ow%.' •LIBRARY OF CONGKKSS. \ i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. ! SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. BY KICHAKD CHEVENIX TRENCH, D. D. SECOND PART. NEW YORK : CHARLES SCRIBNER, 124 GRAND STREET. 1864. [Published by arrangement with the Author.'] No LC Control Number tmp96 029017 PREFACE In publishing a preceding volume on Syn- onyms of the Neio Testament, I took occasion to observe, that the synonyms dealt with in it might easily have been doubled or trebled, and that many of the most interesting had been left altogether untouched. The subject proves so inexhaustible that, after another considerable number dealt with here, the assertion seems to me just as true now as it was then. That it is a subject of interest to the student of theology, and that the little volume did, however partially and imper- fectly, supply a want, I feel assured by the several editions through which it has past, IV PKEFACE. and the requests which I have received to add a second part to that first. This I have at length done, and hope at some future day to fuse the two parts into a single volume. The book, though small in bulk, has been sufficiently laborious. It is my earnest prayer that, by God's blessing, the labour may not have been altogether in vain. Westminster, July 27, 1863. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, PART II. § i. — ev^y, 7rpo(T€V)(7]} Seyo't'S, evrevgis, evxapMrria, atrrjfjLa, i/ceTrjpLa. Four of these words occur together at 1 Tim. ii. 1 ; on which Flacius Illyricus (Clavis, s. v. OraUd) justly observes, i Quern vocum acervum procul dubio Paulus non temere congessit.' It will be advisable to consider not these only, but the larger group of which they form a portion. Evxv occurs only once in the H. T. in the sense of a prayer (Jam. v. 15). On the distinction be- tween it and irpoaevxn, between evxeaOcu and irpoa- ev%e<7&w, there is a long discussion in Origen (De Orat. § 2, 3, 4), but not of any great value, nor bringing out more than the obvious fact that in evyr) an( l eij-^ecrdaL the notion of the vow, of the dedicated thing, is more commonly found than that of prayer. The two other occasions on which the 1 2 SYNONYMS OF THE word is found in the 1ST. T. (Acts xviii. 18 ; xxi. 23), bear ont this remark. Upocrevyr) and Serjo-i? often in the "N. T. occur together (Phil. iv. 6; Ephes. vi. 18; 1 Tim. ii. 1; v. 5), and not unfrequently in the Septnagint (Ps. vi. 10; Dan. ix. 21, 23; 1 Mace. vii. 37). There have been a great many, but for the most part not very successful, attempts to distinguish between them. Grotius, for instance, affirms that they are severally ' precatio ' and ' deprecatio ; ' that the first seeks to obtain good, the second to avert evil. Au- gustine, I may observe by the way, in his treatment of the more important of this group of words {Ejp. 149, § 12 — 16), which, though interesting, does not yield any definite results of value, observes that in his time this distinction between 'precatio' and 'deprecatio' had practically quite disappeared. Theodoret in like manner, who has anticipated Gro- tius here, explains irpocrev^r) as alrrjcn^ ayadr} rjv avd' iKerrjpla^ irporelvG) (Philo, Leg. ad Cai. 36). It is easy to trace the steps by which this, the symbol of supplication, came to sig- nify the supplication itself. It does so on the only occasion of the word's occurrence in the "N. T. (Heb. v. 7), being there joined to Se^crt?, as often elsewhere (Job xl. 3 ; Polybius, iii. 112. 8). Thus much on the distinction between these words; although, when all has been said, it will still to a great extent remain true that they will often set forth, not different kinds of prayer, but prayer contemplated from different sides and in different aspects. "Witsius (De Orat. Dom. § 4) : * Mihi sic videtur, unam eandemque rem diversis nominibus designari pro diversis quos habet aspec- tibus. Preces nostras Serjcrei,? vocantur, quatenus iis nostram apud Deum testamur egestdiem, nam Seecrdai indigere est ; irpoa-ev^a^ quatenus vota nos- tra continent ; ahrjfiara, quatenus exponunt jpeti- tiones et desideria ; ivrevgeis, quatenus non timide et diffidenter, se&familiariter Deus se a nobis adiri patitur ; ivrevgis enim est colloquium et congressus familiaris ; ivx^picrTlav gratiarum actionem esse pro acceptis jam beneficiis, notius est quam ut moneri oportuit.' — On the Hebrew correlatives to the several words just considered, see Vitringa, De Synagogd, iii. 2. 13. SYNONYMS OF THE § ii. — acrvvOeros, aeo? (Euripides, Alcestis, 431). "Where davvOeros is employed, a peace is pre- sumed, which the dcrvvOeroi refuse to continue, but 1* 10 SYNONYMS OF THE unrighteously interrupt; while acrirovhos presumes a state of war, which the aairovhoi refuse to bring to a righteous close. It will be seen then that Cal- vin, who renders aairovhoi ' foedifragi,' and aavvderou 1 insociabiles,' has exactly missed the force of both ; it is the same with Theodoret, who on Horn. i. 31 writes : aavvOkrovs, tovs aKOivcbvrjTov koX irovr}pov ftiov aaira^ofievov^ ■ d(T7r6vBov<; rou9 aSeeo? to, * fia/cpodv/JLel yap Tt? 7T/30? ifcelvov? ou? hvvarov ical dfjuvvaadai, virofievev he ou? ov Svvcltcu afivvaaOav. This, however, will not endure a closer examination ; for see decisively against it Heb. xii.. 2, 3.- He, to whom viropovr) is 12 SYNONYMS OF THE there ascribed, bore, not certainly because He could not help bearing; for He might have sum- moned to his aid twelve legions of angels, if so He had willed (Matt. xxvi. 53). It may be well, there- fore, to consider the words apart, and then to bring them into comparison, and try whether some more satisfactory distinction between them cannot be drawn. MaKpoOvfila is a word of the later periods of the Greek language. It occurs in the Septuagint (Jer. xv. 15), and in Plutarch {Luc. 32), although not in Plutarch exactly with the sense which in Scripture it bears. The long-suffering of men he prefers to express by avefjitcafcla (De Cap. ex In. Util. 9), while for the grand long-suffering of God he has a noble word, of his own coining I believe, ^eyaXoTrdOeia {De jSer. Num. Vind. 5). The Church Latin ren- dered it by ' longanimitas,' which the Rheims Ver- sion sought to introduce into English in the shape of ' longanimity,' but without success ; and this though Jeremy Taylor allowed and employed the word. We have preferred ' long-suffering,' and understand by it a long holding out of the mind before it gives room to action or passion — generally to passion. Anger usually, but not universally, is the passion thus long held aloof; the fiafcpodvfio? being one {3pa$v$ ets opyrjv, and the word exchanged for /cparcov 6pyrj$, Prov. xvi. 32, and set over against 6v/jlcoBt]^, NEW TESTAMENT. 13 Prov. xv. 18. At the same time it need not neces- sarily be wrath, which is thus excluded or set at a distance ; for when the historian of the Maccabees describes how the Romans had won the world "by their policy and their patience " (1 Mace. viii. 4), fiaKpoOu/jbia is that Roman persistency which would never make peace under defeat ; cf. Plutarch, Lug. 32, 33 ; Isai. lvii. 1 5. The true antithesis to fxaicpo- Ov/jula in that sense is o^vOvjata, a word belonging to the best times of the language, and employed by Euripides (Androm. 729), as 6%v6vjjlo<; by Aris- totle {Rhet. ii. 12). But vTTOfjLovrj, — jSacriXl*; rebv aperwv Chrysostom calls it, — is that virtue which in heathen Ethics would be called more often by the name of Kaprepia (the words are joined together, Plutarch, Apoth. Lao. Ages. 2), and which Clement of Alexandria, following in the track of some heathen moralists, describes as the knowledge of what things are to be borne and what are not (iiri&Tijf£n/j ifi^everecov /cat ovk ififjbevericov, Strom, ii. 18 ; cf. Plutarch, De Plac. Phil. iv. 23), being the Latin ' perseverantia ' and ' patientia ' * both in one, or more accurately still 1 These two Cicero (Be Inven. ii. 54) thus defines : ' Patientia est honestatis aut utilitatis causa re rum arduarum ac difficilium volun- taria ac diuturna perpessio ; perseverantia est in ratione bene con- siderate stabilis et perpetua permansio.' Cf. Augustine, Qucest. lxxxiii. qu. 31. 14 SYNONYMS OF THE 'tolerantia.' 'In this noble word viro^iovrj there always appears (in the N". T.) a background of avSpeta (cf. Plato, Thecet. 177 ft, where av$piK used commonly in the plural in classical Greek, signifies, for the most part, ' a truce or sus- pension of arms,' the Latin*' indutise.' It is excel- 16 SYNONYMS OF THE lently rendered ' forbearance' on the two occasions of its occurrence in the E". T. (Rom. ii. 4 ; iii. 26). Between it and fiafcpodufiia Origen draws the following distinction in his Commentary on the Romans (ii. 4) — the original, as is well known, is lost : — ' Sustentatio \avoxn\ a jpatientid \jiattpoQv- fiia] hoc videtur differre, quod qui infirmitate magis quam proposito delinquunt sustentari di- cuntur; qui vero pertinaci mente velut exsultant in delictis suis, ferri patienUr dicendi sunt.' This does not hit off very successfully the differ- ence. Rather the avoxn is temporary, transient: we may say that, like the word ' truce,' it asserts its own temporary, transient character ; that after a certain lapse of time, and unless other condi- tions intervene, it will pass away. This, it may be urged, is true of fiaKpoOv/ubta no less ; above all, of the divine yiaicpoQvp.ia. But as much does not lie in the word ; we may conceive of a fia/cpoOv/jLia, though it would be worthy of little honour, which should never be exhausted ; while avoyf) implies its own merely provisional character. Fritzsche (on Rom. ii. 4) distinguishes the words : ' rj avo^r) indul- gentiam not at qua jus tuuni non continuo exequutus, ei qui te lseserit spatium des ad resipiscendum ; i] pbaKpoOvfjiia clementiam significat qua irse tem- perans delictum non statim vindices, sed ei qui peccaverit pcenitendi locum relinqnas; ' and see NEW TESTAMENT. IT p. 198, on Rom. iii. 26, where he draws the matter still better to a point : ' Indulgentia (f) avoyr]) eo valet, ut in aliorum peccatis conniveas, non ut alicui peccata condones, quod clementioe est ; ' it is there- fore fitly used at this last place in relation to the irdpecns a/naprtayv which found place before the atoning death of Christ, as contrasted with the afacns dfMapTicov, which was the result of that death. It is that forbearance or suspense of wrath, that truce with the sinner, which by no means implies that the wrath will not be executed at the last; nay, involves that it certainly will, unless he be found under new conditions of repentance and obe- dience (Luke xiii. 9 ; Rom. ii. 13). The words are also distinguished, but the difference between them not very sharply drawn out, by Jeremy Taylor, in his first Sermon ' On the Mercy of the divine Judg- ments J in init. § iv. — STprjvido}, rpvcpdco, (TTraTaXday. In all these words lies the notion of excess, of wanton, dissolute, self-indulgent, prodigal living, but with a difference. ^Tprjvidv occurs only twice in the "N. T. (Rev. xviii. 7, 9), o-Tprjvo? once (Rev. xviii. 3 ; cf. 2 Kin. 18 SYNONYMS OF THE xix. 28), and the compound Karaarp^viav as often (1 Tim. v. 11). It is a word of the New or Middle Comedy, and is used by Lycophron, as quoted in Athenceufl (x. 420 b); by Sophilus (ih. iii. 100 a); and Antiphanes (it. iii. 127 d) ; but rejected by the Greek purists-Phrynichus, indeed, affirming that none but one out of his senses would employ it, having rpvcpdv at his command (Lobeck, Phry- nichus, p. 381). They do however different work, and oftentimes one would be no substitute for the other, as will presently appear. Tpv^av, which is thus so greatly preferred, is of solitary occurrence in the 1ST. T. (Jam. v. 5), ivrpv^dv (2 Pet. ii. 13) of the same; but belongs with rpvty (Luke vii. 25; 1 Tim. v. 11 ; 2 Pet. ii. 13), to the best age and most classical writers in the language. In r) is found (Plato, Alcib. i. 122 h) ; these words only running into the notion of the insolent as a secondary and rarer meaning. It is thus we find united Tpv(f>r} and vfipts (Strabo, vi. 1) ; rpvcfrav and vftpi&iv (Plutarch, Prcec. Ger. JSejp. 3) ; and compare the line of Menander — virep7](pav6v ttov ylved' f] Kiav Tpvav to the rich man faring sumptuously every day (evcppaivo/ievos fca6' rj/mipav \ajjLTrpm, Luke xvi. 19) ; the arprjviav to Jeshurun when, waxing fat, he kicked (Dent, xxxii. 15). § v. — 6\fyt<$, crrevo^copia. These words are often joined together. Thus G-Tevoxwpia, occurring only four times in the !N". T., occurs thrice in association with OXtyis (Rom. ii. 9 ; viii. 5 ; 2 Cor. vi. 4 ; cf. Isai. viii. 22 ; xxx. 6). So too the verbs OXifteiv and arevoxcopelv, 2 Cor. iv. 8 ; cf. Lucian, Nigrin. 13 ; Arteroidorus, i. 79 ; ii. 37). From the antithesis of the last-mentioned scriptural passage, 6\ij36iievoi, akX ov arevo'xppoviievoi, and from the fact that wherever in the N". T. the two words occur together, crrevoxcopia always occurs last, we may conclude that, whatever is the differ- ence of meaning, o-revoxfopla is the stronger word. NEW TESTAMENT. 21 They indeed express very nearly the same thing, but under changed images. @\tycs, which we find joined with fido-avos, Ezek. xii. 18, is properly pressure, i pressura,' ' tribulatio,' — which last in Church Latin had a metaphorical sense, and in- deed belongs to Church Latin alone, — that which presses upon, or burdens the spirit — I should have said 'angor,' the more that Cicero (Tusc. iv. 8) explains this ' aegritudo jpremens] but that the con- nexion of ' angor' with ' Angst,' ' enge ' (see Grimm, Worterhueh, s. v. Angst) makes it better to reserve this for (TTevo^aypia. The proper meaning of this latter word is nar- rowness of room, confined space, i angustise,' and then the painfullness of which this is the occasion : airopia arevrj and arevo^copia occur together, Isai. viii. 22. It is used literally by Thucydides, vii. 70 ; being sometimes exchanged for (W%&)/)ta ; by Plu- tarch (Symp. v. 6) set over against avecris : and in the Septuagint expresses the straitness of a siege (Deut. xxviii. 