Synonyms of the New Testament

De Def. Orac. 16), and signi-

fying no more than one uninitiated, the a]norgi, and, as

such, arcendus a sacris; compare Plato, Symp. 218 b, where

it is joined with a]groi?koj. In like manner a@rtoi be

(1 Sam. xxi. 4) are simply unconsecrated common loaves,

as contrasted with the shew-bread which the high priest

declares to be holy. Not otherwise the Latin ‘profanes’

means no more than that which is left outside the te,

that which is ‘pro fano,’ and thus wanting the consecra-

tion which the te, or sanctuary, has obtained. We,

too, in English mean no more, when we distinguish be-

tween 'sacred' and 'profane' history, setting the one

over against the other. We do not imply thereby any

profaneness, positive and properly so called, in the latter,

but only that it is not what the former is, a history having

in the first place to do with the kingdom of God, and the

course of that kingdom. So too it fared at first with

be. It was only in later use that it came to be set

over against a!gioj (Ezek. xxii. 6) and o!sioj, to be joined

with a]no, (1 Tim, i. 9), with graw (iv. 7), with

a@nomoj (Ezek. ii. 25), that miarai> xei?rej (2 Macc. v. i6)

could within a few lines be changed for be, as an

adequate equivalent.

But in what relations, it may be asked, do be and

koino stand to one another? Before bringing the latter

into such questionable company it may be observed that we

have many pleasant and honourable uses koino and its

derivatives, koinwni and koinwniko, in the N. T.; thus

Jude 3; 2 Cor, xiii, 13; I Tim. vi. 18; while in heathen

Greek Socrates is by Dio Chrysostom happily charac-

terized as koino>j kai> fila, giving himself, that is,

no airs, and in nothing withdrawing himself from friendly

376 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § CI.
and familiar intercourse with his fellow-men; the word

being capable of finding a yet higher application to Him,

of whom some complained that He ate with publicans and

sinners (Matt. ix. 10, 11). He, too, in this sense, and in

the noblest aspect of the word, was koino. This, however,

only by the way. The employment with which we have

here to do of koino and koino in sacred things, and as equi-

valent to be and bebhlo, is exclusively Jewish Hel-

lenistic. One might claim for it to be restricted to the

N. T. alone, if it were not for two exceptional examples

(I Macc. i. 47, 62). Comparing Acts xxi. 28 and xxiv. 6,

we have curious implicit evidence that such an employ-

ment of koino was, at the time when the Acts were written,

unfamiliar, probably unknown, to the heathen. The

Jewish adversaries of St. Paul, when addressing their

Israelitish fellow-countrymen, make their charge against

him, kekoin a!gion to
(Acts xxi. 28); but when they

are bringing against him the same accusation, not now to

their Jewish fellow-countrymen, but to Felix, a heathen,

they change their word, and the charge runs, e]pei

babhlw?sai to> i[ero>n, (Acts xxiv. 6); the other language

would have been here out of keeping, might very likely

have been unintelligible.

Very noticeable is the manner in which koino in the

N. T. more and more encroaches on the province of mean-

ing which, first belonging exclusively to be, the two

came afterwards to divide between them, but with the re-

sult that koino gradually assumed to itself the larger

share, and was use the most often (Matt. vii. 2; Acts x.

14; Rom. xiv. 14 bis; Heb. x. 29). How this came to pass,

how be had, since the Septuagint was written, been

gradually pushed from its place, is not difficult to see. Koi-

no, which stepped into its room, more commended itself to

Jewish ears, as bringing out by contrast the e]klogh< of the

Jewish people as a lao>j periou, having no fellowship

with alight which was unclean. The less that there neces-

§ CII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 377
sarily lay in koinoj of defilement, the more strongly the

separation of Israel was brought out, hat would endure

no fellowship with things which had any commonness

about them. The ceremonially unclean was in fact more

and more breaking down the barrier which divided it from

that which was morally unclean; an doing away with

any distinction between them.
§ cii. mo.
Mo only occurs three times in the N. T., and al-

ways in closest sequence to ko

, (2 Co . xi. 27; I Thess.

ii. 9; 2 Thess. iii. 8). There can scarcely be a doubt of

its near connection with mo, this last, a Curtius suggests,

bung a dative plural, mo, which has let fall a letter,

and subsided into an adverb. The word, which does not

occur in Homer nor in Plato, is the homely everyday word

for that labour which, in one shape or another, is the

lot under the sun of all of the sinful children of Adam.

