Synonyms of the New Testament

th>n i]sxu>n kai>

eu]toni du pnoh> w[j a}n au]ra< tij e]sti kai> a]na-

qumi. Against this may be urged,

that in one of the two places where pnoh<; occurs in the

N. T., namely Acts ii. 2, the epithet biai is attached 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 accounted for by the fact that on that occa-

sion it was necessary to reserve pneu?ma for the higher
¹ So quoted by Doderlein; but the edition of Seneca before me reads

‘modus.’

276 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LXXIII.
spiritual gift, whereof this pnoh< was the sign and symbol;

and it would have introduced a perplexing repetition to

have already employed pneu?ma here.

Pneu?ma is seldom used in the N. T.—indeed only at

John iii. 8; Heb. 7 (in this last place not certainly)—

for wind; but in the Septuagint often, as at Gen. viii. 1;

Ezek. xxxvii. 9; Eccles. xi. 5. The rendering of HUr in

this last passage by ‘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 remarkable

connexion between this saying of the Preacher and our

Lord's words to Nicodemus (John iii. 8). He, who ever

loves to move in the sphere and region of the 0. T., in

those words of his, "The wind bloweth where it listeth,"

takes up words of Ecclesiastes, "Thou knowest not what

is the way of the wind;" the Preacher having thus already

indicated of what higher mysteries these courses of the

winds, not to be traced by man, were the symbol. Pneu?ma,

is found often in the Septuagint in connexion with pnoh<,

but generally in a figurative sense (Job xxxiii. 4; Isai.

xlii. 5; lvii. 16; and at 2 Sam. xxii. 16: pnoh> pneu).

Of a@nemoj Aristotle (De Mund. 4) gives this account:

ou]de>n gan a]h>r plou>j r[e a@qrooj, o!stij

a!ma kai> pneu?ma le: we may compare Hippocrates:

a@nemoj ga xeu?ma. Like ‘ventus’ and

‘wind,’ a@nemoj is usually the strong, oftentimes the tem-

pestuous, wind (I Kin. xix. 11; Job i. 19; Matt. vii. 25;

John vi. 18; Acts xxvii. 14; Jam. iii. 4; Plutarch, Praec.

Conj. 12). It is interesting and instructive to observe that

our Lord, or rather the inspired reporter of his conversa-

tion with Nicodemus, which itself no doubt took place in

Aramaic, uses not a@nemoj, but pneu?ma, as has been noted

already, 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 fierce or violent, but all measured

§LXXIII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 277
in his operation; while on the other hand, when St. Paul

would describe men violently blown about and tempested

on a sea of error, he speaks of them as kludwnizo

perifero a]ne (Ephes. iv. 14;

cf. Jude 12 with 2 Pet. ii. 17).

Lai?lay is a word of uncertain derivation. It is probably

formed by reduplication, and is meant to be imitative in

sound of that which it designates. We meet it three

times in the N. T. (Mark iv. 37; Luke viii. 23; 2 Pet. ii.

17); oftener, but not often, in the Septuagint. It is our

‘squall’; but with something more formidable about it

than we commonly ascribe to the squall. Thus J. H. H.

Schmidt, who, in his Synonymik, vol. ii. p. 218 sqq., has a

very careful and full discussion on the whole group of

words having to do with wind and weather, and the phe-

nomena which these present, words in which the Greek

language, as might be expected, is singularly rich, writes

on lai?lay thus: ‘Die Alten verstanden darunter ganz

allgemein den unstaen, aus finsteren Gewolk hervor-

brechenden mit Regengussen verbundenen hin and her to-

benden Sturm.' And examples which he gives quite bear

out this statement; it is, as Hesychius explains it, a]ne

sustrofh> meq ] u[etou?: or as Suidas, who brings in the fur-

ther notion of darkness, met ] a]ne sko: the

constant association in Homer of the epithets kelainh< and

e]remnh< with lai?lay certainly implying that this feature

of it, namely the darkness which goes along with it,

should not be passed over (Il. xi. 747; xvi. 384; xx. 50.

