Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

6

Lord thy God." What we commonly mean by the word tempting, does not suit the sense of the Gr. word innipato in this passage. The Eng. word means, properly either to solicit to evil,' or to provoke;' whereas the import of the Gr. verb in this and several other places is to assay,' to try,'' to put to the proof.' It is thus the word is used, Gen. 22: 1, where God is said to have tempted Abraham, commanding him to offer up his son Isaac for a burnt-offering. God did not solicit the patriarch to evil, for, in this sense, as the apostle James tells us, 1: 13, he neither can be tempted, nor tempteth any man. But God tried Abraham, as the word ought manifestly to have been rendered, putting his faith and obedience to the proof. His ready compliance, so far from being evil, was an evidence of the sublimest virtue. It was in desiring to have a proof of God's care of them, and presence with them, that the children of Israel are said to have "tempted the Lord at Massah," saying, " Is the Lord among us or not?" Ex. 17: 7. And on the present occasion, it was God's love to him, and faithfulness in the performance of his promise, that the devil desired our Lord, by throwing himself headlong from a precipice, to make trial of. As however it has been objected, that this last phrase, which I at first adopted, is somewhat ambiguous, I have changed it for one which cannot be mistaken.

[ocr errors]

15. "On the Jordan," nav tov logdávov. E. T. "Beyond Jordan." The Heb. word megheber,' rendered by the Seventy nav, signifies indifferently on this side,' or 'on the other side.' In Num. 32: 19, the word is used in both meanings in the same sentence. Unless, therefore, some other word or phrase is added, as κατ' ἀνατόλας, or κατὰ θαλάσσαν, to ascertain the sense, it ought to be rendered as in the text, or as in verse 25. Zebulun and Naphthali were on the same side of the Jordan with Jerusalem and Judea, where Isaiah exercised his prophetical office.

What is

2 "Near the sea,” óðòv Valdoons. E. T. "By the way of the sea.' ." This expression is rather indefinite and obscure. There is an ellipsis in the original, but I have given the sense. here called sea, is properly not a sea, but a lake. It was customary with the Hebrews to denominate à large extent of water, though fresh water, and encompassed with land, by the name sea. Both Mt. and Mr. denominate this "the sea of Galilee;" J. calls it "the sea of Tiberias ;" L. more properly, "the lake of Gennesareth." It was on this lake that Capernaum, and some other towns of note, were situated. Here also Peter and Andrew, James and John, before they were called to the apostleship, exercised the occupation of fishers. "The sea of Galilee," and "the sea of Tiberias," are become, in Scripture style, so much like proper names, that it might look affected to change them for "the lake of Galilee," and "the lake of Tiberias." Besides, where it VOL. II.

4

can conveniently be done, these small differences in phraseology, which diversify the styles of the evangelists in the original, ought to be preserved in translation.

16. "A region of the shades of death," zooa xai oxía daváτου. In the Sep. in the passage referred to, the words are xwoo oxías Davárov, literally from the Heb. of the prophet, ni

'arets tsal-moth.' Tsal-moth, it was observed, Diss. VI. ii. sect. 2, and sheol, are nearly synonymous, and answer to adns in the N. T. which signifies the invisible world, or the state of the dead. The expression is here evidently metaphorical, and represents the ignorance or spiritual darkness in which the people of that region, who were intermixed with the heathen, lived, before they received the light of the gospel.

17. "Began to proclaim," aro novooεw, Mr. v. 17. N.

18. "A drag," augißinoroov. E. T. "A net." The word is not the same here that it is in verse 20: there it is dixzvov, which I take to be the name of the genus, and properly rendered 'net.' The name here is that of a species answering to what we call a dray. The same historian, 13: 47, uses the word oayývn, which in the common translation is also rendered 'net.' It is not very material, but neither ought it to be altogether overlooked, to make, when possible in a consistency with propriety, the phraseology of the version both as various and as special as that of the original. Diss. XII. Part i. sect. 9-13.

21. "In the bark," iv to nioio. E. T. "In a ship." L. 5: 2 N.

2 "Mending," xaraorisovras. Mr. 1: 19. N.

CHAPTER V.

3. "Happy," μanάgio. E. T. "Blessed." I agree with those translators who choose generally to render uaxάolos happy,' ευλογήτος and εὐλογημενος ' blessed. The common version rarely makes a distinction.