It has been suggested by some that the infinitely laborious

character of labour, the more or less of distress which is

inextricably bound up with it, and can of be escaped, is

hardly brought out in mo with the same emphasis as it

is in the other words which are here grouped with it, and

especially in po, and that a point if difference may

here be found between them; but this is hardly the case.

Phrases like the polu of Euripides (Phaen.

791), and they may be multiplied to any extent, do not

bear out this view.

Out of the four occasions on which ponoj occurs in the

N. T., three are found in the Apocalyise (xvi. 10, 11;

xxi. 4), and one in Colossians (iv. 13); for po must

there stand beyond all serious question, however there

may be no fewer than four other readings, po,

zh?loj, a]gw, which are competitors fo the place that

it occupies by a right better than them all. Po is

378 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § CII.
labour such as does not stop short of demanding the

whole strength of man; and this exerted to the utter-

most, if he is to accomplish the task which is before him

Thus in Homer war is constantly regarded as the po,

not of mortal warriors only, but immortal, of Ares him-

self; po, as Theognis (985) calls it; being joined

with dh?rij, (Il. xvii. 158) and with po (xvii. 718).

Po is the standing word by which the labours of Her-

cules are expresse; mo too they are sometimes, but

not nearly so often, called (Sophocles, Trach. 1080, 1150).

Po in Plato is joined with a]gw>n e@sxatoj (Phaedr.

247 b), with no244 d), with ki (2 Alcib. 142 b),

with zhmi(Rep. 65 b), in the LXX. with plhgh< (1 Kin.

xv. 23), with (Jer. vi. 7), with o]du (2 Chr. ix.

28). The cruel boy dage of the children of Israel in Egypt

is their po (Exod. ii. 11). It is nothing wonderful

that, signifying this, po should be expressly named as

having no place in the Heavenly City (Rev. xxi. 4).

Ko
is of much more frequent recurrence. It is

found some twenty times in the N. T., being not so much

the actual exertion which a man makes, as the lassitude

or weariness (see Pott, Etym. Forsch. vol. v. p. 80) which

follows on this straining of all his powers to the utmost.

It is well worth our while to note the frequent use which

is made of ko
and of the verb kopiw?, for the desig-

nating what are or ought to be the labours of the Chris-

tian ministry, containing as they do a word of warning

for all that are in it engaged (John iv. 38; Acts xx. 35

Col. i. 29; 2 Cor vi. 5; 1 Thess. iii. 5, and often).

It may be said in conclusion that ‘labour,’ ‘toil’ (or

perhaps ‘travail’) and ‘weariness,’ are the three words

which in English best reproduce the several Greek words,

mo, with which we here have to do.

§ CIII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 379

ciii. a@mwmoj, a@memptoj, a]ne
WORDS expressing severally absence of blemish, and absence

of blame, are very easily confounded, and the distinction

between them lost sight of; not to say that those which

bear one of these meanings easily acquire and make the

other their own. Take in proof the first in this group of

words—of which all have to do with the Christian life, and

what its character should be. We have in the rendering

of this a singular illustration of a shortcoming on the part

of bur Translators of 1611, which has been often noted, the

failure I mean upon their parts to render one Greek word by

a fixed correspondent word in the English. It is quite true

that this feat cannot always, or nearly always, be done; but

what constraining motive was there for six variations such

as these which are the lot of a!mwmoj on the six occasions

of its occurrence? At Ephes. i. 4 it appears as ‘without

blame'; at Col. i. 22., as unblameable; at Ephes. v. 27

as ‘without blemish’; at Heb. ix. 14, as ‘without spot’;

at Jude xxiv. as ‘faultless’; at Rev. xi . 15 as ‘without

fault.’ Of these the first and second have failed to seize

the exact force of the word. No such charge can be

brought against the other four; one may be happier than

another, but all are sufficiently correct. Inaccurate it

certainly is to render a@mwmoj ‘without blame,’ or ‘un-

blameable,’ seeing that mw?moj in later Hellenistic Greek

has travelled from the signifying of blame to the signifying

of that which is the subject of blame, blot, that is, or

spat, or blemish. @Amwmoj, a rare word in classical Greek,

but found in Herodotus (ii. 177), and in AEschylus (Persae,

185), in this way became the technical word to designate

the absence of anything amiss in a sacrifice, of anything

which would render it unworthy to be offered (Exod. xxix.