53, 57). It is once employed in a secondary and metaphorical sense in the O. T. {crTevoywp^ irvevjxaTOs, Wisd. v. 3), this being the only sense in which it is employed in the New. The fitness of this image is attested by the frequency with which on the other hand a state of joy is ex- pressed in the Psalms and elsewhere as a bringing into a large room {evpv^copla, Marcus Antoninus, 22 SYNONYMS OF THE ix. 32), I do not know whether Aquinas intended an etymology, but he certainly nttered a truth, when he said, ' lastitia est quasi latitia ; ' compare the use of irXaTvcr/jLo? by the Greek Fathers ; as by Origen, De Orat. 30. When, according to the ancient law of England, those who wilfully refused to plead, had heavy weights placed on their breasts, and were so pressed and crushed to death, this was literally OXtyis. When Bajazet, having been vanquished by Tamer- lane, was carried about by him in an iron cage, this was crrevo^copla : or, as we do not know that any suffering there ensued from actual narrowness of room, we may more fitly adduce the oubliettes in which Louis the Eleventh shut up his victims ; or the ' little-ease ' by which, according to Lingard, the Roman Catholics in Queen Elizabeth's reign were tortured : ' it was of so small dimensions and so constructed, that the prisoners could neither stand, walk, sit, nor lie in it at full length.' The word 1 little-ease ' is not in our dictionaries, but grew in our early English to a common-place to express any condition of extreme discomfort. — For some con- siderations on the awful sense in which &ktyi$ and arevoxcopla shall be, according to St. Paul's words (Rom. ii. 9), alike the portion of the lost, see Ger- hard, Log. Tkeoll. xxxi. 6. 52. NEW TESTAMENT. 23 § vi. — airkovs, a/cipaios, afca/cos, a&o\o$. In this group of words we have some of the rarest and most excellent graces of the Christian character set forth; or perhaps, as it will rather prove, the same grace by aid of different images, and with only slightest shades of real difference. 'Aifkovs occurs only twice in the N. T. (Matt. vi. 22 ; Luke xi. 34) ; hut aifkoT^ seven times, or perhaps eight, always in St. Paul's Epistles, and cnfkm once (Jam. i. 5). It would be quite impos- sible to improve on ' single ' ' by which our Trans- lators have rendered it, being as it is from aifkoay, ' expando,' c explico,' that which is sjpread out, and thus without folds or wrinkles ; exactly opposed to the 7roXu7rXo/co? of Job v. 13 ; cf. ' simplex ' (not 1 sine plicis ' ' without folds ; ' but ' one-folded,' ' einfaltig,' see Donaldson, Varronianus, p. 390), which is its exact representative in Latin, and a word, like it, in honourable use. This notion of singleness, simplicity, absence of folds, which thus lies according to its etymology in aifkovs, is also the prominent one in its use — ' animus alienus a ver- 1 See the learned note in Fritzsche's Commentary on the Romans, vol. iii. p. 64, denying that airXoTtis has ever the meaning of liberality, which our Translators have so often given it. 24 SYNONYMS OF THE sutia, fraude, simulatione, dolo malo, et studio no- cendi aliis' (Suicer). That all this lies in the word is manifest from those with which we find it connected, as airbvypos (Theophrastus) ; yevvalos (Plato, Rep. 3615); fop* to? (Plutarch, De Comm. Not 48); aaivOero^ < in- composite,' not put together (id. ib. ; Basil, Adv. Ewnom. i. 23) ; ^vhrpwros (id. Mom. in Prin. Prov. § 7); aatyfc (Alexis, in Meineke's Frag. Com. p. 750). But it is still more apparent from the words to which it is opposed, as womm'Xo? (Plato, Thecet. 146 d) ; irdkveMfi (Phcedrus, 270 d) ; iroXv- rpo7ro9 (S#p. ifiw- 364 «); weirXeyfiivcxi (Aristotle, Poet. 13); SwrXoiJ? (ib.)] nravroScnros (Plutarch, Quom. Ad. ab Am. 7). Ait\6t^ (see 1 Mace. i. 37) is in like manner associated with elXueplveia (2 Cor. i. 12), with iuaida (Philo, Opif. § 41) ; the two words being used indiscriminately in the Septuagint to render the Hebrew, which we translate now < integrity' (Ps. vii. 8 ; Prov. xix. 1) ; now < simpli- city' (2 Sam. xv. 11); again with peyatofvxta (Josephus, Antt. vii. 13. 4), with ayadorrj, (Wisd. i. 1) • is opposed to iroucCkta (Plato, Rep. 404 e), to JxvrpoTrla, to mfcovpyta (Theophylact), to koko4- deia (Theodoret), to 86X09 (Aristophanes, Plut 1158). It may further be observed that on (Gen xxv. 17) which the Septuagint renders aifXacnos, Aquila has rendered airXov,. As is the case with NEW TESTAMENT. 25 at least one other word of the group, and with mul- titudes of others expressive of the same ethical quali- ties, airXovs comes often to be used of a foolish sim- plicity, unworthy of the Christian, who with all his simplicity should be fypoviiios as well. It is so used by Basil the Great, Ep. 58. *Aickpaio<$ (not in the Septuagint) occurs only three times in the N. T. (Matt. x. 16 ; Rom. xvi. 19 ; Phil. ii. 15). A mistaken etymology, namely, that it was = aKeparos, and derived from a and icepas (cf. Kepat^eiv, ' lsedere '), without horn to push or hurt, — one into which even Bengel falls, who at Matt. x. 16 has this note: 'atcepcuoi: sine cornu, ungula, dente, aculeo,' — has caused our Translators on two of these occasions to render it ' harmless.' In each case, however, they have put a more correct rendering, 6 simple ' in St. Matthew, ' sincere ' in Philippians, in the margin. At Rom. xvi. 19 all is reversed, and ' simple ' stands in the text, with ' harmless ' in the margin. The fundamental no- tion of a/cipcuos, as of aicrjpcLTos, which has the same derivation from a and tcepavvvfic, is the absence of foreign admixture: 6 fir) fce/cpap,ivo<; tca/cols, a\X a7rXoO? /cat cnroiiciXos (Etym. Mag.). Thus Philo, speaking of a boon which Caligula granted to the Jews, but with harsh conditions annexed, styles i'c a %apt? ovk cucipaios, with manifest reference to this its etymology {Be Leg. ad Gai. 42) : ' o/icos, jievroi 2 26 SYNONYMS OF THE /cat rrjv %apiv Si8ovydke(£>Tepov.' > It is joined by Plato with. aftXafSrjs (Rep. i. 312 5), and with 6p66s (Polit. 268 &); by Plutarch with vywfc (J.^y. ,$£<%;?, as by Plutarch (Quom. in Virt. Prof. 7) to the aco^pov. The word at its next stage expresses the same NEW TESTAMENT. 27 absence of all harm, but now contemplated more negatively than positively : thus apviov a/cafcov (Jer. xi. 19) ; wcuSla/cr] via /cat clkclicos (Plutarch, Virt. Mid. 23). The K T. does not supply an ex- ample of the word at this its second stage. The process by which it comes to signify easily deceived, and then too easily deceived, and a/caxia, simplicity running into an excess (Aristotle, Bhet. ii. 12), is not difficult to trace. He who himself means no evil to others, oftentimes fears no evil from others ; conscious of truth in his own heart, he believes truth in the hearts of all ; a noble quality, yet in a world such as ours capable of being pushed too far, where, if in malice we are to be children, yet in understanding to be men (1 Cor. xiv. 20 ; cf. Matt. x. 16) ; if " simple concerning evil," yet " wise unto that which is good " (Rom. xvi. 19). The word, as employed Rom. xvi. 18, already indicates this con- fidence beginning to degenerate into a credulous openness to the being deceived and led away from the truth (6av/jLacrTUcol teal a/cafcoi, Plutarch, De Beet. Bat. Aud. 7 ; cf. Wisd. iv. 12 ; Prov. i. 4 ; xiv. 15 ; a/cafco? Trio-revec mravrl \6ya>). For a some- what contemptuous use oiaicaKos, see Plato, Timceas, 91 d, and Stallbaum's note ; but above all, the words which the author of the Second Alcibiades puts into Socrates' mouth (140 c) : tou? /jlev ifKela-rov avrr^ [a(j)pocrvv7]x co? ifc 7Tpoaipeo~ecos t?5? Katcias fcexcopLo-fievovs, dXX* go? firj ttco eh irelpav tt}? Trovrjpds ef eco? dcpcy/jLevcvs. From all this it will be seen that aKatcos has in fact run the same course, and has the same history as dirXovs, evrjOrjs, with which it is often joined (as by Diodorus Siculus, v 66), 'bon' (Jean le Bon = Petourdi), ' bonllommie, , ' silly,' ' simple,' ' einfaltig,' and many more. NEW TESTAMENT. 29 The last word of this beautiful group, aSoXos, occurs only once in the N": T. (1 Pet. ii. 2), and is there beautifully translated ' sincere,' — " the sincere milk of the word ; " see the early English use of ' sincere ' as unmixed, unadulterated ; and compare, for that milk of the word which would not be sin- cere, 2 Cor. iv. 2. It does not appear in the Sep- tuagint, but aSokcos once (Wisd. vii. 13). Plato joins it with vyt^ (Ep. viii. 355 e) ; Philemo (Meineke, Fragm. Com. p. 843) with v /ccupcov, which last phrase does actually occur Ephes. i. 10. So, too, there is every reason to think that the yjpbvoi an ofcara- o-rdcreG)? of Acts iii. 21 are identical with the icaipoi avatyv^ews of the verse preceding. Thus it is possi- ble to speak of the icaipbs xpovov, and Sophocles {Elect. 1292) does so : Xpovov yap av > ^ VQ NEW TESTAMENT. 33 tccupovs, cum liabeant hsec duo inter se non negli- gendam diiFerentiam ; Kaipovs quippe appellant Graece tempora quasdam, non tamen quae in spa- tiorum voluminibns transeunt, sed quas in rebus ad aliquid opportunis vel importunis sentiuntur, sicut messis, vindemia, calor, frigus, pax, bellum, et si qua similia: xpovovs autem ipsa spatia temporum vocant.' Bearing out this complaint of bis, we find in the Vulgate the most various renderings of tccupoi, as often as it occurs in combination with Xpovoo, and cannot therefore be rendered by ' tem- pora,' which XP° V0L nas generally preoccupied. 1 Thus ' tempora et momenta ' (Acts i. 7 ; 1 Thess. v. 1), ' tempora et estates ' (Dan. ii. 21), ' tempora et saecula' (Wisd. viii. 8); while a modern Latin commentator on the 1ST. T. has ' tempora et articuli ;' Bengel, ' intervalla et tempora.' It might be urged that ' tempora et opportunitates ' would fulfil all conditions. This, however, is not so. Augustine has anticipated this suggestion, but only to acknow- ledge its insufficiency, on the ground that ' oppor- tunitas ' (= c opportunum tempus ') is a convenient, favourable season, evicaipia ; while the Kaipbs may be the most inconvenient, most unfavourable of all, the essential notion of it being that it is the critical 1 Yet not perhaps very correctly, for in the common Latin phrase ' dies tempusque,' it is dies which answers to XP '*' *? an< ^ tempus to Kaipos ; see Doderlein, Lat. Syn. ir. 267. 2* 34 SYNONYMS OF THE nick of time ; but whether, as such, to make or to mar, effectually to help or effectually to hinder, the word determines not at all (' sive opportuna, sive importuna sint tempora, tccupoi dicuntur '). § viii. — (pepco, cfropico. On the distinction between these words Lobeck (Ph?ynichus, p. 585) has the following remarks : 'Inter (f>epco et opecQ hoc interesse constat, quod ilmd actionem simplicem et transitoriam, hoc antem actionis ejnsdem continnationem significat; verbi causa ayyeXl^v cfyepetv, est alicujus rei nuncium afferre, Herod, iii. 53 et 122; v. 14; ayyekfyv cfropeeiv, iii. 34, nnncii munere apnd aliquem fungi. Hinc et opelv zcoXttcdtovs yjjTwvas. Arms would only be borne at intervals, therefore cpepecv ; but garments are habitually worn, therefore this is in the second clause exchanged for (popelv. § ix. — fcocrfios, aicov. The first of these words our Translators have, I believe, always rendered 'world;' and the second often, though by no means exclusively, so ; thus (not to speak of eh alcova) see Ephes. ii. 2, 7 ; Col. i. 26. It is certainly a question whether we might 36 SYNONYMS OF THE we have employed it but rarely, — only, indeed, in the two places which I have cited last. ' Age ' may sound to us inadequate now ; but it is quite possi- ble that, so used, it would little by little have ex- panded and acquired a larger, deeper meaning than it now possesses. One cannot but regret that by this or some other like device, our Translators did not mark the difference between words conveying, to a considerable extent, different ideas; /coayxo? being the world contemplated under aspects of space, alcbv under aspects of time, — koct/jlos ' mun- dus,' and alcov i seculum ; ' for the Latin, like the Greek, has two words, where we have, or have acted as though we had, but one. In all those passages, such as Matt. xiii. 39; 1 Cor. x. 11, which speak of the end or consummation of the ala>v (there are none which speak of the end of the koct/jlos;), as in others which speak of " the wisdom of this world " (1 Cor. ii. 6), " the god of this world " (ib. iv. 4), " the children of this world " (Luke xvi. 8), it must be admitted that we are losers by the course which we have adopted. K6o-[xo?}?, Rom. vi. 4) through the ava/caivcocri,*; of the Spirit (Tit. iii. 5); compare the Epistle of Barnabas, 16, iyev6/ji€0a kclivoi, iraKiv eg apXVS KTityfievoi. Often as the words in this appli- cation would be interchangeable, yet there are also times when they would not be so. Take for in- stance the saying of Clement of Alexandria (Peed. i. 6), %pr) yap elvai kclivovs Aoyov tcaivov fierei\rj^)6- ras. How impossible it would be to substitute viovs or viov here. Take, again, the verbs avaveovv (Ephes. iv. 23), and avatcawovv (Col. iv. 10). We have need avaveovaOat,, and we have need avaiccu- vovaOai. It is indeed the same mysterious process, to be brought about by the same almighty Agent ; 48 SYNONYMS OF THE but it is the same regarded from different points of view ; avaveovaOai, to be made young again, ava- KaivovaOai, to be made new again. Apply this in the other instances quoted above. New wine may be characterized as vios or kclivos, but from different points of view. As it is z/eo?, it is tacitly contrasted with the vintage of past years ; as it is icaivbs, we may assume it austere and strong, in contrast with that which is xpncrTos, sweet and mellow through, age (Luke v. 39). So too, the Covenant of which Christ is the Mediator is a hiaOrjicri vea, as compared with the Mosaic covenant, given nearly two thousand years before; it is a hiaOrjKr] Kaivr) as compared with the same, effete with age, and from which all vigour, energy, and strength had departed (Heb. viii. 13). A Latin grammarian, drawing the distinction between ' recens ' and ' novus,' has said, ' Recens ad temp us, novum ad rem refertur.' Substituting z/eo? and icaivbs, we might say, ' veos ad tempus, kclivos ad rem refertur,' and should thus grasp in a few words, easily remembered, the distinction between them at its central point. 1 1 Lafage {Diet, des Synonymes, p. *798) claims the same distinc- tion for 'nouveau' (= yeos), and 'neuf' (= Kaivos). ' Ce qui est nouveau went de paraitre pour la premiere fois : ce qui est neuf vient d'etre fait et n'a pas encore servi. Une invention est nouvclle, une expression neuve? NEW TESTAMENT. 49 § xi. — fiiOrj, kotos, olvofyXvyia, Ktopos, /cpanrdkrj. 31 €0r), occurring in the N. T. at Luke xxi. 34 ; Rom. xiii. 13 ; Gal. v* 21 ; and kotos, found only at 1 Pet. iv. 3, are distinguishable as an abstract and a concrete. MiOrj, defined by Clement of Alex- andria, aKpaTov %prjo~i<; crcpoBpoTepa, is drunkenness (Joel i. 5 ; Ezek. xxxix. 19) ; kotos (= evco^la Hesychius, cf. Polybius, ii. 4. 6), the drinking bout, the symposium, not of necessity excessive (Gen. xix. 3 ; 2 Sam. iii. 20), which gives opportunity for this (1 Sam. xxv. 36 ; Xenophon, Anab. vii. 3, 13 ; iirel 7rpov%a>pei o kotos). MeOrj is stronger and expresses a worse excess than ocvcoans, from which it is distinguished by Plutarch, De Garr. 4 ; Syrwp. iii. 1. The next word in this group, olvocfrXvyla, occurs only 1 Pet. iv. 3, where we translate it " excess of wine," and never in the Septuagint ; but olvocpXv- yelv, Deut. xxi. 20 ; Isai. lvi. 12. It is certainly a step in advance of piOrj, see Philo De JEbriet. 