Page images
PDF
EPUB

second edition of some verbal alteration in his mode of settling the interpretation of doctrinal texts, which at present has in some places an appearance of harshness. He is too fond of such formulæ as the following: "Valeant igitur quorundam insomnia qui, &c. (v. 4. viii. 7. x. 48. Vide also xiii. 48.)

The nature of the work rendering it impossible to enter here into any minute examination of its contents, we can do no more than give a specimen or two of the manner in which it is executed.

We begin with the short and useful chronological table of the principal events recorded in the Acts of the Apostles.

A.D.

"Jesus in cœlum rediens, S. Spiritum emisit.... 38
Stephanus lapidatur....

Paulus ad Christi signa se confert

37

40

primâ vice Hierosolymam venit...... 43
secundâ vice eleemosynas ibi defert.... 44
tertiâ vice ad concilium ibi mittitur.... 52

Judæi Româ expelluntur

Porcius Festus Judææ procurator

Paulus Romam advenit...

52

59

60"

P. vi.

We next take, almost at hazard, the first two verses of the tenth chapter, on which we have the following notes.

66

“ Ανηρ δέ τις ἦν Καισαρείᾳ, ὀνόματι Κορνήλιος, ἑκατοντάρχης ἐκ σπείρης τῆς καλουμένης Ἰταλικῆς, εὐσεβὴς καὶ φοβούμενος τὸν Θεὸν, σὺν παντὶ τῷ οἴκῳ αὐτοῦ, ποιῶν τε ἐλεημοσύνας πολλὰς τῷ λαῷ, καὶ δεόμενος τοῦ Θεοῦ διαπαντός.”

66

Koprýλos. Romanus, Romano nomine. Sunt qui eum proselytum portæ fuisse statuunt, rationibus tamen haud idoneis; disertè enim gentilibus annumeratur inf. 28.

"Teipns. Plerique interpretes Cornelium intelligunt cobortis fuisse centurionem quæ ad legionem Italicam pertineret. Quæ vero in hoë capite memorantur, vel sub fine Caligula vel sub initio Claudii gesta sunt, quo tempore legionem Italicam haud extitisse crediderim. Hane enim a Nerone comparatam e Dione discimus LV. p. 645, cujus hæc sunt verba. Νέρον τὸ πρωτον τε καὶ Ἰταλικὸν ὀνομαζόμενον (στρατόπεδον τ avviraže. Paulo inferius inter alias legiones a Trajano institutis, duas memorat ᾧ καὶ Ιταλικὰ κέκληται. Præoptanda est igitur eorum sententia qui hanc cohortem, ut aliæ quoque quæ in Judeâ ante urbis excidium meruerunt, a cohortibus legionariis distingui credunt. Josephus enim, Romanorum legiones recensens, ad Vespasianum a filio ductas, monet quod τούτοις sc. τάγμασιν, εἵποντα ὀκτωκαίδεκα σπεῖραι, decem et octo cohortes adjunctæ erant. Porro, quod cohortibus quoque distincta nomina imponerentur, e Tacito colligimus, qui Gallorum, Lusitanorum, Britannorumque cohortes memorat Hist. 1. 70. Apud Livium etiam cohors Placentina XLI. 1. Firmana et Cremonensis XLIV. 40. nomina

tim appellantur, quæ scilicet e coloniis Placentia, Firmo, et Cremona collocatis nomen deduxerunt. Per cohortem igitur Italicam eam intelligo, in quod merebant milites in Italiâ nati, unde cognomen invenit. In Gruteri inscriptt. p. 434. 1. memoratur cohors Italicorum voluntaria, quæ est in Syria.

"Evσεßns. Ita hanc vocem explicat Socrates ap. Xen. Mem. iv. Rogatus enim, ἔχεις οὖν εἰπεῖν, ὁποῖος τις ὁ εὐσεβής ἐστιν; ἐμοὶ μὲν δοκεῖ, ἔφη, À TOUS DEOUS THμv, et mox, correctione quâdam adhibitâ, addit, we̱ de î τιμῶν, εὐσέβης έστι.”

Notes on the Epistle to the Romans, intended to assist Students of Theology, &c. By SAMUEL TURNER, Professor of Biblical Learn ing, and Interpreter of Scripture in the General Theological Seminary of the Protestant Episcopal Church. New York. 1824.