2; Num. vi. 14; Ezek. xliii. 22; Philo, De Vict. 2); or

380 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § CIII.
the sacrificing priest unworthy to offer it (1 Macc. iv.

42).

When joined with a@spiloj, for the designation of this

faultlessness, as it is joined at 1 Pet. i. 19, a@mwmoj, would

indicate the absence of internal blemish, a@spiloj that of

external spot. Already in the Septuagint it has been

transferred to the region of ethics, being of constant use

there to set forth the holy walking of the faithful (Ps.

cxviii. (cxix. E. V.) I; Prov. xi. 5), and even applied as

a title of honour to God Himself (Ps. xvii. 33). We find

it joined with o!sioj (Wisd. x. 15), and in the N. T. with

a]ne (Col i. 22), and with a!gioj (Ephes. i. 4; v.

27), and we may regard it as affirming a complete absence

of all fault or lemish on the part of that whereof it is

predicated.

But if a@mwmoj, is thus the ‘unblemished,’ a@memmptoj is

the ‘unblamed.’ There is a difference between the two

statements. Christ was a@mwmoj in that there was in Him

no spot or blemish, and He could say "Which of you

convinceth Me of sin?" but in strictness of speech He

was not a@memptoj nor is this epithet ever given to Him

in the N. T., seeing that He endured the contradiction of

sinners against himself, who slandered his footsteps and

laid to his charge things that He knew not. Nor, how-

ever they may strive after this, can the saints of God lay

to their account that they will certainly attain it, and that

fault, just or unjust, will not be found with them. The

a@mwmoj may be a@memptoj (for see Luke i. 6; Phil. ii. 15),

but he does not always prove so (I Pet. ii. 12, 15). At

the same time there is a constant tendency to regard the

‘inculpatus’ as s lso the ‘inculpabilis,’ so that in actual

usage there is a ontinual breaking down of the distinct

and several use of these words. The 0. T. uses of a@memptoj,

as Job xi. 4, sufficiently prove this.

]Ane which, like a]nepi, is in the N. T.

exclusively a word of St. Paul's, occurring five times in

§ CIII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 381
his Epistles, and nowhere else, is render 'unreprovable'

(Col. i. 22), 'blameless' (1 Cor. i. 8), I Tim. iii. 10; Tit. i.

6, 7). It is justly explained by Chrysostom as implying

not acquittal merely, but absence so much as of a charge

or accusation brought against him of whom it is affirmed.

It moves, like a@mwmoj, not in the subjective world of the

thoughts and estimates of men, but in the objective world

of facts. It is an epithet by Plutarch (De Cap. ex In.

Util. 5) accurately joined with a]loidocited above, namely I Tim. iii. 10, there is a manifest

allusion to a custom which still survives in our Ordinations,

at the opening of which the ordaining Bishop demands of

the faithful present whether they know any notable crime

or charge for the which those who have been presented

to him for Holy Orders ought not to be ordained; he

demands, in other words, whether they me a]ne

is, not merely unaccusable, but unaccused; not merely

free from any just charge, for that question is reserved, if

need be, for later investigation, but free from any charge

at all—the intention of this citation being, that if any

present had such charge to bring, the ordination should

not go forward until this had been duly sifted (I Tim.

iii. 10.

]Anepi

occurring once in Thucydides (v. 17) and once in Plato

(Phileb. 43 c), never in the Septuagint or the Apocrypha,

is found in company with kaPiscat. i. 8),

with a]ne ib. 46), with teSept.

Sap. Conv. 9), with a]diaPericles, cf. De Lib.

Ed. 7), is in our Version twice rendered ‘blameless’

(I Tim. iii. 2; v. 7), but once ‘irreprovable’ (vi. 14);

these three being the only occasions on which it is found

in the N. T. ‘Irreprehensible,’ a word not occurring in

our Authorized Version, but as old as it and older; and

on one of the above occasions, namely, at I Tim. iii. 2,

employed by the Rhemish, which had gotten it from the

382 SYNONYMS OF THE ATEW TESTAMENT. § CIV.

‘irreprehensibilis’ of the Vulgate, would be a nearer

translation, resting as it does on the same image as the

Greek; that, namely, of affording nothing which an ad-

versary could take hold of, on which he might ground

a charge: mh> pare

liast on Thucydides has it. At the same time ‘unrepre-

hended,’ if such a word might pass, would be a nearer

rendering still.

