Page images



new heaven and new earth (Rev. ii, 17; iii, 12; v,9; xiv, 3; xxi, 1), to designate which Kalvóc is used, are the renewed, ennobled, and glorious apocalyptic aspects of the things of the kingdom of God. The word véoc is used nine times in the Synoptic Gospels of wine recently made. In 1 Cor. v, 7, it is applied to the new lump of leaven, as that which has been recently prepared. It is used of the new man in Col. iii, 10, where the putting on the new man is spoken of as a work recently accomplished; whereas kalvós is used in Eph. ii, 15, denoting rather the character of the work accomplished. So the new covenant may be conceived of as new, or recent (Heb. xii, 24), in opposition to that long ago given at Sinai, while it may also be designated as new in the sense of being different from the old (Matt. xxvi, 28; 2 Cor. iü, 6), which is worn out with age, and ready to vanish away (Heb. viii, 13). Let it be noted, also, that

newness of life” and “newness of spirit” (Rom. vi, 4; vii, 6), are expressed by Kalvórns; but youth is denoted by veÓTTS (Matt. xix 20; Mark x, 20; Luke xviii, 21; Acts xxvi, 4; 1 Tim. iv, 12).

The two words for life, Bioc and (wń, are easily distinguishable as used in the New Testament. Bíos denotes the pres- Bloş and Swń. ent human life considered especially with reference to modes and conditions of existence. It nowhere means lifetime, or period of life; for the true text of 1 Pet. iv, 3, which was supposed to convey this meaning, omits the word. It commonly denotes the means of living; that on which one depends as a means of support. ing life. Thus the poor widow cast into the treasury her whole living (Biov, Mark xii, 44). Another woman spent all her living on physicians (Luke viii, 14). The same meaning appears in Luke xv, 12, 30; xxi, 4. In Luke viii, 14 and 1 John iii, 17 it denotes, rather, life as conditioned by riches, pleasures, and abundance. In 1 Tim. ii, 2; 2 Tim. ii, 4; 1 John ii, 16 it conveys the idea of the manner and style in which one spends his life; and so, in all its uses, Bios has reference solely to the life of man as lived in this world. Zw, on the other hand, is the antithesis of death (Jávatos), and while used occasionally in the New Testament in the sense of physical existence (Acts xvii, 25; 1 Cor. iii, 22; xv, 19; Phil. i, 20; James iv, 14), is defined by Cremer as “the kind of existence possessed by individualized being, to be explained as self-governing existence, which God is, and man has or is said to have, and which, on its part, is supreme over all the rest of creation."1 Tholuck

* Biblico-Theological Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 272. Cremer goes on to show how from the sense of physical existence the word is also used to denote a perfect and abiding antithesis to death (Heb. vii, 16), a positive freedom from death (Acts ii, 28; 2 Cor. v, 4), and the sum of the divine promises under the Gospel," belonging


observes: “The words [wn and Jávatos (death), along with the cognate verbs, although appearing in very various applications, are most clearly explained when we suppose the following views to have lain at the basis of them. God is the life eternal (swi alúvios, 1 John v, 20), or the light, (pās, 1 John i, 5; James i, 7). Beings made in the image of God have true life only in fellowship with him. Wherever this life is absent there is death. Accordingly the idea of Swń comprehends holiness and bliss, that of Jávatos sin and misery. Now as both the sun and the Návatos manifest themselves in different degrees, sometimes under different aspects, the words acquire a variety of significations. The highest grade of the Swń is the life which the redeemed live with the Saviour in the glorious kingdom of heaven. Viewed on this side, śwn denotes continued existence after death, communion with God, and blessedness, of which each is implied in the other.”

In Jesus' conversation with Simon Peter at the sea of Tiberias Ayarów and (John xxi, 15–17), we have four sets of synonymes. φιλέω.

