A Plea for the Received Greek Text: And for the Authorized Version of the ...

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http : //books . google . com/

zr3
7

L I It K .4 R T

'•I IMV:

Divinity School,

Kkckivkii Nov. i.^.'t^

F«OM THB LIBRARV UK EXRA AHUOT,

II

■^4

A. ^T" '

THE RECEIVED GREEK TEXT

AND FOR

THE AUTHORISED VERSION

OF

C&e iSeto Cestament,

IN ANSWIB TO

SOMK OF THE DEAN OF CANTEBBUBY'S CBITICISMS ON BOTH.

THE REV. S. C. MALAN, M.A.

▼IGAS OF BBOADwHTdsOB.

LONDON:

HATCHARDS, 187 PICCADILLY, W.

1869.

LONDON:

ttTKAWOrWATB AJTD WaLDSN, PBINTEKS,

28 Castis St Leieester Sq

PREFACE.

To hear some people talk, one really would think
wisdom and knowledge had come with them into
the world ; until, whether from conceit on their
part or from their " scientific " discoveries, we
shall soon have nothing left either of the old
world or of our old faith. Once, indeed, even
heathens, Ik Atoc vixovro, claimed their descent
from Heaven — for, said they, row yap kol ylvoc
efTfiiiv, we are his kin ; though Christians now
derive it from brutes ; while language, which of
old was, in theory, said to be Trpo^opiKog \6yo^,
' outspoken reason,' in token of its divine origin,
is now discovered practically to be nothing but
the development of the two mighty roots Bau-
Wau, which in time overspread the earth. Such
profound lore cannot, of course, be gainsaid ; but
everything, from the creation of the world and
of man, to the laws of etymology and the rules of
syntax, is now settled accordingly.

ly PREFACE.

No wonder, then, if, under such circomstancesy
both the Receiyed Ghreek Text and the Authorised
English Version of the New Testament — ^monu*
ments of learning of the past — should lately have
had a hard life of it. The Greek Text especially ;
because, being read by comparatively few, any
one who takes into his head ''to construct^' a
text, may try his hand at it with a certain
degree of impimity ; so that, as things are at pre-
sent, we have almost as many texts as there are
critics ; to the great hindranciB and confusion of
us all. Perhaps is it that '' to construct a text,"
after the manner of some men, is on the whole
easier than to study and explain the one already
existing, which, for the last two or three him-
dred years, has been l^oSiov iv iravrl xpovc^ rrig
K^rig,^ the provision by the way and trusty guide
of thousands on their life-long journey to hea-
ven.

The handling of the Authorised Version, how-
ever, is not so readily done as " the construction"
of a Greek text. Written as the English BiUe
is, in a style especially chaste and vigorous, that
blends Saxon manliness with cadence and melody,
* S. Cyril of Jerusalem, Oatech. v.

PREFACE. V

in greater harmony, perhaps, than any other
EngKsh book written before or since — it first
formed the language of the nation, and then
struck root so deep in the affections of those who
love truth and know the sterling worth of their
mother-tongue, that alterations in it, by whomso-
ever made, will not so soon be borne.

Not that it is perfect. It only is the best of
modem versions and inferior to none of the old
ones ; so that the few blemishes it has, no more
hurt its worth and usefulness, than do the spots
on the sun the heat and light thereof; they
trouble no one but those who make them an ex-
cuse for a change. Yet, let those few blemishes
remain rather than aQcept the ready services of
eager Revisers, who, under the pretext of new
discoveries — which, after all, amount to very, very
little of any real utility — fain would, if they
could, introduce a new Bible of their own ; that
by so doing they might cut asunder one of the
few remaining links of fellowship between men of
the same nation, who yet are estranged one from
another on all points but that of using the same
Bible, and thus occasionally listening together to
the same words.

VI PBEFACE.

It is, no doubt, easy to talk of revising the
Authorised Version. But, besides that in this
case, as in most others, it is best to let well alone,
the simple truth is that there are not now in
England enough men able either to revise the
English Bible without making mere patchwork
of it, or to translate afresh and equally well from
the originals. Revisers or translators, first, need
be masters of Hebrew. But where are now-a-
days in England the Hebrew scholars of the six-
teenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries?
Their works then written in Latin enlightened
Europe, took the lead in European scholarship,
and still are the treasure-house of knowledge to
which all must come. But who would dream of
looking here for aught of the kind, now that
silks, lace, and embroidery, begin to take the
place of Greek and Hebrew ; and that even
the veteran scholar who represents Hyde, Po-
cocke, and Lowth, is reduced to write in Roman
characters the Hebrew of his learned Commen-
tary, lest haply the sight of " strange alphabets,"
as the " Literary Churchman" calls anything but
Latin and Greek, should offend the eyes of his
readers P

PBKFACE. VU

Next, Revisers of the English Bible should be
imbued with solid Biblical lore ; with a few of
the marvellous attainments in learning of some
of their ancestors, in days, "when," to quote
even the " Saturday Review," " England had
scholars." Whereas, are not Biblical criticism
and scholarship, confessedly at the lowest ebb at
present, in this country, and, so far as they go,
not much else than German teaching at second
hand? Only compare what now passes for
learning and scholarship — the Bible story-book
about Abraham, king of Damascus, inventor of
monotheism, being tempted of the Devil to offer
up his son in sacrifice, &c., prepared by one Dean
for the special use of the Clergy, with the kin-
dred works of Selden, Spencer, and StilUngfleet,
Marsham, Lardner, and Warburton ; or the
mighty labours of Walton, Castell, Lightfoot,
Mill, and others, on the Old and New Testa-
ments, with the aimless criticisms on the same
subject and borrowed learning of another Dean ;
and then say whether, with all the boasting of
to-day, the scholarship of yore was not more true,
though with smaller means ; the research deeper
and more honest, though with fewer resources ;

VUl PREFACE.

and the lore altogether more solid and better
worth having, than what is now offered under the
same name P

Then, thirdly, ought Revisers of the Autho-
rised Version to know grammar — "the Dean's
English" will not do — and, assuredly, to have
studied, not the English dialect of to-day, but
the English language of old ; the peerless tongue
of Shakspeare, Hooker, Milton, and of other ori-
ginal sons of the soil.

Since, however, none of these requirements
are at present available, let the Old Bible by all
means remain as it is. Let the old garment be,
which, if a little faded perhaps, after having
stood in the light of two centuries and a half, is
yet as good and as warm as when first woven;
for the warp of it is as taut, and the woof as
tight, the nap as soft .and thick as when cut off
the weaver's thrums two hundred and fifty
years ago. Let it then abide as it is, rather
than pieced with patches of newer weft put on
by modern Revisers; lest in the end, the rent
be made worse, and all their labour in darning
be lost.

