Synonyms of the New Testament
Yüklə 3,52 Mb.
|
phanes); with keno full of empty and boastful professions of cures and other feats which they could accomplish; such as Volpone in
§ XXIX. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT 99 transferred to any braggart or boaster (a]lazw>n kai> u[pe auxoj, Philo, Cong. Erud. Grat. § 8; while for other in- different company which the word keeps, see Aristophanes, Nub. 445-452); vaunting himself in the possession of skill (Wisd. xvii. 7), or knowledge, or courage, or virtue, or riches, or whatever else it might be, which were not truly his (Plutarch, Qua quis Rat. Laud. 4). He is thus the exact antithesis of the ei@rwn, who makes less of himself and his belongings than the reality would warrant, in the same way as the a]lazw 12). In the Definitions which pass under Plato's name, a]lazonei xo a]lazw e]pi> toi?j prospoioume a]ndreiote kai> tau?ta, faneroi?j gignome kerda?nai poiou?sin: and Aristotle (Ethic. Nic. iv. 7. 2): dokei? dh> o[ me>n a]lazw?n prospoihtiko>j tw?n e]ndo u[parxo i. 30: a]lazo ei]j fronh is likely to be a busybody and meddler, which may explain the juxtaposition of a]lazonei Rome, 1 Ep. § 13); a]gerwxi (Philo, Migrat. Abrah. 24): while in the passage from Xenophon, which was just now quoted in part, the a]lazo are distinguished from the a]stei?oi, and eu]xai It is not an accident, but of the essence of the a]lazw that in his boastings he overpasses the limits of the truth (Wisd. ii. 16, 17); thus Aristotle sees in him not merely one making unseemly display of things which he actually possesses, but vaunting himself in those which he does not possess; and sets over against him the a]lhqeutiko>j kai> 100 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § XXIX. t&? bi<& kai> t&? lo fa while Plato (Rep. viii. 560 c) joins yeudei?j with a]lazo lo have in the same sense a lively description of the a]lazw in the Characters (23) of Theophrastus; and, still better, of the shifts and evasions to which he has recourse, in the treatise, Ad Herenn. iv. 50, 51. While, therefore ‘boaster’ fairly represents a]lazw racters of Theophrastus, p. 193), ‘ostentation’ does not well give back a]lazonei ostentatious in things which he really has to show. No word of ours, and certainly not ‘pride’ (1 John ii. 16, E. V.), renders it all so adequately as the German ‘prahlerei.’ For the thing, Falstaff and Parolles, both of them ‘un- scarred braggarts of the war,’ are excellent, though mar- vellously diverse, examples; so too Bessus in Beaumont and Fletcher’s King and no King; while, on the other hand, Marlowe's Tamburlaine, despite of all his big vaunting words, is no a]lazw ties of power by which these his mega are sustained and borne out. This dealing in braggadocio is a vice sometimes ascribed to whole nations; thus an e@mfutoj a]lazonei Livy, xxxiii. II); and, in modern times, to the Gascons; out of which these last have given us ‘gasconade.’ The Vulgate, translating a]lazo ‘haughty’) has not seized the central meaning as suc- cessfully as Beza, who has rendered it ‘gloriosi.'1 A distinction has been sometimes drawn between the
[Alcibiades] was like enough to have done it.' And Milton (The Reason of Church Government, i. 5): ‘He [Anselm] little dreamt then that the weeding hook of Reformation would, after two ages, pluck up his glori- ous poppy [prelacy] from insulting over the good corn [presbytery].’ § XXIX. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 101 xiii. 4], that the first vaunts of things which he has not, the second of things which, however little this his boasting and bravery about them may become him, he actually has. The distinction, however, cannot be main- tained (see Polybius, xxxii. 6. 5 : xl. 6. 2); both are liars alike.