8 ; and De Merc. Mer. 1, where he names olvocpXvyia among the vfipeis eayarai, and compare Xenophon (CEcon. i. 22) ; hovXoi Xiyyeiwv, Xayvei&v, olvofyXv- ytcov. In strict definition it is eKiOvpia oivov amXr)- gtos (Andronicus of Rhodes), amX^pwTos iKiQvpia, 3 50 SYNONYMS OF THE as Philo ( Vit. 3£os. iii. 22) calls it ; the German ' Trinksucht ; ' bat we find it commonly used for a debauch. I know no single word which would bet- ter render it, being as it is an extravagant indulgence in potations long drawn out (see Basil, Horn, in Ebviosos, 7), such as may induce permanent mis- chiefs on the body (Aristotle, Eth. JVic. iii. 5. 15) ; as did for instance that fatal one to which Arrian, according to one report current in antiquity, in- clines to ascribe the death of Alexander the Great (vii. 24. 25). Kgj/jlos (used in the plural on the three occasions when it is found in the N. T.) rendered once ' riot- ing' (Rom. xiii. 13), and twice 'revelling' (Gal. v. 21 ; 1 Pet. iv. 3), may be said to unite in itself both these notions, namely, of riot, and of revelry. It is the Latin ' comissatio,' which, as is well known, is connected with tecofid^eiv, not with ' comedo.' Thus, k&ijlos teal acrcoTia (2 Mace, vi. 4) ; ttotoi teal kco/jlol teal OaXiai dteaipot, (Plutarch, Pyrrli. 16 ; i/ifiavel^ teco/jLOL (Wisd. xiv. 23); cf. Philo, Be Cher. 27, where we have a striking description of the com- pany which it and /liOrj keep, of the other vices with which these are associated the most nearly. At the same time km/jlos is often in a more special sense the troop of drunken revellers (' comissantium agmen,' Blomfield, Agamemnon 1160, where the troop of Puries, as drunk with blood, obtain this NEW TESTAMENT. 51 name), who at the late close of a revel, with gar- lands on their heads, and torches in their hands, 1 with shout and song 2 (aw/ao? koX /3od, Plutarch, Alexander, 38), pass to the harlots' houses, or other- wise wander through the streets, with insult and wanton outrage for any whom they meet ; cf. Meineke, Fragm. Com. Grcec. p. 617. It is evident that Milton had the k&jjlos in his eye in those lines of his — ' when night Darkens the streets, then wander forth the sons Of Belial, flown with insolence and wine.'* Plutarch {Alex. 37) characterized as a #y the parallel place, c. iv. of this Epistle, ver. 2, " not walking in craftiness," fiySe BoXovvres rbv \6yov rod €>eov, " nor handling the word of God deceitfully ; " they took Kairrfkevovre^ and SdXovvres in the same adequate notion, as the vulgar Latin had done before them, which expresses both by the same word, adulterantes verbum Dei ; and so, like- wise, Hesychius makes them synonyms, eKKairT]- \eveiv, SdXovv. AokovVy indeed, is fitly rendered c adulterare ; ' so SoXovv ' tov xpvabv, rbv olvov, to adulterate gold or wine, by mixing worse ingre- dients with the metal or liquor. And our Trans- lators had done well if they had rendered the latter passage, not adulterating, not sophisticating the word. But KairrjkevovTes in our text has a complex idea and a wider signification ; KaTrrfkeveiv always comprehends BdXovv; but BoXovv never extends to KairrfKeveiv, which, besides the sense of adulterating, has an additional notion of unjust lucre, gain, profit, advantage. This is plain from the word /caTnjXos, a calling always infamous for avarice and knavery : " perfidus hie caupo," says the poet, as a genera] NEW TESTAMENT. 57 character. Thence fcairrfXevecv, by an easy and natural metaphor, was diverted to other expres- sions where cheating and lucre were signified : xa- irrjXeveiv top \6yov, says the Apostle here, and the ancient Greeks, Kairrfkevevv ra<; hi/cas, rrjv elprjvrjv, tt]v aofyiav, to, fiaOijfjLaTa, to corrupt and sell jus- tice, to barter a negociation of peace, to prostitute learning and philosophy for gain. Cheating, we see, and adulterating is part of the notion of Kairr\- Xevew, but the principal essential of it is sordid lucre. So ' cauponari ' in the famous passage of EnniuSj where Pyrrhus refuses the offer of a ransom for his captives, and restores them gratis : 4 Non mi aurum posco, nee mi pretium dederitis, Non cauponanti bellum, sed belligeranti.' And so the Fathers expound this place So that, in short, what St. Paul says, KairrfkevovTe? rbv \6yov, might be expressed in one classic word — Xoye/jLTropoi,, or \oyo7rparcu, 1 where the idea of gain and profit is the chief part of the signification. Wherefore, to do justice to our text, we must not stop lamely with our Translators, " corrupters of the word of God ; " but add to it as its plenary notion, " corrupters of the word of God for filthy lucre" If what has been just said is correct, it will 1 So KoyoirwKot, in Philo, Cong. Erud. Grat. 10. 58 SYNONYMS OF THE follow that < deceitfully handling ' would be a more accurate, though itself not a perfectly adequate, rendering of /ownyXeuoims, and < who corrupt' of Sdkovvres, than the converse of this which our Yersion actually offers. § xiii. — ayadcoavvr], xp^tott??. 'AyadcHrtvri is one of the words with which re- vealed religion has enriched the Greek language. It occurs no where else but in the Greek transla- tions of the O. T. (Nehem. ix. 25 ; 2 Chron. xiv. 16), in the "N. T., and in those writings which are directly dependent upon these. The grammarians, indeed, at no time acknowledged, or gave to it or to ayaeSrw the stamp of allowance, demanding that xfWrirvi' wMch ? et we sha11 See iS n0t abS °" lutely identical with it, should be always employed in its stead (Lobeck, Pathol. Serm. Gtcbc. p. 237). In the N. T. we meet with it four times, always in the writings of St. Paul (Rom. xv. 14 ; Gal. v. 22 ; Ephes. v. 9 ; 2 Thess. i. 11) ; and it is invariably rendered < goodness ' in our Yersion. We feel the want of some word more special and definite at such passages as Gal. v. 22, where dyaO^w makes one of a long list of Christian virtues or NEW TESTAMENT. 59 graces, and must mean some single and separate grace, while ' goodness ' seems to embrace all. To explain it there, as Phavoriniis explains it, rj aizr\p- THTfjLevTi apery, is little satisfactory. It is quite true that in such passages as Ps. lii. 5, it is set over against fcarcia, and has this general meaning, but not there. At the same time it is hard to suggest any other rendering ; even as, no doubt, it is harder to seize the central force of this word than it is of XP7) Ecclus. xxxvii. 13), like aya0G)avv7], occurs in the !N". T. only in the writings of St. Paul, being by him joined to (fcikavdpwTria, (Tit. iii. 4) ; to paKpoOvfiia and avoyr) (Pom. ii. 4) ; and opposed to airoTOfita (Rom. xi. 22). -The E. Y. renders it < good ' (Pom. iii. 12) ; ' kindness ' (2 Cor. vi. 6 ; Ephes. ii. 7 ; Col. iii. 12; Tit. iii. 4); 'gentleness' (Gal. v. 22). 60 SYNONYMS OF THE The Rheims, which has for it \ benignity ' (Gal. v. 22), ' sweetness ' (2 Cor. vi. 6), has perhaps seized more successfully the central notion of the word. It is explained in the Definitions which go under Plato's name (412 e), rjdovs airkaa-rla fxer eiiko- y tar Las', by Phavorinus, evo-7f\ay)(y{a, rj irpbs tovs TreXa? avvSiadeaLS, tcl avrov &>? olfeeia l8io7roiov/jLevr). It is joined by Clemens Romanus with eXeo? (1 Ep. i. 9) ; by Plutarch with fyCkavdpwirla (Demet. 50) ; with evfieveia (De Cap. ex In. Util. 9) ; with y\v- tcvOvjAia {Terr, an Aquat. 32) ; with ottXot^? and fjLeya\o quanos reddimus amabiles. Mansuetudo \7rpdvT7]u rvyxavei Tifiwpias. 1 The xP r i i/3\7)ift\r)GTpov, would have suited at all so well. § xv. — XvTreofjLat, irevdeco, Oprjveco, kotttcd. In all these words there is the sense of grief, or the utterance of grief; but the sense of grief in dif- ferent degrees of intensity, the utterance of it in different ways of manifestation. AvTrelcrOai (Matt. xiy. 9 ; Ephes. iv. 30 ; 1 Pet. i. 6) is the most general word, to be sorrowful, ' dolere,' being opposed to xalpeLv (Aristotle, Rhet. i. 2), as \v7tv to x a P^ (Xenopkon, Hell. vii. 1, 22). Tkis \vtt7], unlike tke grief of the three following words, a man may so entertain in the deep of his heart, that there shall not be any outward manifes- tation of it, unless he himself be pleased to reveal it (Eom. ix. 2 ; Phil. ii. 7). Not so the irevdelv, which is stronger, being not merely ' dolere ' or ' angi,' but ' lugere,' and like this last, properly and primarily (Cicero, Tusc. i. 13; iv. 8: 'luctus, ssgritudo ex ejus, qui cams NEW TESTAMENT. 67 fuerit, interitu acerbo ') to lament for the dead ; irev- Oelv vkicvv (Homer, II. xix. 225); to*)? dirokwKora^ (Xenophon, Hell. ii. 2, 3) ; then any other passionate lamenting (Sophocles, (Ed. Tyr. 1296 ; Gen. xxxvii. 34) ; irevOos being in fact a form of irdOo^ (see Plu- tarch, Cons, ad Apoll. 22) ; to grieve with a grief which so takes possession of the whole being that it cannot be hid ; cf. Spanheim {Dub. Evang. 81) : 'irevdelv enim apud Hellenistas respondit verbis ri32 Kkaieiv, Oprjvelv, et ^ okoXv^eiv, adeoque non tantum denotat lnctum conceptum intus, sed et ex- pressum foris.' According to Chrysostom (in loco) the 7revdovvTe$ of Matt. v. 4 are ol fier eiriTaaew^ \v7TovfjL6voL, those who so grieve that their grief manifests itself externally. Thus we find irevOelv often joined with Kkaieiv (2 Kin. xix. 1 ; Mark xvi. 10 ; Jam. iv. 9 ; Rev. xviii. 13) ; so irevOwv zeal aKvdpwird^wv, Ps. xxxiv. 14. Gregory of Nyssa (Suicer, Thes. s. v. irevOos), gives it more generally, irevOos earl (TKv0pco7rrj d>ia6e%%), if we accept this as the first beginning of all, must be older than any per- son or thing that is merely irakaios, existing a long time ago (?raka,i) ; while on the other hand there may be so many later beginnings, that it is quite possible to conceive the Trakcuos as older than the apxalo?. In Donaldson's New Cratylus, p. 19, the following passage occurs : c As the word archceology is already appropriated to the discussion of those subjects of which the antiquity is only comparative, it would be consistent with the usual distinction between ap^alo? and TraXaio^ to give the name of jpalcBology to those sciences which aim at repro- ducing an absolutely primeval state or condition.' I confess I fail to find in the uses of wdkaios so strong a sense, or at least at all so constant a sense, of a more primeval state or condition, as this state- ment would seem to imply. Thus compare Thucy- dides, ii. 15 : l B,vfjL/3e/3rjK6 tovto airo tov irdvv ap- Xaiov, that is, from the pre-historic time of Cecrops, with i. 18 : AafceSaifAcov etc ircbkaiTcurov evvofi7]0r], from very early times, but still within the historic period ; where the words are used in senses exactly reversed. NEW TESTAMENT. 83 The distinction between them is not to be look- ed for here, and on many occasions it is not to be looked for at all. Often they occur together as merely cumulative synonyms, or at any rate with no higher antiquity predicated by the one than by the other (Plato, Legg. 865 d ; Plutarch, Cons, ad Apoll. 27; Justin Martyr, Coh. ad Grceo. 5). It lies in the etymology of the words that in cases out of number they may be quite indifferently used ; that which was from the beginning will have been generally from a long while since ; and that which was from a long while since will have been often from the beginning. Thus the apyata $ wv *) °f one passage in Plato (Or at. 418 e) is exactly equivalent to the irdkala (fxovrj of another {lb. 398 b) ; ol ttcl- Xacoi and ol apyaloi alike mean the ancients (Plu- tarch, Cons, ad Apoll. 14 and 33) ; there cannot be much difference between iraXaioi %pbvoi (2 Mace, vi. 21) and apyaiai r/jjuepcu (Ps. xliii. 2). At the same time it is evident that whenever an emphasis is desired to be laid on the reaching back to a beginning, whatever that beginning may be, a/5% ^ato?, nor indeed is it altogether strange to iraXaios : but there are other qualities that cleave to the ancient; it is often old-fashioned, seems to be un- suitable to the present, and to belong to a world which has past away. "We have a witness for this fact in our own language, where ' antique ' and 'antic' are but two different spellings of one and the same word. There lies often in ap^alo^ this sense superadded of old-world fashion; now not merely antique, but antiquated and out of date (^Eschylus, Prom. V. 325 ; Aristophanes, Pint. 323) ; and still more strongly in ap^cLiorr)?, which has no other meaning but this (Plato, Legg. ii. 657 l\ But while ap-^aio^ goes off in this direction (we have, indeed, no instance in the !NT. T.), nraXaios diverges in another, of which the N. T. usage will supply a large number of examples. That which has existed long has been exposed to, and in many cases will have suffered from, the wrongs and in- juries of time ; it will be old in the sense of more or less worn out ; and it is always iraXaios, never apXaios, which is employed to express old in such a sense as this. 1 Thus Ifidriov irakaibv (Matt. 1 The same lies, or may lie, in ' vetus,' as witnesses Tertullian's 86 SYNONYMS OF THE ix. 16) ; acncol irdXaiol (Matt. ix. IT) ; so ogkovs Trcikaiovs teal Kareppcoyora^ (Josh. ix. 10) ; irdkaia pcbKT] (Jer. xlv. 11). In the same way, while ol ap^aioi could never express the old men of a living generation as compared with the young of the same, ol iraKaioi continually bears this sense ; thus z>eo? rje irdkaios (Homer, II. xiv. 108, and often) ; iroXvereh icaX nrcCkaioi (Philo, De Yit. Cont. 8 ; cf. Job xv. 10). It is the same with the words formed on 7ra\cu6<; : thus Heb. viii. 13 : to Be 7ra\cuovp,evov teal /yii6? in the place of Ovacacmjpcov is employed. But indeed this distinction is common to all sacred and ecclesiastical Greek, both to that which goes before, and that which follows, the writings of the New Covenant. Thus so resolute were the Septuagint Translators to mark the distinction between the altars of the true God and those on which abominable things were offered, that there is every reason to think they invented the word 88 SYNONYMS OF THE Ovo-iao-Ti'ipiov for the purpose of maintaining this distinction ; being indeed herein more nice than the inspired Hebrew Scriptures themselves, in which nzT^a does duty for the one and for the other (Lev. i. 9 ; Isai. xvii. 8). I need hardly observe that dvo-iao-Trjpiov, properly the neuter of Ovcna- crrrjpLo^, as tXao-rypwv (Exod. xxv. 17; Heb. ix. 5) of 'Ckao-TrjpLos, nowhere occurs in classical Greek ; and it is this fact of its having been coined by the Septuagint Translators one must suppose that Philo has in mind when he affirms that Moses invented the word {Be Vit. Mos. iii. 10). At the same time the writers of the Septuagint do not themselves invariably observe this distinction. Thus there are four occasions, two in the Second Book of Mac- cabees (ii. 20 ; xiii. 8), and two in Ecclesiasticus (1. 