But, says the Dean of Canterbury, in one of

PREFACE. IX

his late articles on the subject/ the English Bible
must be revised, in spite of all that is said to the
contrary ; and the day for it is not far distant.
If so, then by whom ? Will the Dean himself
undertake the Hebrew of the Old Testament, or
even the Greek or the English of the New?
He must know something about it, and he has a
right to speak ; for he has done more to it, as the
saying is, than any living Englishman ; since he
first " constructed " a Greek Text, and then re-
vised thereon the English version ; with what
feelings, however, may best be seen from his
"New Testament for English Readers;" while
he leaves us no doubt of his utter contempt for
the Received Text, when saying that —

" Lachmann s great merit and the real service he
rendered to the cause of sacred criticism has been the
bold and uncompromising demolition of that unworthy
and pedantic reverence for the Received Text, which
stood in the way of all chance of discovering the
genuine Word of God." 2

Such frothy writing says, of course, very little;
for, had we then no " genuine Word of God,"

* Contemp. Eeview for July.
* Proleg. to the fifth ed. of the Greek Test. p. 76.

X PREFACE.

until Drs. Alford and Lachmann arose to dis-
cover it ? Yet is such language offensive enough
towards those who, with a reverence neither " pe-
dantic '' nor " unworthy/' have all along trusted
the Received Text, and loved the English Bible,
to justify them in examining Dr. Alford's quali-
fications as critic, and in questioning his right to
give so rash and so sweeping a judgment. What,
if many of his criticisms and his knowledge of
Greek and of English grammar proved such as
to shake all confidence in him as a guide ; while
his quotations from the Old Versions lead one to
doubt his acquaintance with any of them P

As one, therefore, of the numerous class of
Clergy for whom Dr. Alford kindly undertook
" to construct" a new Text, and in behalf of them,
— of men, who, hard at work in their country
parishes, never see a library, and study as best
they may, their two main-stays, the Received
Text and the Authorised Version — must I ven-
ture to make a few remarks on certain points of
his teaching, both Greek and English, which are
not quite clear to me. They will serve as a
sample of what his whole work probably is ; and
may thus tend to re-assure many who, too busy

PREFACE. XI

perhaps, or unable to study the matter for them-
selves, might, on the Dean's authority, and, at
the sight of the fearful array of ciphers and
symbols of his "digest," take for granted that
the Received Text they trust, and to which they
have been accustomed, is utterly worthless ; and
that the English Bible they love and venerate is
not much better. And thus, by losing confidence
in both, unsettle their minds and shake their
faith. All of which, God, in His mercy, forbid.

S. C. Malan.

Torquay, Nov. 26, 1868.

BKRATA.

At page 47, line 8, fur <* be his," feed '* to be bis/'
„ 58, „ 2, fwr «* he may," rtod " maybe."
„ 84» „ 20, for " makes," read " make,"

EEMAKKS

ON THE

FIRST FOUR CHAPTERS OF DR. ALFORFS GOSPEL
ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW, IN GREEK

CHAPTER I.

Passing over a few trifling matters in the first
seventeen verses of this chapter, we come to Dr.
Alford's reading of v. 18.

fov §€ 'Ijjerou 77 yivemg ovrtjg ijv, on whicli he
says, in his digest, that

" yivvrjmg of the Received Text, which is a probable
correction from the verb so often used before^ occurs in
L. and the rest,"

He then gives us his authorities for the change: —

"BCPSZA, 1 syr. Ath. Eus. Dial-trin. ex-
pressly ;"

and adds in his notes that —

" yeveiTig must be understood in a wide sense, as
nearly identical in meaning with yiyyrjmQ ; &s=i^or{go,'

B

2 REMARKS, ETC.

not merely * birth,' " Mey. It probably is chosen by the
Holy Spirit to mark a slight distinction [1] between
the yivvriffiQ of our Lord and that of ordinary men.
See Schol. in digest.'*

I. Before examining Dr. Alford^s authorities,
let me say one word on the relative meaning of
yivvri(Tig and yivetrig, which are not seldom con-
fused by careless Greek writers; Doubtless, ac-
1 cording to the scholiast quoted by the Dean, both
terms are said cv oeriorirn slg Xpitnov, somewhat
as " birth," " origin," and " pedigree," may be
said of the same person ; though assuredly not in
the same sense. Yet, inasmuch as these terms
are not applicable to Christ in the same way as
they are to every one of us, the fact that Origen,
who is supposed to be that scholiast, uses almost
exclusively one of those terms, is assuredly not
an absolute authority in favour of it ; for, in
many things, he is not a very safe guide. Let us,
then, look at these terips, yivttrig and yivvriaig,
and judge of them on their own merits.

(1.) As yivvvi(Tig comes from yevv^cii, and
yevvq, avrjp ndiSa,^ it is said of the actual procre-
ation of children, as being (1) begotten by the
father (y^vvriTWf), yevvrirrig 6 irarrip^), and (2)
borne and brought forth by the mother (a/u^orl-
pwv y^vvTiaavrwv^) ; in which sense yivvrtatg is
used by Plato, when he speaks of ai rwv TrafSwv

» Thorn. Mag. s. v. p. 78. " lb. p. 308.

3 Arist. ^-ffJ i. y«y. i. 17, 4, ed. Oxf,

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. . 3

yivvfi(T£iiQ Kai rpoipaU When, however, he speaks
of rrjg yevvriaawg kol tov tokov,^ he limits yivvri<rig
to the father; for rlKreiv Kvp(<og IttI yyyaiKa, to
Si ysvvqv €7rt avSpa ; ^ wherefore vapOivog rtKrei
— ri^erai to iv avrg yevvridiv^ likewise Aristotle,
TO appev fiiv sivai to SvvafJLSvov yBvv^v elg erc-
/oov— TO Se OrjXv to dg avTO.^ So that albeit yevv^v
be sometimes used for the actual " bringing
forth *' (yevv^v ovaag driXetag — Sea yap [Z^o,"] i%
avTtJv yevvq, rlXcm rj t^d^a rj cfa),^ yet the primary
idea of yevv^v, yivvri<ng, belongs to the father ;
and these terms are never said of the mother,
except as implying the part taken by the father
in the reproduction of her offspring.^ Whereas —
(2.) riveaig, from (inus. yivw) ylvofiai, is a
generic term, KaOoXiKti Xi^ig,^ rj awXwg Xlyerae,^
which is said absolutely of production or origin
of any kind ; as yiv. voTa/Jiiov, Kotxfxov, &c. It is
said by S. Clement Al. to be twofold, Sirrrj yap r\
yiveaig;^^ (b), of reproduction {ytvvwfJLiv(M)v)j and
(2), of mere results (yivo/ulvciw). Viveaig, then,
is a generic term for " coming into being " —
oTav p^v yap elg aladnrriv jiBTafiaXXy vXtiv, ytvsar-

> Be Legib. I. 6, p, 440, ed. Lond.

* Conviv. 31, p. 89. » Thorn. Mag. s. v. p. 358.