But this habitual boasting of our own will hardly fail to be accompanied with a contempt for that of others. If it did not find, it would rapidly generate, such a tendency; and thus the a]lazw 24); a]lazonei as almost convertible terms (Philo, De Carat. 22-24). But from u[peroyi we need not then wonder to meet u[perh a]lazw the N. T. where it occurs, besides those noted already, are Luke i. 51; Jam. iv. 6; I Pet. v. 5; u[perh vii. 22. A picturesque image serves for its basis: the u[perh himself above his fellows, exactly as the Latin ‘superbus’ is from 'super;' as our ‘stilts’ is connected with ‘Stolz,’ and with ‘stout’ in its earlier sense of ‘proud,’ or ‘lifted up.’ Deyling (Obss. Sac. vol. v. p. 219): ‘Vox proprie notat hominem capite super alios eminentem, ita ut, quem- admodum Saul, prae ceteris sit conspicuus, I Sam. ix. 2.’ Compare Horace (Carm. i. 18. 15): ‘Et tollens vacuum plus nimio Gloria verticem.’ A man can show himself a]lazw with his fellow-men; but the proper seat of the u[[perhfani the German ‘hochmuth,’ is within. He that is sick of this sin compares himself, it may be secretly or openly, with others, and lifts himself above others, in honour preferring himself; his sin being, as Theophrastus (Charact. 34) describes it, katafro joined therefore with u[peroyi 247); with e]coude 102 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § XXIX.
consequence, of his sin. His ‘arrogance,’ as we say, his claiming to himself of honour and observance (u[perhfani is joined with filodoci and, it may be, his cruelty and revenge, if these are with- held (see Esth. 5, 6; and Appian, De Reb. Pun. viii. 118: w[ma> kai> u[perh false estimate of himself; it is thus that u[perh e]pi (Qu. Rom. 63), u[perhfani are joined together. In the u[perh perversion of a nobler character than in the a]lazw melancholic, as the a]lazw the choleric, temperament; but because nobler, therefore one which, if it falls, falls more deeply, sins more fear- fully. He is one whose "heart is lifted up" (u[yhloka dioj, Prov. xvi. 5); one of those ta> u[yhla> fronou?ntej (Rom. xii. 16), as opposed to the tapeinoi> t^? kardi<%: he is tufwqei besotted with pride, and far from all true wisdom (Ecclus. xv. 8); and this lifting up of his heart may be not merely against man, but against God; he may assail the very prerogatives of Deity itself (I Macc. i. 21, 24; Ecclus. x. I 2, 13; Wisd. xiv. 6: u[perh therefore does not go too far, when he calls this sin a]kro<-
in the very same words, that "God resisteth the proud" (u[perhfa iii. 34); sets Himself in battle array against them, as they against Him. It remains to speak of u[bristh tion from u!brij, which is, again, from u[pe Schneider and Pott; but Curtius, Grundzuge, 2nd. edit. p. 473 doubts), and as we should say, ‘uppishness,’ stands in a certain etymological relation with u[perh § XXIX. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 103
insolent wrongdoing to others, not out of revenge, or any other motive except the mere pleasure which the infliction of the wrong imparts. So Aristotle (Rhet. 2): e@sti ga>r u!brij, to> bla lupei?n, e]f ] oi$j ai]sxu xonti, mh> i!na ti ge h]sq^?: oi[ ga>r a]ntipoiou?ntej ou]x u[bri What its flower and fruit and harvest shall be, the dread lines of AEschylus (Pers. 822) have told us. [Ubristh occurs only twice in the N. T.; Rom. i. 30 ('despiteful,' E. V.), and I Tim. i. 13 ('injurious,' E.V.; a word seldom now applied except to things; but preferable, as it seems, to ‘insolent,’ which has recently been proposed; in the Septuagint often; being at Job xi. 6, 7; Isai. ii. 12, asso- ciated with u[perh like manner, are connected by Aristotle (Rhet. ii. 16). Other words whose company it keeps are a@grioj (Homer,