13., 16), where /3co/jlo<; is used of the altar of the true God ; these two Books however, it must be remembered, hellenize very much ; it is employed in like manner occasionally by Philo, thus De Vit Mos. iii. 29: and 6v(jiacnr)piov is sometimes used of an idol altar ; thus Judg. ii. 2 ; vi. 25 ; 2 Kin. xvi. 10 P and in other places. Still these are quite the rare exceptions, and sometimes the antago- nism between the words comes out with the most marked emphasis. It does so, for example, at 1 Mace. i. 59,, where the historian recounts how the servants of Antiochus offered sacrifices to Olympian NEW TESTAMENT. VX Jove on the altar which had been built over the altar of the God of Israel : QvcriuZpvTes eVl tov fico/jibv, b; r\v eVl tov Qvaiaajv^iov. Our Trans- lators here are put to their shifts, and are obliged to render jB&ixos ' idol altar,' and dvcriaarrjpiov 1 altar.' In the Latin, of course, there is no such difficulty ; for at a very early day the Church adopted ' altare ' as the word expressive of her altar, and assigned i ara ' exclusively to heathen uses. Thus Cyprian {Ep. 63) expresses his wonder at the profane boldness of one of the ' thurificati,' or those who in time of persecution had consented to save their lives by burning incense before a heathen idol, — that he should afterwards have dared, without having obtained the Church's for- giveness, to continue his ministry — • quasi post aras diaboli accedere ad altare Dei fas sit.' I said the distinction between /3o>/z6? and Ovcriao-Trjpiov, first established in the Septuagint, and recognized in the 1ST. T., was afterwards observed in ecclesiastical Greek ; for the Church has still her Qvaia alvkaew^ (Heb. xiii. 15) and her dvaia ava/ivrjo-ecos, or rather her avd/jLV7] oh rjfiaprev /juerevorjo-ev, el arvvecriv ekaftev icj) oh eiTTaiaev, zeal fiereyvco, oirep ecrri, fiera ravra eyvco ' /3paSeia yap yvayaLS, /juerdvoia. At its next step fjuerdvoia signifies the change of mind consequent on this after-knowledge. At its third, regret for the course pursued, resulting from the change of mind consequent on this after-know- ledge ; ' passio qugedam animi quae veniat de offensa sentential prioris,' as Tertullian (De Pwnit. 1) af- firms, was all that the heathen understood by it. At this stage of its meaning it is found connected with Srjyfios (Plutarch, Quom. Am. ah Adul. 12). Last of all it signifies change of conduct for the future, springing from all this. There is not of necessity any ethical meaning in the word in any of these stages of meaning — the change of mind, and of action upon this following, may be for the worse as well as for the better ; thus Plutarch (Sept. Sap. Conv. 21) tells us of two murderers, who, having spared a child, afterwards ' repented ' (/jLerevorjcrav) and sought to slay it ; /jberajxeXeia is used by him in the same sense of a repenting of good (De Ser. Num. Vin. 11); so that here also Tertullian had right in his complaints (De Pcenit, 94: SYNONYMS OF THE 1) : ' Quam ante in in poenitentise actu irrationaliter deversentur [ethnici], vel imo isto satis erit expe- dire, cum illam etiam in bonis actis suis adhibent. Poenitet fidei, amoris, simplicitatis, patientise, mise- ricordige, prout quid in ingratiam cecidit.' The re- gret may be, and often is, quite unconnected with the sense of any wrong done, of the violation of any moral law, may be simply what our fathers were wont to call ' hadiwist ' (had-I-wist better, I should have acted otherwise) ; thus see Plutarch, De Lib. Ed. 14 ; Sept. Sap. Conv. 12 ; De Sober. Anim. 3 : \v7T7] hi a\yr]S6vo^, t)v fierdvoiav ovo/id^o/nev, ' dis- pleasure with oneself, proceeding from pain, which we call repentance ' (Holland). That it had some- times, though rarely, an ethical meaning, none would of course deny, in which sense Plutarch (De Ser. Num. Vin. 6) has a passage in wonderful har- mony with Rom. ii. 4. It is only after fierdvota has been taken up into the uses of Scripture, or of writers dependent on Scripture, that it comes predominantly to mean a change of mind, taking a wiser view of the past, avvaicrOriGLs ^f%^)? icj> oh eirpa^ev droiroc^ (Pha- vorinus), a regret for the ill done in that past, and out of all this a change of life for the better. This is all imported into, does not etymologically nor yet by primary usage lie in, the word. Not very frequent in the Septuagint (yet see Ecclus. xliv. 15 ; NEW TESTAMENT. 95 Wisd. xi. 24 ; xii. 10, 19 ; and for the verb, Jer. viii. 6), it is frequent in Philo, who joins /xerdvota with fieXricoo-L? (De Ahrah. 3), explaining it as 717)65 to fteXriov f) jjLeraftoXr} (ibid, and De Pmn. 2) ; while in the 35T. T. fxeravoelv and /juerdvoia are never used in other than an ethical sense. It is singular how seldom they occur in the writings of St. Paul, fieravoelv only once, and jierdvoia not more than four times. But while thus /xeravoelv and fierdvota gradually advanced in depth and fulness of meaning, till they became the fixed and recognized words to express that mighty change in mind, heart and life wrought by the Spirit of God ; ' such a virtuous alteration of the mind and purpose as begets a like virtuous change in the life and practice ' (Kettlewell) as we call repentance ; the like honour was very partially vouchsafed to fiera/jbeXeia and fieTafjueXeaOcu. The first, explained by Plutarch as r) iirl rat? rjSoval^, ocrai TrapdvofjLOL teal dfcparels, ala^vvrj (De Gen. Soc. 22), associated by him with fiapvdvjju'a (An Vit. ad Inf. 2), by Plato with Tapayjq (Rep. ix. 577 e), has been noted as never occurring in the E". T. ; the second only five times; and on one of these to designate the sorrow of this world which worketh death, of Judas Iscariot (Matt, xxvii. 3), and on another expressing not the repentance of men, but of God (Heb. vii. 21) ; and this while fierdvoia oc- 96 SYKONYMS OF THE curs some five and twenty, and fieravoelv some five and thirty times. Those who deny that either in profane or sacred Greek any traceable difference existed between the words are able in the former to point to passages where fieraiieketa is used in all those senses which have been here claimed for fierdvoia, to others where the two are employed as convertible terms, and both to express remorse (Plutarch, De Tranq. Anim. 19) ; in the latter to passages in the IN". T. where jjueraiiekeaOai implies all that /jberavoelv would have implied (Matt. xxi. 29, 32). But all this freely admitted, there does remain, both in sacred and profane use, a Yerj dis- tinct preference for ixerdvota as the expression of the nobler repentance. This we might, indeed, have expected beforehand, from the relative ety- mological value of the words. He who has changed Ms mind about the past is in the way to change everything ; he who has an after care may have nothing but a selfish dread of the conse- quences of what he Las done; so that the long debate on the relation of these words with one another may be summed up in the words of Ben- gel, which seem to me to express the exact truth of the matter; allowing a difference, but not urging it too far {Gnomon N. T. ; 2 Cor. vii. 10): rj /cal irepas aco/xaro?. The distinction between the words comes out very clearly in the compound verbs /jLeraa-xvf ia - tl&lv and fxerafxop^ovv. Thus if I were to change a Dutch garden into an Italian, this would be li£Tacr){ri\jucvTi(7ixQs : but if I were to transform a garden into something wholly different, say a gar- den into a city, this would be fierafiopcfxoarts. It is possible for Satan /i6ra<7xvf jLaT ^ eLl ' himself into an angel of light (2 Cor. xi. 14) ; he can take all the outward semblance of such ; the fi6rafiop(j)ova6ai would be impossible ; it would involve an inward- ness of change, a change not external but internal, not of accidents but of essence, which lies quite beyond his power. How fine and subtle is the variation of words at Rom. xii. 2 ; though < con- formed ' and ' transformed ' ' in our Translation 1 The Authorized Version is the first -which uses ' transformed ' here. Wiclif and the Rheims, both following closely the Vulgate, ' transfigured,' and the intermediate Reformed Versions, ' changed NEW TESTAMENT. 101 Lave failed adequately to represent it. ' Do not fall in,' says the Apostle, ' with, the fleeting fashions of this world, nor he yourselves fashioned to them (jit) crvaxnfiaTL^eaOe)^ but undergo a deep abiding change {aXkd pLerafiop^ovaOe) by the renewing of your mind, such as the Spirit of God alone can work in you (2 Cor. iii. 18).' Theodoret, comment- ing on these words, calls particular attention to this variation of the word used, a variation which it would task the highest skill of the English scholar adequately to reproduce in his own language. Among much else which is interesting, he says: *EBiBao~Kev 6? viqirioi with which he pro- ceeds to explain it — but only that they were intel- lectually as well as spiritually tarrying at the thresh- old of the faith ; making no progress, and content to remain where they were, when they might have been carried far onward by the mighty transforming powers of that Spirit which was freely given to them 'of God. He does not charge them in this word NEW TESTAMENT. 115 with being 9 $ia(j)opa<; ovo-779 ' to fiev yap irvevfia ve- vorjrai Kara rrjv Icr^vv teal evroviav zeal hvvafxiv ' y Be 7TPorj &>9 av avpd tw io-ri, real avadv/jiiacris rjpefiaia real irpaeia. It may be urged as against this, that in one of the only two places where irvorj occurs in the N". T., namely Acts ii. 2, the epithet fioaia is at- tached to it, and it plainly is used of a strong and vehement wind (cf. Job xxxvii. 9). But, as De Wette has observed, this may be sufficiently ac- counted for by the fact that it was necessary to reserve irvevfxa for the higher gift of which this irvorj was the sign and symbol ; and it would have introduced, if not confusion, yet certainly a repeti- tion, for many reasons to have been avoided, to have employed that word here. IIvev/jLa is seldom used in the ~N. T., indeed only twice, namely at John iii. 8 ; Heb. i. 7 (in this last place not certainly), for wind ; but in the Septua- gint often, as at Gen. viii. 1 ; Ezek. xxxvii. 9 ; Eccles. xi. 5. The rendering of t#n in this last passage by i spirit,' and not, as so often, by ' wind ' (Job i. 19 ; Ps. cxlviii. 8), in our English Version, is to be regretted, obscuring as it does the remark- able connexion between these words of the Preacher 118 SYNONYMS OF THE and our Lord's words at John iii. 8. He, who ever moves in the sphere and region of the O. T., in those words of his, " The wind bloweth where it listeth," takes up the words of the Preacher, " Thou knowest not what is the way of the wind • " who had thus already indicated of what higher mysteries these courses of the winds, not to be traced by man, were the symbol. Uvevfia is found often in the Septuagint in connexion with irvorj, but this gener- ally in a figurative sense : Job xxxiii. 3 ; Isai. xlii. 5 ; lvii. 16 ; 2 Sam. xxii. 16 (ttvot) 7rvevfiaTos). "Avefios, etymologically identical with ' ventus ' and ' wind,' is the strong, oftentimes the tempes- tuous, wind (1 Kin. xix. 11 ; Job i. 19 ; Matt. vii. 25 ; John vi. 18 ; Acts xxvii. 14 ; Jam. iii. 4 ; Plu- tarch, JPrce. Conj. 12). It is interesting and in- structive to observe that our Lord, or rather the inspired reporter of his conversation with Mcode- mus, which itself no doubt took place in Aramaic, uses not avefMos, but irvev^a, as has been noted al- ready, when he would seek analogies in the natural world for the mysterious movements, not to be traced by human eye, of the Holy Spirit ; and this, doubtless, because there is nothing tierce or violent, but all measured in his operation ; while on the other hand, when St. Paul would describe men vio- lently blown about and tempested in a sea of error, it is K\vhwvi^6[JbevoL kclI Trepifyepo/JLevoi iravrX ave/iro NEW TESTAMENT. 119 tt}? SiSacTKaXlas (Ephes. iv. 14 ; cf. Jude 12 with 2 Pet. ii. IT). § xxiv. — So/ci/id^co, Treipd^G). These words occur not seldom together, as at 2 Cor. xiii. 5 ; Ps. xxv. ii ; xciv. 10 (at Heb. iii. 9 the better reading is iv So/ci/iao-la) ; but though both in our English Version are rendered ' prove ' (John vi. 6 ; Luke xiv. 19), both ' try ' (Eev. ii. 2 ; 1 Cor. iii. 13), both < examine ' (1 Cor. xi. 28 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 5), they are not therefore perfectly synonymous. In Sofcifjid&iv, which has four other renderings in our Version, — namely, 'discern' (Luke xii. 56); 'like' (Rom. i. 28); ' approve' (Rom. ii. 18) ; ' al- low ' (Rom. xiv. 22), — lies ever the notion of prov- ing a thing whether it be worthy to he received or not, being, as it is, nearly connected with he^eaOat. In classical Greek it is the technical word for put- ting money to the Bokc/xt] or proof, by aid of the BoKLfxiov or test (Plato, Timceus, 65 c\ Plutarch, Def. Orac. 21) ; that which endures this proof being hoicifjLos, that which fails oZokiijlos, which words it will be well to recollect are not, at least immedi- ately, connected with SoKL/id^ecv, but with hixeaOcu. Resting on the fact that this proving is through fire 120 SYNONYMS OF THE (1 Cor. iii. 13), hoKifjia^eiv and irvpovv are often found together (Ps. xcv. 9 ; Jer. ix. 4). As em- ployed in the N. T., the word will in almost every case imply that the proof is victoriously surmounted, the proved is also approved (2 Cor. viii. 8 ; 1 Thess. ii. 4 ; 1 Tim. iii. 10), just as in English we speak of tried men (= hehoKifiaa-fievoC), meaning not merely those who have been tested, but who have stood the test. It is then very nearly equivalent to afyovv (1 Thess. ii. 4 ; cf. Plutarch, Theseus, 12). Some- times the word will advance even a step further, and signify not merely to approve the proved, but to select or choose the approved (Xenophon, Andb. iii. 3. 12 ; cf. Eom. i. 18). But on BoKt/Mci^etv there not merely for the most part follows a coming victoriously out of the trial, but also it is implied that the trial was itself made in the expectation and hope that so it would be ; at all events, with no contrary hope or expectation. The ore is not thrown into the fining pot — and this is the image which continually underlies the use of the word in the Old Testament (Zech. xiii. 9 ; Pro v. viii. 10 ; xvii. 3 ; xxvii. 21 ; Ps. lxv. 10 ; Jer. ix. 7 ; Sirac. ii. 5 ; "Wisd. iii. 6 ; cf. 1 Pet. i. 7) — except in the expectation and belief that, whatever of dross may be found mingled with it, yet it is not all dross, but that some good metal, and better now than before, will come forth from the fiery trial NEW TESTAMENT. 