Synonyms of the New Testament
Yüklə 3,52 Mb.
|
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 under different aspects. Witsius (De
diversis nominibus designari pro diversis quos habet as- pectibus. Preces nostrae deh nostram apud Deum testamur egestatem, nam de digere est; proseuxai<, quatenus vota nostra continent;
Deus se a nobis adiri patitur; e@nteucij enim est colloquium et congressus familiaris: eu]xaristi esse pro acceptis jam beneficiis, notius est quam ut moneri oportuit.' On the Hebrew correlatives to the several words of this group, see Vitringa, De Synagoga, iii. 2. 13. § LII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 193
i. 31; cf. Jer. iii. 8-11, where it is found several times, but not elsewhere in the Septuagint. There is the same solitary use of a@spondoj (2 Tim. iii. 3); for its right to a place in the text at Rom. i. 31 is with good reason con- tested, and the best critical editions omit it there. It is nowhere found in the Septuagint. The distinction between the two words, as used in Scripture, is not hard to draw;—I have said, as used in Scripture; because there may be a question whether a]su challenges there. Elsewhere often united with a[plou?j, with a@kratoj (Plutarch, De Comm. Not. 8), it has the pas- sive sense of 'not put together' or 'not rude up of several parts'; and in this sense evidently the Vulgate, which renders it ‘incompositus,’ has taken it; we have here the explanation of the ‘dissolute’ of the Rheims Version. But the a]su tive sense—are they who, being in covenant and treaty with others, refuse to abide by the e covenants and treaties: mh> e]mme torum haudquaquam tenaces' (Erasmus); ‘bundbruchig’ (not ‘unvertraglich,’ as Tittmann maintains); ‘covenant- breakers' (A. V.). The word is associate with a]sta Demosthenes, De Fals. Leg. 383. Worse than the dusdia 10), who are only hard to be reconciled, the a@spondoi are the absolutely irreconcileable (a@spondoi kai> a]kata Philo, Quis Rer. Div. Haer. 50); those who will not be
their enmity, or to listen to terms of accommodation; ‘implacabiles, qui semel offensi reconciliationem non. ad- midunt’ (Estius); ‘unversohnlich,’ ‘implacable’ (A. V.); 194 SYNONMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LII. the word is by Philo (De Mere. Mer. 4) joined to a]su and a]kooinw is frequent, indeed proverbial, in Greek (Demosthenes, De Coron. 79; Phil., De Praem. et Paen. 15; Lucian, Pisc. 36); in this connexion a]kh not duly announced by the fecial; but rather one in which what Virgil calls the ‘belli commercia’ are wholly sus- pended; no herald, no flag of truce, as we should now say, being allowed to pass between the parties, no terms of reconcilement listened to; such a war, for example, as that which the Carthaginians in the interval between the first and second Punic Wars waged with their revolted mercenaries. In the same sense we have elsewhere a@spon- doj ma a@speistoj ko field, Agamemnon, p. 285); a@spondoj e@xqra (Plutarch, Pericles, 30); a@spondoj qeo ]Asu who are such unrighteously interrupt; while a@spondoj presumes a state of war, which the a@spondoi, refuse to bring to an equitable close. It will follow that Calvin, who renders a@spondoi ‘foedifragi,' and a]su has exactly missed the force of both; Theodoret has done the same; who on Rom. i. 31 writes: a]sunqe a]koinw a]dew?j ta> sugkei each word that meaning which these interpreters have ascribed to the ether, will the right equivalents be ob- tained.