2 "Happy the poor," μaxάoioi oi лræɣoì. E. T. "Blessed are the poor." It has more energy in these aphoristical sentences, after the example of the original, and all the ancient versions, to omit the substantive verb. The idiom of our language admits this freedom as easily as the Itn. and more so than the Fr. None of the La. versions express the verb. Dio.'s Itn. does not; nor do the Fr. versions of P. R. L. Cl. and Sa. Si. expresses it in the first beatitude, but not in the following ones. Another reason which induced me to adopt this manner is to render these aphorisms, in regard to happiness, as similar in form as they are in the original to the aphorisms in regard to wretchedness, which are, L. vi, contrasted with

them, woe to you that are rich;"-for I shall show, in the note on that passage, that the verb to be supplied is in the indicative mood equally in both.

366 Happy the poor who repine not,” μακάριοι οι πτωχοὶ τῷ лνεуμаιı. É. Т. "Blessed are the poor in spirit." I have assigned my reasons, Diss. XI. Parti. sect. 18, for thinking that it is as much the business of a translator to translate phrases as to translate words. An idiomatic phrase stands precisely on the same footing with a compound word. The meaning is commonly learnt from the usual application of the whole word, or of the whole phrase, and not by the detached meanings of the several parts, which, in another language, conjoined in the same manner, may convey either no meaning at all, or a meaning very different from the author's. Such, in a particular manner, is the meaning which the phrase poor in spirit naturally conveys to English ears. Poor spirited, which to appearance is coincident with it, is always employed in a bad sense, and denotes mean, dastardly, servile. Poorness of spirit is the same ill quality in the abstract. The phrase, therefore, in our language, if it can be said to suggest any sense, suggests one different from the sense of the text. In support of the interpretation here given, let the following things be attended to: First, That it is literally the poor that is meant, may be fairly concluded from the parallel place, L. 6: 20, where the like declaration is pronounced of the poor simply, without any limitation as in this passage. And this is of considerable weight, whether we consider the discourse recorded by L. as the same or different, since their coincidence in many things, and similarity in others, are confessed on all sides. Now what puts it beyond a doubt that it is the poor in the proper sense that is meant there, is the characters contrasted to those pronounced happy. These begin ver. 24. "Woe unto you that are rich." It is also not without its weight, that our Lord begins with the poor on both occasions; but especially that the same beatitude is ascribed to both: "Theirs is the kingdom of heaven." I might urge further, that if the poor be not meant here, there is none of these maxims that relate to them. Now this omission is very improbable, in ushering in the laws of a dispensation which was entitled, many ages before, "glad tidings to the poor;" to announce which was one great end of the Messiah's mission. And the fulfilment of this prophecy in him, is what our Lord fails not to observe on more occasions than one. I cannot therefore agree with Wh. and others in thinking that yoì rợ nvevμarı means' humble.' The quotations produced by that critic in support of his opinion, are more foreign to his purpose than any thing I have yet discovered in his learned Commentaries. "The usual expression," says he, "by which the Scriptures [meaning the O. T.] and the Jewish writers represent the humble man is, that he is