121 (Heb. xii. 5—11 ; 2 Mace. vi. 12—16). It is ever so with the proofs to which He who sits as a Refiner in his Church submits his own; his intention in these being ever, not indeed to find his saints pure gold (for that He knows they are not), but to make them such ; to purge out their dross, never to show that they are all dross. As such, He is BoKi/naa-rrj^ rcov Kaphiwv (1 Thess. ii. 4 ; Jer. xi. 20 ; Ps. xvi. 4) ; as such, Job could say of Him, using another equiv- alent word, Bci/cpcve p,e coairep to yjp VG ^ 0V ' To Him as such his people pray, in words like those of Abe- lard, expounding the sixth petition of the Lord's Prayer, ' Da ut per tentationem probemur, non re- probemur.' And here is the point of divergence between the use of hoKifxa^eLv and irei,pd^€tv, as will be plain when the second of these words has been a little considered. This putting to the proof may have quite an- other intention, as it may have quite another issue and end, than those which have been just described; nay, it certainly will have such in the case of the false-hearted, and those who, seemingly belonging to God, had yet no root of the matter in themselves. Being proved or tempted, they will appear to be what they have always been; and this fact, though it does not overrule all the uses of irsipd^eiv, does yet predominantly affect the use of the word. It lies not of necessity in it that it should oftenest pos- 6 122 SYNONYMS OF THE sess an evil signification, and imply a making trial with the intention and hope of entangling the per- son so tried in sin. Heipd^eiv, connected with ' perior,' ' experior,' 7relpco, means properly no more than to make an experience of {irelpav \a/jLJ3dveiv, Heb. xi. 29, 36), to pierce or search into (thus of the wicked it is said, ireipd^ovat Odvarov, Wisd. ii. 25 ; cf. xii. 26 ; Ecclns. xxxix. 4) ; or to attempt (Acts xvi. 7 ; xxiv. 6). But the word came next to signify the trying intentionally and with the pur- pose of discovering what of good or evil, of power or weakness, was in a person or thing (Matt. xvi. 1 ; xix. 3 ; xxii. 18 ; 1 Kin. x. 1) ; or, where this was already known to the trier, discovering the same to the tried themselves; as when St. Paul addresses the Corinthians, iavrovs ireipd^ere, u try," or as we have it, " examine yourselves " (2 Cor. xiii. 5). It is thus that sinners are said to tempt God (Matt. iv. 7 [i/cireipd&iv] ; Acts v. 9 ; 1 Cor. x. 9 ; Wisd. i. 2), putting Him to the proof, refusing to believe Him on his own word or till He has shown his power. At this stage, too, of the word's history and suc- cessive usages we must arrest it, when we affirm of God that He tempts (Heb. xi. IT; cf. Gen. xxii. 1 ; Exod. xv. 25 ; Deut. xiii. 3). In no other sense or intention can He try or tempt men (Jam. i. 13) ; but because He does tempt in this sense (tyvfivaaias %ap\v /cat dvapprjo-em, (Ecumenius), and because of NEW TESTAMENT. 123 the self-knowledge which may be won through these temptations, — so that men may, and often do, come ont of them holier, humbler, stronger than they were when they entered in, 1 — St. James is able to say, " Count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations" (i. 2"; cf. ver. 12). The word itself, however, does not stop here. The melancholy fact that men so often break down under temptation gives to ireipaX^iv a predominant sense of putting to the proof with the intention and the hope that they may break down ; and thus the word is con- stantly applied to the temptations of Satan (Matt, iv. 1 ; 1 Cor. vii. 5 ; Rev. ii. 10), which are always made with such intention, he himself bearing the name of The Tempter (Matt. iv. 3 ; 1 Thess. iii. 5), and evermore approving himself as such (Gen. iii. 1, 4, 5 ; 1 Chron. xxi. 1). We may say then in conclusion, that while irei- paQciv may be used, but exceptionally, of God, Botci- 1 Augustine (Serm. lxxi. c. 10) : ' In eo quod dictum est, Deus neminem tentat, non omni sed quodam tentationis modo Deus nemi- nem tentare intelligendus est : ne falsum sit illud quod scriptum est, Tentat yos Dominus Deus vester [Deut. xiii. 3] ; et ne Christum negemus Deum, vel dicamus falsum Evangelium, ubi legimus quia interrogabat discipulum, tentans eum [Joh. vi. 5]. Est enim tenta- tio adducens. peccatum, qua Deus neminem tentat; et est tentatio probans fidem, qua et Deus tentare dignatur.' Cf. Serm. ii. c. 3 : ' Deus tentat ut doceat ; diabolus tentat, ut decipiat.' Cf. Serm. lvii. c. 9. 124 SYNONYMS OF THE jid^eiv could not be used of Satan, seeing that he never proves that he may approve, or tests that he may accept. § xxv. — ^o(j>La } (frpovrjats, yvcocns, eTriyvoMTis. So(f)ia, (ftpovrjais, p6vr)la and yvcocris, Horn. xi. 33 ; (ppovrjcris and crofyia, Prov. iii. 19 ; Jer. x. 12. There have been various efforts to draw the exact lines of distinction between them. These, however they may vary in detail, have this in common, that ia\ pertineat ad intellectum seternorum, scientia [yvcoais;'] 1 On the relation of la, (iirirr)5 evens p6- vrjens (Quod Deus. Imm. 35), gives elsewhere the distinction between it and croia (De Prcem. et Poen. 14) : Xo$La fiev yap 7Tj0o? QepameLav Seov, p6vr)ais Be 7T/30? avOpcoiTivov /3lov hiOLKTjcnv. This was the familiar and recognized distinction, as witness the words of Cicero (De Off. ii. 43)': ' Princeps om- nium virtutum est ilia sapientia quam aocf>lav Grseci vocant. Prudentiam enim, quam Grseci §pbvr}cnv dicunt, aliam quandam intelligimus, quge est rerum expetendarum, fugiendarumque scientia ; ilia autem sapientia, quam principem dixi, rerum est divinarum atque humanarum scientia : ' cf. Tusc. iv. 26. In all this he is following in the steps of Aristotle, who thus defines (f>p6vr)cn<; (Ethic. Nie. vi. 5. 4) : e^t? dXrjOr)^ /juera \6yov TTpaiCTiKr) irepl tcl avOpcoira) dyaOa zeal Kcuca. It will be seen from these references and quotations, that the Christian Fathers have drawn their distinction between these words from the schools of heathen philosophy, with only such deep- ening of their meaning as must necessarily follow when the ethical terms of a lower are assumed into the service of a higher. 126 SYNONYMS OF THE We may say boldly that crocj>ia, is never in Scrip- ture ascribed to other than God or good men, except in an ironical sense, with the express addition, or subaudition, of rod Koafxov tovtov (1 Cor. i. 20), rov alwvos tovtov (1 Cor. ii. 6), or some such words (2 Cor. i. 12) ; nor are any of the children of this world called aocpoi except with this tacit or express- ed addition (Luke x. 21) ; they are in fact the (f)do~- KovTes eivai crocpoi of Rom. i. 22. For, indeed, if o-oaiv€TCLL ' cf. Ecclus. xix. 20, 22, a fine parallel. The true antithesis to aocpos is avor\Tos (Rom. i. 14). The acrvveTos need not be more than intellectually deficient, but in the avorjTos there is always a moral fault which lies at the root of the intellectual, the vovs, the highest knowing power in man, the organ by which divine things are known and apprehend- ed, being the ultimate seat of the error. Thus com- pare Luke xxiv. 25 (c5 avor)Toi real yS/jaSet? tjj icap- S(a); Gal. v. 1, 3 ; 1 Tim. vi. 9; Tit. iii. 3; in every one" of which places the word has a moral tinge : it is the foolishness which is akin to and is NEW TESTAMENT. 127 derived from wickedness, even as la is the wis- dom which is akin to goodness. But (ppovrjo-t,?, being a right nse and application of the pr)v, is a [xeaov. It may be akin to aofyia (Prov. x. 23),— they are interchangeably used by Plato, Conv. 202 a, — but it may also be akin to iravovpyla (Job v. 13 ; Wisd. xvii. 7). It skilfully adapts its means to the attainment of the desired ends, but whether the ends themselves are good, of this the word affirms nothing. On the different kinds of povrj? fj,r)/ciTL 7)jjba<; eiravekdeiv irciktv eirl rrjv avrrjv SovXetav. In this no doubt he has right, and there is the same force in the curb of aTroKaraXkaaareiv (Ephes. ii. 16 ; Col. i. 20, 22), which is 'prorsus reconciliare ; • see Fritzsche on Horn. v. 10. Both airoKvTpwaLs (which nowhere occurs in the Septua- gint, but airokvTpoto twice, Exod. xxi. 8 ; Zeph. iii. 1), and \vTpG)(TLBal aBe\(f)(bv air ap^r}? virb TTMJTwv elcrai, rbv Aoyov rov Oeov rbv Xpicr- ibv vfivovaL OeoXoyovvres. Augustine in more places than one states the notes of what in his mind are the essentials of a hymn — which are three. It must be sung. It must be praise. It must be to God. Thus Enarr. in Ps. lxxii. 1 : ' Hymni laudes sunt Dei cum cantico : hymni cantus sunt continentes 146 SYNONYMS OF THE laudes Dei. Si sit laus, et non sit Dei, non est hymmis : si sit laus, et Dei laus, et non cantetur, non est hymnus. Oportet ergo ut, si sit hymnus, habeat hsec tria, et laudem, et Dei, et canticum.' Cf. Enarr. in Ps. cxlviii. 14 : ' Hymnus scitis quid est? Cantus est cum laude Dei. Si laudas Deum, et non cantas, non dicis liymnum ; si cantas, et non laudas Deum, non dicis hymnum ; si laudas aliud quod non pertinet ad laudem Dei, etsi cantando laudes, non dicis hymnum. Hymnus ergo tria ista habet, et cantum, et laudem, et Dei.' 1 Compare Gregory of Nazianzum : iitaiv6s icrriv e5 ri rS>v i/xwv eum, in the Veni Creator Spiritus, and in many a later heritage for ever which the Church has acquired. That the Church, at the time when St. Paul wrote, brought into a new and marvellous world of realities, would be rich in these we might be sure, even if no evi- dence existed to this effect, of which however there is abundance, more than one fragment of a hymn being probably embedded in St. Paul's own Epistles 148 SYNONYMS OF THE (Eplies. y. 14 ; 1 Tim. iii. 16). And as it was quite impossible that the Christian Church, mightily re- leasing itself, though not with any revolutionary violence, from the Jewish synagogue, should fall into that mistake into which some portions of the Reformed Church afterward ran, we may be sure that it adopted into liturgic use not psalms only, but also hymns, singing hymns to Christ as to God (Pliny, Ejp. x. 96) ; though this, as we may well conclude, to a larger extent in Churches gathered out of the heathen world than in those where a strong Jewish element was found. 'Slhrj (= aoihr)) is the only word of this group which the Apocalypse knows (v. 9 ; xiv. 3 ; xv. 3). St. Paul, on the two occasions when he employs it, adds 7rvevfiaTLK)] to it ; and this, no doubt, because (p$r) by itself might mean any kind of song, of bat- tle, of harvest, or festal, or hymeneal, while yjraX/Aos from its Hebrew, and vjivos from its Greek, use, did not require any such qualifying adjective. It will at once be evident that this epithet thus ap- plied does not necessarily imply that these tpSal were divinely inspired, any more than the avrjp Trveufiarifcos was an inspired man (1 Cor. iii. 1 ; Gal. vi. 1) ; but only that they were such as were com- posed by spiritual men, and had to do with spirit- ual things. How, it may be asked, are we to dis- tinguish these " spiritual songs " from the "psalms " NEW TESTAMENT. 149 and " hymns " with which they are associated by St. Paul ? If the first word represents the heritage of sacred song which the Christian Church derived from the Jewish, the second and third will between them express what more of this sacred song it pro- duced out of its bosom ; but with a difference. What the vfivoi were, we have already seen ; but Christian feeling will soon have expanded into a wider range of poetic utterances than those in which there is a direct address to the Deity. If we turn for instance to Keble's Christian Year, or Herbert's Temple, there are many poems in both which, as they certainly are not psalms, so as little do they possess the characteristics of hymns ; but which would most justly be entitled " spiritual songs ; " and in almost all our collections of so-called u hymns " at the present day, there are not a few which by much juster title would bear this name. Calvin : ' Sub his tribus nominibus complexus est [Paulus] omne genus canticorum ; quae ita vulgo distinguuntur, ut Psalmus sit in quo concinendo adhibetur musicum aliquod instrumentum prseter linguam ; hymnus proprie sit laudis canticum, sive assa voce, sive aliter canatur ; oda non laudes tan- turn contineat, sed parseneses, et alia argumenta.' 150 SYNONYMS OF THE § xxix. — aypdjJLfjLaTos, IBubTrjs. These words occur together Acts iv. 13 ; dypdfi- fjLaros nowhere else in the E". T., but IBicdttjs on four other occasions (1 Cor. xiv. 16, 23, 24 ; 2 Cor. xi. 6). In that first-named passage there can be little donbt that according to the natural rhetoric of human speech the second word is stronger than the first, adds something to it; thus our Translators have evidently under stood them, rendering dypdii/jLaros 'unlearned,' and IBmott]? 'ignorant;' and so Ben- gel : ' aypdfjL/jLciTos est rudis, IBicott)^ rudior.' When we seek more accurately to distinguish them, and to detect the exact notion which each conveys, the second, as the word of more various and subtle uses, will mainly claim our attention. 'Aypdfifiaros need not occupy us long ; it is simply illiterate (John vii. 13; Acts xxvi. 24; 2 Tim. iii. 15) ; the dypd/jb/xaro^ being joined by Plato with opeios, rugged as the mountaineer (Grit. 109 cZ), with a/jiovcros (Tim. 23 b) ; by Plutarch set over against the fiefiovcrco/ievo^ (Adv. Col. 26). But ISlcott]<; is a far more complex word. Its primary idea, the point from which, so to speak, etymologically it starts, is that of the private man, occupying himself with ra cBca, as contrasted with NEW TESTAMENT. 151 the political ; the man unclothed with office, as set over against and distinguished from him who bears some office in the state. But then as it lay very deep in the Greek mind, being one of the strongest convictions there, that in public life the true educa- tion of the man and the citizen consisted, a con- temptuous use lay very near to ISlcottjs, which it did not fail presently to make its own. The ISlgottjs, unexercised in business, unaccustomed to deal with his fellow-men, is unpractical ; and thus the word is joined with aTrpdyfjicov by Plato {Rep. x. 620 c ; cf. Plutarch, De Virt. et Vit. 4), with anrpcucTos by Plutarch {Phil, esse cum Princ. 1), who sets him over against the 7ro\m/eo? real TrpcucTiicos. But more than this, he is boorish, and thus ISloottjs is linked with aypoi/cos (Chrysostom, In 1 Ep. Cor. Horn. 3), with airaihevTos (Plutarch, Arist. et Men. Comp. I). 1 The history of the word by no means stops here, though we have followed it as far as is absolutely necessary to explain its association at Acts iv. 13 with aypdfi/jLciTos, and the points of likeness and dif- ference between them. But for the sake of the other passages where it occurs, and to explain why it should be used at 1 Cor. xiv. 16, 23, 24, and ex- actly in what sense, it may be well to pursue this his- 1 There is, I may observe, an excellent discussion on the successive meanings of tStcoTTjs in Bishop Horsley's Tracts in Controversy with Dr. Priestly, Appendix, Disquisition Second, pp. 4*75 — 485. 