In agreement with what has been just said, and in con- firmation of it, is the distinction which Ammonius draws between sunqh being a further agreement, it may be a treaty of alliance, between those already on general terms of amity. Thus there was a sunqh § LIII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 195
that, with whatever territory any one of these began the war, with the same it should close it (Thucydides, v. 31). But spondh<, oftener in the plural, assumes war, of which the spondh< is the cessation; a merely temporary cessation, an armistice it may be (Homer, Il. ii. 341). It is true that a sunqh liance consequent on terms of peace; thus spondh< and sunqh are different things; in the spondh<; there is a cessation of the state of war, there is peace, or a all events truce; in the sunqh agreement or alliance.— Eu]su would be the exact opposite of a]su our lexicons; and we may presume is not found in any Greek author; but eu]sunqesi as a]sunqesi the same sense often in Polybius (ii. 3 ). § liii. makroqumi BETWEEN makroqumi at Col. i. 11 and in the same context 2 Cor. vi. 4, 6; 2 Tim. iii. 10; Jam. v. 10, 11; cf. Clement of Rome, 58; Ignatius, Ephes. 3, Chrysostom draws he following dis- tinction; that a man makroqumei?, who having power to avenge himself, yet refrains from th exercise of this power; while he u[pome bear, and only the alternative of a patient or impatient bearing, has grace to choose the former. Thus the faith- ful, he concludes, would commonly be called to exercise the former grace among themselves (1 Co vi. 7), the latter in their commerce with those that were without: makro- qumi ga de> ou{j ou] du 196 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LIII. will not endure a closer examination; for see decisively against it Heb. xii. 2, 3. He to whom u[pomonh< is there ascribed, bore, not certainly because He could not avoid bearing; for e might have summoned to his aid twelve legions of angels, if so He had willed (Matt. xxvi. 53). It may be well then to consider whether some more satis- factory distinction between these words cannot be drawn.
language. It occurs in the Septuagint, though neither there nor elsewhere exactly in the sense which in the N.T. it bears; thus at Isai. lvii. 15 it is rather a patient hold- ing out under trial than long-suffering under provocation, more, that is, the u[pomonh< with which we have presently to do; and compare Jer. xv. 15, I Macc. viii. 4; in neither of which places is its use that of the N. T.; and as little is it that of Plutarch (Lucul. 32); the long-suffering of men he prefers to express by a]necikaki Util. 9; cf. Epictetus, Enchir. 10), while for the grand long-suffering of God he has a noble word, one probably of his own coining, megalopa The Church-Latin rendered it by ‘longanimitas,’ which the Rheims Version sought to introduce into English in the shape of ‘longanimity.’ There is no reason why ‘longanimity’ should not have had the same success as ‘magnanimity’; but there is a fortune about words, as well as about books and this failed, notwithstanding that Jeremy Taylor and Bishop Hall allowed and employed it. 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; a]nexo pounds the meaning which he attaches to the word. Anger usually, but not universally, is the passion thus long held aloof the makro o]rgh xvi. 31); and set over against qumw § LIII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 197
a distance; for when the historian of the Maccabees de- scribes how the Romans had won the world by their policy and their patience’ (1 Macc. viii. 4) makroqumi there that Roman persistency which would never make peace under defeat. The true ant thesis to makroqumi that sense is o]cuqumi of the language, and employed by Euripides (Androm. 729), as o]cu But u[pomonh<,—basili>j tw?n a]retw?n Chrysostom calls it, —is that virtue which in heathen ethics would be called more often by the name of karteri together, Plutarch, Apoph. Lac. Ares. 2), or karte and which Clement of Alexandria, allowing in the track of some heathen moralists, describe as the knowledge of what things are to be borne and what are not (e]pith e]mmenete De Plac. Phil. iv. 23), being the Latin ‘perseverantia’ and ‘patientia’2 both in one, or, more accurately still, ‘tolerantia.’ ‘In this noble word u[pomonh< there always appears (in the N. T.) a background of a]ndrei Theaet. 177 b, where a]ndrikw?j u[pomei?nai is opposed to a]na the "sustinentia" (Vulg.), or eve the "patientia" (Clarom.), but the "perseverantia," the brave patience with which the Christian contends against the various hindrances, persecutions, and tempta dons that befal him in his conflict with the inward and outward world’ (Elli- cott, on I Thess. i. 3). It is, only springing froth a nobler