* S. Matt. i. 20, 23. S. Athan. De Inc. V. D. vol. i. pp. 88,
593, &c,

» «-ieJ {. yi». I. 2, 4. « Ibid. HI. 5, 5, 10, 11, &c,

^ Justin. M. Dial. c. Tiyph. pp. 310, 312.

8 Enthym. Zig. ad loc. and A. Bynsei de Nat. J. G. p. 165.

* Arist ri^} yn, ». ^t. I. 3, 14.
w Strom. IV. p. 585.

4 REMARKS, ETC.

Oai tj^amv^ — and includes all special modes of
production, reproduction, or origin, without de-
fining the process of any.

Thus, yivemg is said (1) of the waters of the
Ocean, as origin of all things;* (2), of " the origin
of the world ; (3), beings ; (4), natures ; (5), an-
gels ; (6), powers ; (7), souls ; (8), commandments ;
(9^, laws ; (10), of the Gospel ; (11), of the know-
ledge of God;''* (12), of the procreation of chil-
dren, said absolutely, as origin of the human
body — (TWfiarog, aapKog yiveorig — yiveaig avOpwirov
— (rapKiKTi yiviaig, ^ rrig fxriTpag irapaSoxfi (row
yevvirriKOv <nr,) rriv yiveaiv 6/JLo\oyu^ — without in
any way alluding to the part each agent takes in
it. It is also said absolutely by S. Athanasius,
when he asks, who ever Ik irapBivov /lovijc t^X^
TTjv Tox) (rdjfJLaTog yiveaiv,^ and by S. Clement Al.
where he speaks of top Trjg yevlaewg /i£r«Xj?0ora
Kvpiov — Kttt rfiv yevvritratrav irapOivovJ Tivemg,
then, is said (13) of a genealogy or pedigree, and
(14) Ka0oXiKi7 Xl^iC oiaa, <Tr\iiaivH kcu rfiv yivvri-
(Ttv,® being a generic term, it also implies " birth,"
yivvr\(ng, and is used for it, but, of course, incor-
rectly. For accurate writers do not take the one
term for the other : witness Plato — r\ Kvrimg icai

» Arist. ibid. I. 3, 18. « H. f . 245.

* S. Clem. Al. Strom. IV. p. 470.

* S. Athan. De Inc. V. D. toI. i. p. 637.

* S. Clem. Al. Psedag. II. p. 188. Strom, iii. p. 461.
« De Inc. V. D. vol. i. 88, 637.

' Strom. III. p. 469. • Euthym. Zigab. in Matt i. 1.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 5

Yi yivvtiaig. 'ElXelOvia 1} KaWovfi core ry yeviaei ; *
because, whereas yevimg simply tells of origin or
production, yivvtiartg in good authors always im-
plies the part of the father, row ysvvriTOpog Trarpog,
(yEvvijora/ufvoc /titv ttIvtc y^viareig^ — yiveaig Sc ev

II. From all this, it is evident that yiveaig
and yivvriaig cannot be said indiscriminately of
Christ, riveartg may be said of Him, as in (iifiXog
yEviaewg, without being misunderstood ; because
there it is limited to Kara trapica — wg av rig iliroi
/3f j3Xoc yeveaXoyiag,* to his genealogy from Abra-
ham to Joseph and Mary. But if said, without
qualification, of His Incarnation, as yivemg means
"origin*' in general, it then becomes a wrong
expression ; since the Son has no " origia," but is
one with the Father from all eternity ; of whom
He was begotten before all worlds.

Wherefore do we hear of no yiveaig in this case,
neither can He be yeyevtifiivog ; but 6 tov Gcou
X070C Svo yevvriaeig exct, fiiav fiev Ik rov 0£oO koi
iraTpbg, ring kol Trpwrij yivvr\(ng XiyeraC icai kripav
Ik Tr^g aapKog, ^ig kol Ssvripa yivvriaig Xiyerai,^
* the Word of God has two procreations ; the one
of God the Father, which is the first ; and the
other of the flesh, which is called the second ;'
that is, begotten of the Father and bom of the

* Conviv. 31, vol. ii. p. 79.

* Critias, 8, p. 389. » Arist. ArigJ {. ytw, I. 22, 1.

* Theophan. Cer. Horn. xiv.

" Quffist. in S. Athan. vol. ii. p. 441.

6 BEMAKKS, ETC.

Virgin Mary. Tlarfip ^v, koX Ylog iyewfiOn- M^
uwyg, wore ; aXka rrapaSpafu to hrupwrr^fia. M^
hriZttrriifr^^y Tiw^ ; aSvvaroc yap r\ awoKpurig^
* The Father existed, and the Son was begotten.
Say not, When ? but avoid the question^ Nei-
ther inquire, How P for it is impossible to answer
thee.' 'O yap ysvvnOeig avtoOev Ik warpog Xoyoc,
apprrriaig^ atppaarrwc, aKaraX-ftnTw^, aiSlwg, iv ypovi^
ysvvarai KarwOev Ik wapOivov Mapiag ; * ' for the
Word of God who was begotten on high, ineffably,
inexplicably, incomprehensibly, eternally, in time
was bofn of the Virgin Mary.'

III. So then, whereas the orthodox yiwrimg
said of our Lord Christ, is liable to no mistake,
we cannot wonder at the term yivtmg, when said
of Him, haying given birth to various errors and
heresies. S. Athanasius alludes to this when he
says : EiTrare rolvvv, irtjg Xiyere Gebv iv Na^a/Dlr
yeyevriarOai, rfjc OcorijTOc i>g €Lp)(rjv yeviaewg airay^
ylXXovrec Kara IlauXov rov 'Sia/JLoararia, rj rijc
aapKog rfiv yiveaiv apvoiffievoi Kara Ma/9icfciiva, KaX
rohg aXXouc aiperiKoifg, ov rc(» evayyektK(^ erroc-
^ovvreg opt^ aXX' Ik rdjv liiwv XaiXeiv OiXovreg ; —
Ov yap apxvv yevi(TBwg Ik ^aZaplr 6 Qebg iTrcScfK-
vvrai, aXX 6 vTrapxtov npo rC^v alwvwv Xoyog
0€oc, Ik Na^a/Dtr avOptoirog e&00t}, yivwiOeig Ik
Mapiag rrig napOivov Ka\ Uvevfiarog 'Aytov Iv
BeOXelfi rrjg 'lovSafac Ik (rrripfxarog Aa6t8 koL

' Homil. in Sanct. Ghr. Gener. S. Basil. 0pp. vol. iii. col.
1167,ed. M.

* S. Athanas. De H. Nat. vol. i. p. 599.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 7

Afipaafu^ *Tell me, then, how do you say that
God was bom at Nazareth, making that the
origin of the Godhead, according to Paul of Sa-
mosata, or denying the origin of His flesh, like
Marcion and the other heretics; giving, all of you,
your own conceits, and not keeping to the line
marked out by the Gospel? For God does not
show the beginning of His existence from Na-
zareth, but God the Word, who existed from all
eternity, appeared as man out of Nazareth, being
bom of the Virgin Mary and the Holy Ghost in
Bethlehem of Judah, of the seed of David, of
Abraham, and of Adam, as it is written.'

