.

^_Sr-

.^

o
O
E-i

O
M

4-i

Vw9

^
i

THE

BIBLICAL CABINET;
OR

HERMENEUTICAL, EXEGETICAL,
AND

PHILOLOGICAL LIBRARY.

VOL.

TITTMANN

TIL

SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAJIENT.

EDINBURGH
THOMAS CLARK,
J. G.

AND

&

F.

38,

GEORGE STREET;

RIVINGTON, LONDON;

W. CURRY, JUN. & CO. DUBLIN.

MDCCCXXXIII.

REMARKS
ox THE

SYNONYMS
OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.
BY

JOHN AUG. HENRY TITTMANN,

D.D.

FIRST THEOLOGICAL PROFESSOR IN THE

UNIVERSITY OF LEIPSIC

TRANSLATED BY

THE REV. EDWARD

OF

ST.

CRAIG, M. A.

EDMUND HALL, OXFORD-

VOL.

I.

EDINBURGH:
THOMAS CLARK,

38,

GEORGE STREET.

MDCCCXXXIII.

PRINTED HY

J.

TIIOMSOK, MILKF. SQUARE.

TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE.

The

inspiration of the

Sacred Scriptures

either a fact, substantiated

is

by ample testimony,

or a miserable fallacy,

which should be openly

and utterly repudiated,

as calculated only to de-

lude.

Such, however,

the accumulation of

is

evidence on this point, that the former alternative

must be unequivocally admitted by every

man and the latter,

educated and unprejudiced

or indeed

any approximation

subject, entirely renounced.

books of the Old and

New

to a

doubt on the

The

canonical

Testament are the

word of the living God.

This conviction leads at once to the necessity of

an accurate interpretation of the Scrip-

tures as a divine record.

satisfied

Men ought not

without attaining

to

to

be

a clear compre-

TRANSLATOR

VI

PREFACE.

hension of the substance of God's message.

For

if it

is

the

word of God, of which there

can be no legitimate doubt, then there must

exist throughout the

whole volume, as the pro-

duct of one mind, one harmonious meaning

And

consonant with the divine wisdom.

be a revelation from God

is

to

man, that meaning

intended to be ascertained, and

certained

by a

of the right

diligent

if it

may

be as

and humble application

means of knowledge.

be a revelation as far as

It ceases to

does not reveal,

it

if

the difficulty of comprehension lies in the terms

of the message
divine

wisdom

it is

is

it

impugns the

suppose that the impediment

to

to discovering that

discovered,

and

itself;

which

God

traceable to the

intended to be

mode

in

which

expressed.

From

these principles

ences yet existing

it

flows that the differ-

among men, about

the

mean-

ing of the inspired Scriptures, are criminal.

Men

are guilty of these differences of opinion.

Had

they adopted seriously and

that

reverence

ertlancipates

for

divine

fully,

and with

authority,

which

from prejudice, the right means of

TRANSLATOR

understanding that which

the

PREFACE.

Vll

God hasput on record,

supposed discrepancies with which that

record has been rashly charged, and the conflicting opinions entertained

as

by

different

men,

deduced from the same words, would have

vanished.

With

these views, every

to establish

work which tends

and recommend sound principles

of interpretation, should be received with thank-

The German critics have done much.

Though many of them have been deeply in

fulness.

error, others

have deserved the thanks of the

Christian world;

and, among the many valu-

able treatises which have issued from the Ger-

man

Theological

few rank higher

School,

than the unfinished production of Dr. Tittmann

now

presented to the English public.

It pro-

ceeds, with great judgment, on the soundest

principles of interpretation

and, in the course

of an inquiry, conducted under the guidance

of very superior

acumen and

erudition,

only throws a valuable light on

of Scripture, but, which

is

many

it

not

passages

peculiarly desirable

as a part of the series of the Biblical Cabinet,

TRANSLATOR

Vlll

PREFACE.

example of the

exhibits a very excellent

it

mode

which judicious,

in

and well- train-

ripe,

ed scholars approach the sacred fountain of

And while,

truth.

in

many

instances,

it

brings

out satisfactorily the peculiar force of the pas-

sage under discussion,

it

presents, collaterally,

strong presumptive evidence, drawn from the

extraordinary accuracy of the style of the sacred
writers, that they
sitions

The

were guided

in their

compo-

by a supernatural power.
object of Dr. Tittmann

was

to investi-

gate the comparative force of those words in

the

New

nymous,

Testament which appear

i.

e,

to

be syno-

which range under a common

genus, as having one generic idea in

common

but which have each of them, additional to

a specific difference of meaning.

given an extensive
as

it

list;

and

this,

Of these he has

this

work, as far

has gone, consists of enlarged observations

upon some of these synonyms.

It is

deeply to

be regretted that the completion of so able and

useful a
its

work was prevented by

the death of

author.

To

illustrate the specific force of

each word.

TRANSLATOR

PREFACE.

IX

Dr. Tittmann has brought the whole of his

extensive

erudition,

and

the

accumulated

stores of a long life of painful application, to

bear upon each successive object of inquiry.

He

has elicited from other writers, with great

the exact

felicity,

meaning of each word

cording to the usus loquendi

from sources of

ac-

and he has shown,

illustration altogether

uncon-

nected with the sacred writings, that the words

used by our Lord, and by his inspired

when taken

ples,

rect sense,

in their

disci-

most obviously cor-

were the best which could have

been chosen

and that

if

any other synonym

had been adopted, instead of that which

given,

it

is

would not so accurately have ex-

pressed the intended idea.

A work so
fective,

midst,

who

conducted and so remarkably

though
is

it

has been broken oif in the

a most valuable example to others

profess to interpret the Scriptures.

Many

" a pattern of well-doing."

is to

ef-

It is

persons,

it

be lamented, approach very rashly the in-

terpretation of the

word

of

adequate preparation for

God, with very

it,

and with

in-

little

IHASSLATOUS PREFACE.

more

specific

thought on the subject than a

ruling wish to find there the opinions which,

under other influences, they have previously

There are men, who have been

adopted.

re-

gularly drilled in the creeds and catechetical

Arminian

exercises of the Calvinistic or the

schools of theology, to

whom

this

remark ap-

Their religious opinions are not drawn

plies.

They

fresh from the living spring.

the stamp and impress

are rather

of those formularies,

under the cramping pressure of which their

minds rose

They have

to a stunted maturity.

walked the round of a certain

train of theolo-

They have

acquired the con-

viction, that certain formal

dogmas are proved

gical thought.

by certain
these

But
Its

texts,

common
this

places in their regular routine.

system

disciples

and they can fluently quote

is

a barrier to improvement.

scarcely ever

escape

shackles of such an education.

force of the

Word is

from the

The genuine

often repressed

by

it

hidden by the interpretation of earlier and

enliglitened days, authoritatively
it.

And

the

and
less

bound upon

more accurate meaning, which

translator's preface.

xi

might otherwise have been evident

such scholastic attainment, can never

way

There are

human

make

its

who have

critical

either imbibed the

some modern

leader ; or

rule of faith.

who

however,

others,

endowed with learning and

of

of

against this rigid habit of interpreting ac-

cording to the authorized

but

men

to

are

less

acumen,

narrow views

particular sect, or sectarian

who have been thrown

loose from a

reverence for any systematic views of narrated

truth

and who seem

to

regard the Scriptures

as the sands of an African river, in which truth

lies

scattered like so

of gold, and from

to bring forth

whence each

grains

day's labour

some new and independent

To them

covery.

many unconnected

is

dis-

the laws of interpretation

are fetters not to be endured

same word,

the

repeated even in the same sentence, does not

necessarily retain the same sense

ever a passage

made

may

be distorted,

and, liow^-

if it

can be

accord with the favourite fancy of the

to

moment,

this

meaning

is

given forth with

all

the solemnity of an oracle.

Now

to both classes of students here

de-

translator's preface.

xii

and especially

scribed,

be unwittingly led

to

to the

young, who

may

adopt the habits of either

of these objectionable schools, the strict and

steady perusal of Tittmann's

It will

profitable.

work may be very

give them practical expe-

rience of the nature of sound interpretation.

show them the character of mind best

It will

such inquiry, and the judgment and

fitted for

caution,

and extensive and accurate reading,

with which

first-rate

minds approach a task so

intensely interesting and important.

place before
sults to

And,
ters

them some of the

which

It

successful re-

inquiries, so conducted,

in fact, a serious study of these

may, with the divine

will

lead.

few chap-

blessing, lead to

enlarged and accurate investigation of

an
the

canon of revealed truth, and to a satisfactory

conviction of the substance of

its

announce-

ments, not drawn from the dogmatic assertions

of

human

authority, or based

on the inven-

tions of an exuberant fancy; but flowing legi-

timately and clearly, from a well-directed grammatical exegesis of the averments of the ins])ired

book

itself.

TRANSLATOR

On

tlie

PREFACE.

immediate subject of the work, as

far as it has

gone,

would have been pre-

it

sumption in the translator

thing from his

some

own

have added any

to

limited

collateral topics a

appended.

XIU

On

resources.

few notes have been

And, on one point, which the learn-

ed author has scarcely touched, but which ap-

peared

to

him materially

to

strengthen and

confirm Dr. Tittmann's views, the translator

has added, occasionally, a more enlarged an-

He

notation.

has endeavoured to extend the

inquiry into the force of a word, beyond the

immediate use of

it

at the time

Testament was written,

when

the

to

when

the

New

an anterior period,

same word existed

in

an

earlier

language, and in a different character.

Ernesti says truly, (Biblical Cabinet, p. 27,)
that " the usage of language

many

things,

by

is

affected

by

the time, the religion, the

sect or party, the habits of ordinary

the political institutions,

all

life,

and

of which tend to

form the character of the style."

And that "

the

proper province of grammarians, the highest

exercise of their art, consists in discovering

what

is

the exact meaning of each word, at

TRANSLATOllS PREFACE.

XIV

diflferent times, in different authors,

period

changes

flourishes,

and

in dif-

It is evident then, that

ferent styles."

during the

'

which one

in

may and

even

language

do occur in the

meaning of words, and by the introduction

of

new

an

words, derivative or otherwise.

examination

of

whole

the

Hence

history and

progress of the word in that one language be-

comes necessary
sult.

But

must be ever remembered, that

it

each language

is

ent existence.
earth

an accurate re-

to bring out

not a separate and independ-

Each successive nation of the

was originally a migrating colony, which

brought a language with

after they

were

shores were

still

them

and even

thinly peopled

settled, their

open

to the ingress of other

adventurers, the peculiarities of whose speech

would blend with those of the

The English language

fact.

It

is

is

earlier colonists.

an illustration of

this

a compound of Celtic, Gothic,

Roman, Saxon, Danish, and French, and necessarily, therefore,

extends a scientific inves-

tigation of the language into those

which were

spoken by the successive invaders of our

And from

this it will appear,

that

island.

etymology

TRANSLATOR
is

PREFACE

XV

nothing more than an extension of the in-

quiry, which Ernesti proposes, over a wider

range of time and space.

It

in fact, tracing

is,

the history of the word, the original idea, and

its

various changes of form and modifications

of
its
it

thought,

whole period

through the

among whom

existence, from the people

is

first

discovered,

down

of

to

more modern

times.

Doubtless, in a multitude of cases, evidence

may be adduced

of a

word having undergone,

from custom or accidental intiuence, a very

important modification in
is

its

force; though

it

scarcely in the nature of things that such

changes should occur arbitrarily and without a

traceable reason; and such variations are
less

much

frequent and extensive than some persons

imagine.

But, in the pursuit of philological

inquiries,

when

a word occurs but rarely in

surviving writings,

and

real difficulty arises

from the scantiness of the contemporary evidence, in fixing the precise force of the word
at the period required,

of great

moment

it

is

to be able to

surely a matter

show what was

TRANSLATOR

XVI

PREFACE.

meaning of the same word

the

terior

what
still

the

is

under discussion, and

period

the

to

in ages an-

meaning or derivation of

that

word

extant in modern languages or dialects.

Ernesti admits this in some measure.

says,

" There

may

He

be a deficiency of evidence

as to the tisus loquendi in the particular

age

And he suggests, in

such

and author." (P.

difficulties,

80.)

among

other aids, a consideration

of " the analogy subsisting between similar

languages, that

sprung from a

between those which have

is,

common

origin, as the

the Chaldee, the Syriac, the Arabian

Hebrew,
or like

those which stand in the relation of parent or

Greek and Latin."

But the

here timidly proposed.

Ernesti

derivative, as the

remedy

is

does not take a

the

Greek no parent ?

Did

well-arranged language, with

of

its

Has

view of the subject.

full

that copious
all

and

the beauties

grammatical inflexion, spring up at once,

and independently, from the Hellenic

host of

armed men

gress of

Greek

to

If

we can

soil,

trace the pro-

the Italian shore,

may we

not trace back the Greek to something else

TRANSLATOR

PREFACE.

XVll

Is the progress of language, anterior to the

formation of the Greek, so completely involved

in obscurity, that

tion

we can

discover no connec-

between the language of the Hellenic

and that of

colonists

their Asiatic ancestors,

whose language we know

written language before

to

have been a

Greek had a being

Fair and cautious investigation shows, be-

yond

question, that although the radical

all

words of the Greek language have undergone

considerable metamorphosis, they have their

source in the languages spoken directly to the

eastward of the Grecian territories; and that

the etymons of

Greek and Latin words are

found in abundance in the roots of

and

its

cognate dialects.

And, in

Hebrew
the

fact,

connection between the language spoken by

the diiferent divisions of the

Shemitic and

Japhetic tribes, emigrating westward,

dent, that they

may

all

is

so evi-

be regarded as dialects

emanating from one common source, which

may

still

be recognized as the basis of

all

European languages.
In the 12th vol. of the Encyclopaedie
b

Mo-

TRANSLATOR

XVIII

derne, there

is

PREFACE.

a short treatise on Etymology,

by M. Champollion Figeac, which speaks of

such inquiries as of great importance to
ture,

and

in

which he

litera-

states the principles

on

which the investigation should be conducted,

and without which

must be

it

vain.

" Ignorer

ces regies," he says, " c'est vouloir analyser

chimiquement une substance

sant a coups de marteau."

solide en la bri-

The

substance of

the rule on which he proceeds in the etymological analysis of

detach
tial

all

words

in present use, is to

grammatical terminations, and

augments, as prepositions, &c. to

word of

all

additions or alterations

the sake of euphony

when any word

and then he

has been

j)rocess, there will

syllable of

strip the

made

for

affirms, that

subjected to this

generally remain a

two or three

ini-

letters,

mono-

which consti-

tute the radical word.

If,

then, this

mode

of analysis which

Champollion recommends, be adopted,

it

M.
will

be found that the great proportion of words

in

modern language are

directly referrible to

an oriental source: and that the radical word

translator's preface.
so

denuded

ChampoUion

oriental.

is

xlx
gives, as

an instance, the word Individuellement

an adverbial termination,

elle

meut,

an adjectival

ter-

mination, in the negative proposition, di the

sign of separation.

vidu or idu
video,

and

which

^T

to

this

is s/5w, /3w,

gamma, and
brew

There remains then only

probably comes from
with the prefixed di-

once to the He-

this leads us at

know, or perceive.

Take another instance unencumbered, ed is a

:

participial termination, en

verbs, un
tion.

is

formative of certain

the negative prefix, in

is

a preposi-

is

After this denudation, there remains only

cum ; which
to raise

up

even in

its

is

the

and

Hebrew Dp,

vv^hich

word

to rise up, or

retained

still

is

simple form in our language

coom, a heap, and comb, the erection of bees.

French combler, Latin cumulus.

We might

pursue

this to

the evidence goes beyond

shown, that very

many

any extent.

oriental

origin have retained the

It

this.

and that

may

be

words of early

same sense

languages throughout the period of

history

But

their progress,

in several

this world's

do'v\^n

to the

XX

TRANSLATOR

may

present time,

in

PREFACE.

We

be distinctly traced.

must be limited here

^1^,

to

one or two instances.

Hebrew, darkness, evening, the raven.

In this sense, also, the word occurs in Chaldee, Syriac,

Greek,

and Arabic.

e^e/Soj,

We meet with
and

vesper, nox, caligo,

it

in

g?'w, tego^

whence the German, ^ra/;^, and English, grave.

In the Latin

it

occurs as

English, crow, French,

another form,
English, raven

it
;

corbeau.

appears in

and then

Saxon, crav,

corvtis,

it

Again, in

Saxon, hraefn,

branches out, from

the habits of the bird, into Saxon, hraejian, to

raven, to rob
ven

German, rauhen

Swedish, rqfiva

rapina

Belgic, roo~

old Latin, reffare; rapere^

English, rob, rape, rapine, &c. &c.

Another instance may be given

in the

yh^i which word occurs in Hebrew and

word
all its

cognate dialects, in the sense to absorb, to swallow, to devour

and
it

vorax, edax, gula.

in all the families of the

In Gothic,

Gothic migration,

occurs in the form,Z>fl/y, venter, scortum, saccus.

In the Celtic family

also, balg, holg, builg,

ing venter, saccus, uterus, and balgum,

In Latin, hulga, a bag, a budget.

mean-

sorbitio.

In English,

translator's preface.
a bag, a

boil,

xxi

blain, fScotticeJ a bealiiig

In

bilge, to bulge, to bulk, to blow, to bellow.

Latin

baleine.

iraXkaKri,

to

and

(pccXccim,

In Latin, jf?6Z/M0, Greek

(SsB/iXog,

bellua, balaena,

French

Greek,

/SsXoi/jj

&c. &C.

kind might be multiplied

Examples of

this

any extent.

The

maybe

to

gradual course of a word

traced as an historic fact through several

languages, in which the original generic sense

has always controlled the specific signification

throua:hout a series of

aj^es.

And

it

must be

evident that, in discussing the force of syno-

nyms, much assistance may be derived from a

cautious reference to such sources of illustraIf

tion.

two synonymous words are under

consideration, and the evidence in favour of

the usus loquendi

is

but scanty, and intimates,

without effectually establishing, the fact of a

difference;
to

be able

it

times

to its
;

as that

a matter of no

to trace the

the earliest

down

is

and

word

known period

of

little

moment,

in question
its

up

existence,

to

and

remaining derivatives in modern

to

show

which was

that the idea entertained,

justified

by the usage,

is

XXU

TRANSLATOR

PREFACE.

comfirmed by the generic character and force

word

of the

at all times;

that the specific use of

it,

and probably

which

is

also

sought to

be established, did exist in another line of

migration from the east than the Hellenic.

To

ven-

this point, then, the Translator has

tured to apply a few observations, not because

he aspires

any remarks of

to associate

his with

the pages of such a writer as Tittmann

but

because this systematic application

of

mological inquiry to exegesis,

not yet

been adequately

tried

teaches him that

means, to

this

Scripture.

has

ety-

and because experience

much may

yet be done by

illustrate difficult

passages of

If the valuable glossaries of an-

and modern languages, of which we are

cient

possessed, are examined, with a view to this

mode

of illustration, treasures of invaluable

importance

may

yet be brought forth

which,

under the guidance of sound and well-weighed

canons of application,
light

upon

rare words

both in the^

And

if

may throw much new

and obScure passages,

Hebrew and Greek

Scriptures.

these few hints shall turn the attention

TRANSLATOR

PREFACE.

XXIU

of superior linguists to the subject, the Trans-

own
medium of

lator will not regret the intrusion of his

views on the public through the

The

these prefatory remarks.

tensive,
ant,

and the matter

subject

for illustration

is

ex-

abund-

and requiring ample space for detail. Here,

however,

it

should not be carried further.

Mr. Tittmann completed, before

his death,

another small portion of this work on

Synonyms.

the

This, together with some other

small tracts, on subjects intimately connected

with the present treatise,

it

is

the purpose of

the Translator to give to the public at a future

period.

The second volume also will include a general

list of the Synonyms of the New Testament,
which was arranged by Tittmann, and printed
with short notices attached occasionally to some
of the words.

Edinburgh, March

1,

1833

MEMOIR

TITTMANN,

DR.

ABKIIXiED FliOM

(JKKMAN.

Tril-

Dr. John Aucjustus Henry Tittmann, was

born on the
ill

1st of

August 1773,

Upper Saxony,

was then stationed

St.

Boniface.

delicate,

at

at Langersalza,

which place

his father

as deacon in the church of

He

was

in infancy

extremely

but his health gradually improved,

especially after the removal of his father to

Wittenberg.

and

Here

his progress

was

of age he gave the

talents in

imitante."

his education

rapid.
first

an essay. "

At

commenced,
fifteen years

public proof of his

De

Virgilio

Homerum

Enjoying the privilege of such

teachers as Schrock, Antoni, Henrichs, Hiller,

and especially the

illustrious

Pteiiihard,

he

pursued his studies successfully, taking the

XXVI

MEMOIR OF

degree of

M. A.

DR. Til THAN N.

And in

in 1791.

the year fol-

lowing, having determined to devote himself

to

an academical

life,

he went

to Leipsic

and

studied under Professors Morus, RosenmuUer,

Keil and Wolf.

In 1793, he defended from

the chair a dissertation entitled, "

Philosophorum veterum in
niendo^^

and

De

summo

Consensu

bono defi-

month opened

in the following

In 1795, he was

his first course of lectures.

made B. D. and was appointed

to

be the morn-

ing preacher at the University Church.

prelections to the theological students

very much approved,

he was appointed

to

ship of Philosophy

one in theology.

that,

His

were so

in the year 1796,

an extraordinary professor;

and

in

1800

to

a similar

In 1805, being just thirty-

two years of age, he took the degree

of doctor

in divinity,

and was admitted into the concilium

professorum

and having thus obtained a vote

in the Theological faculty,

he had the means

of being useful to his pupils,

readily availed himself for those

of

which he

who merited

his favour.

On

the death of Dr.

Wolf

in 1809,

he was

MEMOIR OF

DR. TITTMANN.

XXVll

appointed the third regular professor of the

In 1812, he became the assessor

University.

of the royal consistory.

In 1815, he succeeded

Rosenmuller as the second professor, and canon

of Meissen

and on the death of Dr. Keil

in

1818, he rose to the very honourable position

of Academiae professor primarius

and having

passed also through the various intermediate

grades of ecclesiastical honour, he was elected

the Custos prelatus of the cathedral church at

Meissen.

These successive

steps of honour-

able elevation, present to us a very striking

instance of the steady progress to respect and

usefulness, of a
It is

remarkable

man

of real worth and talent.

also, that in all these several

stations, his talent for business

was

as his theological attainments.

in the midst of

as

He

eminent

was

ever,

an active devotion to the most

complicated duties, the ready counsellor of his

pupils in
ties.

all

their various doubts

His advice

also

and

was sought with much

avidity in the filling

up of

academical charges

and such was

rate

difficul-

ecclesiastical

discernment of character,

and

his accu-

that

he had

MEMOIU OF

XXVlll

Dll.

TITTMANN.

scarcely ever reason to regret his

recommen-

dation.

In the several stations which he held, Dr.

Tittmann continued

to lecture,

riod of forty years,

on various branches of

theological study.

He

during a pe-

gave courses of

tures on the exegesis of the

New

lec-

Testament,

on the method of theological study, on church

on the evidences, the morality, the

history,

creeds,

and the dogmar-c system of Christian-

ity, all

of which were highly valued.

His system of exegesis led directly

to the

bringing out the meaning from the sacred text

itself,

independently of

opinions
lectures

of

all

consideration of the

commentators.

His

course

of

on the method of study extended

through a period of seven years.

The views

contained in his lectures on Church History,

are given to the world in his admirable work,

called,

"

gelical

Churches

Practical Exposition of the

in the years

Der Evangelische Kirche

Ul.iO,

praymatisch dargesteUt.

in

Evan-

1530 and 1830."*

Jahre 1530, und in Jahre

MEMOIR OF

DR. TITTMANN.

XXIX

very valuable tract from his pen on the

same

subject, appeared a

few weeks before

his

death in the Journal of Historical Theology.

In his lectures on the evidences of Christianity, he

made use

of a small work, entitled,

" Thoughts on the Subject of a Defence of

the

Faith."*'

His lectures on morals were

deeply interesting; and nothing could be more

beautiful than the

simplicity of

ing in dogmatic theology.

gretted that a projected

work on

which he had commenced

consequence of the
rigid

as

A
ed

demands of

often

laid

It

his
is

to

teach-

be re-

this subject,

six times,

but, in

difficulty of satisfying the

own

his

aside,

accurate mind, had

was never

completed.

few days before his death, he had mentionhis intention of

devoting himself to

it

in

the following spring.

In his lectures on " the Creeds," he used, as

a text-book, his "

Institutio

Evangelicae^^* Lips,

1811.

Symbolica Ecclesiae

In the course of

these prelections, he taught his pupils to en*

Ideen su einer Apologie des Glauhens,

MEMOIR OF

XXX

tertain a due,

as

human

DR. TITTMANN.

but only a due regard for creeds,

standards of religious opinion.

And

he drew, with delicate accuracy, the distinc-

between the Lutheran creed and that of

tions

other churches.

Tittmann's ability as a lecturer was admitted by

was good,

all

who heard

his style lucid

His manner

him.

and simple, and

readiness for extempore address great.

was remarkable

his

He

also for his constant attention

to the interests of his students,

and

for

his

great liberality, both with respect to the fees

of the

class,

and the devotion of

his time to the

society of his students out of the class-room.

The works of Tittmann are not very extensive.

They contain, however, much of the
fruits of forty

years of labour

often giving, in

a few sentences, matter which others would

have expanded into a volume.

tion to those productions,
professional, he wrote
lets

on

ecclesiastical

And

which were

in addi-

strictly

many

tracts

and pamph-

law.

He

contributed

papers to the Antiquarian Society, and re-

MEMOIR OF
gularly,

DR. TITTMANN.

from the year 1822

XXXI

he wrote

to 1831,

the preface to the Leipsic Missionary Report.

Dr. Tittmann was, according to the

German

technical style of speaking, a supernaturalist

and, however some of his views might for a

short time, and

by some persons be misunder-

he was decidedly opposed to what

stood,

is

on the continent of Europe called Rationalism.

He drew

the distinction

calmly and wisely

between the departments of reason and

ligious submission

to

divine

re-

He

teaching.

vindicated the proper province of reason in

judging of

religious, as of all other truth

and

maintained that the reason cannot receive, as

any thing which

true,

eternal
truth,

which God has given

He

in Christianity

to

held

it

really opposed to the

and universally recognized laws of

guidance.

and

is

for

man's general

held, therefore, that there

was

nothing contrary to these laws

sound reason.

At

the same time, he

vain to affirm, that the statements of a

religious dispensation

were limited

to

matters

which the human mind, by the force of

its

na-

MEMOIR OF

XXXn
tural

DR. TITTMANN.

might have ascertained

faculties,

but

that, besides the natural exercise of the reason-

ing powers for the discovery of truth, there

still

viz.

is

another source of religious knowledge,

the special teaching of the Infinite reason

by means of which the

finite

mind may

created

receive truths with which formerly

it

was un-

acquainted; that the Infinite mind, acting in

way

the same

as

we

conceive him to act in his

providential government, has, in the develop-

ment of

purposes towards his creature man,

his

from time

to time

gious truths
that

it is

that this

is

source

is

system

and that

it

as a supernatural revelation,

properly called so, because

is

certain reli-

the revelation of God;

in the Christian

must be regarded
and

made known

its

ultimate

not nature, but the immediate teach-

ing of that being who, in other respects, operates ordinarily

of nature

and absurd

and regularly through the laws

and that consequently

it

were vain

to attempt to base the doctrines

of Christianity on metaphysical subtleties

that the only wise

and

and

safe course is to hold

MEMOIR OF
stedfastly

DR. TITTMAN.

XXXIU

by the teaching of Christ and

his

Apostles.

The

rigidly studious
his

and industrious.

youth at four, and

in the morning.
till

Tittmann were of course

habits of Dr.

rose in

in later years at five,

The morning hours he passed

He

nine in his study.

class-room,

He

then went to his

From

where he taught till twelve.

twelve to one he wrote letters and read the

papers.

He

dined early, and took a short rest.

From

At

three he received visitors.

six

he attended various literary societies

four to
;

and

then hastened again to his desk, at which he

generally sat

till

eleven.

He married a widow lady in the year 1811,

by whom he had three children, two of whom
still live.

The outward frame of Tittmann was worthy

to be the tabernacle of such a spirit as his.

Benevolence beamed

and speaking eye

to the last

and

noble and commanding.

of consumption,

his

from

his blue

whole figure was

Dr. Tittmann died

combined with other

local

MEMOIR OF

XXXI V

DR. TITTMANN.

His general health began

affections.

to

wear

a suspicious character in the month of October,

he persisted

yet, contrary to medical advice,

in being carried in a sedan chair to the class-

room, and continued to lecture three hours

daily, until the

day

2d of December.

From

that

rapidly failed, yet he only

his strength

ceased from labour on the 23d, because his

hands were too weak

to hold the pen,

and an

inflammatory seizure in the throat prevented

him from

dictating.

In the close of his

am

He

illness

died on the 30th.

he said one day, " I

a philosopher and a theologian, but never

did I perceive so distinctly as now, that soul

and body are two

distinct things."

Towards

the evening of the 29th, he called for a mirror,

saying, " I suspect I have got the Jacies hippocra-

tica^

During the evening he seemed to dream

and, in a plaintive accent, he said, " All I

have
little,

now

to

do

is

to sleep."

however, and in his

last

He

revived a

moments he

imagined himself in the chair lecturing

pupils

to his

he repeated the words with which he

MEMOIR OF
frequently concluded
Ji7iis,

Jinis

XXXV

DR. TITTMANN.

in fide ;"

" Sed

Jiaec siifficiant

and so saying, he

fell

asleep.

Happy and worthy

actively

of imitation, a

and unremittingly devoted

vice of

God, and the elucidation of

word.

And

life

so

to the ser-

his inspired

blessed they, who, according to

their several ability, shall

go and do

likewise.

List of the Author's works.

Grundriss der Elementar Logik, nebst einer EinLeipzig, 1795.

leitung in die philosophie.

Theocles ein Gesprach iiber den Glauben an Gott.

Leipzig, 1799.

Theon oder

iiber

unsere

HofFnungen nach dem

Tode. Leipzig, 180L

Lehrbuch der Homiletik. Breslau, 1804.

Pragmatische Geschichte der

Theologie und Re-

ligion in der Protestantischen

Kirche, wahrend

der Zweiten Halfte des 18 Jahrhunderts Erstes

Theil.

De

Breslau, 1805.

rebus academicis epistola ad virum

verendum perillustrem

Adolph. Ernest. Nostitz

1808.

summe

re-

et excellentissimum Gottl.
et

Taenkendorf. Lipsiae

XXXvi

LIST OF

THE AUTHOR*S WORKS.

Ueber Supranaturalismus Rationalisnms

mus.

Ueber

et Atheis-

Leipzig 1816.
die Vereinigung der Evangelischen Kirchen.

Leipzig, 1818.

Die protestation

dem

der

Reichstage

zu

Evangelischen Stande auf

Speyer im Jahre

1529.

Leipzig, 1829.

Confessio Fidei exhibita Imperatori Charles V. in

Comitiis Augustae,

MDXXX.

thonis editione recognita.

ex primo Melanc-

Dresdae, 1829.

Ueber die FixerungderStolgebuhren. Leipzig, 1831.

PEiJ^OJSjiOS

^^

THE
^THE0L06IG:Sll/
y^
SYNONYMS
rr^^

^-,

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.
CHAPTER

I.

ON THE ACCURATE DISCRIMINATION OF THE

SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

The

anniversary of

fellow-citizens,

view

to

is

tliat

arrived,

day,

my

beloved

on which, with a

do away a shameless

traffic in

gences, Luther enkindled a flame, that

enveloped the dome of

St. Peter's.

indulall

But

but
this

flame having declined together with the pontifical

sovereignty of

Rome,

it

becomes those

Christians whose primitive rights the sacred en-

ergy of Luther vindicated, to commemorate

that day, not

by

idle triumphs,

but by remem-

bering the wise councils of that great man.

becomes them

It

so to avail themselves of the be-

THE SYNONYMS

2
wliicli

iiefits

he conferred, that they

may be

seen to hav^e been realized by judicious men,

who do

not merely boast themselves of their

but

privileges,

course, as

it

who seemed
has

it

them

use

wisely.

Which

has been often neglected by those

adhere to Lutheran views, so

to

especially been the case with those who,

forsaking the study of the interpretation of

Scripture, have based their confidence on hu-

man forms and

ecclesiastical

authority,

and

thus rashly overthrown one of Luther's wisest

For no opinion of Luther was

more prominent than that the divine doctrine
must be drawn directly from the sacred fount
itself; and he therefore especially recommended the art of grammar and the study of the
instructions.

ancient languages;

supposed
tion

that,

although

on account of

is

it

generally

own educa-

his

under a defective system, or from the

multiplicity of duties

by which he was subse-

quently overwhelmed, he was,

with the greatest

men

in

common

of that age, not tho-

roughly trained to the subtleties of grammar.

These

subtleties,

have learned

however,

to despise

many

and, as

if

in

our day

the subject

were exhausted, they have turned to sophistical disputation, and have learned to regard
the whole business of the grammatic interpret-

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

er as lying in determining' the

vague signifiwhat they

cation of words, or in seeking out

call the literal sense,

but which they evidently

do not understand.

Of

will not

now

speak, as

that after such an

this folly,

it is

however, I

sufficiently evident

improvement

in letters as

that which has recently taken place, the iiiertion

of these

men

will scarcely

be longer endured.

day which we are about to celebrate, it will be gratifying to all to whom the
divine doctrine and discipline are precious, to

But on

that

remember that saying which was ever in the

mouth of Luther the best grammarian is the
lest theologian ; that is, he who not only knows
:

the principles of the ancient languages, but

also so perceives the general art of speaking,

than which nothing more sublime has been in-

vented by the

common
he

^to

be reducible to

rules naturally based in reason, so that

expound all the memoand to open the fathomless

able rightly to

is

rials

human mind,

of talent,

treasuries of

human

erudition, he

is

certainly

best fitted to ascertain and to impart to others

sacred truth.

He

is

sadly mistaken

who mea-

sures the business of the interpreter

vulgar
to

mode

of speaking, as

if

by the

he had nothing

do but what boys learn at school.

Although

even the elementary rules of grammar are not

THE SYNONYMS

4
to

be despised; because, as Quinctillian

to those entering the interior of

many

subtle distinctions will

even

opening minds, but

this art,

appear,

are not only fitted to exercise the

sa^'^s,

which

acumen of

even the science

and erudition of the best informed men. But
to test

most truly Hemsterhusius has

stand a language,

common

that

is,

said, to

under-

according to the

all the words and forms

packed close in the brain, appears

notion, to get

of speech

but an idle and profitless attainment.

(See his

Oration on uniting the Study of Mathematics

and Philosophy with that of the Linguistic Art.)

But while many things in respect to the
grammatical interpretation of the New Testa-

ment

require a nicer accuracy than

ly thought necessary

those words
that,

general-

this is especially true of

commonly

called

synonyms

unless the most accurate thought

been exercised on them,

feared

is

that

be

whatever can

be

is

For that which, in

thoroughly understood.
the study of language,

is

regarded as the high-

know whence, and

est attainment, viz. to

has

to

it

no language

much

so

for

what reasons, certain names were given to certain things, is of such a nature that

it

cannot

be attained without the accurate examination

of

synonymous terms

neither can an inter-

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

preter remain ignorant of the origin and rea-

son of them, unless he

is

himself willing to

err in respect to the notions of things so ex-

pressed in words, or carelessly to acquiesce in

loose analogous significations,

That

this nicety,

explaining synonyms

many

however rendered.

however, in discriminating and

yet wanting, both in

is

interpreters of the

New

Testament, and

in almost all our Lexicons, is not surprising.

For this is in all languages the most difficult

branch of study, and the least elaborated and
;

is,

of course, so

much more

difficult as

the

times of the rise, perfection, and decline of a

language are more remote from our own age
and that, as the foundation and origin of parti;

cular words
relation of

And

fall

into obscurity,

synonyms

the origin and

are less easily discovered.

although in the Greek language especial-

on account of the refinement and exuberance of the Greek mind, the accurate discri-

ly,

mination of synonyms

is

extremely

difficult,

yet

New Testament, the definite marking of cognate and si-

in explaining the writings of the

on two accounts, attended with

greater difficulty.
In the first place^ be-

milar words
still

is,

cause the customary speech of those writers

more nearly

is

allied to the style of vulgar life

than to that of erudite men, which

is

governed

THE SYNONYMS

by

strict rules

and

new

multitude of

also that

on account of the

ideas to

be expressed by

means of words then

have been
to those

difficult to

who were

in use, their task must

any one, but especially

strange to the habit of accu-

rate speaking

and writing.

common

if,

of

minds,

For the multitude

on the whole, they agree

in certain general notions or ideas of things,

care not to ascertain accurately

word

force of each

but

what

make use

is

the

of similar

and
do little more than endeavour to express what
they think in the readiest and most accessible
terms.
And hence they not only do not nicely discriminate between synonyms ; but they
heap together similar words, the true and nice
distinctions between which, even learned men
or analogous terms very promiscuously,

much neglect. The language of men in

common life is certainly more vehement and
too

less

modified

sured,

and

it

its

terms are less nicely mea-

often affirms both indistinctly

and rashly; which, if an interpreter lose sight

of, he will often be seeking in the force of
words for a meaning which never entered

mind of the author; ah error far too

palpable in most of the interpreters of the
the

New

Testament.

But, in explaining the sa-

cred volume, the other point which

we have

OF THE
noticed
ters,

is

NEW TESTAMENT.

common

For

not less important.

in expressing

new

7
tliese

wri-

things, for which, in

were wanting, made use of analogous words which would

be clear and perspicuous to the men to whom
they wrote, but which certainly present difficulty to others who are estranged from their
modes and habits of thinking. For in respect
to things of which a people have no notion,
there must be in their language a want of
words or signs for them and therefore if their
range of knowledge is to be increased by new
notions of new things, either new words must
be coined, which ordinarily takes place in
those things which strike the senses or foreign
words must be borrowed, which is frequently
done or the new idea is expressed as it best
may, in analogous words then extant, whether
parlance, suitable words

And

in a simple or tropical sense.

Apostles have done this

is

that the

no marvel, and

surely not a ground of blame, seeing that the

greatness and

sublimity of the

truths

they

of
than the
truths
guage could not endure the regulated preci-

tauy:ht,

mii^htier

sion of established

fetters

modes of speech.

Ian-

But, in

explaining their writings, extreme caution

required, lest

the

interpreter,

in

is

rendering

cognate and analogous words differing minute-

THE SYNONYMS

from each other, should attribute

ly

the same sense,

ent one

when they are used

to

them

in a differ-

or should attach importance to the

difference of sense,

And

when they did not intend to

more caution
than those who despise the niceties of grammar are willing to exercise and hence it is,
do

so.

truly this requires

that in explaining the books of the

New

Tes-

tament, words which differ widely in meaning

are assumed to be synonymous, while others

which are allied to one common notion, are

not acknowledged as synonymous, or are

And

not explained with sufficient accuracy.

that I do not here speak unadvisedly, I will

now endeavour

to demonstrate.

we must determine what

For many have written only

But, at the outset,

synonyms

are.

ambiguously and defectively on

this

point

and neither Ammonius,* Popma,'' or others,

who have written on " similar or dissimilar expressions," have adequately discussed the nature of synonyms.

country,
"

The philologists

who seem, by

of our

nature, fitted

writer of the fourth century.

His work,

own

beyond
De

Simili-

tudine ac differentia quarundam dictionum, was published

at Paris, 1521,
^

and London, 1637

See Ausonius

Popma de

usu antiquae locutionis.

T.

differentiis

Lipsiae, 1734.

verhorum item de
T.

NEW TESTAMENT.

or THE
all

Others, for the examination of such difficul-

ties,

have thrown the

Among

on

light

this subject.

and Ade-

these, after Stosch, Fischer,

lung, Eberhard

We

nent.

first

mind of

admitted to stand pre-emi-

is

yet admire, however, the superior

Aristotle,

who

defined so subtilely and

elegantly the notions of indefinite things, that

he has given us a most perfect example of accu-

and thinking.

rate speaking
ro, Ts

ho,aa xomv, zai

avTog. ohv

^mv,

o,

xard

<s\)vm\j[xa^ c^v

rouvo/xa Xoyog rrjg ovuiocg 6

Synonyms,

rs av^^oj-Tog xai 6 ^ovg.

according to

therefore,

He says,

those

are

Aristotle,

common geFrom
common name.

things which, having by nature a

nus,

are called

by a

these he distinguishes

6/a,wi/u/xa,

which, though

common

possessing a different nature, have a

generic name,
Tovrojv

ya^

dv^^oj'Trog
6

ds

(ante Categor.

xa) to ys^ga/x/xft'ov

Kara

rovvo/Ma Xoyog

Whence

1, 2.)''

Far otherwise speaks Dionysius Thrax* (See Bekkeri

Anecdot.
Xuv

^mv

ovo/JjO, f/jovov xoivhv,

rrig ovffiag srs^og

oJov

vol.

ii.

p G36,)

ofZMVvfico; Tt&if^ivov, oiov

fcvs S-ciXda-trio;
ovof/,oc(n

ku)

fjt,vi

o/jccuvv/u,ov
A't'a.; o

ynyivvi?.

TO ecvTO ^yiXouv, olov uo^,

limv

ro xxrcc

ovo/ua,

l!iXix.f/.ei>vio;

kxi A/j

'2vv&i\vy.ov %i io-rt

to

ToX"

OiXia/s,

Iv 'hta.(po^oi$

^I'Pog, fj^a^eci^ct, c^oc^*}, ^atryctvor.

But the Scholiasts (ibid p. 867,) appear to diifer, unless we examine them very accurately. Certainly grammarians say that
the ofjcuvvfjca is a word common to diverse persons or things,
A grammarian resident at

l<

nodes, a disciple of Aristarchus, and wlio,

according to Suidas, publislied some grammatical work?.

T.

it

THE SYNONYMS

10

appears, tliathe called those tilings

synonyms

common

generic name, and had

reason why the name
same
in them
was given. And so far the definition is good
for it correctly intimates what they have in
common. But one point is yet unnoticed, viz
that synonyms differ, and in what they differ.
And, although this is almost an endless subject; for synonyms differ in as many ways as
there is room for distinctions in the same word;
yet this must not be lost sight of, lest synonyms
be confounded with words of precisely similar
power and meaning. For it is to be understood, that synonyms are words of the same
genus, but of different species, in which fact
but,
especially the nature of synonyms lies
since all the species are not of the same mode,
for some are subject directly to the genus, and
others to the species, it becomes necessary to explain accurately both the affinities and the diffewliieli

bore a

also the

rences which exist. Eustathius (on Iliad. 8, 20.)

has spoken more fully, and

as Ala?,

fiu;,

sigiiificatiim

yaviTi

'J

hey

xvMv,

(poTvi^.

conveyed

l)y

t-itt

the

as well to quote

ffv.ei vicet,

diverse wortis,

diffe:', tlieref'.irej

synonyms are not terms

tliiiigs

but

it is

i.s

a similar

Ita -^kuovav evo/ad-

IVorn Aristotle, ^vho s;.ys that

peculiar tu a ginius, but n mies of

ranged in one common genus.

OF THE

have

says,

Xsyzrai
jcorcg'

7MV

'Tra^o^vvofjbsvojv

rtaoa r(Z

ov6[jjr/,roL

fih

'^v^dog

Si'i

xomncm

/xg^'

y.al

y^a/x/jj-xriyuovg'

^u/xog* yoXog'

yokog raurd karir

^oXog xaJ

Kurcc

d's

rsSdaoa roAjra

rh'^oojrruv,

cro/fi-yi'*

r,

h^yri

/cocl

TO' (Soorog' /jjho-]/' av'^^MTog.

ooyri xcii

%al

'^v.'jjog TroXvojvv/jjOvcfiv sv

/j>^vtg'

xa/

W(r-:r5

xara

xat

ourcfj y^v)

rovg

xa^a

<!roXvu>vv(j^a^

ravrornr/

ri

ra rota

zlgi

6\))/U)VV[JijCt

rovg uXkovg

'/.cii

He

meanino:.

"O/JjTi^ov Xsyo/jAjyj opyrj'

6 '^j/ihg 6

Tccvrcc,

caught his

rij^htlv

s'^i

11

Henry Stephen does not appear

his words, for

to

NEW TESTAMENT.

'/oXog

(jri/xaa/ag.

These words very accurately express that which

constitutes the nature of synonyms, viz a cer:

tain notion

which

common

to several

words, in each of

a certain specific difference resides

there are four species of

as

ooyrj, '^vfj.og' yJJKog^ ^55v/$*

which may be predicated of an angry

but yet in each there is something by

xoVog, all

man

which
If,

it

may

therefore,

onyms

be distinguished from the others.

we

regard the grammarians, syn-

are words contained under the

genus, but each of which has

so

that,

though they are

its

all

same

peculiar species;

comprehended

under one common notion, yet each has besides

its

distinguishing peculiarity.

Synonyms

are,

however, of two kinds, of

which the one may be called logical^ the other

grammatical. And we would call those logical,
in

which there

is

a diverse notion of the forms

THE SYNONYMS

12

or species which class under the

example cited from Eustathius, ky^

as in the

the g-enus, but the several species are

is

-/Jkog'

fic

[Mtivig'

^v/Mog'

diverse certainly in their speci-

%6rog'

common and more

may be predicated

nature, but cognate in one

general

quality

of an angry man.

nyms, because

for all

We

call these logical

common name

or/

ccvrog s6tiv

there

are

syno-

their relation lies in the reason

of the thing, which interlinks

a

same genus

ohaiag Xoyog.

But

synonyms which the

older

grammarians appear

synonyms of

things with

or thing; or, as Aristole says,

Tiara rovvof^a

other

many

to

rrjg

have called

-roXuwi/u/Aa,

on various accounts, are called by various names, as ^ooHg'

/As^o-vj/* av^oo)-7:og.
These, as they differ, not in
the notion of the thing expressed, but merely
in the reason of the particular term given, may
be called grammatical synonyms, unless some
should prefer to call them etymological.
For
often many terms are appropriated to the same
thing, which differ only in the etymology; as
the same men are called, in a different relation,
ai/^^wTo/, (S^oToi, /ui.iPQ-:rsg.
But, if any one maintains that such words should be excluded from
the

the

list

things, which,

of synonyms,

I shall

not object; since

properly, those things only are

which have, in

fact,

the same

synonymous

name

as sub-

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

And

jects to the

same genus.

later writers

have used the term.

to both kinds of words, this is

13

in this sense

But since,
common, that

they are the signs of things which possess in

common one

generic distinction, they would

not be altogether incorrectly called synonyms,

by any one who wished

comprehend under one term this whole genus of cognate

vocables. This, however, must not be conceded, that words which signify the same thing in
the same mode, are to be accounted synonyms.
For how many have erred who have classed
together the (Suvu)vu[/.a and hodwa/xovvra. It is one
thing to signify in some way the same object,
it is another to have the same force, that is
precisely the same meaning.
Nor does Aquila
Rom.^ (de avmwfila) speak altogether unadvised-

when he

to

we avail ourselves of this kind

when we consider one word not

says,

of elocution,

to express sufficiently the

dignity and great-

ness of the subject; and, therefore, introduce

others having
it is

on Aristophanes

says, ^o$

Xs'^sffiv laoh'jvctf/jovaaig

^ I

same

the

signification.

But

a very different matter what the Scholiast

roTg 'jroinrcug

y^^r^G'bai,

(vid.

cra^aXX^Xo/j

loh,

Chr.

G.

suppose the author means Peter de Aquila, or Aqui-

lanus,

who

wrote, in 1737j a book, Questiones in quatuor

libros sententiarum.

T.

THE SYNONYMS.

14

Ernesti Lexicon Technol. Graec. Rhetor, p. 334.)

More

correctly J. A. Ernesti, the

this university,
tis

N.

T.,* that

least, in the

ornament

ot

taught in his Institutio Interpre-

"

in the

same

same language,

dialect of

it,

among

or, at

same

the

people, during the same age, there are no syn-

onyms

of

words specifically applied

ever, such exist in

how-

if,

any language, they are the

This

product of different dialects or periods."

remark is true, and worthy of much attention,

if synonyms are to be regarded as equivalent
words; the number of which will always be

few

any language

in

in proportion to its re-

finement, as in Greek;

for

may

it

be

fairly

doubted, whether in a language so far refined,

any words can be found of precisely the same

force, i, e. which indicate the same thing, prefor although they
cisely in the same way
same
thing,
the
as ^agiXsvg, avaf,
may denote
;

or

Tv^avvog,

may

signify the several species of

the same genus, as

differ

in

certain

points

traces of this difference

time and

(pdayam, yet they

^'^og, ao^,
;

although

and,

may

be,

the

by length of

indiscriminate use, almost obliterat-

ed ; yet they may be recovered from accurate

writers, and can even be followed out by means

See Biblical Cabinet,

vol.

i.

p.

50

T.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

of the etymology

15

Wherefore, great

itself.

care should be taken, lest in words of this kind,

which seem

to

mean

the

same

and
though

in degree,

mind

may appear very

or

ne-

terms which relate to morals

to the affections of the

they,

we

meaning; and

glect the specific diiference of

this especially in

thing,

mode, or

which, al-

nearly allied, yet

in specific character,

may, nevertheless, differ very widely. And

this is, in fact, one of the most fruitful sources
of synonyms.

And

hence, therefore, both in other books,

and in the books of the New Testament, those

words only can be regarded as synonyms,
which have the same common notion, to which
several species or modes are subjected; so
that tliey may be all referred to the same generic head but each, at the same time, so dis;

tinctly differing that, as species, they

may be

accurately distinguished from the genus

There
especially

may

be

are,

in

however, three kinds of words

the

New

erroneously

and concerning these

The

first class

taken
I

which
synonyms;

Testament,
for

will

speak shortly.

which signify
and are so much

consists of those

either the cause or the effect;

more

itself.

likely to be regarded as

the writers of the

New

synonyms, because

Testament, as

is

very

THE SYNONYMS.

16

common

in popular writing, are

very closely cause and

effect.

wont to unite
For example,

writers of dogmatic theology are very apt to

use promiscuously those words which are applied

by the sacred

of man, as
raXkcLyn'

writers to the redemption

/Xao/xog* Xvt^ov s^ayooaff/Mg' dixaiuffig'

o!.<pi<sig

a/xagr/wr

so that these

xa-

words ap-

pear to signify precisely the same thing,

or, at all

synonymous. And the three former we might grant to be synonyms, although,

even then, their specific difference should be
but the others which follow, differ
noticed
widely from them. For these denote the efthose benefits which
fects of the work of Christ
events, to be

flow through Christ to the real believer

the cause or reason

why

while

such benefits are re-

ferred to Christ as their author,

is

expressed

by those words, which show what Christ has

For when the sacred writers say that
done.
Christ accomplished,

they

mean

to express that

tain xaraXkayy]^
Aixaluffig is

/Xao/xo?,

d/xalcoffig,

Xur^ov, s^ayo^afffios,

which he did

aipsffig

to ob-

The

a/j^a^riuv.

the effect of iJayo^atf/Aog, and so

is

the

and they who have considered it as

synonymous with iXagf^og have greatly erred.
For the xara'AXayr] is not referred to God, but
it is the effect of the /Xao/xog and the
to men
xaTccXXayyj,

a<peffig a/j^aprtuv.

For

after

that

men have

ob-


OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
tained, through Christ, the assured

17

hope of par-

don and future happiness, nothing hinders

return to a state of gracious favour with

their

God;

and, that lifted up and encouraged by that hope,

they should both cease to dread any thing from

God

towards themselves, and cease to act con-

And

trary to his will.

to

be

this

**

is

although

men

are said

enemies by wicked works," the force of

not that God is angry with them al;

though, on account of his perfect holiness, he

cannot approve of
grant to
unfit

man

but

it

human

perverseness, nor

a salvation for which he

is,

that,

men

is

utterly

alienated from the

love of virtue, and struggling against the sanctity of the divine laws, are in their thoughts,

their course of

life,

and even

in their fear, op-

posed to the will of God, and are in despair of

happy end than which, nothing

can render man, who is "sold under sin," more
wretched.^
But from this benefit which is re-

attaining a

^This

and

is

a most important theological dogma, brought out

by accurate scholarship. It lies at the basis of

That which divineshave called
thelaw-enmity onthe part of God towardsmen,hasbeen made
too much of by some, in the face of the Gospel announcement, that " God was, in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, and not imputing to men their trespasses."
If men are
illustrated

useful evangelical instruction.

to be encouraged to seek a better state, they

that the impediment does not

but in their

own

lie

must be shown,

in the religious

wilful indifference and mistrust.

system,
T.

THE SYNONYMS

18
ferred to

Christ,

follows that

it

The

reconciled to God.

and then follows the

cedes,

cause

^iog

"hjoyiXjtihiwc,

r]v Iv

%^/<J'rw Ttodijjov

avToTg

the duty of

ra

men

rw

pre-

Be-

TtaraXXayr,'

xaraXXaco'wi' savruj,

ira^aitrfj^iLCLra

avruv

it

is

[/j7\

now

to return to a state of grace

with a holy God.

yfiTi

man may be

a^sc/g a/y,apr/wv,

dio/Mi^a

oh

vtso xi"^'^cv,

xaraXXd-

(2 Cor. V. 19, 20.)

%i(^

and a^piag afiainm

For
are improperly regarded as synonyms.
dixatojffig is the whole gift of salvation ;^ but the
aipsffig a/^a^r/wi/ is the cause and necessary condition by which the hxamaig exists.
Many passages show that they thus differ as cause and
effect, but those, especially in which they
In the same way,

^/xa/wtf/g

are plainly distinguished as to order of time,

Rom.

as

iv.

25.