mosthenes, Orat. xxiv. 169); pa (Id: Orat. liv. 1261); a@dikoj (Plato, Legg. i. 63o b); a]ko-
(Aristotle, Ethic. Nic. iv. 3. 21); qrasu Alexandria, Strom. ii. 5); fau?loj (Plutarch, Def. Orac. 45); filoge sense). In his Lucullus, 34, Plutarch speaks of one as
Its exact antithesis is sw Ages. x. 2; cf. pro%u~qumoj, Prov. xvi. 19). The u[bristh contumelious; his insolence and contempt of others break forth in acts of wantonness and outrage. Menelaus is
burial from the dead body of Ajax (Sophocles, Ajax, 1065). So, too, when Hanun, king of Ammon, cut short the gar- ments of king David's ambassadors, and shaved off half their beards, and so sent them back to their master 104 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § XXIX. (2 Sam. x.), this was u!brij. St. Paul, when he persecuted the Church, was u[bristh but himself u[brisqei xvi. 22, 23). Our blessed Lord, prophesying the order of his Passion, declares that the Son of Man u[brisqh (Luke xviii. 32); the whole blasphemous masquerade of royalty, in which it was sought that He should sustain the principal part (Matt. xxvii. 27-30), constituting the ful- filment of this prophecy. ‘Pereuntibus addita ludibria’ are the words of Tacitus (Annal. xv. 44), describing the martyrdoms of the Christians in Nero's persecution; they died, he would say, meq ] u!brewj. The same may be said of York, when, in Shakespeare's Henry VI., the paper crown is set upon his head, in mockery of his kingly pre- tensions, before Margaret and Clifford stab him. In like manner the Spartans are not satisfied with throwing down the Long Walls of Athens, unless they do it to the sound of music (Plutarch, Lys. § 15). Prisoners in a Spanish civil war are shot in the back. And indeed all human story is full of examples of this demoniac element lying deep in the heart of man; this evil for evil's sake, and ever begetting itself anew. Cruelty and lust are the two main shapes in which
as the hideous records of human wickedness have too often attested, the trial, for example, of Gilles de Retz, Marshal of France, in the fifteenth century, they are not two sins but one; and Milton, when he wrote, "lust hard by hate," saying much, yet did not say all. Out of a sense that in u!brij both are included, one quite as much as the other, Josephus (Antt. i. 11. 1) characterizes the men of Sodom as u[bristai< to men (cf. Gen. xix. 5), no less than a]sebei?j to God. He uses the same language (Ib. v. 10. 1) about the sons of Eli (cf. I Sam. ii. 22); on each occasion showing that by the u!brij which he ascribed to those and these, he intended an assault on the chastity of others (cf. Eu- § XXX. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 105 ripides, Hipp. 1086). Critias (quoted by AElian, V. H. x. 13) calls Archilochus la comparing Demetrius Poliorcetes and Antony, gives this title to them both (Com. Dem. cum Anton. 3; cf. Demet. 24; Lucian, Dial. Deor. vi. 1; and the article !Ubrewj
The three words, then, are clearly distinguishable, occupying three different provinces of meaning: they pre- sent to us an ascending scale of guilt; and, as has been observed already, they severally designate the boastful in words, the proud and overbearing in thoughts, the insolent and injurious in acts.