IV. Further examples are needless, in order
to show that when the generic yivectig, " origin,"
is said of One who has none, but who, being, ne*
vertheless, also " born of a woman," had a birth
into this world, ylwijertc is assuredly the most
appropriate term to use for that event. For, with
the mention of the Holy Ghost, yivetrig here may
mean that our Saviour was His Son, and not that
of the Father, as Macedonius says, 'O Ylbg ovv
itmv 6 ^Irjaovg tov irve6/uaroc ; ^ 'Is Jesus, then, the
son of the Holy Ghost ?* as if taking His "origin"
from Him ; whereas, the " birth," yivvrimCy being
once told, the subsequent mention of the Holy

» De Salut. adv. Ch. vol. i. p. 637.

* Dial. III. de Trin. in S. Athan. vol. ii. p. 233* These
Dialogues are by some ascribed to S. Maximus Confessor, who
lived in the 6th century, and by others to Theodoritus, who
was a disciple of S. Ghrysostom. For, as to these Dialogues

8 BEMARKS, ETC.

Ghost as miraculous agent in it, is liable to no
such misconstruction.

Not only does S. Chrysostom only speak of
yiwtimg in his first four homilies on S. Matthew,
but, commenting on this yerse, which he reads,
Tov I. X. ri yivvrimg, ovrwg ^v, he asks, Hoiav
fioi yivvvimv Xiytig; drri fioi' Kairoiye rovg vpo^
yovovc s^irag. 'AXXa ^oiXofiai Koi tov Tp6irov rrig
yevvfiaewg elveiv. *What birth? tell me, since thou
hast just rehearsed his ancestors ; but I must also
tell thee what manner of birth that was.'

He then speaks of the Holy Ghost ov iirXaaev
TOV vaov, as building the temple, i. e. the flesh of
Christ in the Virgin's womb ; and uses through-
out the term yiwrimg. Whereas, the author of
the Dialogues on the Trinity, above alluded to,
founds his reading, Tov 'I?j<roO, 81 1} yivetrig ovrwg
ijv, which is one of Dr. Alford's authorities, on

&Tl TOV Vabv TOV (TWfJLaTOg tov XplOTOV TO TTvev/JLa

TO ayiov iKTifTsv, that the Holy Ghost created the
temple of Christ's body ; explaining the operation
of the Holy Ghost by — Kat yap koL 01 avOpwiroi
TTpiOTOv yiyvofJLeOa dmfiiovpyiKiijg, the way in
which we were first brought into being. While
S. Chrysostom, whose opinion commends itself,
says of the part acted by the Holy Ghost, " that

being the work of S. Athanasius, not odIj does internal evi-
dence prove the contrary, but Cave ranks them amoDg the
spurious writings of this Father, adding, '^ ciguscunque sint,
Athanasii non esse certo certius est." Hist. litt. vol. i. pp. 196
and 687.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 9

neither Gabriel nor S. Matthew could ^ay more
than that — Ik irvev/JLaTog aylov yiyove to yeyevri-
fiivov, what took place^ happened by virtue of the
Holy Ghost ; but, ttwc Ik IIv. A., icai rlvi rpoirt^,
ovSeig tovtwv ripfi-nvevarev — 'as to "how'' and "in
what manner " the Holy Ghost wrought it, nei-
ther the Angel nor the Evangelist have explained
it to us.'*

V. Reasoning d priori, therefore, we may sup-
pose which of the two terms, yivemg or yivvriaig,
S. Matthew would choose, in order to explain to
his countrymen that He whom they knew as
Jesus, and whom they thought to be the son of
Joseph and Mary, was the Christ, descended, as
He must be, from Abraham and David, and,
though bom of a woman, yet supematurally con-
ceived in her by the Holy Ghost. Not only does
it seem natural that, having stated the ancestry
— j3rj3Xoc yeviarewg — he should then come to the
"birth," yivvritrig; and having told this, then
to explain how it took place ; but the construe-
tioii, of the Greek forces it upon us. No Greek
scholar, no one who has an inkling of the lan-
guage, can first read /3^/3Xoc yeviaetjjg, at v. 1,
and then — tov SI ^Irjaov Xpiarov -q yivvrimg ovrwg
^v, without being driven by the Sc, to turn his
mind to what is coming ; and that, too, despite
all the intervening Sc's in the genealogy. ^'Here
is the book of the generation ; but now for the

» Homil. IV. in Matt, fi', y\

10 REMARKS, ETC.

birth and all tlie particulars." And so under-
stand it —

(a.) Didymus Alexandrinus (a.d. 370), who
says : fivrifJLovtvriov ovv, &ri 8io rag aiptriKag aSo-
Xeer^fac ylveaiv Trpoavira^ev Trig ivavOpuyjrficrBfog
6 tvayyeXurrfig, elra yivvnmv^ 'We must bear in
mind that, because of the fond conceits of here-
tics, did the Evangelist place first the origin or
descent, ylvemg, before the Incarnation, and then
the birth, yivvnmg,^

{b,) S. Epiphanius, who speaking of jitjSXog
yivsarewg I. X. viov A. v- 'A/3, says, elra iXOwv iir
avrh TO ZirroifJLBvov, (pricri' tov 8I I. X. ri yivvvi<ng
ovTfog ijv.® The Evangelist, after introducijig the
genealogy of Jesus Christ, then comes to his ob-
ject and says, tov 8I I. X. ri yivv. &c. * Now the
birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise.*

(c.) Theophanes: aTro ytveaXoylag ap\6iuvoL
— ouroi Triv aylav tov Xpifrrov yivvriaiv viro\p6'
fitOa,^ * Beginning with the genealogy, we will
then consider the hallowed birth of Christ.'

(d.) S. Irenseus. MaTOatog 8l t?)v Kara avBptO"
TTOv aurov yivvriaiv KripirrH \iy<ov j3/j3Xoc yevi'
(TBwg I. X. viov A. viov 'Aj3/t>aa/u.* ' That Matthew
proclaims His birth as man, saying. The book of
generation of Jesus Christ,* &c.

(e,) S. Chrysostom takes yivamg and j3fj3Xoc
yBvi<retog in the sense of yivviiaig throughout in

» De Tiin. Lib. II. col. 672, ed. Mign.

■ Adv. Hseres. lib. ii. vol. i. p. 426. • Homil, xiv.