§ civ. braduIN a careful article which treats of these words, Schmidt

expresses in German the ultimate conclusions about them

whereat he has arrived; which it may be worth while to

repeat, as some instruction may be gotten from them.

bradu

by ‘langsam,’ with taxuOdys.

viii. 329), or with a]gxi

‘trage,’ with o]cu

identifies a]rgo

tig,’ and finds in e]nergo

Let us examine these words a little closer.

Bradu

brought into comparison, that no moral fault or blame is

necessarily involved in it; so far indeed from this, that

of the three occasions on which it is used in the N. T.,

two are in honour; for to be ‘slow’ to evil things, to rash

speaking, or to anger (Jam. i. 19, bis), is a grace, and not

the contrary. Elsewhere too bradu

as when Isocrates (i. 34) advises, to be ‘slow’ in planning

and swift in performing. Neither is it in dispraise of the

Spartans that Thucydides ascribes slowness of action

(bradu

He is in this doing no more than weighing in equal

scales, these against those, the more striking and more

excellent qualities of each (viii. 96).

§ CIV. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 383

Of nwboth times in the Epistle to the Hebrews (v. 11; vi. 12),

the etymology is uncertain; that from nh and w]qei?n,

which found favour once, failing to do so now. We

meet the word in good Attic Greek; thus in Plato (The-

aetet. 144 b); the form nwqh>j being the favourite in the

classical periods of the language, and nw

into common use till the times of the koinh> dia

It occurs but once in the Septuagint (Prov. xxii. 29),

nwqroka also once (Prov. xii. 8); twice in the Apo-

crypha, at Ecclus. xi. 13, and again at iv. 34, where

nw

juxtaposition.

There is a deeper, more inborn sluggishness implied in

nw

than in either of the other words of this group. The

bradu>j of to-day might become the w]ku>j of to-morrow;

the a]rgo>j might grow to e]nergo

tion of the nw

spirit; he is nw

The word is joined by Dionysius of Halicarnassus with

a]nai

by Schmidt, with baruDe Orac. Def.)

with duski

in others just named is only suggested, namely, a certain

awkwardness and unwieldliness of gait and demeanour, re-

presenting to the outward world a slowness and inaptitude

for activities of the mind which is within. On its second

appearance, Heb. vi. 12, the Vulgate happily renders it

by ‘segnis’; ‘sluggish,’ in place of the ‘slothful,’ which

now stands in our Version, would be an improvement.

Delitzsch, upon Heb. v. 11, sums up the force of nw

Schwer in Bewegung zu setzen, schwerfallig, trage, stumpf,

matt, lassig; while Pollux makes nw

a]mbu

the ass (Homer, Il. ii. 559).

384 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § CV.

]Argo12) and of thing. (Matt. xii. 36; xx. 3, 6), is joined in

the first of these places with a@karpoj. It is there ren-

dered ‘barren,’ a not very happy rendering, for which

‘idle’ might be substituted with advantage, seeing that

‘barren and unfruitful,’ as we read it now, constitute

a tautology which it would be well to get rid of. It is

joined by Plato a]melhRep. 421 d) and to deiloLegg.

x. 903), by Plutarch, as already had been done by St.

Peter, to a@karpoj (Poplic. 8); the verb a]rgei?n by De-

mosthenes to sxola

e]nergoCyrop. iii. 2. 19), against e]rga

by Sophocles (Ph i. 1. 97).

‘Slow’ (or ‘tardy’), ‘sluggish,’ and ‘idle’ would

severally represent the words of this group.
§ cv. dhmiourgo‘BUILDER and maker’ cannot be regarded as a very satis-

factory rendering of the texni dhmiourgo

10; ‘maker’ saying little more than ‘builder’ had said

already. The words, as we have them, were brought into

the text by Tyndale, and have kept their place in all the

Protestant translations since, while ‘craftyman and maker’

are in Wiclif, ‘artificer and builder’ in the Rheims. De-

litzsch traces this distinction between them, namely that

God, regarded as texni

the scheme and ground plan, if we might so speak, of the

Heavenly City. He is dhmiourgo

form and shape the divine idea or thought of his mind.

