| Note 0 |
For I take the Hebrew Pronouns Hu and Hi, (which we commonly render by He, She, or It, according as the Gender varies) to be Derivatives from the Verb Havah or Hajah which signifies To Be. Not that I take Hu to be a proper Name of God (as are Jah and Jehovah, from the same Verbs,) But an Appellative w•rd, common to the Creatures also; but here Emphatically appl•ed to God, (as are the words NONLATINALPHABET and NONLATINALPHABET. which are common to the Creatures al•o; for •hey also are, in their kind, NONLATINALPHABET.) And the Latin P•onouns is, id, (that is, he or it ) when Relatively taken, are to be expounded of their Antecedent to which t••y Relate: But when put A•solutely without an Antecedent; they are of alike import with NONLATINALPHABET Quid taken Substantively: (NONLATINALPHABET, or NONLATINALPHABET) according •o which we use to say (even in our Metaphys•cks) Ens & Aliquid con•ertunt•r, ( He or It, so taken ar• of the same import, with a Being, or What Is. ) And the Learned Gat•ker (than whom I do not know that we have a better Critick; more Judicious or more Acute;) though (in his Book De •tylo Novi Instrumenti, contra Pfochenium, ) he do n•t take Hu to be a Proper Name of God (but communicable to Creatures, however here Emphatic•ll• applied to him:) Yet doth allow, that in these places, and in many others (o• which he gives divers instances) it is used for the Ve•b Substantive (Sum, or Est. ) Which is the same wi•• •hat I say, that it Imports a Being, or to Be, (and therefore, when signally applied to G•d, •is Absolute, Infinite, Independent ▪ Self-Being. ) And so, it seems, the Septuagi•ts did 〈 ◊ 〉 und•rstand it, who render Ani Hu, by NONLATINALPHABET, I AM; (and the Vu•gar Latin b• 〈 ◊ 〉 Sum ;) and in the New T•stam••t (which commonly •ollows the Phrase o• the •ept••gints) Christ says it of himself, Before Abraham Was (not I Was, but) I Am, (NONLATINALPHABET) importing •hereby his Permanent and Ins•ccessive Being: co-exis•ent to all the 〈 … 〉 (Successive) Duration; Past, Present, and Future: the same Yes•erday, and To-da• ▪ and fo• e•er. The differe•ce between is or id Relatively tak•n (r•lating to what we call 〈 ◊ 〉 Antecedent,) and the same taken Absolutely (without such reference to other 〈 ◊ 〉 it selfe;) is much the same as between (what the Logi•ians call) Est secundi •djecti (which is but a Copula to join the Predicate with the •ubject.) and Est ••rr• adjecti; where it self is (or doth include) the Predicate. As when S•crat•• Est, 〈 ◊ 〉 r•solved by Socrates Est Ens, or Est Existens ; The word Est, so taken, including 〈 ◊ 〉 the Copula and the Predicate: Like as id or quid Substantively taken, is not Relative, 〈 ◊ 〉 Absolute, and the same with Ens. |
For I take the Hebrew Pronouns Hu and Him, (which we commonly render by He, She, or It, according as the Gender Varies) to be Derivatives from the Verb Havah or Hajah which signifies To Be. Not that I take Hu to be a proper Name of God (as Are Jah and Jehovah, from the same Verbs,) But an Appellative w•rd, Common to the Creatures also; but Here Emphatically appl•ed to God, (as Are the words and. which Are Common to the Creatures al•o; for •hey also Are, in their kind,.) And the Latin P•onouns is, id, (that is, he or it) when Relatively taken, Are to be expounded of their Antecedent to which t••y Relate: But when put A•solutely without an Antecedent; they Are of alike import with Quid taken Substantively: (, or) according •o which we use to say (even in our Metaphys•cks) Ens & Aliquid con•ertunt•r, (He or It, so taken ar• of the same import, with a Being, or What Is.) And the Learned Gat•ker (than whom I do not know that we have a