* Adv. Heeres. lib. iii. c. zi. p. 222, ed. Gr.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 11

his Horn. I.-IV. on S. Matthew ; as we are re-
minded by —

(/.) Euthymius Zigabenns,* who, on (i((i\og
y€vi(Ti(M)g, says that yiveaig evravOa, r^v yivvr\(nv
Ivo^crcv 6 ')(pv<r6<TTOfjLog Iwavvrig ; and then says,
avb) filv eiiTiv (MarOaToc) /3t/3Xoc yiveaetog — k&t(o
Sf, Tov lijerov ')(pi<TTov, 0?|(riv, 17 yivvriarig ourwc ^v ;
above, St. Matthew says, yiv^mg, and below,
•ylvvijercc 5 8Jid at v. 18, " ovrwg" wc Aneiv fciXXet,
fiyovv vTTOKeirai, " in this wise," that is, as he is
goiQg to tell ; " as follows." Likewise —

(g.) S. Athanasius: **You deny that Christ
was made man, how then do you read the
Gospels ? that of S. Matthew, for instance, which
begins with (iifiXoc ysvianwg I. X. viov A. viov
^AjipaafjL f while elsewhere S. Athanasius renders
yiv£(T{g by yivvrimg, saying, Mar 6. rriv Kara av-
Op(tnrov avTov ylvvri<riv — j3fj3Xoc 7€vI(T£wc> Xlyciiv.*

(h,) Theophylact also* reads, j3//3Xoc ycvlercwc?
TOV 81 'Iijtrov XpioTOv ri yivvr\(ng ovrtog ^v.

I have not by me a copy of S. Cyril of Alex-
andria, but Justin Martyr seems to have read
yivvrimg in this verse when he speaks of yivvr\(nq
fi Sta Trig trapOivov TjTig fiv inrb tov Aa/BiS Koi
'Aj3/oaa/i yivovg.^

Those few examples will suffice to show that

1 Enthym. Zig. vol. i. p. 17, 18, 35, ed. Matth.

• De iDcam. Ch. vol. 1. p. 623.

• De Interp. Par. SS.vol. ii. p. 400, if this treatise is of him.

• In Matt, ad loc.

» Diai. c. Trin. p. 327.

12 REMARKS, ETC.

the reading of the Received text, yivvrimg, in this
18th verse is not so very bad, after all.

VI. Let tis now examine Dr. AKord's autho-
rities for condemning it.

He gives us six M88., the Vatican, C. Ephraemi
and Guelph, supposed to be of the fourth, fifth,
and sixth centuries respectively. The last three
are of the ninth and tenth centuries and later.
The most valuable authority for yiveatg in this
place, then, is that of the Cod. Vaticanus B., the
date of which, however, is only " supposed " to
be the fourth century ; but it may be later, for no
one ever gives the latest probable date to MS8.,on
the contrary, they are all made as old as possible.

Against this we may set the older authorities
already mentioned, SS. Chrysostom, Epiphanius,
IrensDus, &c., and also one to which the Dean
does not allude, namely, Didymus Alexandrinus,
who reads, Tov 8l 'It|(tov X/otarou fi yivvri<ng ov-
rwg ^v,* and who, as we saw above, dwells espe-
cially on the fact that yivearig occurs in verse 1
and yivvr}(Ttc in verse 18. Now, since it is clear
(1) that heresies of various kinds were more
easily fostered by yiveaig, as " origin " of Christ
at that time, than by yivvrjaig, His " birth'* as
man, and (2) that these two readings are on that
account of a very ancient date, why not accuse
the Cod. Vaticanus of some of the earlier here-
sies, as the valuable and accurate Gothic version is

^ > De Trinit. Hb. ii. col. 669, D. ed. M.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 13

of Arianism P Seeing that yivvriaig is infinitely
more orthodox — yevvrfOivra Ik tov irarpog^ — and
theologically correct, as applicable to Christ, than
yivearig ; His birth of the Virgin being, as Eulo-
gius says, 17 ')Q:}oviKri yivvriaig Trig Oeiag avrov icai
aiSiov yevvri<retjgy^ " but the birth in time of His
divine and eternal issue from the Father.*'

The authority of the other five uncial MS8.
and of the cursive one is, of course, less than that
of the Cod. Vat. ; albeit Cod. EphraBmi, said to
be of the sixth century, may possibly suffer from
what Mill in the Prolegomena* to his Greek Tes-
tament calls " interpolatae lectiones," instancing
this very one, yivetrig, as interpolated by Maximus
in his Dialogue with Macedonius.

VII. Then come "syr. Ath. Eus. Dial.-trin.
expr.*'

As regards the Syriac, the Peschito, which is
older, and carries more weight than the later Phi-
loxenian, reads yiveaig {yilidutho) in verse 1 and
yivvr\(ng (paldo, c. suff. yaMeh) in verse 18. All
the editions I have of Widmanstadt, Schaaf, Tro-
stius, &c., have this reading; and the Latin trans-
lations attached to the last two render the Syriac
by generatio in verse 1 and natimtas in verse 18.
"Hie Polyglot, however, has, incorrectly, genera-
tio at each verse for the two distinct Syriac terms.
That the two terms are not identical is proved by

» Symb. Nic. in S. Athan. vol. i p. 247.
• In Photii Bibl. p. 763, ed. Kot.
» 757 and 1021. ed. Rot. 1710.

14 REMABKS, ETC.

the term yaldo being used in S. Matt. xiv. for
Herod's birth-day, upon which S. EphrsBm com-
ments,^ and renders yaldo in this and in other
places by maulodo, birth, partus, so that there can
be no doubt that the transktors of the Peschito
had before their eyes yivemg at verse 1 and
yivvriorig at verse 18 ; and this, too, either at the
end of the first or about the middle of the second
century.*

Dr. Alford, therefore, cannot boast of much
support from ancient versions, if he may not get
that of the old Peschito, but must go to the
Philoxenian for his Syriac authority in favour of
yivifTig, For we see what both the Peschito and
S. Ephraem say; but as to the '* revised '* Pes-
chito by Philoxenus of Mabug and Thomas of
Harkel, in the sixth century, like most other re-
visions, it betrays- tokens of strange handling,
and often is hardly readable by the side of its
more venerable original* Here, for instance, it

1 De Nat. Dom. Serm. Hi. iv. zi. &c.

* Abulphar%j (Hist. Dyn. Arab. p. 300, ed Poo.) says that
'* the Peschito or simple version was made in the days of Addens,
who succeeded Thaddeus as Bishop of Edessa in the days of
King Ahgarus, to whom Thaddeus was sent by Christ, or by
Thomas. Some, however, say that this version was made in
the time of Solomon and Hiram. [If this legend could be true,
it would, of course, apply only to a few books of the Old T.]
The Syrians, however, have another version, more figured and
adorned in style [the Philoxenian], made from the Greek a long
time after our Saviour's birth."

In the ** Ancient Syriac Documents " (p. 14, 15, ed. Cur.),
we read that the converts by Aggseus, who was consecrated

ON S. MATT. CH. I, V. 18. 15

renders yivetrig or yivvtitrie by a term which has
nothing to do with either, namely, hwot/o, from
hwo, " to be " nin, that means '* being " or " exist-
ence;" also " factura, elementnm;" whereas both
yivmiQ and yivvtitriQ come from the Aryan root
gen or Jen, widely spread over East and West. One
can hardly help suspecting that, somehow or other,
the Syrian heretics of the Nestorian days had
something to do with Philoxenus and his work.