is a slight distinction: karteri lu po 2 These two Cicero (De Inven. ii. 54) thus defines and ditinguishes: ‘Patientia est honestatis aut utilitatis causa rerum arduarum ac difficilium voluntaria ac diuturna perpessio: perseverantia est in ratione bene con- siderata stabilis et perpetua permansiu;' compare Tusc. Disp. iv. 24, where he deals with ‘fortitudo'; and Augustine, Quaestes lxxxiii. qu. 31. 198 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LIII. root, the kratera> tlhmosu Cocceius (on Jam. i. 12) describes it well: ‘ [Upomonh< ver, satur in contemtu bonorum hujus mundi, et in forti sus- ceptione afflictionum cum gratiarum actione; imprimis autem in constantia fidei et caritatis, ut neutro modo quassari aut labefactari se patiatur, aut impediri quominus opus suum et laborem suum efficiat.' For some other definitions see the article ‘Geduld’ in Herzog's Real Encyclopeidie. We may proceed now to distinguish between these; and this distinction, I believe, will hold good wherever the words occur; namely, that makroqumi express patience in respect of persons, u[pomonh< in respect of things. The man makroqumei?, who, having to do with injurious person does not suffer himself easily to be pro- voked by them, or to blaze up into anger (2 Tim. iv. 2). The man u[pome up, and does not lose heart or courage (Rom. v. 3; 2 Cor. i. 6; cf. Clement of Rom,1 Ep. § 5). We should speak, therefore, of the makroqumi the u[pomonh< of Job (Jam. v. 11). Thus, while both graces are ascribed to the saints, only makroqumi of God; and there is a beautiful account of his makroqumi at Wisd. xii. 2 however the word itself does not there appear. Men may tempt and provoke Him, and He may and does display an infinite makroqumi (Exod. xxxiv. 6; Rom. ii. 4; I Pet. ii. 20); there may be a resistance to God in men, because He respects the wills which He has given them, even when those wills are fighting against Him. But there can be no resistance to God, nor burden upon Him, the Almighty, from things; therefore u[pomonh< can find no place in Him, nor is it, as Chrysostom rightly observes, properly ascribed to Him; (yet see Augustine, De Patientia, § I), for it need hardly be observed that when God is called qeo>j th?j u[pomonh?j (Rom. xv. 5), this does not mean, God whose own attribute u[po— § LIII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 199
saints (Tittmann, p. 194: [Qeo>j th?j u[pomonh?j, Deus qui largitur u[pomonh way as qeo>j xa of grace; qeo>j th?j ei]rh author of peace; and compare qeo>j th?j e]lpi 13), 'the God of hope.'
signifies, for the most part, a truce or suspension of arms, the Latin ‘indutiae.’ It is excellent rendered forbear- ance' on the two occasions of its occurrence in the N. T. (Rom. ii. 4; iii. 25), Between it any makroqumi draws the following distinction in his Commentary on the Romans (ii. 4)—the Greek original is lost:—‘Sustentatio [a]nxh<] a patientia [makroqumi qui infirmitate magis quam proposito delinquunt sustentari dicuntur; qui vero pertinaci mente velut exsultant in de- lictis suis, ferri patienter dicendi sunt.’ This does not seize very successfully the distinction, which is not one merely of degree. Rather the a]noxh< is temporary, tran- sient: we may say that, like our ‘truce,’ it asserts its own temporary, transient character; that after a certain lapse of time, and unless other conditions intervene, it will pass away. This, it may be urged, is true of p,atcpo-
xiii. 9). But as much does not lie in the word; we may conceive of a makroqumi little honour, which should never be exhausted; while (a]noxh< implies its own merely provisional character. Fritzsche (on Rom. ii. 4) distinguishes the words: [ h[ a]noxh< indul- gentiam notat qua, jus tuum non cont nuo exequutus, ei qui to laeserit spatium des ad resipiscendum; h[ makro- qumi non statim vindices, sed ei qui peccaverit poenitendi locum relinquas;' elsewhere (Rom. iii. 26) he draws the matter still better to a point: ‘Indulgentia [h[ a]noxh<] eo valet, ut 200 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LIV.
dones, quod clementiae est.' It is therefore most fitly used at Rom. iii. 26 in relation to the pa found place before the atoning death of Christ, as con- trasted with the a@fesij a[marti that death (see back, p. 114). 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 obedience (Luke xiii. 9; Rom. ii. 3-6). The words are distinguished, but the difference between them not very sharply defined, by Jeremy Taylor, in his first Sermon On the Mercy of the
dissolute, self-indulgent, prodigal living, but in each case with a difference.