better Critic; more Judicious or more Acute;) though (in his Book De •tylo Novi Instrument, contra Pfochenium,) he do n•t take Hu to be a Proper Name of God (but communicable to Creatures, however Here Emphatic•ll• applied to him:) Yet does allow, that in these places, and in many Others (o• which he gives diverse instances) it is used for the Ve•b Substantive (Sum, or Est.) Which is the same wi•• •hat I say, that it Imports a Being, or to Be, (and Therefore, when signally applied to G•d, •is Absolute, Infinite, Independent ▪ Self-Being.) And so, it seems, the Septuagi•ts did 〈 ◊ 〉 und•rstand it, who render Ani Hu, by, I AM; (and the Vu•gar Latin b• 〈 ◊ 〉 Sum;) and in the New T•stam••t (which commonly •ollows the Phrase o• the •ept••gints) christ Says it of himself, Before Abraham Was (not I Was, but) I Am, () importing •hereby his Permanent and Ins•ccessive Being: co-exis•ent to all the 〈 … 〉 (Successive) Duration; Passed, Present, and Future: the same Yes•erday, and To-da• ▪ and fo• e•er. The differe•ce between is or id Relatively tak•n (r•lating to what we call 〈 ◊ 〉 Antecedent,) and the same taken Absolutely (without such Referente to other 〈 ◊ 〉 it self;) is much the same as between (what the Logi•ians call) Est secundi •djecti (which is but a Copula to join the Predicate with the •ubject.) and Est ••rr• adjecti; where it self is (or does include) the Predicate. As when S•crat•• Est, 〈 ◊ 〉 r•solved by Socrates Est Ens, or Est Existens; The word Est, so taken, including 〈 ◊ 〉 the Copula and the Predicate: Like as id or quid Substantively taken, is not Relative, 〈 ◊ 〉 Absolute, and the same with Ens. |
c-acp pns11 vvb dt njp n2 uh cc pno31, (r-crq pns12 av-j vvb p-acp pns31, pns31, cc pn31, vvg p-acp dt n1 vvz) pc-acp vbi n2 p-acp dt n1 np1 cc np1 r-crq vvz pc-acp vbi. xx cst pns11 vvb uh pc-acp vbi dt j n1 pp-f np1 (c-acp vbr np1 cc np1, p-acp dt d n2,) cc-acp dt j n1, j p-acp dt n2 av; cc-acp av av-j vvn p-acp np1, (c-acp vbr dt n2 cc. r-crq vbr j p-acp dt n2 av; p-acp n1 av vbr, p-acp po32 n1,.) cc dt jp n2 vbz, fw-la, (cst vbz, pns31 cc pn31) c-crq av-j vvn, vbr pc-acp vbi vvn pp-f po32 n1 p-acp r-crq vmb vvi: cc-acp c-crq vvd av-j p-acp dt n1; pns32 vbr pp-f av vvi p-acp fw-la vvn av-j: (, cc) vvg av r-crq pns12 vvb pc-acp vvi (av p-acp po12 vvz) fw-la cc j n1, (pns31 cc pn31, av vvn n1 pp-f dt d n1, p-acp av vbg, cc r-crq np1) cc dt j jc (cs ro-crq pns11 vdb xx vvi cst pns12 vhb dt jc n1; dc j cc av-dc j;) cs (p-acp po31 n1 fw-fr fw-la fw-la np1, fw-la np1,) pns31 vdb av vvi uh pc-acp vbi dt j n1 pp-f np1 (cc-acp j p-acp n2, c-acp av np1 vvd p-acp pno31:) av vdz vvi, cst p-acp d n2, cc p-acp d n2-jn (n1 r-crq pns31 vvz j n2) pn31 vbz vvn p-acp dt vvb j-jn (n1, cc np1) r-crq vbz dt d n1 av pns11 vvb, cst pn31 vvz dt vbg, cc pc-acp vbi, (cc av, c-crq av-j vvd pc-acp vvi, fw-la j, j, j-jn ▪ j.) cc av, pn31 vvz, dt n2 vdd 〈 sy 〉 vvb pn31, r-crq vvb np1 uh, p-acp, pns11 vbm; (cc dt j jp n1 〈 sy 〉 vvb;) cc p-acp dt j n1 (r-crq av-j vvz dt n1 n1 dt n2) np1 vvz pn31 pp-f px31, p-acp np1 vbds (xx pns11 vbds, p-acp) pns11 vbm, () vvg av po31 j cc j vbg: j p-acp d dt 〈 … 〉 (j) n1; p-acp, j, cc j-jn: dt d av-an, cc j ▪ cc n1 av. dt n1 p-acp vbz cc fw-la av-j vvn (vvg p-acp r-crq pns12 vvb 〈 sy 〉 n1,) cc dt d vvn av-j (p-acp d n1 p-acp j-jn 〈 sy 〉 pn31 n1;) vbz d dt d c-acp p-acp (r-crq dt njp2 vvb) fw-la fw-la n1 (r-crq vbz p-acp dt np1 pc-acp vvi dt j p-acp dt n-jn.) cc fw-la n1 n1; c-crq pn31 n1 vbz (cc vdz vvi) dt j. p-acp c-crq np1 fw-la, 〈 sy 〉 vvn p-acp np1 fw-la fw-la, cc fw-la fw-la; dt n1 fw-la, av vvn, vvg 〈 sy 〉 dt np1 cc dt vvb: av-j c-acp fw-la cc fw-la av-j vvn, vbz xx j, 〈 sy 〉 j, cc dt d p-acp np1 |