John, occurring five times in them (1 Ep. 18, bis; ii. 22; iv. 3; 2 Ep. 7); and nowhere else in the N. T. But if he alone has the word, St. Paul, in common with him, designates the person of this great adversary, and the marks by which he shall be recognized; for all expositors of weight, Grotius alone excepted, are agreed that St. Paul's a@nqrwpoj th?j a[marti a@nomoj (2 Thess. ii. 3, 8), is identical with St. John's a]nti<- xristoj (see Augustine, De Civ. Dei, xx. 19. 2); and, indeed, to St. Paul we are indebted for our fullest instruc- tion concerning this arch-enemy of Christ and of God. Passing by, as not relevant to our purpose, many discus- sions to which the mysterious announcement of such a coming foe has given rise, whether, for example, the Anti- christ is a single person or a succession of persons, a person or a system, we occupy ourselves here with one question only; namely, what the force is of a]nti< in this composi- tion. Is, it such as to difference a]nti xristoj? does a]nti against Christ, or, like yeudo 106 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § XXX. up in the stead of Christ? Does he proclaim that there is no Christ? or that he is Christ? There is no settling this matter off-hand, as some are so ready to do; seeing that a]nti<, in composition, has both these forces. For a subtle analysis of the mental processes see Pott, Etymol. Forschunyen, 2nd edit. p. 260. It often by which it now means ‘instead of,’ and now ‘against,’ expresses substitution; thus, a]ntibasileu of the king, ‘prorex,’ ‘viceroy;' a]nqu
paid instead of a person. But often also it implies opposi- tion, as in a]ntilogi menoj: and, still more to the point, as expressing not merely the fact of opposition, but the very object against which the opposition is directed, in a]ntinomi opposition to law; a]nti because equivalent in strength to the whole hand, but as set over against the hand; a]ntifilo philosophical opinions; a]ntika which Caesar wrote against Cato; a]nti Homer, where, applied to Polyphemus (Od. i. 70), and to the Ithacan suitors (xiv. 18; cf. Pindar, Pyth. 88); it means ‘godlike,’ that is, in strength and power;—but yet, in later use, as in Philo; with whom a]nti Ling. 19; De Somn. ii. 27) can be only the ‘adversa Deo mens;' and so in the Christian Fathers; while the jests about an Antipater who sought to murder his father, to the effect that he was ferw less, if a]nti< in composition did not bear this meaning. I will not further cite ]Ante more questionable; examples already adduced having sufficiently shown that a]nti<, in composition implies some- times substitution, sometimes opposition. There are words in which it has now this force, and now that, as these § XXX. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 107
hostile army, while for later Greek writers, such as Plutarch, who occupy themselves with Roman affairs, it is the stand- ing equivalent for 'propraetor.' All this being so, they have equally erred, who, holding one view of Antichrist or the other, have claimed the name by which in Scripture he is named, as itself deciding the matter in their favour. It does not so; but leaves the question to be settled by other considerations.1 To me St. John's words seem decisive that resistance to Christ, and defiance of Him, this, and not any treacherous assumption of his character and offices, is the essential mark of the Antichrist; is that which, therefore, we should expect to find embodied in his name: thus see I John ii. 22; 2 John 7; and in the parallel passage, 2 Thess, ii. 4, he is o[ a]ntikei if not all, yet many of the Fathers have understood the word. Thus Tertullian (De Praesc. Haer. 4): ‘Qui anti- christi, nisi Christi rebelles?’ The Antichrist is, in Theo- phylact's language, e]nanti (Con. Gels. vi. 45), Xrist&? kata> dia christ,’ as the Germans have rightly rendered it; one who shall not pay so much homage to God's word as to assert its fulfilment in himself, for he shall deny that word altogether; hating even erroneous worship, because it is worship at all, and everything that is called ‘God’ (2 Thess. ii. 4), but hating most of all the Church's worship in spirit and in truth (Dan. viii. 11); who, on the destruc- tion of every religion, every acknowledgment that man is submitted to higher powers than his own, shall seek to establish his throne; and, for God's great truth that in