But

taken for synonyms,

that

as these

it

words have been

has, of course,

happened

when they ought to be plainly subordinated

one to the other, they have been treated as

parallel in order,

and by

this

means a

serious

confusion has been introduced into ideas of the

For not even now, in explaining the substance of the Gospel concernfirst

importance.

Rather,

it is

the putting

man

in

such a state before God,

forensically, as that all the practical realization of salvation

\

from

s>in

and

its

consequences shall follow

T.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

19

ing the salvation accomplished by Christ, and

by men, do they altogether

really obtainable

abstain from those formulae which, taking their

rise

from

Vulgate rendering of certain

the

words, subsequently,

when

the

Romish Church

had obscured the true benefits of the death of

were adopted almost of necessity by our

own theologians and then, at length, contrary to the plain meaning of the sacred writers,
were received among the evangelic dogmata,
Christ,

and defended with more zeal than propriety

and even now, are attempted to be justified.
If any true evangelical theologian could persuade himself, in explaining the doctrine of

words which actually accord

salvation, to use

with the Greek, and not those uncertain am-

biguous terms borrowed from the Vulgate, as

justitia, justification satisfaction &c.,

as doing

much

to place the evangelic doctrine

in its true light,

filements of
praise.'^

**

It is

he certainly,

its

In the

and

to

defend

it

from the de-

enemies, would deserve

mean

much

time, let us give dili-

almost impracticable to unravel the

mish sophistry has woven around the truth

web which RoThe

it.

to hide

ingenuity of ages has been devoted to this subject.

For

in-

stance, the true notion of repentance has been almost entirely lost,

through the

false

view which the Romanists have

They have endeavoured to

word comes horn poena^ punishment, and

promulgated about penance.

show

that the very

THE SYNONYMS

20

gence that the words which, in their teaching",

the sacred writers have used, be understood in

and meaning.
Another class of words in the New Testament which have been mistaken for synonyms,
is that of those which express the state or the
their true force

In explaining these, error often

action.

who know

committed, when persons

is

not the

true force of the words, endeavour to excuse

the rashness of their

own

by the

interpretation

supposed inaccuracy of diction in the sacred

and thus confound those words which

express the action with those which denote

writers

the state or condition of the thing.

And

if

any one should say that this is of no moment

for that in both words the notion of the same
thing

dominant;

is

greatly he

is

deceived.

that penance or repentance

But the

fact

is,

it

is

is

easy to shew

For, in the

first

how

place,

a voluntary infliction for sin.

that our word repent^ and the French se

repentir, are not at all derived

from

this source,

but from

Hebrew word niS)> ^^ ^"^^ ^ ^^^ this'etymological view

of the word brings us away altogether from the false doctrine of Rome, and exhibits to us the idea of repentance in
the

its

true light, and in perfect accordance with the

tament word
sin to

God.

for

it, fitravoiei,

New

Tes-

a change of mind, a turning from

From the same source, we have the French word

and in our own language, pent-house, a

penie, inclination,

sloping roof, inclining towards the

main building

T.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

21

the words are of a different genus, and cannot

therefore be accounted

synonyms

as,

ample, creation and the thing created

for ex-

slaugh-

and death who would call these synonyms ?

Moreover, as the thought is widely different
when we speak of a certain action, and when
ter

we speak

of the state or conditk)n effected

that action,

must

it

arise if

is

inevitable that

many

errors

words of these different kinds

are accounted synonymous.

Yet

this is

a fault

so frequent with our lexicographers, that

not hesitate to affirm

of

many

by

it

do

to be a fruitful source

Examples of this may

those words especially which have

serious errors.

be found in

common root, as ^/xa/wc/g, o/xa/oand dixalu/^a, and many others; which, when

their origin in a
(f'jvn,

they are referred to the same thing, are improperly regarded as synonyms, and are therefore

frequently explained as

if it

were the same thing

whether the Apostle had written 6/xa/w/xa or

dr/caiudig.
And this is still more objectionable

when words

of this class are used to express im-

portant general notions, for the accurate setting

forth of
suffices.

which customary language scarcely

For in these cases it must often hap-

pen, and most unfortunately for the ascertain-

ing the Apostle's meaning, that words which

describe the action are confounded with the

THE SYNONYMS

22

idea of the state and condition of the thing

acted on

which, in passages where the sacred

writers have spoken of the wickedness of the

men

of their generation not unfrequently oc-

curs.

synonyms which

Finally, the third kind of

are erroneously assumed to exist in the

Testament,
It

is

more

of development.

difficult

embraces those words which so

the same

New

far signify

thing, that they equally regard cer-

and places, and

assumed to be synony-

tain persons, or certain times

therefore are falsely

mous, and are not explained as

to their specific

diiference, because a certain general notion

assumed as the basis of them

many such words

in

the

is

all.

There are

New

Testament,

which are used only of certain persons or of a

certain time or place, each of which express
a very different idea, although they have refe-

rence to one and the same thing.

xr/tj^Jji/a/,

all

dvazaivovff^ai,

predicated of

Such are

which, though they are

amendment

of heart and

life,

yet they exhibit the notion so differently, that

they cannot be accounted synonymous.

indeed, as

mon
f

/mbtuvosTv, dyiuG^i^vai,

notion of

gcr^a/, dvoj^iv

amendment;

yivn^rtvai^

Some

express the comothers, as

sTiffr^s-

are spoken of a change

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

in the Jews'
rest,

mode

23

of thinking and acting

and indeed most words of

the

this class, re-

quire the improvement of the manners and

life

of

men

already corrupted and defiled by

sinful association.

And

if

these words are ac-

counted synonymous, then they are

stood in
and, as

all underone sense as of renewing, restoring,

it

were, forming again

when they ought

amendment of the

nature,

be understood of the

to
life

human

of

men already in

ence, and already corrupted;

exist-

and any one

capable of judging, will readily admit the con-

must thus be introduced. For,

although we are not disposed to deny that

fusion

human
and

that

nature, even at

discipline of the

obtain a blessed end;

grant that
despair

all

of

its best,

Holy

nay,

we

the posterity of

eternal

needs the aid

Spirit, that

happiness,

it

may

will readily

Adam must
unless

they

which the sacred

books prescribe, and which is most assuredly
pointed out to them by inspiration
yet this
also we think evident, that no opinions have
been held concerning man's moral state more
dreadful, or which ought more justly to be

steadily pursue that course

mollified

by

the favourable use of

ambiguous

words, than those which apply the Scripture

statements, concerning

men

in a state of actual

THE SYNONYMS

24

corruption, to the moral state of

and

itself;^

this

arises

human

nature

from no other cause

than that words, which were affirmed only of

certain

men

in certain places

and times, were,

same general notion,

Certainly this will
regarded as synonymous.
be granted by all, that a passage concerning
man's moral improvement is usually treated as
if it spoke indiscriminately of the new-born inAnd we
fant and of the worst man on earth.
as if they involved the

'

It is to be feared that the

author has, in these latter re-

marks, allowed the benevolence of his feelings to carry him

away from
prescribes,

caution.

the line of accurate investigation which he

and in which he generally walks with much

The whole

of this passage

is

far too general

and

loose in its statements, to warrant an almost sceptical view

of the established theology of ages,

points of doctrine.

upon some important

We must not receive even upon so respect-

able an authority, the mere assertion that, Wiffr^i<fi(r6ai

and civuhv yivvn&iivat are expressions only to denote a
change from Judaism to Christianity; nor Avould it be a

sound canon of

criticism,

that there

is

an ambiguity in

doctrinal terms in the inspired writers, which should be

thrown into the

scale in favour of

dition as a fallen being.

It

is

man's present moral con-

easy for perverted intellect,

or unsound scholarship, to assume this ambiguity, and build

on

dogma ; and in fact, this is the

most heretical opinions ; while, before the
meridian light of such acumen as that which Mr. Titmann generally shows, all seeming ambiguity vanishes.
it

a false and ruinous

fruitful source of

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

25

might easily multiply sucli examples if we had

room, or if more examples were needed to
sustain a self-evident observation.

have spoken,

ever

men

fall

So

how-

far

which

lest the errors into

respecting synonyms, should be ac-

counted of little importance. The ills under

which we suffer in this respect are undoubtedly curable
rally

but they

lie

deeper than

is

thought; nor will they be heard

compliance with the advice of Luther,

gene-

till,

we

in

re-

turn to the strict accuracy of grammatic investigation.^

Certainly

much

of the wild theology, which, to the dis-

grace of the Christian church in the 19th century, has dis-

turbed the peace of

its

naembers,

may

inaccuracy with which the word of

is

read in the ori-

Women

and boys, and sometimes men,

such publications as the Morning Watch, passim) with

ginal languages.
(see

be traced to the sad

God

little smattering of Greek and Hebrew, set up for critics

and inventors of new views ; and so extensive is the want

of a habit of strict exegetical interpretation, that not

many

of the pastors of the present day in our country, are pre-

pared by the ponderous metal of a sound scholarship, to confound and silence their frivolous and baseless speculations.

The

mists which they raise could not live in the light of

such writings as this very able work on the synonyms of

Scripture.

T.

THE SYNONYMS

"26

CHAPTER
It

is

11.

generally allowed, that one great

diffi-

culty in explaining old authors, lies in

the

For,

accurate observation of the use of words.

as in the grammatical laws of a language,

no

such rigid necessity exists, but that an occasional deviation

may

be permitted

use of coo^nate words, a

still

so in the

jrreater latitude of

meaning obtains; for those laws arise from

fixed causes, and cannot therefore be lost sight
of,

unless the causes themselves are removed,

custom introduces many forms of

speech which are contrary to the rule and
(although

genius of a language;) but the wider use of

particular words
laws, but
that

is

is

not controlled by certain

frequently so guided by custom,

not only at different periods,

writers of the

materially

same period, the

differs.

And

but in

force of a

word

justifies

the

this

masters of the hermeneutic school,

when they

affirm that, next to the grammatical

and

logical

knowledge of a language, regard should be

had, especially in rendering the older writers,
to the usiis loquendi, or sense in

which particu-

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE
lar

27

words were received, both generally in the

language in which the book

specially in the writings of
as this attempt

common

cases,

is

so

its

and

written,

And

author.

not without
is

difficulty

in

that difficulty consider-

ably increased in the

examination of those

who have more

writers,

is

frequently receded

from the customary use of words, whether

it

be from ignorance of their own language, or

and magnitude of their subject compelled them to a more lax applicathat the novelty

The

tion of the terms already in use.

New

of the

writers

Testament Scriptures were of this

class.

In no class of words, however,

culty greater than in those called
that

is,

the

common notion,
some particular mode and

ing of the thing signified.

diffi-

synonyms;

in those which, although they

referred to one
sents

is

may be

yet each prespecific

For

mark-

in regard to

such words, not only must great care be taken

lest

many words

should be falsely accounted

synonymous; but the determining of those that

really are synonymous, is rendered extremely
partly because in the natural

pro-

gress of language the specific force of a

word

difficult

is

frequently changed; and partly because the

sacred writers, freed from the ambition of mere

THE SYNONYMS

28

human eloquence, have

leadings of a

rather followed the

mind illumined by the divine

than laboured after the beauties of an

spirit,

eloquence.

artificial

In noticing, therefore,

the specific difference of particular synonyms,

caution

is

required

in the interpretation

lest,

we should search in them

more than the writer himself intended.
At the same time, they appear to err greatly

of certain passages,
for

who,

forming lexicons of the

in

ment, do not at

all

New

Testa-

regard the true relation of

synonyms, but

treat of

certain degree

cognate,

words which are

in a

though really very

diverse from each other, as

if

they were equi-

valent and identical in their form and

mean-

ing.

must be granted that in all

passages the distinction between synonyms
cannot be so urged, as that we shall always
For, although

gain

much towards

we

exhibiting the force of each

yet accurate interpretation requires

passage,
that

it

should diligently notice the difference

of words, lest in places in which the writer

meant

to

convey

we

different ideas,

should

swerve from the sure rule of discrimination,

and,

by an ambiguous

mind

of the author yet

version,

render the

more obscure.

repeated meditation on this subject,

it

After

seemed

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

29

desirable to exhibit a specimen of a synony-

mic lexicon of the New Testament and, for

this purpose, we have chosen words which are
;

least foreign to the character of these sacred

They all regard

human soul which

days.*

that moral habit of

the

is

wrought
aya^os*

in

by the Holy

it

dyiog,

dixaiog'

be divinely

to

These are

Spirit.

ayvog'

xa^a^og*

h^og'

offiog*

dxe^a/og* a-rXoD^* ax,ax.og' d/ns/M'rrog' a/xcofiog' avsT/X^j'Trrog,

all,

with their nouns.

be evident to

words one common notion

which may be referred whatever of

that in these

exists, to

moral excellence
each there

is

is

man

yet in

regarded.

is

All these terms

predicated of the same man, yet

man

think of the same

we

desired in

a difference of mode, under which

that excellence

may be
as

It will

we

differently, according

use the one or the other of these ex-

pletives.

But they

selves, as to the

differ also

mode
we

periority of nature

between them-

of expressing this suwill divide therefore

the whole group of words into classes.

dya^og and

dya^og'

dixaiog.

dlxaiog

agree, as either

which

said of a person or a thing

is

state with regard to another, so that

what each one would wish

'

See page

it,

may be

in a right
it is

just

and may justly

THE SYNONYMS

30

Yet they differ. For tlie

word aya^Lg regards the good or the benefit
which springs from a good person or thing, but
6/xa/os implies only that a thing is precisely what
it should be, without any regard to the question whether good or evil may flow from it.
For he is h'rA.oLioc, who observes the ^i^f-n (jusTherefore, God is %iirr\<; hixaiog, 2 Tim.
tice).
require

it

for

iv. 8.

be.

to

he will lender

But

ing to his works.

which

in

to

some way

that

dsvd^ov

Luke

viii. 8. dovXog

5.

Hence

Matth.

V. 45.

ii.

do

ed in Matth.

For

dyahohg.

aya^'oi
lities
it is

by

is,

'rrovri^oi

and elsewhere.

And

this is

xxii. 10.
it is

ill

are opposed,

For the

'rovTj^oi

not contradict-

cfvvyjyuyov 'TTovrjooug rt

xal

rendered by some, men

however, sometimes used not to express the qua-

mind but of the person. In Exodus ii. 2. where

of Moses J^IH ^ID "'D? which the LXX. renders

of the
said

uffriio?,

Aquila uses

a,ya.6o;.

And

aya^og

times used in this sense in purer writers.

Idyl, xxiii. 2. rdv y/o^ipav ayetSoi.

com.raou notion of
it

7^ dyu^T],

17.

vii.

18. collated with Tit.

ii.

dya^oi and

to others.

'^rovoi

men and

dya^og, Matth. XXV. 21, 23.

dya%Tg, 1 Pet.

dsg-TToraig

accord-

dya^d, Mattb.

dofji^ara

Matth.

dya^ov,

man

called aya^og

is

profitable to

is

supplies their wants," as

vii. 11.

every

tlie

ocrurs in Exodus

again in

Samuel

uypJ'oi oouffiij

ii.

word
2.

in fact, some-

So in Theocritus
the same use of the

in our old adjective, goodly, as

that he

xvi. 12,

our Version

Wehave

is,

was a goodly

child.

where, in the Septuagint,

is,

goodly to look

to.

T.

And
it

is

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

31

For they are

horn of a good or had race.

called,

unworthy, as the parable plainly declares.

And

would be both absurd and unjust, promiscuously to invite men of any condition, and
then when they were assembled, with severe
rebuke to cast out those who were found to be

it

In

of an inferior condition.

the

commandment

is

said to be both

dya^h* the one, because

what

is

Romans

vii. 1*2.

hixaia xai

teaches nothing but

it

just; the other, because

whom

it

regards the

was given, v. 13.

In the same way they are opposed in Rom. v.
Scarcely for a righteous man (hixaku) would
7,
one die, but for a good man (a/a^ou) some
would even dare to die. Though a man be
free from crime, it is not necessary that he be
freed from the risk of suffering but for a beneficent man, (Matth. xx, 15.) some would not

happiness of those to

it

hesitate to die.
AiJicciog

then,

is

more extensive meaning

of

than dya^og' for d/xaiog is

one who follows the

law of right and equity, whether

others in good or

ill

but

dycc^og is

it

he

issues to

who

does

and even those who are vrovri^oi

may sometimes " give good gifts," Matth. vii.
II. But since the law of equity requires, that
if it is allowable and possible we should do

good

to others

good

to all,

and not always use our own

right,

THE SYNONYMS

32

in which, certainly, real probity consists

who

also are called dixawt,

fulfil

they

the offices of

humanity, as well as those who observe strict

In the New Testament, therefore,
justice.
not only
called

he who acts justly and blamelessly

is

Christ, Acts

he

Rom.

hixaiog,

also

who

14;

iii.

is

iii.

(so

10.

vii.

52.

affirmed of

it is

Pet.

iii.

18.)

but

benign and tender, equitable and

So Joseph, Matth. i. 19., is said to

be dizaiog, because he was unwilling to expose
and so God
his wife to public ignominy
himself, because he pardons sinners, Rom. iii.
clement.

26.

John

nification of

Many

9.

i.

dUaiog

in

think that this sig-

New

the

springs from the Hebrew, in which

denotes the same with TDH."

"

There can be no good ground

scores of instances in
yixettos,
ViKCito?

we

find but

which

Testament,

pn^

But even among

for this idea.

"T^liJ

is

often

Among the
LXX.

rendered in the

one instance in which that version puts

for *7Dr7j ^^^' ^^ Isaiah Ivii. 1.

x-a) oiv^^t; ViKOttoi ai^ovrut.

And here there is no propriety in the rendering; it very improperly confounds two different words in the verse, and destroys

beauty. Our English version draws the correct distinction.

" The righteous T'^'^n^perisheth and no man layeth it to heart,
and merciful men "IDH ^^^ taken away," &c. Certainly seits

eral passages occur in

*lDn ^y

^i>taioffvv>i

ter rendered

which the

LXX.

renders the noun

but even these generally would be bet-

more strictly according to the original notion

Hebrew word. Gen. xix. 19. xx. 13. xxi. 23,

of mercy in the

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Greeks,

tlie

who

not only signifies just, he

dr/.u/og

observes the

what the law

and constantly does

rii>]it,

requires, but he also

he

is

lie

ob-

who

in ail things is equir(d)le,

^^V.rj,

and never excessive

to punish

who

For

serves the duties of humanity.

preserves the

80

he

is

lenient

mercilul

when

when

called

called to aid

the wretched, even to his ov/n inconvenience.

For

diJcii

der to each his due, in which

but that

sists,

as far as

we

requires not only, that

we

we should

should ren-

civil right

con-

give liberally to each,

are able, consistently with justice

between justice
altogether exploded from the law

to others; for the ditference

and equity

is

And

of morals.

as the notion of

^rz-ri

orio-inates

in the idea that things are equally distribut-

who both observes that

wdiich is lawful and right, and who does what
Ruhnken on Xevirtue and equity require.
nophon, Memor. iv. 4, 5, says, " Aizaiog is
ed, he is called d/zaiog

in

whom

excessive, nothing deficient,

which

spoken of a person or thing

is

&c.

In die

first

case,

oixaio; is

is

ade-

our trausLitors have rendered

mercy, and in the other two, kindness.

term

nothing

only ap;tlied to

men

But, in

fact,

it

tl;f

in such instances as tiie

case of .Joseph referred to in the text, as indicative of that

justice

and equity out of which the exrevnal act of kindness

He was 2/;ta/of,
is assumed to fimv.

and mercy, in question,

and,

tlierefoi-e,

he was kind and merciful.

T.


THE SYNONYMS

34
qiiate to its
its

appointed functions, and perfect in

There

numbers.

this,

when

that

is

is

another notion akin to

said to be

hiTtaiog

which pre-

serves uniformity and consistency in

Hence,

parts."

a chariot

is

in

Xenoph. Cyrop.

said not to be

all

its

ii. "2.

26,

that

dlxaiog,

is,

it

would not keep an even course, when drawn

by horses of unequal strength or swiftness.
Wherefore, dizaiog often signifies that which is
fit and suitable, as yn ^/?ta/a, in Pollux i. 227;
and yridiov dixaiurarov Cyrop. viii. 3, 38, is not
the most fertile soil, but the most congenial.

The Romans used justice or just in this sense,

the German gerecht, as expressing that

like

which

proper and

is

fit,

that in

nothing defective or redundant.

which there

But

is

the Jews,

whose minds were imbued with the notion of

civil justice,

only

when they sought

the bless-

ings of divine grace, had in view justice in

strictest sense,

its

but were totally alien from the

sublime moral feeling which

we admire

in that

saying of our blessed Lord, which declares

God

only to be dya^og, good, that

mum

honum.

In the word

bixaiog

the notion of benefit and

the sum-

therefore, the notion of

just, right, equitable, prevails.

ct/a^os,

is

In the word
utility.

See Schneider's edition of Cyrop

T.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

ay log'

dyvog oV/og^/sgog*

35

xaSa^o^

d/Miocvrog'

All these words so far agree, that they denote

purity of mind, blamelessness, and integrity of

They

spirit.

diiFer, therefore,

dya^og, for these

from

have reference more imme-

diately to the reason of acting

man

for a

be

to

and

hixaiog

hlxaiog

It is possible

or dycc^og,

who cannot

and dyvog. But, besides this,

these words differ from each other in respect
to the way in which that integrity of mind is

be said

be

to

dytog

regarded.
ciytog

and

though they have the same

For
differ in their use.

dyvog^

etymological origin,

in dyvog the proper idea

person

is,

that the thing or

pure, either in body or

is

word ay log

indicates

rence which

is

dyvog properly

due

more

mind but the

;

especially the reve-

such a person or thing.

to

denotes cleanliness of body, but

many

subsequently, like

expressions

similar

or ideas, being transferred to the mind,

fies mental purity.

there

Euripides,
rdg
-ra^

(p^zvag.

y}\ag

1.

viii.

is

in

it

dX'A

xiiicig-

Hippolyt. V. 316, 317, dyvdg

aiiMarog

In the

2 Cor.

p. 647.

<psiig

Xs/^^ss

first

xi. 2. Tit.

E.

(J^^-Xl^

l^'^^

sig-

which

In the Orestes of

1621, dyvig yd^ uiu

i'yzi iLicKSihd 71.

chastity,

That

nothing impure.

is

dyvov

fji^h

place,

ii.

3.

dymiy
it is

OX)

(hiv,

(p^zv

w
b

used for

(Plato de Legg.

'xaihoyoviag

Tjf^ioi,

y.cci

THE SYNONYMS

36

ydfLuv rs ayvoi

azriPCcroi

Homer it

In

Zojsiv,

is

the

epithet applied to the goddesses, but only in

Hence

the Odyssey.)

a pure

2, is

iii.

and

Tim.

v.

life

22,

ava6T^o(pr,

ayvr,

Pet.

contaminated by no crimes

we have

6cci-jtw ayiov rriou, it

being previously enjoined " neither to partake

In 2 Cor. vii. 11,
of other men's sins."
xa,T&aT7)(fari kauroig

as

ayvovg iivaih ruJ 'Tr^dy/nurii is not,

some have rendered

it,

the language,

"

genius of

contrary to

the

Ye have proved

yourselves to be pure from this crime." (For

not said, uy-Cg h

is

r.w,

ye have proved

but,

buta/vo's nvog

in this matter,

event, that ye are pure."

iii.

3,

God is

all evil,

above

and

is

and
i.

e.

Therefore, in

by

James

said to

be

a/v/j,

pure, and because he

the

7.

iii.

is

from

wi&dom from

because

who

most
imbued with it
it is

has a pure mind; and they are in error

explain the passage as

and imparted purity

cially

But

if

that

dyvog,

denotes the absence of

dyiog

more

this

John

said to be dy^og^ as he is free

in

it

dyvog Tt)

who

wisdom required
therefore,
all

particularly

espe-

impurity.

regards

that

worthy of veneration and demands

For although dyjog is often
our reverence.
used of sacred things, as soery; dyrr,^ Odyss. f v.
2 ''9
for sacred rites ought especiiilly to be free

which

is

from impurity

yet dyiog

is

more

directly used

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

37

as a matter of custom, to express the notion

of sanctity.

For,

it

frequently happens, that

words which bear a common origin, and therefore seem to denote the same thing-, diverofe
in their use to different sig-nifications, so that

each has

its

plication

peculiar and proper range of apiversity cannot be traced

whilst this

any difference of form in the word, but very

frequently to the omnipotence .of custom. As
there is no reason in the different form of
the word, why 6cLo%i%6g and o'ap;t/vo; should so
differ that (fcc^xmo? should be that which has a
fleshly mind, even th .ugh it exists not in the
flesh; but <rdf/img, that which is composed of
to

flesh as a material,

(whilst

-rvsy^aar/xog

denotes

both a spiritual existence and a spiritual m.ind)

and yet by no example could

it

be demon-

strated that ffdoxmg denotes that which has both

mind and the nature, of the flesh. And,

number of manuscripts can sustain that reading in Rom. vii. 14.p ay/oj, therefore, is rarely or never used by the Greek

the

therefore, no

writers for that purity of mind, which theolo-

gians have called sanctity, but

P

Rom.

which
few

is

vii- 14.,

\yuTi

scarcely

worth

]\ISS.,

except as

it

<rd^xivcs

(i/u,i.

it

This

remark,

constantly de-

is

a various reading

supported bv so
shows the accuracy of Titmann's ex.
tfie

amination of the sacred text

it is

THE SYNONYMS

38

notes that which

That, however, in the books of the

the gods.

New

sacred and consecrated to

is

Testament

of morals

known how

should be used for sanctity

For

not surprisin^r.

is

cleanliness

it

Jews were

carefid the

sacred

their

in all

to secure

Hence, even

way

word tnp the cog-

abundantly appear from an examination of

(compared with

Lev^it. xi. 43, 44,

Deut.

14

xxiii.

Chron.

11

v.

notion

vulgar
One

2 Sam.

xi.

Isa. Ixvi. 17.^

therefore,

ror,

"*

pol-

notions of purity and sanctity exist, as

nate
will

in the

That

rites.

could not be sacred which was in any

luted.

well

is

it

of dy'og

who

Pet.

16,)

i.

Exod. xix. 22

They

are in er-

affirm that the primitive

that

is,

which

is

set apart

from

and profane use, and consecrated

to

or two seeming instances to the contrary occur in

Scripture, in which the

word JltfTp

is

used for a harlot,

Genesis xxxviii. 21, compared with verse 15, where the more

common word

nj"l|

is

used for the same person.

dently, the iJea of consecration

purity.

The JlttHp were

is

the prostitutes consecrated to

the service of heathen and idolatrous temples.

Deut.

xxiii. 17

^1p in

Hosea

iv. 14.

The general

See also

use of the word

Scripture, however, unites fioth the idea of sanctity

and purity.
the word

Here, evi-

separated from that of

is

And

the anomaly in this other application of

explained by the

common

hahit of fallen

man

both to pollute sacred tilings, and to throw a veil of religious

pretence over impurity

cration for real holiness.

in fact to substitute formal conse-

T.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

peculiar uses,

which

that

ayioc, is

that only can be sacred w4iich

And hence its

tament may

is

accurately

sacred,

and

not unclean.

is

New

Tes-

obtained.

In

various uses in the

be

39

which among the Greek writers

is its proper force, viz. that which is sacred,
which it is wicked to injure or contemn, a/zoj
is spoken in the New Testament of things or
that sense,

Rom.

persons sacred to God.

a/Za,

Luke ii. 23,

Luke i. 70 Acts
ayio)i Tuj

prophets,

Thess.

Acts

13

iii.

ii.

5J

a'Ta|;^/?^

of the

xXyj^jjcsra/,

2 Pet.

'21;

i.

21

of the Apostles,

of places. Acts

Jerusalem, Matth.

citdly of

temple;

Pet.

xi. 16,

8; of the Angels, Matth. xxv. 31;

5,

iii.

iii.

of the priesthood,

Eph.

'/.voluj

Cor.

ix. 13,

17

iii.

33 espeand of the

vii.

iv.

more frequently,

still

of Christians, (as in Daniel

vii.

as

21.

24. D'^^lp) Then, it is that which is to be

venerated or treated with all honour, and pri-

viii.

marily with respect to God, Apoc.

xvii.

11.

Luke

Luke

i.

72.

49. dyid

i.

which

dia^/]xr} dyici,

Cor.

it

purity being added to

notes that which

is

is

Then

20.

2 Pet.

Mark
iii.

vi.

12.

20. Ephes.

And

i.

2.

the idea of

frequently de-

it

from error and

or from actual defilement,

ii.

John

impious to violate,

this,

free

Rom.

yoa:p'/i,

17.

iii.

iv. 8.

Pet.
i.

4.

in 2 Pet.

i.

ii.

15.

Cor.

vice,

John

vii.

21, the

34.

com-

THE SYNOKYMS

40
iDhiKlment

called a/Za, not because

is

Loiy, but because

to
i.

l<e

inviolate.

y^Anffig o^y'oc

9,

tion

ot"

and ought
similar in 2 lim.

it is

holy in

The

use

is

it ir.ahci.

itself,

for as xX^c/s involves the

no-

inviting' to a certain thing, it follows,

that with the addition of the adjective,

it

im-

by the adjective, that thing to which

And hence xXJjc/g ayia is
invitation is given.
not a calling which makes holy, or which conplies

tains in itself the energies of piety,

does
it

is

it

mean

less

still

the whole Christian doctrine, but

the actual call to a

whom

life

of sanctity

tor

comes are invited that

So
Hebrews iii. 1, y^Aijcrtg
they may
i'TTovpamg, Nor is it inevident why the word dyiov
is, in the New Testamenr, the almost constant
epithet of the Spirit. Not that it is invariably associated with tiie word '^rviv/j.a when something
divine is signified. For sometimes cr^sD/xa stands
1 Cor. ii. 4; 1 Tim. iii.
alone, as Matth. xii. 31
Ki; 1 Pet. iii. 18; John iii. 34, or the word ^soD is
or rov
ad<led, as Matth. xii. 28; I Cor. vii. 40
TUT^og, Matth. X. 20, compared with Luke xii.
they to

be

the

xXTiffig

clyioi,

where ctyiov is added, 'rvsu/Ma always

denotes something which has been wrought by
diviue power, or the cause itself by which the
12.

i^ut

effect is

dym

produced.

TO -rnv/Ma is said,

In both classes of passages

not only because

it is

from

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

Gocl, but because

vine

in its very nature di-

is

it

41

and, therefore, entirely pure, holy, and

worthy of reverence.
offiog is, in its meaning, more nearly allied to
ayvog, and h^k to dyiog; yet there is a difference.
For

o(^'og

who

is

properly, pure from

all

crime; one

has committed no crime, but religiously

observes every sacred duty/ Therefore

it

does

not denote integrity geiserally? but piety more

and the religious observance of

o(Siog
Wherefore
of piety.
is pious.
and d/jcaiog are often used together, the one

especially,
offices
o(ftog

denoting that which

which

and
xai

xaia
V.

right, as in Sophocles

is

in Josephus, A.

offiojv

'i^yojv

I. viii.

in Charit.

xcci ir^hg ^scC's

788.

holy,

is

Sg/a

dr/caiog.

ira. ii. 8,
ocfiovg,

i.

oiidiv

God

enophon

tJttov

himself

is

said to be

whom

impious to dishonour.

xvi. 5

it
;

is

Acts

ii.

Phavorinus,

27,

oirio;'

ra, offia

cri^)

tcx.

in 1'it.

i.

which have com-

Testament

oV/og,

So

Hec.

rightly exhorts to

e.

for truly

Atresil. xi. 2, rovg ?^sovg

h^oTg riha^ai.

'^^og av'^^u-Trovg di-

10.

8.

ruv dizaiuv

^^a/

9, 1,

lift

ccyvcTg

ov ^i/x/5 ou5' otyiov

Schol. Euripides,

061a.

o^iog is, 6 crg^/ ra,

St. Paul, I 1
up holy hands,
mitted no impiet

i.

the other that

offioig

says,

i^yoig

in the

r}

New

as that holy being

In Apoc.

means those pious

B^-Tx Vix,a,ioi.T.

THE SYNONYMS

4'2

which

duties

wicked

peculiar
Office

it

it

were virtuous to perform, and

But the word occurs in a

to neglect.

sense

Acts

in

Aa(3id ra rxicra.

Many

by a reference of

which the

34,

xiii.

'o/xTv

ra

interpreters illustrate

Hebrew TDH,

to the

it

^'^(Tw

LXX frequently rendersby

and

oV/og;

they think, therefore, that in this place ra

osia.

means the mercies promised to David

by God, Isa. Iv. 3. But they never can properly render otf/a by mercies or bounties.
Paul speaks of a certain thing which it was
predicted in Ps. xvi. 10, should happen to
Aa(3id

David,

ov

bu)6sig

thing, in the
AaiSid.

But

Tov

words of

office

Aa/3/5,

David.
o-sojMa ffov

since properly

w/xotfa

AajSid,

about to make

covenant

this

calls ra 'Uia

term expressive

God was

with the Jewish people

ed

he

Isaiah,

in Isaiah it is a

of the covenant that

This

dia(p'^o^uv.

offiov ffov idsTv

it

is

is call-

made with

tug rov aioovog iroi/xdffu ro

Ps. Ixxxix. 3, 4.

The

6V/a

Aa^id was

nothing more than the covenant made with

David, who was at that time the head of the

Jewish people.

The

very words of Isaiah

which Paul quotes teach

this

and

I will

nant with you an eternal covenant, ra

ra

ziffrd.

The subsequent

Iffia

coveAa(3id

statement shews

what covenant is intended, rd

same as kxta mffrd in Homer.

offia

mffrd is the

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

'lego's

43

denotes that which

strictly

conse-

is

crated or sacred, as given or devoted to God.'

Whence
they

ac/so^a/ is

who

to

consecrate, and

are consecrated; and

is

spoken of animals who are devoted

and wander

in a free pasture.

Therefore in the word

^ojv,)

(Synes.

/sgoj,

mind

irrespective of
that

Homer and

New

who, in

God, are
et

lor,

ac-

intended

but especially

vv.

Cor.

ix.

13,

and repeatedly

other writers.

It is

Testament of moral

this sense, are said to

called

dd.

ad Hesychius

ad Aeschin.

Ka^ago's is

not used

Those

habits.

be sacred to

See Valesius ad Harpo-

ayioi.

Valckenar. ad

crat. p. 143.
s.

is

New Testament, as the sacred things

themselves, in

in the

ep. 57,

ii.

subserves a sacred purpose, as the tem-

it

ple in the

in

is

God

sacred to God,

is

or morals

to

which

curately rendered sacred, nothing

but that the person or thing

aproi

frequently

Ammon.

p. 184,

oa/ovg.

Tay-

v.

p. 50.

used to express a mind or a

life

free from vice; and sometimes those things

which they who use them do not

Suidas,

lif/ov'

alytoV)

TM

defile

B-iM avarihifiivov,

of Suidas refers this definition to the Schol.

nes

T.

them-

and the Editor

on Aristopha-

44

THE SYNONYMS

selves with, as

Luke

Rom.

Tit.

xiv. t>0;

is

Tim.

1
6g

9,

therefore

ccyvog,

For

'^^rjff/Ciia

Matt,

xxiii.

19

Now

2'2.

v.

xa^a^a,

8; Ko^aocc

James

sunibnctg^

27. xa^a-

i.

spoken of purity of mind> as

is

and yet there

in

which nothing sordid or

intermixed, Matt.
iii.

41

15; Heb. x.

i.

that in

the'-yici^a^ov is

base

xi.

/,a^r/.o6g it is

is

a degree of difference.

implied that -there

no

is

fo-

reign admixture or addition that affects the use

or the senses, so as to render the person or

thing unfit or objectionable, as dirt or stain,

odour, colour, or any useless thing whatever.

The dying words

viii.

7,

of Cyrus, in the Cyroped.

strikingly illustrate this idea,

o'Ttf/ig a.<pp(f)v

'idrai

7]

-^v^r,,

sTsidav rou a(ppovog

ovds

yi

ffu)fji^ctrog

^'X^ /si^^jra/, ovds rovro erg rs/c/jta/* dXX' orav ax^uTog

xai /ia^oiPog o vovg sxxoi^r, rors xa! (p^ovi/iUiTaTOv sixog
a-jTov ihai.

And

a body, xa^a^hv

as

Xenoph. Oecon.

(Tiij/xa,

from
adornment; so

not because

defilement, but from every false

x. 7, calls

it is

free

James uses ^frjcxs/a xa^aou for that in which

there is no mixture of falsehood. Very nearly
allied, however, to this word is d/xiavrog, which
James, in
with

this

xa^aoof,

passage, uses in

(Compare Heb.

conjunction

xiii. 4.)

Yet

they had not been different in sense,

would not have been used together.

if

they

Certain-

;;

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

man must

ly to be xa^agog a

unless he
a/jjiavTog

immaculate he cannot be pure.

we

then

ayvog.

For

necessary.

is

For

a/x/avrog.

In

find the cause of the xa^a^og.

then has a more extensive signification

y.ix'^a^jg

than

is

be

45

but any thing

to

it

the thought of impurity-

It is

freedom from impurity

may

be said to be xa^a^og in

which there is no foreign admixture, whether

ayvog is that which is
it be itself good or evil,
not contaminated by any thing in itself really
But wine, though it be combined with
evil.
the purest water, can no longer be said to be

That which

yM^ci^og.
^a^^og'

but

many

is ciyvog is

necessarily xa-

things that are

enough from being a /vol.

These four words tht-n,
reference to the

human

discriminated thus.

if

soul

Ka^a^og

is

are far

oio^a^oi

we

use them in

and

may be

life,

pure from every

thing which would change or corrupt the nature of the subject with which
ciyvog
0(7/0$

is
is

it is

combined

pure from every defilement of mind,

pure from crime or impious deed

ciyiog

on account of integrity of mind

and morals, is sacred to God aiid revered; and
finally, h^k is simply that which is consecrated
is

that which,

to,

or set apart for

culate

ayj-jg

is

God

chaste,

y.a^aoog is pure',

imma-

clean, sinless

oV/c;

is


THE SYNONYMS

46
pious;

and %os, sacred or conse-

holy,

dy/og,

crated.*
dxs^aiog'

axaxoc*

acrXoDg*

agree as far as they each denote a certain sim-

mind; yet there

plicity of

is

a difference be-

tween them.
For cc<x\ovg strictly is that in which there is
nothing complex or perplexed, but, as it were,
free from involvement, and therefore, plain and
open." In Matth. vi. 22, and Luke xi. 34, the
It is

'

not a

surprising that the actual use and ap-

little

words can be so distinctly and

plication of these several

philosophically defined, seeing that their origin or etymology

is

so decidedly obscure.

There miist have been

distinct

reason in their etymological history, for their specific application, in a sense so capable of definite insulation

but

this appears to be all

Festum, dies festus

y/oj

lost.

and hoo; or

l^o;,

and yet

may come from

from

Q^H

^|^

^ verb

which, in Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, and Arabic, means, set

apart or devoted to God, as a victim, (and in this sense U^og
is

used by Greek writers, both of tbe temple, victim, sacred

vases, omens, &c.) and probably tbe first and simple idea

])7 the sacred

and

tus,

usum
na,

in

fire.

xuSu^'os

from

af^ixvTos

nVQ'

whence the Latin, mingo.

very
roots

remaining in

As compounded

viscera, venter, intesti-

But

after

all,

these etymo-

and, to be established, would need a

strict investigation
still

is

"T^^^ rec-

Chaldee, vasa, &c. polluta ad rectum et licitum

aptare.

logies are questionable

may be derived from

same

into other derivatives of the

diflferent

modern languages.

of a privative and irXsw, plico

T.
T.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

eye

is

properly called

is,

as seeing dis-

a-rXoDj,

without double or distracted vision.

tinctly

And

47

opposed the

to this is

cxp'^ccXfj^hg 'rovrj^og,

which does not rightly perform

but sees

mind

that

drawn

is

God and mammon,

office

office,

its

So the

or distractedly.

dngroa/j^fMsvug,

that

different ways, as towards

does not rightly perform

its

but that which desires and follows after

one thing only, as the chief good, that mind

There

attains its object.

is

cognate notions of plain

the

a'TrXovg is

simple, because, in

involved

or intricate.

230. E. a-TXovg and

word ccrrXoug
and straight;

in the

it

there

is

In Plato, Hipp. Min*

are placed in con-

uXri^yig

nexion, and are put in opposition to

xal

to

-^^/svdrjg.

it

is

the

(3Xsfj,fMa

a-Xovv

not surprising,

a'xXovg is associated

Tim. Ivi. 173.

Lucian combines
1

way

'roXvr^o'rog

Themistius, Orat. xxii. attributes

friendship

Hence

nothing

that

%ai

yzwaTov.

frequently

with the idea of liberality

cc'rXo'/x.ov

it

with

as Horace, Epist.

ii.

zai

rojv

ysvmTog,

ovruv xoivuvikov.

in the

2. v. 193.

same

simplex hi-

and Tacitus Hist. Lib. iii. c. SQ. inetamen simplicitas et liberalitas. In this

larisque,
rat

sense also

ccrXorrig

ment, Rom.

occurs in the

New

Testa-

It
8; 2 Cor. viii. 2. ix. 11.
denotes the candour of an ingenuous and sin-

cere mind.

xii.

THE SYNONYMS

48

with

is,

not combined

other thina;s as parts.

For though

nieiniing of dxs^awg

But the

many

the origin of this word

it is

be doubtful,'^ since

frequently confused with

undoubtedly

is

may

dx^r-ar-

occurs in the Timaeus uxTj^aror

and

^aioiy 01 g'^w %rioog\

^aiog

may

be said

riglitlv

to

be

may

is dx'/iPccTo;

For

he

for

xcc^a^or

0/

who

and

it

djt's-

is dy.i-

bein^ cor-

dx^^ccrog^

rupted by no admixture

who

yet this

$,

true siii^nification.

its

similarly,

he

be said to be dzhouog^ for

he would be corrupt uuless he were x.cc'^aocg.

Either word, therefore, is frequently used of
So in
the same thing, and in the same sense.
Euripid. in the Orestes,
48,

V.

^ I

can scarcely regard the origin of this word as doubtx^6<a

Scapula gives as
re,

occurs in IMatth. v. and elsewhere, and

meaning, eminentiae et apices in aliqua

its

ut cornua, &c., and deduces

nothing but jT)"in from

both in

Matth.

H^p

it

from'

V. it

xi^ecg.

xtoea

is

and thence,

accidentia, casus.

In

occurs in the sense of a little addition to the let-

In the Arabic it occurs

.V

foedatio cutis, vibices.

stain.

very minute in his account of the word,

ekoxXn^ov.

ff*!/u,atvii

iiyta,

rov xk^aoi,

excoriatio,

uki^ccios is, therefore, tree

from any extraneous addition, mark or

at.'Tto

Now

evenit, occurrit,

Hebrew and Chaldee, j^Tlp

ters of tlie alphal'et.

is

and the Helen,

they are used indifferently in a similar

The word

ful.

v. .568,

and clear

Phavorinui

uxiocnei, x*a,

xri^us, xu) rov iiXtixotvri xeii

xui rov

'i^u

xi^uiog,

xcc) f^-ira

rev cripfiTixou A^,

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

The same

expression.

of Menelaus

X;^og

in one place, said to be preserved

the other,

ax'/^oarog.

It

49
is,

and in
however, fol-

a-Zioaiog^

does not,

and azri^arog have

low from
It is one thing for two
the same meaning.
words to be predicated mutually of the same
this,

may

other

dy/soatog

what the one accords with, the

since

thing,

that

accord with also; and

it is

another

thing for them to have precisely the same sig-

In the neglect of

nification.

New Testament have

the lexicographers of the

But

very frequently erred.

^aiog,

6/m6(Js

roTg Xoyoig

Matth. X. 16.
'TTi^isrioai

aya^v,

Phil.

'

'^sXojv,

(ppovifMoi

wg a/

o'l^g/j,

and Romans xvi

d'/.i^aiovg ds sJg rh xaxoi/,

which
ii.

15.

v.

912.

Bvvsrhg

Be

Azspaiog, avs-T/A'/j-rov

evidently in the same sense as

j3iov,

rjffTcn^tojg

it is

Euripid. Orest.

admixture.

that

'Aks-

return.

to

spoken of mind, sigsimple, entirely free from false or evil

therefore,

nifies,

'^(^ctJPcTv

when

this diiference,

is

19.
i.

good, and free

a[jji[M,':rrot

Finally, ay^nog

is

xa/ a%\^atoi wg a)
6o(po'jg

e.

[mv

s/g

rh

wise towards

from

all

evil.

/tai dzs^aioi.

he who

is

both free alto-

gether from the influence of evil counsel

xa/t/a,

and who fears no evil from others, as it is commonly said, simple and ingenuous, both these
one who
ideas exist in the word axa-aog
;

neither purposes evil nor suspects

it,

since he

THE SYNONYMS.

50

to

altogether alien

is

Tim.

V.

See Ruhnken. ad

it.

does not denote

It

aytaxog.

every

species of simplicity, but that ingenuous simplicity which exists in an upright mind, free

igaTarSitf/

rag Tta^diag

\_xcckovStv~\

/xsv fx.iyciko'^'oyovg

it is

ever,

man

d'Trsi^ovg

from

p. 81.

o/

srs^ot

ds

suspicion,

them imply
cifMSf/jTrog'

vii.

26.

free from all duplicity,

is

unmixed with

blameless,

log

ii.

siiy^^s/c.

Sometimes, how-

Heb.

all evil,

'AT^ovg therefore

all evil

ds

xal svsovgj

18,

used in the former sense, to denote

free

d'/s^aiog,

oi

xvi.

Such men are

rojv d'/cd'/Cuv,

Plato Alcibiad.

easily deceived.

dxd/iovg xai

Romans

So in

from suspicions.

evil,

d'n-Xovg is

open, sincere, axs^a-

ingenuous

azaxog

from

axaxog, free

and

simplicity.
(^dviT/XyiTrog'

a/jLu/j^og'

dvsyyikrjrog*^

and afMoofiog are both expressions

freedom from blame they however differ.
riijjZfjjiTTog

is ufiifL'Trrogf

wanting

in

whom

a/^w/xog,

reprehensible.
sion

he

nothing

whom

in

Each

He

yet accounted

there

is

nothing

is

the former, as perfect and absolute in

the latter as devoid of

numerical parts

error.

Hence a law which

7, is a

is ,'xe/xTroc

Heb.

viii.

law which cannot be found fault with,

Sep Plato

p. 2-,Cy

is

for

free from reprehen-

all his

'

of

all

T.

I>i;^l.

ex recensioiie Ilekkeri, Part

I,

vol.

ii.

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE
because there

ought

nothing wanting to

be there

to

it

answers

all

which

it,

the purposes

Whilst, on the other hand, Peter, in

of a law.
Epist.

is

51

1.

i.

speaks of Christ as of a lamb,

19.

inasmuch as he was without

have also in this
any spot of defilement.
%a}

a/xw/>{,oy

ad'Tti'Kou,

We

sense, a/xw/xouc

ytai aviyyXrjroxjg

in Coloss.

Nor, does the sense of the word

very

difficult

where

cH/jjoj/mq

piation in

but this
to

havrhv 'r^offrjvsyxiv

14,
tuj

^'cc

^scT,

does not relate to a perfect ex-

which there

be purged from

of Christ,

ix.

u/JjOJ/j^ov

is

nothing wanting

the idea of the Apostle

is

diifer in that

passage in Hebrews

a/ojviov

crvsv/j^ccrog

22.

i.

who by

all

we

that

are

impurity by the blood

the eternal spirit

{i.

e.

by

Heb. vii. 16.) offered himself a victim, uncontaminatedand immaculate^ (omni macula carentem) and in Ephes.
the

hiivafLiv trnii

axccrakvTou,

That is, not that by the sanctifying influence of the

Holy Spirit, operating as in the case of fallen and corrupt
men, he succeeded to present, i. e. to make himself, without
spot, notwithstanding his tendencies to sin ; an error which has
*

among us ; but that he being a divine person,

and therefore immaculate anduncontaminate, did by the Holy
Spirit offer himself a victim, and, on account of that immaculacy, a fitting victim. This is a beautiful instance, in which
lately crept in

accurate exegesis throws a very valuable light on a question,

at once of

much

interest

Christ been in his

could not be

eif^ufios

human
;

Had

the

nature corrupt and sinful,

he

and much

for that corrupt

difficulty.

nature in us,

is itself

THE SYNONYMS

52
V. 27.

the church

For

roio-jTuv.

is

/xw/xo$

made

therefore said to be

properly

is

or disgrace, visibly attached to

But the idea of the word

a shame, stain,

any

thing.

u,'M/x'7rrog

sets forth

one who cannot be blamed, because nothing is

wanting to him, for which, if wanting, he

would
1

Thess.

afis/j.'rrug

C.

V. 23.

in

Paul desires to be preserved

coming of the Lord, and

until the

he says,

10.

ii.

Hence

deservedly incur blame.

in

zat dixaiug xai a/xs/XTrwg

off/ojg

showing in the subsequent

verse, that he had not failed in his duty towards one of them. He had acted d/jus/jbTrug
because he had done no less than it was right
that he should do.
So d/xs/jj'TTug buoce. didovai,
Xenoph. H. G. I, i. 10. a/xs/xcrrwg os^sc^ai rovg
avd^ocg Cyrop. iv. 2. 18. a/^s/XTroi/ diTTD^ov Sympos.
Although, a/xs/xTro; is sometimes used
2, 2.
kyivvr^YiiJjiv

vfj,7v

in both senses, especially

who, even
polished

by the Attic

writers,

in administering reproof, are

in

their

style

than others.

more

They

seldom make use of the other word, because

it

wouM

the

(/.wfio?,

selves

appear a higher style of praise to

or stain which renders us unacceptable in our-

but in that holy thing wliich was conceived by the

overshadowing of the Holy Ghost,

&c.

He

is,

and we are

as a divine person

so in him.

T,

we are

from

first

fjt-v

'ixovva. ff-rTxaf,

to last,

a,fjiufji,oi ;

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

53

use a word, which not only implies that no

spot or stain exists, but that nothing

want-

is

ing which could properly be desired.

and

dvsyxXrjTog

He

is GcvsyKXriTog

avsTiXri'Trrog

who

is

are cognate words.

not accused, and cannot

But

properly be accused by any one.

Tim.

iii.

Pastor should be

avs-riXri'TrTog,

no just cause of blame

10. the

word

dox.i>Ma(f/a,

i.

e.

i.

one in

whom

Whilst

in v.

exists.

avsyxXriTog is

e.

Apostle, says the Christian

the

2.

in

used

to infer, that in

as the result of public investiga-

tion, in cler offentlichen

For

umfrage^ he stands un-

was the custom even

in

apostolic times, to constitute the minister

by

accused.

it

the consent of the church, that

ple.*

" It

The
is

is

of the peo-

people therefore were interrogated,

surprising

how

far

men's peculiar preconceived

The author

notions will carry them.

sees a popular ap-

pointment of a candidate to be a minister, in the mere popular investigation into character, even

He

be explained in that way.

the whole of the passage
to

Timothy, the

self in the

is

how he

church of God, so that,

other men's sins.

the

'hoKtfJt.a.ffta,

can

an injunction to an individual,

prelate, v. 15.

lay hands rashly on

if

loses sight of the iact, that

c.

is

to conduct

v. 22,

he

him-

may

not

any man, and become a partaker in

The

rule here laid

down

for the ^oKif^atna,

even stretched to the uttermost, will be found very

much

in

accordance with the church of England custom, of reading a

paper in the congregation where the candidate customarily

worshipped, called a

si quis,

intimating

si

quis, &c.

If

any

THE SYNONYMS

54

whether any subject of reprehension was

found in the candidate, and if he was found
as to

he was ordained. Tiiis is the true

observation of Grotius de imperio summar.
dvsyxXTirog

potest, circa sacra

who

10. 8.

dvi'7riXr,'?rrog,

gives no cause for reprehension,

xarriyo^iag
1

c.

Tim.

d(po^fjb7]v.

iii.

dvs'TriXri'ZTog

2,

and

(Schol.

in vi. 14.

because

dff<7riXog.

Thucyd.

e.

'7ragg;;^wv

V. 17.)

So

d6<7ri\ov Ttdl dvimXri'^rrov

The

from the others. For as

differs

i.

word, however,

diMiJ.'xroi

and a^w-

who are not blamed, avsmXri'Trrog

denotes one, who though he is blamed is unIn Lucian. Pise. 8. Tom. 1
deserving of it.
p. 377. a man blamed and accused, when calln dbixuv (pated on to defend himself says,
denote those

(i^oi

/'

vctifjjat

At

riv

hi

xa^a^og

v/j^Tv

fJ'Sv

xai dvimXTj-rog

sii^iffxu/Mai.

word is used in a more

lax sense, regard being had only to the fact of
blame, and not to the real force of the cause
of it for the a^g^acrro/ and a/Aw,ao/, are but few,
but the dvs'TTiXrj'rroi are few indeed.
times, however, this

one knows any thing against him that he

But

all

is

to declare

it.

notion of authority on the part of the people, as

founded on this passage of Scripture, in the matter

invention.

The

is

a mere

scrutiny of character might be a popular

matter, and the choice of ministers already ordained to be

pastors of particular churches might be so too, and probably

was

tive

church was entirely vested in the

but the ordination, as a matter of right, in the primiclerical order.

T.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

CHAPTER

55

III.