9), strh?noj once (Rev. xviii. 3; cf. 2 Kin. xix. 28), and the compound katastrhnia is a word of the New or Middle Comedy, and is used by Lycophron, as quoted in Athenaeus (x. 420 b); by Sophilus (ib. 100 a); and Antiphanes (ib. iii. 127 d); but re- jected by the Greek purists—Phrynichus, indeed, affirm- ing that none but a madman would employ it, having trufa?n at his command (Lobeck, Phrynichus, p. 381). This last, which is thus so greatly preferred, is a word of solitary occurrence in the N. T. (Jam. v. 5); e]ntrufa?n (2 Pet. ii. 13) of the same; but belongs with trufh< (Luke vii. 25; 2 Pet. ii. 13) to the best age and most classical writers in the language. It will be found on closer in- spection that the words do different work, and that often- times one could not be employed in room of the other. § LIV. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 201
Hesychius), is properly the insolence of wealth, the wan- tonness and petulance from fulness of bread; something of the Latin ‘lascivire.’ There is nothing of sybaritic effeminacy in it; so far from this that Pape connects
ii. 2. 357; and there is ever the notion of strength, vigour, the German ‘Uebermuth,’ such as that displayed by the inhabitants of Sodom (Gen. xix. 4-9), implied in the word. On the other hand, effeminacy, brokenness of spirit through self-indulgence, is exactly the point from which trufh< and trufa?n (connected with qru and qru trufh< is linked with xlidh< (Philo, De Mere. Mer. 2); with polute Poet. 4); with r[aqumi s. v. ; and note the company which it keeps elsewhere ( Plato, 1 Alcib. 122 b); and the description of it which Clement of Alexandria gives (Strom. ii. 20) ti< ga>r e!teron h[ trufh<, h} filh h[dupa insolent as a secondary and rarer meaning; being then united with u[brij (Aristophanes, Ranae, 21, Strabo, vi. I);
compare the line of Menander: u[perh li into a good sense, and expresses the triumph and exulta- tion of the saints of God (Chrysostom, in Matt. Hom. 67, 668; Isai. lxvi. 11; Ezek. xxxiv. 13; xxxv. 9); so, too, e]ntrufa?n (Isai. lv. 2); while the garden of Eden is
Ecclus. xxi. 17; Ezek. xvi. 49; Amos vi. 4; the last two being instructive passages) is more nearly allied to trufa?n, with which at Jam. v. 5 it is associated, than with strhnia?n, but it brings in the further notion of wastefulness (=a]na-
202 SYNONMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LV. from spa [trufa?n deliciarum est, et exquisitae voluptatis, spatala?n luxuriae atque prodigalitatis.’ Tittmann: [trufa?n potius mollitiam vitae luxuriosae, spatala?n petulantiam et prodi- galitatem denotat.’ Theile, who takes them in the reverse order: ‘Componuntur tanquam antecedens et consequens; diffiuere et dila pidare, luxuriare et lascivire.' It will follow, if these distinctions have been rightly- drawn, that the spatala?n might properly be laid to the charge of the Prodigal, scattering his substance in riotous living (zw?n a]sw Man faring sumptuously every day (eu]faino when, waxing fat, he kicked (Deut. xxxii. 15). §lv. qli?yij, stenoxwri THESE words ware often joined together. Thus stenoxwri occurring only four times in the N. T., is on three of these associated with qli?yij, (Rom. ii. 9; viii. 35; 2 Cor. vi. 4; cf. Deut. xxviii. 55; Isai. viii. 22; xxx. 6). So too the verbs qli thesis at 2 Cor. iv. 8, qlibo and from the fact that, wherever in the N. T. the words occur together, stenoxwri conclude that, whatever be the difference of meaning,