The next authority on the Dean's list is
" Ath." which means Athanasius : but where does
S. Athanasius quote this verse P Such loose re-
ferences only puzzle the student and waste a deal
of his precious time by referring him, if he be in
earnest, to anywhere in one or two folio volumes ;
but if he is not in earnest, and takes the Dean
upon trust, much good will it do him to know
?ind to repeat that " Ath." favours the reading ;
though he cannot tell where. Such information,
however, and such scholarship, would both be

bishop by Thaddens, and ibrmerly Abgar's silk mercer, came to
him and read in the " Old and New Testaments, and in the
Prophets and the Acts of the Apostles." This, however, could
be neither in ^reek nor Syriac in those days, as regcurds the
New Testament. So that no great faith can be placed in the
authenticity of these " Documents." But the same thing
occurs in the Ethiopic and Coptic Apostolic Constitutions, in
which the Apostles enjoin the reading of the Gospel that Was
not written in their days; it is also found in the 8th para-
graph of the Doctrine of the Apostles in Syriac, p. 27 of
these " Documents." For full information on the Peschito see
J. Wichelhaus, de N. T. Versione Syriaca Antiqua quam Pes-
chito vocant, libri iv. 1850.

16 REMARKS, ETC.

worth very little, in good classical studies. Only
compare the accuracy of notes by most of the real
scholars of old. You at once lay your finger on
the line, and learn to trust and thank them for
their accurate and solid lore. Whereas a whole
page of such digest as " Ath. Eus. Dial-Trin. Syr.
Cyr. Orig. B C P A Z. a. /3. 7. 2, 3, 4, 7," &c., would
be of very little use to the student, who must
either give it up or learn it by heart, and after
all really know nothing about the matter.

I have spent considerable time in trying to
discover the Dean's reference to S. Athanasius ;
but in vain. Such expressions, indeed, as o-w/xaroc
yivemQy^ trapKog yivemg,'^ said of Christ occur ; but
they allude to the formation of His body in His
mother's womb, and do not assuredly favour the
Dean's reading, seeing the vast difierence there is
between yiveaig, origin, or formation of Christ's
body, and the yivecng, origin, formation of Him
said absolutely, as implied in rov Se I.X. 17 yivztng
ovTWQ ^v. This, we saw, was the heresy of Paul
of Samosata, who held Geov Ik No^o/oer otpOivra,
Koi evreifOev rriQ vTrap^ewg r?)v ap\fiv l<T\riK6Tay^
* that God was seen out of Nazareth, and that He
thence took the beginning of His existence,' ac-
cording to the Philoxenian version ; Gcov Iv No-
^a/oer -yc'ycviJo'Ooi, Tr\q Oeorr^rog (og ap^fjv yeviaevjg
airayyiWwv,^ reporting that God was bom at

» De Incarn. V. Dei, vol. i. p. 89. • Id. p. 637.

3 De Salut. Adv. J. Ch. S. Ath. vol. i. p. 635. * lb. p. 637.

ON S. BiATT. CH. I. V. 18. 17

Nazareth, as if the beginning of the Godhead
dated from His yivaviQ, formation in the Virgin's
womb.

That such is the sense of yivemg is further
proved by this passage : rivog 8l rijc yevi<TBwg
irpoiSpajULev aor?)/© iv ovpavoig^ koI tov yevvriOivra
itrniuLave ry olKovfiivy :^ 'whose origin was preceded
by a star in the heavens that marked Him out when
born to the whole world :' words which favour the
idea that the star appeared in the heavens at the
descent of Gabriel from thence, and continued to
shine as a heavenly witness over the develop-
ment of the Word mude flesh in the Yirgin's
womb; until, as a beacon, it brought the wise
men to Jerusalem, and at last stood over the
dwelling in which the young child was. I know
not if the above passages are the ones meant by
the Dean in " Ath.," if so, tov 2(iir?}|0oc yivatrigf
found in S. Clement Al. ; - Trpotnrolrimc Trjg Ik
irapdivov yevitrewg,^ said by Origen, who also
speaks of the same Virgin as ry irpiwH yevv^v
yivvrtfiay iif (J rexOivriy* &c., may, perhaps,
answer the same purpose, though he does not
mention them.

VIII. Then comes " Eus." for Eusebius ; but
where P ad Steph. P The only passage I can
discover bearing directly upon this is in his
Chronicon Arm. Lat., where the original Arme-

» S. Ath. De Incam. V. D. p. 88. * Strom, i. p. 339, 840.
» PhUocal. p. 30. * lb. p. 28.

C

18 REMARKS, ETC.

nian dznunt is rendered by yivvn<Tig in a parallel
passage from Cedrenus given in a note.^

IX. Lastly, we haye "Dial-trin. express.,"
which means that the reading tov Si 'If|(r. ri ylv
e<rig ovTwg Ifv is foond expressly in the third
Dialogue of S. Maximus against Macedonius,
generally printed among the writings of S. Atha-
nasius ; but this authority is worth very little.
(1.) S. Maximus flourished late in the sixth cen-
tury, 200 years after SS. Chrysostom, Epiphanius,
and Didymus Alexandrinus, who all give in so
many words the other reading, tov 8J I.X. ri yiv-
vri<Tig ovTwg ^v, as noticed above. (2.) The real
author of this Dialogue is not known. (3.) Who-
ever he be, he dwells on i^ yivBtrig elinv, oix* v
yivvriaig,^ that S. Matthew said, "the genesis,
making or forming," not the "birth" or gene-
ration of Christ ; whereby, as we already noticed,
he alluded to the temple of Christ's body being
created by the Holy Ghost — to ay, UvavjULa Ik-
Ti<nv.

But as to this formation by the Holy Ghost
the Fathers held more than one opinion. S.
Chrysostom,^ whose authority is always great,
uses the term iirXatTev for the work of the Holy
Ghost, and reads yivvri<nQ throughout. Justin
Martyr, however, alludes to S. Luke's words, say-
ing that SivafiiQ Oeov iweXOovaa rg wapOivt^ Ittc-

* Vol. ii. p. 260 and 261 . * S. Athan. vol. ii. p. 233.
• Homil. iii. iv. in Matt.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 19

fTKlatrev aifrfjv' koi Kt;o^O|0i}(rae vapOivov ovtrav ttctto/-
iiice :^ * the power of God coming upon the Virgin,
overshadowed her, and made her be with child,
being a virgin.' To irvtvfia ovv kol rfiv Svvafiiv
Tr)V irapa rov Oeov ovSev aX\o vorifTai OifUQy ri rbv
Aoyoi/, oc KOL vpwTOTOKog T(^ Getj) i(TTi :^ ' but we
dare not call the Spirit and the power that is
from God aught else than the Word, who stands
as first-bom to God : Sc ravrrig rfiv vijSvv elfT^vgf
olovel Tig Oetog (Tiropog, ttXclttu vabv kavrt^ rov
riXeiov avOptairov :^ ' who having entered into the
Virgin's womb, like a divine energy, built for
Himself a temple, the perfect man.' Likewise S.
Ephrsem :* " He who forms in the womb all beings
that are bom, tsjor hu laqnumeh tsalmo VcarsOy
framed for Himself a form in His mother's
womb,"

