are correctly understood . It
, merely corrects the errors in computation , which an uninspired human mind may have committed in common with many others , who have given their interpretation as to dates and occurrences in history , both sacred and profane . Indeed , as will hereafter be shown , our hieroglyphical researches tend to throw much light on sacred antiquities ; but it is totally impossible to reconcile the monumental evidences of remote antiquity still existing in Egypt , with Usher ' s chronology , and all
attempts to confine the early history of the land of the Pharaohs within such circumscribed limits , must be abandoned as altogether untenable . In conducting this investigation , it should be borne in mind that antiquity is merely a relative term . A thousand years are but as a drop in the great ocean of Eternity , and countless ages but fleeting moments in the estimation of Omnipotence . The period which elapsed between the deluge and the birth of Christ ,
is unquestionably much greater than that assigned by Usher . This is a fact wliich is now incontrovertible ;* and as we thus clearly perceive the existence of a discrepancy , it becomes important to ascertain in what way it originated . This was a task undertaken b y the Rev . Dr . Hales ; and we may therefore avail ourselves of the result of his investigation . Having patiently , and with great labour , weighed the various evidences in favour of the longer and shorter computations of patriarchal genealogy , he established the untenabietiess of the shortest or Hebrew computation .
It appeared that the apparent discrepancy had proceeded from a manifest corruption of the text about the time of the Seder Olam Rabba , ( the great Jewish system of chronology , ) A . n . 130 , when the Scriptures were altered , interpolated , and curtailed by the Jews themselves , to confuse the dates , because they found " their own Scriptures" turned by the Christians into arms against themselves , and were confounded by the proofs drawn from their own archives that the Saviour ' s advent at the exact time of his appearancewas prophesied from patriarchal
, times in the ancient Hebrew text . The computation , however , from this spurious source was adopted by Archbishop Usher , and the older translation of the Bible , the Greek , made about B . o . 250 , disregarded . But as Dr . Hales observes , " Usher ' s date attached to our English Bible , has been relinquished b y the ablest chronologists of the present time ,