WE hail with great pleasure any transatlantic publication of orthodox theology, such as the present; and although we differ from the writer in unimportant particulars, and conceive that he has occasionally admitted undignified criticisms, we have nothing to object to the principles on which he has constructed his work. He informs us, in his Preface, that the notes were only intended for the private lectures of his class, and were not published as a complete commentary; which will naturally weigh with our readers in his defence, against those few remarks, which our impartial duty compels us to offer. The "Notes" are preceded by a translation of Koppe's Introduction to the Epistle, which divides it into doctrinal and hortatory parts, the former comprehending the arguments, as far as the eleventh chapter, the latter concluding the Epistle. On this plan, Professor Turner has composed the annotations before ús, upon which we shall at once proceed to make such observations as they seem to merit; but, in the first place, we must be permitted to decry the omission of the Greek accents, and to mention that there are several errata in the Greek texts which he has quoted.

Ch. i. v. 1. "Approvos, synonymous with the "Heb. 22, and implying distinction." We conceive that this brief remark hardly expresses the whole of St. Paul's idea: the apostle appears to have selected the phrase for a particular purpose, and in opposition to the superstitious dogmata of the Pharisaic sect. They affected to be Dawgiquέvoi, separated from the rest of mankind by a peculiar holiness, as ecclesiastical his torians have assured us. Is it, therefore, improbable, that the apostle, who once belonged to their strictest order, retained the

term in his epistles, to shew, in contradistinction to his former sentiments, that his separation from the world now consisted in preaching the Gospel of Christ, "to the Jews a stumbling-block, to the Greeks foolishness?” Αφωρισμένος εἰς Ευαγγέλιον Θεό was his paraphrase of the title in the New Testament, and seems the most obvious explanation of the word, according to the opinions of those times: in Biblical Hebrew, is, most commonly the verb, which the Septuagint translates apopila. The author has rightly comprehended the scope of this Epistle, and has not been biassed by the Calvinistic exposition of it, to which many modern commentators have inclined.

Ch. ii. v. 12. We imagine that both Macknight and Mr. Turner have created a needless difficulty in the words ev you and Sià vous; their general acceptation of the verse is true, but we cannot discover the authority, by which they have asserted voos not to signify the Mosaic law. It is granted that this clause is contrasted with the preceding, which refers to those who lived vows without any divine revelation or law; but certainly with respect to the Jews, vóuos can have but one sense, although, with respect to Christians, it implies the whole law of God delivered in either Testament. Rabbi Bechai observes, that, as the Jews deemed themselves bound by the revealed, so the Gentiles thought themselves under moral obligations to a natural law.

Ch. iii. 4." VIETA" is here printed for yow. There is much ingenuity in the proposed punctuation of the verse, un γένοιτο· γινέσθω δὲ. κ. τ. λ. Yet, we doubt its accuracy. If the latter were the same optative exclamation as the former, it would be yévoiro de and the author's observations tend to demonstrate

it to be so. His error appears to consist in a want of discrimi

nation between the force of yivoua in classical and Hellenistic Greek, and in too much dependence on Koppe. FiveTai is used with a parallel force in Matt. vi. 16. Luke vi. 36. xiii. 2. Rom. xi. 6. and many other places, and yow answers here to an easy solution of the verse might have been elicited from a comparison of the power of the verb in its present connexion, and in Gal. iii. 17. "let God be proclaimed true, and every man a liar." (Cf. Schleusner. sign. 13). All the ancient versions are opposed to the canon which Koppe would establish. V. 19. A similar blunder respecting vouos occurs; and it is extraordinary that the professor should have attributed one sense to it at v. 19, and another at v. 20. We conceive that at v. 24. he has needlessly laboured in his interpretation of anоλúrρwais; concerning the meaning of which, there could be no reasonable dispute. At v. 25. we disapprove of Juua, as the noun in agreement with iλaornpov, because it is a word no where oc

curring in the New Testament, and scarcely, if ever, in the pages of the fathers. Ιλαστήριόν τι would be better Greek, and express the same idea. Ti in this manner continually occurs both in pure and biblical Greek for quoddam, or magnum quid, and had not the apostle intended something intense, he would probably have made use of the common Hellenistic term Thaoμos. V. 27. Nóuos is here perverted to a new signification, of which it is utterly incapable: had the author remembered, that in St. Paul's writings, it should be invariably interpreted, as in Hebrew, he would have avoided the errors which he has committed, where it occurs in some few examples it is mentioned as a principle in opposition to the law of God, but in these it does not lose its proper sense, as the apostle, metaphorically, calls this resisting principle, ὁ νόμος τῆς ἁμαρτίας καὶ θανάτου.