This distribution of meaning to the several words, which

is very much that of the Vulgate (‘artifex et conditor’),

and in modern times of Meyer (Bauktunstler and Werk-

meister), has its advantage, namely, that what is first,

so far as a first and last exist in the order of the work

§ CV. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 385

of God, is named first, the divine intention before the

divine realisation of the same; but it labours under this

serious defect, namely, that it assigns to texni

ing of which it is difficult, if not impossible, to find any

example. Assuredly it is no unworthy conception of God

to conceive of Him as the drawer of the ground-plan of

the Heavenly City; while the Epistle to the Hebrews, with

its relations to Philo, and through him to Plato, is

exactly where we might expect to meet it; but texni

in no other passage of its occurrence in the N. T. (they

are three, Acts xix. 24, 38; Rev. xviii. 22), nor yet in

the thirteen of the Septuagint and Apocrypha, gives the

slightest countenance to the ascription to it of such a

meaning; the same being as little traceable in the Greek

which lies outside of and beyond the sacred writings.

While therefore I believe that dhmiourgo

may and ought to be distinguished, I am unable to accept

this distinction.

But first let something be said concerning each of these

words. Dhmiourgo

cal purposes finely selected words, which constitute so

remarkable and unique a feature of the Epistle to the

Hebrews; and, in the matter of style, difference it so

much from the other Epistles. Beside its single occur-

rence there (Heb. xi. 10), it is to be found once in the

Apocrypha (2 Macc. iv. I); in the Septuagint not at all.

Its proper meaning, as it bears on its front, is ‘one

whose works stand forth to the public gaze’ (‘cujus

opificia publice prostant’). But this of the public cha-

racter of the works has dropt out of the word; and

'maker' or ‘author’—this on more or less of a grand

scale—is all which remains to it. It is a very favourite

word with Plato, and. of very various employment by

him. Thus rhetoric is the dhmiourgo

453 a); the sun, by its presence or absence, is the dhmi-

ourgoTim. 40 a); God is the dhmiourgo

386 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § CV.
of mortal men (compare Josephus, Antt. 7. I). There

is no hint in Holy Scripture of the adoption of the word

into the theosophic or philosophic speculations of the

age, nor any presentiment of the prominent part which it

should play in coming struggles, close at hand as were

some of these.

But if God, as He obtains the name of dhmiourgo

recognized as Maker of all things, path>r kai> poih

is called by Plutarch (De Fac. in Orbe Lun. 13), path>r kai>

dhmiourgo

found in connexion with it (thus Lucian, Hipp. 8; Philo,

Allea. Leg. iii. 32), brings further out what we may ven-

ture to call the artistic side of creation, that which justifies

Cicero in speaking of God as ‘artifex mundi,’ He mould-

ing and fashioning, in many and marvellous ways, the

materials which by a prior act of his will, prior, that

is, in our concept on of it, He has called into existence.

If dhmiourgopower of the divine

Creator, texniwisdom,

the infinite variety and beauty of the works of his hand;

‘how manifold are thy works; in wisdom hast Thou made

them all!' All the beauty of God's world owns Him for

its author, tou? ka

Apocrypha, whose further words I shall presently quote,

names Him. Bleak therefore (on Heb. xi. 10) is, as I

cannot doubt, nearer the mark when he says, Durch

texni

aber mit Beziehun auf das Kunstlerische in der Berei-

tung des Werkes; and he quotes Wisdom xiii. I: ou@te

toi?j e@rgoij prosxon texni

a certain inconvenience in taking the words, not as they

occur in the Epistle itself, but in a reverse order, dhmiourgo

first and texni

great as in retaining the order as we find it, and allowing

it to dominate our interpretation, as it appears to me that

Delitzsch has done.

§ CVI. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 387

§ cvi. a]stei?oj, w[rai?oj, kalo]Astei?oj occurs twice in the N. T. (Acts vii. 20, and Heb.

xi. 23), and on both occasions it is an epithet applied to

Moses; having been drawn from Exod. ii. 2, where the

Septuagint uses this word as an equivalent to the Hebrew

bOF; compare Philo, De Vita, Mos. i. 3. The t&? qe&?,

which at Acts vii. 20 is added to a]stei?oj has not a little

perplexed interpreters, as is evident from the various

renderings which the expression has found. I will enu-

merate a few: ‘gratus Deo’ (Vulg.); ‘loved of God’

(Wiclif); ‘a proper child in the sight of God’ (Tyndale);

‘acceptable unto God’ (Cranmer, Geneva, and Rheims);

‘exceeding fair’ (Authorized Version); this last ren-

dering, which makes the t&? qe&? a heightening of the

high quality of the thing which is thus extolled, being

probably the nearest to the truth; see for a like idiom

Jonah iii. 3: po

proper child’ is the rendering of all our English Versions,

nor would it be easy to improve upon it; though 'proper,'

so used, is a little out of date.