They indeed express very nearly the same thing, but not under the same image. qli?yij (joined with ba at Ezek. xii. 18, and for which we have the form qlimmo Exod. 9; Deut. xxvi. 7) is properly pressure, ‘pres- sura,’ ‘tribulatio’ —which last word in Church-Latin, to which alone it belongs, had a metaphorical sense,—that which presses uison or burdens the spirit; I should have said ‘angor,’ the more that Cicero (Tusc. iv. 8) explains LV. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 203 this ‘aegritudo premens,' but that the connexion of ‘angor’ with ‘Angst,’ ‘enge’ (see Grimm, Worterbuch, s. v. Angst; and Max Muller, On the Science of Language, i 861, vol. i. p. 366), makes it better to reserve this for stenoxwri The proper meaning of stenoxwri room, confined space, ‘angustiae,’ and then the painfulness of which this is the occasion: a]pori; and stenoxwri occurring together, Isai. viii. 22. It is used literally by Thucydides, vii. 70: being sometimes exchanged for dus-
while in the Septuagint it expresses the straitness of a siege (Deut. xxviii. 53, 57.) It is once employed in a secondary and metaphorical sense in the 0. T. (stenoxwri, Wisd. v. 3); this being the only sense which it knows in the New. The fitness of this image is attested by the frequency with which on the other hand a state of joy is expressed in the Psalms and elsewhere as a bringing into a large room (platusmo Ecclus. xlvii. 12; Clement of Rome, I Ep. § 3; Origen, De Orat. 30; eu]ruxwri whether Aquinas intended an etymology or not, and most probably he did, he certainly uttered a truth, when he said, ‘laetitia est quasi latitia.’ 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 qli?yij. When Bajazet, vanquished by Tamerlane, was carried about by him in an iron cage, if indeed the story be true, this was stenoxwri do not know that any suffering there ensued from actual narrowness of room, we may more fitly adduce the oubli- ettes in which Louis XI. shut up his victims; or the ‘little- ease’1 by which, according to Lingard, the Roman Catho- 1 The word ‘little-ease’ is not in our Dictionaries, but grew in our early, English to a commonplace to express any place or condition of extreme discomfort.
so small dimensions and so constructed, that the prisoners could neither stand, walk, sit, nor lie in it at full length.’ For some consider Lions on the awful sense in which qli?yij and stenoxwri (Rom. ii. 9), be the portion of the lost, see Gerhard, Loc. Theoll. xxxi. 6. 5 § lvi. a[plou?j, a]ke 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 may rather prove, the same grace by aid of different image, and with only slightest shades of real difference.
Luke xi. 34); but a[plo always in St. Pau 's Epistles; and a[plw?j once (Jam. i. 5). It would be quite impossible to improve on ‘single’1 by which our Translators have rendered it, being as it is from
thus without folds or wrinkles; exactly opposed to the polu of Jo v. 13; compare ‘simplex’ (not ‘with- out folds’; but ‘one-folded,’ ‘semel,’ not ‘sine,’ lying in its first syllable, ‘einfaltig,’ see Donaldson, Varronianus, p. 390), which is its exact representative in Latin, and a word, like it, in honorable use. This notion of singleness, simplicity, absence of folds, which thus lies according to its etymology in a[plou?j, is also predominant in its use- 'animus alienus a versutia, fraude, simulatione, dolo malo, et studio nocendi aliis' (Suicer); cf. Herzog, Real-Encyclop.