152 SYNONYMS OF THE toiy a little further. The circumstance is explain- ed hy a singular characteristic of the word, which is not easy to describe, but which a few examples at once make intelligible. There lies continually in it a negation of that particular skill, knowledge, pro- fession, standing, over against which it is antitheti- cally set, and not of any other except that alone. For example, is the ISicbrr)*; set over against the STjfiiovpyos (as by Plato, Theag. 124 c), he is the un- skilled man as set over against the skilled artificer ; any other dexterity he may possess, but that of the Srj/jLiovpyos is denied him. Is he set over against the larpos, he is one ignorant of the physician's art (Plato, fiep. iii. 389 I ; Philo, De Conf. Ling. 7) ; against the (jo^kttt]^, he is one unacquainted with the dialectic fence of the sophists (Xenophon, De Venat. 13 ; cf. Iliero, i. 2 ; Lucian, Pise. 31 ; Plu- tarch, Symp. iv. 2. 3). Those unpractised in gym- nastic exercises are IBicorat as contrasted with the aOXrjTcd (Xenophon, Hiero, iv. 6 ; Philo, De Sept. 6) ; subjects are IBlwtcll as contrasted with their prince (Id. De Abrah. 33) ; the underlings in the harvest-field are 1$i£>tcu real vTrrjpircu as distinguish- ed from the fjyeiioves (Id. De Somn. ii. 4) ; and last- ly, the whole congregation of Israel are IBioyrao as contrasted with the priests (De Vit. Mos. iii. 29). With these uses of the word to assist us, it is im- possible, I think, to come to any other conclusion NEW TESTAMENT. 153 than that the ISicotcu of St. Paul (1 Cor. xiv. 16, 23, 24) are the plain believers, with no special spiritual gifts, as distinguished from those who were in the possession of these ; even as elsewhere they are the lay members of the Church as contrasted with those who minister in the Word and Sacraments ; for it is ever the word with which it is at once combined and contrasted which determines its use. But to return to the matter immediately before us. For this it will be sufficient to say that when the Pharisees recognized Peter and James as men wypannaToi teal ISicorai, in the first word they ex- pressed more the absence in them of book-learning, and, confining as they would have done this to the O. T., the lepa ypd/jb/iara, and to the glosses of the elders upon these, their lack of acquaintance with such lore as St. Paul had learned at the feet of Gamaliel ; in the second the absence in them of that education which men insensibly acquire by mingling with those who have important affairs to transact, and by themselves sharing in the transac- tion of such. Setting aside that higher training of the heart and the intellect which comes from direct contact with God and his truth, no doubt books and public life, literature and politics, are the two most effectual organs of mental and moral training which the world has at its command — the second, as needs hardly be said, immeasurably more effec- 7* 154 SYNONYMS OF THE tual than the first. He is aypd/jLfjLaros who has not shared in the first, ISiwttis who has no part in the second. § xxx. — So/ceo), <\>aivo[iai. Ouk Translators have not always observed the distinction which exists between hoiceiv == ' videri,' and ^aiveaOai == ' apparere.' Aoicelv expresses the subjective mental estimate or opinion about- a mat- ter which men form, their $6%a concerning it, which may be right (Acts xv. 28 ; 1 Cor. i v. 9 ; vii. 40 ; cf. Plato, Tim. 51 d, Soga akrjOfc), but which may be wrong ; involving, as it always does, the possi- bility of error (2 Mace. ix. 10 ; Matt. vi. 7 ; Mark vi. 49 ; John xvi. 2 ; Acts xxvii. 13 ; cf. Plato, Gorg. 458 a, ho%a ^ev^rj^: ; Xenophon, Cyr. i. 6. 22 ; Mem. i. 7. 4 \ la^vpbv, fir) ovra, So/celv, to have a false reputation for strength) ; cj>aiveadcu on the contrary expresses how a matter phenomenally shows and presents itself, with no necessary assump- tion of any beholder at all ; suggesting an opposi- tion not to the 6v, but to the voovfievov. Thus, when Plato {Rep. 408 a) says of certain heroes in the Trojan war, dyaOol 7T/30? tov iroXefiov i^dvr^aav, he does not mean they seemed good for the war NEW TESTAMENT. 155 and were not, but they showed good, with the tacit consequence that what they showed, they were as well. So too, when Xenophon writes i^aivero lyyia L7nra)v {Anab. i. 6. 1), he would imply that horses had been actually there, and left their prints on the ground. He could only have used Bo/celv, supposing him to have wished to say, that Cyrus and his com- pany took for the tracks of horses what indeed might have been, but what also might not have been, such at all ; cf. Mem. iii. 10. 2. Zeune : i Bo/cetv cernitur in opinione, quse falsa esse potest et vana; sed (palveo-Oai plerumque est in re extra mentem, quam- vis nemo opinatur.' Thus So/cel tyalvecrdai, (Plato, Phcedr. 269 d; Legg. xii. 960 d). Even in passages where Boicelv may be exchanged with elvaiy it does not lose the proper meaning which Zeune gives to it here. There is ever a predomi- nant reference to the public opinion and estimate, rather than to the actual being ; however the for- mer may be the just echo of the latter (Pro v. xxvii. 14). Thus, while there is no slightest touch of irony in St. Paul's use of ol Botcovvres at Gal. ii. 2, ol Bo/covvres elvai tl (ii. 6), and manifestly could not be, seeing that he is so characterizing some of the chiefest of his fellow Apostles, the words at the same time express rather the reputation in which they were held in the Church than that which in themselves they were, however this reputation was 156 SYNONYMS OF THE only the true measure of their worth (= iiriarniot, Rom. xvi. 7) ; compare Euripides, Hec. 295, and Porphyry, De Abst. ii. 40, where ol hotcovvres in like manner is put absolutely, and set over against ra TrkrjOrj. In the same way ol Bo/covvres apxew ta/iev Be top Bebv elvai %(oov dthov apuTTov (Aristotle, Metwph. xii. Y). It is true 160 SYNONYMS OF THE that there is no example of this employment of fwoz/ to designate man in the ET. T. ; bnt see Plato, Pol. 271 e; Xenophon, Oyr. i. 1. 3; "Wisd. xix.20; still less to designate God ; for whom, as not merely living, but as being absolute life, the one fountain of life, the avro^coov, the fitter and more reverent %wr) is retained (John i. 4 ; 1 John i. 2). In its ordinary use tfaov covers the same extent of mean- ing as our own word ' animal,' having generally, but by no means universally (Plutarch, De Garr. 22 ; Heb. xiii. 11), aXoyov or some such epithet at- tached (2 Pet. ii. 12 ; Jude 10). Orjplov, a diminutive of 6rjp, which in its ^Eolic form (f>rjp gives the Latin ' fera,' and appears in its more usual shape in the German ' Thier ' and our own ' deer,' like xpvcriov, /3t/3\iov, (fropri'ov, ayyelov, and so many other words in the Greek language (see Fischer, Prol. de Tit. Lex. N. T. p. 256), has quite left behind its diminutive signification ; how completely it is felt to have done so is remarkably attested in the modern compound ' megatherium ; ' and compare Xenophon, Cyrop. i. 4. 11, drjpta /-te- yd\a. Neither does Orjplov exclusively mean the mischievous and cruel beast, for see Heb. xii. 20; Exod. xix. 13; at the same time it has predomi- nantly this meaning (Mark i. 13 ; Acts xxviii. 4, 5) ; drjpla at Acts xi. 6 being distinguished from re- rpcLTroha. It is very noticeable that, numerous as NEW TESTAMENT. 161 are the passages of the Septuagint where beasts for sacrifice are mentioned, it is never under this name; and the reason of this is evident, namely, that the brutal, bestial element is that which the word brings prominently forward, and not that wherein the lower animals are akin to man, not that therefore which gives them a fitness to be offered as substi- tutes for man. Here, too, we have an explanation of the frequent transfer of Orjplov and 07)picoSrj?, as in Latin of ' bestia ' and ' bellua,' to fierce and brutal men (Tit. i. 12 ; 1 Cor. xv. 32 ; Josephus, Antt. xvii. 5. 5 ; Arrian, In Epict. ii. 9). All this makes the more to be regretted the breaking down for the English reader of the dis- tinction between £twoz> and Orjpiov in the Apocalypse, by the rendering of fwa as ' beasts ' throughout that Book. As I could only say over again in other words what I had said before, I will make no apol- ogy for quoting on this matter some w r ords of my own (On the Authorized Version of the New Testa- ment, 2d edit. p. 102) : ' One must always regret, and the regret has been often expressed — it was so by Broughton almost as soon as our Version was published— that in the Apocalypse our Translators should have rendered Orjpiov and JSoi/ by the same word, ' beast.' Both play important parts in the book ; both belong to its higher symbolism ; but to portions the most different. The fwa or " living 162 SYNONYMS OF THE creatures," which stand before the throne, in which dwells the fulness of all creaturely life, as it gives praise and glory to God (iv. 6 — 9 ; v. 6 ; vi. 1 ; and often) form part of the heavenly symbolism; the 07ipia, the first beast and the second, which rise up, one from the bottomless pit (xi. 7), the other from the sea (xiii. 1), of which the one makes war upon the two Witnesses, the other opens his mouth in blasphemies, these form part of the hellish sym- bolism. To confound these and those under a com- mon designation, to call those ' beasts ' and these ' beasts,' would be an oversight, even granting the name to be suitable to both ; it is a more serious one, when the word used, bringing out, as this must, the predominance of the lower animal life, is ap- plied to glorious creatures in the very court and presence of Heaven. The error is common to all the translations. That the Bheirns should not have escaped it is strange ; for the Ynlgate renders £wa by ' animalia ' (' animantia ' would have been still better), and only Orjplop by ' bestia.' If fwa had al- ways been rendered " living creatures," this would have had the additional advantage of setting these symbols of the Apocalypse, even for the English reader, in an unmistakeable connexion with Ezek. ji. 5, 13, 14, and often; where "living creature" is the rendering in our English Version of n*n, as faioi/ is in the Septuagint. NEW TESTAMENT. 163 § xxxn. — virep, avn. It lias been often claimed, and in the interests of an all-important truth, namely the vicarious character of the sacrifice of Christ, that in such pas- sages as Heb. ii. 9 ; Tit. ii. 14 ; 1 Tim..ii. 6 ; Gal. iii. 13 ; Luke xxii. 19, 20 ; 1 Pet. ii. 21 ; iii. 18 ; iv. 1 ; Rom. v. 8 ; John x. 15, in all of which Christ is said to have died virep irdvrcov, virep r)fj,cov, virep rcov irpofidrcov, and the like, virep shall be accepted as equipollent with dvrl: it being further urged that, as olvtl is the preposition first of equivalence (Homer, II. ix. 116, 117) and then of exchange (1 Cor. xi. 15 ; Heb. xii. 16 ; Matt. v. 38), virep must in the passages referred to above be regarded as having the same force. Each of these, it is evi- dent, would thus become a dictum prohans for a truth, in itself most vital, namely that Christ suf- fered, not merely on our behalf and for our good, but also in our room, and bearing that penalty of our sins which we otherwise must have borne. Now, though some have denied, we must yet ac- cept as certain that virep has sometimes this mean- ing. Thus in the Gorgias of Plato, 515 c, eya) virep crov dirofcpwovfjLcu, I will answer in your stead ; cf. Thucydides, i. 141 ; Euripides, Alcestis, 712 ; Poly- 164 SYXOKYMS OF THE bius, iii. 67. 7 ; Philem. 13 ; and perhaps 1 Cor. xv. 29 ; but it is not less certain, that in passages far more numerous virkp means no more than, on be- half of, for the good of ; thus Matt. v. 44 ; John xiii. 37 ; 1 Tim. ii. 1, and continually. It must be admitted, I think, to follow from this, that had we in the Scripture only statements to the effect that Christ died virep tj/jlwv, that He tasted death virep ttclvtos, it would be impossible to found on these anj irrefragable proof that the death of Christ was vicarious, He dying in our stead, and Himself bear- ing on his Cross our sins and the penalty of our sins ; however we might find it, as no doubt we do, elsewhere (Isai. liii. 4 — 6). It is only as having other declarations to the effect that Christ died dvrl iroWwv (Matt. xx. 28), gave Himself as an dvr L- Xvrpov (1 Tim. ii. 6), and bringing these others to the interpretation of those, that we feel we have a perfect right to claim such declarations of Christ's death for us as also declarations of his death in our stead. And in them beyond doubt the preposition vwep is the rather employed, that it may embrace both these meanings, and express how Christ died at once for our salces ' (here it touches more nearly on the meaning of irepi, Matt. xxvi. 28 ; Mark xiv. 24 ; 1 Pet. iii. 18 ; Bed also once occurring in this connexion, 1 Cor. viii. 11), and in our stead ; while dvTi would only have expressed the latter. NEW TESTAMENT. 165 Teschendorf, in his little treatise, Doctrina Pauli oZe vi mortis Christi satisfactoria, has some excel- lent remarks on this matter : ' Fnerunt, qui ex sola natura et usu praepositionis virep demonstrare cona- rentnr, Panlnm docuisse satisfactionem Christi vica- riam ; alii rursus negarunt, praepositionem virep a N. Test, auctoribus recte positam esse pro avrl, inde probaturi contrarium. Peccatum utrimque est. Sola praepositio utramque pariter adjnvat senten- tiarum partem ; pariter, inquam, ntramque. Nam- qne in promptn sunt, contra perplurinm opinionem, desnmta ex mnltis veternm Graecorum scriptoribus loca, quae prsepositioni virep significatum, loco, vice, alicnjus plane vindicant, atque ipsnm Pauluin eodem significatu earn usurpasse, et quidem in locis, quae ad nostram rem non pertinent, nemini potest esse dubinm (cf. Philem. 13 ; 2 Cor. v. 20 ; 1 Cor. xv. 29). Si antem quseritur, cnr hac potissimum prae- positione incerti et flnctuantis significatiis in re tarn gravi usns sit Apostolus — inest in ipsa praapositione quo sit aptior reliquis ad describendam Christi mor- tem pro nobis oppetitam. Etenim in hoc versari rei summam, quod Christus mortuus sit in commo- dum hominum, nemo negat ; atque id quidem fac- tum est ita, ut moreretnr hominum loco. Pro con- juncta significatione et commodi et vicarii praaclare ab Apostolo adhibita est praepositio virep. Itaque rectissime, ut solet, contendit Winerus noster, non 166 SYNONYMS OF THE licere nobis in gravibus locis, nbi de morte Christi agatur, prsepositionem virep simpliciter = ami su- mere. Est enim plane Latinorum pro, nostrum fur. Quotiescunque Panlus Christum pro nobis mortuum esse docet, ab ipsa notione vicarii non disjunctam esse voluit notionem commodi, neque umquam ab hac, quamvis perquam aperta sit, exelndi illam in ista formula, jure meo dico.' § xxxiii. — (povevs, avOpayiroiCTovos, crcieapios. Our Translators have rendered all these words by ' murderer,' a word apt enough in the case of the first (Matt. xxii. 7 ; 1 Pet. iv. 15 ; Kev. xxi. 8), but at the same time so general that it keeps out of sight characteristic features which the other two possess. 