The a@stin which lies in a]stei?oj, and which constitutes

its base, tells us at once what is the point from which it

starts, and explains the successive changes through which

it passes. He first of all is a]stei?oj who has been born

and bred, or at all events reared, in the city; who in this

way is ‘urban.’ But the ‘urban’ may be assumed also

to be ‘urbane’; so testifying to the gracious civilizing

influences of the life among men, and converse with men,

which he has enjoyed; and thus a]stei?oj obtains a certain

ethical tinge, which is real, though it may not be very

profound; he who is such being implicitly contrasted with

the a]groi?koj, the churl, the boor, the villein. Thus in an in-

structive passage in Xenophon (Cyrop. ii. 2. 12) the a]stei?oi

are described as also eu]xa

388 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § CVI.

gracious, according to the humbler uses of that word.

It is next assumed that the higher culture which he

that is bred in cities enjoys, will display itself in the very

aspect that he wears, which will be fashioned and moulded

under humanizing influences; and thus the a]stei?oj may

be assumed as fair to look on and comely, a suggestion of

beauty, not indeed generally of a high character, finding

its way very distinctly into the word; thus Plutarch, De

Soc. Gen. 584 c, contrasts the a]stei?oj and the ai]sxroj, or

positively ugly; and thus too Judith is a]stei?a (Judith

ix. 23) =to the eu]pro

[Wrai?oj is a word of constant recurrence in the Septu-

agint, representing there a large variety of Hebrew words.

In the N. T. it appears only four times (Matt. xxiii. 27;

Acts iii. 2, 10; Rom. x. 15). The steps by which it ob-

tains the meaning of beautiful, such as in all these pas-

sages it possesses, are few and not difficult to trace. All

which in this world it lives submitted to the laws of growth

and decay, has its 'hour' or w!ra, the period, that is, when

it makes fairest show of whatever of grace or beauty it

may own. This w!ra, being thus the turning point of its

existence, the time when it is at its loveliest and best, yields

w[rai?oj with the sense first of timely; thus w[rai?oj qa

in Xenophon, a timely because honourable death; and then

of beautiful (in voller Entwicklung oder Blute stehend,

Schmidt).

It will be seen that a]stei?oj and w[rai?oj arrive at one

and the same goal; so that ‘fair,’ or ‘proper,’ or ‘beau-

tiful,’ might be the rendering of either or of both; but

that they arrive at it by paths wholly different, reposing as

they do on wholly different images. One belongs to art, the

other to nature. In a]stei?oj the notions of neatness, sym-

metry, elegance, an so finally more or less of beauty, are

bound up. It is indeed generally something small which

a]stei?oj implies, even when it is something proposed for our

admiration. Thus Aristotle, while he admits that small

§ CVI. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 389
persons (oi[ mikroi<) may be a]stei?oi and su

and well shaped, refuses them the title of kaloi<. [Wrai?oj

is different. There speaks out in it the sense that for all

things which belong to this passing world, the grace of the

fashion of them perishes, but that they have their ‘hour,’

however brief, the season of their highest perfection.

The higher moral aspects and used of kalo

interesting to note, above all, the perfect freedom with

which it moves alike in the world of beauty and in that

of goodness, claiming both for its own; but of this we

are not here to speak. It is only as designating physical

aspects of beauty that it could be brought into comparison

with w[rai?oj here. Kalo

descent as the German ‘heil,’ as our own ‘whole’ (Curtius,

Grundzuge, 130), as we first know it, expresses beauty, and

beauty contemplated from a point of view especially dear

to the Greek mind, namely as the harmonious complete-

ness, the balance, proportion, and measure of all the parts

one with another of that to which his epithet is given.