That all this 1ies in the word is manifest from those 1 See a good note n Fritzsche, Commentary on the Romans, vol. iii. p. 64, denying that a[polo our Translators have so often given to it. § LVI. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 205 with which we find it associated, as a]lhqh Anab. ii. 6. 22; Plato, Legg. v. 738 e, and often); a]po (Theophrastus); gennai?oj, (Plato, Rep. 361 b); a@kratoj (Plutarch, De Comm. Not. 48); monoeidh 21); a]su Basil, Adv. Eunom. i. 23); mono Prov. 7); safh p. 750); a@kakoj (Diodorus Siculus, xiii. 76); u[gih mosthenes, Orat. xxxvii. 969). But it is still more appa- rent from those to which it is opposed; as poiki Theaet. 146 d); polueidh (Hipp. Min. 364 e); peplegme lou?j (ib.); e]pi po 1 Macc. i. 37) is in like manner associated with ei]likri (2 Cor. 12), with a]kaki words being used indiscriminately in the Septuagint to render the Hebrew which we translate now ‘integrity’ (Ps. vii. 8; Prov. xix. I); now ‘simplicity’ (2 Sam. xv. 11); again with megaloyuxi with a]gaqo (Plato, Rep. 404 e), to polutropi lact), to kakoh Plut. 1158). It may further be observed that MtA (Gen. xxv. 27), which the Septuagint renders a@plastoj, Aquila has rendered a[polou?j. As happens to at least one other word of this group, and to multitudes besides which ex- press the same grace, fro foolish simplicity, unworthy of the Christian, who with all his simplicity should be fro Rom. xvi. 19). It is so used by Basil the Great (Ep. 58); but nowhere in biblical Greek.
in the N. T. (Matt. x. 16; Rom. xvi. 19 ; Phil. ii. 15). A mistaken etymology, namely, that it was= a]ke derived from a] and ke 206 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LVI.
Bengel falls, who at Mat. x. 16 has this note: [ake sine cornu, ungula, dente, aculeo,’—has led our Translators on two of these occasions to render it ‘harmless.’ In each case, however they have put a more correct rendering, ‘simple’ (Mt. x. 16), 'sincere' (Phil. ii. 15), in the mar- gin. At Rom. xvi. 19 all is reversed, and ‘simple’ stands in the text, with ‘harmless’ in the margin. The funda- mental notion of a]ke same derivation from a] and kera foreign admixture: o[ mh> kekrame boon which Caligula granted to the Jews, but with harsh conditions a hexed, styles it a xa manifest reference to this its etymology (De Leg. ad Cai. 42): o!mwj, me with water is a]ke metal the same epithet is applied. The word is joined by Plato with a]blabh 268 b); by Plutarch with u[gih against taraktiko (I Ep. § 2) with ei]likrinh which is in its true and natural condition (Polybius, ii. 100. 4; Josephus, Antt. i. 2. 2) ‘integer’; in this bordering on
the predominant idea, and not, as here, freedom from dis- turbing elements. The word which we have next to consider, a@kakoj, appears only twice in the N. T. (Heb. vii. 26; Rom. xvi. 18). There are three stages in its history, two of which are sufficiently marked by its use in these two places; for the third we must seek elsewhere. Thus at Heb. vii. 26 the epithet challenges for Christ the Lord that absence of all evil which implies the presence of all good; being asso- ciated there with other noblest epithets. The Septuagint, LVI. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW ESTAMENT. 207 which knows all uses of a@kakoj, employs it sometimes in this highest sense: thus Job is described as a@nqrwpoj a@kakoj, a]lhqino ii. 3); while at Job viii. 20, the a@kakoj is opposed to the a]sebh Plutarch (Quom. in Virt. Prof. 7) to the sw at its next stage expresses the same absence of all harm, but now contemplated more negatively than positively: thus a]rni Virt. Mul. 23); a@kakoj kai> a]pra xlvii. 