Didymus Alexandrinus, on the other hand,
agrees with the author of the Dialogue v. Mace-
donius, so far as to say that to Si yi Uvevfia koX
avOevTiKCJQ wout, 'the Spirit indeed acts on His
own authority, and makes beings out of nothing,
but CLTB (Tvvepyov kal wvofj rov Ilarpog,^ * only as
breath of the Father and feUow-worker with
Him.' This brings us to S. Basil, who, while
saying that the Holy Ghost, irpdrov filv yap avry
ry (TapKi rov Kvptov (rvvrjv, -xpitrfia yevoimevov,^ 'was

* Pro Christ. Apol. ii. p. 75. • lb.

3 lb. Expos. Fid. p. 381. * De Nat. Dom. Serin, iii. p. 412.

* De Trinit. lib. iii. p. 572, col.

« S. Bas. vol. iv. De Sp. S. 39, col. 140, ed. M.

20 REMARKS, ETC.

from the very first united with the Lord's flesh,
being made an unction^' icai a^iDplarwQ frap6v,
'and inseparably present/ adds iv Si rg ktIvh
ivvof|<rov fioi rriv wpOKaTapKTiKrjv alrlav rHv yivo*
liivwVf Tov Uaripa' ^Ap'Xfj yap t£jv ovro^v fila,
Si Yiov Snfuovpyov<Ta, koi nXeiovaa iv Ilve^/xari :*
* In the creation of all things, both viable and
invisible, keep present to thy mind the Father as
the primary cause of all things that exist. He
alone, then, is the One Cause of all, working
through the Son, and perfecting in the Spirit/
Tiveg Si ap\ai Trig yevvriaewg ; ' what are the
beginnings of the birth of Christ P' asks the
author of the Homily on the Generation of
Christ. TLvevfia ayiov koi Sivajung 'Y}pl(rTov liri-
(TKid^ovo-a:^ *The Holy Ghost and the overshadow*
ing virtue of the Most High.'

Ylbv ovv avOpfoirov kavrhv IXeycv ; * Wherefore
did he call Himself the Son of Man ? ' says J.
Martyr, firoi airo Trig yivvfitrttog rrig Sia wapOlvov,
T/rec ^v {(jjg e^ijv) airo tov Aaj3lS, icai *Iaic(oj3, koI
'I(raaK, Kot ^Afipaafi yivovg,^ that is, ' on account
of His birth through the Virgin, who, as they
said, was of the kindred of David, of Jacob, of
Isaac, and of Abraham ; ' iv y to yevvriOiv Ik tov
UvevfjuiTog Ifv aylov,* * and in whom that which
was bom was of the Holy Ghost,' Sri avwOcv, koi
Sia ya<rTpog avOpwwetagy 6 Oiog koI HaTrjp tHjv
(iXfov Ycvvaffdat avrov [rov YJov] efiekXe : * * inas-

» lb. « S. Bas. vol. iii. col. 1464.

« Dial. c. Tr. p. 327. * S. Matt. i. 20. » lb. p. 286.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 21

mucli as Gtod and the Father of all was to heget
Him from ahove and hring Him forth through a
human womb.'

X. Since, then, He who is from all eternity
one with the Father, very God of very God, be-
gotten not made, can have no yiveaiQy no origin,
formation, or coming into existence, I conclude
that the reading chosen by Dr. Alford, rov Si
^Iriaov ri yivtmq ovrwq ^v, on the authority of
only six MSS. and other doubtful evidence, is
liable to the abuse made of it by heretics, and is
therefore much worse than the Received reading,
rov Si 'I. X. r\ yivvritrig ovrayg ijv, which, by Dr.
Alford's own showing, rests on the authority of
considerably more than fifty MSS., one of which,
C. Sinaiticus, is as old or older than the Cod.
Vaticanus ; on that of the Fathers ; and is most
correct according to the orthodox faith.'

XI. Having examined Dr. Alford's digest, let
us now look at his notes on this verse.

He tells us in the digest that ylvvijcnc " is a
probable correction from verb so often used
above," and in his notes he again informs us that

' Dr. Alford, who tells tts that he constructs his text on that
only of which he is quite certtjin, says that the Beceived reading
yifffirtf is supported by *L.rel.'i.«. by the MS. L. andaU the rest.
I have carried my eye rapidly up and down his list, and have
found the number of MSS. in which this passage may be sup-
posed to occur, considerably above fifty or sixty. Doubtless
Dr. Alford has collated them all. He might, however, have
mentioned some of the authorities brought forward in favour of

22 REMARKS, ETC.

"the ordinary reading yiwriaig seems to have
been taken up from t. 16." Of coarse it must be
so, since Dr. Alford " entirely depends" on what
he asserts. " Doctors," however, ** do differ " in
this as in many other things; for Mill, whose
work it is a pleasure to consult,^ says,

" Bed et interpolatse plnres lectioDeB (in S. Athana-
sii 0pp.), *Iri(Tov fi yiyetric ovTug ijv. Mat. i. 18. Sic
Auctor Dialogi 3, de Trin. J. 25, ff yevetrn, inquit,
oux^ V yivvnf^ii' 6^ sic forte Codd. aliq. ipsins sevi.
Sed yiveffiQ irrepsit ex principio hnjus cap."

And again when treating of Maximus : ^

" Sic Orthodoxus, ^ yireanc tlirtv^ oif^c ^ yiyyrftng»
Matthsei, cap. i. v. 18; cam tamen yivetnc non nisi
pancornm qnomndam Codicnm faerit,et qnidem traduc-
tum yideatur ex versa prime istias cap. yiwritrig in
omnibus jam libris, eodemqae qaod ad opBo^o^iavy
redit, hoc an illad legatur."

The reading above given from Didymus Alex-
andrinus seems to have escaped Mill, for he does
not mention it in his remarks on that Father, but
further, in his note to this verse,* he says, speak-
ing of the reading yivkmg : —

** Sic dim Codd. pleriqae, inqait Grotius. Nos certe
in istos nondum incidimas : im6 nallum exemplar MS.
Patrem aut Tractatorem vidimus, qui ita legat."

» Proleg. 757. » lb. 1021. » Proleg. 818.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 23

He must have overlooked the Codd. Vatic,
Epiir., but as to the Fathers he bids fair to be
correct.

Further, the Dean says that

" The yap, which follows [yui/iy<n-fvdft<nyc yap], was
appended to account for the exception in this last case
to the direct sequence of kyivvtitrev throughout the
genealogy."