qu, joined with gno whenever it occurs in the

Septuagint, namely at Deut. iv. 11; v. 22 Exod. x. 22,

is found in the N. T. only at Heb. xii. 18, and sounds there

rather as a reminiscence from the Septuagint, than a word

which the writer would have otherwise employed. Schmidt

is at much pains to distinguish it from the Homeric

a@ella, but with the difference between these we have

nothing to do. It is sufficient to say that in the qu,

278 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LXXIV.
which is often a natural phenomenon wilder and fiercer,

as it would seem, than the lai?lay itself, there is not

seldom the mingling in conflict of many opposing winds

(Homer, Od. v. 319; xii. 290), something of the turbulent

cyclone.
§ lxxiv. dokima.
THESE words occur not seldom together, as at 2 Cor. xiii.

5; Ps. xciv. 10 (at Heb. 9 the better reading is e]n doki-

masi<%); but notwithstanding that they are both in our

English Version rendered ‘prove’ (John vi. 6; Luke xiv.

19), both ‘try’ (Rev. ii. 2; 1 Cor. xiii. 13), both ‘examine’

(I Cor. xi. 28; 2 Cor. xiii. 5), they are not perfectly

synonymous. In dokima, which has four other render-

ings in our Version,—namely, ‘discern’ (Luke xii. 56);

‘like’ (Rom. i. 18); ‘approve’ (Rom. ii. 18); ‘allow’

(Rom. xiv. 22),—lies ever the notion of proving a thing

whether it be worthy to be received or not, being, as it is,

nearly connected with de. In classical Greek it is

the technical word for putting money to the dokimh< or

proof, by aid of the dokior test (Plato, Timaeus, 65 c;

Plutarch, Def. Orac. 21); that which endures this proof

being do, that which fails a]do, which words it

will be well to recollect are not, at least immediately, con-

nected with dokima, but with de. Resting on the

fact that this proving is through fire (I Cor. iii. 13), doki-

ma and purou?n are often found together (Ps. xcv. 9;

Jer. ix. 7). As employed in the N. T. dokima almost

always implies that the proof is victoriously surmounted,

the proved is also approved (2 Cor. viii. 8; I Thess. ii. 4;

I Tim. iii. 10), just as in English we speak of tried men

(=dedokimasme), meaning not merely those who have

been tested, but who have stood the test. It is then very

nearly equivalent to a]ciou?n (1 Thess. 4; cf. Plutarch,

Thes. 12). Sometimes the word will advance even a step

further, and signify not merely to approve the proved, but

§ LXXIV. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 279
to select or choose the approved (Xenophon, Anab. iii. 3.

12; cf. Rom. i. 28).

But on the dokimasi there follows for the most part not

merely a victorious coming out of the trial, but it is further

implied that the trial was itself made in the expectation

and hope that the issue would be such; at all events, with

no contrary hope or expectation. The ore is not thrown

into the fining pot—and this is the image which con-

tinually underlies the use of the word in the 0. T. (Zech.

xiii. 9; Prov. viii. 10; xvii. 3; xxvii. 21; Ps. lxv. 10;

Jer. ix. 7; Ecclus. 5; Wisd. 6; cf. 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 (Heb. xii. 5-11; 2 Macc.

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 inten-

tion 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 make evident that

they are all dross. As such, He is dokimasth>j tw?n kardiw?n,

(I Thess. ii. 4; Jer. xi. 20; Ps. xvi. 4); as such, Job could

say of Him, using another equivalent word, die

w!sper to> xrusi (xxiii. 10). To Him, as such, his people

pray, in words like "those of Abelard, expounding the sixth

petition of the Lord's Prayer, ‘Da ut per tentationem

probemur, non reprobemur.’ And here is the point of

divergence between dokima and peira, as will be

plain when the latter word has been a little considered.

This putting to the proof may have quite another in-

tention, as it may have quite another issue and end, than

such as have been just described; nay, it certainly will

have such in the case of the false-hearted, and those who

belong to God only in semblance and in show. Being

'proved' or tempted, they will appear to be what they

have always been; and this fact, though not overruling all

280 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LXXIV.

the uses of peira, does yet predominantly affect them.