In a former notice of some obvious synonyms

in the New Testament, it was observed that the
distinction

between synonymous terms, must

not be so pressed in every instance, as that

we

be chiefly playing on the force of particular terms yet that, in seeking an accurate
shall

interpretation,

we

should observe

diligently

the minute differences of w^ords, lest in ai^y

passage in which the author aimed at a nice

distinction of idea,

it

should be lost sight of

This remark, however,

in the hands of one little familiarized with the

through inaccuracy.

nicer beauties of style,

may

be easily so far

perverted as to induce him to affirm, that

all

inquiry into the differences between synonyms

even the sacred

writers often use synonymous terms promis-

is

utterly useless.

cuously, and that

For,

it

if

evidently matters

little

whether they used the one word or the other,

it were scarcely worth while to attempt to discriminate

accurately

there are certainly

between

many

them.

writers,

who

And
consi-

der elegance of style to consist in the not fre-

quently using the same word,

but rather in

substituting another, in an interchange of ana-

THE SYNONYMS

56

logous terms, that the same word

may not occur

same period, or even in the same page

although the example of the best writers
shews that true elegance consists in the precision with which each word is applied to express its particular idea.
For they who write
in the

accurately, do not use even the smallest par-

however trivial the

nor
diiFerence between any two may appear
do they hesitate to use the same word often in
the same passage, if the same notion is to be
conveyed for there are scarcely two words in
any language, which signify precisely the same
thing.
But since many maintain the opinion,
that the New Testament writers are not so
elegant as some, and consider that they have
used many similar words promiscuously, we
grant to them this far, that the specific force
of synonyms must not be pressed in every
ticles

indiscriminately,

place, so that

we

should always expect to trace

an emphatic sense

or that

we

should curious-

ly search out the difference of each

conveying a special force

to the

word

passage

as
for

beyond the powers of the most able and

polished writer yet at the same time we think
that in the writings of men, who do not ap-

this is

pear so particular as others in the choice of

words, the investigation of synonymous terms
is

more decidedly required.

For those who

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

labour

tlieir

to select

57

style of writing closely, are

words more

wont

of orna-

for the sake

ment, and therefore frequently indulge an interchange of synonyms; whilst they

unpractised in writing as an

art,

who

are

generally use

words which common custom has affixed to the

thing that they mean; and hence it occurs,
that

men who make

use of

common

language,

accumulate in their compositions, a greater

number

synonyms than more learned men;

of

for they are

its

accustomed

to

view each thing in

and

peculiarities, rather than to generalize

to abstract.

And

this

custom must be diligent-

ly noted in interpreting the sacred writers

as

is too evident that, through neglect of it,

commentators have rashly and carelessly adduced from their accurate and specific senit

tences,

only some jejune and

thought.

For

it

common

.place

often happens, that although

the sacred writers were strangers to that ele-

study and practice, yet their

by
true meaning

cannot be ascertained,

we

gance of style which

make

out the precise

of every

word

used.

is

formed
unless

and
This

artificially

accurately

specific signification
is

especially true

with respect to the particles, the force of which

has been sadly neglected by the Lexicographers of the

we

New

Testament.

read in the Lexicons that.

For instance,

THE SYNONYMS

58

and

ax^i

do not

diiFer,

Eustathius,
rou /M^^tg

tJ^ix^i

and they adduce the authority of

who says,

d'7roj3oX7J

p.

1062, ymrai

rov "^ xcci r^crfi rov

rb ci^^ig a-ro

Eus-

(pcovTjsvrog.

however, means nothing more than that

tathius,

^Xi'^ is

formed from

fJ^s^^'s;

not that they

mean

the same thing.

For who would affirm that it
would have been the same thing, if, in Rom.
V. 13, 14, the Apostle had written /J^sxi' IH
[JjOM a^jja^rict riv Iv xo^imu) and ver. 14) aTc^ 'Ada/M oiyji
Mwffsw?.
It must be generally evident that a
different idea would then be expressed from
that of the Apostle, who wrote a%^' voih^^x)' L e.
before the law was brought in, and ij^'^x^i Mwtrsiog*
2. e.
until Moses had brought in the law.
*'"

Rightly therefore
afjja^ria

law.

r}v,

But

is it

written

o^y^^i

ycco

vofj^ou

for the a/xa^r/a existed before the

in ver. 14,

^og M'SXi' Mwtfswg,

it is

said

3t3a(riXsvffsv b

^dva-

not because death had ceased-

from the time of Moses, but because

continued through the whole of that period,

to reign
it

which period closed with Moses.

For neither did he wish to say that death
reigned both before Moses and after Moses;
(firj ovrog vo/jjow)

but that

it

reigned before Moses,

/j^^

ovrog

vo/j^ov.

Evidently then the word ax' involves more

especially the idea of the whole time or place
in

which any thing

is

done

and the use of the

genitive case denotes the thing or event be-

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

59

fore

which

/a%p/

has respect rather to the end or close of the

it is

considered to be done; whilst

time or space within which any thing*

however, any one should think

If,

tion

more

that

/^s%f^ is

subtle than correct, let

done.

is

this distinc-

him remember

never put absolutely, but that

a;^f/,

as Eustathius has rightly observed, (Iliad,

1062, 48,)

very frequently put

is

%arcc rovg craXa/oOg, to signify dtoXov.

ever

meant by

is

P. 599, that

is

ci^^t,

't.

sivipliciter

For what-

as Iliad A. 522, n. 324,

understood to

last

during the

whole implied space of time but in iW-^xig^ the

terminius or close, whether of time or place, is
desiderated and therefore it is always added.**
If, therefore, a%g/ rmg occurs, it signifies the
;

thing or the time before which any certain thing

So

existed.

means
ly,

in Acts xx. 11,

that he continued with

before the dawn.

ahrw

o/MiXyjaag oi^x^"^ ^^y'^if

And

them subsequent-

in ver. 4, (rui/smro

5s

A(Stag, signifies that they accompanied

Paul before they came into Asia, and then

ay^^i

'

preceded him,
'A(r/ag,
^

it

Once

xvi(f)eios,

it

been

f^'^x^i

would have been doubtful whether

certainly in the Odyssey

it

occurs,

vritrTHi

et^^i

that both notions are intended to be expressed by

the same particle.

B^aXdffo-fis

ax^va/v

Had

(-rgosX^oi/rsg*)

ffiiv

%iiXiv(riff6a,iy

But

in

Iliad,

and

Xl

128. tio f^ix^'?

iliai K^ec^tm'

where

it is

ferent sense would be brought out,

instead of

ff-ixi'-

Ni^l43. occurs

fii^^t

ohv^'of/.i)ios

xat

plain that a totally difif apc^i

had been written

THE SYNONYMS

60
they

The

Paul.

left

writer did not intend to

Paul into

say that they only accompanied

went together with him

Asia, but that they

so

and then went forward to wait for him.

far,

So

verb,

it

has the notion of a certain period of

duration, Gal.

16;

19, a%^'/5 oS

iii.

And Rom.

17.

xvii.

rX-y^ow/xa

a^f/ is joined to a

which

in passages in

Tuv s%u)v

siffsX'^ri'

i,

>3?j,

SO

loiiff

the Gentiles are entering, not merely

So

have entered.

shall

sailed

and came

fore five days

day.

to Troas, ^Xi"^

had expired,

am aware

as while
till

i.

that both

they

6,

we

rji^^^uv 'jsvrs,

be-

Acts xx.

also

rb

ou

25, %?'?

xi.
e.

Apoc. xv.

e.

on the

fifth

words are occa-

sionally used for each other, as in Xenophon,

Symp.
vfjv

is

iv.

37.

crgp/stfr/ /xo/

xa/ sa^iovri ay^^i rov

a(pi%s(^at, %a] 'xmvri liiy^t'

"^^^ l^^ '^I'^ft^f

,'xri

crsi-

(if this

the true reading, though I strongly suspect

that

But

should be read in both instances.)

/^%f'
it

does not follow from such an instance

same

that both particles have precisely the

meaning

but as

we have

before said,

it is

of

the nature of synonyms, that they have refe-

rence to the same thing, but in a different way.

Some may

affirm,

however, that in the

Testament these two

criminately; for
f/xs/i-av /x//^/

it is

particles are used indis-

written in

rJjg ofi/MPov,

New

and

in

Matthew xi.
Romans viii.

23,
22,

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

(yycrsva^s/

ay^n rov

But these passages do not

vvv.

For, though

affect our rule.

61

the former instance,

we

grant, that in

might have been

it

a%g/,

yet this was not necessary, because the verb

fismv implies state or condition, rather

tion

he who remains

for

than ac-

to this day, has evi-

dently continued through the former period,

and has not even now perished, or he w^ould

not have remained to this day.
But in the
had been written /J^^Xi' ''^^
vuv, the idea expressed would have been that
the creature had groaned unto this day, and

other instance,

if it

then had ceased

,;>// r/i/og,

than

is

for

he who does any thing

not thereby affirmed to do

it

longer

has thus been asserted to have been

it

The

done.

creation

sigh a^^i rov

even then

is,

therefore, affirmed to

that is, to this day, and not

have ceased from sighing, which

vuv,

to

was precisely the sentiment that the Apostle

intended to express.

In the former passage,

the duplex force of

/'--s^f/ is given in the word

any one will accurately examine
other passages on this principle, he will find
that it is not a vain and unmeaning distinction.
For, in all the places of the New Tes-

fis'^siv.

And

tament,
ists,

is

if

when

fJ^sx=' '^'^^^

that the thing

occurs, the notion ex-

which

is

only done, or only endures

said to be done,
fJ^^x^i

rm<;

up

to

THE SYNONYMS.

62

a certain point of time, and then has an end,

except in the one passage in Matthew already

referred

For,

to.

both grow together,

nifest that

Matthew

in

rou ^s^/^/xol/,

/w-s^^'

harvest,

See

xiii.

30

Tim.

14

vi.

Heb.

ii.

iii.

For the common notion that

ma-

Romans

30; 2 Tim.

8,

14. xii.

6,

/^e%f'

exclude

the consequent, cannot be proved from

(See Theodoret in

For

loc.)

4.

denotes the

not to

intermediate time, yet so as

V. 14.

is

the time of

till

Acts xx. 7

XV. 19; Ephes.iv. 13; Phil.

ii.

it

let

the subsequent statement shows.

Mark

also,

30,

husbandman did not wish the

the

tares to continue longer than

as

xiii.

Rom.

it is

not

intended here that death reigned also after

the time of

Moses

Moses,

v6/Mv,

axi'

time until Moses

sin

but that

seem

reigned before

through the whole of that

although there being no law,

was not charged.

viz.

it

Two passages,

Matth. xxviii. 15, and Acts

to

oppose

bii^ni->^i(^ri 6

this

Xoyog ovroc

but in the
fJi^s^^i

r^g

however,

x. 30,

first

(fyj/jus^ov,

may

instance,
it

is

evi-

dent that the saying, which was reported, and

passed current to that day, was thenceforth

manifested to be a fraud.

And

in the latter, al-

though Cornelius affirmed that he was fasting,

fj^Bxi ra-!jrr,g rrjg oi^ag, there is then every probability that his fast had terminated at that hour.

or THE NEW TESTAMENT.

63

had called together his kinsfolk and acquaintance. And, although I would not stand

as

lie

out too strictly,

as in

if it

Xenophon,

which

should be said, that here,

/^s%^/

put for

is

have stated seems

of the language.

For,

if

yet this

a;/f/,

be the very force

to

Cornelius had intend-

ed to say that he had fasted for four successive

days to the very hour when he met Peter, he

should have said, not

Some may

call

but

VfJ'^v,

s//x/

v7}(frivojv.

these needless subtleties, and

think that no good comes of such nice discriminations

but really,

often in such minute

it is

observations as these that the religious reve-

rence of the interpreter for the sacred writings

appears

who once

he

for

conceives, that in

explaining the sacred books he

may

any lax inaccurate explanation,

in

lay aside
as

all

speedily

and learn

veneration for them,

to

engraft his

own

acquiesce

will speedily

views, and

even the most dark and ill-founded notions

upon the writings of the

"

This

IS

accurate,
value.

New

Testament.'^

an invaluable remark, and founded upon a verycriticism, which directly illustrates its

minute

No man who

has been

much among

the theolo-

gians, so called, of the present day, will fail to perceive the

importance of this observation,

if his

own mind

has been in

any measure trained to correct exegesis. The wild and interminably varied and varying notions of men on Scriptural truth, if they have not their source in this b.aljit of
loose and inaccurate construing, at least, find in it their pa-


THE SYNONYMS

64

But to
d'frsarrj

It is written in

return.
a'jrov

d'Tr

seen that

tliis

ay^^i

diufSoXog

Luke

iv. 13,

was

It

xciiooxj.

could not be rendered, for a cer-

Therefore, the lexicographers say,

tain time.

same

that a%f/ denotes the

and they render

ytai^ov,

a%f/

as the Latin usque^

ah hoc ipso tempore.

But they never can demonstrate a-)^oi xa/^oD nvog

to be ah hoc tempore, nor that usque is used in
For

that sense.
aurou,

but a%g/

from

d-^^i xcci^ov.

fjjsypi

not said a%f/5

But

In Heb.

fJ^'^Xi'

v. 9.

Therefore,

to a certain time, scil

/Msx^i Ttaiocovy

wa^^s,

/Jy'^Xi' '''"^^J

i. e, sJg

Sirac.

yjovoM %ai zai^ov.

fLsxi' rsXovg.

i.

But

is

said,

rev xa/^oi/ rov

denotes

for sometime, as often

(whence
23,

it

fJ^sX:' ''ct/foD

fJ^s^Pi rravrog,

Charit. v. 4. Aristaenet.

xamZ (rmg)

ccxierv^ di:

^^'^^^ differs

10,

ix.

%aioov hio^^^iug si'izsifMva.

evsffrrjzora,

up

it is

Ttai^ou,

24

a%f/

ii.

Dan.

xccido\j

14.)
vii.

al-

eug

s.

12. ews

is fwj rsXovg,

Clearly then a%f^ as

we have

s.

be-

fore said, denotes not the end, but the duration,

or the whole period of time,

in

thing in question continues; but

bulum

vitae.

which the
<^%f'

desig-

Doctrinal notions are formed anterior to cri-

and then are vindicated and confirmed

by the most extravagant and unjustifiable forcing of the
words of eternal truth. And wherever this habit of mind
has become established, the most polished and pointed shafts
of enlightened criticism fall inefl^ectively from it, as arrows
from the thick hide of the rhinoceros
T
tical investigation,

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

nates the end at whicli

it

ceases to be, unless

some word be added, by the

force of

notion of a termination or close

in

Nor does

i^'^x^' 'TTccvTog.

xiii.

"Thou

11,

the sun,

ay^^^i

xai^ou,

which

meaning of the words.

been written

fJ^'^x^i Tcai^ov.

reason to conclude that

to

him

is

the rule

shalt be

ed, until a certain time.

65

blind,

which the

removed, as
fail in

Acts

not seeing

commonly renderBut this is not the

It would then have
Nor have we any
Paul would indicate
is

that he should only be blind for a cer-

But we must now notice some

other synonyms which have not, as yet, been

tain time.

accurately distinguished.
dfdtog'

a/oJviog,

Agree, inasmuch as they denote a long continuance of time, even perpetuity. But they
differ;

for

didiog

a wider

has

meaning than

For, since there are properly two no-

aioJvwg,

and the future, (for

that which we call time present, is the whole
of time, of whicli the past and the future are,
dfdtog includes both,^ and
as it were, forms.)

tations of time, the past

This

is

the case with the

Hebrew word

Q^")^*, seculum,

from O7375 to conceal. It applies equally to ages of time running into the inconceivable, concealed and obscure, either with
reference to the past or the future.

many,

will suffice,

One example

out of

Ps. xc. 2, " Before the mountains

were

THE SYNONYMS

66

expresses an existence in

all

which yet has not an end; but

and

time past,

only that

ctiu)mg

no end is conceived. Therefore,

didiog sometimes denotes both, as Rom. i. 30,
ai'diog avrov dxjvcc/j^ig xai ^s/OTrjg
and sometimes
that which, although it had a beginning, yet is
not considered to have an end, as Jud. v. 6,
dsg/MoTg didioig
and Diodorus Sicul. i. 51, rdcpoug

of which

dfdiovg oixovg ^oo6ayo^i\jo-j6iv.

On

the contrary, dtu)mg, although

pear to be capable of denoting

throughout

all

Testament,

it

future

in

conjunction

Ttokacig' Xvr^oodig

Whence
this

is

iv.
it

18,
is

with

continually
l^ojn,

xX^j^oi/j^y-Za*

rd

duration

all

yet strictly in the

New

used of duration through

So

time.

all

(2 Cor.

ages

may ap-

it

aidovta

6oga,

occurs

it

n/Mn'

x^/c/j,

jSaffiXsia'

opposed

tjp'

x^/'/xa*'

to crPoVxa/^a.)

quite needless to argue about

word, and to show more fully that

it is

not

But there
always used absolutely of eternity.
aidjviog
applied
is
to that
in
which
are passages
which endures

for a long period

word,

Q7l^,

Rom.

as

"from
somewhat
It is
which is the same

brought forth," &c. ^i^ Hfib^ d'?u>"i;^

everlasting to everlasting thou an Ciod."
remarkable that the Latin adverb, olim,

d':''!;;;::')

has retained both senses fiom

its

etymon,

" Et haec

and not only refers to past time but to future.

T.
meminisse juvabit." Virgil
" There is this tendency to excess in the human mind

olitn

in

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE
xvi. 25,

%foi/o/s a/Mvloig

2 Tim.

ffs(ri'yrifj/svov,

ya^iv do^cTffocv t^o ^oovojv aJuviuv,

67

Tit.

i.

2.

9,

i.

Nor

is

these passages to recede from

it necessary in

meaning which usage has confirmed nor

is any light derived from a comparison with
For in all these three passages
the Hebrew.
alojvioi
occurs.
But these words do not
Xi^voi
the

mean ancient times,

commonly rendered

elapsed ages, as they are

but enduring ages, un-

terminated, of which no end

contemplated.
a/ojvioic ffsffr/r,>j^svov,

that which has

is

known from unmeasured

speech mean

-^po

this

^oovuv a/wv/wv, if xi^^^'

ages or times past.

It

x^oi/0/5

been un-

time, (diutissime, in

But what can

Zeiten.)

ewiffen

then actually

is

Therefore, the mystery

may

form of
(^i'^vioi

is

easily be ren-

dered, from the most distant times, (for this forall

We

nations.

are the creatvires of a day, and every

thing is fading round us.

And, although we have the

idea of

eternal duration, every thing connected with our experience,

our joys, our

aflfections,

Man

are fleeting and transitory.

catches at the glimmering notion that he has of eternal duration,

and

loves to attach

things around him.

we

And

are used.

If

queath our

estate, it is,

brew

love, it

Scriptures, the

it

to the perishing events

is,

for ever

for ever.

same word

press the idea of eternity,

is

if

And

7')^

we convey

or be-

even in the He-

which

is

used to ex-

applied repeatedly in a secon-

dary sense to express a long period of time.

T.

and

hence the strongest expressions

Exod.

xii.

14.

THE SYNONYMS

68

mula can be referred

to this idea,)

but how,

before the past ages, can be the same as, from

the most ancient times, this they do not show,

neither can they.
aJdjviog is

The

matter

is

very plain,

that which endures through the a/wv

therefore, are those successive pe-

X^ovoi a/'wwo/,

up or constitute the a/'wv or

created time, and t^o ^^ovuv a/wwwv is before
those remote times, before the longest time of
which memory remains, heretofore, long ago.
which

riods

But

fill

this leads us to consider the

terms

And we doubt not, but that the remark will

be made by some one, that these words so far
differ, that they cannot be accounted synonymous

for,

that w^a does not denote time ge-

nerally, but only a definite part of the day,

that
it

is

xa/^og,

properly means, opportunity.

and

Yet

known that there are, in all

many words, to which usage and

generally

languages,

custom have affixed a force which was peculiar

to other words, and have thus converted into

synonyms, words which originally had a sepaand specific signification. And in words
of this kind, which are thus accounted synony-

rate

mous,

this

is

the greatest difficulty, that the

ascertaining the distinction between them as

synonyms, depends mainly upon the accurate

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

69

observation of the usage with respect to them

for the reason of that difference
to

but seldom

be sought with success in their etymology/

among

especially

These words,

New

the

common

time in which something

Xl^^^'i

time

is,

time at

differ

for

have the notion of indefinite

a/wi'

were Ofos, terminus. %cct^6c. is the time,

the opportune point of time, the very
which a thino^ should be done. But

of time, (as

even

conceived to be,

is

w^a denotes a certain and definite space

that

writers.

notion of a

Yet they

or to have been, done.

and

Testament

therefore, so far agree, as that

they have each in them a

*^

is

x^(>vog

it

and

ai(Jjv

differ

for a/wv signifies

an

do not wish to attach too great importance to etymo-

logy, for

the dangers

am
it

fully conscious, both of its difficulties,

presents to the student

of the author's

remark in the

text.

and of

admit, also, the force

At the same

time, I

am satisfied that there are many words, the sense of which

may be made out most accurately by reference to the etymon; and

that there are synonyms, the distinctibpis be-

tween which are preserved

for instance,

The

Luke

distinction

iii.

in the respective etymons.

5. x<

between the

ed in the Hebrew etymon,

and

Tav

tana

loca,

hill,

or banky which

(-lovvo;

o^o?

hill

'i^o;

Take,

(iouvo; Ta-Tuvcodri^iron.

and the mountain

being from

"^j;^

is

mark-

mons, mon-

from ^^J, dropping J), n;^, colUSj a

the same word retained in English

is

through the Anglo-Saxon, banc.

Hebrew, which the

x,a.)

LXX

And

thus

it

stands in the

has rendered almost literally.

THE SYNONYMS

70

indefinite course or flow of time, so

used simply,

it is

if it is

tliat,

without the notion of an end

or close; but %fovog denotes the time itself in

by which we perceive the succession

actuality,

Therefore,

of things.
ai'Jjviot

New

its

said correctly,

it is

but no one ever said,

Testament

this holds

ciiuiv

good

"x^d^ot

I^ the

Xl^^"^'^'

For

also.

a/wv

always denotes the perpetuity of successional

time, unless a definition of that time

Whence
xii. 3*2,

the formula

it

riod of a
so

in

man's

on the earth

life

Matth. xxviii. 20,

Cor. X. 11,
that

and

is

added.

in

Matth,

appears to be said of the whole pe-

<r-jVTsXdag

rrig

zh tov aJcom

rov

a/uvog;

fn'^'

here,

for

rov

ffuvTsXsia

eco/xa/

but not

aJuvog,

is

vfLuv

as

in

iwg
1

spoken of

change in the character of time, or of the

age, up to which period the Lord had promised

to

be with his

But

disciples.^

in Ephes.

ivvriXua. rov ulorjoi, as it'occurs in the

New

ii.

7j

Testament,

does not denote the end, hut rather the consummation of th(
a/v,
xiii.

which

to be followed

is

39, 40, 49,

feared,

and xxiv. 3

may he misunderstood

by a new
which last
in

age.

So

in

Matth.

])assage, it is to

applying

it

be

to the destruc-

'1 he same idea exists in this formula in

which has its parallel in i'Jplus. i. 10, vXri-

tion of the world.

Hebrews
[

It

ix. 26,

were scarcely warranted

to

found any thing on the

use of a term so vague by the Redeemer's yet ill-informed

disciples.

It

must be remembered, that they were not

teaching, in this insiaice, by inspiration, but asking in ig-

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE
a'luvcg lit^ypiMvoi,

tle,

however, uses
his

those,

which was

The Apos-

are ages to come.

it,

71

in this instance, to denote

own express and present

times, in

at length manifested, ver. 8,

" the

exceeding riches of grace." And I'rai'/hiLzvoi is

not necessarily to be understood of time which
is

not yet present, but simply denotes a time

which has followed another; as James v. 1,

roLkaiitCfi^iai s'miy^oiMivoLi^ are calamities which are
already present or thought to be

word
press a certain and
So

also the

so.

never used to ex-

"X^o^og is

definite time

but when

it

occurs apparently in that sense, the force of

the idea will not be found in the

viii.

and xx.

29,

^^os'oj,

For, in two passages in

but in the adjuncts.

Luke

word

9,

where

xovoi

appears

to signify years, there is another reason for

for

%^oi/o5,

as

a sort of aggregate

it

of times,

been put
for the space of a year, as the most known and
familiar aggregate of times in the same way

by the usage of recent

writers, has

as

ci'^a

norance.
tory.

is

used loosely and popularly for the

Many

Luke

such instances occur in the evangelic his-

ix. 33.

John

xiv. 5, 22.

On

such passages no

doctrine can be founded, any more than on the fallacious

averments of
terms by the

Joi>'s friends

disciples,

in a

nor any criticism on the use of

pcpular and inaccurate sense^

except as to the usus loquendi.]

T.

THE SYNONYMS

72

Yet

parts of a day.^

xfovog

by

itself is

not a

And, in fact, it may

well be doubted whether xi^m ixavoi should be
specific limited time.

many

rendered,

years.

frequent error

It is a

Greek word can be rendermake sense by any particular Latin

in lexicons, that if a

ed so as to

word, they affirm that the two words have the

same meaning; and hence the greatest monstrosities have sprung up in the lexicons, especially in respect to the prepositions. For who
could ever be persuaded that

s?t

signifies ad, in,

and cum^ or that sig could be de ;

and Ttard, ex, &c. ?
Ka/po's

cc'jrh^

ad and

in,

always denotes a certain specific time,

with the superadded notion of opportunity.

(

Ammonius

says very accurately

[J^'^v

nai^hg dt]XoT

For that which

i?} done opportunely,
is understood to be done
at a certain period of time
wdiile that which
is done rashly, and not at a fixed time, is almost necessarily done inopportunely. Whence
ntQidrfiTOL yoQvox),

yojiwg

5g TotfJrTjra.)

it

occurs, that sometimes the

word may be

used indefinitely and yet it may be gathered

from the whole tenor of the address, what that
is of which the xa/gog is affirmed.
So in Matth.
;

xxvi. 18,
^ See

Du

-KCLioJag [JjOU

eyyvg

Canj^e Glossar.

Med.

husius ad Aristoph. Phil. 1084.

iffriVf

the rou aTo^uvs/v

et Inf. lat.

and Hemster-

OF THE
not,

is

in

fact,

NEW TESTAMENT.
omitted,

(for

73
written

is

it

and not merely, o xa/^oj,) but from

the very time in which he gave this injunction
6 jcoci^og /MOV,

to his disciples,

what was

o -/.aioog

might have been known

But when Tcaioog is com-

it

avrov.

bined with another word, then

it

does not de-

note the opportunity of the thing

whole formula does

13,

it,

as xai^og

lexicons very incorrectly render

For

Mark

avxojv,

xi.

Matth. xxi. 34, where the

jccci^og rcov xa^'-ciov,

of year.

but the

y,ocio6g

the time

-/Mi^og,

denotes any opportunity

whatsoever, not only of time, but of place, and

of the apt and convenient

any thing
volves in

place

is

it

means

for

doing

as the notion of opportunity in-

the notion of time.

For,

convenient for a certain

act,

then

should be done there.

xai^og eujcai^og h^n, that it

If the thing itself

the

if

and convenient, it
may then be made use of. Wherefore, we
must not at once condemn the views of some,
regarding
it

Mark xi.

is

fit

13, ou ycco

f,v -/.ai^hg

refers to the opportunity of place

Lect

Aristaenet.

vol.

Thorn. Ma^.ip. 490.)

i.

if,

p.

16,

indeed,

to vindicate our Lord's act at

all.

cuxw!/,
(

that

Abresch.

17, Triller,
it

ad

be necessary
Nor, indeed,

would the excuse be sufficient, that the place

was not suitable to that kind of fruit; if we
iiould, for a moment, imagine that our Lord,

THE SYNONYMS

74

disappointed in his expectation, had acted in

an^er, a passion from which the divine mind

But, in

is free.

fact, xa/^o/ is

often said of

any

opportunity (as the Latins use tempera^) in

which any thing can be conveniently done.

I will also make one passing remark on the
formula which occurs twice in the New Testament, Ephes. V. 16, and Coloss. iv. 5, ijayo^aZpix^m

In both places the Apostle

xai^ov.

Tov

exhorts Christians to live prudently and cautiously; and, therefore,

commands them

s^ayopd-

Luther renders this, sdiicket euch

in die Zeit.^ This gives the idea certainly.
In
my view, however, s^ayopa^g(r^a/ rh xai^ov^ is,
^str^a/ TOV %aiom.

according to the manner of merchants

who

ac-

curately examine goods, and choose the best,

diligently to watch the time,

our own, that

we may

and

to

make

over-rule or control

as Pindar well says of Damophilus, Pyth,

509,

V.

d^darag,

and

(j-hv

vtv

o-TrabsT.

to serve

shall

it

it,

xat^ov^ syvuziv ^sou'Tojv ds

You

o/,

it
it

iv.
ov

are not to yield to time,

but you

may command it, and

And evidently

do what you approve.

this idea

agrees best with the relation of both

the passages.'
^

So

also Horn. xii. 11,

he renders the words vS

which reading, by
bach, has always appeared
XivovTts,

'

The same formula

tlie

to

by,

me

occui's in

xai^oi ^ou-

though admitted by Griesdtubtful.

the

LXX. Dan

ii.

8.

Lu-

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

But, since opportunity

75

generally fleeting,

is

and of very short duration, as Pindar

6

yao xai^oc

T^k

fore,

ir^hg dv^^M'jrojv

xa/^o'i/

^^cc^j /mst^ov i^-'^

says,

there-

means, at a time, considered as

no longer enduring than while the opportunity

contemplated
T/tfT-s uovrsg,

it

lasts; as

are they

Luke

who

viii.

13,

0/

^fog

xolioov

believed for a time, while

was convenient, and no danger threatened

but

Si'

may

Jcoc/^'M

'TTSiPafffjuou

And now we

u(pi(fravTai.

explain that singular formula, which oc-

curs in Apoc.
xai^ou.

It

is

xii. 14,

xcufov %a) zai^oug %ai

rifitffu

usually rendered, three years and

and rightly; for the same space of

time is, in ver. 6, and c. xi. 3, spoken of, as
vjfjijsoag yp^at>g haxosiag l^yizovra; and in xi. 2, fJ'^vag.
Tsffffotgdzovra dvo.
But that this number is used

a half;

any space of time, according to the Hebrew

mode, is evident, (see Eichhorn on Apoc. xi.
And, therefore, xa/^o's, in this place, is not
2.)
for

ther renders
idea

is

it.

" Ich

sehe, dass ihr Frist suchet.^*

the same here also.

"

know

But the

that you accurately

watch the time." They knew that the king had forgotten his
dream, and therefore, they asked him to tell it, not so much
for the pui'pose of delay, as with a view to avoid the neces-

[The

sity of giving the interpretation.

nion,

more

idea

directly expressed in the Chaldee,

dered in our English version.

"

the time." ^^22.1 ]1J^^^^ S^^Dl^*

know

pt

is,

in

my

opi-

and well ren-

that ye would gain

emere, acquirere.

THE SYNONYMS

76
a year, but
there

is

said of the time of a year.

is

of this or that

notes that thing.

used in Dan.

It is

The LXXrendersit (compare

xii. 7.

For

when a word is predicated

thing, and when it actually de-

a difference,

25

vii.

ver. 11.)

not of actual years, but of a certain indefinite

period of time, according- to the usage of prophetic language

for as to the true sense, this

formula means no more than, aliquamdiu, a

Compare James

good while.

A
word

v. 17.

similar reason obtains in respect to the

For, as w^a properly denotes a de-

w^a.

and limited time, we may understand

from this, why it may be predicated of any
certain specific period, although custom has
appropria^d it specially to the hours of the day.
finite

Nor

tncy in the right,

are

" The

LXX

who

has rendered the Chaldee word

properly means, time, by xa/^oj, as Dan.

vii. 12, 'ius KCkt^ou

year, in the

iv.

Kce.)

xai^os. the

same word

13. vii. 25. xii. 7

And

word which they have rendered in

^fiitru

Kui^ou, in c.

it is possible,

iii.

5,

15,

may

it is

iii.

5,

15.

also used for a

curious that the

c. xii. 7

i's

xai^o* xa)

But

u^et.

that both in Daniel and the Apocalypse, this

reverence for the

it

ii.

is

it

"ny which

8.

they have rendered

description of an indefinite time

that

say that

number seven

may

arise out of a religious

divided into two parts

or,

be referred to that time during which the tem-

was profaned by Antiochus, was deserted by

the Jews. SeeJosephus Bel. Jud.i. 1,2, proem. 7- aud 2.
Mark x. 3. See Grotius on Daniel vii. 25.
pie,

after

it

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

means the

39, 46, no one

xii.'

moment

For

least portion of time.

passages as Matth.

viii.

13

ix.

mere point of

or

Luke

that wga

was a

when

time,

evident that he who affirms an event

sv rfi

if

ftigijc

he had said

T^bg w^ai/,

rect to

it

is

to occur,

definite time than

And

^o6v(^ hslvcfj.

though

rendered, a good while, in the

were still incorsay that w^a means any minute portion

of time.

it

sv tuj

may be

same way

is

means a more

ix^'ivrii

such

in

x. 19.

22

would think

77

as

yet

'^rfog ocai^ov,

Certainly

when

it

a small part of time

intended, the word w^a might be used, for

denotes a small part of the day

fore,

'^fog

M^av

is

some time; but

wpa

is,

the

it

same

and there-

does not follow fr^|^this, that

time, generally,

little

as aliquod tempus, at

'iflre

is

a dif-

xa/gov.

however, between 'rrohg w^ai' and

For that which is said to endure,

u^ccv, is

conceived not to

hour

expired,

ference,

that

is

which

i. e.

last

longer than

ir^hg

till

for only a short time

said to be done,

is

rr^hi

-rgos jcaipov, is

the

but
con-

ceived as being done precisely up to another

point of time.

Another formula
viz.

rov Tcaicov,
'^i^g

also differs from T^og

It

means, conveniently, as

time shall permit. Lucian. i.Deor. Dial.

The

force of the article

formula, xara

xc^i^ov

Tcaipov,

may be

Rom.

v. 6.

iv.

209.

noticed in the

See Lucian,

i.

THE SYNONYMS

78
Hermot.

^tam

x. 749.

zaicov

in the needful time, to do

When

rightly.

opportunely,

is,

that

it,

be done

it

said that Christ xara

it is

x.ai-

does not mean, at a time fixed of

^6v d'TTs'^avs, it

God, but at an opportune time, ztir rechten Zeit

when we were ac^ivzTg. If a definite or appointed
time were meant, it would have been xara rh
xaifov (a-jTov.)
The Greeks, almost in the same
s/g
x.ai:6i/,
sense, use
opposed to '^fo xaioov, 1 Cor.
Kaifog

iv. 9.

means, the

a portion of time.

some
w^ai/,

certain

Therefore,

time,

of time,

&%,

'^^og xa/^ov is,

at

Zeit) coos

(avf eine gewisse

for a short time, {aiifeine kurze Zeit)

In Galatians

some, a s if
1

moment

it

ii.

were the same

Thess^B^.

For,

a short time, but,

period in which
gives

5, ir^og u^av is

as

rj/j^ug 6

eine

Weile

laravag.
s.

which

is
is

added,

not, for

to

define

Luther

eine Zeit lang,

some while, for a

And, finally, w^a, by itself,

opportune time, opportunity, as

word

w^ag,

for that time, that particular

aliquamditi, for
riod.

rendered by

'^^og xaifov

rrpoc xaiohv o)pag, is

svsxo-^sv

it correctl)'',

ill

specific peis

never the

xa/cog;

but some

and specify that

uncertain in the notion of w^a, time,

John ii.'4; xvi. 21 Mark xiv. 35; Johnxii.

27.
But these things are so manifest, that I
need not add another word. And I know not
how it is, that only in lexicons of the New Testament such trifling exists.
as

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

dd/KYifia,

dvo/juioc'

The
at all

so in

79

discrimination of synonyms, which

times sufficiently

words applicable

is

is still

more

to disposition of

mind.

difficult,

For as many virtues or vices are so nearly

allied, that the difference cannot easily be
pointed out,

them are
It

is,

words which represent

so the

frequently

used indiscriminately.

however, often very desirable to trace

with accuracy

that

above written, so

common

far

The words

difference.

agree that they have the

notion of sin generally, yet they dif-

There is a greater degree of affinity between d/xa^rla, d/Md^ryj/jba and 'Xa^uvroomL, They
involve the notion of vice or f4H? which
brings blame or injury.
But in the first place
dfxa^T/cc and d/xd^rrifj^a, differ.
For d/xa^ria pro-

fer.

perly denotes the innate vice, from which the

springs."

dfid^rrif/^a

" It is

worth while

force of the
is vised

It is true that d^ap-'ia is in

to endeavour to ascertain the real

word a^a^r/a, a word which, as 1'itmann states,

repeatedly for the evil act, but which

is

emphatically, a^a^r/a, for the evil principle.

primitive in Greek

is

probaidy a^^ which

a duct or canal for water, by whicli water

upon any

also used

Its root or

trcaiaila renders,

may

flow

down

This will bring

it

into near connexion

with the Hebrew root "^^^ which

is

to

place.

speak or put forth,

THE SYNONYMS

80

New

Testament used for the vicious act

xvi. 8, 9 2 Pet. i. 9,
itself, as John viii. 21, 24
but the proper force of the word will
ii. 14;^
be found in many places, especially in the seventh and eighth chapters of Romans. Neither
would any one inconsiderately affirm, that in
John i. 29, a/xagr/a had its specific signification.
the

Certainly the Saviour

took away

external sins and iniquities, but

very corruption of the soul

not only

^ aixa^ria the

itself;

for if this

be not extirpated, mere propriety of outward

conduct, which Melanchthon calls civil rightto cause to flow.

The ufta^ria may be regarded as a stream

down upon the human race. There is,
Hebrew word nearly allied to this viz.

of influence, flowing

however, j|tother

*^Qn whioRot
an

evil

only carries the idea of an influence, but of

influence.

In

the cognate dialects, Chaldee,

all

has the idea of turpidity and

impure commixtion and excitement, muddy confusion in
water, acetous fermentation in wine, bitumen arising from
hot natural springs, collection of mud or clay brought down
by tumultuous waters, bitter and brackish waters, &c.
Syriac, Arabic, Ethiopic,

And from hence we

French amere.
bitter principle,

The

it

derive the

afia^Ticc is

Latin antarus and the

then a defiling influence,

a,

a principle of disturbance flowing down,

upon the moral creation

of God.

It

may

be noticed, in cor-

roboration of this etymology, that the word

amar repeatedly

occurs in Gaelic, as a river channel, a mill-course, a ditch or

canal

T.

Those places should be accurately distinguished from

each other, in which ufia^rla or afji-a^riat occur.
^

e^

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

would be utterly unavailing

eousness,

In

Rom.

in the words,

6 vhjjjoc,

sanctity.

incitement to
evil

and

81

vii. 7,

manifest that

it is

a/xa^r/a

not the

aijjaoria is

but that which

sin,

to real

in itself

is

Paul denies that the law

vicious.

is

but concedes properly that the law ex-

aiMaoria,

cites to

sin

But

%w^'S 7^2, vofMv a/xa^rla vix^d.

the whole argument in this chapter shows that

d/xa^r/a is

not the sin or transgression, but the

which

corruption

Some

say that

for all

sins, as

^'

is

by nature

d/^agr/a

we

is

the soul.

in

put collectively

But

say, die siinde.

it

is

evident in the view of the Apostle, that the

afLa^ricc

is

and that
was dead, but that when the law
gave rise to lust and he became

in US before the

s-ri^vfMia

for a time sin

reigned, sin
xa^'

v'TTs^lSoXriv

And

a/j^a^TuXog.

does not understand

ccfMcc^rla

to

he

therefore

be actual trans-

who know themselves

what
must perceive, an innate corruption, and
gression, but,

voiMov rrig

d/xagr/ag

all

sv ffa^yj.

sq. it is scarcely to

man,,^/'

tinguished from

in

Rom.

be doubted that

used in the same sense.

came by one

And

svo's.

TO Tov kvhg

The

into the world,

;

v. 12,

cL(j.aoria. is

a{/.a^ria

TagaTrw/xa

roov

which
is

and

disit is

death came

not said, that by

to 'xaod-itTMiJ^a rou hog

into the world,

and by d//,aer/a
death came upon all men, for
G

death,

and that

but

d/xa^r/a,

THE SYNONYMS

82
that all

have sinned, which could not be said

death to
it

all

may be

sXXoys/tT^a/,
lo/xoy

but

Adam.

arose from the act of

said with correctness,

i^ri

ovrog v6/mov,

for

Also

a//<a^r/av
vsx^oc yjM^lg

is

it

if

oux
roD

could scarcely be said that sin

it

is

For death reigned before Moses,

(v. 14), seeing that all have sinned.
They then are not to be justified, who af-

not imputed.

firm that the sacred writers, not only in the

same passage, but actually in the same formula, use the same word in two different senses.
Such an ambiguity is utterly foreign to the

Even

simplicity of their writings.

quent interpretation of Hebrews

a/xagr/as
is

h<p'^r,(iirai,

without a piacular

scarcely warrantable.

Besides

denotes sacrifice for sins.

the expression
are

is elliptical,

For

because of

sacrifice,

afiaorla

in

and the

^uc/ai/ (s. 'rr^o<S(po^av v. 18.) tso/

sacrifice offered

the fre-

ix. 28, x^i^^

Hebrews
full

terms

a/^a^r/ag,

And

sin.

never

e,

2.

there

is

no confirmation of the false rendering obtained,

by comparing it with Rom. viii. 4, 'rrsix-^ug 'xt^i
afiupTtagy i, e. he sent his Son on account of
sin,

that

aixa^riav.

he might condemn,

Now

cri/x,^g/i/

'Xi^i rtvog

is

Tcarax^hp

rriv

SO plainly to

send on account of any thing, that

it

is

won-

derful to see interpreters attempting to bring

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

83

any thing further out of so plain and simple

an expression. But ai^dprrtiMa is always used
for the

Rom.

12,

iv.

Mark iii. 28
18. And ra^a-

actual transgression.

25; 1 Cor. vi.

from both those former words

iii.

TTw/xa differs

for although Jerome's distinction is not correct,

that

means the lapse towards

ita^cL'XTiaiLa

aficii^ria,

word

the completed act itself;

-raiacrrw/xa

and

yet in the

the notion inheres of sin rashly

committed as by one unwilling

but

sin,

to

do an injury

in d/xagr/aand d/xa^r'/j^a the act is

expressed

which he who does, does willingly whether he

errs in improperly thinking that he is doing
right, or whether he acts under the impulse of
Elegantly therefore in Matth.

passion.

word

14, 15; xviii. 35, the

in

cra^d'^rw/xa is

preference to the other two

der term tiian

1,

ii.

for

it is

given
a mil-

as applicable to a single

afi^a^ria

In Ephes.

fault.

vi.

both words occur.

And

sometimes, in fact, cra^dTrw/xa is

used with re-

ference to any transgression, as

Rom.

2 Cor.

ment

V.

19.

Rom.

But

in

iv.

25

the important state-

and following verses,

the distinction between d,(iaria and 'Tra^d'^'rdjfia
had need to be accurately drawn and Paul
draws it. For the 'rraoazori of Adam he calls,
Tasacrrw/xa, v. 15, 17, 18, by which the d,iMa^ria
came into the world and in verse 20, he says
in

v.

12,

THE SYNONYMS

84

'Xa^sKjT^X^iv /Va ifkzovdgri

vo/xoj,

wherefore?

why

TO 'TTa^d'Trroj/Ma ?

rh 'Tra^d'xroiiJja' o5

does he not say,

^^

o5 ds s'xXiovags

Evidently because

it is

effected

were
less criminal, as the mere result of imprudence
or of error, now might become more criminal,
inasmuch as they who commit them, know
But he says,
themselves to be sinning.

by

the law, that those sinful acts which

s'TrXUvagsv

tj

u'?rs^[SoXriv

stress

tions

d/j^a^ruXog.

must not be
yet

it is

the

for

df/^a^riw

XalSovffcc did rng broXng

d/j^cc^ria

d(po^/!Mriv

makes the individual

I

am aware

laid

on

certainly

xa^*

much

that too

tliese nice distinc-

more

satisfactory to

follow out, in interpreting the sacred books,

these delicate distinctions of the force of terms,

than blindly to acquiesce in an ambiguous and

misty interpretation.
Paul, with the same ac-

curacy of speech, very tenderly in

11,

Rom.

when, speaking of the Jews rejecting

Christ, calls that act rru^d^ruda, which our

John

in

xi.

xvi. 9, calls d/jLaorla.

It

Lord

would be a

false interpretation to say, that 'raodTrroj/Ma in

this place

means the same thing

as

T^'^rrj^u^a,

which

has reference to their misery.^

The etymology

the author's idea.

of the

word ^rrnfia will not bear out

from the Hebrew J^tOn>

It is derived

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

however, and

ddixta,

dvof^ia differ

85

from

all

the

For in them the general notion only

others.

of transgression or fault

words involve the nature of the

of which

it is

the dkonov

the law

act,

these

on account

That is ddma by which

that is dvofJa by which

faulty.

injured;

is

is

But

exists.

For as he properly is
not what he ought to be, and

violated.

who is
therefore who

adixog,

violates right

so ddixla

is

said of

any impropriety which is repugnant to the

dizatov. So 1 John V. 17, TttCa ddix'/a, dfj^a^ria. But
in

the idea properly

dvo/Mta

Syriac and Chaldee.

in the Ethiopic

indiguit,

In Arabic also
it is

orhatus

lUf.

and

^U^^

used not only in this sense, but in

commonly

that which more

deficit,

the non-obser-

and which occurs in the same sense in

peccarcj errare,

And

is

attached to

is

it

This etymology

est.

in Greek, of
is

confirmed

also by the occurrence of the word in Greek, in l)0th forms

of

and

nTra.ofi,on

a difference evidently originating

y\(riia.o fjt.au,

Hebrew, and

in the soft sound of JQ, in

slides easily either into the

nant idea of
ijTTMv ohov,

de

iis

rtTTo.

rifftruv v^ovcov.

of

he

is

or

r.

^ in Arabic,

And

in fact the

which
domi-

that of moral inferiority.

Schleusner says,

yiTToiir6a,i

So

eleganter

usurpatur, qui cupiditatibus pravis indulgent et vitio-

sitati serviunt.

as

or ^^c-a

(T,

states,

rirr^f/.a,

This, however,

is

the primary idea, and not,

The meaning therefore

would be tijat of moral
consequence of fault. " If

secondary and derived.

in the passage refered to,

deterioration or depression in

their error be the riches of the world, and their degradation

the enriching of the nations."

THE SYNONYMS

86

vance or transgression of the law, whether the

He

law be unknown or wilfully violated.

civo/Mog,

strictly

who

speaking,

is

has not the law,

and then subsequently who regards not the law, and who
Acts

ii.

23.

Cor.

violates the law.

ix.

21

dvo/iia is

the violation of law,

And

doing contrary to right.

ddixia the

has the wider sense.

It

may be

conceived of

without a law, but there can be no

out

ddr/Jo:.

Finally,

which

is

See Xenoph. Memor.

ddir.r,//jcc

is

that

is

ocvo/j^ia

with-

iv. 4. 12, 13.

done in dhmay

unjustly done. Acts xviii. 14, xxiv.

20. Apoc. xviii. 5.

3. a/ ToXg/^
TiirotrjXOKriv,

Ta'jffo'jng.

which

ddr/Ja

S'TtI

Xenoph. Memorab.

roTg (liyieroig dbixr,n>ast ^rifiiav

ug cux av

/Xct^r^vog KCizoij ^h(3uj

rr,v

ii.

2,

Savaron
dbtxtav

OF THE

NEW

TESTAJIENT.

CHAPTER
All

87

IV.

real adepts of the liermeneutic art

have

taught latterly, that, in interpreting old writings, not only must regard be

had

to the commr.ii

usage of words, but that the extreme nicety

of discernment consisted in noticing diligently
the

mode

of speaking peculiar to each author.

more abundantly confirmed, in

the rendering of the New Testament.
At the
same time, the observance of it is combined with
This remark

is

greater difficulties than has been generally sup-

For
ornamented

Greek

more
style was conformed to the more
polished forms of speech, which, though they
may undergo some change from diversity of
dialect, follow as to the use of words a permaBut the style of
nent and unv-arying rule.
the sacred writers, neither corrected by literary study, nor by the practice of writing
adapted to the modes of general and popular
and, as it were, overthought and diction
whelmed by the greatness of those new announcements, for the expression of which all

posed.

in other

writers, the

THE SYNONYMS

88

wonted language would appear inadequate,

renders the observation of the use of words
more difficult, and requires a more minute
scrutiny than that of works more artificially
composed. This remark, which is applicable
in

many

respects,

is

peculiarly so with refer-

For

ence to the use of synonyms.

it

was

truly said, that he only could rightly under-

stand and feel

WTiters,

who

the

Greek

elegance of the

could learn to distinguish the va-

rious shades of style, by means of the synony-

mous

terms, as a delicate tint arising out of the

intermixture of a multitude of subtle atomic

particles.

writers, of

What
whom

then are
all

we

to

do with those

agree that they were al-

together strangers to those subtleties of composition

been

whilst

many

believe

them

to

have

so barbarous, as scarcely to allow that

they spoke the Greek language at

tainly if the sacred writers

the rules of the

all ?

Cer-

had no regard to

Greek language,

especially to

that of analogy, then their writings

might be

interpreted without any consideration of those

might be accounted the best

interpreter of Holy Scripture, who, neglecting

rules

so that he

Greek composition, should investigate this barbarous mode of speech by the

opinions and customs of this age.
But that
the laws of

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

89

were a most improper mode of procedure,

is proved in a variety of ways, more especially
by the diligent observation of the synonymous
terms for this shows plainly that the style of
this

the sacred writers,

although very far from

possessing Attic elegance, and full of those

defects which

who have
rather

may always be

detected in those

acquired a language by actual use,

than

by

study,

abounds with acute

thought and accuracy of expression

who would

so that he

attain to the full perception of the

sublimity of the sacred writers, which shines

most conspicuously in their simplicity, would

do well to compare them with the compositions
of those authors who have thought and spoken
most acutely.
And, in pursuing our inquiries, these sacred
days will direct our choice of the words best
For the great truth
suited for observation.

which,

on the feast of our Lord's nativity,

Christians would desire

contained in John
s^yacTTjcgv,

iii.

to

16

commemorate,
"

God

is

so loved,

the world that he gave his only begot-

ten Son," &c. Let us direct our attention there-

and consider what is the

force of the word aya'Ttav which John uses, and
in what respect it differs from the cognate
fore

word

to this point,

^I'kuv,

THE SYNONYMS

90

The

A.y attar

(piXsTv.

accordance in some measure of these

two words, is sufficiently plain. But some

deny that they at all differ, on the ground that
words which express the same affection of mind,

That they

are frequently used indiscriminately.

however, will appear from the

differ,

that

fact,

each word has certain meanings peculiar to

it-

and which the other will not admit. For

if in both words the same precise idea existed,
both would be used of the same things. But
the usage is otherwise.^ For as ^/Xs/V properly

self,

*'

^iXos,

from whence

others from -riku,

cherish.

is

from

(piu,

or accordinn^ to

he wiiom we embrace,

Vid. Etymol. 794. 12.777- 778. Eustath.

5G. (^iXuv' 76 ayKTav

X^i^i

<pi}>.t7v,

to press,

(rufi(iu.Xkuy.

Kctt

conf.

Leimep. Etjinolog.

p.

to rot; ^iiXiffiv

1799. 51.
10G3.

But

a.(rTaZ,i(r6a,i,

Vid.

p.

kiss,

1583.

xul to ta

ad
which appears
?icheidius

jLv.

aya^rZv,

to be derived from uyau, aydcryi, denotes properly the love

that springs from admiration and veneration

and from

this

the other notions of the word flow, as to cherish, to receive

kindly, to acquiesce, &c.
xccTu.

ship

^'V^rtv

is

u.yct'xa..

called ^/X/a not

Hesydiins gives correctly,

It is evident, therefore,

why

(piktT.

friend-

ayaTn. It denotes an intimate union

of souls.

[There is great probability that fikiTv, strictly to kiss,

and vlu or tivcu, to drink, and tu^u to persuade, are all derivatives fnnn "^3, the mouth.
And that ayawav, is derived
from ^rii^ amare by the natural substitution of y, as a barder sound for the mere aspiration j^. M'e find in several passages of Scripture, the word

nUnj^j amor, which, by

accommodation of the sound of the second

the

radical to the style

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

means,

to kiss,

so has dya'Trav

91

and dyaTav never has tKis sense,

its peculiar meaning to he satis-

which sense <pt'ki7v is never

used.
Moreover, if these words were precisely similar, there would be no distinction made

fied, to acquiesce, in

by

more elegant writers, as Xenophon,

Plato and others.
For although in the Methe

morab.

7,

ii.

auriv

tfti

/-^si'

and a

dycL'K7]6(i\jm'
i(piXovv,

they are twice apparently

9, 12,

interchanged

d's

s?c/la5

little

(piX^ffug

Jxs/Va/

further on, xa/ /

avrdg ^yuTa,

yet

os

//<!<

he would

who should conclude that Xenophon thus unthinkingly interchanged words of

synonymous import, because he had used both
words vicissively of the same persons. For if we
inspect the passage more accurately, we shall
greatly err,

readily perceive

man

why

Socrates should say to a

anxious about the support of his poorer

relations

Now when

their indolence grieves

oun sxuvai

you
would teach them

to seek

tain themselves,

A^si/

ours 6v sxiTvag <piXsTg,

tfy

<Si

ccliraTc.

ayawrisoxiSiv,

this

if

you

to

main-

o^wi/

w^sX/-

a/ff^ofisvat

There existed no cause of

of Greek pronunciation, would give at once

And

but

by labour

IxiTvag ^/Xjjcs/j,

fLOXjg &sccvr(f) o'Scccfy sxsTvai ds Cs

yjxi^ovrd

trs;

tlie

word

a.ya.'xvi.

etymology of the two words accords with the ma-

nifest disuiiction in their use.

(piXiTv

heing used to express

the more direct demonstration of regard, aya-rav the principle, or internal feeling of delectation

and kindliness

7'.]