discusses the word. On the whole subject of Antichrist see Schnecken- burger, Jahrbuch fur Deutsche Theologie, vol. iv. p. 405 sqq, 108 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § XXX. Christ God is man, to substitute his own lie, that in him man is God. The term yeudo pare it, appears only twice in the N. T.; or, if we count, not how often it has been written, but how often it was spoken, only once; for the two passages in which it occurs (Matt. xxiv. 24; Mark xiii. 22) are records of the same discourse. In form it resembles many others in which yeu?doj is combined with almost any other nouns at will. Thus yeudapo xi. 26), yeudodida vii. 13; cf. Jer. xxxiii. 7), yeudoma Plato). So, too, in ecclesiastical Greek, yeudopoimh contrary, he builds on the world's expectations of such a person; only he appropriates these to himself, blas- phemously affirms that he is the foretold One, in whom. God's promises and men's expectations are fulfilled. Thus Barchochab,—‘Son of the Star,’ as, appropriating the prophecy of Num. xxiv. 17, he called himself—who, in Hadrian's reign, stirred up again the smouldering embers of Jewish insurrection into a flame so fierce that it con- sumed himself with more than a million of his fellow- countrymen,—was a yeudo that long series of blasphemous pretenders and impostors, the false Messiahs, who, since the rejection of the true, have, in almost every age, fed and flattered and betrayed the expectations of the Jews. The distinction, then, is plain. The a]nti that there is a Christ; the yeudo be the Christ. Both alike make war against the Christ of God, and would set themselves, though under different pretences, on the throne of his glory. And yet, while the words have this broad distinction between them, while § XXX. SYNONYM OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 109 they represent two different manifestations of the kingdom of wickedness, there is a sense in which the final ‘Anti- christ' will be a ‘Pseudochrist’ as well; even as it will be the very character of that last revelation of hell to gather up into itself, and to reconcile for one last assault against the truth, all anterior and subordinate forms of error. He will not, it is true, call himself the Christ, for he will be filled with deadliest hate against the name and offices, as against the whole spirit and temper, of Jesus of Nazareth, the exalted King of Glory. But, inasmuch as no one can resist the truth by a mere negation, he must offer and oppose something positive, in the room of that faith which he will assail and endeavour utterly to abolish. And thus we may certainly conclude that the final Anti- christ will reveal himself to the world,—for he too will have his a]poka —as, in a sense, its Messiah; not, indeed, as the Messiah of prophecy, the Messiah of God, but still as the world's saviour; as one who will make the blessedness of as many as obey him, giving to them the full enjoyment of a pre- sent material earth, instead of a distant, shadowy, and uncertain heaven; abolishing those troublesome distinc- tions, now the fruitful sources of so much disquietude, abridging men of so many enjoyments, between the Church and the world, between the spirit and the flesh, between holiness and sin, between good and evil. It will follow, therefore, that however he will not assume the name of Christ, and so will not, in the letter, be a yeudo yet, usurping to himself Christ's offices, presenting him- self to the world as the true centre of its hopes, as the satisfier of all its needs and healer of all its hurts, he, ‘the Red Christ,’ as his servants already call him, will in fact take up and absorb into himself all names and forms of blasphemy, will be the great yeudo xristoj in one. 110 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § XXXI. § xxxi. molu WE have translated both these words, as often as they occur in the N. T. (molu xiv. 4; miai Jude 8), by a single word ‘defile,’ which doubtless covers them both. At the same time they differ in the images on which they severally repose;— molu ‘to besmear,’ or ‘besmirch,’ as with mud or filth, ‘to de- foul;' which, indeed, is only another form of ‘defile;’ thus Aristotle (Hist. An. vi. 17. I) speaks of swine, t&? phl&?
themselves over with mud (cf. Plato, Rep. vii. 535 e; Cant. v. 3; Ecclus. xiii. I): while miai usage, is not ‘to smear’ as with matter, but ‘to stain’ as with colour. The first corresponds to the Latin ‘inquinare’ (Horace, Sat. i. 8. 37), ‘spurcare’ (itself probably connected with ‘porcus’), the German ‘besudeln;’ the second to the Latin ‘maculare,’ and the German ‘beflecken.’ It will follow, that while in a secondary and ethical sense both words have an equally dishonorable signifi- cation, the molusmo>j sarko than the mia also used of the defiling of women (cf. Gen. xxxiv. 5; Zech. xiv. 2),—this will only hold good so long as they are figuratively and ethically taken. So taken indeed, miai<-