'AvOpcoTTOKTovos, exactly corresponding to our ' manslayer,' or 'homicide,' occurs in the N". T. only in the writings of St. John (viii. 44 ; 1 Ep. iii. 15 bis) ; it is found also in Euripides {Iphig. in Taur. 390). On our Lord's lips the word has its special fitness ; no other would have suited at all so well ; for his reference (John viii. 44) is to the great, and in part only too successful, assault on the life natu- ral and the life spiritual of all mankind which Satan NEW TESTAMENT. 167 made, when pi anting sin, and through sin death, in them who should be the authors of being to all other men, he poisoned, as he hoped, the stream of human life at its fountain-head. Satan was thus 6 avOpwiroKTovo? indeed; for he would have fain murdered not this man or that, but the whole race of mankind. Xacapios, which only occurs once in the N. T. and, noticeably enough, then on the lips of a Roman captain (Acts xxi. 38), is one of the many Latin words which we meet with there. Such in not inconsiderable numbers had followed the Roman domination even into those provinces of the empire that still retained their own language. The ' sica- rius,' in the Roman use of the word, having his name from the ' sica,' a short sword, or. rather po- niard or stiletto, which he wore and was prompt to use, was the hired bravo or swordsman, of whom in the last days of the Republic, lawless men, the Antonies and the Clodiuses, kept troops in their pay and oftentimes about their person, to remove out of the way any who were obnoxious to them. The word had found its way into Palestine, and into the Greek, which was spoken there ; Josephus in two instructive passages (B. J. ii. 13. 3 ; Antt. xx. 8. 6) giving us full details about those to whom the name of aucapioi was applied. They were as- sassins who sprang up in the latter days of the Jew- 168 SYNONYMS OF THE isli Commonwealth, when, in token of the approach- ing catastrophe, all ties of society were fast being dissolved. Concealing their short swords nnder their garments (it was from the likeness of this sword to the Roman ' sica ' that, as Josephus tells us, they obtained their name), and mingling with the multitude, especially at the chief feasts, they stabbed whom of their enemies they would, and then, taking part with the bystanders in exclama- tions of horror, effectually averted suspicion from themselves. It will appear from what has been said that (povev? may be any murderer, the genus of which crucapLos is a species, this latter being an assassin, using a particular weapon, and following his trade of blood in a special manner. Again, avOpwiro- ktovos has a special stress and emphasis of its own. It bears on its front that he to whom this name is given is a murderer of men, a homicide ; while o- vevs is capable of vaguer use, so that it would be possible to characterize a wicked man as cf>ovevs 7% evaeftelas, a destroyer of piety, though he made no direct attack on the lives of men, or a traitor as cpovev<; tyjs 7rar/o/8o? (Plutarch, Prmc. Ger. Beip. 19) ; and such uses of the word are not unfrequent. NEW TESTAMENT. 169 § xxxiv. — irovr)p6av\o<} from the latter. IIovTipos, connected with irovos and irovelv, has sometimes, though very rarely, a good sense, as when Hercules on account of his twelve noble toils is termed in Hesiod TrovrjpoTaros koX apLaros. It is then equal to eiriirovo^, by which Suidas explains it. Yery much oftener, however, irovrjpos is not one who himself labours, but who causes labours to others; and the point of difference between it and cf)av\os, and in a measure between it and fcatcos, is, that in it the positive activity of evil is more de- cidedly expressed than in either of those. Thus oxjrov Trovripov (Plutarch, Sept. Sap. Conv. 2) is an unwholesome dish ; acr/iara 7rov7)pd (id. Quom. Adol. Poet. 4), wanton songs, such as corrupt the minds of the young. Satan is emphatically 6 ttovt]- po?, as the first author of all the mischief in the world (Matt. vi. 13; Ephes. v, 16; cf. Luke vii. 8 170 SYNONYMS OF THE 21 ; Acts xix. 12) ; evil beasts are always Orjpia 7rov7]pd in the Septnagint (Gen. xxxvii. 33 ; Isai. xxxv. 9) ; Kaica Orjpla indeed once in the "N. T. (Tit. i. 12), bnt the meaning to be expressed is not pre- cisely the same ; so too the evil eye is 6a0\o? is one of them, which contemplate evil un- der another aspect, that namely of its good-lbr- nothingness, the impossibility of any good ever coming forth from it. Thus ' nequam ' (in strict- ness opposed to ' frugi ') and ' nequitia ' in Latin ; ' vaurien ' in French ; ' naughty ' and i naughtiness' in English; ' taugenichts,' 'schlecht,' 4 schlechtig- keit ' in German ; * while on the other hand ' tu- gend - (= ' taugend ') is virtue contemplated as use- fulness. This notion of worthlessness is the central notion of av\o<; (by some recognized in 'faul,' ' foul '), which in Greek runs successively through the following meanings, light, unstable, blown about by every wind (see Donaldson, Cratylus, § 152 ; c synonymum ex levitate permutatum : ' Matthsei), small, slight (' schlecht ' and ' schlicht ' in German 1 Graff, in his Alt-hochdeutsche jSprachschatz, p. 1.38, ascribes in like manner to ' bose ' (' bose ') an original sense of weak, small, no- thing worth. NEW TESTAMENT. 171 are only different spellings of one and the same word), mediocre, of no account, worthless, bad; but still bad predominantly in the sense of worth- less ; thus cpavXr) avkrjTpk (Plato, Conv. 215 c) ; 6? (id. Gorg. 486 I) ; aToiros (Plutarch, De And. Poet. 12 ; Conj. Prcec. 48) ; kowos (id. Prcec. San. 14) ; a/cparrjs (id. Gryll. 8) ; avorjros (id. De Comm. not. 11). $aOXo9, as used in the !N\ T., has reached this its latest meaning ; and tcl (f>av\a irpd^avre^ are set over against tcl ayadci 7roir)6vov, and the like. It may then, I think, be said in conclusion, that as the Christian is elXifcpwrjs, this grace in him will exclude all double-mindedness, the divided heart (Jam. i. 8 ; iv. 8), the eye not single (Matt. vi. 22), all hypocrisies ; while, as he is /caOapb? rfj fcapSla, by this are excluded the fiido-fiara (2 Pet. ii. 20 ; cf. Tit. i. 18), the fio\vve^o? embraces the whole course of hostilities, ndxv n ° more than the actual encounter in arms of hostile forces, Pericles, dissuading the Athenians from giving way to the demands of the Spartans, admits that the Peloponnesians were a match for all the other Greeks together in a single battle, but refuses to allow that they would possess the same superiority in a war, at least against such as had their preparations of another kind (j^dxy f^ev yap NEAV TESTAMENT. 177 fjuia 7rpo? anravTas "EWrjvas Bvvarol TLeXoirovvrjaioL Kal oi %vfifjLa%9 teal r) Xoyofia^la BrjXol. Kal avrbs Be 6 iroirjTrjs per oXiya (prjo-L, pa^eo-o-apevco enreecrcn (ver. 304). Kal aWa>? Be payr) p,ev, avrrj r) roiv dvBpcov crvvetcrfioXr) ' 6 Be TroXejuLOS Kal eirl 7rapard%e(ov Kal p^aylpov Kaipov Xeyerac. Tittmann (De Synon. in JV. T. p. 66) : 6 Conveniunt igitur in eo quod dimicationem, con- tentionem, pugnam denotant, sed iroKep^o^ et 7roXe- puelv de pngna quae manibus fit proprie dicuntur, /jid^v autem et pud^eadav de qnaennque contentione, etiam animorum, etiamsi non ad verbera et csedes ITS SYNONYMS OF THE pervenerit. In illis igitur ipsa pugna cogitatur, in his sufticit cogitare de contentione, quam pugna plerunique sequitur.' § xxxvii. — tt&Oos, 67ridvfiia, opfjur}, opegis. Hados occurs three times in the ~N. T., once co- ordinated with eindv^ia (Col. iii. 5 ; for iradrj^aTa and iindvfilaL in like manner joined together see Gal. y. 24) ; once with iinOvfiia subordinated to it (irados liriQv^ia^, 1 Thess. iY. 5); the only other occasion of its use being at Rom. i. 26, where the irddif) aTifiias (" Yile affections," E. Y.) are lusts that dishonour those who indulge in them. The word belongs to the terminology of the Greek schools of ethical philosophy. Thus Cicero (Tusc. Quoest. iv. 5) : ' Quse Grseci iraQt) Yocant, nobis perturbationes appellari magis placet quam morbos ; ' on this preference see iii. 10 ; and pres- ently after he adopts Zeno's definition, c aversa a recta ratione, contra naturam, animi commotio ; ' and elsewhere (Offic. ii. 5), 'motus animi turbatus.' The exact definition of Zeno, as given by Diogenes Laertius, is as follows (vi£ 1. 63) : ev(T(,v i^ru^?)? fclvrjo-i?, rj opfjbrj ifkeovaCpvaa, Clement of Alexandria has NEW TESTAMENT. 179 this in his mind when, distinguishing between opfxr) and irado<>, he writes thus {Strom, ii. 13) : op fir) fzev ovv (popa hiavolas iiri tl rj dwo tov irdOos Be, 7r\eovd^ovaa oppbr), r) virepTeivovaa ra Kara tov Xo- dopas (2 Pet. i. 4) ; /mckt/jlov (2 Pet. ii. 20) ; dv0pco7T(i)v (1 Pet. ii. 2) ; -n}? aapKo^ (1 John ii. 16) ; and without a qualifying epithet (Rom. vii. 7; Jude 16, 18; Gen. xlix. 6; Ps. cv. 14). It is then, as Yitringa defines it, 'vitiosa ilia voluntatis affectio, qua fertur ad appetendum quae illicite usurpantur ; aut quae licite usurpantur, appetit draicTws ; ' this same evil sense being ascribed to it in such definitions as that of Clement of Alex- andria (Strom, ii. 20), etyeais zeal 6pe%is a\o rod iroielv. The Stoics explain it further as this ' motus animi,' which, if toward a thing is ope%i<$, if from it eKtckiais. When our Translators at Acts xiv. 5 render opfirj < assault/ they ascribe to the word more than it there con- tains. Manifestly there was no ' assault ' actually made on the house where Paul and Barnabas abode ; for in such a case it would have been very super- fluous for St. Luke to tell us that they " were ware" of it. It was not an assault, but a purpose and intention of assault : c Trieb,' ' Drang,' as Meyer gives it. And in the same way at Jam. iii. 4, the opfirj of the pilot is not the i impetus brachiorum,' but the ' studium et conatus voluntatis.' Compare for this use of opfii], Sophocles, Philoct. 237 ; Plu- 182 SYNONYMS OF THE tarch, De Red. Rat. And. 1 ; Prov. iii. 25 ; and the many passages in which it is joined with irpo- aipevis (Josephus, Antt. xix. 6. 3). But while the opfirj is thns oftentimes the hostile motion and spring toward an object, with a purpose of propelling and repelling it still further from it- self, as for example the opyJ) of the spear, of the assaulting host, the opef t? (from opiyeaOcu) is ever and always the reaching out after and toward an object, with a purpose of drawing that after which it reaches to itself, and making it its own. Yery commonly the word is used to express the appetite for food (Plutarch, De Frat. Am. 2 ; Symjp. vi. 2. 1) ; in the Definitions of Plato (414 o) philosophy is described as tt}? tcov ovtcov del e7r io-ttJ/jltis opeft?. After what vile enjoyments the heathen, as judged by St. Paul, are regarded as reaching out, is suf- ficiently manifest from the context of the one pas- sage in the "N. T. where the word occurs (Kom. i. 27 ; cf. Plutarch, Qucest. Nat. 21). § xxxviii. — tepo?, oo-ios, ayios, ayvos. *Iep6<; never in the ~N. T., and very seldom any- where else, expresses moral qualities. It is singu- lar how seldom the word occurs there, indeed only NEW TESTAMENT. 183 twice (1 Cor. ix. 13 ; 2 Tim. iii. 15) ; and, except in the Book of Maccabees, only once in the Septuagint (Josh. vi. 8) ; being in none of these cases employ- ed of persons, who alone are moral agents, but only of things. To persons the word is of rarest applica- tion, as for instance when in Plutarch the Indian gymnosophists are avSpes lepoi koX avrovofioi (De Alex. Fort. i. 10). 'Iepbs (tg3 0e&> avaredei/jievos, Suidas) answers very closely to the Latin ' sacer ' (' quidquid destinatum est diis sacrum vocatur '), to our ' sacred ' ; being that to which a certain inviola- bility is attached, thus Upbs koX acrvXos \6yos in Plutarch {De Gen. Soc. 24), this inviolable character being derived from its relations nearer or remoter to God ; deio? and te/36? being often joined together, as by Plato, Tim. 45 a. Tittmann : i In voce [epos proprie nihil aliud cogitatur, quam quod res quse- dam aut persona Deo sacra sit, nulla ingenii mo- rumque ratione habita ; imprimis quod sacris inser- vit.' Thus the lepev? is a sacred person, as serving at God's altar, the word not in the least implying that he is a holy one as well ; he may be a Hophni, a Caiaphas, an Alexander Borgia. The true anti- thesis to f'epo? is /3i/3rj\o<}, and, though not so per- fectly antithetic, /Mapos (2 Mace. v. 19). "Oglos is oftener grouped with $ikcuopovelv oaia (Strom, v. 1); is better denned as iiriracris aco^poavv^ by Suidas, ekevOepia nravros /ioXvct/jlov . vii. 60 ; and Dissen's, note), and to God Himself (1 John iii. 3). For these nobler uses of 071/0? in the Septuagint, where the word however is excessively rare as com- pared to 07^0?, see Ps. xi. 7 ; Prov. xx. 9. As there is no such impurity as fornication, being as it is defilement of the body and the spirit alike (1 Cor. vi. 18, 19) so 07Z/0? is an epithet predominantly em- ployed to express freedom from all impurity of this 190 SYNONYMS OF THE nature (Plutarch, Prce. Conj. 4A ; Qucest. Pom. 20 ; cf. Tit. ii. 5) ; while sometimes in a still more re- stricted sense it expresses not chastity merely, but virginity ; thus atctfparos yd/iav re ayvos (Plato, Legg. viii. 840 e), and for the same use of wyveia see Ignatius, ad Polyc. 5. If what has been said is correct, Joseph, when he was tempted to sin by his Egyptian mistress (Gen. xxxix. 7 — 12), approved himself ocrto?, in reveren- cing those everlasting sanctities of the marriage bond, which God had founded, and which he could not violate without sinning against God ; " How can I do this great wickedness and sin against God ? " aycos in that he separated himself from any unholy fellowship with his temptress, and ayvos in that he kept his body pure, and chaste, and unde- filed. § xxxix. — fywvr), \6yos. On these words, and on their relation to an- other, very much has been written by the Greek grammarians and natural philosophers (see Lersch, Sprachphilosophie der Alien, part iii. pp. 35, 45, and passim). Qoavrj, from (j)dco, w? ^>ayrl^ovaa to voovfxevov (Plutarch, Be Plac. Phil. 19), rendered in our NEW TESTAMENT. 