Nothing in the word itself required that it should oftenest

signify a making trial with the intention and hope of

entangling the person tried in sin. Peira, connected

with ‘perior,’ ‘experior,’ pei, means properly no more

than to make an experience of (pei?ran lamba, Heb. xi.

29, 36); to pierce or search into (thus of the wicked it is

said, peira, ii. 25; cf. xii. 26; Ecclus.

xxxix. 4); or to attempt (Acts xvi. 7; xxiv. 6). It came

next to signify the trying intentionally, and with the pur-

pose of discovering what of good or evil, of power or weak-

ness, was in a person or thing (Matt. xvi. 1; xix. 3; xxii.

18; I Kin. x. i); or, where this was already known to the

trier, revealing the same to the tried themselves; as when

St. Paul addresses the Corinthians, e[autou>j peira,

"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 [e]kpeira]; 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 manifested his power. At this

stage, too, of the word's history and successive usages we

must arrest it, when we affirm of God that He tempts

men (Heb. xi. 17; cf. Gen. xxii. 1; Exod. xv. 25; Deut.

xiii. 3); in no other sense or intention can He do this

(Jam. i. 13); but because He does tempt in this sense

(gumnasin kai> a]nar]r[h, OEeumenius), and because

of the self-knowledge which may be won through these

temptations,—so that men may, and often do, come out

of them holier, humbler, stronger than they were when

they entered in,¹ James is able to say, "Count it all

¹ Augustine (Serm. lxxi. c. 10): ‘In eo quod dictum est, Deus ne-

minem tentat, non omni sed quodam tentationis modo Deus neminem

tentare intelligendus est: ne falsum sit illud quod scriptum est, Tentat

vos Dominus Deus vester [Deut. xiii. 3]; et ne Christum negemus Deum,

vat dicamus falsum Evangelium, ubi legimus quia interrogabat discipulum,

tentans eum [Joh. vi. 5]. Est enim tentatio adducens peccatum, qua.

Deus neminem tentat; et est tentatio probans fidem, qua et Deus tentage

§ LXXV. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 281

joy when ye fall into divers temptations" (i. 2; cf. ver. 12).

But the word itself enters on another stage of meaning.

The melancholy fact that men so often break down under

temptation gives to peira a predominant sense of

putting to the proof with the intention and the hope that

the ‘proved’ may not turn out ‘approved,’ but ‘repro-

bate’; may break down under the proof; and thus the

word is constantly applied to the solicitations and sug-

gestions of Satan (Matt. iv. i; 1 Cor. vii. 5; Rev. ii. 10),

which are always made with such a malicious hope, he

himself bearing the name of ‘The Tempter’ (Matt. iv. 3;

Thess. 5), and evermore revealing himself as such

(Gen. iii. 1, 4, 5; I Chron. xxi. I).

We may say then in conclusion, that while peira

may be used, but exceptionally, of God, dokima could

not be used of Satan, seeing that he never proves that he

may approve, nor tests that he may accept.
lxxv. sofi.
Sofi, and gnw?sij occur together, Dan. i. 4, 17.

They are all ascribed to God (fro not in the N. T.,

for Ephes. i. 8 is not in point); sofi and gnw?sij, Rom.

ix. 33; fro and sofi, Prov. iii. 19; Jer. x. 12. There

have been various attempts to divide to each its own

proper sphere of meaning. These, not always running

in exactly the same lines, have this in common, that in all

sofi, is recognized as expressing the highest and noblest;

being, as Clement of Alexandria has it (Paedag. ii. 2), qei

kai> a]nqrwpi adding, however,

elsewhere, as the Stoics had done before him, kai> tw?n tou

ai]ti (Strom. i. 5).¹ Augustine distinguishes between it
dignatur.' Cf. Serm. lvii. c. 9: Enarr. in Ps. lv. 1 ; Serm. ii. c. 3: 'Deus

tentat, ut doceat: diabolus tentat, ut decipiat.'