1164). The N. T. supplies no example of the word at this its second stage. The process by which it comes next to signify easily deceived, and then too easily de- ceived, and a]kaki (Aristotle, Rhet. 12), is not difficult to trace. He who himself means no evil to others, often times fears no evil from others. Conscious of truth in is own heart, he believes truth in the hearts of all: a noble quality, yet in a world like ours capable of being pushed too far, where, if in malice we are to be children, yet in understanding to be men (I Cor. xiv. 20); if "simple concerning evil," yet "wise unto that which is good" (Rom. vi. 19; cf. Jeremy Taylor's Sermon On Christian Simplicity, Works, Eden's edition, vol. iv. p. 609). The word, as employed Rom. xvi. 18, already indicates such a confidence as this be- ginning to degenerate into a credulous readiness to the being deceived and led away from the truth (qaumastikoi>,
12; Prov. i. 4 [where Solomon declares the object with which his Proverbs were written, i!na d&? a]ka For a somewhat contemptuous use of a@kakoj, see Plato, Timtaeus, 91 d, with Stallbaum's note; and Plutarch (Dem. i): th>n a]peiri<% tw?n kakw?n kallwpizome e]painou?sin [oi[ sofoi], a]ll ] a]belteri noian w$n mali 208 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LVI. words which the author of the Second Alcibiades puts into the mouth of Socrates (140 c): tou>j me>n plei?ston au]th?j [a]frosu after all it is in the mouth of the rogue Autolycus that Shakespeare put the words, ‘What a fool Honesty is, and Trust, his sworn brother, a very simple gentleman’ (Win- ter's Tale, act iv. sc. 3). The second and third among these meanings of a@kakoj are separated by so slight and vanishing a line, oftentimes. so run into one another, that it is not wonderful if some find rather two stages in the word's use than three; Basil the Great, for example, whose words are worth quoting (Hom. in Princ. Prov. II): dittw?j noou?men th>n a]kaki be seen that a@kakoj has in fact run the same course, and has the same moral history as xrhsto with which it is often joined (as by Diodorus Siculus, v. 66), ‘bon’ (thus Jean le Bon=l’etourdi), ‘bonhomie,’ ‘silly,’ ‘simple,’ ‘daft,’ ‘einfaltig,’ ‘gutig,’ and many more. The last word of this beautiful group, a@doloj, occurs only once in the N. T. (I Pet. ii. 2), and is there beauti- fully translated ‘sincere,’—"the sincere milk of the word; § LVII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 209 see the early English use of 'sincere' as unmixed, unadul- terated; and compare, for that ‘milk of the word’ which would not be ‘sincere’ 2 Cor. iv. 2. It does not appear in the Septuagint, nor in the Apocrypha, but a]do in the latter (Wisd. vii. 13). Plato joins it with u[gih viii. 355 e); Philemo with gnh Com. p. 843). It is difficult, indeed impossible, to vindi- cate an ethical province for this word on which other of the group have not encroached, or, indeed, preoccupied already. We can only regard it as setting forth the same excellent grace under another image, or on another side. Thus if the a@kakoj has nothing of the serpent's tooth, the a@doloj has nothing of the serpent's guile; if the absence of willingness to hurt, of the malice of or fallen nature, is predicated of the a@kakoj, the absence of its fraud and deceit is predicated of the a@doloj, the Nathanael "in whom is no guile" (John i. 48). And finall to sum up all, we may say, that as the a@kakoj (='innocens') has no harm- fulness in him, and the a@doloj, (=’sincerus’) no guile, so the a]ke a[plou?j (= ‘simplex ') no folds. § lvii. xro SEVERAL times in the N. T. but always in the plural, xro v. I); and not unfrequently in the Septuagint and the Apocrypha, Wisd. vii. 18; viii. 8 (both instructive passages); Dan. ii. 21; and in the singular, Eccles 1; Dan. vii. 12 (but in this last passage the reading is doubtful). Grotius (on Acts i. 7) conceives the difference between them to consist merely in the greater length of the xro pared with the kairoi<, and writes: [xro temporum spatia, ut anni; kairoi< minora, ut menses et dies.' Compare Bengel: [xro 210 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LVII.