profaning or unhallowing of aught (Plato, Legg. ix. 868 a; Tim. 69 d; Sophocles, Antig. 1031; cf. Lev. v. 3; John xviii. 28). In a literal sense, on the contrary, miai may be used in good part, just as, in English, we speak of the staining of glass, the staining of ivory (Il. iv. 141; cf. Virgil, AEn. xii. 67); or as, in Latin, the ‘macula’ need not of necessity be also a ‘labes;’ nor yet in English the ‘spot’ be always a ‘blot.’ Molu § XXXI. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 111 as little admits of such nobler employment in a literal as in a figurative sense.—The verb spilou?n, a late word, and found only twice in the N. T. (Jam. ii. 6; Jude 23), is in meaning nearer to miai chus, p. 28. xxxii. paidei IT is worth while to attempt a discrimination between these words, occurring as they do together at Ephes. vi. 4, and being often there either not distinguished at all, or distinguished. erroneously. Paidei vealed religion has put a deeper meaning than it knew of, till this took possession of it; the new wine by a wondrous process making new even the old vessel into which it was poured. For the Greek, paidei nor, in all the many definitions of it which Plato gives, is there the slightest prophetic anticipation of the new force which it one day should obtain. But the deeper appre- hension of those who had learned that "foolishness is bound in the heart" alike "of a child" and of a man, while yet "the rod of correction may drive it far from him " (Prov. xxii. 15), led them, in assuming the word, to bring into it a further thought. They felt and under- stood that all effectual instruction for the sinful children of men, includes and implies chastening, or, as we are accustomed to say, out of a sense of the same truth, ‘cor- rection.' There must be e]pano it; which last word, occurring but once in the N. T., is there found in closest connexion with paidei(2 Tim. iii. 16).1
his secondary use of a]ko unchastised.’ Menander too has this confession:
And in other uses of paideu the same: thus see Xenophon, Mem. i. 3. 5; Polybius, Hist. ii. 9. 6. 112 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § XXXII. Two definitions of paidei philosopher, the other by a great Christian theologian,— may be profitably compared. This is Plato's (Legg. ii. 659 d: paidein e]sq ] h[ pai to>n u[po> tou? no of Basil the Great (In Prov. I): e@stin h[ paidei w]fe dwn au]th>n e]kkaqai ledged all which St. Basil here asserts, paidei not simply ‘eruditio,’ but, as Augustine expresses it, who has noticed the changed use of the word (Enarr. in Ps. cxviii. 66), ‘per molestias eruditio.’ And this is quite the predominant use of paidei tuagint, in the Apocrypha, and in the N. T. (Lev. xxvi. 18; Ps. vi. 1; Isai. 5; Ecclus. iv. 17; xxii. 6, ma paidei Rev. iii. 19, and often). The only occasion in the N. T. upon which paideu vii. 22. Instead of ‘nurture’ at Ephes. vi. 4, which is too weak a word, discipline' might be substituted with advantage—the laws and ordinances of the Christian household, the transgression of which will induce correc- tion, being indicated by paidei Nouqesi Phrynichus, pp. 513, 520) is more successfully rendered, ‘admonition;' which, however, as we must not forget, has been defined by Cicero thus: ‘Admonitio est quasi lenior ohjurgatio.' And such is nouqesihere; it is the training by word—by the word of encouragement, when this is sufficient, but also by that of remonstrance, of reproof, of blame, where these may be required; as set over against the training by act and by discipline, which is paidei the exact distinction here, having on e]n paidei<% kai> nouqesi<% this note: ‘Harum altera occurrit ruditati; altera oblivioni et levitati. Utraque et sermonem et reliquam disciplinam § XXXII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 113
training by word of mouth is evidenced by such com- binations as these: paraine Relatively, then, and by comparison with paidei qesi paidei of Christian education; that the paidei be very incomplete; even as, when years advance, and there is no longer a child, but a young man, to deal with, it must give place to, or rather be swallowed up in, the
need is, will be earnest and severe enough; it is much more than a feeble Eli-remonstrance: "Nay, my sons, for it is no good report that I hear" (I Sam. ii. 24); indeed, of Eli it is expressly recorded, in respect of those sons,