. First, the words ayatráw and diéw, for which we have no two corresponding English words. The former, as opposed to the latter, denotes a devout reverential love, grounded in reason and admiration. Idéw, on the other hand, denotes the love of a warm personal affection, a tender emotional love of the heart. “The first expresses,” says Trench, "a more reasoning attachment, of choice and selection (diligere-deligere), from seeing in the object upon whom it is bestowed that which is worthy of regard; or else. from a sense that such was fit and due toward the person so regarded, as being a benefactor, or the like; while the second, without being necessarily an unreasoning attachment, does yet oftentimes give less account of itself to itself; is more instinctive, is more of the feelings, implies more passion."" The range of pinów, according to Cremer, is wider than that of ayatáw, but ayatráw stands high above diéw on account of its moral import. It involves the moral affection of conscious, deliberate will, and may therefore be depended on in moments of trial. But pikéw, involving the love of natural inclination and impulse, may be variable.' Observe, then, to those to whom the future is sure, already in possession of all who are partakers of the New Testament salvation, that leadeth unto life,' and who already in this life begin life eternal.” (Matt. vii, 14; Tit. i, 2; 2 Tim. i, 1; Acts xi, 18; xiii, 48). He further observes, that in the writings of Paul “swń is the substance of Gospel preaching, the final aim of faith (1 Tim. i, 16);” in the writings of John it “is the subject matter and aim of divine revelation.” Comp. John v, 39; 1 John v, 20; etc. 1 Commentary on Romans v, 12. Synonymes of the New Testament, sub verbo. * Comp. Biblico-Theological Lexicon, pp. 11, 12.




the use of these words in the passage before us. “Jesus says to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonah, dost thou devoutly love (ayatõs) me more than these? He says to him, Yea, Lord, thou knowest (oidas, seest) that I tenderly love (piãã) thee.” In his second question our Lord, in tender regard for Simon, omits the words more than these, and simply asks: “Dost thou devoutly love (ayatõs) me?” To this Simon answers precisely as before, not venturing to assume so lofty a love as åyatáw implies. In his third question (verse 17) our Lord uses Simon's word, thus approaching nearer to the heart and emotion of the disciple: “Simon, son of Jonah, dost thou tenderly love (pleis) me?” The change of word, as well as his asking for the third time, filled Peter with grief (édurñon), and he replied with great emotion: “O Lord, all things thou knowest (oidas, seest, dost perceive), thou dost surely know (yiváokers, art fully cog- Oida and you nizant of the fact, hast full assurance by personal vboka. knowledge) that I tenderly love (inā) thee." The distinction between oida (from eidw, to see, to perceive) and yiváokw (to obtain and have knowledge of) is very subtle, and the words appear to be often used interchangeably. According to Cremer, “there is merely the difference that yiváoKELV implies an active relation, to wit, a self-reference of the knower to the object of his knowledge; -whereas, in the case of sidéval, the object has simply come within the sphere of perception, within the knower's circle of vision.” As used by Peter the two words differ, in that yevwokw expresses a deeper and more positive knowledge than oida.

According to many ancient authorities we have in this passage three different words to denote lambs and sheep. In verse 15 the word is åpvía, lambs, in verse 16 mpóßata, sheep, and in

'Αρνία, πρόβαverse 17 mposhtia, sheeplings, or choice sheep. The dif- ra, and mpoference and distinct import of these several words it is Bária. not difficult to understand. The lambs are those of tender age; the young of the flock. The sheep are the full-grown and strong. The sheeplings, repoßária, are the choice full-grown sheep, those which deserve peculiar tenderness and care, with special reference, perhaps, to the milch-ewes of the flock. Compare Isa. xl, 11. Then, in connexion with these different words for sheep we have also the synonymes βόσκω and ποιμαίνω, to denote the various Βόσκω and cares and work of the shepherd. Bookw means to feed, noquaivw. and is used especially of a shepherd providing his flock with pasture, leading them to the field, and furnishing them with food. Iloquaivu is a word of wider significance, and involves the whole office and work of a shepherd. It comes more nearly to our word

Biblico-Theological Lexicon, p. 230.

tend, and includes the ideas of feeding, folding, governing, guiding, guarding, and whatever a good shepherd is expected to do for his flock. Bóoku denotes the more special and tender care, the giving of nourishment, and is appropriately used when speaking of lambs. IIoquaivu is more general and comprehensive, and means to rule as well as to feed.