THE SYNONYMS

9*2

mutual love;
in

w^ho

for neither could

he love them

were only an annoy-

their poverty

ance to him, nor could they love him, when

him unwilling to support them.

For there is no greater impediment to mu-

they saw
tual love

among relations,

aid unwillingly given

than the receiving of

or the being compelled

But

to give to the undeserving.

the"

if

he obeyed

advice of Socrates, he might find that he

them whom he had taught

to be useful to himself, and that they might
love him, when they perceived that he was no
would

at length love

longer unwilling to take care of them.

And

then, that which Socrates predicted, took place,

a/

[Liv

wg

xi^di/jjova

We admit,

s(p/XovVf

ds

therefore, that

ug u^psXifiovg

riya/Tra,

Xenophon adopted

the interchange of the words

but not blindly,

or from a false regard to eloquence, which,

by

the mere variation of words, the imitators of

ancient writers too eagerly sought.

if

we

rightly read

the

passage,

Certainly,

Xenophon

changed the terms, because he now wished to

intimate what would occur after these women
had understood that they would no longer be
and that he also now
a burden to the man
perceived some probable fruit of their labour.
For now they could really love him who, as a
;

parent, nourished them

he could affectionately

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

whom

regard them

There

he saw worthy of his care.

a similar passage in Dion. Cass.

is

xliv. sipiXTjcfan aurov ug -rars^a,

But

yerriv.

one, yet

Plato, Lysid.
(p/Xov

6 ds

av

x,cci rjya'xriffccrs

ug

lib.
sOgg-

more important, occurs

A. "O

p. '215.

rov dsofisvog,

fjjri

ouS"

d'ya'Truii^,

d3

fi'n

dya'Trcpro,

ovds ri ayct'^rwjj

It

<piXoT.

ds

oiv

clear that

is

in

irug

6 ds fiii

de-

(piXsTv

notes the sense of love, but in the word d/aTa/

implied

properly

is

Properly,

dyccTrav is to

of the

cause

the

make much

to admire, either for utility sake,

and then

reason,

regard
its

rise

but

(piXzTv

wish well, to cherish, to

to

denotes the love which takes

is

frequently without reason,

But
oc-

it

is used in instances
which no just cause of love exists. 'Aya-rctv
never applied to an improper love.

curs, at times, that

is

any thing,
or some other
of

naturally from the thing loved.

since love

in

pXsTv,

In the

New

(piXiTv

Testament, certainly, passages

and

occur in which

dya'Trdv

discriminately

but there are others in which

each

is

former
(piXiTv

used in
class,

and

its

XX. 46,

own proper

used in-

sense.

are those in which Jesus

dyai:dy

T^uToxa^sd^iav, for
c.

pXsTv are

and Luke

xi.

Of the
is

said

43, dya^itdn

rr]v

which the Evangelist says, in

(piXsTv TYiv 'TT^ojr.

But we must not

class

with these John xxi. 15, where, to the question, dycLitdg

//,g

-rXs/bv

roiiruVf

Peter replies,

vcci

THE SYNONYMS

94
xu^/g,

g-j

oJdag

pXu

on

And

6v

repeats the words of Peter,

thou so far love

me ?

our Lord twice

o/Xg/g

but

are never said,

God

is

For

Touc.

<piXiiv

i, e.

dost

however, worthy

It is,

New

of observation, that in the

men

//-

rh

"^zh^

Testament,
but ayacrav

and aywxav rovg dv^^wthe word (piXiTv the direct

said both ^/Xs/V

since,

in

mind is expressed, but in ayathe regard to any thing, as that which we

affection of the
'5r<5ty

venerate,

the part of

it is

but of God, both

spect to men,

if

^/Xs/V

men

ayarruai

rh

^iov

can be affirmed, with re-

they do rightly, John xvi. 27

and aya-rccv, when he wishes them good, and seeks

So, in John iii. 16, where ^
their salvation.
a/avTTj rou ^oS is
TTjffgv 6

^og

rh

it is

rightly said ^ya-

s<piXsi;

for it could not

recorded,

xoafjjov^

not

be affirmed of God, that he

^/Xg/V rbv xoff/xov,

world not being worthy of his love.

it is

used, therefore,

when God

is

the

Although
considered

men, yet an adequate cause is

stated, or, at least, made apparent from the
circumstances, v. c. John xvi. 27. In John xi.
3, 5, 36, speaking of our Lord's love to Lazarus, the words /Xg?!/ and dyu'rav are interchangas approving

ed.

For, in ver. 3, the sisters are recorded to

have intimated
ver. 36,

it

grief, said,

to Jesus,

ov ^/Ag?s,

that the

is

said,

/^s,

crw; gf/Xs/ aurCv.

u(j%nT;

and

men who saw

in

his

Whilst, in ver.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

5,
if

John adds

we

take

all

But

Ad^a^ov.

things into account, the reason

why

appear plain,

will
(lid

5g o 'Irjffovg rov

viya'nci

95

not write

s(piXsi

in this 5th verse

but

For

^i/avra.

John

this love

applies, not only to Lazarus^ but to his sisters,

with reference to

whom,

a/acrai/

was the more

For the sense implied,

correct expression.

that of friendship or delectation,

tiiat

kind of affection which

word

(piXsTv

though
i^aig is

when used

<piXia

and not of

involved in the

is

woman.

of a

is

For, al-

especially denotes friendship, (for

the special

word

yet

for love,)

(piXsTv is

never used of the friendship between the sexes,

unless

when

the idea of love

is

conjoined.

But, lest this should be considered as an

over-nice distinction,

example.

why
not

we

In Matth.

v.

will refer to another

43,

it

will

our Lord commands dyaTav

^/Xg/v.

For the

^/Xs/v,

towards

a virtuous

Love cannot be

quired, but favour or kindness may.

a duty of humanity

where there
32, 35.)

is

re-

Kindness

but love can exist only

congeniality of soul, (Luke

The Lord

feel kindly to

and

could

willing to be beneficent.

is

man

man but he miofht the

any man to whom God was

not feel towards a bad

dya'ff^v

be manifest

rovg s^^^ovg,

requires that

we

vi.

should

an enemy, and seek as much as

possible his benefit

but he does not require

THE SYNONYMS.

96

we should actually love bad men. On the

contrary, when they are reproved, who. from
that

an excessive desire
of the real object of
rightly said,
is

dyaTiiJv

But

in

living-,

(piXuv r^v

-^u^nv

John
ccvrov.

25,

xii.

it is

For he who

rrjv

-^v^tiv,

consults his real interest.

Luke

vii. 5,

the Jews are recorded to

have said, ayci-a rh

rished.

to preserve life, lose sight

'i'^vog tj/j^uv, z. e.

Concerning Mark

TTi^sv ccvrov,

x. 21,

favoured, che6 ds

l-^eovg iiyd-

But

interpreters have differed.

needless to invent a strange sense, as

it is

if dyu'Tr^v

meant, to address with bland and friendly words,

and then as nearly allied to it, to approve, to
praise, which would rather be the force of <piXsTv.
Besides, if our Lord had approved of the young
man, he would not have added, that one thing
yet more trying and difficult to overcome remained. For, when our Lord saw that he was
not ill-disposed, yet that he confided too

much

view to his benefit, he

which his covetousness

in his possessions, with a

added an admonition

to

would not submit. Jesus, therefore, riyd'rriffsv

that is, meaning kindly to him, warned
the rich man, that he might, at the same time,
impress more fully the minds of his disciples.
aurov,

Briefly then, in fine,

is

to regard

other

(pi^^iTv

in Latin, the

dlliffere,

is

one

is

to love,

dywr^v

amare, and the

which two words

differ in the

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

97

same manner. See Wetstein on John

and Ciceron. ep. ad Dolabell, ix. 14. ad
17.

ad Div.

4,

Attic.

47.

xiii.

now be

It will

xi.

plain

how

it is

that ^/Xs/v

and

have each their peculiar signification

that Q.ya'Trclv never means to kiss, p/Xg7v never to
ayd'K^y

acquiesce, or to cherish with reverence.

although

it

may

be doubted whether the radi-

cal sense of ^/Xs/v is oscular i^ yet

that this

For

meaning accords

it

evident

is

best with the notion

of love, but not with the notion of regard, in

which reason rather than feeling

the contrary, the impetus of love,

Amor.
is

ii.

438,) which exists in the

Lucian.

word

not found in the mind of him who,

acquiesces,

is

when he

satisfied

On

reigns.
(o^z-o^

pXiTvy

aya'Tra,

attains

that

which he thinks worthy of his desire. Lastly,

since, in the word a/ar^v exists the notion of
admiring and reverencing, he is said properly,
dya'xcfv^

who reverently

or receives any one.

or respectfully addresses

The

the Greeks use for love, viz.

cur in the

New
^

third

word which

s^ai',

does not oc-

Testament.

Aya^oi^yih*

These words are

dya^o'TrotsTv,

so nearly allied, that they

For the words of

which they are composed, s^ydZ^ss'^cci and -ffo/g/v,
scarcely appear to differ.

frequently are not distinguishable in sense

yet

THE SYNONYMS

98
they

For dya^eoysTv is properly fgyadya^ov^ good occupation, bene agere^ to

differ.

gstj^a/ TO

be doing good, whilst

good
is

dyu'^o'TrohTv

In the word

thing.

is,

to

a/a^os^/g/i/,

do some

the action

word

regarded, the notion of acting; in the

aya^omnTv something more

is

considered, the

doing some particular good. The same thing

is done both by o dya^osoym and 6 dya%'7roiuv, viz.
rb

But he who

dya%v.

is

said aya^o-ro/s/V

is

only

considered the author of good, while he dya^os^ys?;

dya^oTg.

while he

e.

2.

all

can eifect good; but there

aya^ocro/sTi/,

not

aya^osgys/v,

good works.

more

occupied with

not granted to

It is

who may

is

yois

that they
is

no one

occupy himself with

For, as in the verb hydZzG^ai

is

especially understood, the labour of ac-

complishing some object, so also dya^oz^yitv

is

doing good; but

to

to labour in
effect the

good

In the

but once,

for

New
1

which any one

Testament,

Tim.

aya^ocro/g/P is

vi. 18.

is dya^oi^yuv.

dya^oz^yzTv

It is

occurs

commonly ren-

dered henefacere, to be kind towards the poor.

But

it

is

questionable whether the notion of

beneficence

is

there expressed, and not rather

that of acting well

for the notions of

bene-

ficence and liberality are in the following words:

ivfMeradoTovg

mothy

mat

TtoivuvrAovg.

Paul commands Ti-

to exhort the rich not to boast in their

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

but rather to place their hope in

riches,

and therefore he wishes them

well,

99

-rXoyrs/v Iv

hyoig d'ya%Tg,

tO

works, to be sv^sra^orovg and

God

aya^oioyi7v to

do

be rich in gOod

Tcoivuvixovg

that

is,

beneficent and liberal; and thus to lay up a

real treasure to be enjoyed in another world.

hence be plain that there

It will

is

no reason

for attaching the idea of beneficence to /^osoyiTv,

On

the contrary,

d'ya%'7roizTv is

good, to do good acts, as opposed

in

Mark

to

xaxovTo/g/i/.

is it

this

4.

Luke

vi. 9,

to

33, 35,

some

bad acts. So

opposed

it is

Nor, in the former place in Luke,

ocTroXhcci.
exchanged for -^'^x^iv <rojffa/
But
is the example by which the general no-

tion of
in

iii.

to effect

d'ya%'7rois7v

Pet.

ii.

15,

is

Hence

illustrated.

it is said,

that Christians

repel calumny by aya^oTo/oDcrsg,

also,

may

by a steady
observance of those good deeds which are sub-

sequently enumerated.
^Toita

In

is

e.

Pet.

do well;

to

do good.

aya^ovro/sTi',

iXxus/v

The

iv. 10,

gut handeln,

bene facere^ gutes thun,

(sXxs;r}

cxj'iiv.

older interpreters had evidently no

difficulty

Lord

dya-

properly beneficence.

fine, dya^osoyiTv is bene a^ere,

to

.the

In

i.

with John
says,

vi.

little

44; in which passage

o\}Oi}g h-ovarai

sX^g/V -r^og

^as,

lav aij

THE SYNONYMS

100

For,

ra,rr,^, 6 Tg/x-vj/ag /xs, gXxi/tfr; avrov.

word

sXxig/v is

the

silice

rendered trahere, to draw, they

conceived that a notion of force was implied

in

it

at least, those

who defended

the notion of

the irresistible grace of God, thought so

God led those who were

as if

predestined to salvation,

even, notwithstanding their

own

reluctance, to

So even Calvin, following after

Augustine, wrote " Without controversy it is
deducible from the words of John, that the
hearts of the pious are so effectually governed

faith in him.

by divine
flexible

grace, that they follow with an in-

affection/

'This point

is

not easily settled, even by

cism of Mr. Titmann.

own

And, although they had

predilections.

tlie

acute

For instance, in

Calvin's Institutes, on which

this

Titmann

very passage of

seizes, in order

controvert the notion uf a constrained reluctan>.e

part of the elect,

was intended

it is

criti-

iMeu are too easily biassed by their

to

on the

evident that no such idea exists, or

to be expressed.

It

only

iniiiicnce o?i Ihe hearts of the pious.

arfirnis

It

an invincible

assumes the pious

turn and tendency, as co-existing with, coeval with, the influence

and

this excludes the idea of reluctance

and unwill-

ingness, co-exisiing with the operations of effective grace.

It s>huts
it to

bo difficult is
when, even with reference

out the idea of dragging altogether,

settle controversial points,

to the forte of terms, a writer of

such peculiar acuteness

misses the plain and direct meaning of his opponent.

there
in

is little

more afHiUied

Suiely

in this sentence, given, as

it is,

au insulated form from the writings of Caivin, than that

OF THE NET\ TESTAMENT.

101

authentic interpretation of those former

the

words given

whence it might be
dsdofj^svov
they meant only suv

in ver. 65,

gathered that
avTM

sK rou

fj^'n

-rrocr^og fj^ov,

fi

yet they adhered to this

notion of dragging, and, therefore, taught that

he to

whom God

gave the grace to come

him, was so controlled that he could not

and that

this

theologians,

was given only

who

God, regarding

resist,

to the elect.

Our

teach the universal grace of

it

which may be rethe word sXxvsiv there

as a thing

maintain, that in

sisted,

to

not necessarily the idea of a certain con-

is

on the resisting and unwilling, but only

straint

Which,

the notion of leading and attracting.*

" They

(i. e.

the predestined to

(Jod's purpose,

by

his spirit

life)

be called according to

working in due season;

^ei/^

through grace, obey the calling, they are justified freely, they
ure

made

the sons of

God by

adoption, they are

made

like

image of his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, they walk

religiously in good works ; and, at length, by God's mercv,
t;ie

they attain to everlasting felicity." Art. 17 of the Chuixh cf

Kngland.
a'".ove

m.'inn

Neither in the terms of this

article,

nor in the

extract from Calvin, does the idea exist,

which Tit-

condemns, with

of a divine

violence dragging a

justice, as unscriptural,

still

reluctant heart to a worship, half-

siacere and half involuntary.

'

Most

proi;ably

"T7n> ambulavit,
fe;ise also

in all

we

ivit,

T.

are right, in tracing tXxveo, Ixxm, to

ire fecit, deducit.

the cognate dialects.

CV. ildee, in the sense of vectigal, tribute

motions of the planets.

The same

It

has the san e

It occurs also in

drawn, and of the

general idea obtains

THE SYNONYMS

10*2

as

it

may be shown by many

Greek

writers, so especially will

to appear,

which

passages of the

the word

if

is

it

be made

compared with

<rugg/v,

synonym.

is its

In this respect the two words agree, that in

both of them there

of effecting that

own

place,

sense

sXxusiv,

the idea of drawing

is

some

should

thing,

; i.

moved from

follow another.

In

e,

its

this

(which very frequently means only

to carri/ along witli, as in Euripid. Ion. v. 750,)

is

used in John

far

xviii.

they appear to

may

10; xxi.

differ, that in

But so
the word ?vxu/v
6, 11.

be understood a certain drawing^ tending

to a particular point

in the

word

(r6^/v,

a conti-

nuous and uninterrupted movement of the thing

drawn. Wherefore, c^^onv is frequently used
of those things which are drawn perpetually
in Greek.

used of the weight caTising the scale to de-

It is

and of any attractive influence by which one thing

;
is caused to move towards another.
So also aXxej derived
from it, is the track or course along which any thing has
scend

passed, as the plough, a vessel, a serpent, an arrow.

The

word has reached us through the Gothic migration, in the German, umlch, peregrinus, (Walachia ?) and
our own word, retaining the primitive sense, to walk. This
oriental

etymology of Ikkvuv quite

justifies the author's critical re-

marks on

a-v^uv^

(lecessit,

he word

may

be referred to "T)D,
amovit, detraxit. In eXxJE/y, the original idea is, influit.

'J

ence causing motion

tion, aversion

T.

in au^itv the leading notion

is,

separa-

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

on the ground, Lucian,
655.

'Trs^i/Mhocvrsg

Merced. Cond.

i.

xai

s^iX'/tofxsvov

TPog dvdy%rjv dyo/j^svov

ffv^o/Mvov 7tal

103

s/jj'Tr&'Trrj'yorog,

3.
rjd'/i

Speaking

ogai/.

by the hook, and

CatapL 13. 635. ii. Luc.

of a man, as of a fish caught

dragged along. Conf.

i.

In the same sense,

56. 6*24.

Eurip. Rhes.

And

v. 58.

of a continual impetus, as
V. c.

Leonid. Alex. Ep.

'T^r}<fryioojv

i^aiffiovg ffvp/xovg,

Probably they
schleppen

differ,

cable to

some act

in

Greek

drawing

is

as

it is

ii.

it is

cu^s/i'

German

is

word; but

and

92.

17.

wTiters

peculiarly applic.

Sclilepptau

is

and

seldom found

when

the idea

of

The no-

combined with violence.

tion of violence
either

spoken

words zeihen and

as

except

writers,

used in

Aeschin. Axioch.

as our

so

is

yaXaZrigy vKpzruv,

Anal.

or work. (v.

ffv^/jbcc,)

is

(Tup/xoj

(Suii^h

xii.

when

only use this word

die Schleppe^

so

And,

(zerren.)

Gv^drjv

not necessarily inherent in

it

becomes attached

to

cuos/v,

inferred that the thing drawn, so follows

as with reluctance or resistance,

and as need-

ing the application of a stronger force.

different notion

is

The

very evident in John xxi.

For when the disciples, at their

Lord's command, let down the net, outc 'in auro

ver. 6, 8, 11.

ikxh^OLi

'Icynjsav

ccrro

afterwards came
(^ii^ovTsg

TO

h'r/.r-jov

rou 'rXri'^ovg rcov /^^(jpuv.

the others,

rojv /p/^uwD.

and then

And,

it is

finally,

But
said,

when

THE SYNONYMS

104

they were landed, Peter iiXxvcz rh dixTvov kiri rn^

Where it may be readily seen why, in
yng.

word

the second instance, John uses the

Nor can we say

c'oouv.

that both words are used con-

cerning the same thing in the same sense, in

Acts xvi. 19, I'i'k'/'Vffav sig rriv dyoodv; ActS xxi.
30,

siXxov alrov sjw rou hoov

x^ljjdg iig

rd xoirnoia

b?ag

xa,i

19,

id'ooov

-r5)5

ug

is

viii. 3,

(p'SkccTcrir

ActS

-^ro'Xsw;*

ii.

Xvii.

sXxovm

6,

tfugwv rs av-

Acts
6,

XlV.

ls\)0(iV s'^i

Certainly in the former pas-

rovg coX/raop/aj.

sages there

James

and ActS

^ji/a/>cas 'iraoththo-j
i^oi

not the notion of violence, but

only that of efficacy, which cannot be separated

Often they are said

from the idea of drawing.

to draw,

who would prefer

that the thing

which

they draw, as chains, calamities, &c. should not

follow.

The same form

and others
word there

whence

occurs in

kXxvsiv

rroda,

appears that in this

it

exists only the simple notion

of

drawing, independently of the additional idea

of violence, which

is

only adventitious, arising

Nor

out of the circumstances.

xus/i/ sig

rnv dyoodv,

of violence

dragging the

as

s/g '/.Ptrrj^tov,

if

man

is

in the

form

>w-

there the notion

the lictors were actually

to

the

forum,

any more

than in the Latin expression, in jus rapere.

Which
ilX'/.ViJav

appears sufficiently
ii;

Triv

dyoodi

irri

in

Acts xvi. 19,

rovg d^y^arug' xcci T^oca*

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

yaywric, uvrovg roTg

In

groocrrjyoTg, iiTov,

cuouv

fact,

never used in that sense in which kXxvuv

is

frequently

that

is,

sense in which

the metaphorical

in

is,

which

is

frequently used of those

or other

is

means

conform

their

to

way

and

For, as

i'kyMnv

who by speaking

may

that they

attract others,

means no more than

32

12. ver.

c.

used by others.

in

it

named

occurs in the above

it

passage in John, and in

it

105

so in these passages

to attract, to influence

the opportunity being given to bring over to a

side

which

not done by violence, (frequently

is

associated with the idea of drawing

by

but only

;)

So

the rational inflexion of the wilL

Lucian,
r7\v o'vp/v,

i.

Pise. 46. 613,

who

is

he

moved by

said of

to

him

dzoXou^/a?

L'TO rr^g

him who, under a

be true which

same manner,

in

and

i.

Epist.

ii.

21.)

Anim.

14,

i.

vi.

Hence

it is

said,

\J'r^^

which

is

right in the idea that

and Aristaenet.

is

used with refe-

it

rather

who

But

not surprising,
it

rn<i

(Conf.

31,

taken not by force but by guile.

;

ig

In the

is false.

rence to sporting, concerning animals

not so used

Her-

aXxo/^svoj,

ibiag i-TTi^v/Mtag s^sX-/,6/jjSvog Kui dsXsaZ^o/xivog.

Aelian. Hist.

'Trohg

false influence, be-

lieves that to

James

iXy.6[jjivog

the sight of riches

and indulgences proposed

mot. 74. p. 817,

said

is

in

if

means

are

(fvpsiv

we
to

is

are

drag

THE SYNONYMS

106

(whence

after;

Rev.

xii. 4,

eu^uv are

and

sX-z^nv

And,

or with.

and

cv^f/^cc

not used

Nigrin.

draw to,
the compounds of

For

to

but of drawing away,

to,

As Lucian
and

craoacj^g/v

elegantly says

aibujg xai d^irri xaJ

55, cra^acu^gra;

16. p.

bijcccioffvvrj.

mean,

they will not have

strictly,

driving, propelling.
1.

'iXxhuv

therefore, if

the notion of drawing

whilst in

Imffv^siv;)

are ap-

'Trsotffv^siv

plied to rivers or torrents, which with swollen

waters drag

down

opposing substances be-

all

fore them. (See Hemsterhusius

on

this

passage

of Lucian.)

Kamg'

Agree

in

But

TccXaiog.
it

is

this,

in

that

)/sog,

both

itoCkaiog

o/^^gs

rraXaiog,

Luke

that which has existed long,

iljjdrm rtaXam,

sense nog
xa/vov

that
2. e.

opposed

to

there are two ideas;

used of that which was originated some

time back, as

is

are

is

Matth.

opposed

which comes

ix.

v.

39, or of

and been
16.

To

in use,

the

to the last xamg.

first

That

in the place of a thing

was formerly, and has not yet been used,

new ; vsog is that which has only lately been

originated, recent.

That in the New Testament this notion of

each word is distinctly preserved, appears from

We

the references given in Lexicons.

adduce a few instances:

Matth.

ix.

16.

will
17,

OF THE
ifjbdriov

TocXcx.iov

vaXaiovg

NEW TESTAMENT.

'TrXTj^M/jjO,

xaivovg,

(coiif.

Our Lord does

36).

But

ohov %(imi.

Mark

ii.

not say

vsov

oivov

x,cciv6v

21

daxovg

Luke

v^ovg dffxovg,

V.

nor

he says,

in Mattli. xxvi. 29,

yhw^ihoL ry\g d[M'7iXo'j xa/vov,

other

107

because he refers to w-

wine than that which he poured out then to

his friends, not recent but different. For, as in the

word

xa/i/Jg is

expressed that which has not been

must be other and different from that which had been formerly. And
we also, in speaking of wine, draw the distinction between neic wine and recent wm^. Hence,
long,

follows that

it

the yXusoai xaivai in

it

Mark

xvi. 17,

not formerly used by the

Acts

add

ii.

4, called

s^'^^a/,

tongues

e.

i.

Apostles, are, in

other tongues.

to this the notion of superiority;

Some
but

it

does not necessarily exist in ytamg, although

it

frequently arises out of the opposite term

often that which

is

Yet the

worn by use

by age.
ways better than

the older.

in the formula

%amv

viov

and the

for

corrupted

is

Ttcimv

are not al-

Therefore, neither

dfM'irsXcv

yswri/j.a

does the

notion of superiority exist absolutely, nor in

these:

Tca/v^i

dia^rj'/.7i,

Heb.

viii.

8.

13;

ix.

15,

John xiv. 34.

But Tcccmg and vsog are used interchangeably
with the same word. For instance, y^aivr, ^/cc^j^xtj
and vsa diu^'/jKYi Heb. xii. 24 /camg dv^^wrog Eph.
xaivri svToXrjj

THE SYNONYMS

108
ii.

15;

23. et

iv.

though,

vsog

uv'^pwrog Col.

xa/vT] bia^r,%n is

had

to the old

this

passage called

iii.

10.

But

al-

always used, regard being

covenants
via,

it

once only in

is

as a recent covenant,

only lately established, of which the Jews were

now
in

Epist.

For

place

this

xri(fav'7rog

is

avrhv,

On

Creator.
vsa xriffig

15,

to

one who

one which

vBog

but

Eph.

self,

speaks of the

evident that regard

it is

oi)f^oM<7tog

Colossians,

to

when he had been wont

av^jwcrog,

in

For the same reason Paul,

participants.

ii.

there

is

is

the

had
xamg
the

especially

is

from the former

dvaxaivovfisvog

renewed

to say, xa/vos*

avayiwridig

differs

veo^

s/Kova

roO

image of

his

jcccr

after the

the

the contrary, Paul does not say,

?ca/v>3

15,)

(2 Cor. V.

15.

17

because in the word

the notion of

the difference of which

csor^s,

Gal.

vi.

xr/V/g it-

newness.

we speak may be

And
ob-

served in the use of the words amxamlv and

dvaveovv, which occur in the New Testament.
They are both rendered, to restore, to renew
For who does not see in 2
yet they differ.
Cor.

iv. 16,

sgu^iv dv^^uTog dvaxutvovrai ^/xe^a xai

that the meaning is different from what

have been, if the Apostle had written
would
it
dvocvsourai. On the contrary, in Eph. iv. 23, it
was correct to write c' xvsouSai roJ 'jviiiiMari ro\j
voog u/xuv.
For if in this latter passage he had
jj/xsia,

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT,

written

avaxa/voCJ^^a/,

we

109

should not gather what

know, that a new spirit should

dwell in those who had put on the oca,mg av^^wcrog
but there would have been a tautology, as apBut in the former
pears by what follows.
he wished us

to

place, dvaxumuTcci

rj/J^s^'^

xal

rj/jje^cf,,

does not

mean

man is daily born anew, but that

it daily acquires new strength, which previously
so that though the outer man perish,
it had not
that the inner

there

is

no need

properly in

for the soul to despond.

Rom.

xii.

he writes

*2,

rvi dvaxaivdJast rou voog vfMuv

^asra/xo^^ouo^s

for this dvaxaivuffig is

not the work of an hour, but of a whole

wherefore also baptism,

life

ro Xovr^hv rng dvaxa;vw-

Luther says, must be brought into

as

tfsojj,

But

operation throughout the whole of

life.*

more easily said than explained. Even the

of Luther will not make it the less obscure.
The effect of a specific and terminated act may be realized
throughout life; but how the act of baptism, which is com*

This

great

Is

name

pleted at the instant, can be continued through a lengthened

period,

is

yet a difficulty calling for elucidation

T.

THE SYNONYMS

ilO

CHAPTER
An

V.

synonyms is pecuand necessary, in cases where they

accurate observation of

liarly useful

This

occur in juxtaposition.
writers, but

is

two accounts

worthy of notice in

especially

the books of the

New

first,

this conjunction of

fact occurs in all

Testament, and that on

because some think that

synonyms may be neglect-

ed in studying the writings of

authors

and, secondly,

that

less elegant

many,

in those

places in which this accumulated junction of

synonymous terms occur, have been accustomed to look for some emphasis or ornament.
Both opinions, however, are false. For it is
that

plain,

guage

men who

have acquired the lan-

that they speak rather

by custom than by

more frequently make use of particular

terms, which, taken together, go to express the

study,

universal or general notion present in their

minds

whence

it

happens that the

full

force

of their meaning must be gathered from a close

consideration of the whole

which they have used,

notion about ornament

synonymous terms

collectively.
is

And

the

equally unfounded.

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

ill

For, as the most elegant writers abstain from

that kind of

ornament which

so also should

more simple

we

is

take care,

writers,

merely verbal,

lest,

we conclude

reading

in

that

words

cognate as to a certain similitude of meaning,

For

are introduced merely for ornament.

is

common enough

to

it

rapid writers to adopt a

verbose style, which gratifies the idle and

list-

less reader, but gives disgust to a better taste.

But more elegant authors never

except

its

sense

is

fitted to

insert a word,

impart some

new

view to the subject; and

which pleases, because it leads the mind to con-

light or additional

sider the

same point

in various

ways

so that

the same topic, presented in different aspects,

mind of the reader dift'erent

ideas respecting it.
But less artificial writers,
who are chiefly anxious to be understood by
up

calls

in

the

their readers,

often use sentences of similar

import or synonymous terras near together,

not for the sake of ornament or variety, but
that their readers

may more

fully

apprehend

the whole idea which they wish to convey."

" I

conceive this to be the primary source of that parallelism

which

is

so celebrated

among the Hebrew writers,

especially

what mode, or by what laws,

it is reg^ilated, has not been shown with sufficient accuracy.
For that which Herder has written in his work, {yom Geist
in their poetical books, but in

THE SYNONYMS

112

Hence not only among the New Testament

writers, but among the more ancient Greek
authors, and especially Homer, many passages
occur in which synonymous words or sentences

appear together; yet in vain would you seek

any intentional ornament, except that

clearness which flows naturally from an accurate description of particular things, from
which a general notion is derived. Yet they
give pleasure, although not inserted by the
for

author with that view; for although the enjoy-

ment derived from mere ornament, would be

lost if the writer abstained

from the ornament,

yet readers would not the less distinctly ap-

prehend

his

meaning.

But, in passages of this

kind, the pleasure arises from this,

writer has exhibited the

that the

matter by various

terms of description to the eyes of the reader,

not merely

to.

please him, but to state

more

own way of thinking about it.

Before we demonstrate this by examples
from the New Testament, it may be well to

precisely his

adduce a few instances from the writings of

Homer, which will clearly illustrate my meaning

an.l of the

many

that immediately suggest

d^r hebr. Poesie, Tom. I. 0pp. p. 34. sgq.J has well explained

the beauty and force of such parallelism, but

on the inquiry into

its

nature.

lias

not entered

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE
themselves.

parallel cases

may

tament, [Mvuv^a
saep. n'Mg

475.

a.

d'

vvsc'^iro

o-^l^iriXiffrov.

/xaXa

zarsdu xai stI xvicpag

yirjdsrai

zksaiozi.

rid'

Iliad.

325.

(3.

vr/triffrj

Iliad. 7. 92. ai<Syja dsidiorsg

sgrU ib. 242. aiSXrirog

ovd'

7J/j,j3ooTsg

488.

ib.

^dvzTv

xa/

^ai/a-roi/

smrsXXsai
ayjjvwff,

sTvysg,

y/5s

ibid.

ttotimv

Iliad,

o-^i/j^ov

ovsidsa ttoXX'

fMoi

^.

540.

287. s^wp zal

yJjoijcc

Iliad.

Iliad,

61.

x.

27.

/3.

zosicfgoov rs ysvi^rai.

Iliad,

s'Triff'TrsTv'

sTiff'TrsTv,

xsXsvsig'

v.

s.

Iliad,

y^^^^s

112.

/3.

Tes-

416. et

Iliad.

dvovrarog,

Iliad,

y.al

'ror/Jbov

-/.a}

TtQLt

New

Iliad, a.

hriv.

which

to

be found in the

xarsvzv(^sv.

Iliad.

those

select

our/

'TTZo

rjsXiog

[jfiyct,

xat

will

113

220. 244. 319.

337.

v.

x^ab'tri

(It

yj.

52.

//.u^w

rat ^u/x^s

only occurs

in the Iliad in this instance, but in the Odyss.

3,348.

238.

fjj*

i[jji^uv

'Jrokiijjov

Iliad.

aiosiTM. Iliad. ^.

553.

a.

of

Iliad.

499.

33. our

Iliad,
X.

(Sfiaiv 'iyi

12.

v.

250.

Wz[i>nv(xv

(p^sg}, fMyids

s'/oo/iai o-Srs

<ss

'TToko'ld*

X?]^rj

/xsraXXw. Iliad,

emphasis

no ornament nor any paryet we deny that this union

is
;

synonymous terms

futile.

dXzyll^o). Iliad,

In these passages any one will per-

ceive, that there

ticular

hriioTYiroi..

7ict.i

/xd;^(T^a/.

Vibl

h<p6^r^iv,

oW

60.) our/ /xsrargsTo//

(T,

is

altogether otiose and

Similar instances occur

among more

elegant writers, which need not be enumerat-

ed
*

;^

and they are found

We may

also in the sacred

subjoin a few passages, not dissimilar to tl^o^e

I

THE SYNONYMS

114

In following out, therefore,

writings.

synonyms

cussion on the

New

of the

ment which we have begun,

this dis-

Testa-

must seek
from passages of a similar kind, some examples
in order to demonstrate what course, in our
w^e

opinion, should be taken, to ascertain the real

mind

of the writer, and to define accurately

the force of his

synonymous expressions.

Paul writes in 1 Tim. ii. 2.

yjw jSiov didyufj.sv and correctly
;

be desired

/va ^'^s/xov %clI

for both are to

two words agree in this,

there any thing of tumult,

for the

that in neither

is

perturbation, agitation or solicitude

differ.

he

He is rt<^'oyjog who makes

r,^z(J^og

is

who

That
no

excites

and that

which we are about

t;f

Xeiiophon

cra.fji.a.'ru.

mor.

1.

ifroocav

3.

5,

5,

3,
xa.)

is

in

is na-oyjoi

others

not disturbed by

evidently used in this sense

The

to speak.

ku)

following occur in

a'la^ia'rcCj

yneg, 13. 11,

10. 6, uvor.TOJV xui pt-^oxiv^vvtiJV,

ih. 2. 5. 3,

af/.fi;^eiveov,

'X'a.ioivB-'ivTcts

The word

desiderium,

Me-

9, a^^iiov ku) uvu<piX\i tov (juf/uTOi, ih. 1. 2. 64,

Kcci ufj(.a.h75j ih.

'

disturbance

kux.i(Ttu,

Lyc

KCiKaJ* KKt avai-S^iyv,

yet they

no disturbance

therefore

life

which

is ^f,aos

'^a-oyjog is

others.^

himself free from agitation

is

or disturbance.

which

rjccj-

uf/,\kiiecy

fjcaSovTUij

xc.i puBv/uiiav,

opposed

ib.

to ecroii^ivrov;

1. 4.

navyux

aiul

xui

is,

is

derived from pt/n (^^ovit, appelivi*,

therefore, vifa

tranqiullu, p/acida

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

in

Pet.

Hence,

4,

iii.

r}(rv^a(siv is

to rest, to

yjgv^iOD Tvev/xarog.

do nothing; and

who make no reply, nor conas Luke xiv. 3. Acts xi. 18.

tradict further,

xxi.

and 2 Thess.

14,

those

Tjav^/ag

fxi^'

affairs of others.

with the

silence,

Tim.

11,

ii.

12,

"Uoi'Mog is

Cor. xiv. 34.

common
;

It is

forms

compared with

is

himself quiet,

is

others.

And

hence

We

in both senses.

i.

will

it is

mV? and

have spe-

the same source

'/nyiy.'y;

does not

a.i-

often used

and wishes,
"Hoiao;

is

quiete

from

itudus, vacuus, evacuaius, cava, spelunca.

is

words, eremite, Ilerm'd.

conveyed by

free froin

add a passage fiom

rather a pleasui-aide repose.

nnV'

e.

5^(ru%/oj is

placid lite accoi'uing with the desires

From

v.^e

often referred to external thingy

fear or other disturbing passions,

rjos/xih,

riOifxaTog,

although in these words the notion of

he who

fruens

seldom used; but the

^s/^a,

have the meaning which

tranquillity

noy

evident

frequently used in the sense of

ri<s\jyja is

%/x/^e;)/,

dpov

sccvtcov

(Aristid. p. 494.)

'Kz^^iaoydZiro,

7iai iJjTibh

Tjffv^tctv Tiyi

cified

rov

he heard drdzrojg <?rs^i'7raTsTv, [xr,oiv

dXXd 'XSPiz^yccl^o/Mvovg, i. e. meddling

hydZpixivovg^

more

Paul exhorts

12.

iii.

soyd'i^sa'^ai,

whom

sff%'ovrag,

for

-/.at

said of those

it is

that

roX) 'jr^cfsog

115

is

from annoyance, the

derived

And

l^-ziftos,

desert,

rather that of vacuity of

q^uiet

and the

the idea, thereCore, which

of solitude

T.

care.s,

is

freedom

THE SYNONYMS

116
Luclan,

Amor.

ii.

29. 429. i/w

error

who

They

Troad. 649.)

rljnd, Orest. 1*217.

say that

^^iJ^og is

i^nhasai

di ri(sx)yj\

same

the

are in

as

rif^^og.

But Luther elegantly renders the words of

Paul in the passage in question

i^uhe,

ein geruhigcs

For although we also use

and stille, still, promis-

itnd stilles Lehen.

the words

ruliig,

cuously; yet that a similar difference exists

between them is made evident by those formulae, which necessarily require the one rather than the other.
fXjdysff^ar

Among
we gave
to

it

On

rrhy.ziJ.oi

xal bia<pood rig

Oi

oXiyct

/xsr

^s

'ToXi/xog

Xeysrat.

And

Iliad,

fi^ffi,

t^^^YJi
'/.ai

a.

must add

177.

891.

Eustathius says,

Xst,s<fiv,

iJ.ayj66a(xz\(/i

/-^sv,

srri

rb

od)rr[

rj

raiv rivd^uv

avvncjSoXrj,

f.cay//xou

'!:oXs[MiZsiv r,hs

view of Eustathius

is

ds 6

Wacci. (v. 304.)

ca^ara^wv xat
xat ro

r\

i/ys [xayzrai fisv rig

Xoyo/xayia di^Xor xai avrhg

tj

yo7i(fifxov ds ojds

this

Homer,

1% cra^aXX^Xoi/ S'/jXo/'ro auri,

raTg

sffrt

xai Xoyoig, ug xai

xa/ aXXwj

rs'

former passage
r\

We

[hdyid^cii.

[jdyjii

TToXs/xoi rs ihdycii rs,

<Kotrirrig

T.oksfiot.

the former quotations from

'roXs/jL{Z,nv r,cs

the

/xdy^ar

ttoXs/xs/V*

xaipov

/xuys5^ai.

confirmed by

other writers, and by the Scriptures especially.

Paul

in

2 Tim.

ii.

23,

commands

rcg

fjLu^dg

OF THE
Zriryiffsig

way

NEW TESTAMENT.

TaoatnTv, on yinaxii [jjd-^ag.

exhorts Titus,

lie

xa/ ycviokoyicig,

xocl igztg

In 2 Corinth,

vii. 5,

In

%a;/xayaj

same

tlie

9, [MUioag hi

iii.

the

117

(^rjrjjtfs/s,

i/o/O/Z/taj 'rsPif(STcc(ro,

a/ T^oj^-v aa;/a/

are not

bodily calamities, but the actual contentions

with which

the

Compare John
26,

(Exod.

ii.

vi.

Apostle had to encounter.

52

2 Tim.

13. D^iJ3.)

and

bats,

which take place

The word is so

collision.

certainly in Rev.
go/A^a/a rou

6T6[x,c/-og

Act.

way

the

in

com-

of actual

used, metaphorically,

16, ^oXs/x^trw /ast auroov

ii.

'j^rrj.

vii.

on the con-

nJ?.s/a<og,

are said of battles and

trary,

'TroAiiMi'^iiv

24

ii,

(comp.

V. 12.)

But

rf

it is

never applied to verbal disputes.

So

then they agree, that they denote

far

cro'Xs/xo;

and

actual collision

by
any

contest, contention, fio-htin<j:: but

are

'xokiUjit))

restricted to

physical force,

it^^x^

contention

mind

thouo^h

it

of

come not

the actual struggle

it is

and

[jjdyjG'^ai

as

well as

to blows.

is

apply

to

body,

even

In the former

expressed: in the

latter,

sufficient to have the idea of such conten-

For in the word

not properly and necessarily

tion as often leads to blows.

(jjdyi.s'^cci

the

there

notion

is

of physical collision,

from one passage of Homer.

Xrl<S^

/>-!'

our;

'iyo)yi

(La-^^ooiiicci

as appears

(Iliad, a, 298.)
i'ivixa

xov^rii.

THE SYNONYMS

118

of

original notion

RtTon2;ly suspect tliat the

word was that of impetus, or force by

which one rushes on another ;^ wherein the
this

Hence

verb has only a middle termination.

/y^a%5<7^a/

T/vi

simply rendered,

violently against

and

/Aa%a/

177.

C6,

IxdyjG^a!
ToXsas?!/

The

any one,

as

be borne

to

is

Iliad.

329.

^,

are often joined as in the Iliad.

iPidig

Xenoph. Hier.

891.

have a wide

i.

and

38. A^a%?3

signification.

and

'rro'KiiJjoc

are restricted to the idea of war.

Titmann

suspicion of

is

well founded

and

this in-

stance again ilhistrates the valiie of etymological inquiry.

The

original

collision,

form of

than

f/^oix'^

^okiftes.

is

which according to the form of

with

drops; the

D^DI^;
riation

first radical,

it

to slay,

directly that of actual

all

and dimicare

nocAiit in

Latin

from p73J,

to swjife

and takes the formative

Q;

"Witli a slight va-

pf"''c^(iipns.

and hence

,*

Hehrew words beginning

occurs in Chaldee J^nD ^"'^

in Arabic ?>^ fidit

have

HDD-

percutrentes

more

It is derived

nHD'

/u.a;^Ki^et,

percussit and

a sword, mactarg

From the same source, we

and knocks through the Gothic. Un-

to fight.

questionably, therefore, the original notion ai fiaxv

is

a blow.

has reference rather to the general confusion of an

extended contest, and is probnbly derived from 77^, con.
voXifjuuv

fudit. miscuif.

WBS very natural

It

for

simply expresses the idea of contest by

in a fi.curative sense for every

natural course of language.

more complex

idea,

proper meaning.

kind rf

'X'oX'.fAiiv

^;^:>j,

which more

collision, to be

conflict.

This

used

is

the

originallv expressed a

and has been retained by custom in

Phavorinus, however, sfvs

its

TeXtui^tiv rXt

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

TO axjTo

(J'j/Ji^v^or

The

(ro

cur, is Philip,

2.

ii.

iv (p^ovovvTsg.

The word

once in the

New

fco-^v^og^

p^a^aj/, /Va

dhrriv ayd-rrriv i^ovrsg, (jvfj.-^v^oi, rb

Testament.

For

same

jffo-^v-^og

ivot/ ;

It differs

4^X0/ who are not

the same thing,

The

Iffo'^'v^of.

cu/^-^y^o;,

epistle,

to think the

Gv^i/.-^v^og,

who

from

animated or moved

is

be of one mind.

thing, to

but

occurs

<iJ/J:.^lv^og

which Paul used in the same

20.

mind.

/mu t^v

TLXTj^uigare

rriv

in the

(ppovovvng.^

sv

passage in which these expressions oc-

TO auro O^ovrjTi,

ii.

119

same

They may be gv^u,For often men think

diifer materially

same with

are the

as

0/ 7-6

to
auro

But we must inquire into the diiference between rh aurb ^^ovg/vand rb h ^^ovsTv. For
it cannot be credited that the Apostle would
have so rashly introduced a mere tautology.
Once only he writes rb h <p^ovsTv, and that in this
passage. Six times he writes rb ahrb <p^ovsTv. Now,
TO ahrb (p^ovm is to have the same opinion, to
So in
feel, to wish, to seek the same thing.
(poovovvrsg.

Romans xii.
Rom. XV. 5,
11, rb ahrb

16,

aXXj^Xo/g*

And

Philippians,

rh ahrb

and

dXXrjXovg

itg

(p^ovsTrs, s/gTjvsusrs.

cror^iTv %a\6'i,
;

ahrb

rb ahrb (poovsTv

Epistle to the

reading

rb

iv. 2,

(p^oviTv^

rb ahrb

c.

if

2 Cor. xui.

again, in the

iii.

that

cpPoviTv

(p^ovovvrsg'

16, r'2 ahriZ

is

the true

xv^/m.

We

need hardly attempt to demonstrate that this

formula is used by other writers in the same

THE SYNONYMS

120

But

sense.

only,

The
/v,

to

rh

(p^oviTi/,

agree in

one thing

to wish

is

seeking one

thing only.

Apostle wishes the Philippians

ro ahrh <p^o-

not to disagree, but to regard each

2. e.

other with the same mutual love, to be unanimous, seeking one thing. For, if each sought
something different, they could neither be

nor would they have

6-Jij.-^-oyjjt^

rr^v

ahrnv dydrrnv.

But the one thing [rh h) which he wished

them all to mind, he explains in ver. 4, im ^^
iccxjTuv

He

syMdrog

wishes, therefore,

vouvrag,

while

dXXd

CTiO'Trouvrsg,

all

all

xa/ rd ers^uv sxaffrog.

ffv,'j.'y\/{j^ovg

rd

avTU)v

if

would certainly

benefit of the others, they

Briefly,

same mind

and

in

mutual

then, ro auro
;

(ru/x4'u;)/ov

live

love.
is

(p^ovzTv^

gJm/, is to

thing, to be of accordant
is

agreed in one

all

each should expressly seek the

that

in concord

For, if

they could

ver. 20,

^r,Tovffi,

not be accordant; but

thing,

(ppo-

minded or sought one thing

only, the convenience of each other.

0/ crai/rss

Jmt, to

have the

to

think the same

mind;

rh

<poon7v,

not to differ in council and purpose, but to

seek one and the same object.

CTCkdy^va'

oJjcrio'jjOi.

In the same clause of the Epistle to the

Philippians, ver.
oljiTioijjot,

as

is

1,

we

read,

s'/

rrXriPutffars /xou 7r,v yct-odv.

stated

in the

common

T/]/a a-Tr'Ady^va,

If

it

were

xai

true,

lexicons to the

NEW TESTAMENT,

OF THE

New

Testament, that

phorically

for

cfkrLyjyai.

mercy,

121

put meta-

is

commiseration,

Paul

would have written tautologically. But that

the word has a wider meaning, and that the
notion of mercy only attaches to it adventitiously, will
sXsovg,

appear from Luke

and Coloss.

Certainly, as

more noble
^(f-TrXdy^^vor

'jtXayy^jia^

7]

properly signifies the

<r-7rXdy^m

viiicera,

(S'TrXa.yxvcc

(j'TrXdy^'ja cixri^/j^uv.

1*2,

iii.

78,

i.

the heart, lungs, liver, &c.

xaph'ia^^ V\^hence, iuS'-rrXayy^Joi

are terms for

and

'^fl'-

so are all

fortitude,

these terms figuratively assumed to express the

more vehement feelings and passions, which are

believed to arise more immediately from these
Hence co-Xa^p^vot %p/j,aheiv T^hg hyhh
viscera.
Aristoph. Han, v. 868, and cciviav G^Xdyyvov Sophocl. Ajac. V. 995. A nd thus, the ac^jXay/yot are
those

who

are destitute either of love and bene-

volence, or of hate and anger, wg

V'rd^^ovre;,

zccrd to

(jjTihh

sXsQUVTsg /MTidha, fjjsn

71

sTccivovvrojv

(Galen.
V.

ii

<piXovvrsg,

-^syovrc/jv,

yj

Luther renders

we

dvak'^rirot

et

/j,ri

oXug (poovTiZovng

Plat.

ri

oj^sXovvtmv,

iii. c.

4.

Tom.

say herzlos^ heartless.)

c-TtXayyvc/.

Barmherzigkeit and

firid'

d^/xoujTwv,

deDopn. Hippocr.

0pp. 316. ed Lips,

Xi^oi

hbuv 6vvctXyovv.

'iyjiv

sXkvg,

H'TcXdyxva

by

o}-a.ti^(iuv

herzliche
herzliches

Erharmen.

There is then a diiference between C'zXdyxjjci

and oi7iri^,'j.oi The former denotes some vehe-

THE SYNONYMS

122

inent affection or regard,

towards children, which

ffro^y/j,

as of parents

most intense

is tlie

af-

and on which account chihiren are

12 and often

fection,

called d'K'kayyjia in Philem. v.

The

elsewhere.*

latter

properly denotes mercy,

a sense of grief for the distresses of others.

These words of Paul should be rendered, therefore, If ye have any true love towards me,
if any mercy.
Luther writes, herzliche Liebe
vnd Barmherzinheit.
Let us now speak of the synonyms,
'ikiog'

oizriofiog'

and

O/xTi/^iiv

o/xrs/^stv

sXesTv'

olzn^fjiog

denote merely

passion, a sense of unhappiness for the

o\\\QY^^

den

but

sXsoe, sXgs/V,

denote the desire of relievIn these

latter, then,

something more than in the former,

he wdio

is jXawv

easily

the
*

iXiog is

This

is

is

enough
less

prompt
up

called

to

the

which

apply.

Pity

in the soul,

frequently to be

perhaps assumed too

there

viz

additional notion of beneficence, of aid,

is

of

ills

harmherzig seyn. Barmherzigkeit^ Mitlei-

ing the miserable.

is

com-

easily.

met

but

with.

The Apostle

uses

a strong expression indicative of his love to Timothy, but

would not follow from this, that the word which he uses
Theophylact thus parameans children, or, my child
it

plirases the passage

ecvrnvy
o^tj^y)

uXXa

<ra ifia

T'.^i^'igtu.

the word.

T.

Msra

i.ya.'prtis 'hi^xi

olItov,

fiaXXov

ffTXay^va.^ outoj yito ahrov KyetTu

Vt

oIk

xeci Iv

t?

See Suicer's Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus on

OF THE

LXX

The

but for

New

and p;^

and

sXnTv

has

it

The same
sXico

xai

relieve

able

are put, in the

(^ski'/i[jj06\)vri)

o/xtsiotjcoj

ov

but

o/xr/^/AoV,

never.

sion only,

who

he

compared

av c/xri/^w,

He who is

the miserable,

but he

may be made on that

passage, Rom. ix. 15, IXsrytfw

with Exod. xxxiii. 19.

to

Hence

oJxrei^nv.

observation

very remarkable
av

sXsog,

Testament, for those benefits which are

bestowed on the miserable

ov

123

TDn by

frequently renders

Om

also, sAiog

NEW TESTAMENT.

6 iXso!'!/,

and does

limits himself to his

The

is said, olTtni^st.

if

strives

he

is

compas-

Latins ap-

pear to express both notions by the words misericors

and misericordia, unless we are correct

distinguishing miseratio and misericordia,

that the
latter

first

with

agrees with

gXsog.

The

be thus rendered, "

to succour.

will succour

tainly according to the

for the

as

o/W/g/xo'sand ohrog^ the

passage, therefore,

I will pity

in

whom
mind

Hebrew words have

whom

I pity."

may

1 will

Cer-

of the Apostle
rather the sense

of certain and perpetual favour and Divine aid,

than of absolute will in the distribution of bless-

But they err greatly who think that they

deduce from these words, that God wills not
to save some.
For what follows, a^a ovv oh roZ
^sXovTog, ovds rov r^s^ovrog, dXXa rou sXsouvrog ^eou,
ings.

has certainly not the force, that even though

any one

desires the favour of

God, he cannot

THE SYNONYMS

1*24

attain

God

if

it,

has negatived (noluerit) that

he should attain

who

our desire;

to his benignity, not to

mercy
our own works

receive benefits, therefore, from the

and clemency of God, not

Tou ^iXovrog,

for

Therefore,

or deservings.
OX)

case of one

tlie

gives a benefit, the accepted benefit must

be referred

we

For, in

it.

ovoi

aXkct

rov ro's'^ovrog,

^sov, scil. ro ^doia/xa;

that

the

is,

rightly said,

is

it

sXsovvrog

70\j

a cpn-

;:^a5/(r/xa,

ferred benefit; cannot be referred to our

or merit, but to the

thence

he

it

will.

have

comes

It

because

from

whom

does not follow, then, as some would

God

who

v/ishes cannot obtain,

forbids the success of his prayer;

but rather, what

we may,

for

he favours and benefits

that even he

it,

mercy of God,

eff'ort

most

is

true, that labour as

by the grace of i3od we obtain

the promise, and not by our own merit.
It
it

is

comes from God; he gives to the unworthy;

some rejoice in it, some receiv^e it not. These
fail

of the promise, because they seek

the right

way

voiMov dixato<fuvr}g

s^

spyoiiv vo/j^ov,

i^^svTsg,
offvvTjv,

fjjij

/V^a'/^X

ovx s^^acs, or/

ver.

