omittere. Μετάνοια partakes of the like variety. It is emendata vita, vitæ emendatio, correcta vita, vitæ correctio, morum correctio, correcti mores, corrigenda vita, sanitas, pœnitentia; and in the oblique cases, frugem and bonam frugem. For μeraμɛλoμat I only find the two words pœnitere and mutare sententiam. Μετανοιαν αμεταμέλητον is not badly rendered vita correctionem nunquam pœnitendam, αμεταμέλητα χαρισματα munera irrevocabilia, and αμετανοητος καρδια, deploratus animus. Diodati, the Italian translator, in every case of moment, renders the verb ustavoev ravedersi, which in the Vocabolario della Crusca is explained resipiscere, ad mentis sanitatem redire; but for the noun μɛτavoia he always uses penitenza, and for μɛtɑμɛλoμai, very properly pentirsi. The Geneva French translates μετανοεω, s'amender, μεταμέλομαι, se repentir, and μeτavoia repentance. In both these versions they use, in rendering μετανοιαν αμεταμελη TOV, the same paronomasia which is in the common English version. Diodati has penitenza della quale huom non si pente. The Geneva French has repentance 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 μετανοειν bude thun, and μεταμε λeodai, reuen or gereuen. PART IV. Αγιος AND ὅσιος. I SHALL give, as another example of words, supposed to be synonymous, the terms ἅγιος and ὅσιος. 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 signification may, in most cases, be, very nearly, if not entirely, reached. I shall, therefore, first mention my reasons for thinking that the two words άytos and dotos, in the New Testament, are not synonymous, and then endeavour to ascertain the precise meaning of each. 140 Diss. II. § 4. § 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 Hellenistic 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. Ayios is the word used for p kadosh, sanctus, holy, ódios for TDП chasid, benignus, gracious. Άγιος § 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 ἅγιος. 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 adopted for rendering the other. Few words occur oftener than kadosh. But, though it is, beyond comparison, oftenest translated ayos, it is not so always. In one place it is rendered xadapos, mundus, clean; the verb kadash, the etymon, is rendered δοξάζειν, glorificare, to glorify, αναβιβάζειν ascen dere facere, to cause to ascend, xaSapišeiv purgare, to cleanse, ayvičev purificare, to purify, as well as ἁγιάζειν and καθαγιάζειν sanctificare, to hallow, to sanctify; but not once by oσtos, or any of its conjugates. On the other hand, chasid is rendered ɛɛnμw and roλvɛλɛos misericors, merciful, Evλaßns pius, devout, and by some other words, but not once by ayos, 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, several 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 'ayos, it is applied not only to persons, but to things inanimate, as the sacred utensils and vestments; to times, as their jubilees and sabbaths, 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, 'n 'ayıa scilicet oxnvn, the holy place, and the inner 'n aya ayun, the holy of holies, or the most holy place. Now I find nothing like this in the use made of the word 'ooos, which as far as I can discover, is applied only to persons, or beings susceptible of cha η racter. The ta oσia Aaßid, cannot be accounted an exception. The word used by the Prophet is Ton chesed, benignitas, not on chasid, benignus, and is not improperly rendered in our version mercies. Nor is the oσs xepas of the Apostle 12, 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 ayas 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 'aytos, as applied to Aaron ; 141 Isaiah. lv. 3. Acts, xiii. 34. 142 1 Tim. ii. 8. |