altogether fails to reach the heart of the matter. Xro cession of moments (Matt. xxv. 19; Rev. x. 6; Heb. iv. 7); ai]w?noj ei]kw>n kinhth<, as Plato calls it (Tim. 37 d; compare Hooker, Eccles. Pol. v. 69); dia sewj, as Philo has it (De Mund. Op. 7). It is the German ‘Zeitraum,’ as distinguished from ‘Zeitpunkt;’ thus com- pare Demosthenes, 1357, where both the words occur; and Severianus (Suicer, Thes. s. v.): xro kai?roj eu]kairi from ‘temno,’ is time as it brings forth its several births; thus kairo>j qerismou? (Matt. xiii. 30); kairo>j su xi. 13); Christ died kata> kairo compare, as constituting a miniature essay on the word, Eccles. iii. 1–8: see Keil, in loco. Xro appear, embraces all possible kairoi<, and, being the larger, more inclusive term, may be often used where kairo have been equally suitable, though not the converse; thus
ness, of the time for the manifestation of the Son of God, where we should before have rather expected tou? kairou?, or tw?n kairw?n, his last phrase actually occurring at Ephes. i. 10. So, too, we may confidently say that the xro Thus it is possible to speak of the kairo>j xro Sophocles (Elect. 1292) does so:
(Suicer, Thes. s. v. xro kaq ] o[ pra xro kairo>j ou] xro ginome xro by Athenaeus, ix. 22, eu@kairoj xro From what has been said, it will appear that when the Apostles ask the Lord, "Wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" and He makes answer, "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons " (Acts i. 6, 7), ‘the times’ (xro spatia temporum,’ and these contemplated merely under the aspect of their duration, over which the Church's history should extend; but ‘the seasons’ (kairoi<) are the joints or articulations in these times, the critical epoch-making periods fore-ordained of God (kairoi> protetagme xvii. 26; cf. Augustine, Conf. xi. 13: ‘Deus operator temporum'); when all that has been slowly, and often without observation, ripening through long ages is mature and comes to the birth in grand decisive events, which constitute at once the close of one period and the com- mencement of another. Such, for example, was the passing away with a great noise of the old Jewish dispensation; such, again, the recognition of Christianity as the religion of the Roman Empire; such the conversion of the Germanic tribes settled within the limits of the Empire; and such again the conversion of those outside; such the great revival which went along with the first institution of the Mendicant Orders; such, by still better right, the Reforma- tion; such, above all others, the second coming of the Lord in glory (Dan. vii. 22). The Latin had no word by which adequately to render kairoi<. Augustine complains of this (Ep. cxcvii. 2): ‘Graece legitur xro hoc verbum tempora appellant, sive xro cum habeant haec duo inter se non negligendam differen- tiara: kairou non tamen quae in spatiorum voluminibu transeunt, sed qua in rebus ad aliquid opportunis vel importunis senti- 212 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LVIII. untur, sicut messis, vindemia, calor, frigus, pax, bellum, et si qua simi lia; xro vocant.' It will be seen that he does not recognize ‘tem- pestivitas,’ which, however, is used by Cicero. Bearing out this complaint of his, we find in the Vulgate the most various renderings of kairoi<, as often as it occurs in combi- nation with xro ‘tempora,’ which xro et momenta' (Acts 7; 1 Thess. v. I), ‘tempora et aetates’ (Dan. ii. 21), ‘tempora et saecula’ (Wisd. viii. 8); while a modern Latin commentator on the N. T. has ‘tempora et
urged that ‘tempora et opportunitates’ would fulfil all necessary conditions. Augustine has anticipated this suggestion, but only to demonstrate its insufficiency, on the ground tha ‘opportunitas’ (=’opportunum tempus’) is a convenient, favourable season (eu]kairi kairo all, the essential notion of it being that it is the critical nick of time; tut whether, as such, to make or to mar, effectually to help or effectually to hinder, the word deter- mines not at all (‘sive opportuna, sive importuna sint tempora, kairoi<, dicuntur'). At the same time it is oftener the former: kairo>j ga>r o!sper a]ndra distinction between xro Synonymik, vol. ii. p. 54 sqq. § lviii. fe ON the distinction between these words Lobeck (Phry- nichus, p. 585) h s the following remarks: ‘Inter fe fore et transitoriam, hoc autem actionis ejusdem continua- tionem significa; verbi causa a]ggeli Yüklə 3,52 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|