31

v6,mv

ovx.

t'/c

those ovx

it

not in

BiTtaioffuvyig,

jriarsug,

rikirnikvoi,

ug

uXX' ug

dXX' sXs-

diu)X0VTsg dixuioffvvrjv, xaraX/x/3avoL/<r/ djxui-

dixccioffvvrjv ds ttiV

so had

biujy.m

mercy

{sXisT)

ex TiffTsug.

that those

Has then God

whom

he willed

not to save, ought to perish notwithstandinodiU)ycuj(Si rrjv dixaioffvvrjv.

Certain

it is,

they do not

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

obtain what they wish, because
'iyj)\j<st\\

dXX'

the true

'Q\Kov [j.h 3s&D

Had

xccr s'^/yvcom.

same

yet, at the
sXiouvrog,

oh

di7cato<fvvri,

125

they sought

they would have obtained

time,

ou

t^v

it,

d?.Xa roZ

rgs^/ovrog,

the ^ift woukl have been of God.

have often wondered, therefore, that those who

hekl the notion of an absolute decree,

had recourse

to these

their opinion.

words

have

for the support of

Certainly they have so under-

stood the passage.

It matters little, therefore,

whether we seek or disregard the favour of

God, if God only regard us

one may strive and seek to

yet he cannot attain

This

it.

tived

it

is

it

reason and true religion

sage in question.''
^

All this

is

is
;

however any

attain salvation,

unless

assuredly true,

but this idea

for

if

God
God

has v/ilied

has nega-

repugnant
nor

Certainly

is it

it

to right

in the pas-

becomes every

very accurately and judiciously stated.

man of
that man

But

Which of the
Calvinistic divines asserts,
seeks to be made holy,
and that a holy God has put a negative on his desire ? The
great body of those divines who are advocates for the sovethe author

is

fiyhting with a

straw.

reignty of God's grace, which man's natiiral Jieart impugns,

and who wear the epithet, Calvinistic, as an opprobrious

brand, go no further than the statement of Titmann ; and
take the same view which he does, of the passage in question.

There

hcive

been rash assertions on

tlie

subject of a

decree of reprobation, but they were e^ er confined to a few.

THE SYNONYMS

1*26

one versed in the language,

they establish the

that

fact,

^Jvui

how

inquire

to

rmg

signifies

is wanting.
what they wish. For the word
But what thiit is, which oux Isn rmg, they have
Luther renders it, So liegt et
not exphiined.
nun nicht an dem, 8fc. Beza, " Election is not
s<5ri

He

of him," &c.

completes this impersonal

by adding, rashly, the notion of elecwhich was wanting. 1 say rashly, for in

formula,
tion

the whole chapter there

nothing said of the

is

election of the schools, but only of the gift of

divine blessings,*^ especially of calling to the

It would be AvfcU, however, if the great body of Pelagians
and Arminians could be i>roui;ht to adopt cordially the view
There would then be little material
laid dowii in the text.
difference on this difficult point, within the limits of the
Christian community. The grand testing question to man's
proud heart is : Is God a sovereign from first to last in

the gifis of grace, in the ro tkuiv

^

Titmann has hardly been

vine word.

T.

just to this passage of the di-

mooted is, who are the

To illustrate this point,

It is clear that the point

Israel, tlie tIxvcc

rod

B-ioV, ver. 7> 8.

an example is given in the case of Jacob and Esau, in reference to winch it is shewn, thfit the selection of Jacob to be
the fa\'oured seed, was i^efore the children had done good or
evil, according to the 9r^oB-z<rii Kar txkoy^v rov hou nat of
works but of him that calleth And then comes, in veriO 16",
the deduction from this exam[ile as applicaide to the v.hole
argument,

toZ ^iXovroi &c.

a^a, oZv oh

The

ellipsis,

then,

cannot be the notion that Titmann has introduced,

must be

of this kiud

So then, to be the child of

child of promise, the true seed of

that willeth,

&c

T.

Abraham,

is

(jJod,

not of

but
the

Him

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

kingdom of
fore, is it

Measiali, ver. 24.

rendered by

not depend on

rmg

Sciiott,

127

lllglitly, tliere-

" divine

gifts

do

seeks," &c., for ihcu

liiin vvlio

any thing, i. e. to be
any thing, as that it is the
And
cause of being or doing any thing.
hence, it is to owe one's origin to any one, to
depend on any one, to be in the power of any
is

10 iuive cause in

so conjoined with

Xenoph. Memor.

one.

shai

^^M-TTiVT^g yvojfj.rjg

i.

1. 9, To-jghiiravrarTiga^j-

bai'Mviav

olo'jjhoug,

icpri.

(Mark'

yuvri.) Whether, there"

It is not in the power,"
fore, it be rendered,
or, " it does not depend on," yet it means no

xii.

23,

r'mgcf/orZi'j

hrai

55

more than that the efficient cause is the mercy

Lastly, we must be careful not to
of God.
attach to the particle

v.

ai/,

15, the notion of

uncertainty as to the will or determination,

which there is no reason to suppose, that some

For the words ov av sXsm do
persons have done.
not signify, quemcunque volaero, whosoever I

may

Vt'^ish,

as if

wished or not
wish.
if I

So

it

were uncertain whether he

but, si quern volo, he

that the true sense of the passage

have pity on any one,

him; and therefore

lie

wills

whom

to

it is

pity, but

it

I will

is,

have pity on

not uncertain whether

is

most certain

for

that he had willed to be graciously present

with Moses,

lie

had previously promised.

So

THE SYNONYMS

128
in

i.

Xenoph.
e,

Polit.

ii.

6, sav

y]

croX/g

bibo'iri oiJtodo/j.riac/.'

those seeking the privileges of the city,

who may appear worthy.

and

og

S.V

c.

Neaer. 1383, 17.

for

/ Tig'

vi.

16,

xaraXaXo/.

^t^voidrar

Rom.

In

tog'ether,
vovg^

c.

i.

v.

Thucyd. vi. 14,

and ii. 44. Demosth.

Paul enumerates

30, 31.

^i^\jot(Srag^ za^raXaKo-jg' b^^iGTag^ b-7riP7}(pd~

dXccC^ovag'

On

Xs7}fj.ovag.

d(rvv'^s70vg,

d(f-7r6vdovg'

dcropyovg,

each of which terms

I will

dvs'

speak

briefly.

and xraXdXoi so

Yt%^i(STai

both mean, a calumniator.

ever; for the

lumny

-^i^-joiGTng, is

secretly

xarakdXog

is

he

far agree, that

They differ howhe who spreads ca-

and whispers

who

Xoyjocy

But

'TTccpoc

it

TO)

makes

-^i^uoKSiUg'

d-Tr'jgroX'jj'

little

it

in the ear,**

So they
on
which
20,

slanders openly.

are distinguished in 2 Cor.

place Suidas says,

they

xii.
i)

ruv Ta^ovruv xaxo-

Kuster prefers

The

difference.

d-ro'/ruv.

slander

^ From
*1J1D latuitj occultavit, and from the same source
the Latin susurrus ; another instance of the Hebrew hard

sound of f) being altered in two languages, into an 5 in the

one, and an aspirated t, S, in the other. iV.
The same

word, with the formative ^, rTI/^DD)

T.
fiufryi^tovy mystermm, mystery

^^

*^^ original of

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

who

traduces those

sent publicly and

129

are present, sh rh

oZg,

\|//^y3/(rra? Xeyg/ roug 'rfog rb ovg didXsyo/Msvovg

^(tvrag rivag Kccxcog dyoosvovrug-

xaraXdXoif

The
common to

xs^^rifxsvoi.

is

the law. This

xai

aTovruv

tu)v

i.

'jra-

30,

ddsug

notion of accusation, bicc^dXkuvy

But

both.

means, to act contrary to

v6/mou

is

James iv. 11,

]jo[mov^ some think

in

xcLTokakuv dbik<poZ, %a.raXaXi7

that xaraXakuv

in loc.

and on Romans

zaru

diocjSoXaTg

oi

the ab-

Theodoret says

doijj:.

an

error, for

though we grant

same word

that sometimes, though rarely, the

may be put successively in two diiFerent senses

yet care must be taken, lest in searching for a

meaning

in the writings of the Apostles,

we

should conclude that this has been done contrary to the usage of the word,

we

Evidently here xaraXaXirj

tion.

der the law

ther
tle

is

as if

adds

The law
AXaZpvii

Tim.

iii.

He who

itself.

also,

o rhv

ddsX^phv

slan-

slanders his bro-

XPivoov,

The Aposrbv

v6[i>ov

x^mi.

forbids to do either.

and
3.

V'7ripy](po!.vor

v'7r:pri(favoi

They

expressive of one

it

is

(^v(3^i(rraiy

occur together also in 2

agree so far that both are

who

more than he ought.

speech,

is to

vo/jlov

he slandered the law.

dXa^ovsi'
'

and that thus

introduce uncertainty into the interpreta-

arrogates to himself

But

ostentation

dXat^ovsta is
v'jn^riipavJa

more
is

in

pride

THE SYNONYMS

130

united with contumely and contempt of others.

'AXflft^oiv is

who

a,vain-glorious boaster

i/Ts^^f avc$,

he

prides himself on the things in which he

excels, or thinks that he excels.

The

arrogance, the other pride.

The one

is

aAa^wf puffs

himself, because, as he admires himself, he seeks

that others should admire him, withoutcalumni-

ating or despising others

but the

contemptuously and insolently

Jirsp^uyc? acts

to others.

The

one makes men laugh at him, but seldom moves

their hatred

the other excites the contempt,

and anger of those whom he contemns.

The one only boasts of his own merits, the other
brings down the contempt of men on his own
deeds.
Casaubon. ad Theophr. p. 353. rightly
says, that dXa^w and vm^Tj^avci differ in this,

hatred,

that the boaster extols himself without injuring

others,

and deceives himself, f^.a-ara, Galat.

3; but the

^crg^Tjfavc? is

contumelious, and des-

pises every one but himself.

between
curs in

Etymol.

dXa^ovivuv

Cor.
ii.

* 'AXa^aiJv IS

of the tongue

p.

and

As

to the difference

Ts^crspsjEffSae/,

which oc-

see Valckenar. ad Lennep.

764. dXa^ovsveiv

derived from

tion or boasting.
lish verttion, is

xiii. 4.

vi.

W7,

to boast falsely

is

linc/ua,

and means the use

a bad sense exclusively, either for detrac-

The

old word, leasing, Psl. ir. 2.

from the same eouru

T.

Eng-

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

of things that are

false,

131

but tspts^zUc^ui to boast

conceitedly of things in themselves true.

The

from both the former.

These are the insolent, who, from pride, not
v[3pigrat

diflfer

only treat others with contempt, but with con-

tumely and injury.

The

cares for no

v3^i(jrr,i

man, but thinks himself at liberty to act towards any one as he pleases who put forth
;

their pride in injurious actions. Vid. Eustath.

ad Odyss.
ii.

p. 51.

a,

The

p. 28.

In uXa^oveia there

in degree.

but only
is

and Wettsten. ad N. T.

three words, therefore, differ

In

silly ostentation.

no contempt,

is

v-:prj:pavia,

there

contempt of others and contumely. In C^^'i

Xenophon
is contempt with injury.

there

contrasts
12.

Ages.

ed with

Gu):p^ovsg

with

10. 2,

and the

ra-iivoi in

Cyrop.

ulB^iffrai.

James

b'rrsi'npdvoi

iv. 6.

1.

are contrastPet.

To these words we may add a fourth,

which occurs

iii.

v. 5.
a-j'^ddrig,

2 Pet. ii. 10. It

signifies that viciousness of life which arises
out of a self-satisfaction, that can approve of
in Titus

i.

nothing but the doings of

self.

It designates

him who does not accommodate himself

others; and

is

and morose.
is

consequently unaccommodating
Aristotle calls

therefore often united with

as in Pet.

ii.

to

10,

with

him

d-JgzoXog.

ro\fjjr,Ti]i,

It

and ^^atruj
(Eunap. de

cxXyjfo?

THE SYNONYMS

182
217,

L,eff. p.

xa/ ah^dhig,')

rok[Jjrio6raTOi

in

not the rash,

this passage roki^riral av'^adsig, are

who

But

seek only to please themselves, but the

petulant and cruel,

who

care for no one

and

certainly a bishop should not be aO^a^jjg, but

mild and

(fs/jbvog.

ad'Trovhor

d<f{j:'^sror

So

they prefer

far are similar, that

with others in enmity and

friendship and peace.

the

6rrovbr\

between

rather than in

strife,

But

live

to

as the

<rui/^;jx>j

made by

and

differ,

the one being

whom

there had been no previous

those

enmity, the other being the covenanted termination of war, at least for a time, so the se-

meaning
commonly

veral adjectives will have a distinct

also.

The

<r6^^gro/

stated, those

rather those

are not, as

is

who break a confederacy, but are

who will not come into a confe-

deracy, nor be easily led to adopt pacific

sures, unvertrdglich.
will not

make

are they

utfTtovbot

who

peace, but prefer interminable

The

war, unversohnlich.
to preserve

The

mea-

peace

the

aGhv^zroi

a&xovboi

do nothing

do nothing

restore peace, ddtd7J^a7iror dcrovhi

'iTokiiJjog

is

to

im-

But Demosthenes says dc-jv^icx^.ov, because they were dvo/xoXoyog

placable war.
rdjrarov

and

rov

dff-j/M^ovoc

pression.

as Harpocrates explains the ex-

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

The
may be

133

between affro^yor dveXsyjfiovig

readily traced from what has been already said on the word sXiog.
difference

(^aijjOL^iTg^

The two
Pet.

iii.

darrjoixror

16, a

once, that,

a^^ooffroi.

former words occur together in 2

oi

d/j^cc^iTg

xcci d(rryjoixroi

We

id/xv ahrojv ditiiX^im.

tig rriv

if

dcrrigixroi

ffr^ijSXovfftv

may

admit at

used in their proper sense, they

But

are not synonymous.

the

dff'^svsTg'

may

be those

ficiently established

as, in this

who

passage,

are not yet suf-

in religious

knowledge,

may properly be compared with

dn>a^iTg,
The a/xa^s/f are those who have

they

the

not

learned that which they might and ought to

have learned, who have not had proper instruction

and

discipline.

Xenoph. Mem.

iiraibi'j^evrag 7tai [j.a^ovrag

They

are therefore the

d<sr^r/,Toi

are they

iv. 1. 4,

d'xaidsvrovg xai dfMcc^sTg,

untutored

who have

but the

learned, but have

not been adequately taught and confirmed,

who

yet need definite religious knowledge.

were scarcely necessary to notice

that interpreters have endeavoured
It

to the

word

a/xa^^js,

this,

but

to attach

the idea of perversity and

impiety, with the view probably to justify the

further afl[irmation of Peter, that they pervert

the difficult passages of Paul's writings to their

destruction.

But what then should we say of

THE SYNONYMS

154
the

unless

atfrj^e/xro/,

bear the blame of

the

ocTolXs/a is

evil

which

we suppose that these also

their own infirmity?
For

not the penalty of crime, but the

from igno-

arises spontaneously

rance, although that ignorance be blameless.

They

render

not easily justify

The

be taught.
afia^r^g,

s.

indocile

dfxa^rjg,

ffotpoi

is

But

unwilling to

different, if it is said

But there

no
For they who are so untaught

dfj.a':^sffr^og

own
yia./

but they could

this rendering,

case

<:r^6g

rt.

need of this.
and unstable, do pervert the
their

hurt.

^urrvoTjra

They ought

is

of Paul to

already to be

reXs/Ci,

in

Corinth,

xi.

30, aSsviTg

-/.at

t^hMdroi,

and they are rendered by

Luther, Schwache und Kranke. If we give heed

are used together

and voffovvrsg
differ and, on the contrary, dc^svsTg and o^'^m&toi
appear to be identical in meaning, if we conto the old

grammarians,

o^oMffroi

sider their composition.

they

are dSsvsTg

imbecile

who have

they are

whose powers has

Yet they

differ; for

not strength, infirm,

a^huffroi

the

strength

failed, languid, sick.

of

Cicero

de clar. or. 180. hifinna afqne ctiam acgra vale-

So in Xenoph. Apol. 30, o^puxrrog

is he who is sick in spirit; but in
Agesil. 9. 5, ao^sve/a -^^v^ng is weakness of mind,
on account of which he avoids effort, as ''wv
tudinefuit.
rnv -^iX'^v

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

He
He

is agpwtfro^

has lost his strength by disease.

'Kennpk,

aff^si/stfrarwi'

who
who

135

^rjoiuv ^iov

/j^i/jjov/xsvcf.

has naturally no strength.

Memo?',

ii.

6.

12,

Id. Oeconom.

o/

rCJ ct^iMarit

xa/ a/

^^jXi^po/ajvwv

Although

ytyvovrai.

d^^ujaroTsoai

vj/oi;^;'//

dff^iviardroi

(pvffn

4. 2, tmv Cjiij^drm

dff^Syrji

is

must

it

be at the same time admitted that both are pre-

New

dicated of the sick, both in the

ment and other

in

xd/jbrnv

rh

syioi7

cL6%vu

Many

writings.

the notion of sickness

James

v.

is

15,

Testa-

suppose that

intended by the word

xa/^

su^tj

55

Titrrsuf

rr^q

especially because the

'/.diMvovrai

occurs in verse

And,

14.

word

therefore,

the papists bring forward this passage to prove

sacrament

the

we

although

mean

xii.

3,

7.

'"a

fiTj

is

thing

evidently

its

distress

dead,
this

in

of

Heb.

and Apocal.

For

xa/xi/s/v

pro-

to be labouring or distressed with

any

he whose strength gives

way

dXX'

xd/Mvojv is

ou zsx/Mrr/iag.

in consequence of excessive labour

ocdfiovrss

ii.

whether, in

meaning

xd/xrirs raTg -^-oyjug v/xuv,

Tir/.o'jricixg

perly

may

Jtdf/jvuv

Wetsten, ad N. T.

may be doubted
not mean
it does

is

But

unction.

it

Such

mind.

(vid.

sick,

instance,

this

extreme

should concede that

680,) yet

p.

ii.

be

to

of

and

TCiXfjbrjTtorig

whence

(but not xd/xmrsg) are the

whose labours are ended.

do not press

conjecture, however, partly because

it i

THE SYNONYMS

136

not altogether contrary to the truth that James

may

be teaching here

in

accordance with the

forms and practices of the other Apostles, and

with former custom

and partly from the un-

willingness to introduce a doubtful interpretation

is

for the passage,

even in their own way,

James advises

of no avail to the Romanists.

of anointing, together

application

the

prayer, for the healing of the sick

Vvith

they never

when no hope

administer extreme unction but

and they never apply it

with the view to recovery, but merely as a
means of smoothing the path to heaven for the
of recovery remains

dying, as appears in the Catechismus

The Cateclnsm

*"

of the Council of Trent, used by the

authority of Pope Pius V.

It has been recently translated

Donovan

into English by Professor

of Maynooth, and the

Latin copies are exceedingly scarce.

versialist,

is

in

Protestant contro-

however, must never confide in the English ver-

sion without comparing

text

Romanus/

many

it

with the Latin, as Mr. Donovan's

instances softened, according to the present

policy of the Romanists, to

The Latin only has

meet the

spirit of these times.

the authority of the church; and

iNir.

Donovan's version will at any convenient season be thrown

overboard.
The whole tenor, however, of the teaching of
the

Roman

Catechism,

passage of James on
superstitious

is

completely at variance with the

which they profess

ceremony.

Practically,

ceremony has no application whatever

of the sick.
It

is

called

It is

to

found their

their superstitious
to

the recovery

only regarded as a preliminary to death.

in the

Catcchi.>>m

" the sacrament of dyin^

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

137

persons ;" and

its object is declared to I)e, ^' to calm the

terror" attendant on death, and ' to enable the soul to

wait with cheerfulness" the coming event.

This

is

surely

in direct contrariety to a passage of Scripture which exhorts

to pray, and the prayer of faith shall save

Ivord shall raise

ministered

vanished

till

him

all

\ip.

tlie sick,

Extreme unction

is

and the

never ad-

hope of the sick being raised up has

and, for such a ceremony, no scriptural authority

can be adduced.

T,

THE SYNONYMS

138

CHAPTER
A WANT

VI.

of mimite attention to the force of

synonymous terms is not only a great impediment to those who are seriously engaged in
the interpretation of the
also in a point of
rise to

wear

many

to the

still

New

Testament; but

greater magnitude gives

doubts, which, although they

may

unlearned the semblance of import-

ance, will yet be smiled at by

gical attainment,

sive erudition,

men

of philolo-

who, as possessed of exten-

well aware

of the

usage of

words, and wont to proceed themselves with

the greatest caution, consider that theologians,
in interpreting

Greek

writings, often confound

words and forms, and conceive that

our lexicons are sadly wanting in sound prinrashly

all

For some persons, when they find

words, or forms of speech, in any book of the
New Testament, which are rarely or never
ciples.

met with

in the others,

test in a still

make

use of them as a

higher matter, and deny that the

books in which such words are found can be

written by the same author as those are in

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

wliich similar things have

been usually express-

The

ed in other words.

139

Epistle to the

brews affords a striking example of

And

drous subtilty of criticism.

of

it,

that,

from

New

all

Hewon-

they affirm

style of language, it

its

be set apart from

this

must

the other books of the

Testament for that it cannot possibly

have been written by any one of the authors
;

Now,

of the other books.

in this matter,

give them up at once, their axaj

they must really allow

us,

of synonymous terms, to

Xsyo'asi/a;

we
but

in our explanation

make

a few remarks

on certain words and forms, which, in their estimation, are not synonymous, but identical,
}ffod-jm/j.ovvra
and with respect to which they
;

affirm so confidently that if

Paul had written

on these points he would certainly have made

use of different words and forms of speech
and, therefore, had he been the author of the
Epistle to the Hebrews, he would have adopt-

ed those words which are peculiar and familiar

to his general style,

and not those which are

found exclusively in

this epistle.

When

lately 1

commenced

tion of the Epistle to the

the interpreta-

Hebrews,

I ccime,

the very outset, into contact with the

AaXy}(fccg,

ch.

i.

1,

concerning which

at

word

many

in-

THE SYNONYMS

140
terpreters have

which

differed as

to

in

Those who

used by the Apostle.

it is

sense

the

delight in removing verbal difficulties to which

they have themselves given

prepared

may

of this Epistle

seem almost

rise,

that the peculiar character

to affirm,

known by

be

the use of

word only. But let them point out what

other word the Apostle could have used when
this

he wished

to say

The four words which

had spoken.
used in

head of

New
XaXs/V

no other thing but that

this sense,

and which are placed

made use

this section, are

at the

of in the

Testament; but of these no other but

would have been properly fitted for this

They agree

place.

so far, certainly, that they

who

are spoken of those

to speak, (loqui)

XaXs/V

words yet they

is no other than

to utter

words of any lan-

For

differ materially.
i.

e.

utter

guage, independently of any reason

are uttered

cause

God

the Greeks

it

we

as

terance of

voice.

they adduce the passage

;

lanyfuaare.

Rightly, therefore,
XaXg/V

ci^iarcty

but they are quite in error

affirm that XaXiTv

means

and inconsiderately.
carelessness

human

has no other force than the ut-

human

ddvvccroJrarog

they

say the parrot speaks, be-

enunciates M'ords of

XaXsTv therefore,

why

Xsynv

who

to

speak imprudently

And

the looseness and

of lexicographers

in

admitting

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE
such observations

is

141

quite surprising.

New

Manywhich

Testament in
this sense of imprudent and inconsiderate
speech would be quite absurd, as Matt. ix. 18,
compared with x. 19, 20. Hence XaXs/P r/w,
and cr^os ri'ia. mean only to speak to any one,
and XaXs/v iLircL rtvof to hold colloquy. And in
James i. 19, ^sccbug zlg rh XaX^ca/ is, slow to speak,
according to the Rabbinical proverb, " one
mouth to speak with, but two ears to hear.'*
passages occur in the

Therefore, in this passage of the Epistle to the

Hebrews, the same signification must be strictly adhered to as in all other places where it is
predicated of the prophets, or of

God

himself^

25; Acts iii. 21, 24; Luke i.

21
vii. 6
John ix. 29
45, 55
Acts vii. 38, 44 viii. 26. They would hardly adduce what Phavorinus states from Ammonius, to show that XaXs^i^ means araxrui X(psoiiv
ra ^{ifjjara.
For Ammonius says other philosophers (Plato he had named previously), 5/a/|7j

Luke

as

xxiv.

Acts

iii.

ovruc' XaXsTv /mv rovg drdxrojg sx(psDovrag

yov
is

ovrrso ouv

diocXsysc'^ai ds roi/g (i,ir siriixzXiia.i Xsyovrag,

X6-

This

in fact a rhetorical distinction.

Xsys/f

and

hav^e the

s/Vg/i/

are so far similar that they

common

notion of words and things

which we enunciate
respecting them

to auditors,

and they

and commune

differ

therefore

THE SYNONYMS

142

which simply implies the use of

And often
the human voice and of words.
they are so made use of by the most elegant
from

>.a>wg/i',

that they scarcely

writers

Yet they

For

reden and sagen.

appear to

the same degree

differ in

differ.

our

as

has reference to

Xs^^g/v

the sentiment and the connexion of words;

words which any one

relates only to the

g/Vs/i'

may

This difference

has successively spoken.

be learned from those passages

in which the
two words occur in juxtaposition. Xenoph.
Oecon. iv. 23, ?ta/ o Avcavh^og. /Vg/V* ri Xiyug,
.

pdvai,

Cyrop.

"'TOTS

cian.
0,

Ti

g/ fJ'SV

Hermot.

o)

'xaTdsg ii<7ror

8.

p.

i.

For

747.

Xiysig

g^?j. Xsyg/g*

disXu^ri(fav.

s}'7r6\'Tsg

Cyrop.

Xs^utu.

Tig ihrsTv ti (SovXsTai,

Kai y^syug.

'Trovra^ov

v. 1. 10, JtaXX/cra,

TovT

[jjh bri

vi. 4. 19,

4. 12,

i.

Cyrop.

TO ir^ay^a.

Mr^da^aojg,

Lu-

aXX'

g/Vg

the notion inheres

in Xg^g/v

of collecting (colUgendi) words in a sentence or

oration,

whence,

but in

g/Vg/V

the

which any one

may
self;

say,

Xoyog^ "koyKSixog^ &c. biakiysc^ai

words only are considered

utters successively.

g/Vg/V Xo'/oi/,

but never

same way

Xgyg/i/

and

Xg^g/i/

and

5,

g/Vg-

XiyovTOJV

Xsyw

601,

<7:i^} to\j

3,

Hence we

of the oration

"koyog

"khyov,

g/Vg/V

Testament, Luke xxi.

TivoJv

or

^^/-ta.

are used in the

??rgv*

h^oZ

New

aXrl^ug Xsyoj. xxi.

gJ-Trg.

and elsewhere and

;

it-

In the

xxii. 34,

o 3g

suspect that

it

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

143

good reason why Xsyg/v', is

used in some places and s/Vs/i/ in others. For when
either v/ord is added to other words, as /dm Jts,
is

possible to give a

eyoyyv^ov Xhyovng, &c. it

may

he observed that

Xsynv

if in

the

ists

is

generally used,

word

which

to

added, the notion of speaking already ex-

it is

but that

ditional notion, then sJmTv

7, 8.

s'TTTj^uTViffav

XsyovTsg.

given as an ad-

to be

if this is

Luke

used,

is

(xxii. 64.) v. 12.

xxi.
sds7}'^i)

avrov XiyMV. v. 21. ^e^avro dtcx.Xoyi^so^ai Xsyovrsg. v.

30.

di^d/Mivog

And

if it is

stances,

v. 13.

ii-TTc,

it

Luke

Contra.

Xsyovrsg.

syoyyvt^^ov

n-^ocru

s/Vouv.

v.

xxii.

20.

17,

toujv s/Wg.

found to be otherwise in some in-

must be remembered

that the sacred

writers did not in all places observe the rules

Yet frequently when

of elegant composition.
Xsynv appears to

have been put for

s/Vsiv it

has

not the meaning of speaking, but of thinking,

feeling,

commanding.

So Mark.

Tou tiMccrm avrov' sXsys yd^,

in Matth. ix. 21,

23,

24,

sX'^dJv

There appears

to

yd^ h'savrp. Matth.

'iXsyiv

auroTg-

aTrox^i'^itg

ix.

dvayjaoilri.

be an opposition to

in the frequent form,

d'TToxomff'^ai is

28, ^-^olto

with the parallel passage

'iXsys
}d(jjv

v.

sJ-tts.

this rule

But that
mind

rather to be referred to the

than to the actual words,

passages in which

it

is

occurs,

evident from the

where no

interro-

THE SYNONYMS

144

gation precedes, which

New Testament.
in

Luke

v.

e.

and

this

it

name^

only remains to be noticed.

s^sTv

that

in the

his Apostles.

appears so far to

Xgys/v,

And

xxii. 50, 51.

own name, but

on the behalf of

The word
But

So Luke

31, our Lord answered the Pha-

risees not in his

i.

often the case in the

is

differ

from both

s/Vg/V

should neither be considered

words only of the speaker,

as relating to the

nor to the speech only, but to the mind and

almost always the

It has

will of the speaker.

notion of denouncing, affirming, objecting, or

commanding; or some other thing which

volves the mind and will of the speaker.
in

is,

fact,

thought.
the
ful

New

to

inIt

enunciate or give forth the

Examples occur
Testament. But

in the

let

not to admit the idea that

times, to interrogate.

It

g^s/V

may

who utters his own mind,

know the mind of another,

Lexicons to

students be care-

means some-

be used of hini

while he seeks to
as in the passages

usually adduced, but simply and properly (per

sc)

it

In the

cannot mean, to interrogate.

same way

as Xsysiv

often occurs that

may

be, to deny, because

Xg/wv, denies, or as

l)e

to reproach, if

In

fine, XaXsTv is to

it is

g/Vg/i/

it

may

followed by reproaches.

speak or

talk,

i.

e.

to use

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

human

language,

and

cessively, Xs^s/v is to say,

words suc-

to utter

s/~?y is

145

is

ffs/i/

to express

thought.
vs(pog'

The word

vs(pog

Testament, Heb.

word

is

xii. 1, togovtov s^ovTsg ir^oxiifiivov

Some
vs(p&Xyj

conjecture that Paul

uses

be

therefore

say,

this

peculiar to the writer of this epistle

that the others use

epistle,

New

occurs but once in the

fjbaoTv^Mv.

vs(pog

TjfMTv

vs(psXyi,

and thence they

not the author of the

is

because he never, in speaking of a cloud,

vs(pog,

but

vi(psXn.

sufficient to

show

that

short statement will

we cannot make

this

use of the passage.

The two words

nify a dense and

sky

but they

cloud,

so far agree, that they sig-

humid vapour, which

veils the

inasmuch as

denotes,

differ,

indefinitely,

{das Geivolke), but vspXyi

specific clouds, which,

roll

vs(pog

breaking from the mass,

together in a certain form, (die Wolken.)

For although in the most ancient writers, as

Homer, they appear to be usedindiscriminately,
^'et certain traces

of this difference appears.

Homer we

n<psXYi xvavsri

vs(psXn
vi(pri

if

find

fMsXaim

and

is

said in the

the

passages

this difference will

vs(pog

fxsXav,

same way
are

and

vs(pog

And
as

xvdvsov,

certainly

n^iXau

accurately

In

But

compared,

be perceptible, that by

I'spo;

THE SYNONYMS

146
is

intended an indefinite cloudy mass that

by

covers the heavens,

tinct cloud.

And

vi<psXr)

a particular dis-

as rb n<pog is used for

distinct and confused portions, so ra

many clouds,

used to denote

uses

vi(pia

and not

of the gods.
'OXvfMTifj vTo

it, is

Iliad,

^^L/fl'so/fl'/

Hence Homer

covered.

vzcpiXai
v,

but collectively, the

by which the heaven, or

clouds, for the whole veil

a great portion of

many inmay be

vs<p7}

abode

to describe the

v. 523, ciX^ oy a^ ax^w

Two

vs<psg<jiv ^ffro,

observa-

tions here will suffice to point out the different

the epithet of Jove,

is

said to be

The

two words.

force of these

For Jupiter

v(psXr;'/s^&rns,

rag vi^sXng, not rd

regards

first

(fuvdyuv.

vsipri,

It

could not be written without meaning in Iliad.

,

192.

V.

For

vi<peXrigiv.

Iliad,

g,

Certainly
row vs^ovg)

npn
is

s.

siig

it

it is,

o'j^ccvoi/

O/XOD VS(p20aiV IdjV

al^sgi xai

veiphffivy
g/'g

as in

ov^avo\> SU^VV,

vB(peXag

(h

over which he rules, not rd

behind which the abode of deity

rh vepog^

Then never do we

vifiXai (plural)

find in

with an adjective as,

vifioiv ^i(3evvuvy vspseat y^^ucioiGi

gular,

sv^uv

because he compels

al'^s^i,

imagined.

iXa^

might have been

867.

V.

d'

some epithet

is

Homer

^e^Jga cxioivra^

whilst, to the sin-

frequently added, to

describe the particular cloud.

We

can con-

ceive of clouds of colour widely different, but

the colour of rd vifaa (rb

i'spog) is

but one.

It

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

may

be shown readily, that later writers have

made

same

the

A few examples will

distinction.

Lucian. Icaromen.ii. p. 776. Luna,says:

suffice.
Tiva,

y.a,\i

147

avroov /j^Gi^ivovra.

'ibc/t

iu^dg

rokiMojvrcc vv/crspivdjrarov,

Here

svsKaXv^dfMrjv.

75

xXsTrrovru

ciXXo

yj

lT/<y-n'a<ra/Av>j

ro

ri

vs<pog,

meant a cloud, he
it must have
that it might be indicat-

if vs(pog

could not have written

been without the article,

to /i(pog

ed that the moon involved herself in some cloud.

All will feel that he could not have written
9}

Nor, elsewhere,

vspx^.

this

word

ticular cloud
ro

may

vs(pog

is

the article added to

in the singular, unless a certain paris

intended, as

Cor. x.

1, 2.

be put absolutely, because

it

notes an indefinite and indistinct mass.

But
de-

In

that delightful passage, therefore, of Euripides,

(Phoen.
in

mind,

his

f^avucraz/x/

is

3/'

wanting.

g-n-zCvrw/As^a

The

which Schiller had probably

V. 166.)

'Avs/xwxsog

ai^hog Toog

But there
let US

s'/^s

d^6>jLov

vi(peXag

s/xov o/xoysvsro^a,

is

no need

iroeh

the article

^spog /xa^ru^wv

return from this digression.

Apostle could not write

vsf gX?jv //.cc^ru^uv,

For the Greeks, when

they would express a great assembled multitude, which can scarcely be numbered, always

he ought

write
vj/,

vsfiog^

133,

ib. V.

to say

vz<pog.

never

755.

Homer.

vipXrj.

vs^og Ts^wv.

Iliad,

-^d^ojv vs:pog

r,s

g,

243,

TLokoim

Iliad,

d,

274.

vs(pog ToXs/xoy.

also vs^og

os-vswy

THE SYNONYMS

148

Aristopli. Avib. v. 296,

vs(pog

ar^ov^uv ib. v. 579.

and many other instances. But in this sense

never, as far as I know, is vs<p'iXr] found neither
is it ever used in the New Testament for a
;

Therefore, since the Apostle could

multitude.

not use another word,

is

it

vain to adduce this

For

passage in proof of a difference of style.

if

we

should concede, that he might have writ-

ten cX^^o?

/j^a^Tv^uv,

has used, in this

with

vs^sX?;

which he
sense cannot be compared

neither

yet the word

is it

vs(pog

necessary to suppose

borrowed from the LXX,

when it occurs among all writers, and that
most frequently rare words and elegant forms
of speech are found in those writers whose
style is the least artificial; which forms, if they
are found in any other writer whom he might
have had before him, would still not give
ground to suspect imitation; or to conjecture

that this form

common

is

national origin of both writers

un-

were manifest also, that such words and

forms were entertained by both, in some peless it

culiar sense

Therefore,

we

unknown

to writers

in general.

Hebrews,
inquire, whether

also, in the Epistle to the

must, in the

first

place,

those forms of speech which, in the other books

of the

New Testament,

are never or rarely found,

and certainly not in the Epistles of Paul, are

OF 'IHE NEW TESTAMENT.

149

used in a peculiar sense and manner foreign to

other writers, which only occurs in cases where
the quotation

made from the Septuagint.

still more closely on this point,

is

But it bears
that some think they have observed certain
words, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, for
which Paul, in a similar case, would have used
different

words

although,

if

we

accurately ex-

amine the whole matter, it will appear that

they are synonyms of the very same thing, but,
which is of the nature and essence of synonyms, presented under a different aspect and

mode

of thought.

Both these words occur often in the New Testament. Paul uses them in Galat. iii. 9, in
diaraysig

speaking of the law,

this

solemn

interdict,

di'

Of

ayysXuv.

Exod. xix.

12,

13,

he

thus speaks in the Epistle to the Hebrews,

Some therexii. 20, ouTc s(pz^ov TO diat^TsXXofjjivov,
fore say

S/arafftfs/!/

has

diaarsXkiSai, but that

word;
72/5,

the

same meaning

Paul never uses the

latter

he writes

diccra-

for that, in a similar case,

and

that,

as

had Paul been the

the Hebrews he would

therefore,

author of the Epistle to

have written in this instance as in others, rh

harayh. All, however, will surely see it rash
to assume that dtardgauv and diaarsXkis'^af have

THE SYNONYMS

150

the same meaning

and that

if

Paul had been

would
have said rh dtaraysvf because elsewhere he had
written o v6/Mog hccruyzig. But, before we show
speaking of this particular interdict he

how

these words differ, let us inquire of these

persons whether they think Paul could have

written

vo/^o?

he could

that

aofree

two words agree

the force

much

Surely they will

diccgrsXXo/juBvog.

For thouo^h the

that each word has

not.

in this,

disposing, yet they differ, inas-

of,

mode

as they signify a different

of the

same power.
Aiardgasiv is SO to dispose
is in its

own

matters that each

place, or to put in order, to ar-

range biagrsXXsff^ai properly is so to separate,

that nothing should be in a wrong place or
mode. Hence diaTuffffm is used for any ordi;

nance or prescribed arrangement;

dia(fTsXXia^a,i

frequently denotes separation, interdict,

rdddsiv is to dispose, to

constitute

bia-

hicKSriXkuv to

arrange in different parts, and, in the middle

voice, d/affrsXXsSoci to interdict.

Nor

it

is

ca-

sually used in this sense in the middle voice.

See Matth.
findivi

yuXs

s/ircfjffiv.

Mark v.

43.

vii.

36

iMYihivl il'Xi.Tv)

sages there
act,

xvi. 20, hisaniXaro roTg /xa^/jra?;

^.

e.

is

(Luke
;

ix. 9.

viii.

56,

7vci

rraoriy-

In these pas-

the notion of warning against an

interdicting.

(One passage

occurs,

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

Acts XV. 24, where

It

151

appears to denote a man-

date simply, as in Diodorus Siculus, xi. 38.)

Hence, therefore, ro diaffrsXXo/Mivovj in this place,

is an interdict
which was the fact. But a very
;

different
diccrays/g

meaning
^/'

exists in the passage

law

dyysXov* viz. that the

is

vo/Mog

consti^

tuted and disposed by the ministry of angels.

This

is

evident, if

words.

rd(y(fziv is

we

look at the origin of the

properly to place in a certain

juxtaposition or series

(JrsXXsiv is,

not to send,

according to the lexicons, but, to put in a place,

or to deposit in a place,

whence

arise the no-

tions of preparing, arranging, &c. It

milar to the

German

d'xo rivog is to

Hence

stellen.

avoid a thing, as

it

is

Tovvrog,

The

ocTro

'Travrog

ddsX(pou

glossaries give

it

(TriXXeo^a/, d^pidrixG^ai^ dva^u^iTv.

viii.

20,

Erasmus

arsXXo/xivoi
is

rouro,

(j^'/j

rig

si-

were, to put

oneself in another place, as 2 Thess.

drsKksff^cci v/Mug

not

rnXXsc^a/

draxrwg

iii.

6,

Tsg/'^a-

correctly in he.

See

also

v/Moig

correct as to the sense,

2 Cor.

fxu/j,riffsrai.

when he

See a valuable paragraph on the word hxrayri, in Sui-

cer's Ecclesiastical

Thesaurus, a work of almost indispensa-

ble importance to theological students.

It is a

mine of eru-

and apt quotation, from which many have drawn the

means of their pretensions to learning, without having the

dite

candour to admit their obligation to the lord of the

T.

soil.

THE SYNONYMS

152

says that the idea

taken from the fact of

is

avoiding a rock

sailors

but

it

is,

at the

same

time, an error in the scholiasts to say, that

cnXkiSai properly relates to a voyage or a

naval expedition.
says,

17,

viii.

ou

In the same way, Polybius

h-ovaiMvm xa'^oXov r^v sx

ri^g ffvvr}-

remove or reject. Therefore, as amtsriKknv is to send away,

to dismiss, amariXknv to repress or put down,
^siag xarut,iojm oTsXXia^at,

TLaradTi'k'kiiv

to suppress,

i,

e.

to

(TutfreXXg/v

to contract, or

to arrange or confine in one place, so diagrsXXsiv

is

to allocate in different parts or places, to se-

parate

an

and therefore

interdict,

any thing

is

spoken of

diaaTsXXB<^ai is

who

because he

interdicts

from

considered to do the same thing

him whom he interthat

which
he
from
has interdicted.
dicted,

as if he actually separated

And
for

it

this explains the use of the

often occurs that middle verbs, while the

proper relative notion

is

same time referred

an object.

to

preserved, are at the

sage, therefore, rh dia&rsXXo/jbsm

dict

middle voice;

In

this pas-

means an

inter-

neither could the author of the Epistle,

whom he

may, have written diarsray/j^svov,

I will add another instance which is wont to
be adduced from the Epistle to the Hebrews.
be he

They say

that in

Hebrews

vi. 17, 18,

u/mrd^srog

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

used,

is

and in

vii.

24, aTa^a/3aroj,

New

other books of the

153

when

in

Testament, and by

Paul himself, ^s/Sa/oj would have been. But

though sound philologists would smile at such
a statement, let them bear with us while we
touch

some

as

'Acraoa/Saro;

this briefly.

immutable

say,

does not mean,

(for 'ra^ajScchsiv is in-

correctly rendered to change,) but, that which

does not pass away, or migrate

is

that

which

remains in

is

its

not changed

place.

these words the

(Si(3aiog

ufy.srd'^srog,

that

which

It is true that there is in

common

idea of firmness and

constancy, as in axhnrog, dfMirdyJvrirog,

kdociTog

but

he would err who should say that they so signified the same thing that he who meant that

which was

dfisra^srog or a-^raga/Saro?,

could say

Certainly to express
also that it was (3s(3atog.
the notion which the Apostle had conceived in
the former passage, vi. 17, 18, he ought to
have written rh d/Mra^sTov rng ^ovXrjg aurov. For
a^o-era^srog is constant and immutable, for it is
frequently said of those things which consist
and chaupfe not, but remain ever the same.

But
If,

jSg/Sa/os is

firm,

therefore, he

immoveable, certain,

had written

fixed.

rb jSsiSccm rrjg /SouX^g,

he would only have affirmed that the will of

God is certain and fixed; but wlieri he wishes
to affirm that it is immutable, that which is

THE SYNONYMS

154

ever the same, and changes not with other

Sicul.

he

then

things,

d/j.sTd%rov

o/z-sra^sroi/,

reads

83,

xiii.

69, dfjusTu^Tov

uses

8ia:popav,

vofio-og

23,

i.

to say

then Paul writes

dyxv^U)/

-^uyn^g

Ta^^Tjffia ^sfSala.

d(5<(:akri

ix. 17,

re

have written
written

He

xai

firm, cer-

^i(3aiog,

as vi. 19,
iii.

6,

vex^oTg ^Ss/Sa/a,

irri

bia^r,7tri

(SijSaia /g^wciv^j,

drrapdfSarog.

-rr/Vr/i/

y.a} ^s(3aiav.

&c. Nor in the other passage,

Diod.

the contrary,

no more than

tain, fixed,
TTig

/(j^v^av

On

and other authors.

when he wishes

as

d/Msra^rovg. xvi.

would he
but he ought to have
vii.

wished

24,

to say that the

priesthood of Christ did not pass from one to

another priest, for that Christ was a priest for

ever,

2/5 rhv aJcova,

ed by the word

and

this

notion was express-

He

might have
but if he had written (3s^a/a, he
would have been very wide of what he intended nay, he would have spoken foolishly, for
the Levitical priesthood itself was /3s/3a/05 but
not d'xa^d^arog^ for that may be the one which is

said dhidboxpg

d-iraod^arog.

not the other, as a kingdom

although

it

may be

passes successively into other hands,

bid rh ^avdruj xcoXvit^ai avrovg 'rra^afj.miv.

it is

/Ss/Sa/oj;

no ground

for surprise that these

Lastly,

words

occur only in the Epistle to the Hebrews; for

the same things are not treated of in
Epistles.

all

the

Neither has Paul demonstrated in

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

155

his other epistles that the priesthood of Christ

is

perpetual, and not to pass to others.

wise

it

appears absolutely certain to us, that he

would have used the word

menius, in
for that

now,

is

Other-

loc.

d-7raod(3cx,rog.

rightly adds,

Occu-

dbia,boy^ov, drsXsurovy

which in the same respect remains

in that respect, without end, drsXsvrog,

Several examples of synonyms might be adduced from the Epistle to the Hebrews, which

by many persons would be accounted expressions of precisely equal force, and from which
they would conclude rashly that the author
had used peculiar terms in communicating the
ro dr/inxsg^ zlg rovg aiumg.
same idea, as v. c.
s/'s

ccvrirvjov, ffyjd'fj^sroyov thai,

d^sr'/jtr.'f, ':ra,7.a,i6rrig'

'^ar oXiyojsiTv,

xarcx,(poovi7'v'

/3^a;j/L) r/, -r^o;

M^av

vh^og,

dst,oi,(T-

sx 'Tropviiag ysvvi^^tig.

and many others which are

brought forward as a cumulative proof that in

this Epistle the

same ideas are very

expressed from what they are

of the

New

example may
to

differently

other books

Testament, and that therefore

not probable that Paul was

belong

in

suffice,

its

author.

it is

One

which properly does not

our subject, but yet

is

not very fo-

reign to that subtilty of distinction which the

synonyms requires. There are

constructions of the same words, with different
cases, whence it results that although the same

discussion of

THE SYNONYMS

156

tiling is intended,

which

it

presented

is

we may

these

mode

yet the

of thought in

Among

different.

is

notice,

x^arsTv rtvog

and

x^arsTv

ri.

These expressions are considered to mean

the same thing and even the Lexicons do not
notice the difference of the force of the two
;

constructions.

Seeing, therefore, that in the

Epistle to the Hebrews,

twice

x^arsTv is

with the genitive,

only found

but in the other

Pauline Epistles always with an accusative,

is

affirmed that this

this epistle

is

idiomatic and peculiar to

and that Paul

would have written

x^ccreTv

in those passages

with an accusative.

They should, however, have inquired

ther

x^arsTv really

either case

Tt^arsTv rivog is

is

and

first,

if

not, then

it

is false

idiomatic in this epistle.

epistle the

found with an accusative

c. iv.

whe-

has the same meaning with

true, that in this

altogether^

it

14,

and

word

(It occurs
vi. 18,)

that

For
is

it

not

but twice

but the rea-

is, that the Apostle has only used the word

where he wished to express that, which, to be
understood by his readers, he must have writ-

son

ten

jcoars/v

with a genitive construction.

Generally speaking, with respect to words,

which may be construed with an accusative or

a genitive case, this rule appears to obtain

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

]57

that if they occur with an accusative, the relation

is

question

between them and the whole

;

if

So

only to a part.
appears between

it

but

K^anTv

x^ars/i/

to

For although,

that

have and to

rmg

%garr\(Scii

who has possessed a cernow under his power

often said of one

tain thing,

and

only to take hold of a thing,

hold in his power.

is

is

therefore, a difference

far,

xocctzTv riv6g

x^ars/v rmc, signifies

or to possess

thing* in

with a genitive, the relation

and has

it

;'^

doubt w^hether passages occur in which

7i2^ars7v ri is put simply for to take, to possess,

yet

as x^arg/p

rmg occurs repeatedly (Luke

Mark i. 31 v.
when the
;

cept

41

ix.

viii.

54.

27. Matth. ix. 25,) ex-

additional notion exists also of

a certain force by which any one desires to

seize a reluctant person, and bring him under
control.

So Matth.

xiv. 3, ^arriaag rh'iMavv7\v,

^ Fischer, in his Prolusions

Lexicons for

tlie

New

the force of the word

on the Faults of the existing

p. 474. in remarking on

Testament,

vToiTixZ^ca in 1

Cor. ix. 27, that

it

has

the same power as vToriirTiiv and x^arsrv, says in a note.

" In the same way as h)ve (Chariton vi. 3.) is said x^anlv rav
For x^aruv differs from
B-i&iv, that is, to rule over them.
vix.Zv

in this respect, that

vix.xv

means simply

to conquer

but K^ariiv so to conquer that the conquered party

ed

to,

and in the power of the conqueror.

Xen. Cyrop.

vi.

1,

21." T.

is

subject-

Plato Orat. 12.

THE SYNONYMS

158
28,

xviii.

sdriffsv.

avrk

'/.oarrjffag

xxii. 6.

I'KJiyz^

x^UTTjaavng rovg douXovg v^oigav. XXVI. 4, /Va rhv 'irr

6oXw xai a'Troxrstvum, in wllich in-

Govv x,^arrjffM(fi

stances the accusative must be rendered

connexion with both verbs, as in Matth

And

auTo xul hz^sT.

x^arrj(ji

11,

tinction obtains

among

(fovg '^^ovovg

z^uTovg/v,

i.

e.

tliey

xii.

that this dis-

Greek

other-

may be shown by examples.

Oed. Col. V. 1380. roi yu^ to

in

So
gov

writers,

in Sophocles
xai rovg

^cL'/.r,[j.a

hold

but immedi-

we

ately afterwards in

v.

ifijcpyXio-j hool

to bring into subjection.

So

y;

this is

on

ro

'/.^arsTv

made out by

By which
is,

419.

The

find

/-t^rs yr^g

xgars/V av

J)

rhv

Scholiast says,

ffvvsra^Bv a/V/ar/x^,

But

The

sense

the text

itself.

thou mayest

enemy, or benefit thy

idea

v.

(piXoiffiv oj(psXi7v s^stv.

ffri/xiiursov,

1385,

Aristophanes Avib.

in

iy^^f^v,

is

-/.^aTrisai,

friends.

control

thine

For that the

not that of conquering an

enemy

or

reducing him to subjection, but rather that of

having control over him,

the disjunctive conjunction
is

is

made evident by

for the opposition

not to the idea of procuring friends, but to

them good. In the same way, it

Xenophon. de Exped. Cyri. v. 6. 3,

that of doing

occurs in

x'spara rou o^ovg

bk'r/oi dvvaivT

is,

v-^l^yjXa,

av.

x^ursTv xars^ovrsg xai irdvu

In which the notion evidently

not that of occupying, but of holding, ob-

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

159

Nor

enemy.

taining, in opposition to the

is

by a passage in Hist. Graeca

where the words, '^yvu ovx av buvd[Mzvog,

this contradicted
vii. 3. 4,

ruv &r}(3aiuv s^ovrojv

rriv

axooroXiv,

rrig iroXiojg x^arg/V,

are rendered " since he knew that he could

not retain the city in his power

previous assertion,

according to

;"

rov fih aarsoog sx^drei.

doubt, however, whether

'^oXig

and

a<fru

have the

It is contrary to the
same meaning here.
elegant accuracy of Xenophon, that these two
words should stand in juxtaposition in the same

passage to express a similar idea.

'TToXig,

Doubtless

in this passage, as is frequently the case

in this author,

means " the

Euphron,

state."^

therefore, understood, that although he occu-

pied the
state,

city,

he could not command the whole

while the prefect Thebanus held the

and he wished therefore to persuade

the Thebans that they should eject the leading men who were with him in the tower, and
then give up the state to him, ('Tra^ahvmi rnv
ToXiv.)
The word occurs in a similar way in
Thucyd. vi. 11, xai roug [uv, xaTi^ya(sdijjivoi, xoiv
citadel,

'

PharorinuSj says

tt'oXi;,

kou

o to-pto;,

kx)

ol

KctroiKovvris.

and the Lexicon Xenophonteum gives a number of instances, in which Xenophon

both the place and

its

inhabitants

has used the word expressly in the sense of

state

T.

civitas, or

the

THE SYNONYMS

GO
ruv

xaT(i<S')(ptiJjiv,

yi

si

xal

'/C^arTjgaifJi^cVf

'^oXXmv ovtuv, p^aXsTw^

xccl

at the
r'oyjjt.c,

otv

oia

'ffoXkov

oi^x^tv dvvaifis^a

and

end of the chapter, xi^ ^' 1^^ '^i'^^ ''"^

Tm svavriuv s'Ta/^so'Sa/, dXXa rag oiavotag z^arrj-

gavrag

Sag^s/i'.

From

these instances,

evident that, in

it is

both places in the Epistle to the Hebrews,

should be written with a genitive, for

xparrjffai

in both cases

For

in

c. vi.

it

denotes, to take, not to hold.

18,

it is

God

said that

interposed

a certain evidence of his unchangeable will,

" that they might have

strong

consolation,

who have

fled for refuge to lay hold of the

hope," &C.

x^arr/Cfa/ rrig sX'Tridog.

are the wretched

suppliants

Aul.