'shephal ruach,' i. e. poor, low, or contrite in his spirit:" And of this he brings some examples. It is true, the meaning of shephal is humble, and of ruach is spirit. But because in Scripture, men humble of spirit means humble men, must therefore the poor in spirit'also mean humble men? To make the inconclusiveness of this reasoning pass unobserved, he has inserted the word poor, amongst others, in his explanation of the word shephal. But that it ever means poor, I have not found so much as a single example. It is never translated by the LXX πτωχός; but either ταπεινός, or by some word of like import. As to the phrase 'shephal ruach,' it occurs but thrice in Scripture. In one place it is rendered лоаυπραΰθυμος, in another ταπεινόφρων, and in the third ὀλιγόψυχος. Should any object, that to exclude the humble from a place here, will seem as unsuitable to the temper of our religion as to exclude the poor; I answer, that I understand the humble to be comprehended under the third beatitude, "Happy the meek." Not that I look upon the two words as strictly synonymous, but as expressing the same disposition under different aspects-humility, in the contemplation of self as in the divine presence; meekness, as regarding the conduct towards other men. This temper is accordingly opposed to pride as well as to anger. The words seem to have been often used indiscriminately. Humble in the Heb. is once and again by the LXX rendered meek, and conversely; and they are sometimes so quoted in the N. T. Nay, the very phrase for "lowly in spirit," above criticised,' shephal ruach,' is at one time rendered поαʊʊμоs, meek-spirited,' at another, tantoqov, humble.' But should it be asked, what then does to vεvμare add to the sense of oi nτwɣoi; I think the phrase to which Wh. recurs will furnish us with an answer. Shephal is properly raлevós, ‘humilis ;' the addition of ruach is equivalent to to vεúμuari. Such an addition therefore as is made of the sense of tantivos in the one phrase by τῷ πνεύματι, such also is made to the sense of πτωχός in the other, by the same words superadded. It may be thought that no addition is made to the first, the simple term taлεivós expressing a quality of the mind; but this is a mistake arising from the application of the Eng. word humble, which does not entirely coincide with the aforesaid terms in the ancient tongues. In all these the word properly refers to meanness of condition. In the few instances wherein tanɛiós signifies humble,' and tanvoois humility,' there may be justly said to be an ellipsis of tỷ xaodia or t πνεύματι. The proper word for humble, is ταπεινόφρων, for 6 humility, ταπεινοφροσύνη. As therefore ταπεινόφρων, ταπεινὸς τῇ καρδίᾳ, and ταπεινός τῷ πνεύματι, (for this expression also occurs in the Sep. Ps. 34: 18), denote one whose mind is suited to the lowness of his station, so πτυχὸς τῷ πνεύματι denotes one whose mind is suited to the poorness of his circumstances. As the former im

ports unambitious, unaspiring after worldly honors or the applause of men; the latter imports unrepining, not covetous of earthly treasure, easily satisfied, content with little. This and humility are indeed kindred virtues, but not the same.

Wet. is singular in thinking that the words ought to be construed thus : μακάριοι τῷ πνεύματι-οἱ πτωχοί. He understands πνεῦμα to mean the Spirit of God, and renders it into La. "Beati Spiritui pauperes;" as if we should say, "Happy in the Spirit's account are the poor.' He urges that лrooi to vεvμare is unexampled. But is it more so than μακαριοὶ τῷ πνεύματι? Or do we find any thing in Scripture analogous to this phrase in the manner he has explained it? I have shown that there is at least one phrase, tanɛivos to лνεúμаι, perfectly similar to the other, which may well serve νὸς τῷ πνεύματι, to explain it, and remove his other objection, that it ought to mean a bad quality. Besides, I would ask, whether we are to understand, in verse 8, τῇ καρδίᾳ as likewise construed with μακάριοι; for nothing can be more similar than the expressions μακάριοι οἱ πτωχοὶ τῷ πνεύματι and μακάριοι οἱ καθαροὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ ?

5. "They shall inherit," avtoi xangovouńoovai: Vul. “ Ipsi possidebunt." The La. word possidebunt sufficiently corresponds to the Gr. κληρονομήσουσι, which generally denotes possessing by any title, by lot, succession, purchase, conquest, or gift: I therefore think that Cas. judged better in following the Vul. than Be. who expresses the sentiment by a circumlocution which appears too positively to exclude possession of every other kind: "Ipsi terram haereditario jure obtinebunt." But as the specialty which the word sometimes conveys may be more simply expressed in Eng. I have, with the common version, preferred inherit to possess. It happily accords to the style of the N. T. in regard both to the present privileges and to the future prospects of God's people. They are here denominated sons of God;' and if sons, as the apostle argues, then heirs,'' heirs of God, and coheirs with Christ.' The future recompense is called a birthright,' an inheritance.' Diss. XII. Part i. sect. 17.

2 "The land," vyv: E. T. "The earth." That the word is susceptible of either sense, cannot be doubted. The question is, which is the genuine sense in this passage? Let it be observed, that it had, long before then, become customary among the most enlightened of the Jewish nation, to adopt the phraseology which the sacred writers had employed in reference to ceremonial observances and temporal promises and to affix to the words a more sublime meaning, as referring to moral qualities, and to eternal benefits. This might be illustrated, if necessary, from many passages of the N. T. as well as from the oldest Jewish writers. The expression under examination is an instance, being a quotation from Ps. 37: 11. Now, in order to determine the sense of the word

« PreviousContinue »