Basil the Great (Hom. in Ps. xliv.) brings this out excel-

lently well as he draws the line between it and w[rai?oj

(Hom. in, Ps. xliv): To> w[rai?on, he says, tou? kalou? diafe

o!ti to> me>n w[rai?on le sumpeplhrwmen e]pi-

thn pro>j th>n oi]keij

th?j a]mpen oi]kei

th?j tou? e@touj w!raj a]polabw e]pith

kalo>n de< e]sti to> e]n t^? sunqe

e]panqou?san au]t& ? th>n xaTim.

365; Rep. x. 601 b, and Stalibaum's note.

390 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § CVII.

§ cvii.
[This concluding article contains contributions toward the illustration of

some other synonyms, for a fuller dealing with which I have not

found place in this volume.]
1. e]lpiEnchirid. 8): ‘Est Hague

fides et malarum rerum et bonarum: quia et bona cre-

duntur et mala; et hoc fide bona, non mala. Est etiam

fides et praeteritarum rerum, et praesentium, et futurarum.

Credimus enim Christum mortuum; quod jam praeteriit

credimus sedere ad dexteram Patris; quod nunc est: cre-

dimus venturum ad judicandum; quod futurum est. Item

fides et suarum rerum est et alienarum. Nam et se quisque

credit aliquando esse coepisse, nec fuisse utique sempi-

ternum; et alios, atque alia; nec solum de aliis hominibus

multa, quae ad religionem pertinent, verum etiam de

angelis credimus. Spes autem non nisi bonarum rerum est,

nec nisi futurarum, et ad eum pertinentium qui earum

spem gerere perhibetur. Quae cum ita sint, propter has

caussas distinguend erit fides ab spe, sicut vocabulo, ita

et rationabili differentia. Nam quod adtinet ad non videre

sive quae creduntur, sive quae sperantur, fidei speique com-

mune est.' Compare Bishop O'Brien, Nature and Effects

of Faith, p. 304.

2. presbuEnarr. in Ps. lxx.

18): ‘Senecta et senium discernuntur a Graecis. Gravitas

enim post juventute aliud nomen habet apud Graecos, et

post ipsam gravitate veniens ultima aetas aliud nomen

habet; nam presbu

Quia autem in Latina lingua duorum istorum nominum

distinctio deficit, de senectute ambo sunt positae, senecta

et senium. Scitis autem esse duas aetates.' Cf. Quaest. in

Gen. i. 70.

§ CVII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 391

3. frein Joh. Evang. Tract. 15):

‘Omnis puteus [fre

puteus. Ubi enim aqua de terra manat et usui praebetur

haurientibus, fons dicitur; sed si in promptu et superficie

sit, fons tantum dicitur si autem in alto et profundo sit,

ita puteus vocatur, ut fontis nomen iron amittat.’

4. sxiCon. Creston. Don. ii.

7): ‘Schisma est recens congregationis ex aliqua sen-

tentiarum diversitate dissensio; haeresis autem schisma

inveteratum.’ Cf. Jerome (in Ep. ad Tit. iii. 10): ‘Inter

haeresim et schisma hoc esse arbitrantur, quod haeresis

perversum dogma habeat; schisma propter episcopalem

dissensionem ab Ecclesia separetur; quod quidem in prin-

cipio aliqua, ex parte intelligi queat. Caeterum nullum

schisma non sibi aliquam confingit haeresim, ut recte ab

ecclesia recessisse videatur.' And very admirably Nevin

(Antichrist, or the Spirit of Sectarianism): 'Heresy and

schism are not indeed the same, but yet they constitute

merely the different manifestations of one and the same

disease. Heresy is theoretic schism; schism is practical

heresy. They continually run into one another, and mu-

tually complete each other. Every heresy is in principle

schismatic; every schism is in its innermost constitution

heretical.'

5. makroqumimakroqumi t^? graf^? dia-

fen me>n makron o@nta e]n fronh

o]ce sxol^? e]pitiqen prosh

ptain de> pra?on a]fie

ptain de> pra?on a]fie
6. a]namnhsij, u[poe@lq^ ei]j mnh o!tan u[f ]

e[te

392 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § CVII.

7. foagris solvebantur, at que in ipsis speciebus fere pendebantur,

id est in tritico, ordeo, vino et similibus. Vectigalia vero

sunt quae Graece dicuntur te

bantur et exigebantur, cum tributa a suceptoribus vel ab

apparitoribus praesidum ac praefectorum exigi solerent.'