V.

the hope

xara<p-jy6>rsg
x^arriffai

f-r/

be sup-

rbv ^eoi/,

for

Nor must

d'ro<pvyz7v

must be

word be com2 Pet. ii. 20

but

in

the

Strictly

as an infinitive

is

connected with

often joined with a

verb, signifying motion or desire,

7, 8, 9.

in

they have fled to

of which they had not yet be-

possessed.

pared with

xara(puy6vrsg

(Eurip. Iphig.

altar.

x,ara(pvy6vTig,

itself,

The

grasp at this hope, as

911.) Neither should

plied after

come

do the

who

K^ctr^tra/

Matth.

therefore, in this place,

xi.

means

not to retain, but to apprehend, to take hold,

13, W^avng TTJg 'Trgo^sasug xg" supposing that they had obtained

as in Acts xxvii.
xparrjxivai

OF THE

In

their purpose."

of

x^aTiTv is

NEW TESTAMENT.

we

other passage the force

precisely the same,

14, %&v-

c. iv.

For
here does not denote the religion which

Tsg ouv d^^iz^scc fizyav

c^oXoyia

tlie

161

x,^aToofMv rrig hiMoXoyicig.

profess, but the paction or covenant, that

which

is

For

agreed on.

said to be

d'x6(STo\os

/Msgirng rng dia^yixrii,

in c.

xai d^^n^svg

iii.

1,

Jesus

is

rrig bfjjdkoyiag, i. e.

not because he

is

the teach-

er of religion, but because, as a priest, he pro-

vides that
is,

we

should obtain

the grace of

God and

which the Apostle

fore, x^arridai

rrig

is

rb ofioXoyovfjism, that

salvation, concerning

treating.

oiMoXoyiag is

Hence, there-

not to be steadfast

in the confession of our faith, according to the

popular interpretation, but rather to act with

all

we may

earnestness, so that

blessings, of
curer,

But

i.

e,

it

which our High Priest

is

the pro-

'A^ccTYidcii rrig '^r^oxn/jjsvrjg sX'zidog.

if this

have in

obtain those

criticism shall appear to

more of

some

to

subtilty than truth, this, at

least, I trust that equitable

judges will con-

cede to me, that when they exercise their

ingenuity in some deeper and more

own

difficult

me, in turn, in tlie

explication of words, the same degree of license
crisis,

they will permit

which they claim

to

for themselves.

THE SYNONYMS

162

CHAPTER
The
the

knowledge of

right

Vir.
particles, in

Greek language abounds,

much

difficulty;

allied,

they express, are

nyms.
they

attended with

but especially in those which,

as they serve almost as a

very closely

is

which

mark

common,

or at least

of the relation which

properly accounted syno-

For although the degree

differ is often so subtle, that it

be not always preserved by

in

which

seems

men who

to

write

with less of accuracy and elegance, yet it must

never be neglected,
tigate the

if

we would

strictly inves-

meaning of the sacred

writers.

And

though we know well the great need of caution, lest we rashly judge the style of these

men by

the strict rules of elegant writing, or

attempt to emend their composition by rigid

grammatical rules; yet such

is

the force of

custom in the use of words, that even unlearned

men

fore

it

are compelled to obey

will

it

and there-

always be worth while to consider

and distinct force of

which they use. As an

accurately, the peculiar

each separate particle

example we

will refer to

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

avsu*

which appear

and

163

^w^/g

to differ so little, that it scarcely

matters which

is

used in a sentence, when the

idea to be expressed

is

the separation or ab-

sence of one thing from another.

doubtedly they agree in

this,

For un-

that they both

indicate that relation in which the object

is

regarded as separate or absent from the subject.

As

thing awu

command any one

if I

yoyyudfjjMV,

Pet.

do some-

to

wish

iv. 9.

all

murmurings to be absent or when it is said of

our Lord that he spoke oh %w^/s 'Tra^afSoXy^g Matt,
xiii. 24; in the same way almost it would be
;

thought, that he did not speak without a parable,

and consequently there maybe those who would

think, that in this passage it might have been
written ovk sXdXu anu
this difference

But there

'7ra^a(3oXrig,

between the two

particles, that

X^i'^ is referred to the subject as separated

avsu is

the object;
is

therefore,

say a thing

mean, that

is

done when

when

from

referred to the object .which

regarded as absent from the subject.

but

is

is

done

this is

civsv

When,
rmg,

not present

mean, that that Mdiich was done

was not present with a certain thing, then I

must say it was done x^i'^ ^"'^' It ^s thereIg avruv oh

fore rightly said in Matth. x. 29,

eV

TiffiTrai svi r7]v

that

ylfiv

avsv rou irar^hg u/xwv,

is,

not

THE SYNONYMS

164

even a sparrow
present,

e.

i.

dies, so that the

Father

unconscious or unwilling.

Ducker. ad Thucyd.
been put instead of

iv.

is

not

(See

But if x^^'^ ^^^

would only have af'-

78.)

civiv, it

iirmed that no swallow

is

absent from the Father,

when it falls to the ground. In the same way

we find civsv Xoyou 1 Pet. iii. 1, but %w^'? ^ti^^y
Cor.

8; Heb.

iv.

40, and

xi.

x(*io}g

rnGTsug

For civsu T/Vrswg would

be, without faith aiding and assisting but what
he wished to say was, if any one was actually

Heb.

xi.

7.

vii.

20.

And

destitute of faith.

we

%w^/5

vfJ^^^v

are not present with you, but

actually separated from us.

xi. 40, it

had been written

//-j^

And

is

not

when

when ye
if in

are

Heb.

aveu tiimuv reXsioii^oJc/f

would have been made,

men might not without us, i. e.
without our aid and volition, be blessed." But
what was wished to be said was, that they
the false

assertion

" that these

should not be blessed otherwise than we, but

even as we, through

of calamities.

The

X^i'Sy separately,

faith

and

piety, in the midst

particle therefore

must be

apart from.

The reason is quite evident also in John xv. 5,

X^i^'i

me,

^("'Ou

eav

3.)

were

ob d{jvaG% rtoiuv ovdsvy

[iTi

(jjiivriTi

So Ephes.
far

ii.

sv

sfio/f

i, e,

separate from

v. 4, 6, (conf.

12, ^rg %w^/5 x^/trroD,

John i,
i. e. ye

from Christ, as the context shews,

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

165

aTrjXkor^iojfxsvoi rrig 'TroXirziag rov 'id^arj'k.

^rs,

avrj X^iffrov

would be only, Christ was not present with

And

you.

^ajSoXi^g

ovx sXdXsi p/w^/g cra-

could not be changed into

would

for this

when

hence, therefore,

refer

it

word Taga^oX^g,
more directly to the

to the

in fact %w^/? applies

speaker

and

XaXsTv,

civiy -raga/SoXJjs

could be said at

all,

avsv craga/SoX^g,

would signify

if

opposed by Rom.
tliough

it

might have been

Nor

'ffilja

For
writ-

is

separat-

for this appears to

be the mind of the Apostle, rather than,

teacher be present, as he
preted.

But

yet

civsv xrj^vffffovrog,

ds a%oi)6o\j6t x;wg/s xrjPvffffovrog, i. e.

ed from him who teaches

is this

x^j^ucirovros.

the whole formula required that which

ten

it

that he spoke

without a parable being present.

x. 14, %w^/?

indeed

is

if

no

frequently inter-

dxovsiv an\i XTj^vffaovrog

would be

to

hear alone, without a teacher.

Besides, unless I

an abundant proof of
fact, that %w^/$ is

but by
avsv

itself,

am

altogether mistaken,

this distinction lies in the

not only used with a genitive,

absolutely, as an adverb

invariably has as

its

of the thing assumed to be absent.

%wg/5

is

object,

referred to the subject, and

it is

whilst

adjunct the genitive

For since
avsv to

necessary that, to the particle

the object should be added

the
civsuf

but x^i'^ expresses

absolutely and alone the full idea of the rela-

THE SYNONYMS

166

tion to be noted;

and therefore the introduc-

tion of the object

is

say x^i'^
say

civsu

^^^^'i

sJvai,

Greeks say
in that

So that we may

needless.

or x^i'^

'^'''^^^

and dnv

civiu touTv,

'TToisni

but

passage of Plato,

avsu O'^ov av rrdw ysvvatou

Testament, John xx.

'''

but

civiu rivhg 'TTOisTv Tiva,

as

rov; fisXkovrag itrr/atr^a/

So

'Xor/)ffiiv,

x^i'^ is

7,

we cannot

neither did the

and alone, but not ccveu.

But since it is to be feared

in the

New

used simply

that, in the in-

terpretation of important passages of the

New

Testament, the notice of

may

this distinction

be thought unnecessary, as though

no moment whether any one

is

were of

it

noted as absent

from a certain thing, or whether the thing is

regarded as separated from him, we will adduce one example in those expressions so abundantly discussed,

Rom.

i^yojv,
ii.

20.

had

iii.

21, 28;

Many have

said, tliat faith

salvation,

viz.

vh/xo-j,

x^i'^
iv.

6;

vii. 8,

interpreted

only

is

and

x'^i'^

9; James

them as

sufficient to

if

Paul

a man's

even though he lived wickedly

and,

man, although he do the works

is accepted on account of faith
which idea is not only opposed to Paul's

therefore, that

of the law, yet

aJone

statement, but even to that of James, with

which Luther was somewhat

when Paul

said, in

IlGrn.

dissatisfied.

ii.

13,

o/

For

%oinrul rou

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.
he could

vhfiou dixaiu^rjaovrat^

interval,

have said

167

not, after

a short

man

be jus-

also, that

shall

even though the works of the law are

wanting. James, however, appears as if he
tified,

were opposing that idea

dijccciovff'^cci

tlie

av^^wrrov xa/

accordance

is

for

sz

oiiK

complete

if

he writes
'7i<JriOi}c

we

s^ s'eywv

But

/mvov.

only consider

accurately the proper force of the two particles

If Paul had written,

under discussion.
gf/wv,

ccvsj

then his sentence would have contained

the notion with which he

is

charged, and the

argument of James would be

For,

to him.

if it is

true that

in contradiction

man

is

justified

works being aTtogether wanting

or absent, then it follows, that works are not
needed; that they may be wanting with perfect safety and that is false which Paul has
affirmed, rovg rroiriTag rov vof/^ov diTcaiovG^cn and the
assertion of James would be false also, rrtv crieriv
aviv 'i^yuv,

e,

Yj^^k; ruv

i^yuv,

i^-yojv

that

it

vsk^uv sJvai,

may

But

it is

written, x^i'^

not be supposed that works

may be altogether wanting to him who has

faith,

but that his justification is separate from his

works, ^. e. although he had not done the works.
Therefore, as in the
rightly stated; vwi
^^(pavs^urai, viz.

first
dl

instance

x^i'^

vdfLou

21,)

it is

dix,aioff'jvrj

^soD

(iii.

that the divine compassion

nifested separately from the law (as

it

is

ma-

were not

THE SYNONYMS

168
in
all

connexion with the law, for by the law, which

have violated, is manifested not the d/xaioffuvT},

but the wrath of God;) so also in another pas^

sage that Apostle has written, with equal correctness, hrA,aiov(^ai
e.

i.

'rlffrsi civ^^oj'rov,

'/uolg 'hyojv vo/iov

altogether separated from

this di-Aamvvri is

the works of the law, and therefore applies

it-

man, not because of the works of the

law which he has done, (for he has not done
self to

them) but by
ff^cci

uv^^u-TTov

^idTify

so that the

does not say Bixawv^

s^yooVf i. e. rfj ovjc syoiitsi^ ra.

x^i'^

James says

as

s^ycCf

He

faith.

'TriGT'ci

but

dUaiovc/^ou x^i^^ s^ojvy

hrKatocbvrj

conjoined with the hy^'

is

voiuv,

shown not to be
(asif any one, be-

cause he had done certain works of the law

had therefore attained the

by

hi%aio6-jvYi\)

but simply

although hitherto he had been utterly

faith,

destitute of works.

Wherefore,

it is said,

equal accuracy in the third passage

u.

Xoyi^iTai

6 '^sog

bixo(,iochn,v

%w^/?

'ioyojv,

with

(iv.

6.)

i, e,

al-

though he have been destitute of works, in

fact,

although he has sinned, yet he describes him as

blessed

fJbaxdoiog dvri^

On

r'iOM.

faith,

xa^'

ov

[mti

the contrary,

sdv

s^yuv, is faith

as

Xoyi^riTOLi xu^tog

fjj7\

s^yct

?;/>j.

is

For

dead; that
rrtffrtg

separate from works,

Paul writes

afut^

James has spoken of

%w^^5 rZiv s^yuv,

which,

sauT'^v,

ToTg e^yoig,

u>

in

Rom.

tj

is^

X'^i'^ ^^'

qv ffwrj^yodcrcc

vii. 8, 9,

x^i^^

OF THE
vo(j*o\)

it

ajMa^Tta nx^d, syoj

had been

false

NEW TESTAMENT.

avsu

for, vsx^a

cause the law

'igriy

of sin, for the law

&nu

is

holy.

is

is

the law the cause

And

he did not

was not prethe law was present, but he lived ig-

vof/^ov,

sent, for

sin is dead, not be-

not present, but because sin

without the law; neither

live

If

vo/iov iroTz,

both would have been

\oilo\)^

afMaoria

^'

is

s^wv X^i'^

be

169

i. e.

so that the law

norant of the law.

As

contrary to law, so

Iriv

olvzu vCiiov 'xoisTv

is

to act

avsv vofiov is to live

con-

trary to the law, or not to regard the law, to

live as

The Apostle

though there were no law.

was a time in which he lived

unconstrained by the law, and in that time
" sin was dead," but when he understood the
precepts of the law, o\jxsTi%firiasic, then the power
of evil arose in him.
Chrysostom erroneously
supposes (and is followed, as usual, by Theophylactj) that this refers to a time in which the
law was not present with him. Truly, there-

says, that there

fore,

Paul writes,

cracra (Tag^

^ s'^/wv vofiov ov dixaioj^Tiffirat

hoomov avrou'

(pavhc/jreti vvv

%wg/g

'Trdvreg

yup

vo/xou dixawffuvrj ^oD,

ed by the law, without regard

if

God had had

av^^u-TTog.

but

"^s-

not restrict-

to the law; for

respect to the law, he would

not have given the

punished.

T^f/i^cc^rov,

dixccioavvrj,

Therefore,

he would have

X^i'^ i^yuv

U,(juov

bixaiovrai

But with equal truth James

says,

THE SYNONYMS

170
r},v

mgrtv

'XJ/i^k f7wy, i, e,

free

from works,

is

dead.

For as all have come short of the glory of God,

and therefore none 1^ %7*"' ^'^onovvrcct, shall be justified by works, but by faith; so also faith should
cvvs^'/iTv ToTg e^y.ig, and exhibit by acts its real
and living energy. And this is the view of
our church, as

accurately

is

it

shown by Me-

lancthon in his Apologia.

And hence

students should be admonished

in the use of

common and

popular lexicons,

not to suppose that particles of the same kind

mean

precisely the

same

thing, because they

are often rendered in the lexicons

Latin word

by the same

for although

and

ovTu

/A^-TTw

by nondum, yet undoubtedly

For as ou and /^jj differ (on which

are both rendered

they

differ.

Hermann

point

has written in his edition of

Viger,) so also of necessity oDVw and

differ

and so

xsri, ovd's'TTors, //,)j3gcrore,

gard
6,

it

as a

we have

rifcsi

r,

oo^cc

mere

but in

rsXcg, in

Rom.

yivvr\%vTO}-j /xrjd' 'r^a^uvrojv tI

Heb.
I

n the

ix. 8,

/^t-JJ-^w

/x,??-

re-

accident, that in Matth. xxiv.

outw hri to
fj^oVy

will

f/^ri'ru

compounds ovxeri,
&c. Neither would we

will their

John

ix.

aya^hv

crs^ave^wd^a/

11,
tJ

rr,v

ii.

4,

o'j'ttoj

ya.^

/x^-^rw

xaxov,

and

ruv ccyiuv

in

cdov.

two former passages, we have a nega-

tion of the presence of a future thing.

In the

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

others,

it is

171

intimated, that one thing

before that another thing

is

is

present, to which that appertains.

there-

If,

(which could scarcely have been),

fore,

done

considered to be

it

had

o^a

fj^ov, it would have

been written
appeared uncertain whether that time would
come, which many believed to be already pre-

//-j^-^w ^'xs/

But

sent.

and

it

ri

was certain, that it would come,

was beyond a doubt that the time was
this

The

not yet come.

point denied, therefore,

was, that the time was come.

Paul could not have written

auruiv

On
ou'ttu

the contrary,

ya^

yevri^svruv

For he did not wish to intimate

was said, when the children

s^^s'^rj.

that such a thing

were not born, as if they were born, but that

it was said with a direct reference to their not
being born /^yids T^d^avrsg ri dya^ov %a%w. For
the force of the argument lies in this, that in
ri

tlie

decree of

God

all

regard to fortuitous

Wherefore
if the Apostle had written ou-ttw yi\\r^h7(av^ he
would have said, that the children were not
born when this was said, yet that God knew
that they were about to be born, and to act
well or ill and therefore that God decreed
events

is

put out of the question.

concerning

were

men

yet not born, as though they

which idea

Apostle,

is

foreign to the

and has given

rise

to

mind of the

many

painful

THE SYNONYMS

172

discussions respecting the divine prescience.

He

wrote, therefore,

might be referred

There

matter.

is

to

that the negation

/ajjtw,

the

mind of God

in the

a similar reason for the use

Heb. ix. 8. For

it is not denied that the way was then opened
but it is said that the Spirit taught this; and
of

,oo^vrw

in the other passage,

is not to be referred t-o

which
tlie matter itself
was absent, but to the
thought, for the Spirit admonished men not
If he
to think that the way was opened.

therefore the negation

had written outtu -rg^ai/g^wtf^a/, the notion of future time would have been introduced, as if the
Spirit

would teach
it

is

Besides, as
as

rojv

ay'im

was not

would be subsequently,
evident the Apostle did not mean.
ou negatives a thing simply, and

opened, but that

wliich

that the odog

it

(Hermann ad

regarded in the thought,

Viger. p. 807.) so also ourw

same way.
speaking of any

If I should

the

I infer that it

if I

say

M'^oi differ in

say,

ouVw

roXtra^

deny that it is yet done,

may be done hereafter; but

act, I

but

/A^-^rw

and

not only regard

it

as not done,

but I doubt, or at least I do not in any M^ay

imply, whether

shall yet

I doubt, therefore,

time.
said

it

in

the

be done at any

whether

it

could be

two passages formerly quoted

and /O-^tw rixst wpcc fiov, for by

/x^-Tw Ict] rb rsXogy

7}

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

the particle

/x^'tw

the thought of the event oo-

curring subsequently
fore in

to

axfi,dZpv7a

write ra
future
it

each other ra

and Tu

ou'ttm

oL-A.[i7]

And

put away.

is

Xenoph. Memorab.

opposed

173

iv. 4.

we

23,

ax/>ta^ovra,

'xoL^rixfjja'x.dTa.

there-

ra

Xenophon

find
fjjTi'joi

did not

because the time of the

ax{x>aCpvTa,

was not thought

of,

and therefore

occurs immediately afterwards, ra rwv

ov (fTTovdaTa.

ci.x[j,aZ6)irM))

But

[li]

to proceed.

I liave at different times observed, that the

lexicographers get into error in the explanation of

compound words

one common

thinking that as tlm

notion of the simple word exists

compounds, therefore the compounds

For alcannot differ between themselves.
though at times it may seem to matter little
which compound word a writer makes use of

in

its

in a particular place, yet

for us to consider

what

is

it

is

often needful

the specific force of

each.
xara(p^ovsTv

'^rs^Kp^ovsTv

are either of

them rendered,

temn, and so

far

contempt.

But the

to despise, to con-

they agree, that each signifies

contempt of others

twofold in the cause and the

when we

(y'7rs^(p^ovsTvy

mode

of

it,

is

either

think less of others than they deserve,

or more of ourselves than

idea would be expressed

we ought. The former

by

ptara^govs/i/,

the

latr

THE SYNONYMS

174

To

this j'rs^<poovm stands nearly

related, as appears

from a passage in Aristo-

phanes, (Nubb.

226, 227.) where Socrates

ter

by

'7rs^i(poovs7v,

V.

de^o^aroj xai

says,

rhv

'rrsPKp^ovu

T,ymy Strepsiades

would malignantly turn this, gVe/r a-ri raJ^oD

roui %0-jg v'rs^(p^ovsTg.
For he had said rrs^t(p^ovsTvj
which, as the Scholiast observes,
xai avri rou

sffrt,

'Tre^tcfxo'Tru),

di'rrXoarifiavrov

xal avri rov

v<:re^(p^ovu.

Strepsiades suggests therefore the word

/Va

(p^ovsTg,

another

as

^eojv,

who

dia^dXXr) rov

^rsjv^^oj's?, 2.

2oj'/C^drrjv

^^^(p^ovovvra ruv

For he

Scholiast notices.

e.

wrs^-

studiously and ambitiously

seeks divine things, runs the risk of thinking

that

he knows more than the Deity,

They

(pooveT.

therefore are said,

appear to themselves
dent than others.

Rom.

xii. 3,

If

v're^(ppo)iiTv

it is

u'7r(p^onTv,

who

said simply, as in

/J^n V'7rso(pooviTv, cra^' o dsT(p^oveTv,

words

^-^sg-

be wiser and more pru-

think more of oneself than

nifies to

for the

to

i, e,

<rap' o 8T<p^oveTv,

is

sig-

it

right

explain the word

so that unless the consent of the

rious codices had confirmed the text,

it

var-

might

have been regarded as an explanatory gloss

for a few codices omit it.
The contrary to

whence Hesychius

this is

(Sctxp^oviTv

(p^oveTg'

m^i(roj(p^oviTg'

fore

we

smra/y^g,

find in
!Mr,biig

u'rs^<p^oviTg.

c. ii.

mv

writes,

In Titus there-

15, 'ikiyyj avrovg

TioKp^onirUy

'tte^/-

fji^erd rraffrig

" warn them most

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

175

no one think
For

seriously, with all authority, that

himself above the need of admonition."

the admonition be only given xara

if

(1 Cor. vii. 6,)

ers should not regard

and should treat

nes,

n^i^ <7rs^i(p^om

despises

Socrates

it

be feared

to

it is

So also in AeschiFor he is foolish who

roD

"(^jlv.

Neither was this the notion of

life.

but he had learned from the instruc-

he now

sig afi^shu

fore he had

sOrfs/Sw?,

and the

fi,ira(Srri<s6iMvov,

and there-

fear of death,

But a

be-

little

to

Timothy,

Tim.

iv.

no man

Gou rr,i vidrrirog xaraip^ovsiru, let

{JjYihiig

n xarw,

or/,

Stlid xara(p^ovri(fai b'jrs^SaXkovruv "^tj^iuv

But Paul writes

^!Cig.

12,

ohov

man,

be superior, both

feels himself to

to the pleasures of life

ars

hear-

as applicable to them,

it

avu, svdatfiovsTv dsTrov /Ss/S/wxora

fore

lest the

lightly.

tions of this wonderfully wise

71

cjyyvojfiriv

despise thy youth, but be thou an example.

It

were

in

it

false to

xara^govg/P

the having cause of contempt.

force of the
ri

say that here

ivog

word

is

The proper

evident in Matth.

av^g^gra/, xal rou krs^ov xaraOPOvsTg^

disregard, neglect the other.

4, T^s

involves

fiax^o^v/Jbiag

rov

So

in

vi.

24,

he will

Rom.

ii.

^iou %ara(p^oviTg, despisest

knowing that the goodness of God,

1
Timothy vi. 2, it is used in the

thou, not

&c.

In

same

sense,

(p^ovBiTcaffav^

on

o]

Tigrovg

ddsX(poi

s^ovrag dsgrorag

g/Viv,

fin

xara-

dXXoe, /MaXXov dovXivnruffoiv,

THE SYNONYMS

176

but

when

Heb.

in

xaTa(p^ovri<sagy

cL-oyjovr^c,

meaning

object being

the

elliptically,

Finally,

is

it

omitted.

2, Jesus

xii.

said,

is

manifest that

the

not that our Lord held himself

is

above the force of contumely, but that he so

disregarded or despised the shame, as that he

was willing

to

endure the cross ; which

is

the

real force of the word.

Take another example

d^otXXarrs/v

biaXkamir

xctraXkamir

These compounds of
strictly to

change, (as

of the words

aXkarniVy

it

were, to do different^

nal condition and place of

this, that this original force

to

which means

to the thing itself, or the exter-

ly), either as

OT

aToxa-

it,

agree so far as

of a change of state

mind exists in them all; but they differ as

the mode of thought, and are therefore pro-

perly accounted synonyms.

For

acraXXarrs/i/

properly

to

is

remove, and

from some-

dcraXXarrsffi^a; airo rivog is to set free

tiling;

and therefore,

by a

of one who,

in

Heb.

ii.

certain cause,

15,
is

it is

said

delivered

and absolved, whether by a friendly paction or

a judicial sentence and more especially of the
;

who dismisses the debtor

Luke xii. 58, ^v rfj odu 66c

creditor or the accuser

or the guilty.

So,

s^yaolav d'xrjXXu^^ai d'X

avroij,

which

is

usually

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

177

rendered " Give diligence, that thou mayst be

delivered from him, lest he shoukl take thee to
the judge."

thenes pro Phorm.

afjjxsv

u--r7]XXa^iv

/y

'TTsoI

from

It differs

(p. 95*2,

Demos-

a(psivai;

Reisk.)

oVa r/s

xa/'

et adv. Pantaen.

966.)

(p.

av rig a^g/g xa) ccxaXkd^cig hxdZ^irar (vid.

vv. dd.

ad Harpocrat.

v. d(pdg).

of notice also, that d-raXXdrrsiv

worthy

It is

is

said not only

who sets free the debtor, but of

who satisfies his creditor; which
has been shown in many instances by Raphelius
of the creditor

the debtor

and

on the above passage, and in

Eisner'^

Dresigius de verbis mediis, p. 180.

case, therefore,

In

this

must be under-

d':raXXdrrsSa,i

stood of the debtor who, before he reaches the

how

judge, would endeavour any

his creditor, that

to

sacrifice

And
sider

may

let

him

something than

^og

s^yaffiav

satisfy

go, and rather

to stand

I rather agree with those

which sense
^

he

to

who do

trial.

not con-

a Latinism, da operant^

(in

never met with the word), but

Eisner, on this passage, says, " Beza has rendered this

when

incorrectly, ut libereris ah eo,

its

real force

thou mayst depart from him," referring

tuart a.'TTa.X'ka.aiTKrSa.i ct'

auruv rag

you may be released by him,

support of

this,

voffovg

as appeased ;"

Aristoph. Nubib. 1194.

is,

that

Acts xix. 12,

or rather, " that
to

and quotes, in

THE SYNONYMS

178
that
to

it

refers to the

sum

or compensation given

The same

appease the creditor.

Matth.

in the parallel passage

idea exists

v. 25,

i'ff^/

ilvouv

These words are rightly explained by Zonaras, (p. 920, and Phavorimis),

TM- dvridixu)

(fou.

from an old commentator,

and hence

xg/o3a/;

it

xa^rahiyoM (j^aXXov adi-

does not involve in

d'TraXkarrsiv

word

appears, that the

it

properly the

notion of reconciling or appeasing, unless

who

the thought that he

flows from

away

But

satisfied is appeased.

is

it

sent

this idea will

appear more plainly in the words

and xaraXXdrrzjv,

diccXXdrrnv

They, however, differ for diaXXdrrsiv is said

of many, xctraWdrrm of one. The former is to
;

Xeno-

cause a mutual enmity to cease, as in

phon, biaWdmiv rag

So

>-e/5.

Matth.
not

it

V.

mean

'XokifidiKSag cr^og

occurs once in the

24, ^laKkdy^^i

ru)

dXkrjXovg

iro-

New Testament,

ddsX<pu}

It

ffov.

does

here, see that he be reconciled to

thee, but, see that ye be reconciled to each

other.

It is

not sufficient that he should be

no longer angry, but that both parties should

be on good terms. And hence, ^/aXXaxr^c is

one who reconciles hostile

si

crhusius ad Thom. Mag.

y.ciraXkdrriDi is strictly,

opposite party

may

parties.

(See

v. dirjXXdyri.)

Hem-

Whilst

SO to act as that the

lay aside his enmity.

Ac-

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

179

curacy, therefore, required in the above pas-

sage of Matthew,

biaXkayri^i,

Neither

is this

sage in Thucydides

one party

the other

contradicted

by a pas-

for the latter refers but to

to both.

not xaraWdyr^i

where the SchoFor

liast says, 7h hi TLCcraXkayrivai to hiuXXay^vai.
he does not say this without addition, and simply; but 'TT^og dXXyjXovg zaraXXayrimty which is in
Hence, xaraXXayrif properly
fact BtaXXayj^vai.
ill the singular, is not a mutual reconciliation,
but the conciliating of one party. Nor does
(iv. 59.),

Aristophanes, Avibus,

have written rashly,

v.

'tts^^

1597, appear to us to

'^toXs/mio

xarceXXa^^?,

and

Grammarians would have it, xara/.Xa/wv.

For ToXifj.og is taken collectively, as the
one enmity of those parties warring, on the
subsiding of which the war ceases, and dtaXXdrrovrai oi ToXs/xoD'yrgg.
Certainly he could not

not, as the

have written
in V. 1539,
15, the

Xayn
the

vj

-n-s^/ 'jroXiiioio

and

d'TofSoXri

7(,6(f,(iou,

v.

1584.

ru)\>

So, in

away

it

occurs

Romans

'lovdatm is said to

the putting

means of

dtaXXayuv, as

of the

reconciliation to others

xi.

be xaraX-

Jews

is

not that

it is the cause of the union of Jews and Gentiles in the Christian community; for this
would be unmeaning in itself, and foreign to
the mind of the Apostle.
Neither, in two

other passages,

Rom.

v. 11,

and 2 Cor.

v. 18,

THE SYNONYMS

180
1

9,

does y.aruWay^

God were

as if

mean

the remission of sins,

appeased, and a mutual recon-

between God and man.

ciliation takes place

In the former passage, undoubtedly, ^araXkayy^

means the

actual reconciliation of

death of Christ; for

XdyrnMiv;

we

and not that God

In the other passage, the

is

not the

office

men by

being enemies

the

'/tarr^k-

%arr^Xa.yr\ rui

xoff/M(jJ.

rng xccToKkctyni

diaxovia,

of teachins: the doctrine of the

remission of sins,

i. e.

of the expiation

but

it is

the office itself, as exercised by the Apostle, of advising, exhorting, beseeching

rtZ

%(Z,

For

i.

it is

(John

iii.

e.

the office of effecting the xaraXkayri,

God was

not that
16,)

nor was

his reconciliation
^3oD,

men, xaraXXdyrin

the

enemy

of

men

the object to be effected

but that

men

being

should return into favour with

^-x^i^'

God;

"^^^

i.

e.

since by sin theyare become adverse to the divine

sanctity,

and possess a carnal mind inimical

to

ea^xhg g%^^a

iig

God, (Rom.
^eov,)

viii. 7, rh

(poovTjfMot,

rr^g

and, therefore, have reason to fear his holy

becomes those to do who have

not been obedient to the law, and know that they
authority, (as

it

cannot please God,) they

may now

return to

God that, as is well expressed by

Morns, they should not only cease to fear for
themselves respecting God, but that they
favour with

should cease from their resistance to his autho-

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

rity.

We know how much

it

181

has obscured the

doctrines of the Gospel, that interpreters have

not distinguished with sufficient accuracy the

words of sacred Scripture

but

most abun-

it is

dantly shown, by means of this very word,

necessary

it

is

to observe the strict

and proper

We should be

careful also

force of all words.

not to confound
^^5

is

ought
called

and

7\affSiiv

'AaraXkciyr^vcLi

rw Ssw.

%(traXka66m^

XatfCwv savTtjjf

firi

as

Neither

to
^^

God

Christ

is

God and

himself, for

X?"^'^'?

Xoyi^^ofisvog avroTg

Wherefore, we

men may and

haXkactsm

man; the word is applied

truly it was God who was
ahroj)).

xaraXXarrs/c. /Xac-

the cause for the which

how

ra

''o'^/^o"

y-ocrak-

'rra^aTTOj/xara,

must not suppose that

these words are said av^owToTa^a;^

for

nothing

can be said more truly worthy of the holiness

and wisdom of the Almiarhtv, than that which

except we rashly mix up
is contained in them
with them the unfounded notion of an appeas;

ing of the divine anger.

But as
differs

the force of

from

xaraXXaffu-s/v,

diaXkd<f6siv,

inasmuch as

may be abundantly

thered from these passages of the

ment, so also
writers.

So

may
in the

it

ga-

Testa-

be traced in other Greek

Cyrop.

said xccraXkaysig Kugw.

New

it

vi. 6, 2,

Orontes

is

Formerly he had made

war on Cyrus, but now he dissembled

with

THE SYNONYMS

IB2

him, sm^oukivzi Kugw, and professed friendship.

Cyrus, however, having discovered his deceit,

complained of him, and

sXa(3ov %cl\ sSfiuxa.

^gj/ai/

Joseph us Ant. lud.

vi. 7, 4, rra^axaXsTv TJ^^aro rh

%0Vf x,ocraXkdTr2(^cct

ruj

2avXuj

vii. 8, 4, tC) gavrov 'xaibi

opp.

aurov h^yriv a<psg'

ypCki'iramiv

(a^

kcli

xaraXkdyrj^i xa/

r/jv 'Tr^og

And

ci'Trs^^sff^ai ruJ 'rraibi.

in

Book iii. 15, 2, he says, that the Jews entreated

Moses that he would be xaraXTuzxr^^S aOrwv ir^hg
rhv ^soi', but tliat Moses refused, because God
was not

rashly,

but deservedly angry with

In Demosthenes

them.

ed. Reisk. rovg "EXXrivag

i. c.

who would

we

es Ttai do/Mvg.

oS

got

And

conf. Helen, v. 1251.

Schol. oVwg

said of Ajax,

EurixaraXXu^^Tsa

conciliate the offended.

Sophocles, Ajac.
yJiXov.

btaXkaTtroUy

dso(j,vovg

o^&i^

pid. Iph. in Aul. v. 1157,

'TTipi

read, p. 189, 16,

v.

744,

rriv

ug zaraXXd^^?}

^soTatv

g'^^^ai/ acro^rjra/.

who, through

offended with the gods.

in

This

his insanity,

is

was

Further examples are

needless.

We have only now

to notice

aroxaraXXam/v,

which only occurs twice in the New Testament, Ephes. ii. 16, xa/ a-roxaraXXa^Tj rovg dfKp'
orspovg sv m (Su)/j,ari ruJ ^oJ. and Coloss. i. 20, xa/
0/'

auTov aToxaraXXa^a/

meaning

in the

ra,

'^ravroc eig

former passage

the Apostle himself in v. 15,

is

aurov.

The

explained by

frot^aag

ru

d{j^<p6ri^a

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT,

V

in the latter

by

s/^rivoToiyimg,

in both there is

we know

the same notion which

per meaning of xaraXXdrrstv,

as in the

itself,

be gathered from
u'TroxaraXXdrrsiv,

in xaraXXuTTsiv

v.

For the notion

are

much

in the

whole formula, as

But then

22.

in the

ma)'^

word

there seems a greater force than

for xaTaXXayivrsg, are they

return into favour with any one

Xayevrsg,

be the pro-

to

of mutual alienation exists not so

word

183

M^ho

they,

lay aside

so

who

but acroxaraXtheir

enmity that amity follows nor does any impediment remain to their living accordantly
;

hi

sv

GuifMuri^

the one head of which

is

Christ,

Eph. i. 10, dvccTtzcpaXaiujaac^at rd irdvra h rui XoigTOj.

For though in words compounded of two or

more prepositions

we must

not expect to

must be

find proportional emphasis,' yet care

'

is

That

is

signified

emphasis, says Quintillian, ^x. 2, where more

than

is

said

or as he says elsewhere,

viii. 3,

the

existence of a deeper thought, than that which words seem

Ernesti states more correctly,

to express.
net, vol.

i.

p. 52.)

"that emphasis

customed meaning of the word

section, that

no Avord

is

is

(See Bibl. ('abi-

an accession

and he adds,

emphatic in

itself;

to the ac-

in the next

for every

word

has a certain definite meaning, and conveys a precise idea

which there can be no emphasis." And therefore emmust not be looked for, unless we
gather from the mind of the speaker, that some additional
in

phasis, or additional force,

force

is

intended to be added to the customary force of the

word, or that the writer evidently meant more than the

THE SYNONYMS

184

taken, not to assume rashly that words of this

kind mean only and precisely the same thing.

The preposition a^-o has this force, that if it be

added to a compound verb, it increases its
power, and indicates that the thing intended
by that word is done altogether absolutely, or
in a greater degree.

So

ar2x5s;)^(r^a/ is

to ex-

pect constantly, not only for a certain time,

but even to the end,

happens,

Rom.

same remark

viii.

p. 128.)

19

the expected event

1

Cor.

i.

7.

The

which
show (de Vit. Lex. N. T.

will apply to u'roTcaoadoxiTv,

Fischer labours to

xocpadoxuv.

till

does not differ from the simple word

We

grant indeed, that emphasis

must not be looked for, and that both words

may be rendered by the same Latin word, exjnctare ; but we deny that the force and meaning of both words is precisely the same, or that
word which he has used conveys.

Therefore in comparing

such words as KaocchoKUv, k'Kmcu^cchoKiW

\Kh'i^i(T6a.k,

^tcr^ai' o^i^tiv, I'^oo^l^iiv yivuerxiiv, T^oytvuffKUv^

we

kviKh't-

are not tO

expect emphasis arising from the compound, but to inquire

really in itself means more than
uncompounded word. But the whole figment about emphasis, has arisen from the misunderstanding of compound
words, as I have shown in my dissertation on the force of
prepositions in compound words in the New Testament.
Emphasis is not in a word, because it means more by itself
than another word, but because he who uses it means more
by it, than the word itself would convey.

whether the comf>ound

the

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

sometimes

Polybius,

many

whilst in

writing

185

d'TroxapadoxiTv,

other places he writes

had no design

in

xcc^cc^oxiTvy

dropping the preposition.

Certainly in those places which are adduced,

it

appears manifest that

man who

expects an event, (as

word

Suldas, the

a'Troxa^adoxIa,

buted to Polybius,
a<7roxa^adoxcov,

o'ttoi

xa} rhyyig

d^svuv

ha,

(S\)iJjfjjayjag^

d'TTOxa^otdoxsTv

again

(n. 3*2. p.

ToXswg,

siti

Polyb.

xvi.

1,

(as in

doxriffiv %ig IfM

by

itself,

diligently

r)

irgayiLCLra.

ro7g xai^oTg

ira^ovGiav

d'^rsxa^ccdoxn rovg

is

svs-

and
rng

In which passages,

very evident. Also in

aTTSxa^adoxsi

which
i.

e.

rev

(conf.

xhdvvov.

Is

properly to stretch

to direct the eyes to

any

Aristoph. Equit. v. 660, exa^a-

(3ovXn

-TrdXiv.

according to

Schol.

my

to expect.

chius says, xa^adoxsr

d'ra/3X\)^v)

And

or

may happen,

therefore,

ir^ogdoxsT, sxds-^srat^

rh xi<paXuiov rov '^^dy^arog.

means

opinion, to observe

what may be done

and thence,

attri-

Hi. 7, 26.)

I.

xa^adoxsTv,

forth the head,

thing,

is

cragg/x/SoX^j,

n. 9. (p. 23. ed.

doxp

Tivog 'iffovrai yvui/xrig.

Joseph. B.

But

s.

Avri6')(ou

the notion here stated

ra

p(;&jg>j<ro/

[M,ri

rriv

65.)

r^

-TT^ifffSsurag 'Trsfcmiv sig rijv

(ywsjSovXsvov avroJ,

VTS^

'PoofiTjv

say, ab-

which

xaSJjirro Iv

ds

in Excerpt, de Legat.

Ursin.)

we

of

So on that passage, in Zonaras and

warten.)

And

a-Toxaga^oxs/v, is said

And in

thls,

ri

Hesys'?nrr]oiT

Zonaras

THE SYNONYMS

186

TImaeus agree.
Whence also, haxa^ahoxCv^ which word Toup.
restores for the word xa^ahxttm Suidas, (See
the Etymol. Mag., Suidas, and

Emendat.

in

Suidam,
that

dhx.aadoxr}gafLev,

p. ii.p. 310.) rnv roxr exehrjv

passed the whole

we

is,

night through expecting.

In this sense,
and others, but

used by Polybius

xa^adoxsTv is

see that

all will

we

possible, but that in thought

scarcely

is

it

shall subjoin

the additional notion, which I have said to be

peculiar to

viz. the

acroxa^a^oxg/V,

expectation

of the event, or happening, of a certain thing;

for

he M^io

is

happen, diligently watches

and does not expect

word 'T^ogdjXiTv would be used,

that

all

in the sense in

event, as

we

may

interested in that which

say, erioarten

i.

is

done,

which the

to await the

e.

but in the sense of

may consider what he should

the event occurs either the one wav or the

observing, that he
do, if

It is used simply

other.

p. 604. ed.

Moses,

Paris.)

/x/x^o'v

uTTO^iv

by

Philo. (vita

speaking of the
sxaoadoxsi

ro

drro^yjffo/LsvoVf

which Clemens Alex, expresses by

(vid.

a<!ro^ri(r6fMsvov.

Mem.

iii.

5,

6.)

who

strsTrj^si

rh

Diodor. Sic. xix. 16, Xenoph.

In Herodotus

find, xa^ccdoxsovrsg tov ToXe/tLov

enar.

Mos.

sister of

affirms that

tj

vii.

<7r^ffssTai,

Diodorus

168,

we

See ValckSic.

speak-

ing of the same thing, has written xa^adoxouvrsi

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

rag rou ToXsfiou
doxiTv differ,

V.

^O'Trdg.

The word

ccvdnv T^ogdoKuiv

and

xa^a-

xaoaUxn,

ccmjia^adox/a occurs twice in the

Testament; in Philipp.

aroxa^adoKtccv xal
35

'Tr^ogdoxsTv

appear from Euripides, Rhes.

will

144. ffaXTiyyog

New

That

]87

sXmda

fiov,

aTToxa^aaox/a r^j xr/Vewg.

i.

20, xara r^y

and Romans

viii.

19,

In both places, the

notion exists of an expected event.

In the
former passage, the Apostle said, however ill
things went, yet he would be of good courage,
because he knew on rovro avru) dTO^/jgirai tig
auTvj^/av;

and he

calls this anticipated

issue dmxa^adoxia, xa/ sXmg.

And

prosperous

in the latter

passage, the word could not properly be un-

derstood in the force of

pectation.

It

so rendered,
>.u^j//v ru)V

vim

'^r^ogdoxia,

or simple ex-

would be sadly tame

if it

^ d'rroxa^adoxio. rijg xr/<fsug r^v

rov SsoD d<7rexde^irui, viz.

were

aToxd-

the expec-

tation of the creature (rns xrigsug) expects.

is

It

rather the solicitous and anxious regard to,

and desire

of,

the probable issue in afflictive

circumstances, which looks for the d'xoxdXv-^if,

Luther renders

it

well

das angstliche Harren,

But students should be warned not

to allow

themselves to imagine, that in the explana-

words given by the old lexicographers,

all the words which they thus put down together have the same force and meaning ; for
tions of

THE SYNONYMS

188

they frequently use synonymous terms"*

plain an obscure word. Fischer

respect
doxia

when he endeavours

and

d<roxa^ado%la

do not

to

to

ex-

wrong in this
show that xa^ais

He brings

differ.

forward the authority of Hesychius, who says,

that airoxa^ahxia

word

the

But, to return to

is <r^og5ox/a.

aToxaraXXarrs/v.

In

this

passage

is

recorded that great and extensive conversion

of the state of things on earth which

decreed

to effect

by

Christ, that all

God

has

men, freed

from pride, covetousness, and the love of foolish

and at length reconciled to God, xarakXayhng t'Sj ^suj, encouraged by one hope, and
seeking eternal life through one Saviour, should
unite in one society or communion, sv svi ffui/xari,
vanities,

of which the Lord himself

h^r\ dia ra

'^a^a<:rru)fji,a<ra

And

hi7(.aiu<siv TiiMuv,

if

is

rjfiojv

we do

the head,
xai

og rra^i-

bia

rr^v

not yet see

all

Tiyio^ri

nations, nor all professing Christians, realizing

this

wondrous benefit and

do perceive
cLy^^i

rou

vvv,

cratfay r^v

let

amxccoadoxla xai

blessing, though

we

xrkiv gvgrevd^etv xai gvvudmiv

US cleave more earnestly to the

eXrr/g

of the Apostle

not unduly confident of our own

and while

state,

but cer-

tainly not despairing of a prosperous issue in

" That
l>y

is, in the strict sense of the word synonym, as used

Titmann; words ranging together under a common

^e.ius, but

having each a

specific difference.

T.

OF THE
eternal felicity,

NEW TESTAMENT.

a'Trixhy^ojin^ot.

xar^X?\.ay7j/Agv rui
'TToXXu)

avToZ.

For

vio^iffiav,
'^)(^i'^'

^gw, did rou ^avdrov rov

fidXXov xaraXkaysMTig

hereafter, -raca

r^g fiaraiorrirog

rnv

E/ yd^

d'Tox.dXu'^iv Tojv viuv Tov ^sov.

189

by

liim,

(fu^riffo/i/.s^a
yj

rriv

ovrsg

v/ov aurou,
Iv

rfj

^oj9]

XTiatg d'xaXXayr,6ir(x,i

by means of whom God

has decreed dTOxaraXXd^ai rd

itdvTci iJg aurov.

THE SYNONYMS

190

CHAPTER
Such

is

VIII.

the abundance of words in the

Greek

language, which may be accounted synonymous, that the further I proceed in these inI see less

vestigations,

reason to hope that I

For while my
advancing years admonish me, the work groAvs
on my hand; and the limits of such a work
shall bring

them

to

a close.

seem inadequate to include the many subjects

I would not, however, willingly
before me.
fail

those

fied

with

who have

my

not been altogether dissatis-

labours,

and therefore as yet

proceed in explaining the synonyms of the

New

Testament.

I would speak, therefore, now of those synonyms which are of frequent occurrence, but to

which much
difference

difficulty attaches,

existing between

quently lost sight of in

because the

them

common

is

use,

so frethat

it

may be doubted whether even the more elegant

Greek writers have always correctly observed it.
I

speak of those words which relate to the senses,

and to things applicable to the senses, such

as words of liearing, seeing, feeling, and others

OF THE
which,

when they

NEW TESTAMENT.

191

are transferred to express the

assume a very varied force and

acts of mind,

It occurs in all languages, that the

character.

mind
must be expressed by

notions of things which pertain to the

and

its

various

offices,

words which have their origin in the several

But

powers of the external senses.

all

perceptions there

tion,

is

a triple

mode

since in

of percep-

either of the object perceived, or of the

subject affected, or of the thought which arises

from the relation of both,

follows that words

it

drawn from the powers of the

senses,

when

transferred to the mind, or from the relation of

external things,

modes

in

may

be used in

which the mind

the various

all

thus

is

affected; although all these several

moved

or

modes may

be found conjoined in the same perception.

Whence,

it

may appear
use, with

may
to

arise, that

words of

this

kind

be capable of a promiscuous

no other object

in

view from their

interchange except a certain gratification of

elegant taste.

phon's

have

So when Socrates, in Xeno-

Memorab.

said, to

s^iTiveTi^aif

i.

4,

17,

chv fj,h o^a,aa duvas'^at

is
s'Tri

related

rhv ci rou ^ov 6(p'i^aX/Mhv aduvarov sJvai

xdvra h^^r there are

it

a/xa

few but would think that

ofj^u^a and o<p^aXfi6v waa
might have been written

the difference between

such only, that

to

croXXcc ffrddia

THE SYNONYMS

192
c/x/xa

^oD

and

o^^aX/^ov ac^Pwcrou

yet

am

convinced that Xenophon did not

quite

in this in-

mere elegance the

stance avoid as a matter of

same word, but that the use

of each was justified by its own peculiar force
and meaning, o^^a^aoj may be applied to the
repetition of the

deity, but

liiy^(*'

can only be applied with pro-

But

priety to men.

let us notice other

ex-

amples.
jSXsTs/v

%av

]hi'ir

'(j'XTiS^cir

^iac^ar

(^sw^sTv.)

Since the eyes are not only " the light of

the

satellites of the

that the

ministers and

sedulous

but the

body,"

mind

also,

it is

not surprising

Greeks should have so many words,

v/hich relate properly to the use of the eyes.

And the German

language

also, like the

Greek,

abounds in words which express the widely exOf those which

tensive functions of the eyes.
occur in the New Testament, we may consider
their several relation to,

and

difi*erence

from

each other.
jSXsvrg/i/

ply, to

is

a word of wide extent.

use the eyes, to see.

sight, /3Xe-g/.
sight,
7.

Luke

And

/3X8'T<J/xva

It is
vii.

often

21
in

used of those
;

It is sim-

He who
who

has

recover

Matth. xv. 31 John ix.

New Testament, rA
;

the

are, the things

are the things which

seen by the eyes (o^ara

may

be seen).

Hence

OF THE NEW TESTAiMENT.

in Mattli. v. 28, is

simply to see or look at a

woman, without reference

idea

is

They who

to look

on

ix. 62,

oudsig

xccl (SKsxojv

s}g

s/'g

ra

ixt^irog

h'xi(S(f},

which passage
properly rendered, " He

is

(3Xs-Triv

rd omgoj

huv

is

s/'j

Luke

as in

a^or^ov,

I-tt

rriv (SaffiXs/av

generally, but im-

who

and then turns

s/g

rh sTi'^vfii^ffcj

%s/^a ahrou

t7\v

Tov ^soy,

say,

SKs'tthv

s-TrijSaXujv

to the plough,

'Trohg

turn their eyes to any thing

are said,

it

That

passion.

to

expressed subsequently,

aurTjg.

193

puts his hand

For they

back.^'

to rush

to revert,

the Hebrew,

which
words of seeing are sometimes used for
journeying, as in Genesis xix. 26, where the
word ZD^nij and she looked back, is to be understood of the actual return, not only from its
back and they appeal
;

own

force,

to

in

but because of the explanation

Luke

af-

But though it is
probable that the wife of Lot not only looked
back, but returned, and in that return was
forded by

suffocated; yet
that ^Xs-ntv

/';

32.

xvii.

it

does not follow from

6'xiffoj

that ^Ksrsiv signifies, to journey

more complete non

found.

In

fact,

return,

or

than which a

sequitur could scarcely be

the notion of return

required here, nor can

first,

to

signifies

this,

it

is

neither

be admitted.

For

they have to insert the notion of the par-

which

ticular time, ajid then,

is

not found in

THE SYNONYMS

194

the sentence; the composition of which requires

that the time should be the

man

same

in

which the

puts his hand to the plough and looks

back.

Besides, the person to which this re-

lates,

had asked permission, before he followed

Christ, to bid his friends farewell,

which would

him then actually to return home,

same time, there existed in his

require

whilst, at the

mind the
the Lord

real intention of returning to follow

Jesus, as others, v. 59, 60.

therefore, the inconstancy

the

man

that

is

thus reproved

said without hesitation,

thee

;"

even

and

It is not,

vacillation
;

" Lord,

for

of

he had

I will

follow

but that heavy and sensual mind, which

in such

crisis

prevented the forgetful-

ness of external things, and by which the desire

for the

kingdom of God is repressed and deOur Lord could not mean that this

teriorated.

young man had already hegun the worh, which

they affirm to be the meaning of o st/^uXuv rriv
;i^/^a

abrov Iv a^or^ov,

and then wished

as unwilling to return.

agree with the account of

youth

plough.

for

to leave

it

Neither of these ideas

this well-disposed

he had not yet put his hand to the

And

he was evidently wishing to re-

turn to the Lord Jesus, that he might follow

him

altogether.

To me it

appears, that Christ

used the image merely of a labourer,

who with

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

195

hand actually on the plough, looks back,

and therefore moves not onward with alacrity,
but pauses in his course. The meaning of
the passage would seem to be, That man is
not fit for the kingdom of God, who hangs
back and still hankers after those things, which
he is bound to leave resolutely behind him.
For ^Xs'Trm sig ti, properly means nothing more
his

than turning the eyes to an object: as Xeno-

phon. Anabas.

iv.

ug a^ara ^dvra

sffr/.

times

to

1.15,
It,

ISXs-^ov iig

ra

opn, ^cci 7di

however, means some-

observe accurately with desire; as

and Mark xii. 14, ov ISXsjrsig iig

'}r^6<S(t)'xov dv^Poj'Truy.
See concerning this formula
In the
vv. dd. ad Lucian. i. M. D. p. 378.
same way it may be transferred to the mintl.
But it is sufficient to keep by the proper notion of the word, which corresponds with the
German, sehen. Nor is it strange that /SXs^s/v,
Matth.

xxii. 16,

although

it is

used for the actual sense of see-

ing, should not only be applied to things

which

do not see nor perceive the things placed before them, as in Acts xxvii.

affirmed of things

to

12; but

is

also

be perceived by other

Yet it cannot be said, that ^Xirsiv is,

For in the passage (SXs'rovTag xu<povg
to hear.
XaXovvrag, we must not render it, hearing the
dumb to speak, for then it would have been
senses.

THE SYNONYMS

196

written XaXsTv; but

word

it is

properly seeing, for the

^Xirovrag belongs not only to xu(povg, but

and the other words

may quote, Apoc. i. 12,

to xuXko-jg

in the sentence.

Men

sfriffr^s-^a /SXgTs/v

rriv

(puv^v

7^

iSxirztv is

"

He

heard

rig sXdXrjtfs fj^ir

not

to hear.

But even

s/ao-j.

It

were needless

to say

turned to hear the voice," for he had

it

but he turned that he might ascertain

from whence the voice came.

of the

mark

Greek

writers.

and

here,

opjiv,

Equally wide

are the passages adduced from

For

in these the

do not mean

to hear

words

oWecr^a/

but to perceive

mentally whether by seeing or hearing, as in

Aeschylus.