Ch. iv. v. 1. The professor is certainly correct in placing the interrogation after rí &; as the Arabic, and Ethiopic translators apprehended it. The latter has strangely misconceived the verse : ምነተ : አኝከ : ነብል: ረብብፐሁ፡ ለአብርሃም : አቡሆ : Aplot:n: ::: "What shall we say then? We ለቀደምት ከ®: ሰብእ፡፡=• have even found Abraham their father, the chief of their ancestors, as a man." The expression : is manifestly borrowed from the Syrian version 120. Mr. Turner has supplied the ellipsis in v. 2. with great effect, in elucidation of St. Paul's reasoning: but he has expressed himself very ambiguously at v. 8. "Sins and iniquities are here supposed to exist, consequently justification is obtained by their not being reckoned to the sinner." The sequel, indeed, determines the writer's meaning, by making pardon of sins and justification equivalent terms; but without this observation, (which occurs in a detached sentence) we could scarcely reconcile the dogma to sound theology. They only cease to be reckoned to him when pardon of them, in consequence of repentance, has been granted to him; and this is the only interpretation to be given to the words of David here cited.

V. 17. An obvious allusion of St. Paul is omitted: öri nariga πολλῶν ἐθνῶν τέθεικα σε which is quoted in reference to the covenant made with Abraham, comprehending the Gentiles in its fuller extent. Hence Surenhusius remarks, that were not this its import, the original passage would thus stand, Father of all the people, instead of N Father of a multitude of nations: the whole purport of the preceding chapters, and the emphatic manner in which the apostle has introduced this allegation from the Old Testament prove, be

yond doubt, that this was the inference which he wished to be deduced from its citation. The latter part of the verse, which he, hesitatingly, seems to refer to the birth of Isaac, bears a striking analogy to a frequent proverb, which we detect in the earlier writings of the Jews, and which Schoettgen has adduced in loco: it is again cited, with a slight difference of phraseology in Heb. xi. 3. and has a parallel in 2 Macc. vii. 28. The Gematrical and Cabbalistical fabulists have treated largely "of the philosophical idea" in their analysis of the word in the beginning of Genesis; and it was in opposition to a similar dogma prevalent among the ancients, as Cudworth has shewn, that the Atheistical school asserted their profane canon, "Ex nihilo nihil fit."

Ch. v. ver. 7. Aixaios and ayados correspond to TD and 21* Chrysostom defines the former, as xenoròs xai Eπiens: PTY, tớ which Vorst refers it, too nearly approaches the sense of ayados in this passage, to allow any climax in the clauses of the verse. The ancient church indulged in numberless speculations on this part of the epistle, and some critics, from misapprehension of it, have presumed to account it a gloss or interpolation. Chrysostom himself appears rather to have paraphrased than to have explained it: εἰ γὰρ ὑπὲρ ἀνδρὸς ἐναρέτε ἐκ ἂν ἕλοιτό τις ταχέως αποθα νεῖν, ἐννόησον το Δεσπότε σε τὴν ἀγάπην, ὅταν μὴ ὑπὲρ ἐναρέτων αὐτὸς, ἀλλ' ὑπὲρ ἁμαρτωλῶν καὶ ἐχθρῶν φαίνεται σταυρωθείς. Δίκαιος, here, implies the merely virtuous man, ayados, as Mr. Turner rightly states the ayadoroiwv, who from a just principle, produces righteous actions, and according to the arguments antecedent, one who embellishes his faith with good works originating in it. The verse appears parenthetical, yet there is no doubt of its authenticity. V. 14. 'Eßacíλevσey is a Hebraism: thus, Jalcut "the angel of death reigned over them." We agree with Mr. Turner as to the signification of the verse, although we prefer Heinsius's critical developement of it. "Ut ante legem propriè sic dictam, cujus causâ Moses opponitur, peccârat, ità legem sibi aliquam acceperat: legem quippe quæ præcepto ac prohibitione constat (Magistris autem Hebræorum generali vocem præceptum,

משל בהם מלאך המות .2 .Rubeni, f. 107. c

לא תעשה item מצות,preceptum faciendi מצות עשה distincte

non faciendi, dicitur) divinitùs acceperat, quid videlicet comederet, quo itèm abstineret, Gen. ii. 16, 17. Qui ergò post Adamum ante Mosen rei fuerunt peccati, etiam sic ¿x iì T ὁμοιώματι τῆς παραβάσεως Αδάμ, peccarunt. Ch. vii. v. 4. The whole of the discussion on this verse

[ocr errors]

חסד but not instead of ,טוב instead of צדיק Or *

« PreviousContinue »