8. tu
Praef. ad Ps. xlv.):

‘Typus est cum factum aliquod a Vetere Testamento ac-

cersitur, idque extenditur praesignificasse atque adumbrasse

aliquid gestum vel gerendum in Novo Testamento; allegoria

vero cum aliquid sive ex Vetere sive ex Novo Testamento

exponitur atque accommodatur novo sensu ad spiritualem

doctrinam, sive vitae institutionem.'
9. loidoreComm. in N. T.;

1 Cor. iv. 12): ‘Notandum est discrimen inter haec duo

participia, loidorou blasfhmou

dori
hominem, sed aoriter etiam mordet, famamque aperta con-

tumelia sugillat, non dubium est quih lodorein sit male-

dicto tanquam aculeo vulnerare hominem; proinde reddidi

maledictis lacessiti. Blasfhmi
quispiam graviter et atrociter proscinditur.’
10. o]feiGnomon, 1 Cor. xi. 10)

[ofei

est, hoc quasi physicum; ut in vernacula, wir sollen and

mussen.’
11. prau~j, h[suIb. I Pet. iii. 4): ‘Man-

suetus [prau~j], qui non turbat: tranquillus [h[su

turbas aliorum, superiorum, inferiorum, aequalium, fert

placide. . . . Adde mansuetus in affectibus: tranquillus in

verbis, vultu, actu.’

§ CVII. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 393
12. teqemeliwmeIb. Col. i. 23):

‘teqemeliowmeaffixi fundamento; e[drai ?oi, stabiles, firmi

intus. Illud metaphoricum est, hoc magis proprium:

illud importat majorem respectum ad fundamentum quo

sustentantur fideles; sed e]drai?oi, stabiles, dicit internum

robur, quod fideles ipsi habent; quemamodem aedificium

primo quidem fundamento recte solid que inniti, deinde

vero sua etiam mole probe cohaerere et firmiter consistere

debet.'
13. qnhtoOpusc. Theoll. p. 195):

‘nekro

animae facta est: qnhto

14. e@leoj, oi]ktirmo

significari vocabulis o[ oi]ktirmo

o[ e@leoj et e]leei?n recte veteres doctores vulgo statuunt.

Illis enim cum i!laoj, i[la

oi#ktoj cognatio est. [O e@leoj aegritudinem benevole ex

miseria alterius haustam denotat, et commune vocabulum

est ibi collocandum, ubi misericordiae notio in genere

enuntianda est; o[ oi]ktirmo

seria susceptam, quae fletum tibi et ejulatum excitet, h. e.

magnam ex alterius miseria aegritudinem, miserationem

declarat.'

15. yiquristhin Rom. i. 30):

[yiquristai< sunt susurrones, h. e. clandestini delatores,

qui ut inviso homini noceant quae ei probro sint crimina

tanquam in aurem alicui insusurrant. Contra katala

omnes ii vocantur, qui quae alicujus famae obsint narrant,

sermonibus celebrant, divulgant maloque rumore aliquem

differunt, sive id. malo animo faciant, ut noceant, sive

temere neque nisi garriendi libidine abrepti. Qui utrum-

que vocabulum ita discriminant, ut yiquristaclandestinos
394 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § CVII.
calumniatores, katalapropalam

criminentur explicent, arctioribus quam par est limitibus

voc. katala

niatorem nocendi cupidum sua vi non declaret.'

16. a@xrhstoj, a]xrei?oj.—Tittmann: ‘Omnino in voce a@-

xrhstoj non ines tantum notio negativa quam vocant (ou]

xrh

quod non tantum nihil prodest, sed etiam damnum affert,

molestum et da nosum est. Apud Xenophontem, Hiero,

i. 27, ga

in OEconom. viii. Sed in voce a]xrei?oj per se nulla inest

nota reprehensionis, tantum denotatrem aut hominem quo

non opus est, quo supersedere possumus, unnothig, unent-

behrlich [Thucydides, i. 84; ii. 6], quae ipsa tamen raro

sine vituperation dicuntur.'
17. nomiko

Matt. xxii. 85): [nomiko

tw?n noLexicon; Plutarch, Sull. 36); ein

Mosaischer Jurist; nomodida

chen als Lehrer; grammateu

nomiko

die Auslegung der heiligen Schrift ist.'

INDEX OF SYNONYMS.

PAGE PAGE

a]gaqwsu

a]gapa

a!gioj 331 a]nakai

a]gno