(Prom,

ouTc rot

o-^si

fjt,o^(priv

vinct. v. 21.) // ovrs

(conf.

Sopliocl.

(po^^Vy

Trach.

v.

365.

That

(SXsmiv

only denotes the act of seeing,

without any thought of the object presented

to the sight, will
/3Xg///^a

appear also from the fact that

does not signify the thing seen, as

but the eye, or the aspect in which

And

hence, finally,

we

o^a/^a,

we

see.

arrive at the explana-

which occurs twice in the

Testament, ^Xsmiv uto rmg. There it is

tion of that formula,

New

said, that (SXs'xnv is to

set,

beware

they rashly confound

another,

/^Xe^n-s /x^,

But, besides

this,

from which
it Is

but, at the out-

this
it

formula with

widely

impossible to

differs.

make

out

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

197

means to beware for oneself;

he who wishes to beware of any thing does

that (SXimiv
for

rivog

d'TTo

not turn his eyes from

they say the

(as

it,

swallow does), but steadily looks at the object

to

be avoided;

irm

iig

cre/v d'TTo

from
is

rmg

it.

to turn the

is

to turn

is

But

as

/3Xe-

eyes to a thing, so

/SXs-

^Xs'ttsi ij^n

rt.

-^ratf;^?!

away

the eyes, as flying

In this formula, therefore, the idea

rather to avoid, and to fly from, than to be-

ware of; and

this is evident in

uto rra

ogarg, ^Xs<xsrs

ware of them,

fly

Zptirig

ruv

15,

viii.
i.

be-

e.

Surely he would

from them.

not twice say, beware

Mark

cpa^tffa/Cfiv,

but he wished his dis-

ciples not to follow the hollow professions of

these men, as
o^arg,

'7r^o6sy(^iTS

xii.

38.

dirh rrig

And

XJ^iiY\g r. (p.

Matth. xvi.
But, in

6,

fact,

these pages would not contain the examples,

if

we

show how frequently

are to

all

such for-

mulae are confounded together in our

lexi-

cons.

The word
although

it

ooav diff'ers

means

from

^Xs-ttsi

in this, that

to see, yet it is referred to

the thing seen, or presented to the eye.

is

said of one

who

he sees nothing

^Xsmi

uses his eyes, even though

(^Xs^rovrgg ov ^Xs'Trovfff ;) 6^a,

of

one who sees something. Hence

which is seen, ooaffig the species or form of the
thing which falls on the eye, o^arov, that which
o^a/xa is tluit

THE SYNONYMS

198
it

submitted to sight, which

And

is visible.

o^av

never used absolutely, but as associated

is

with the thought of that which

looked

is

at.

becomes him who would avoid error

or deception, diligently to circumspect and
to observe all things, we may comprehend

But

as

how

these expressions, %,

way we

this

Moses

rroi7]ffpg.

is

warned

it

cautiously, lest they do that

,'j^n

viii.

And

and

exists

(SXzTsrs

be made acwhen we say

who are about

yet they

first

place

which they ought

although in both forms,

/^jj,

%a

5,

may

do any thing, to examine in the

not to do.

And

observe accurately

to

the intended building, that

sig-

fjuri

lest.

Heb.

explain

But
cording to the pattern.
o^arSf h^an fin, we require those
to

ooan

o^ars,

take care, see that, beware

nify,

in

it

o^are

the notion of being ware,

For as

differ.

SXecrere,

with-

out a negation, signifies only, use your eyes,

that

you may see

Philip,

2,

iii.

command
object.

correctly, as in

so o^are

Cor. x. 18,

has this force, that

the eyes or the

mind

It is said, therefore, correctly in

xxii. 26, ^^a r/ (MiXkug

'xonTv.

And

/SXecre

have been used, for the centurion

may look
he command

ed that he

at

do, lest

scourged.

On

is

what he

Roman

the contrary, in

we

to turn to the

Acts

could not

admonish-

is

about to

citizen

Mark

to
iv.

be
24,

OF THE
it is ^Xs'^rsrs 71

18j

we have

NEW TESTAMENT.
which in Luke

axousrg, for

/Sxi-rers

Tug

199
viii.

as in Ephes. v.

dxov&rs,

For in all
these passages the proper force of the word is
referred to the mind, and therefore /SXs-Trg/v may
be joined with dx.ovsiv; but it could not have
/SXs'Tsrg

15,

been,

'TTUjg

dxotfSciJg

ogars r/ dxovsTs

to the object seen,

have used

word
hence

it

for

And

otherwise.

arises that

o^ccv is

always referred

and no good writer would

ogav this force,

it

'Trs^irrareTri,

as there

which we

it is

is

in the

call objective,

joined with those pre-

by which the thought is referred

the object seen. For in the compound word

positions only,
to

d(popdv

there

tion

one,

is

a twofold force in the preposi-

by which

removed, so that

the force of the

word

is

away, as
in Cyrop. vii. 1. 36, Tama/v d(pooojvTac^ for they
smote the backs of the Egyptians; another
it signifies,

to look

which intimates that the thing itself is removed

from the subject to which the word refers. So
Herodot. viii. 37, cItw^soi/ to }^6v. For it was to
the Delphi, and not to the temple, that the barbarians had approached, as the sequel shows.
Although,

therefore,

it

is

allowable to

say

would be absurd to say

any one says that, in the
interpretation of the New Testament, such
subtilties are unnecessary, I would have him

(Sksmiv d^o rmg,

Q^dv diTo

rmg.

yet

it

And

if

THE SYNONY3IS

200
to consider

why he would

proper to say,
avrov

is

it

im-

j8XsTS/v rhv ^soVf ISKstsiv rhv ^ars^a,

speaking of the Deity, or

slg

himself feel

different

sayrov,

(3Xi<n'siv

matter,) or

(^Xsrreiv

why

the

Greeks speaking of the situation of a region,

&c., always use ^btsiv and never o^av.
come next to consider IdiTv, which so far
differs from opoiv, that it must be referred rather
so that as o^at/ reto the mind of him who sees
gards the object, /^s?i' should be referred in

We

No

thought to the subject.

accurate observer

deny that this is the force of the word.

For what other reason is there why the word
idsTv does not occur even among the most ancient writers in the present, whether it is used
to denote seeing or knowing, except it be that
will

there exists in
past,

properly the notion of a thing

it

from which that very thing

which

arises,

now thought to be, i. e. the having seen or

known something and therefore now to know
is

it

and

that

to

have

it

ascertained

oJda, idov, Jduvy

whence

it

follows

have the notion of time pre-

Nor do I fear the adduction of some

passages in Homer, in which the present time
For in these the word either has a
is read.
sent.

future sense, as Iliad.

<y,

V.

53,

Odyss.

/,

xXDrg
V. 17,

0^^'

o(p^oc

^, v. 18,
iv

rradai

xai vfiug

i'va e'/dire
'E.'lbir

'E'ibir

^ai/reg.

dxovovffai.

or a passive

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

which the idea

sense, in

is

201

not that any one

has seen a certain thing, but that this thing

appeared to him, that

V.

228. TO

r ilhirai aorga.
ov fih

fJ^oi

we

xaxog

Hence

sJvai,

was seen,

it

ds roi xri^ s'ldsTai g/va/,

see, to

v,

v. 98. vuv

i'ihrai,

also,

cl^a/xoc;

hy\

^, v.

itavrci h\

472.

iihirai rj/ia^. ^, v.

w, v. 197.

s'l^og

as Iliad, a,

559.

ri roi (p^sffh

rihrai

denotes not that which

but the image of the thing,

the species or form presented to the mind.

this sense it occurs in 1

Thess.

v.

22,

In

cro 'jravTog

which some render, " abfrom every kind of evil." But Luther

s'/doug Tovrjoou

stain

d^s-^sTs^

more correctly, meidet alien hosen Schein.^ For

might have been written according to the

it

former

rendering,

(Joseph. Antiq. x. 3,
l^ut it

iihog Tovn^ov is

is

're^/'raroD/Av,

ou 6/a

s^^og

v. 7,

g/^oug,

aKSy^^w in

On

im Glauhen

nicht

the other

the words
Luther has very ac-

im Schauen.

terpreters say that in this place

"

^i^og is

And
the

wir
in-

same

version is, " from every appearance of

which accords with M. Titmann's view.
It does

The English

evil,"

not

Euri-

5/a T/Vrswg

curately given, as to the general sense

leben

loc.)

a disreputable or wicked

an ungraceful form.

hand, in 2 Corinth,

'Trov^iag^

dirh cravrog zlbovg to\j 'Konr

appearance or mode, as
pides

s'/dovg

See Wetstein in

1.

should have been

But

iCI.

^avTog

cc'To

mean

evil presented to us,

hlance in us.

T.

but

evil

appearance or serr-

THE SYNONYMS

202
as

Yet

oS^/c.

has not
it is

it

may

be doubted whether

proper sense

still its

never used for

o-^/g

s/Sos

not only because

but that the Apostle

does not appear to have entertained this idea:

we now

believe these things only, but

not see them,

i.

we do

have not realized them.

e.

For he exhorts them to be cheerful, and to

trust God, who gives the earnest of the Spirit,
inasmuch as they know that now they are pilgrim exiles from God, and should therefore
desire rather to be absent from the body, and
to be present with the Lord. Finally,
bia T/arsug

appears to

^s^i-TrarsTv Iv rivi^

differ

Tsp/'rarg/v

from the expression

which sometimes occurs.

doubt not but that these words

plained from

usage

among

the

may be

For
ex-

Greeks, as

Valkenar. has shown on Euripides, Phoeniss.

compared with v. 1555,) so

is shown to be equivalent to '^riffTivovra Te^/'TrccTsTv, ?. e. to live by faith.
So in Aeschylus. Prometh. v. 120, tov rrasi '^io7;
(p. 177. to v. 482.

that ^sf/Targ/V hia mffrsug

bi

d-xiy^zia^ iX%vra,

and
(im

in
rig

vjv

i.

e.

is

d(pr/a'evog, {, e.

by

in the Orestes v. 755, bta

mffrevovru))!

rroogx6/M/j.arog

v.

my

1164,

hostile

(p6^ou

ya^

5/ ly^^oLi

mind, and

i^yofMai.

So

Romans, c. iv. v. 11,

dxPolSvffriac^ and xiv. 20, tuj 6iu
l<f^iovTi.
And in the same way we

also in the Epist. to the

rcliv

hateful to the gods

Euripides, Hippol.

di'

OF THE

may
5,

di'

N',V

TESTAMENT.

203

explain that difficult passage in 2 Pet.

dJv 6

Ton

Kog/xog

vdari xuraxXvff'^sig

iii.

d'TrdoXiro.

See MarklandonLysias, p. 329. Reisk's edition.

In fact /^o$ is tlie external form and species of
and therefore
things, as is generally admitted
;

di'

it

s'/'dovg

m^i-TTariiv is

so to live, that the

were the companion of our

life,

^l^og is

as

to live in-

timately associated with the external form of

But

becomes not the Christian to

yearn after outward things, or to be ensnared
by their glitter. It behoves him to seek higher
things, and therefore '^abhouat /xaXXov Ixdrj/xricrat ix
things.

rov gu>/j,arog xai

it

svdrj/MTjffai cr^og

rov Kv^tov.

conceive

the meaning of the passage, therefore, to be

Our

governed by our immortal hope,

not by the vain hope of present things, we
prefer, however, to leave the body, that we may

go

life

is

into the presence of

God.

Between o^av and tdsTv there is a middle term,

For it is referred, at the same time, to
the object presented to the eye, and to the
ocrrscrSa/.

And

subject which sees and perceives.

it

will appear

why

the

word

is

only used in

the passive and middle voice, and

not found in the present tense.

hence

why

For, as

it

it

is

does

not denote the action of seeing, but the state

of him to whose eye or mind the object

is

presented, the active power would not properly

THE SYNONYMS

204

express this ; and therefore, the word must be

in the middle or passive voice

when any thing

in the passive

said to be presented, or to

is

appear to our mind; in the middle, when the

thought

is

rather of

some object presented

or fixed in the eye or the mind, that

perceive

Whence

it.

also, it is

to,

we may

put either in

the past or the future, since the accurate notion

of the word requires that that must be regard-

ed as to have been done, or to be about to be

we

done, by which

For the
it

are to arrive at cognizance.

power of

specific

word

this

is

not that

denotes the action of seeing, but the state or

affection of the

presented.

ing,

subject.

to

which the object

which denote the action of see-

ooav,

ids7v,

Nor

is

from the words

It diff'ers, therefore,

and
and from

/SXsTg/v

mind

which

is

referred only to the

are passages wanting in which

this specific force of the

rightly said in
for this does not

word

is

evident.

Matthew v. 8, o-^ovrai rov %6v

mean that they shall actually

see God, which could not be

but they shall

comprehend and know him as

iii. 2, o-^o/jjs^cc avTov xa^wj sffri, and Heb.
X^i'5 ot^yiaff/jLov ovdsig o-^srai rhv xv^iov. For
truly

whether, in these words,

more
tercourse with God,

the notion of a

It is

o-^ovrai rhv

familiar

^soi/,

John

xii. 14,

doubt

we have

and nearer

in-

as the lexicons tell us.

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

think they intimate the felicity of

I rather

who more

those

205

accurately perceive and ap-

preciate the wisdom, holiness, and love of God,

which

can only be realized by the

felicity

For truly

xa^cc^ol rfj Tta^bia.

machus,
yet

oh

(in Apoll. v. 7. 9,)

'Travrl

therefore,

<pamrai,

when

uXX'

o,

by

Calli-

ng

sa^Xog.
v.

And

501,) Pen-

Where

is

God?"

oVrgfl^a/,

Acutely, therefore, Plu-

inne werden.

tarch (de Ei) says, that Apollo

d^y^of/jsvoig /xai/^ai/g/i/
<i>ccyaTov,

^g/ag.

said

Ssog ohx in /x-ax^av,

answered deservedly, -Tra^' e^o-o/* av d' dci^r^g

we, ovx sioo^ag
where i'i<so^av is the same as

is

avrog

(Eurip. Bacch.

theus inquires impiously, "

he

is it

o/g

ridri

ri

xa/

roTg

A'/jXiov ds

xai

dia'7rv\i^dvi(^cci,

briXoZrai xal b'TTo^aivirai rrig dXvj'

And Homer

says,

(Odyss.

(paivovrai sva^ytTg.

was uU^m

oh

yd^

'^,

V. 161.)

-rw irdvnasi

%ol

must not be denied, however, that the

words oWgff^a/ and %av are sometimes interchanged, so that oWgff^a/ appears to mean no
more than o^av. So in Xenophon, (Cyneg. v.
31.) [Socdi^ovra ds ovbstg sdoPaziv ovd' o-^srar, and in
the New Testament it is often put for o^av, as
Matth. xxiv. 30; xxvi. 64; John i. 51, 52; xi.
It

But it does not follow from

this that it has the same force altogether as
ofav, idiTv, ^Xs-TTsiv
so that in any place in which
it occurs, any one of these might be substituted.
40

Acts XX. 25.

THE SYNONYMS

208

Nor do

I fear the remark, that o'^noSa/ is used,

because the words

o^av

and

the time from the future.

to learn

why

the future of opuv

the same verb

'

would change
For we have yet

iidiTii

is

without the

I rather think that

these irregularities

and

we must

unused, as

is

aorist.

look for the explanation of

deficiencies in verbs of very early

use, to their etymology rather than to the caprice of later

nations, into

which the word was introduced, in the neglect of

and inflections. The more simple explana-

certain tenses

word has continued to

which it has been dewhich
only
in
it occurred in the
the
same
tenses
in
rived,
not
undergone
all the artificial
and
has
primitive form,
words
which
of
more recent forinflections
to
grammatical
Such
probably
the case in this
is
submitted.
mation were
o^au
word
is
of
one
the
few remnants
The
Greek
instance.
"^^^
word
being comof the Hebrew word ni^^ '^ *^^*
tion of these anomalies

is,

that the

be used in the later language, into

posed of one consonant, and two almost,

if

vowel sounds, would be a bad subject for

all

not altogether,
the niceties of

Greek inflection; and hence, as more convenient words

would readily occur, the word o^Sv^ except in the instances
in which it would slide gradually into use in its primitive
That the Hebrew word HJ^")
form, would be avoided.
has been thus brought into use in later languages is evident
from other remnants of it. It is found in the English words
ray and array, and the French, rayon. And it is the etymon of the Latin, ratioy and our English word, reason. Both
in Chaldee and in Arabic, the

word ^^^")>

(S<\jf occurs in

the sense of mental perception, understanding

this sense that it has

reason.

and

it fs

in

been retained in the words ratio and

have no doubt that an accurate examination of

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

There
oVrso^a/,

is

207

yet something more in the word

because, as I have said,

it

should not be

referred only to the object, but to the subject

may be sometimes

also.

It

ijjiiZova

TOVTUV o-^sr

nothing more
is

xviii. 15,

tfj)

written
rov

do^ccv

o-^si;

'^soUf

as

when

intended than that something

is

But Matth.

be seen.

to

o-^ei

r-^v

and Acts

xxvii. 4,

were written.
a difference between ffu o^a, and

o%]^/

and

o>]^stf^s aCiro/

For there is
o^/g/.
For (fv oga, is, look accurately, consio4/g/ is like the Latin, tu
der, examine
but
videris (from which formula, tu vide, differs.)
It means, it is for you to examine, consider, re<ri)

^ri)

He who

gard.

done

says

he who says

tfu

a^o

o^a

o\)y/

commands

to

it

be

only permits another

and denies that he himself will do it.

Wherefore cy or aOro/ or some other pronoun is
added, as putting away the duty from the speakto

er

do

it,

for instance in Arrian diss.

aXkoiy

ii

XvdiTiXsT auroTg cra^a

pears distinctly in Acts

iTi^l

Xoyov

iyu rovruv
is

o-^i(j'^e

(pvaiv

i.

avToi' for it is

In

it

^^r^;aa

added

this

o-^l/ovrai

oi

This ap-

g%/v.

xviii. 15,

oy (SovXo/^at uvai.

17.

%^ir^g

sense

tfO

IffTi

yap
oga

never found.

We
Both

have yet

differ so far

to

notice ^gatrSa/ and

^swfgri'.

from the words noticed above,

the defective Greek verbs, and their anomalous combina

tions,

would fuUv bear out the remarks made above.

T.

THE SYNONYMS

208

that they denote the intention of

mind with

which a man regards or contemplates an ob-

They

ject.

when

are

frequently used,

the desire of seeing

So Matth.

xi. 7,

be expressed.

Matth.

xxii. 11.

e.

ri

And

in

i.

^iu^iT ahro ohbs yivuxfxn auro,

John xiv. 17,

must not render this simply,
oV/ oh

to

sJ^X^srs ^gacatr^a/,

''/

igsX^ovrgg i^sXsrg ogav.

is

therefore,

sees,

we

knows, under-

word y/i'wffxg/,
a very unsound remark made by some,
this place yivuxSTtziv and ^gw^g/i/ may be

stands, (which is in the force of the

for

it is

that in

used for one another.)

It

should be translated,

he did not studiously and attentively consider,

and therefore he did not understand.

Matth.

vi. 1,

xxiii. 5,)

to

'TT^og

rb '^sa^rivai auroTg

does not mean

passages

in

(and Matth.

simply, to be seen, but

be seen with regard and admiration.

are

For

There

undoubtedly in which ^sa(^ui

means only to see, as Matth. xvi. 11 Luke v.

But there are others in which the pecu27.
liar force is manifest, and in which it has always the adjunct notion of the desire and intention to consider and know the thing looked
;

at.

In Rom. XV. 24,

eaa^ai vfiag,

IXcr/i^w

dia'Xo^svofMSvog

^ga-

Paul not only says that he would

would look diligently

So Lucian (Nigrin. 2. i. p.

see them, but that he

into their affairs.
40.)

jSouAo/j^ivog lUT^ov

o^'^ak/JLuv ^id(fa(^a{ rivcCf

i.

e.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Xenoph.
grodrsvfj^ay and

TO

^gatfa/jt-cvog

Cyrop.

In

coriveiiire.

209

vii.

7,

5.

v.

1,

rs^dfii^a

would be, we
looked at the city, wliich would not express
the author's meaning.
See also Hiero, 2. 5,
z,'jxX(jj rriv 'Ttoajv.

sModxa/jjiv z. r.

^eaff^a/ ytdXXiov

^iSe, yvdo/jiYig

pides Orestes,

on the word

said

The

did ruv

909, SsSo^a/

v.

What the

Jdovra.

<j<7r6Triv

Jj

<7r6Xiv,

S.h

rh h-

-^^^'^

older grammarians have

^suosTv is

peculiarity of the

Euri-

o(p'^akiJijOjv.
6'

word

well known.P

B-tu^iTv is

But

very beautifully

illustrated by a reference to the etymology.

This

is

one of

more extensively the inquiry

Inon, the more bright and certain is the result.

those instances in which the

is

carried

stead of wild and uncertain conjecture,

we

arrive at little

short of demonstration and definite certainty.

place,

words

there
S-a&z.

video

speciatio, B-Au,

In the

first

evidently a close connection between the

is

cum

cum

stupore, S-idof^ai, specto, contemplor, S-ja

admiratione specto, (lonice) B-ta^iuj con-

and the Latin Tuco, Tueor, to behold, to look

Both in the Latin and Greek word, there is the
idea of stedfast considerate observing, and contemplation.
The probability then is, that these words had a common

templor,

stedfastly.

origin.

On

turning to the ancient oriental tongues, we

find the word,

ntH

^^ed in Hel)rew, C^haldee and Syriac,

very extensively in the sense, to see

but generally in a still

stronger sense, as intimating serious and intense contemplation.

In

all

these three cognate dialects,

it

signifies the

seeing into obscure, mysterious, and future things

videns,

propheia, or seer, attentio, consideralio, contemplatio, spectaiio

cum

voliptate.

In the

first place,

we

fiiid,

on examination, some remains

THE SYNONYMS

210
although

it

true that ^iu^hg and ^sw^/a

is

are

frequently used with reference to sacred rites

and ceremonies, yet

of the

sound

may

be shown by

many

-with the previous guttural

J^]f} in this form,
distinct, as in Gothic, kisawi ; in Francic and Ale-

word

mannic, geseon

in

or contemplation.
that of

ayd^ofiai' admiror

Greek

in English,

All these words have the idea of stedfast looking

to gaze.

was

But the union

of the sound of

so close, that the distinction

confounded and
the

it

lost.

We

was

H ^^^^

likely to be

have some indication of this in

to look at, and schau, a

German word Schauen, spectare,

an examination

sight,

And

from whence the English word,

appears that finally the sound of the py was

dropped altogether ; when the word gradually assumed the

show.

it

form in which we are more familiar with it. The dental

sound of ], has always been peculiarly liable to variation in
the transfer of words to different dialects, as

nounced more hardly, or

it

may

be pro-

with aspiration.

In

all

word ntrij ^^ abbreviated n|,

In the aspirated form we have Sa<y and

all

softly, or

these several aspects, the

see, is found.
its

derivatives, ^tclof^ai, B^avfiu,

Ssoj, the

name

of God,

is

from

^ot,vfjt.ccZ,u,

B^iu^nv, &.c.

this source

He

English, see, Eolic Greek,

Glossarium Gothicum,

p. 287.)

(rEaa^aa/,

And

And

that seeth.

In the Gothic migration it assumed the soft sound

>in, ecce, see ! Anglo-Saxon seori, Belgic zien,
seiien,

to

Chaldee

German

and ^ff. (See Junius

in the Thracian or

Etruscan migration, which developed itself in the Latin

language, the word occurs with the hardest sound of the
dental,

ttieo,

tueor, intuitns

and probably

this will explain

those other words which occur for the Deity, Tuito, (Tacitus de Moribus
Gaelic, Ti'erna.

Germanorum) Thoth or Theut, and the

They are all terms for the seer, or Him

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

211

by the most elegant Attic

writers, the word ^smosTv is applied to any spectacle whatever, as passages quoted from Xenophon have proved. So also it is used repeatexamples,

that,

edly in the

New

one place (Acts

simply for

Testament, except that in

ix.

In

ogav.

7,)

it

appears to be put

others there

all

evidently

is

the notion of considering with attention or adIt is the

miration.

same

ov^avovc dvsu}yfj.evovg

Toi/g

in

Acts

vii.

56, ^wg&>

although certainly the

idea of joy and pleasure, which some inter-

assumed

preters have

cannot

to exist there,

Nor is this view of the

John
viii. 51, '^dvarof ov
opposed
by
word
%u^r}<f7j i'lg rov aiuva, which is often compared
properly be found.

fj^'n

with the formula formerly noticed,

For

o-^irai.

mean

that passage

in

to experience, to attain

that seeth.

text, as established

It

justified

its

is

it

given in the

quite accurate.

derivatives in all languages.

moment whether the word is

The peculiar force of
or not.
meaning

B^tu^tTv

by the usus loquendi,

little

cific

says, ^swgg/P

by the original word, and by the force of the

great majority of

c^at

it

ovx

After this extensive view of the etymology,

will be quite evident that the view of

is

^wj^v

does not

'^iojosTv

of its

etymon nTH-

It is of

compound of S-e and

it flows from the spe^' ^' ^^ ^^ worthy of
a

remark, en passant, how forcibly such etymological inquiry

vindicates the Scripture account of the peopling of the world
by migration from an oriental source and centre.

T.

THE SYNONYMS

212
s/g rhv

and

"

on or regard for ever ;'*

could not have been o'TrnSai ^amrov ug

a/wva,

it

rhv a/wi/a,

to look

since oVrsff^a/

is

the act of a

moment

and how then could the sentence have meant

to experience for ever?

But

since ^su^uv is

not merely the act of an instant, (for the things

we

on which

^sw^s/i',

are considered as con-

templated for a lengthened period), therefore,

this

word

is

very properly made use of in con-

For this clause could

not properly be rendered " he shall never die.'*
For they also die who walk in the way of

junction with

/5 rhvaJcHiva.

heavenly truth
s/g

rh aima.

but then their death

Here, however,

present pause.

we must

is

not

for the

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

CHAPTER
Many

affections

tliat

in a very slight degree

mode
is

in

which they

On

very similar.

IX.
tlie

mind

they appear to

differ

and conditions of

are so nearly allied,

arise

more especially as the

and show themselves

this account,

many words by which

213

we

find that

mind
is expressed are not only used indifferently by
inaccurate writers and speakers, but even by
lexicographers are rendered by the same Latin
words, as if they had no difference; and, by
these means, recent and raw scholars are misled
to

the condition of

suppose that they are identical in meaning.

But where terms

force should be

are really synonymous, their

most minutely observed;

this is absolutely necessary to the right

standing of the writers of the

Although, at the same time,

New
it

for

under-

Testament.

must be ad-

mitted, that in the customary style of language

which these men used, the difference between

such words was not always observed, especially
those which properly express the different
grades of the same affection. For those whose
affections are

more

easily

moved would

natu-

THE SYNONYMS

214
rally

use stronger language

to

express the

emotions and habits of others; and in such instances a strict interpretation would lead at

once to error.

And

this calls therefore for

more accurate observation of the specific force

of each word, that it may be more certainly
determined what precise meaning best exFor often, when
presses the idea in question.
accurately
in its
a writer has applied a word
specific

sense,

we do

not perceive his real

meaning; because only analogous notions of

the same things occur to us, instead of the one
accurate thought intended.

Finally, in those

fault, we must take

we confound those which

words which denote any

especial care lest

signify a defect of the

mental powers with

those which denote a fault of the

fore,

on the present occasion,

will.

There-

shall notice

some synonyms of this class and I shall begin

with two words, which, among those expressive
of affections of the mind or will, are more ex;

tensively used.

In the

New

Testament,

we

frequently meet with

Although Buttmann on Homer (Lexilogus

has treated very accurately of these
i. p. 26,)
two words, I purpose to add a few remarks

more

directly relatino^ to their use in the

New

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

215

These words agree, inasmuch as

they both mean, velle, to will and the lexicons
more strictly theological, scarcely point out a
difference between them.
But as far as the
decree of the mind by which we will, (and
which the schools have called, volition,) differs
from that propension of mind, by which we
address ourselves to the thing which we have
willed, so far ^sXs/i/ and /S&uXso-^a/ differ from
each other.
For '^s'kuv is simply, to will and
Testament.

has not in

it

the notion of propension.

denotes the

word

And hence

propension.

(SovXsff'^ai is

(3ovXi<^^ai,

the

very generally used to ex-

press a variety of modes, by which the

mind

addresses itself to what the will has determined.

This distinction, however, which

I have

marked,

more elegant writers accurately observed. Who would suppose that Plato had written carelessly, and only with the desire of varyis

in all the

ing the word, in a passage in the Gorgias,

vvv iuf ds (SovXrjy sgau^ig.

doxsTf

Ta^'

s/xs ri'Asiv

s'rridii^sra.i

olxads

7]fj,7v.

Eu

-Tag' e/xol

Xsysig'

/'

/xsf

obxouv orav /Soi/Xgff^t

To^ytag r-OLrakmi

dXk' d^a

ydoTCu^id^ai

i^sX^trs/sv

Ttai

av

Tj/jjTv

diaXi-^^voci

X.

Certainly of Gorgias he rightly used the

word
mere

s'bsXvjtfsiiv

(SjvXofMai

for

Socrates

'!rix^

a'jrov z.

doubted of the

will of the Sophist, (wird er auch wollen ?)

whether he

will

but

sav ^2 ^ohXri is,

if

he de-

THE SYNONYMS

216

sires, orav ^ovXsSs, if lie pleases, ^ovXofiai tv^sg^cu

know from him {ich wiinsche

Xenophon Cyrop. i. 4, 10,

wish to

aurov, I

Trao

von ihm zu horen.)

rrwTa

Xa/Swi'

oiroecc

s%Xiig'

{)hy^

otuj

And

And

ffv

a}X
;

yjri(}^(Xi

(SovXtj,

Urao, w

Ka/

hrrdoyjctVy

coi

(31.)

av 6u

O'jrug

vii. 2. 4, (9.)

SKiikriffuig gvfi(3cvA\j(rai

xai ruv oOXor)

(SovXsi.,

5. 12,

iv.

oiTug av s^sXuGiv,

a'jToTg.
fjLOi

diadidov

KgoTtrs, a^' civrs

y av, i<p7\,
Something bland

^o'okoiiMriV

tv^sTv.
There is
and respectful and courteous in the reply of
Croesus, but in the question of Cyrus nothing

aya^ov

but

r/ sot

this

what

your

is

Whence

will ?

oc-

it

curs often that he w^ho replies to such an interrogation, that he wills

XsXsiv

but by

(^ovXsci'^ai.

does not reply by

I will

from Euripides, which will

ference

wish

the altered

the

diu

].

ds I3o{jXs<^cci

ir^o^-jfMiaf,

Arrian.

rrj

o)v

Xd^^CL

as widely

boKuv

The

%Xcfjv.

Epict.

i.

uc %Xoi).

firi

^sXuv

12.

And

f/.h

other

ohyl
is

in

oudsig urravrav

rov ^iXovrog, dXX*

ovo'jm

xa/

ruj

1329, 1330,

v.

Diss.

Asuvog

19, dlxaiog

k[ioviXr^y\

in

where Menelaus reproves

the kingdom,

Hyppolytus

y^d<pstv TO

first is

from that which he dissembled, before

t'Sj

^ovXiToci

The

manner of Agamemnon,

he obtained
y^fiC,ojv,

illustrate the dif-

to point out.

Iphig. Aul. V. 338,

differing

add two passages

d(pi6rufisff'^^

13,

^o{jXo/j.&j

SO in Matth.

ahrriv 'KaocLbnyfLiLridCLty

d<::oXZ(Sai ahriiv.

But

in this use

OF THE NEV/ TESTAMENT.

-217

of these words, I think I perceive other traces

First, it is well

of the specific sense of each.^

known

that

(SovXsff'^ai

is

75

frequently used in the

sense of malle, to prefer, so that

But
For

he understood.

never so used.

we may

first,

ment,

me

Xoyovg d/a rou

yjldo),

ri

notice in the

Cor. xiv. 19, d>X

mind, the
to ^sXw.

Xoyovg

insufficient.

New

ha xal

Testa-

%aoj

sxxXrigicc

But here,

yXu)6(i'fi.

'ttsvts

aXko\jg zarrr

must be referred rather

voog fx^ov XaXi^(^ai,

/jbv^/oug

^s'Xs/v is

the passages adduced in

support of the notion appear to

And

know,

as far as I

should

f.caXXov

to

to

"jrs^rs

my

than

would, in the church, rather use five

words, then ten

intelligible

thousand which

Another passage is
Xenophon de Mag. Equ. 9. 5, ok xa^vinu

were

unintelh'gible.

in
rh

The only truce of an oriental etymon of (hovXof^ai that I

is, 7V3, a word existing in Hebrew and its cog-

can find

nate dialects, and implying complete power and authority,

used in the sense

who

are understood to have the right to express a sovereign

will.

And

all

of,

dominus, maritus

used of those

it is

the derivatives of

and Gothic, and

ivollen, to will,

P>ouXof^a,i

modern languages,

in

remaining in Latin

volo,

wUgan,

vouloir,

are expressions of a positive determination.

This rather makes against the distinction which the author

At the same time, the usus lo-

has endeavoured to establish.

quendi might have affixed a specific sense to the Greek derivative.

we

And

find in

pension.

this

is

German

very probable, for in this liuated sense

the

word

ivillig,

umviUi(/, implying pro-

Anglice, willing, unwillir.g

T.

THE SYNONYMS

218

'fXTizoVf s^sXovgi rs\i?v d^yii^iov

ug

fi^ mTivsiv,

in

which

by malunt, they prefer

f^aXXov being understood. But it is not
but u)i
they would
that follows, to make the sense
they render

s%Xo-j(H

^i',

rather pay the fine than serve in the cavalry.

And

may even

it

be doubted in those passages

which /laXXov is inserted, ibid. 2. 8, and 9.

fin.
For in both it may be rendered, more

in

more

freely,

Cyrop.

readily, to fight or to counsel, as

iv. 3. 1, {moXXov {jjuyoivr av,

comp. Memorab.

'zaoeiTj.

ti

ra (piXrara

The

iv. 4, 17.

reason

of this use of the word must be sought in

its

For since ^'sXsiv means

is added or understood, it
to wish this or that, v. c.

specific signification.

simply to wish,

would then

if

5i

signify,

^sXsic f^d^iff^ai

ri

(pvyuv.

And

if fJ^aXXov is

not to be referred to ^iXuv

it is

thing

itself

which

is

willed

passages already referred

Homer

sages in

Butmann,
SeXg/

yd^

tojXov,

ri

fidXXofy
<p^vuv.

rrjv

1.

c.

rrctrrio

II. ^,

p. 30.
6

On

to.

the two pasa,

234.

see

Justin. Mart. Apol.

rriv

ru-^rig ffraXay/Mov n

11.

p.

1363, 42.

rri%v

a passage from Epigr. Agathiae xxv. Anal.

43,

s'^ti tfeo fJi'V^ov

AyjXfddog.

ii.

fLirdvoiav roD dfia^-

where Sylburg supplies

and adduces ^sXm

See Eustath. ad

as appears in the

319. Od.

ov^uviog

xoXadiv ai/roD,

added,

but to the

dxovsiv"ll^sXoVj

ij

add
iii.

xi^d^rjg xapov/j^ara

But the Greek language was then

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

declining, of

many

which

this is

q|q

an example, among

others.

second proof of the specific signification

of these words,

is

to be

found in a different

use of them, in passages where neither of them

means properly,
passages in which

same

There are many

to will.
s'^sXnv

appears to have the

Gregory of

force with duvaScci or fMsXXuv.

was Attic Greek. In

this sense, however, the word was only applied
to inanimate objects.
For the observation of
Buttmann (Addenda to Plato Charm, p. 60)
Corinth says, that

is

quite true, that

this

^sXstv for f^eXXstv

or

^jva^'^at, is

only used respecting inanimate objects,

and

For the pasadduced

not
prove
do
that later writers
sages
have used it. Certainly Reisk ought not to
adduce that passage from the 87th epigram of
Macedonius. "E-rra^ov ay^J 'rd(poio %al vj^sXov
then only in a negative sense.

avrog axoDca/, O/a Tsg MadfMviv,

jMoT^av

sfjJrtg

aXo-^ov,

For he did not hope that he should hear the

death of his wife but he thought, since he had
;

sneezed, that he heard the presage of her death

(as

we

say, er wollte das selhst gehort, gesehn

And

hahen.)

to be pressed.

gorium,

therefore the

cthrog is

not

Wherefore Schaefer, apud Gre-

p. 135,

oh d-ovarat.

word

has said, that

we

should read

Plato in Phaedr. p. 280. D. rd

//,5

THE SYNONYMS

9J20

%wg/a xa/ ra

oyy

Xenoph.

Hist. Gr.

ovdh

Matth.
there

ii.

is

So

roc

'xXoTa hsT^iv

iii.

12. extr. ov

18, ov ^sXsiv is

also it is

put for

case he would not

abandon the

In the former

(noluit) stay in Judea, be-

cause the Jews sought to

kill

him

in the lat-

Rachel would not be comforted.

woUte sich nicht trosten lassen^)

sie

But

ov dvvaa^oct.

in either case to

proper meaning- of the word.

ter,

And

dtdddKsiv,

assumed
Testament John vii. 1, and

New

no need

61,

Memor.

s^'sXsi avrofioLrcc gJi/a/.

that in the

l^iku

fi

4.

v.

Tj^iXs 'TTa^a'TrXsTv.

ovTciTi

yd^

dsvdpo,

(German,
as in Gen.

XXX vii. 35, ovx, tj^sXs '^a^axaksTff'^ai, Xsyuv, In the

Hebrew, it is OTOnn^ IJ^Q*^")? i- e. she refused
consolation.' Without the negative, however,

'

It

is

somewhat strange that Titmann did not

Jeremiah xxxi.

15,

refer to

as the original of the quotation

in

The
The

Alatthew, and which completely bears out his idea.

n^H'? ^J^^D7 refusing to be comforted.

word invariably occurs in the Hebrew Scriptures, in the
sense of, determined refusal. And so in this case, it was
words are

not only that Rachel could not be comforted, because her

children were not

but she refused

all consolation,

of what-

ever kind, from the bitter sense which she had of their

The

full

^/^^^ TJ^Q-Q^^, if
ing that the meaning of
all

loss.

word may be seen in Exod. ix. 2,

thou refuse to let them go. And see.

force of the

probable that the

trnuae of ou luvetrai.

't^^f^ is

LXX

so unequivocal,

used ovk

The etymology

iiB-iXi

of IJ^Q

it is

not at

in the umisual
is

probably the

OF THE
^s^^iv is

NEW TESTAMENT.

rather to be wont, to suit, to become.

Herodot.

vii.

50.

1. 2, fJ^sydXa 'Tr^yiyf^ara fnydXoiffi

we

l^gXs/ xfvduvoKfi xarai^ssff'^ai, (as

ternommen

sein)

T^uroe, (ps^sff^ai

e^skii

221

rot,

say: wollenun-

Callim. H. in Del.
'Ex

fiovgsuv.

v. 4, Arfkog

conf. Aris-

toph. Av. V. 532, et Raphel. ad Actor,

And

it

is

observed by some

ii.

12.

as Valc-

critics,

kenar, in the 2d vol. of his Opuscula, p. 307,

on Mark

vi.

5,

that oux fibbmro

^^sXs, or ohx s^ovXsTo.

is

put for

oi/x

And Henry Stephen had

already remarked, App. deDial. Att. p. 50, that

the Attics sometimes put dvvaSat for ^ovXsa^at.

But although there may be passages

which
a man might say ov dvmff^ccif because he had
good reason to refuse, as in our language we
say,

we

cannot, because

we

in

will not, I suspect

none will be found in which ov duva(^ai has the

same force with ov %Xuy. Certainly, in the
passage quoted from Mark, there is no reason
to abandon the usual meaning of the word.
The words are, xa/ oOx ^dvmro sxsT ovdi/j^/av dvmfnv
natural to admit

-Troi^gai.

Evidently, as

that our

Lord could have wrought miracles

word

for negation, ^Ji^,

is

and the formative

the whole force of the word

tion,

it

is

in

and hence

a substantive of direct nega-

submitted to the inflections of a verb, and carrying a

strength of expression which no translation can give uitli-

out circumlocution.

T.

THE SYNONYMS

^22

that place, if he would,

instead of

ohx

honestly and rightly be done,

propriety, that a

good man

although he could,
fore,

the

oux r^duvaro,

is said,

it

For of that which cannot

ri'^iXs.

if

we may

say with

unable to do

is

And

he would.

it,

there-

our Lord, although he was never without

power of working

miracles,

may

properly to have been unable to do so

be said

among

For he never used the power of

this people.

working miracles

rashly, either in the presence

of the wicked, or for the sole object of exciting

He
He

a profitless surprise or admiration.

not therefore

work miracles

there.

could
could

not do so in accordance with his own wise

moderation ; for, " because of their unbelief,"

power would have been utterly

useless.
He would not, therefore, because he
could not with propriety. The same explanation
this display of

may be given
2. 18,

(t^y"

of a passage in the Anabas.

rjdvvd/MTiv

Zti))

vii.

aXXor^iav r^d'XiZccv drro-

etg

^Xs'TTuv,

he could not, for he was ashamed. Some-

times,

however, another passage

forward:
c\jh'iv

oKko

Book
dvva/Msvr],

they say that

saw nothing

ii.
Jj

2.

6,

tjv

d'rod^avat

dum/nsvvi is

Jj

dk

avrri

is
i]

acro^uyg/V

put for

brought
Gr^arriyia

in

^sXeyca,

which
i.

e. it

But there is no
need to shrink from the usual meaning of the
word. Certainly what the (sroarriyia looked for
else to

be done.

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

223

was already stated, that they might escape

secretly and fly. Now, it is related that things

He

took a turn for the better.

the

ar^oLTTiy'ia

tune xdXX/ov
4. 11,
aiirov,

could do nothing else; but forFinally, in Cyrop.

Idr^urriyrias,

they adduce

because

of Panthea.

said therefore,

all

ou

were taken with the beauty

TJiis distracted their attention,

and prevented them from looking

band,

i.

e.

at her hus-

they could not.

But, to return

same

vi.

sdvmvro ^sdaac^ou

cr^off^gf

in force with

^gXs/v

ov

is

ou ^L/vac^a/

sometimes the
but (SovXec^af is

and undoubtedly jSounever used

XsoSa/ and duvccc'^ai are often opposed to each
other.
Plat. Hipp. mai. p. 1259. A, ov^ oJa
(SovXsrcci Tig, dXX' oia duvarai. Lucian. ii. Abd. 179,
ou ^ovXofMUt dvvd/xivog, and J^V ^ovXecr^ai, [x^ dvmc^a/f
for dvvaa'^ai

ibid. p. 182.

Aristot.

Polit. v. 5. 9,

w^rrg

^ovXovra} fiaXXov xui hvvavrat viurs^i^tv, ibid.

C.

xai
8.

Vid. Valckenar. ad Phalar. ep. xcvi. p. 272.

In the New Testament, it is improperly ren-

dered posse,
syM rovruv

C,

valere, as

Acts

ou (3ovXof/.at ihai

^ovXz(/^ai %^miv.

xvii. 15, x^/rv^g yd^

as Plat. Phileb. p. 38.

It is rather nolo,

I refuse,

which we say, Ich mag nicht,

I may not.
Such questions are not my duty.
If it were a question of any crime (v. 14), then

in the sense in

xara X6yov uv

7i\ise'^6/iriv

v/jluv,

would hear you.

THE SYXO^'YMS

2*24

In the word
of the

(SovXse^ai

mind

there

is

rather the notion

desiring, choosing, propensed to,

Often, indeed,

a particular object.

and choose that which cannot be

impossibilities (ra ddvvara)

^ovXerai, rouro

av^poj-TTogf

vi. 6; Platon. Ion. p. 532

dXn^^

Xsysiv.

et in

Euthyd.

iu 'TT^uTTsiv,

And

brutes, as

Ammonius

it

is

but to will

only to choose, as

is

okrau

xoti

desire

the part of fools.

is

Often, therefore, ^ovXet^ai

we

J).

p.

Charit.

iii.

(3ovXot/Mr}y

278. E,

civ

<re

/3oyXo/igvo/

never therefore used of

already observed.

has

For since brutes destitute of reason cannot dewhether an object is to be sought or

avoided, in which is the force of (SovXeff^af,
(whence ^ovXy;), but are led by the blind imliberate

pulse of instinct or habit, they cannot be said

Yet both

jSovXsSai.

^eXuv

plied to inanimate

and (SouXiSai are

things,

a|)-

the

especially in

way of interrogation, r/ ^sXg/, r/ ^ovXsrai rouro.

The former occurs in the New Testament,
Acts

ii.

Herod,

more
mode

12, ri di ^sXo/ rovro zhai.

iv.

this

says,

used, and ^ovXercn

in

that
Xsysiv

or

^^vai.

which they are used seems

Certainly,
Xeyg/v,

131,

Valckenar on

ri rovro (SoiiXsrai

when

said,

it is

the inquiry

is

otliei-s,

as

in

the

to differ.

%Xsi rovro

sJvai

made, what should or

thing be or say

Herodotus and

rl

But

is

c;jfi

that passage

which Valckenar

or

<>[

iip-

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

proves,

similar to

Hippol.

Hut

das seyn

(teas soil

V.

865,

ri (SovXsrai

s.

So, in Euripid.

Xija/ diXrog

Tj

'i^oi

although

rovro^

to

'^di

%Xii,

(J^oi.

may

it

dered in that way, what does

seems

almost

iverden),

tqvto shut.

rl /jlsXXsi

"225

be ren-

this will?

yet

be in that particular sense, that

it

in-

it

quires especially into the end or counsel of the

thing,

which

is said,

to
s.

is

what does

rovro

tend

this

who wish

woman,

icas soil das vorstellen

^ovXi^^ai zhat is said of

ii.

s^d(^fMov

Alex.

sV;

dmi

214, concerning

p.

^ovXo/jbsvTjv

he could

not have written i%Xov(jav; and hence

appear

why

it

it

appear what really they are

to

not, as in Lucian,

the

therefore,

If,

the sense would be,

sJva/,

For often

hedeuten.

those

said (SovXsSai.

ri jSo-jXirai

is

written

ri

it

will

(SovXirai rovro,

and never, if I remember accurately, ri aoi ^sas/

roijro.
For there is in this interrogation a question as to the end and utility of the thing, as
in Lucian,

iii.

p. 427, ri (SovXoivro ahr<Z r^X/xaDra/

yJoXixzg, rojv Xipu/Msojv /Vcc dvvafMVMv.

1).

446,

cup/ 0^0), ri

(SOI

(SovXsrai ro g^wr>j/xa,

what reason you ask

question tend?
I

this ?

Compare

have said that

audi. Dial. Mort.

To what

also

jSovXsc^ai

e.

tor

does the

Hermot,

p. 754.

denotes propension

and inclination of the will. This

by a passage from James, c. i.
d-^iyM<iiv i'j^ag Xoyoj ahr^iiag.

i.

is

confirmed

18, iSovXr^dg

parallel passage

THE SYNONYMS

226

occurs in Plato, Legg.

^o'jA'/j^s/j <pdy' sri

iv. p.

GaoUn^ov,

712,

oTcv

hr,

n Xsyeir

One writer, however,

most strangely supposes that (SovXr^ik is put

elliptically for l3ovX7}%k h tiIuv. But Wahl. properly compares it with z-jhoxr^tsag^ he hath beaccording to his good pleasure.

gotten

us,

Hence

also (SovXiff^ai rd nvog

means to favour
Thucyd. vi. 30.

the interests of any one.

Certainly that person appears to liave been

deceived by some passages of the Septuagint,

where

^sXsiv

kv

timi is

given as the rendering of

But l3ovX(^ai sv rm never

ySJrr.
occurs and it would be absurd.
For, in the
only passage, 1 Sam. xviii. 25, "]^dI? ySH T*K
inQ2j in which the Septuagint has thus renthe

Hebrew
;

dered the words,

oh (SovXsrai 6 [SaffiXsvg kv do/Man, it

a weak version

is

good

for, in fact, desire,

and not

will, is expressed.'

Taylor, in his

of the word

Hebrew Concordance,

yBH*

gives, as the meaning

desire, pleasure, delight

and the simple

rendering of this passage, according to the

Hebrew

idiom,

And the
is,
is not delight to the king in dowry."
the
style
force of this expression may be softened to meet
of later languages, as it is in our version, " The king de" There

si

rcth not dowry," and which has so far followed the Sep-

tuagint.

But that

version has very needlessly retained the

inDU

^V rendering it v
made the whole sentence weak and

lo/xaTi

better either to retain the simpler and

more

Hebraism

and has thus

ineffective.

It

were

forcible style of

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

And we must

not refer to this formula the

words of Paul in Coloss.

ii.

18,

(jj-riCilg

Many interpreters connect

ayy'ikuiv.

the preposition sh and render

it,

lity,

and taking pleasure in

first

place,

known

i:z/
22

b/xag y.aroi'

^sXwi/

affecting

New

place, there

Testament.

no need

is

humi-

But, in the

it.

such a barbarous formula

to the

with

is

un-

In the next

to increase the

number

of solecisms, while another and more probable

interpretation
as

is fairly

had been stated

it

z'^tvsru sv B^u)ffn,

to say,

it

was

to us

in v. 16,

says,

things, or deceive

And

^oTjgxsia.

and

finallvj

ovv

r/g v/j.ag

fj^n

in accordance with this

fMrjdiig v/juag xcx,ruj3^a(3ivircf)

Let no man, he
and

open

ra'7rsivo(p^oG{jvr,.

sv

judge you

you by
^sXojv

that

in external
ra-rs/vo^^ocui/Tj

therefore

opinion, intentionally, wittingly,

is,

in

my

(cojisulto,) sls

in

it altogether into the more

modern mode of expression. Nothing, therefore, can here
be made of the force of (io6kia-3-at Iv, for it is only a servile
rendering of the Hebrew preposition ^. The sentence is
" done into Greek," rather than translated. It may be re-

the original, or to transmute

marked

also, that in

IjXX has rendered

almost every instance in which the

V^H

^^Y

(^ovXi^rBxi,

the true force of the

word goes beyond the Greek expression

and implies not

only propension of the will, but delectation, and emotion of

the affections.
xxi. 6

T.

See Deut. xxv. 7; Huth

iii.

16;

Kings

THE SYNONYMS

2'28

Herodot.

14,

ix. c.

^sXw;, /xw$ rovTOvg

there

^sXeiv

is

raZra

bz

'rr-J^oiMVOi

For

'ttpootov sXoi.

the notion of the will

that, separately

s^cv7',iUro

in the
itself,

word
and

from the notion of considera-

and consequent propcnsion. He who does

any thing %au^ does it at once spontaneously.
He who does it jSyjXofjt^svog, determines to apply
tion

his

mind

ly,

freely

5,

Xav^dm

to

it,

^sXwv

'^a<y%w, I

cro/co.

deserve

do

spontaneous-

it

2 Peter

as

it;

But there

avrovg rovro '^sXovrag.

is

as '^sXm

is

when

difference from these forms of speech,

^gXw

iii.

put with an infinitive of another verb,

It is often

'TiroiiTv,

pXiTv, to

be wont, John

therefore

rendered as
viii.

compounded with

were
words

if it

44.

In

'MXir.

there

all

the

is

notion of spontaneity, but in those compounded

with

So

^o{jXo/j.ai,

that of option

and propension.

in Plato de Legibus, I^ib. v. to

xai ixobam

and

in opposition.
"^sXrii is

said.

New

rh dlSovXr^rov rs /.a/ axovaiov

The formula

well known.
It

is,

(SouXrirov ts

But

xai/

%av
fj.ii

therefore, doubtful

Testament

"^sXnv

are put

^sXi^g,

^ovXp

is

whether

xav

never
in the

ever means to desire, to

choose, to be occupied or delighted with

thing, not even in

Heb.

x. 5, ^jfflav

any

x,u} -TTPogp^dv

where the Hebrew would appear

warrant the notion of delight and oblecta-

ohx riWsXriCag,

to

fir^

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

Certainly Marcus Antoninus has used

tlon.'

word according

the

2*29

ou xoXaxsvs(/^a,i

ra Xoyixa

o'l

^zoi

Hebrew sense,

to the
'^iXo\j(Siv,

dXX'

x. 8,
avroT;

it,o[MOi6\JSai

ircLvra.

been observed, both by Eustathius and

others, that tliese two words are synonyms.
It has

And

in fact, that they are not used indifferent-

ly in the

New

may

Testament,

be shown by

those passages in which they occur together,

Eph.

iv.

xix.

15.

31

We

The Apostle

Rom.

