« PreviousContinue »
omittere. Metavoia partakes of the like variety. It is emendata vita, vitæ emendatio, correcta vita, vitæ correctio, morum correctio, 'correcti mores, corrigenda vita, sanitas, pænitentia ; and in the oblique cases, frugem and -bonam frugem. For ustaus noua. I only find the two words pænitere and mutare sententiam. Μετανοιαν αμεταμελητον is not badly rendered vitæ correctionem nunquam panitendam, αμεταμελητα χαρισματα munera irrevocabitia, and queTavontos xapdia, deploratus animus.
Diodati, the Italian translator, in every case of moment, renders the verb LETAVOELV ravedersi, which in the Vocabolario della Crusca is explained resipiscere, ad mentis sanitatem redire ; but for the noun ustavola he always uses penitenza, and for METAMENoual, very properly pentirsi. The Geneva French translates μετανοεω, s' amender, μεταμελομαι, se repentir, and yetavola repentance. In both these versions they use, in rendering ueTAVOLav Auetauen Tov, the same paronomasia which is in the common English version. Diodati has penitenza della quale huom non si pente. The Geneva French has repen. tance dont on ne se repent.
The other passages, also above quoted from the original, they translate in nearly the same manner. Luther, in his German translation, has generally distinguished the two verbs, rendering ueTAVoelv bulle thun, and METALEneosat, reuen or gereuen.
“Αγιος AND όσιος. .
I shall give, as another example of words, supposed to be synonymous, the terms αγιος and όσιος. The former is, if I mistake not, uniformly rendered in the New Testament, holy, or, when used substantively in the plural, saints. The latter, except in one instance, is always rendered by the same term, not only in the English Bible, but in most modern translations. Yet that these two Greek words are altogether equivalent, there is, in my opinion, good reason to doubt. Both belong to the second class of words which I explained in a former Dissertation 140. They relate to manners, and are therefore not so easily defined. Nor are such words in one language ever found exactly to tally with those of another. There are, however, certain means, by which the true sig. nification may, in most cases, be, very nearly, if not entirely, reached. I shall, therefore, first mention my reasons for thinking that the two words åylos and odlos, in the New Testament, are not synonymous, and then endeavour to ascertain the precise meaning of each.
140 Diss. II. $ 4.
0 2. That there is a real difference in signification between the two Greek words, notwithstanding their affinity, my first reason for thinking is, because in the Septuagint, which is the foundation of the Hel. lenistic idiom, one of them is that by which one Hebrew word, and the other that by which another, not at all synonymous, is commonly translated. 'Ayros is the word used for wip kadosh, sanctus, holy, dolos for T'on chasid, benignus, gracious.
$ 3. My second reason is, because these words have been understood by the ancient Greek translators to be so distinct in signification, that not, in one single instance, is the Hebrew word kadosh rendered by the Greek όσιος, or chasid by άγιος. What gives additional weight to this reason, is the consideration, that both words frequently occur; and that the Greek translators, though they have not been uniform in rendering either, but have adopted different words, on different occasions, for translating each ; have, nevertheless, not in a single instance, adopted any of those terms for rendering one of these Hebrew words, which they had adopt. ed for rendering the other. Few words occur oftener than kadosh. But, though it is, beyond comparison, oftenest translated dylos, it is not so always. In one place it is rendered xalapos, mundus, clean; the verb kadash, the etymon, is rendered dočašev, glorificare, to glorify, avabilaçelv ascen. dere facere, to cause to ascend, kasapišsiv purgare, to cleanse, åyvišeiv purificare, to purify, as well
as αγιαζειν and καθαγιαζειν sanctificare, to hallow, to sanctify; but not once by focus, or any of its conjugates. On the other hand, chasid is ren. dered Edenuwv and noavedeos misericors, merciful, evhaßns pius, devout, and by some other words, but not once by 'ayros, or by any of its conjugates, or by any of the terms employed in rendering kadosh; a certain sign that, to the old Greek translators, se. veral other words appeared to have more coincidence with either than these had with each other.
$ 4. The third reason, which inclines me to think that the two words are not synonymous, is, because I find, on examining and comparing, that there is a considerable difference in the application of them, not only in the Old Testament, but in the New. In regard to the word 'ayios, it is applied not only to persons, but to things inanimate, as the sacred utensils and vestments ; to times, as their jubilees and sab. baths, their solemn festivals and fasts; and to places, as the land of Judea, the city of Jerusalem, the mountain whereon stood the temple with its courts; but more especially the house which the courts inclosed, the outer part whereof was called, by way of eminence, in 'ayia scilicet oxnun, the holy place, and the inner in fayla ‘aywv, the holy of holies, or the most holy place. Now I find nothing like this in the use made of the word 'oolos, which as far as I can discover, is applied only to persons, or beings susceptible of cha
YOL. I. 51
racter. The ta 'ooia Aaßi8 14', cannot be accounted an exception. The word used by the Prophet is 700 chesed, benignitas, not 7'Dn chasid, benignus, and is not improperly rendered in our version mercies. Nor is the foois xeypas of the Apostle '4, an exception, this being manifestly not a literal, but a tropical use of the epithet, wherein that is applied to the instrument, which, in strictness, is applicable only to the agent; as when we say a slanderous tongue and guilty hands, we are always understood as applying the qualities of slander and guilt, to the person of whose tongue and hands we are speaking.
$5. I observe, further, that even when aytas is applied to persons, it has not always a relation to the moral character, but often to something which, in regard to the person, is merely circumstantial and external. It is, in this respect, that the children of Israel are called a holy nation, being consecrated by their circumcision, notwithstanding they were a rebellious and stiff-necked people, and rather worse, instead of better, than other nations; as their great legislator Moses often declares to them. In this sense the tribe of Levi was holier than any other tribe, purely because selected for the sacred service; the priesthood had more holiness than the other Levites, and the high-priest was the holiest of all. There was the same gradation in these, as in the courts and house of the temple. It is in this sense I understand the word 'ayios, as applied to Aaron;
141 Isaiah, lv, 3. Acts, xiii. 34.
142 1 Tim. ii. 8.