¹ On the relation of filosofi (th?j tw?n o@ntwn a]ei> e]pisth

Plato, Def. 414; o@recij th?j qei, Id., quoted by Diogenea

282 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § LXXV.
and gnw?sij as follows (De Div. Quaest. ii. qu. 2): ‘Haec ita

discerni solent, ut sapientia [sofi] pertineat ad intel-

lectum aeternorum, scientia [gnw?sij] vero ad ea quae sensi-

bus corporis experimur;' and for a much fuller discussion

to the same effect see De Trin. xii. 22-24; xiv. 3.

Very much the same distinction has been drawn between

sofi and fro: as by Philo, who defining fro as

the mean between craftiness and folly, me

mwri (Quod Deus Imm. 35), gives elsewhere this

distinction between it and sofi (De Praem. et Poen. 14):

sofin ga>r pro>j qerapei pro>j a]nqrw-

pi. This was indeed the familiar and

recognized distinction, as witness the words of Cicero (De

Off. ii. 43): ‘Princeps omnium virtutum est illa sapientia

quam sofi Graeci vocant. Prudentiam enim, quam

Graeci fro dicunt, aliam quandam intelligimus, quae

est rerum expetendarum, fugiendarumque scientia; illa

autem sapientia, quam principem dixi, rerum est divinarum

atque humanarum scientia' (cf. Tusc. iv. 26; Seneca, Ep.

85). In all this he is following in the steps of Aristotle,

who is careful above all to bring out the practical cha-

racter of fro, and to put it in sharp contrast with

su, which, as in as many words he teaches, is the

critical faculty. One acts, the other judges. This is his

account of fro (Ethic. Nic. vi. 5. 4): e!cij a]lhqh>j meta>

lo peri> ta> a]nqrw
kai> kaka<: and

again (Rhet. 9): e@stin a]reth> dianoi

esqai du a]gaqw?n kai> kakw?n tw?n ei]rhme

eu]daimoni. Not otherwise Aristo the Peripatetic (see

Plutarch, De Virt. Mor. 2): h[ a]reth> poihte

kai> mh> poihte: and see too ch. 5,

where he has some excellent words, discriminating between

Laertius, iii. 63; e]pith, Philo, De Cong. Erud. Grat. xiv.;

'stadium virtutis, sed per ipsam virtutem,' Seneca, Ep. 89. 7) to sofi

see Clement of Alexandria, Strom. i. 5. The word first appears in

Herodotus, i. 50; for a sketch of its history, see Ueberweg, p. i.

§ LXXV. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 283
these. It is plain from the references and quotations

just made that the Christian Fathers have drawn their

distinctions here from the schools of heathen philosophy,

with only such widening and deepening of meaning as

must necessarily follow when the ethical and philosophical

terms of a lower are assumed into the service of a higher;

thus compare Zeller, Philos. d. Griechen, iii. I. 222.

We may affirm with confidence that sofi is never in

Scripture ascribed to other than God or good men, except

in an ironical sense, and with the express addition, or sub-

audition, of tou? ko (1 Cor. i. 20), tou? ai]w?noj

tou(1 Cor. ii. 6), or some such words (2 Cor. 12);

nor are any of the children of this world called sofoi<,

except with this tacit or expressed irony (Luke x. 21);

being never more than the fa, of Rom.

i. 22. For, indeed, if sofi includes the striving after

the best ends as well as the using of the best means, is

mental excellence in its highest and fullest sense (cf.

Aristotle, Ethic. Nic. vi. 7. 3), there can be no wisdom dis-

joined from goodness, even as Plato had said long ago

(Menex. 19): pa?sa e]pisth th?j

a@llhj a]reth?j, panourgi: to which Ecclus.

xix. 20, 22, offers a fine parallel. So, too, the Socrates of

Xenophon (Mem. iii. 9) refuses to separate, or even by a

definition to distinguish, sofi from swfrosunh, from

dikaiosu, or indeed from any other virtue. It will follow

that the true antithesis to sofo is rather a]no