8 Apocal.
read also in Apoc. xvi. 19,

Coloss.

iii.

ii.

has, according to his usual practice, quoted

from the Septuagint, as the established Greek versiou of the

Scriptures ; in which certainly h^iXyiffa; does not give the
whole force of Y)n hut then it is somewhat remarkable,
that the true meaning is given in the word iuloxynroc;, in verse
;

6,

and

is

repeated again in

v. 8, as if

comparative weakness of the

own knowledge
tation

of the

and pleasure,

LXX

the Apostle, seeing

tlie

version, gave, from

liis

Hebrew, the proper idea of

to complete the sense; for

delec-

iuSok-zio-ccs is

not the true meaning of the parallel word H/i^^ti^- iscl solars
must be aware that there is a still more remarkable discre-

pancy here between the quotation

atid the

here

Hebrew, on which

it

but certainly to those

in the

New

Testament

would be out of place

who

to enter

hold, with the tran>lator,

the view of the verbal inspiration of sacred Scripture, there

is

no point requiring more

than the quotations in tbe

tuagint, or

and

some

otlier

(J

full

New

and patient investigation

Testament from the Sep-

reek version of the Old Testament,

their discrepancy from

tlie

present

Hebrew

text

7',

THE SYNONYMS

230
dvfLcg Trig o^yrjg

which

is

generally considered to

But

be an expression for extreme wrath.

young students should

be on their

airainst such observations, lest

when two nouns

found together of which one

are

genitive case,

and as

it

guard
in

is

the

were dependent on the

other, they conclude over hastily, either that

this is

a mere periphrasis, or an increment of

the force of the

word

For

in the genitive.

although a substantive, followed by the genitive case,

is

often, both in

Greek and other

languages, put instead of an adjective, yet the

must be asof the words them-

true force of such an expression

certained

by the

relation

selves; for, frequently, this

mode

more

and amplification

for the full description

adopted

is

of the subject, than for the increased intensity

many

Fischer has collected

of the thought.

examples, th(,ugh some are foreign to the purpose, in Welleri

Gram. Tom.

iii.

cannot, however, be shown, that

nyms
that

are placed together, as

it is

meant

<iTee of the

case

is

ferent
tiie

one

p. 269.

if

It

two syno-

&-j/Mog rrjg

ooyrig,

to express the superlative de-

in the gfenitive case.

very different,

For the

when two nouns

meaning are joined,

force of the one, as

in order to increase

^yi>^og crv^og

In this place, therefore,

of dif-

^-^/xof rrig

Heb.

x. 27.

hoyni

means

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

only the boiling of rage, as

we

231

say, Hitze des

Zornes.

But, to return to the difference of these two

words.

It

commonly

is

and

dv/juog

too

some grammarians,

great confidence in
o^yri

asserted from

so far differ,

that 6v>Mg

that

exacer-

is

bation of mind, anger kindling into existence

is

We

are

warned

ways the
fact

wrath daily enduring and inveterate.

o^yri

it is

case.

that this difference

And
For

false.

is

not al-

rightly enough, for in

and

dv/j,6g

o^y^

differ

not

as to the duration, but as to the nature of the

feeling.

from the

For
spirit

as

&u,fju6g

strictly

means the

which we breathe out

it is

soul,

sub-

sequently used to express a more intense passion of the

And
QixSicag

mind

therefore

as a

more

Sv/j.6g is

forcible exhalation.

thus described as

xa/ ^scsw; r^g -^uy^g.

'O^yrj^

oi^vb Trig

however, de-

notes anger, together with the desire of re-

venge."

Zeno says on Diogen. Laert.

vii. 1 IS,

The word e^ysj is from 3")n' which in Hebrew, Chaldee,

Syriac and Arabic, means to kill, and all the tumults of
"

passion which terminate in killing.

in

modern languages,

in the

There are

German word

traces of

it

krieg, war, con-

tention ; in the French word orgueil, which is properly, fierit,

and the English word, rage. The idea therefore of sanguinary revenge, attaches etymologically to l^yri. The Hebrew worJ nnri' ^^ expressive of a less violent feeling-, and
it

has been transmitted to us in the same qualified sense,

THE SYNONYMS

23*2

For

'ZPogriKovTuc,

altlioiigli

anger or rage,
punishing the

i.

injiirer,

often issues in

6vfj,6g

yet in the word con-

sidered separately, there

is

not the notion of

anger or passion, any more than in

is

Hum.

9. 2,)

(c7|/ /c-r.

eonf.

21.

c.

7.

sVr/

Xenophon says correctly

dv/iog iWw o<u^ o^y// a>'^^oucrw.

et de Venat.

10.

we may understand why

the

New

And hence

14.

put in

c^yv is often

Testament for vengeance and punish-

ment, but
20,

h^yn there

See Nemes. de

idea of diuturnity.

the

Nat.

of

the actual desire

in

e.

said to

O'ofMg is

in connection

Yet

never.

^v/J^og

mean

in

2 Cor.

anger.

with other terms

stands

It

s^s/'s,

xii.

^^Xo/, ^vfxoi,

But even here Ovfioi is rather

the enmities of a morose and passionate man,

sDi^sTai, Tcara'AaXiai.

[Fcindschaften^ Erhittermigen.)

Coriolano

(init.

p.

axj

TaXiv

^oojf^ivov

^j/mj7c d'

drsp'Trroig,

raoiTyjv.

hdhiov

o\j

And

59.

ovd'

from

not

Tubing,

ax^drotg xal

ivd^/j^offrov

vol.

ii.)

(piXovsixiQctg

d\&i>(i)'!Toig

avvuvat

Aristotle in Problem. Sect. xxx.

on the melancholic says,

ira, ire, irritate

ed.

Plutarchus de

and

s^oonxoi xal

aro, arsil, to burn.

co(/itatio, cogitavit,

seferoclus

i-jy/ivnrol 'rr^og

S-ii/zo;^ is

(jeasit.

probal)Iy

It is auliuus,

mind, the working and fermenting of mind, and putting

it

forth in external demonstration of strong feeling or passion.

Tliis etymology justifies the remarks made by the autlunT.
upon the usage of the two words

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

'233

where evidently tlie

idea of wratli is not at all intended.
Other
synonymous terms noticed by grammarians,
To-j;

O-jiMo-j^

ra;

x,ai

Imd-jfMia;,

do not occur in the

New Testament.

Both these words mean

But

desire.

sm^v/xiM

denotes rather the affection of mind, and sm^v/Ja

the inward passion and concupiscence

o^syo/j.ai

the appetite and tendency towards the external

In

object.

sm'^u(j.ia

only the mental desire

thought of (die Beyierde

conjoined with

it

selbst) ;

is

but ^sJ'J has

the notion of the thing de-

may

( Verlangen nach etwas.J So that

be used absolutely as Rom. vii. 7

but

o^'sysff'^M

sired,

And

never.

although

e'7n&v/ji,nv

xiii. 9,

ops^s/g

is

sometimes used for appetites, without the notion

appended of the objects

vi.

1.12,

(comp.

i.

T-ag 6^'s'^sig

6. 6.)

ax/xa^oucaj

yet

desired, as Herodian,
iig cc/ff-^sag k-rti^-uiMtag^

never, to

oosyzc^ai is

my

knowledge, used absolutely and independently.

For the same reason s'n'i^vfj.sTv rmg is to be moved
with the desire or passion for any thing.

word

in the genitive, placed in

the noun
of the

sc/^u/x/a,

fevT/^u/x/a;

The

regimen with

denoting the seat or fountain

as in the

New

Testament

fre-

and especially in that

difficult text John viii. 44. But o^i^'i riv6g denotes
the object desired.
So ^i^'s (saoxog would be the
(juently

s'Tri^vfjjia

eao-Kog

THE SYNONYMS

2S4

desire to eat flesh, (Verlangen nach Flelsch.)

For that one passage

xxiii. 6, xoiX/ag o^s^ig
Serooaav

in the
xcci

Book

of

(fvvovdiacffjbog

Wisdom,

f/Jfj

xaraXa-

cannot be adduced, not only because

fie,

the sayings of this writer are altogether without

authority

but also that

ooe^ig xoiXiag

properly be referred to the desire of

nitive,

known

It is well

belly.

that

words

may

very

filling

the

in the ge-

connected with another noun, frequently

Modern

denote the object, not the subject.

grammarians have accumulated examples, and

Hermann (on Viger, p. 877,) has shown the reason of this. But xoiXia may, in this passage, be
used in the same sense in which it occurs in other

LXX. as Job iii. 11, xxxi. 15,

Genes, xxv. 23, with which cvvoufftaffiiog agrees.

passages of the

We
and

must observe,

l-t^-JiMtct,

in passing, that

are not always put for licentious

passion, but for a virtuous

the soul

15, Phil.

xara
but,

rivog,

by

and tender desire of

the wish for a real good, as

i.

23,

is

Tim.

iii.

1.

bi '::\vJiJ,a

Luke xxii.

Finally,

I'Tri'^viMth

not to be contrary to any thing,

passion, to be led contrary to

as Gal. V. 17,

I'jn'^vfisTv

^7

<^cc|'^

x,ara rng

s'lri^-j/MTxara rov '^viv/u^arog, to

ffot^Kog, i. e.

flesh is against the spirit,

Jigainst the flesh

any thing;

the tendency of the

and of the spirit is

and raZra

dvrixsirai aXkriXoigj

these are opposed to each other

(scil.

gcco^ zoii

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Ti/so^a,)

235

SO that ye cannot do the things that ye

would.

These words are similar for they all denote

the affection of mind which arises out of the
presentation of a new, unexpected, and great
;

They

object to the eye or the mind.

differ,

however, not only in degree, but in the nature

of the affection.

x-X/;(ro'go^a/

tensive meaning.

which the mind

with

is

fear, sorrow,

has the most ex-

used of

It is

all

things

by

powerfully affected, not only

anger

but also of those more

pleasing objects, the aspect of which stimulates

us in a pleasing

manner

to love, reverence, or

by
which any one exTXrimrcci is added. So Xenoph.
Sympos, 4. 23, i^'^o 'rov s^urog i'yCTrXaysvra. Euripid.
P'requently, therefore, the cause

delight.*

Hel.
V.

V.

291.

1413.

^a/x/Ss/ sjCTrXayhrsg.

sjcrXay&Tffa,

In the

plied to auditors,

and

to

the

Rhes.

avd^hg ^ao^im hm'TrATiy/J^'^vriV'

New

Med.

Testament

l^i'r^'kdynaoL, stI

parents

idovreg aurov s^i'TrXdyrjaavy

V. 8. fwr/ Su/xoi/

of Jesus,
i. e.

it is

ap-

rn biba-x/i a-jTou;

Luke

ii.

48,

with joy and admira-

when they found him in the midst of the

But sx^a/^Ss/cr^a/, which occurs three
doctors.
tion,

Query, ^^73 admirabile

please.

T.

esse vel Jieri,

r>.r,(Tra>^

placeo,

THE SYNONYMS

236
times

ill

INIark, is

applied to those who, by the

sight or consideration of
thing, are horrified

some great

or fearful

not only because the object

itself

gives rise to fear, but also because the

mind

is

ahrh

scarcely able to conceive of

So

tude. ^

Mark

in

ix.

?*.

wont

is

presented suddenly.

In

Mark

denotes wonder, coupled with

it is

xat abriiMViiv

said of our

in

Lord

(Matth. xxvi. 37,

Luther has rendered

gen,

oyXog

Iddjv

e.

is

xiv. 33,

magni-

its

were astonished as any one

when the object then spoken of

iJsi^a/x/S;^^?!,

to be,

15,

sv^iMg

this

xvi. 5, 6,

it

Finally,

fear.

^'^Jaro gx^a/x/Ss/d-^a/
7^.v'rsTa^ai

xai

ddrj/x.^

zu zittern und zu za-

way more adapted

to

customary

speech than to the true force of the word; and

not in accordance with our Lord's character,

whose habit
stant, and to

it

was

to

regard his death as in-

But when the hour of

death arrived, it could not be but that his mind
must be intensely affected by the immediate
foretel

it.

contemplation of a form of death, not only cruel,

but of the severest suffering: not, as some older
theologians have said, that he shrunk with fear

For

from that death or those sufferings.

though
in

its

it

must be conceded

to

human

al-

nature,

most resolute form, that the spirit, in such

From HDJl' ^iralus

est,

obstupuit

T.

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE

237

would be considerably aifected yet he

who was conscious that he was in the path of
duty, and who was endued with the very wisdom
of Deity, and who knew himself to be commissioned by his Father expressly that he might
die for the salvation of the human race, would

cfiisis,

regard

all

perturbation or dread as altogether

They
who

therefore

write either in folly or in malice

choose to

aver from such passages as

this, that

our Lord

.foreign to

him and unworthy.

only understood, at a later period of his course,

when he saw that

must be submitted or the cause of
truth betrayed; for that otherwise, he would
not have been in such uneasiness if he had not
hoped originally that the course of events would
have been more prosperous. But of this I have

the necessity of his death,

either death

spoken elsewhere.
Finally, sJ/Vrac^a/

any event, are so

who, by
disturbed that they are

is

far

said of those

not quite in their senses,

they think or say.

used in the

New

Mark iii. 21,

not mean that

Testament.

sXs^oi/ y6i.o

mind

and know not what

In this sense
on

it

is

often

It occurs also in

s^sgrri

where

it

does

they said Jesus was out of his

but they thought

of iXiyov) that he

(this is often the force

was so pressed by the crowd

as to lose his self-possession [ausser sich seyn.)

THE SYNONYMS

2^8
For

was not the opinion of enemies, but

of friends, ruv eras' avTov.
This is evident from
this

the connection axohcavng

iXsyov yd^.

For

o'l

i:a^ ccvrou

ri^sXov

in the midst of the gathering

crowd of Galileans, he held a great disputation

with the law}'ers who had followed him from Jerusalem, V. 22 30. His friends, therefore, feared on his account, lest any harm should happen
to him, and therefore they went out to bring him
in (x^arJjca/), andrescue him from the multitude.
The word is used peculiarly in 2 Cor. v. 13,
g/Vs yd^ st,sff'r7jfjbiv, ^sui' s'Irs (roj(p^ovov/jLev, v/tiTv.
For

there, since a

man

his self-possession,

Sa/

cannot think
it is

who

has lost

often said that

eg/<rra<r-

in this place, to be excessive, to boast

is,

exceedingly.

And

this,

because

it is

opposed

But it can scarcely be so understood, for what would be the meaning there of
s^taraff^ai ru ^c(p ? For how could it be said that
he did this to God, or for God's sake ? Neither
to

is

(rca<poveTv.

it

to rw
ii.

necessary to seek for an idea contrary

eu(p^ovs7v.

15.

Cor.

I suspect,

in this passage,

xv. 11, 2. Thes.

xiii. 8.

therefore,

means

that

eJ/Vraff^a;,

to yield to another, as

way, place, honour, to prefer another to one's

self, in which it is not unfrequent in Greek
to

writers.
iv.

31.

See

And

obuv s^iaraSai,

Xenoph. Sympos.

evidently so in Lucian, Sat.

7.

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE
390,

p.

iii.

do

it

for

God,

" If

yield willingly,

God's sake

;" for

whom

since

(sv

%aohia.) J

T^ogw-rw it is

sv

especially I

See note on Herodian,

They

solicitous

New

be-

if I

your

for

would be

useful.

vol. viii. 8, 13.

These words are generally supposed

fer.

are of

ail tilings

nothing to myself;

I arrogate

have with modesty

sakes, to

Tlie sense, there-

%cl] s'^sffrriv tuJ Aii.

fore, will be,

239

to dif-

are both rendered, to care, to be

except that in some passages of the

Testament it

said that

is

fj^zoifi^av

means

to

be
For although both words carry the meaning of
to care, yet they differ.
For (p^ovrileiv means
be over anxiously careful.

too solicitous, to

only to care, to aim, to meditate, to give

gence, that a thing

So

sent.

ment,

it

care,

as to

to

8.

iii.

ha

(p^ovTt^uv is
is

'i^yov

/j^z^ffivav is

so to

Wherefore our Lord

from

(p^eviw

<Pq*iv

and the proper idea there-

thought, consideration, the occupation of the mind with

amaritudine

of the

Testa-

xaXwv

be truly solicitous that the thing

a subject of interest.
esse,

New

(p^ovri^uei

But

be careful.

should not be wanting.*

fore

be done or be pre-

occurs once in the

Titus

'ff^ofaraG^aiy

may

dili-

Hebrew,

sically as

is

/At^if/,yv is

affecit

derived from

which, in

all

^"IQ amarum

the cognate dialects

used not only in the sense of

a taste, but as bitterness of

care and solicitude.

T.

spirit,

bitter,

and

phy-

fretful

THE SYNONYMS

240

rightly warns his disciples,

And also

XakriCiTz,
'\\>'XT\

u/Awv,

i.

e.

in

be not

necessary to your

And

solicitous

although you

by

vi.

25,

/m^i/mvuts

iJ^n

life

were about
iM'-oiiJ,vr,6iT3

rriv

about the morrow,

know

not what

the cares of to-day;

ra kuvT^g, for on the

rf

its

55

avpiov,

so that

events shall
to increase

yc^i aupiov ^g^z/xv^cg/

morrow

shall

it

be seen

that no needful blessing shall be wanting.

is

to fail you.
s}g

ye should so indulge mistrust as

it

x. 19,

solicitous, as if the things

in verse 34, tm oh^

be not
be,

Matth

Matth.

It

not a care, even an earnest and solicitous

care, for future things, wliicli

reprehended

is

but that diffidence which originates in empty

and baseless pride, and which agitates the
mind and torments it during the whole course
of life with fretful anxiety about earthly things.

This

is

meant by the

'jijj<::viyo-j(it

rh

says (v. 32.)

--rlwct

roZ aicovog,

jui^^i/j^mi

And

Xoyov.

raZra ra

therefore our

which
Lord

'i%ri sT/^^rs/, i. e.

as

the most important and exclusively desirable;

but as for you,

In Themistius, Orat. 26,

gether,

(poovrigag

Kal

^3

H,iHiLva,v^

iT/^s/i/,

we

sich eticas

we

fMSsifivrjffug,

oLv-zwug xotra/MXsrrjffug.

X. 19.

[SagiXs/av rou ^sov.

(^>jr?rs cr^wroi/ TYiV

find placed to-

xoci

ToXXag

v'jxrag

See Wettstein on Matth.

render, y/Zr ctwas sorgen, but

hiimmern.

It

is

properly

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

therefore in this passage written,

For
T-wv

this is the habit of the

uTkruv xai

/u^s/x-^i/ioi^uv.

^41
(xzgi^w.curv

unbelieving mind,

The

affections of

mind, however, which these words express are

so nearly allied, that often one word appears
to

be permuted for the other.

de Vocibus Atticis, v.
therein adduced.

fJi^s^if^v^Vy

See Moeris,
and the examples

THE SYNONYMS

242

CHAPTER

X.

In the former chapter we spoke of a particular class of

Some examples

synonyms.

kind remain to be noticed.

will

now speak

have

little

of this

of these

briefly.
avarrj^og.

gTcXrj^og.

To many

And

persons these two words appear to

or no difference.

by the terms,
harsh, inhuman.
And

of them,

They render

either

austere, hard, severe,

so far certainly they

agree, that neither character, so properly designated, has a regard to that which

is

equitable,

but so uses his right, that he remits nothing,

from a feeling of lenity or mercy. Yet they

differ, (as in German our words streng and

For he

hart.)

is ccucrrri^og,

who although he

is

not altogether alien from the tenderness of

humanity, yet represses

it

within him, because,

under the force of reasons of justice, he thinks

that nothing of his right, and of that which is

due

to him, should

GxXTj^og,

ciple

who

be conceded.

But he

is

asserts his right because the prin-

of humanity

is

wanting.

The

avffrn^o;

would remit and indulge, but thinks that he

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

ought not; the

a'/.Xr}^6;

has

ito

243

wish

do

to

so.

who is a\j<frv}^6g cannot be condemned,

father who is axXriiog is a bad man.

father

but a

In Matth. xxv. 24, the same master

axXri^og,

21,

whom

made

is

the

same servant,

to call

aiidrrj^og.

in

And

is

called

Luke

hence

xix.
it

is

concluded that the two words have the same

We

meaning.

should take care, however, in

treating parallel passages of this kind,

find

the

same thing expressed

in

if

we

different

words, not to conclude too hastily that the

words do not differ in sense.

quent error of lexicographers.

This

is

a fre-

For when two

authors narrate the same fact in such a way,

that they

make

use of different words, by which

the general bearing of the narration

fected,

ask on what ground are

is

we

not af-

entitled

two different words carry

precisely the same meaning? So far we must
admit, they are said, and may be said, of the
same thing; but that they mean the same
to affirm, that the

thing precisely

is

not yet proved.

the estimation of such

men

tioned in the parable,

is

Neither, in

as the one

men-

there any great dif-

ference between a severe or strict master and

a harsh and merciless one.

is

He who

is

c>Ck^6g

deservedly blamed, as in Aristotle's Ethics,

iv. 8,

ay^m

Jtai ajiXri^oi

but the

avgryj^og

cannot

THE SYNONYMS

244
be blamed.
xakhg

5s

Quaest. Gr, cap. 40,

Plutarch.

wk xa/ dixatog, ob^ ^rrqv

Cuxp^ui*

riv

xal

ciha-

rri^og.
T'>u.vg'

^TTiog'

(-r^aur^js*

%ir[(S7og*

Xf^jCTorjjg.)

These words are the opposite of the two former ones they agree as expressions of lenity
J'or crgau^ is gentle,
of mind; yet they differ.
who endures all things with an even temper
;

(sauftmiithig ;)

n'^'og is

mild, especially towards

the faults of others (gelinde,

kindly,

who

jSaffiXrjg rr^avg is

iii.

Therefore in Matthew xxi.

124,

'jTnviMa

Finally, the

xi.

And

ra-xsivhg rfj xa^dlcc.

7]-ji)yjov

as in Pindar Pyth.

j8a(f/Xgi)g 'Tr^aijg dsroTg, ov <p^ovsci)v

Compare Matthew
zai

5,

not benign, but gentle, tender,

from proud ferocity

V.

%or\<irCi

wishes well, and desires to benefit

others (yiitig,)

free

mild;)

is

-r^ae/g

from that haughty

29,
in

on

'Tro^og

Peter

iii.

dya^oTg.
uiii

4,

xal
'^r^ccC

a meek and quiet spirit.

in Matthew v. 5, are free

self-sufficiency, in

which the

Jews made their boast of promised happiness

and therefore, it is said x\v]^ovo/j.yjgov(fi rnv ynvy see
Wetstein on this passage. The force of n'^iog
may be sufficiently shown by one passage,
Thess. ii. 7, duvoi,,u.svoi b (Sd^st iJmi, ug ^ciCtcx/
I
;

droCTokoi^
^otX-ff^j

s'/vr}'^rifj.sv

rtTtoi

rd savT^g rixva

riTiog n^v.

ir^cfog

iv fMsffui vfiuv,

as in

Homer,

denotes tenderness

ug

ccv

crarj?^

r^o(pli

S ug

of spirit;

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

245

exhibition of that tenderness in bear-

^T/og the

ing with others

(gelinde, mild bey der

Tim.

In 2

lung andrer.J

Behand-

24, the

ii.

ser-

vant of the Lord must not strive

{i. e.

useless questions,) but ^V/ov uvai

irdyrag,

'jrfog

about
i. e.

he must be gentle in bearing with the opinions

of Others,

didocKnxhv, avs'^ixccxov,

He

roug avTldiccTi%,(Msvoug.

is

iv it^adrriri 'TTaidiuovTa

n-^'og

the utmost of his power, not to

So we

others.

and

annoy

seeks to

or distress

find ^V/a ^ag/^axa, Iliad. ^.212;

Prometh.

^V/a uxsff/Mara, Aeschyl.

And

who

in Herodot.

iii.

89,

we

find

rj'xiog

v.

481.

opposed

to yoCkiirug.

In the word

the presiding notion

x^^jcro;

Our Lord

benevolence, benignity.

Father that he

is

%p>5tfrov

is

says of the

l^\ ro\ig ayccokroug xat

For he who is Xi^'^^^^ i^ot

only is kind to the good but to the eviL
This
injunction had preceded: Love your enemies.
The d;)(^ag/(rro/ jtai irovri^oi are those who, regardless of benefit received, act wickedly, and are
Compare Ephes. iv. 32, and 1
to all ax^rjffroi.
Cor. XV. 32, and Wetstein's notes.
Often also %,^<^7'o/ and Tovrj^oi are opposed to each other.
'Tovrj^oig,

In

Luke vi.

Matthew

^opT/cv

fjjov

Xirjcrog,

xi.

sXa(p^6v

is

easy,

that here also

it

35.

30,

^vyog

/xou

^g^jcro? xa} rb

commonly thought that

But I rather think
pleasant.

sffrt,

is,

it is

benign.

For the yoke of

THE SYNONYMS

246

the law, especially in connexion with the tra-

and comments of the Pharisees was

((po^T/ci dvff[3d<fTaKTa Matth. xxiii. 4, Luke

ditions
'TovTi^og

and yet it was

yj^idroZ was %;^Ji<rro5, ?.

xi. 46.)

rou

tiges

Joch :J for he

but the ^u/oj

a%f>j<rros;
e.

benign (ein ivohlthd-

who bears

it

feels himself to

be more blessed as he goes forward.

But

young students be on

they so

conceive of the fo^rm

their guard, lest

eXccp^ov,

let

as to suppose that

the precepts of Christian duty are easy to be

observed

which

is

very incorrect

for

it

may

be easy enough to abstain from certain meats

overcome
every rebellious passion, and constantly to obey
the divine commandments, not by the fear of
punishments or the hope of reward, but solely
from the love of truth and virtue, and of the
holy authority which commands it. And yet
but

it

^nv Tcara miv/Mcc, is

may

be said truly,

xa/ iu(Ba,araxrov,

soul,

not SO easy

hXasp^hv rh (poorlov,

because

it

it is

made

i. e.

su(popov

does not depress the

but nourishes and confirms

so that daily

to

day by day

it

^^' ^>-ot<p^or^og.
xi^'^'^^'^H^^

For many are the xou^a to the narrow-minded

man, especially if they are t'Trr^i^ffcc but (i(p(jor^r(x.
zKiXi^io^ avdo'i, as in Lucian, 1. Merc. cond. 13.
;

p.

669.

But

to return.

will be granted

by

all

In

Romans

ii.

4, it

that rl xi^,gTov rov ^lou

means the benevolence of God

but then they

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

247

New

Testament, not

only denotes benevolence or

beneficence, as

say that

Rom.

%p?;(yrorjj

ii.

in the

Cor.

4, xi. '22, 2.

&c., but also

vi. 5,

the benefit derived from benevolence, as in

Ephes.
i<p'

ii.

i]ijja.g

7, crXoDroi/

rJjj "XJ^^iroQ

But in

X^iffrui 'Ir.ffou.

avrov
this

sv ^^rjffrorTjTi

passage %ag^?

seems rather, as elsewhere, to express the benefit conferred on us, by divine benevolence,
through Jesus Christ.

who

does not see that

In Titus
xf^jfyrorTj?

benefit but the benevolence

heed also
does not

we

If

to the lexicographers,
diifer

also,

are to give

even

Jt/s/x^;

from those words of which we

for they render

have spoken,

4,

iii.

denotes not the

it

mild, clement,

indulgent, lenient, humane, and smsr/sta clemency, humanity.

But

in smsix^g there

is

not the

notionofamindmoderate, mild, merciful; which

renders the three former words synonymous;

but

who

rather one

emsizTjg is

not obstinate, (gefdllig,

to

ycLkzitig^

But

v^'^/og*

easy, yielding,

nachgiehig,) opposed

all this is

a^^wv

is

well known.

ai/oTjrog*

cf.(S\)nroi*

with the substantives

All these words so far agree as they express

a certain deficiency of

shows

itself in

differ

very widely.

intellect,

whether

thinking or acting.

this

Yet they

THE SYNONYMS

248

The word

vriT^ioi;

properly expressive of age,

is

and therefore it does not denote vice, absolutely;

nor is it predicated properly of man only, but
frequently it is used to express an incautious
ingenuous man, unsuspicious of evil; it is put
for that simplicity of mind which is so pleasing
in youth.

But

since in adults this quality

deservedly

is

reproved, as unworthy of a mature mind,

it is

used as a term of reproach towards those

who

and act like children, when from

years they ought to have made further ad-

think, feel,
their

In the

vances.

New

Testament, however,

it

often occurs without the idea of reprehension.

So Matth.
ii.

xi.

the

25,

Hence
same way

20.

fi^ reaihia

as in

Luke x. 21, Gal. iv. -3, Rom.

h x^ianZ 1 Cor. iii. 1. In

vrt'xtoi

vyiTid^nv

yhzG^i ra7g

iv. 14,

Cor. xiv. 20,

dXXa

ttj

xax/cc vfimdt^in,

<p^sffh,

Xenoph. Ages.

Ephes.

occurs

i.

17. TuTdccr^

they are called

ccTrdrri,

in

who,

like

vti'zioi,

and easily deceived.

The word stands opposed to d\in^ riXnog v. J 5.
(comp. Heb. v. 13.)
The word a^p^aiv denotes one who does not
rightly use his mental powers.
And this is
not always used in a bad sense.
For what the
lexicographers say, that it means foolish, senseless, pagan, impious, villainous, and even ostcninfants, are

incautious

NEW TESTAMENT.

OF THE
tatious,

must be

249

rejected, together with their

other frequent trifling.

our word unverstdndig

It answers, in fact, to

which is not only applied to boys, but to any who, without actual
blame, are destitute of the true knowledge of
things and it is said sometimes without the
idea of blame.
So it occurs almost invariably
in the New Testament.
In Rom. ii. 20, -ra/dsurrig a<p^6vuv and diddffjcaXog vriirim occur together
and in 2 Cor. xi. 19, we read rih'zug yao anyj(^i
;

ruv d(p^6vuvj

(p^oviiMoi

hng.

Neither are the

impious, or vain and insolent boasters

(p^ovifMog,

for the

could not properly bear with such

they are rather

and

aip^ovsg,

men who

trifling things

but

find pleasure in light

and are called

u(p^ovsg,

be-

cause they do not understand that such things

are vain and perishing.

Such men the ^^ovi/xoi

they may do so ridiugy

Luke

xii.

20,

21.

not only bear with, but

i, e,

without anger.

this sense Paul, in verse 16, calls himself

In

ci(p^ojv^

men he boasted,
For as they are ^^om/jt^oi
who rightly estimate things around them, so men
who are deceived by foolish vanities, yet boast
themselves, are called a(p^ong. So in Xenophon
Apol. wefind df^ontsri^a (J^iyakriyo^ia:.) and Sympos. 4. 55, they are called oc,<p^ong, who were
because after the manner of
sv d<p^o(f{jvr}, i. e.

ug

a<pDoov.

i]

pleased with the

deceits of a

Sicilian.

la

THE SYNONYMS

250
I

Peter

ii.

15, it is

joined with

uyvufflcf;

which

is

put for the ignorance of men who are influenced

Commonly

by mere outward appearance.

it is

there interpreted, calumny, probably because

rv

occurs thus,

^//-toDv

(pUMoZv in this

passage

The word

simply to coerce.

is

avoTirog differs

from both the former.

It is foolish, stupid, either that

wanting
it is

it

But

ruv df^ovMv ayvuciav.

in right reason,

which

is

really

( unvernunftig ) ; or that

not properly called out; so that, although

man may appear to

himself to follow a certain

rule in acting, yet he

rules,

is

in fact

guided by

both in thought and action.

false

Paul, there-

fore, calls the Galatians dvoijroi; because,

although

they thought themselves very wise, they were,

in fact,

decidedly false teachers, and had re-

And

turned to the old superstition.

are rightly opposed to the

and Titus

we

iii.

followed a

wrong

Rom.

(f6<poi;

3. ^M'iv yd^ Tore xai

rj/XiTi

Jesus,

dvorjrot
i.

dvo^roi,

course of living, not

were without a proper knowledge of

And when

the

Luke

rfi

a. e.

we

religion.

xxiv. 25, called his

disciples, dvorirovg xai ^eadiTg

14;

two

xa^dla, it is plain

and would not, upbraid their

weakness and slowness of intellect but he calls
them dvor}roi, because they had formed from the
Scriptures a false hope respecting the Messiah,
that he could not,

and had consequently sunk into despondency.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Luther well renders
lately observed,

or stupid

nor

incredulous

Thoren. Neither, as
xa^bia

is (SpudsTg rfj

^^abijg rp jta^d/cc

we

slow of mind

taken by

but the whole formula

itself,

(3^ccdiTg rfj x.

expresses an incredulous man, one

Tou 'xiffnviiv,

hard of

it

251

For when

belief.

of the

/3^a66$ is said

mind of man, the kind of slowness is determined

by the rest of the sentence. A man may be
either ^^advg sJg rh XaXJjCa/, ^oahug sJg b^yTjv. ( James
sig TO (fuvisvai, sig ro cr/tfrei/g/i'.
But jS^advg
i.
19.)
alone never means slowness of intellect or
Theophrastus rightly says,

stupidity.
(27.)

dvaiff^rjgiuv

(S^ccdvrrira

-^v^i^g

sv

ch. 14.

Xoyoig

xai

which passage is sometimes adduced

show that (S^udvg means stupid. Polybius

<7rd^s<fiVi

to

also,

whom

and

stupid,

man was

they say had affirmed the

(iv. 8. 7.)

Thessalonians to be

dy^^rjgrovg xal

had said a little before that the same

often ^vHruirarog xal ^oadurarog.

tainly in both passages the

they confide in
writers.

But

word denotes slow-

let students

to return.

the Apostle speaks of

mean

Cer-

beware how
examples brought from other

But

ness of action.

not

^oahTg useless

In

Im'^vfitai

passions which

Tim.

vi. 9,

dvor}roi,

when

he does

make men mad,

as

some render it but which are themselves wild

and irrational, as T^o^vf^ia ci<p^uv in Eurip. Here.
Fur. V. 310. Compare Schol. on Aristoph. Nub.
;

THE SYNONYMS

252
V.

426.

avoia

frequently means want of mind,

not want of piety

iii.

but the word

more
word

as

Luke
dvorjffia,

titude of

and

?2X/^/o5.

expresses density and inap-

dffvvsrog

mind

appears to agree

word Moeris gives some

of which

examples on the word

Finally,

and 2 Tim.

proper meaning of the

fully with the

dvoi^rog

vi. 11,

to perceive that

which

is

true

For the M^ord d^vverog s. davvsrog, is

used by the Greeks in two ways, both of a
heavy and stupid man, who is wanting in intellectual acumen
and of those things which
are difficult of comprehension, and only to be
just.

apprehended by

men

of acuteness,

In this latter sense

shviToi.

it

by

the

does not occur in

the sacred writings See Valkenar on Euripid.

Phoen. V. 1510; but in the former sense it is
used both in the New Testament, and by other
:

somewhat surprising
that the Greeks have used the same word
And,
both in the active and passive sense.
in the same way, they use awsrog, both of him
who readily and acutely perceives, and of the
There are some who
thing easily understood.
affirm, that in Rom. i. 31, and x. 30, davvirog
is wicked, wanting in true religion; but without
writers

:iny

although

it

is

ground, except that in Suidas

dffvArovg' roue d<rvvsldr,TOvg,

But

in the

we

find

midst of

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

an enumeration of particular

vices,

*253

we

could

hardly expect to find the general notion of

and in c. x. 30,
s^vog dffvvsrov evidently means a people so far
inferior to the Jews in understanding, as to be

wickedness or improbity

the object of contempt, (oux

i^vog.)

In
one who is yet inexperienced,
unknowing a<p^ct)v^ one who does not use his rafine, v^T/05 is
;

who, although he appears

toknow, yet thinks andacts perversely; dguvirog,

tional powers;

dvorjrog,

one who, from density of mind, does not perceive truth and right.
d<p^Qgvv7i,

in the

and the

fault of the dp^oveg is

dvoTjroi, fioo^lccy

dtrui/gro/, dtruvsg/a.

ever, to

The

in the

vjt/o/,

We will turn now, how-

some other examples.

tv(fi(3'/}c,

ihXaBrig*

svXd^six.

zvcfs^siw

These words are synonymous;

all

used to express piety, Luke

Acts X.

xal svXa^rjg.

Heb.

^SQv.

Tim.

ii.

ccrXorrjgy

2,

xii.

2,

25,

they are

dvri^ dixaiog

svffs^ns Jta/ (polSovfisvog rov

28, /*2ra atdovg

sv Tcdari ihgi^uct.

ii.

for

xa;

x.ai evXajSi/ag,

6i(jj\i6Triri.

Passages,

however, occur, in which their several and

special significations must be observed,
svas^^g

and

inasmuch as svasjSrig expresses that reverence for the Deity which shows
i\)Xa^'/]g

differ,

itself in actions,

especially in the worship of

God; but suXa/Sjj vindicates that disposition, which

dreads and avoids the doing any thing contrary

THE SYNONYMS

254

and diligently labours, therefore, to

fulfil all the duties of piety and humanity.
iuXa(3r}i is the pious man, who is governed by
the thought of the divine sanctity, and always
fears lest he should do, or think, any thing opto right,

posed

to the divine will, gottesfiirclitig

fearing

man

but he

a God-

who shows
Hence guXa/Ss/a is

is sucrs/S^g

piety by acting, fromm.

that
that

piety which governs the soul, Gottesfurcht

fitfg/Sg/a is

the energy of piety in the

life,

both

internal and external, Frommigkeit^ Gottseligkeit,

Luther properly renders

fxooKSfLog fj/iyag

ri

Tim.

Ian

vi. 6,

ebdi^na fisra avTa^xeiui,

wer

hi

gottse-

For true piety has this power, that life

lig
is rendered desirable, even though destitute of
and we find ourselves
external prosperity
ist.

happy

if it

be only in an acquiescence in the

providentialgovernment of God.
fiiT

to

On

auragx/a?.

Thatisei><r/3/a

the contrary, they are said

be most miserably in error, who are

iro^iff/j^hv

who

iJvai rrjv svaejSnav, i. e.

look for mere

earthly gain from their piety.

avra^xsiag

which

is

passage, does not

which leads
X/'a V.

piety.
iii.

13,

to piety.

which

N either

16, as

mean

it is

is

It is piety Ater

And

gainful.

vofii^ovrsg

suffslSsia

in this

the Christian religion

It is

57

^ccr

ivcs^nav didaffxa.

the institution for producing

is rh

/J.V

ar rj

{ ov

Ti^g

voas^iiag 1

Tim.

usually rendered, the mystery of

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

religion,

i.e.

the Christian doctrine but

i. e.

fivgrri^iov

TTii suffi^siag is

all piety,

255

that doctrine or matter to

Christian religion

orvXos xai kdoaiai/Ma

rrig dX^j^g/a;,

That

K|cu^?3 sv (sa^xi %. X.

to

is

be referred.

namely,

6v<rsj3sia

which

^sog fa-

that espe-

is

which shows itself in the life, is evident

from Acts xxii. 12 oivn^ su(f(3rig xara rov v6/xov, as
%ara rov v6/mv,
in Xenoph. Hist. Gr. i. 7, 10.
iugi^ovvng xai ivoexovvngj x^iveTn'
Compare Acts

cially

Wherefore Peter, 2
exhorts Christians to show in their

xvii. 23,

2 Tim.

Epistle

6,

i.

iii.

5.

continence, patience, in their patience,

and

in their

But

gutrs/Ss/a,

sutri/Sgya,

brotherly love.

as ivXa(3rjg properly denotes timidity

caution,

it is

so said of piety, as that

the effects of piety on the

principle of the

life

mind

it

and

exhibits

rather than the

It occurs in this

of piety.

sense in the passages quoted.

But

there are

two places adduced in which it is supposed

that roug suXajSiTg, means proselytes of the gate;
who elsewhere are spoken of by the terms
po/3ou//,gw/ and o'g/3o/xgvo/ rov ':^s6v.
So Acts ii. 5.
^tfav ds sv ' Is^ovgccXii/jiy xaroixovvrsg'lovdaToiy
jSg7$,

uTh

there

is

'TTavrog s^vovg rojv

no reason

vTh rov ov^avov.

why we

of

is

For

it

first,

nothing said

men which may

Jews generally.

But

should admit the

idea of proselytes, since there

concerning these

avd^sgsvXa-

is

not be said

evident that

o/

THE SYNONYMS

2o6

tioned

men-

are only

x'xrotxouvTsg sv 'Is^. avd^tg ivXa(3iT;

because Jews, not only those born in

Hebrew, but

Palestine and speaking

who journeyed from

all

those

provinces

different

to

Jerusalem, and spoke different languages or

each severally heard these Apostles,

dialects,

who were

Galileans,

oiaXsKruj ajrwc,

sv
f\

speak

are spoken of as xaro.xoZvng

understood, with

who

proselytes

r/MfTog

little

rn ibia

iv

For when they

lyivv7]^r,<iav.

this is

ev'li^ovgaXrjf^,

reason, to refer to those

are called 3^1/1

'^1^

and who

certainly received this appellation, not because

they dwelt

in

Jerusalem, but because they were

permitted to sojourn

among

the Israelites ge-

For these sojourners lived not only

in Jerusalem, but throughout the whole of
Palestine, and amongst the Jews scattered
nerally.

through

all

Empire.

name was

the various provinces of the

Besides, they are called

not

calls

lovbaToi

which

mere sojournthose who were

applied to the

ing proselytes, but only to

proselytes of the covenant.

them

Roman

Peter himself,
'

oivbozg JovdaTbi xcci ot jcaroixovvrsg

uTavrsg; but in v. 22, av^gg /V^a/jX/ra/.

ls^ov(faXr,fji,

In

v. 10,

drawn between kvboucn

Finally, the whole line of arr x(tl '^reog^'kvToi
which
Peter
adopts, would have been
gument

however, a distinction

is

inapplicable to the sojourners

among them.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

whom

257

the rulers of the Jews only required

observe the Noachic precepts; for Peter

to

made use

of examples which could only in-

who had embraced

those

fluence

the whole

That the term cannot be referred

law.

covenant

selytes of the

from

this,

that

may

be

these could neither

tinguished from Jews by this term,

could they be called

For

Tcuroixovvrsg.

is

Uti^l/l,

whom

neither

word,

this

applicable only to the sojourners, to

the rest of the description does not ap-

They appear

ply.

dis-

Hebrew term

indeed accords with the

if it

to pro-

be understood

to

me, therefore,

to

have

been men, not born in Judea, yet of the

Jewish nation, who were dwelling for a time
at Jerusalem,

some were

V. 10,

that

among whom

JiarorAsTv

Acts

i.

proselytes.

may be

ers at Jerusalem,

ivXdCrjS,

suppose

lastly,

evident

the dwell-

all

and not only of the sojourners,

where

there

them
is

civo^sg tuXa(3iTg

But there

proselytes

a passage, Ileb.

svXd^iia appears to

are said to

is

no reason

either.
v. 7,

in

And,
which

be said of anxiety of mind,

xa/ iigay.out^iig drrh rng svXa^siag,

:

it is

19.

have buried Stephen.

ed

For

affirmed of

appears by

it

second instance occurs of the use of the

word
to

also

This is render" and was heard and delivered from anxie-

THE SYNONYMS

258
ty."

But

of thought

seeing* that
is

by

this view,

the series

manifestly interrupted, (offering

up ardent prayers, he was freed and accomplished a perfect obedience,) I would prefer
to

understand

the sense of piety,

g'JXaCs/a in

for the sake of

which he was heard.

For he

received this reward of true piety, that he ob-

For he did

tained that for which he prayed.

not ask to be set free from the suffering of

death, but that in the enduring of death, he

might experience that constancy and perseverance of mind which Luke relates to have
been conferred on him, c. xxii. 4*2, 43.
It
would appear, therefore, that all these words
Ko/Vg^

oJv

whg

'i/ji^a^sv

v'Traxorjv,

should be included

in a parenthesis, that the other parts of the

may

sentence
eviyxag,

cohere

s/gaxov^sii;

On

gurnoiug..

this

xa/

together,
rsXs/w^g/g

sysvsro

It

is

a'iriog

use of the preposition

see Abresch. Dilucid. Thuc. p. 144, and

ad Isocr. Paneg.

ir^og-

dsrj^sig

dcr6,

Morus

p. 55.

a groundless complaint which some

persons have made, that some vocables in the

New

Testament are used

and indefinitely, that among their various meanings

it is not always apparent which is to be attached to them in each particular instance.

Whence

it

arises,

so vaguely

that to the

same vocable

OF THE

NEW TESTAMENT.

259

and someBut any

one may perceive that this woukl be an erroneous mode of interpretation. For if a word desometimes they

affix

the generic

times a certain specific signification.

notes any thing which has several forms united

under one common genus, but different in

species,

it is

certainly possible that the generic

word may be predicated of each particular

species
but it would be very absurd to say,
the
word
denoted all the particulars which
that
;

class

under the one genus.

It

were ridiculous

any one in a German lexicon, among the

meanings of the word Holz (wood), should
enumerate all the species of wood as if they
were expressed by the generic term and
should state, that it sometimes means the
genus and sometimes the several species
if

which compose the genus, and then give all

the different kinds of trees, as Bauholz, BrennholZi Nutzholz.

And

is it

not then equally

ridi-

when, in the lexicons to the New

Testament, we see, affixed to any word, all the
notions of the several things which are associated under it as separate species ? It is one

culous,

thing for a word to be predicated of several

things, because the

inherent in
it is

it,

common

or generic notion

applies to those several things

another for that word to denote these se-

THE SYNONYiMS

260

veral specific things.

The examples

of this

error are innumerable, but in this discussion

a few will

suffice.

These words are

said to

have at times a

wider signification than at others; and sometimes to denote

of

life,

cial

all

improbity of manners and

some speSo that it

at others, to represent only

form of that general pravity.

must be sometimes doubtful wliat notion is in

each place to be attached to the word. The
cause, however, of such ambiguity and hesitation, must be sought not in the negligence or
carelessness of the writers, but in the igno-

rance of the true force of the word which they

These words may have been accounted synonymous, because each has the
common notion of impurity of life defiled by
have used.

intemperate passions

and proper
rately,

yet each has

force, which, if

we

we need never remain

meaning
The word

the

meaning, for

its specific

observe accu-

in

doubt as to

in each particular instance.

uxa^a^ffia has the
it

most extensive

denotes every kind of impurity

of mind and conduct.

But

a^eX/s/a,

and

although they also are truly axa^a^<r/a

denote a certain kind of dxa^a^ala only

they cannot be permuted, as

if it

a<r<ur/a,

yet they
;

so that

were the

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

261

same thing whether dcsXyna, dauria, 'rogvs/a, or

dxa^a^<r/a, dvo/xia were written
and they are
;

not so promiscuously used in the

For

ment.

used

axa^agtf/a is

New

Testa-

any

to express

kind of mental or moral impurity or unclean-

and not merely impure passions and indulgences.

So in 1 Thess. ii. 3, the cra^axX^ff/g
ness,

is

made

said to be

ovx.

neither in error,

oO^s Ix doXou,

council, nor in guile

posed
is

to

'TrXdvrjg, ovds

dvofj^Ia,

impurity of

all

improbity,

pious and

s/'s

dvofx,ia^ i. e.

H"

avo/x/av,

flagitious life;

to probity

and

vi. 19,
it is

it

said

The sense

is,

douXa

rij

/uAXyj vfjjuv

and to
lead an im-

to impurity,

so as to

so

op-

it is

iv.

but

life.

as ye formerly ^a^scrj^cars rd
axa^agtf/a xa/ r^

c.

Romans

in

not synonymous with

generally of

nor by impure

and in

And

dixaioffvvr].

Ig d'/M^cc^gicc^f

now consecrate them

dtxaioffvrf}) sJg dyiag//^6v,

virtue, (rf

you may lead a pure and holy life. I

know not but that the words ^h dvof^iav and s/s
ayiagaov might be taken in connection with
ira^icrricari', so that the sense would be, your
that

members which formerly

purity,

were devoted

in the service of

to impiety,

now

holiness and

consecrate to

There

a very similar passage in Ephes.

19, o'irmg

<7rot,^sduKUV

d/ta^ap(ftag TatSrig

iaurovg

rf,

crXsoi'gJ/a.

dgikyzia
It seems,

r/f

chastity.

dixaioevvri,

is

im-

^oDXa

zlg

iv.

l^yadiav

however,

THE SYNONYMS

262
opposed

some-

to this, that rraoierdvai is joined

times with the dative, as

The word
dffiXyrjg is

acsXys/a

v. 16.

differs

from axa^a^Gia.

properly petulant, saucy, impudent

one without modesty or retiredness, but who

acts immoderately and with wantonness; and
atfgXyg/a,

therefore,

is

the forwardness and peev-

and not the

obscenity and uncleanness of lust.
This is
proved by innumerable passages, which, after
Henry Stephen, the lexicographers have heaped together. See also Westein on New Tesish impertinence of the

tament, vol.

2 Cor.

xii.

In

588.

i.

dffsXyrig,

this sense it occurs in

21, joined with axa^a^c/a

as in Cicero, pro Cael. 29,

long harangue, de

given in Gal.

Rom.

v. 19.

It is

Peter

iv. 3,

tonness.

it

It is

seems rather

'rrovrioicti,

^Xa6(p7i(Ma,

21.

Mark

of vices

ii.

18; but in

7,

to intimate

vii.

22.

wanit

is

xkorral,

\j'7ri^r}<pavia, dip^offuvT}.

It

cannot mean

with vices of another cha-

and that has been already noticed

The

[J^n

doXog, affiXyna, o^^aXjULog rrovri^ogy

lust, for it is classed

racter,

list

13,

doubtful in what sense

specially intended in
rrXeovs^iai,

xiii.

de

probably used to

express filthy lust in 2 Peter

1

12, there is a

and in the

xai dasXyi/atg ;

xo/Tccig

cro^vs/a,

corrupteh's, de adulteriis,

de sumtibus.

pj'otervitate,

c.

and

interpreters,

therefore,

in v.

generally

OF THE
render

it

NEW TESTAMENT.

injury; but

263

rather insolence; the

it is

insolence of men, who, indulgent to their

passions, have no regard

to that

which

is

own
just

and equal, but trample down every right of

others, while they hurry on to their own object.*

In this sense

it

among

often occurs,

1 cannot trace satisfactorily the oriental root of this

Probably

word.

if

we

could,

we might

distinct determination of its generic force,

arrive at a

more

and thus reconcile

the seeming discrepancy and obscurity which evidently at

There are traces of the original word in the

it.
whole of the Gothic family of languages. In the Gothic
translation of the Gospel by Ulphilas, unselgam is the wicked.
tend

This word
fatal,

retained in

is still

condemned.

particle,

German

And

selig,

it

German,

unselig, miserable,

occurs also without the negative

Danish

salog,

Anglo-Saxon

saelig, in

the sense of good, virtuous, and therefore in a secondary

The Greek word a<riXyni is evidently comsense, happy.

pounded of the negative or privative a, and some oriental
root corresponding in its consonants to the letters o-Xy, and
identical with that word which came into Europe with the
leaders of the Gothic migration, and which has retained its
place even in

modern

times.

through the film of some

will

If

it

shall be yet discovered

slight orthographical difference, it

most probably throw light upon the use of the Greek

It is very probable that seligo^ in Latin is not a

term.

compound, as the Lexicons state of se and Ugo ; but is another form of the yet undiscovered etymon of selig.
I am inclined to think that the original word is H/iJ
which, in the Hebrew,

is

prospere fecit, profuit.

same sense in Chaldee and Syriac

and in Arabic

It has the
is

not only

used in this sense, but carries also the idea of worth and

THE SYNONYMS

264

and
in those passages which are sometimes compared with the text already quoted from Mark.
other writers, but especially in Polybius

In the same

with

Way Demosthenes

charges Philip

He

puts together

uffsXyna xa) -xXsovs^/a,

xai dffsXyojg^

also

ds<f'?rortxu)g

and

also dcsXycog %al 'n'oXvnXo^g, as

5. ^/a

Ctesiphon, p. 78,

Nor does

the

word

t?iv

koc! TPCTTiroog,

u.(SO\.yZ)c,

Aeschinus iu

dgsXysiav

rTig da'Trdvrjg.

in the Epistle of Jude, v. 4,

vary from the particular sense.

For

o/

da^itg,

r^v roD ^ou ruMOjv ydgi^ [Jjiran^hng sJg dffiXystay

are

not altogether the impious and wicked, but

the wanton, the insolent, o) rhv xv^m 'IriffoZi
Finally,

d.<S'j)ria

is

properly the worthless de-

bauchery of aman, who leads a desperate life, as

(See Cicero Tusc.
ddojrog is a worthless man.
iii.

8, et

Gellius

excellence.

^Jlo

teger, bonus, idoneus.

Hence

vii. 11.)

ly said of the profligate

and

recte habuit res,

It

it is

general-

dissolute,

whom

Prohus fuit homo

In-

seems scarcely probable that a word

should occur in the whole Gothic family of languages, and

mother tongue, expressing

worth
happiness, and composed
of
and
ideas
two
the same
sounds,
without
radical
a derivative connection
of the aame
them.
If
we
have
been thus led to a right
between
existing
the
origin
of
word
aeriXytm,
then the general
view of the
also in the cognate dialects of the

idea attached to

it

is,

that of a course of moral conduct

contrary to right, and issuing in misery.

T.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Cicero describes to the

and
is

16.

life

So in Luke xv.

said daurug

^s^iKTxsc^s o7vw,

And

X^v.

u)

265

in his Officiis

55,

ii.

13. the prodigal son

in Ephes. v. 18.

sdTiv d(Twr/a,

it

is

not spoken

of every kind of wicked impurity, of which

drunkenness

is

the fountain, but of ruinous de-

bauchery particularly,

f Leiderlichkeit, liberPaul also desires that no such person

tinism.)

should be chosen to the pastorship,

Tsxva

sv '/.arrijogici d(fcii)Tiag

Peter

iv.

spoken of

rj

avvToraxra,

who had

And

in 1

3,

the class of impure vices there

is

called in v. 4, dvd^u<rig dcwr/ag, as

a sort of outpouring or cess-pool of debauchery.

Compare Westein on Luke xv. vol. i. p. 758.

There is no need for further examples in a
case

already sufficiently plain, so that this

word might have been dismissed in a very

few words, had it not, in some few instances,
been used differently from its proper and specific meaning.
For there are two common
places to which, in the explanation of words

of this class,

many

for if the proper

passage,

interpreters have recourse

meaning of a

does not

writer, in

any

appear sufficiently plain,

they either conceive that he intends to express

some unclean vice, or that he uses a general

term for any kind of wickedness and impiety.

END OF

VOL.

I.

FEINTED BY

J.

THOMSOX^ MILN SQUAR12.

Library
Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer

1012 01145 3679

Date Due