if not always. the sense of admonishing with blame (Plu- tar; De Prof. in Virt. II; Conj. Praec. 22). Jerome, then, has only partial right, when he desires to get rid, at Ephes. vi. 4, and again at Tit. iii. 10, of ‘correptio’ (still retained by the Vulgate), on the ground that in nouqesi or austerity is implied, as in ‘correptio’ there certainly is: ‘Quam correptionem nos legimus, melius in Graeco dicitur nouqesi austeritatem sonat.’ Undoubtedly, in nouqesi of necessity involved, and therefore ‘correptio’ is not its happiest rendering; but it does not exclude, nay implies this, whenever it may be required: the derivation, from nou?j, and ti 114 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § XXXIII. cause the monition to be taken home, to be laid to heart, is involved in the word. In claiming for it, as discriminated from paidei it is predominantly what our Translators understand it, namely, admonition by word, none would deny that both it and nouqetei?n are employed to express correction by deed; only we affirm that the other—the appeal to the reasonable faculties—is the primary and prevailing use of both. It will follow that in such phrases as these, r[a ix. 879 d; cf. Rep. viii. 56o a), the words are employed in a secondary and improper, but therefore more emphatic, sense. The same emphasis lies in the statement that Gideon "took thorns of the wilderness and briers, and with them he taught the men of Succoth" (Judg. viii. 16). No one on the strength of this language would assert that the verb ‘to teach’ had not for its primary meaning the oral communicating of knowledge. On the relations be- tween nouqetei?n and dida § xxxiii. a@fesij, pa @Afesij is the standing word by which forgiveness, or remission of sins, is expressed in the N. T. (see Vitringa, Obss. Sac. i. pp. 909-933); though, remarkably enough, the LXX. knows nothing of this use of the word, Gen. iv. 13 being the nearest approach to it. Derived from
as of a prisoner (Isai. lxi. I), or letting go, as of a debt (Deut. xv. 3). Probably the year of jubilee, called con- stantly e@toj, or e]niauto>j, th?j a]fe xxv. 31, 40; xxvii. 24), the year in which all debts were forgiven, suggested the higher application of the word, which is frequent in the N. T., though more frequent in St. Luke than in all the other books of the New Covenant put together. On a single occasion, however, the term § XXXIII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 115 pa lators have noticed in the margin, but have not marked in their Version, the variation in the Apostle's phrase, rendering pa a@fesij elsewhere; and many have since justified them in this; whilst others, as I cannot doubt, more rightly affirm that St. Paul of intention changed his word, wishing to say something which pa accurately, and which a@fesij would not; and that our Translators should have reproduced this change which he has made. It is familiar to many, that Cocceius and those of his school found in this text one main support for a favourite doctrine of theirs, namely, that there was no remission of sins, in the fullest sense of these words, under the Old Covenant, no telei of sin even for the faithful themselves, but only a present
God's part, in consideration of the sacrifice which was one day to be; the a]na meanwhile. On this matter a violent controversy raged among the theologians of Holland at the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the following century, which was carried on with an unaccountable acrimony; and for a brief history of which see Deyling, Obss. Sac. vol. v. p. 209; Vitringa, Obss. Sac. vol. iv. p. 3; Venema, Diss. Sac. p. 72; while a full statement of what Cocceius did mean, and in his own words, may be found in his Commentary on the
at length defended and justified in his treatise, Utilitas Distinctionis duorum Vocabulorwm, Scripturae, pare a]fe opposed the Cocceian scheme denied that there was any distinction between a@fesij and pa sius, OEcon. Foed. Dei, iv. 12.36. But in this they erred; for while Cocceius and his followers were undoubtedly 116 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § XXXIII. wrong, in saying that for the faithful, so long as the Old Covenant subsisted, there was only a pa no a@fesij, a[marthma asserted by the Apostle in respect of the world; they were right in maintaining that pa valent to a@fesij. Beza, indeed, had already drawn at- tention to the distinction. Having in his Latin Ver- sion, as first published in 1556, taken no notice of it, he acknowledges at a later period his error, saying, ‘Haec duo plurimum inter se differunt;’ and now rendering pa In the first place, the words themselves suggest a difference of meaning. If a@fesij is remission, ‘Loslas- sung,' pa Yüklə 3,52 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|