191 Yersion < voice ' (Matt. ii. 8), < sound ' (John iii. 8), 6 noise ' (Kev. vi. 1), is distinguished from yfr6cf>o<;, in that it is the cry of a liwing creature (i} Be (povrj tyoou \Lev ecTTi (pcovr) drjp virb 6pfjbrj<; 7T€7r\r}yfAevo<;, avdpcoTrov Be ecrTLv evapOpos koX airo Biavoias eKirefiiroiievr). They transfer here to the (frcovrj what can only be constantly affirmed of the X070? ; indeed, whenever it sought to set the two in sharp antithesis with another, this, that the 66yyov, aXXa \6yov av tia r irTO[ievov avrco rw BwXov- p^evw tov voovvtos. IlXrjyrj yap rj ipcovrj irpoa-eoiKe tt}? ^jrv^i]^, oV cotcdv /3la rbv Xoyov elaBe^ofxevr}^, otclv aXkr)\oi<$ ivTvy^dvcofiev. r O Be tov KpeiTTovos vovva ^v^v, eiriOiyydvwv tg> vorjOevrt, 7r\r)yr)<; /at) BeofjLevrjv. The whole chapter is one of deepest theological interest ; the more so seeing that the great theologians of the early Church, above all Origen in the Greek (in Joan. torn. ii. § 26), and Augustine in the Latin, were very fond of transferring this antithesis of the (j^covy and the Xoyos to John the Baptist and his Lord, the first claiming for himself no more than to be " the voice of one crying in the wilderness " (John i. 23), the other emphatically declared to be the Word that was with God, and was God (John i. 1). In draw- ing out the relations between John and his Lord as expressed by these titles, the Yoice and the Word, * Yox ' and ( Yerbum,' (pcovrj and Xoyos, Augustine NEW TESTAMENT. 193 traces with a singular subtlety the manifold and profound fitnesses which lie in them for the setting forth of those relations. A word, he observes, is something even without a voice, for a word in the heart is as truly a word as after it is outspoken ; while a voice is nothing, a mere unmeaning sound, an empty cry, unless it be also the vehicle of a word. But when they are thus united, the voice in a manner goes before the word, for the sound strikes the ear before the sense is conveyed to the mind : yet while it thus goes before it in this act of com- munication, it is not really before it, but the con- trary. Thus, when we speak, the word in our hearts must precede the voice on our lips, which voice is yet the vehicle by which the word in us is transferred to and becomes also a word in another ; but this being accomplished, or rather in the very accomplishment of this, the voice has passed away, exists no more ; but the word which is planted now in the other's heart, as well as in ours, remains. All this Augustine transfers to the Lord and to his fore- runner. John is nothing without Jesus : Jesus just what he was before without John ; however to men the knowledge of Him may have come through John. John the first in time, and yet He who Game after, most truly having oeen before, ' him. John, so soon as he had accomplished his mission, passing away, ceasing, having no continuous signi- 194 SYNONYMS OF THE ficance for the Church of God ; but Jesus, of whom he had told, and to whom he witnessed, abiding for ever. {Serm. 293. § 3) : ' Johannes vox ad tempus, Christus verbum in principio seternum. Tolle ver- bum, quid est vox? Ubi nullus est intellectus, inanis est strepitus. Yox sine verbo aurem pulsat, cor non sedificat. Yerumtamen in ipso corde nos- tro ssdincando advertamus ordinem rerum. Si cogito quid dicam, jam verbum est in corde meo: sed loqui ad te volens, qusero quemadmodum sit etiam in corde tuo, quod jam est in meo. Hoc quserens quomodo ad te perveniat, et in corde tuo insideat verbum quod jam est in corde meo, assumo vocem, et assumta voce loquor tibi : sonus vocis dueit ad te intellectum verbi, et cum ad te duxit sonus vocis intellectum verbi, sonus quidem ipse pertransit, verbum autem quod ad te sonus per- duxit, jam est in corde tuo, nee recessit a meo.' Cf. Serm. 288. § 3 ; 289. § 3. § xl. — A.6709, fivdos. Aoyos is quite as often ' sermo ' as ' verbum,' a connected discourse as a single wwd. Indeed, as is familiar to many, there was once no little dis- cussion whether Aoyos in its very highest applica- NEW TESTAMENT. 195 tion of all (John i. 1) should not rather be rendered by the former word than by the latter. And, not to dwell on this exceptional and purely theological employment of X070?, it is frequently in the N. T. used to express that word which by supereminent right deserves the name, being, as it is, " the word of God " (Acts iv. 31), " the word of the truth " (2 Tim. ii. 15) ; thus at Luke i. 2 ; Jam. i. 22 ; Acts vi. 4. As employed in this sense, it may be brought into relations of likeness and unlikeness with fivdos, between which and X070? there was at one time but a very slight difference indeed, one however which grew ever wider, until in the end a great gulf has separated them each from the other. There are three distinctly marked stages through which fjuvdos has past ; although, as will often hap- pen, in passing into later meanings it has not alto- gether renounced its earlier. At the first there is nothing of the fabulous, still less of the false, in- volved in it. It stands on the same footing with prjfjba, £77-09, X070?, and as its connexion with fivco, /jLvico, fMv^co sufficiently indicates, must have sig- nified originally the word shut up in the mind, or muttered within the lips (see Creuzer, Symbolic vol. iv. p. 517) ; although of this there is no trace in any actual use ; for already in Homer it appears as the spoken word (II. xviii. 253), the tragic poets and as many as form their diction on Homer con- 196 SYNONYMS OF THE tinning so to employ it (thus iEschylus, Eumen. 582 ; Euripides, Phoen. 455), at a time when in Attic prose it had nearly or altogether exchanged this meaning for another. At the second stage of its progress fivdos is al- ready in a certain antithesis to \6709, although still employed in a respectful, often in a very honour- able sense. It is the mentally conceived as set over against the historically true. Not literal fact, it is often truer than the literal truth, involves a higher teaching; \6y05 yjrevSrfs, eltcovi^wv ttjv akrjOeiav (Suidas) ; though not aXrjdrjs, yet, as one has said, aXrjOeias e^cov e/Kpaatv. There is a Xoyos ev fjiv6(p (' Veritas quae in fabulse involucro latet,' as "Wytten- bach, Plutarch, vol. ii. pars 1, p. 406, gives it), which may have infinitely more value than much which is actual fact. Mvdos had already obtained this significance in Herodotus (ii. 45) and in Pin- dar (Olymp. i. 29) ; and Attic prose, as has been observed, hardly knows of any other (Plato, Gorg. 523 a ; Phoedo, 61 a ; Legg. 9. 872 d ; Plutarch, De Ser. Num. Yin. 18 ; Sym/p. i. 1. 4). But in a world like ours the fable easily degene- rates into the falsehood ; ' story,' ' tale,' and other words not a few, bear witness to the fact ; and at its third stage fiv0os is the fable, not any more al- lowing itself to be such, and at the same time un- dertaking to be, and often being, the vehicle of NEW TESTAMENT. 197 some higher truth ; it is now the lying fable with all its falsehood and all its pretended claims to be what it is not ; and this is the only sense of fivdos which the E". T. knows (in the Septuagint it occurs but once, Ecclus. xx. 19) ; thus we have there fivOot fteftrjXoL teal ypacoBeis (1 Tim. iv. 1) ; 'lovhatKoC (Tit. i. 14); ivo~ iv ylvercu, ro Be arj/jielov it a p a crvvijOeoav; and again by Theophylact (in Horn. xv. 19) : Bca^epec Be arj/jbeiov Kal re pas tc3 to fiev arjfjuelov iv rocs Kara, vcriv, olov to tov i/c yeveTTjs Tvdv7) fjiirya arj/jia, Bpd/ccov). Origen (in Joh. torn. xiii. § 60 ; in Rom. lib. x. § 12) long ago called attention to the fact that the name ripara is never in the N. T. applied to these works of wonder, ex- cept in connexion with some other name. They are often called arj^eca, often hvvajjLels, often ripara zeal arjixela, more than once ripara, arjpLela, koX Bv- vap,&<$, but never ripara alone. The observation was well worth the making ; for the fact which we 1 On the same similar group of synonymous words in the Latin, Augustine writes as follows {Be Civ. Dei, xxi. 8) : ' Monstra sane dicta perhibent a monstrando, quod aliquid significando demonstrant, et ostenta ad ostendendo, et portenta a portendendo, id est, prseosten- dendo, et prodigia quod porro dicant, id est, futura prasdicant.' Com- pare Cicero, Be Bivin. i. 42. 0* 202 SYNONYMS OF THE are thus bidden to note is indeed eminently charac- teristic of the miracles of the IS". T. ; namely, that a title, by which more than any other these might seem to hold on to the prodigies and portents of the heathen world, and to have something akin to them, should thus never be permitted to appear, except in the company of some other, necessarily suggesting higher thoughts about them. But the miracles are also o-7]/nela. Of aTj^elov Basil the Great (in .Esai. vii. § 198) furnishes us a good definition : eW arj/xelov irpa^fxa cfravepov, KeKpVfjL/JbivOV TWOS tCCbl CKpCLVOVS €V kcLVTO) T7]V Si]\a>- 6poL tributa sunt quge ex agris solvebantur, atque in ipsis speciebus fere pendebantur, id est in tritico, ordeo, vino et similibus. Vectigalia vero sunt quae Grsece dicun- tur reXr), quae a publicanis conducebantur et exi- gebantur, cum tributa a susceptoribus vel ab ap- paritoribus prsesidum ac prsefectorum exigi sole- rent. /3. icaXos [Luke xxi. 5], cbpalos. — Basil the Great (Ilb?n. in JPs. xliv.) : to copalov tov kclKov hia^epeu • on to pbev Qopalov XiyeTai to o-vpbireTfKfqpwiievov eh tov eTTLTrjheiov Kaipov Trpbs ttjv oltceiav ate[xr)v ' cos copato? o KapTrbs Trjpa$ airoXa- 206 SYNONYMS OF THE /3cov, teal eTriTrjheios eh aizoKavGiv ' kcCKqv Be ean to ev rfj avvdeaei twv fieKwv evdp/Moarov, eizavQovaav avr(p tt]v %obpi eypv. 7. 7rpeei\ei, Set. — Bengel (Gnomon, 1 Cor. xi. 10): ofatkei notat obligationem, Bel necessitatem ; illud morale est, hoc quasi physicum; ut in vernacula, wir sollen und miissen. e. TeOe/jLeXMOfiivos, eSpalos. — Bengel (lb. Col. i. 23) : re6efie\io)/ubivoL, affixi fundamento / eBpaloi, stabiles, firmi intus. Illud metaphoricum est, hoc magis proprium ; illud importat majorem respec- tum ad fundamentum quo sustentantur fideles ; sed e&paioL, stabiles, dicit internum robur, quod fideles ipsi habent; quemadmodum sedincium primo qui- dem fundamento recte solideque inniti, deinde vero NEW TESTAMENT. 207 sua etiam mole probe cohgerere et firmitcr consistere debet. f. TJn0vpi(TTr)<;, Karak&Xos. — Fritzsche {in Rom. i. 30) : ^rtOvpto-Tai sunt susurrones, h. e. clandestini delatores, qui ut inviso homini noceant quae ei probro sint crimina taDqnam in aurem alieni insu- surrant. Contra kotclKoXol omnes ii vocantur, qui quae alicujus famae obsint narrant, sermonibus cele- brant, divulgant maloque rumore aliquem differunt, sive id malo animo faciant ut noceant, sive temcre neque nisi garriendi libicline abrepti. Qui utrum- que vocabulmn ita discriminant, ut ^iOvpio-Tas clandestinos calumniatores, KaraXakows calumnia- tores qui propalam criminentur explicent, arctiori- bus quam fas est limitibus voc. fcaraXakos circum- scribunt, quum id yoc. calumniatorem nocendi cu- pidum sua vi non declaret. V' axpTjcrros, axpecos. — Tittmann : Omnino in voce a%/077<7TO9 non inest tantum notio negativa quam vocant (ov xptfa-ifiov), sed adjecta ut plerumque con- traria tov irovrjpov, quod non tantum nihil prodest, sed etiam damnum affert, molestum et damnosum est. Apud Xenopliontem, Hiero i. 27, 7^09 axprjcTTos non est inutilis, sed molestissimus, et in (Econom. viii. 4. Sed in voce axpetos per se nulla inest nota reprebensionis, tantum denotat rem aut 208 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. hominem quo non opus est, quo supersedere possu- rnus, unnothig, unentbehrlich [Thucydides, i. 84; ii. 6], quae ipsa tamen raro sine vituperatione di- cuntur. INDEX OF SYNONYMS. PAGE ay a&a)(TvvT] 58 ayios 182 dyvorjp.a 69 ayvos 182 dypafifxaros 150 ciboXos 23 a'ir-qpa 1 alcov 35 cikcikos 23 uKepaios 23 apdprrjpa 69 apaprla 69 dfx(pLJ3Xr](TTpou 64 civepos 116 dvdpafTTOKTOVOS 166 dvopLta 69 d.VO)(T) 11 duTi 163 dnXovs 23 dirokvTpoicns 134 dp-^aios 81 acmovdos 8 davv&eros . 8 a^peios 207 axprjOTTOs 207 (3a)p6s 87 PAGE yepatv 206 yveoais 124 derjcris 1 del 206 dlKTVOU 64 SoKCCD 154 doKipa£(ti 119 SoXdoo 52 bvvapts 198 idpalos 206 fiXiKpivfjs 172 euBoiov 198 €vrev£is 1 eTTiyvoicns 124 em&vpia 178 evxapicrria 1 ™xh 1 faov 159 rJTTTjpa 69 &avp.daLOV 198 drjpiov 159 6\fyis 20 210 INDEX. PAGE Spr/veco 66 QvaiatjTripiov 87 Idea 97 IdiaTTjs 150 lepos 182 iKeTTjpia 1 lka(rp.6s 134 Ktifiapos 172 kclivos 42 KdipOS 30 KaXos 205 KcmT]\ev(o 52 KaraXdXos 207 KaraXXayr] 134 K07TTG) 6Q Kocrpos 35 Kpanrakr) 49 Kwpos 49 XaXeco 129 XaXid 129 Xe'ya) 129 Xoyos 129, 190, 194 Xvireop.cn 66 p.aKpoQvpia 11 h-«xv i^ 6 pe&r) 49 p-erapeXopai 90 p,€TdVO€(0 90 p-opcpT] 97 p.vQos 194 veos 42 PAGE olvoCpXvyla 49 opegis 178 oppr) 178 oaios 182 oCpeLXei 206 ndQos 178 7raXaios 81 Tra.pdfia.o~is 69 Trapdbo^ov 198 TrapaKor) 69 Ttapavopia 69 Trapdnrcop-a 69 neipd^a) 119 TrevQeu 66 7TV€Vp,a 116 TTVOT) 116 iroXep-os 176 TTovrjpos 169 7TOTOS 49 np€aj3vTT]s 206 7Tpoepa> 34 (povevs 166 (popu Xpouos PAGE 205 124 190 53 30 yj/aXpos 142 yjsi&vpHTTrjs 207 ^vxtKos 106 &)Sj7 142 34 | copatos 205 II. INDEX OF OTHER WORDS. PAGE ddiKTjixa 72 ddiKia . . 72 Aer 116 alvos 146 CLKrjpaTas 25 aKrjpvKTOs . . 9 Altare 89 dvatcaivoco 47 dvaveooo 47 Angor 21 Angst 21 Animal 161 dvorjTos 126 Antic .. 85 Ara 89 Archeology 82 Astutus 127 dcrvveTos 126 Atonement 139 Aura 116 Benignitas 61 Bestia 161 Bitte 3 Bonitas 61 Canticum 146 PAGE Xprjaros 60 Oomissatio 50 Orapula 51 Deprecatio 2 diaXXayr) 137 dLKaios 184 doKi/xiov 119 elkiKpiveia 173 ifjLjxeXeia 81 erraivos 146 evpvxcapia 21 Figura 104 Figure 102 Forma 104 Formality 103 Forme 102 Fulsomeness 52 Glassen 113 Gebet 3 Hadiwist 94 ayveia 188 ayvi^oo 189 INDEX. 213 anXoi PAGE ^tijs 23 IXaaTTjpLov 139 Hymnus .. . . 145 Iniquitas 75 Intercession 3 Interpellate- 4 Jaculum 64 Katvokoyia 45 Ka7rrj\os 53 Kara(TTpr]vtdco 18 Laatitia 22 Legend 197 Little-ease 22 Longanimity 12 Lnctus 66 XvrpasTrjs 135 H-aX°H< al 1T6 /zera/ze'Aeta 90 p.€Tap.op(povpai 100 p-erdvota 90 p.era(rxr)p.aTi^(o 102 Monstrum 201 Mundus 37 ISTeuf 48 Nouveau 48 Novus 48 o'lvuxth 49 Opportunitas 33 Susurro PAGE 82 Patientia 13 Pecco, peccatum 75 Perse verantia 13 Petitio q cpiXoaocpia 124 0P«&> 132 TrXarvapos 22 TrXrjppeXeia 81 Poenitentia 94 noXepea) 176 Prsevaricatio 76 Precatio 2 Prodigium 200 Propitiation 140 Prudentia 125 Recens 48 Sagena 65 Sapientia 125 Seculum 40 <")/«* 201 Senecta 206 Senium 206 Sensual m Sicarius 167 Simplex 23 Signum 200 Spiritus lie enrovbrj 10 Stonen 113 Strenuus 18 (TVvQfjKT] 10 o-ucr^/xart^o) 101 207 214: INDEX. PAGE Tempus 30 Tento 123 &avfj.a 204 Tolerantia 14 Transfigure. 100 Transform 100 rpv(f>r) 19 Tugend 170 PAGE Ventus 116 Verbum 192 Vetus 85 Yox 192 Welt 41 Weralt 41 World 41 Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide Treatment Date: June 2005 PreservationTechnologies A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive Cranberry Township, PA 16066 (724)779-2111 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 014 383 703 8