Hence appear

the depth and fulness of the threefold commandment: “Feed my lambs,” “Tend my sheep,” “Feed my choice sheep." The lambs and the choice sheep need special nourishment; all the sheep need the shepherd's faithful care. It is well to note, that, on the occasion of the first miraculous draught of fishes, at this same sea of Galilee (Luke v, 1-10), Jesus sounded the depths of Simon Peter's soul (verse 8), awakened him to an awful sense of sin, and then told him that he should thereafter catch men (verse 10). Now, after this second like miracle, at the same sea, and with another probing of his heart, he indicates to him that there is something more for him to do than to catch men. He must know how to care for them after they have been caught. He must be a shepherd of the Lord's sheep as well as a fisher of men, and he must learn to imitate the manifold care of the Great Shepherd of Israel, of whom Isaiah wrote (Isa. xl, 11): “As a shepherd he will feed his flock (17y); in his arms he will gather the lambs (DS), and in his bosom bear; the milch-ewes (niby) he will gently lead.”

The synonymes of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures have been as yet but slightly and imperfectly treated. They afford the biblical scholar a broad and most interesting field of study. It is a spiritual as well as an intellectual discipline to discriminate sharply between synonymous terms of Holy Writ, and trace the diverging lines of thought, and the far-reaching suggestions which often arise therefrom. The foregoing pages will have made it apparent that the exact import and the discriminative usage of words are all-important to the biblical interpreter. Without an accurate knowledge of the meaning of his words, no one can properly either understand or explain the language of any author.

i The only works of note on the subject are, Girdlestone, Synonymes of the Old Testament, London, 1871; and Trench, Synonymes of the New Testament, originally published in two small volumes, and subsequently in one; Ninth Edition, London, 1880. The work of Tittmann, De Synonymis in Novo Testamento, translated and published in two volumes of the Edinburgh Biblical Cabinet, is now of no great value. Cremer's Biblico-Theological Lexicon of the New Testament contains a very excellent treatment of a number of the New Testament synonymes ; and Wilson's Syntax and Synonymes of the Greek Testament (London, 1864) is well worthy of consultation. A brief but very valuable discussion of the New Testament synonymes is also furnished ir Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti, translated and enlarged by Thayer. New York, 1887.






HAVING become familiar with the meaning of words, and thoroughly versed in the principles and methods by which their signification and usage are ascertained, we are prepared to investigate the grammatico-historical sense. This phrase is believed to have originated with Karl A. G. Keil, whose treatise on Historical Interpretation and Text-Book of New Testament Hermeneutics' furnished an important contribution to the science of interpretation. We have already defined the grammati- historical co-historical method of interpretation as distinguished sense defined. from the allegorical, mystical, naturalistic, mythical, and other methods, which have more or less prevailed. The grammaticohistorical sense of a writer is such an interpretation of his language as is required by the laws of grammar and the facts of history. Sometimes we speak of the literal sense, by which we mean the most simple, direct, and ordinary meaning of phrases and sentences. By this term we usually denote a meaning opposed to the figurative or metaphorical. The grammatical sense is essentially the same as the literal, the one expression being derived from the Greek, the other from the Latin. But in English usage the word grammatical is applied rather to the arrangement and construction of words and sentences. By the historical sense we designate, rather, that meaning of an author's words which is required by historical considerations. It demands that we consider carefully the time of the author, and the circumstances under which he wrote.

“Grammatical and historical interpretation, when rightly understood," says Davidson, "are synonymous. The special Davidson's laws of grammar, agreeably to which the sacred writers statement. employed language, were the result of their peculiar circumstances; and history alone throws us back into these circumstances. A new language was not made for the authors of Scripture; they conformed to the current language of the country and time. Their compositions would not have been otherwise intelligible. They

* De historica librorum sacrorum interpretatione ejusque necessitate. Lps., 1788. Lehrbuch der Hermeneutik des N. T. nach Grundsätzen der grammatisch-historischen Interpretation. Lpz., 1810. A Latin translation, by Emmerling, appeared in 1811.

Compare above, p. 70.

« PreviousContinue »