. But Didymus Al., who reads yivvrimg, also
reads ixvr\<TT€vBdfTriq r^c /*•> omitting the yap ; as
does also S. Chrysostom and S. Epiphanius.^ Of
all the old versions the Slavonic alone inserts the
yap. The rest either adopt idiomatically the
Greek partic. pass., or make use of a conjunction
with the indicative, where the Greek construction
would not be grammatical.

But when Dr. Alford says farther,

" TivetriQ must be understood in a wide sense, as
nearly identical in meaning with yiwritrtQ ; as * =
''oiigo^ not merely * Urth,^ Mey.' "

one may well ask if he be "quite sure*' of what he
says. He seems to take the specific term yivvriaig,
which implies only one of the several modes of
production for the KaOoXiKri Xi^iQ, the generic
yive(TiQ, which embraces them all ; telling us to
understand the generic term, which is already
as wide as it can be, in a yet wider sense, nearly

» See p. 10.

24 BEMARK8, ETC.

identical with a specific term ! And, lastly, lie re-
commends US to imderstand it as ^^origo,** the very
word we must avoid, which he seems to think is
the meaning of yivvi\<Ti^. If, instead of translat-
ing from the German, the Dean had studied the
relative etymology of each term, and a few of the
authorities above given, he probably would have
written otherwise.
Then follows :

" It [yivEfriq] probably is chosen by the Holy Spirit
to mark a slight distinction between the yiwinriQ of oar
Lord and that of ordinary men. See Digest.**

With regard to " this choice of ylvitrig by the
Holy Ghost*' we have already seen enough to
form our judgment as to the side on which the
choice is likely to have been. But that " slight
distinction" in the birth, according to the Dean,
nevertheless, iriptf, yivvtitrei ov trvyKpiverai,^ 'bears
no comparison with any other birth,* says Didy-
mus Al. ; airiorov koi aSvvarov vofutlofisvov wapa
roTc avOptowoig ycvrjo-ccrdai,^ ' was a thing thought
incredible and that could not take place among
men,' says Justin Martyr ; avlK^joaoroc yap icai
airoppriTogj 'a birth ineffable and unsearchable,'
says S. Chrysostom, who to this birth of Christ
in the flesh applies the words of Isaiah, riiv yev-
eav avTov rig Sifiy^(r£rai ; * Who shall declare His

431.

« De Trin. lib. i. c. xv. col. 810, ed. M.

' Pro Christ. Apol. p. 14, and Quest, xyi. p. 400, and Ixyii.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 26

{generation P * To Oavfia to irept rriv yivvntriv
avfifiav,^ ^ for the wonder that took place about
His birth/ adds the same Father.

But enough, surely. To talk of a ''slight
difference" only between the birth of one of us and
that of Him whom the prophets foretold, whom
Gabriel announced, whom His angels heralded,
and on whom the star shone at His birth, is, in
sooth, to form a very mean estimate of the com-
ing into the world of the Son of God ; to irpdrov
Kat fi6vov Tov Ofov ylvvriiuLa — ov ov rig yvtiy ttotI
Kar a^iaVf el fifl ix6voq 6 yevvfitrag avrov Harrip:^
* the first and only issue from God ; whom no one
can ever know as He is, but the Father alone who
begat Him.*

XII. On Ik IIi/cvjuaToc aylov, the Dean has this
note: —

" The interpretation of wyEVfiaTog kyiov in this
place must thus be sought: (1), Unquestionably to
TTv. TO &y. is used in the N. T. as signifying the Holy
OhosU (2), But it is a well-known usage to omit the
article from such words, under certain circumstances ;
e. g. when a preposition precedes, as cic \ifiiva (Plato,
Theaet. £. i.), &c. We are, therefore, justified in inter-
preting £K TV. ky, according to this usage, and under-
standing TO TV, TO &y. as the agent referred to. And
(3), even independently of the above usage, when a
word or an expression came to bear a technical con-

* Homil. ii. 1, in Matt iv. 2, Is. liii. 8.
^ Euseb. Eccl. Hist. lib. ii. c. 2.

26 REMARKS, ETC.

ventional meaning, it was also oommon to use it without
the art., as if it were a proper name ; e.g, dedcy vofio^,
wioc Beov, (Sbc."

We may reasonably doubt whether Dr. Alford
had a clear idea of what he wrote.

(1.) TLvevfia ayiov, to ayiov TLvnffia, to Uv^vfia
TO aytov, and to Ilvevfui, all mean the Holy Ghost,
under different granmiatical circumstances.

(a,) As a general rule in Greek, when two
terms are placed in simple apposition without the
article, the first qualifies the second, and also
defines it so as to let the emphasis fall upon it.
This holds good, whether one or both terms be
substantiyes, adjectiyes, or participles ; the posi-
tion of which in the sentence is thus governed by
the intention of the writer.

(b.) Thus, two substantiyes — avrjp fiavTiq and
fiavTiq avfip do not mean the same thing. In the
first the stress lies on fiavTiQy and the idea is — a
man [who is indeed] a seer ; whereas, in fiavTig
avfip, the emphasis falls on avrip, and the idea is,
" seer-man," i.e, a man [whose profession happens
to be that of] a seer, good or bad. This rule can
have no exception.

(c.) A substantive and an adjective. Thus, in
KoXog avTip and avfjp KoXog the idea differs. In
the first it is " a good man;'* in the second, "a
man [who is] good;" and thus, better than icaXoc
avfip. Examples of this abound: e.g, Iv ayli^
ijuXfiiuLaTi, 2 Cor. xiii. 12 ; iv ipiXfifiaTi ayit^, 1 Cor.
xvi, 20 ; 1 Thess. v. 26 ; wXovtuv tpyotg KoXoig,

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 27

to be rich in works [that are indeed] good, 1 Tim. •
vi. 8 ; whereas in koXov ipyov imO.y 1 Tim. iii. 1 ;
TToXXa fcaXa epya iSei^a, S. John, x. 82, 33 ; riiroQ
KaXwv ipyayv, Tit. ii. 7, 14, etc. ; the stress lies on
ipya, all good ; on " good works." So also is the
emphasis more felt in 6 /xlv vojuloq ayiog ; but the
law is holy, Rom. vii. 12, than in icaXoc 6 vofiog,
good [is] the law, 1 Tim. i. 8 — ypaijtal aylai, the
Scriptures which are holy, Rom. i. 2, &c.

This, I expect, accounts for liv^vfia ayiov,
which occurs constantly; i,e. Spirit [who is]
holy; and not as Winer ^ says, and Dr. Alford
repeats after him, rather to be looked upon as a
proper name. For aylov irvtvfia would mean " a
holy spirit;" but as this cannot be apart from
the Holy Ghost, aylov livvufia never occurs ; but
always livtvfia aylov, Spirit [who is] holy. The
stress laid upon the adjective ayfoc, by its being
put last, of itself defines Trvcv/xa, as the only Spirit
who is holy, without the article ; the use or ab-
sence of which is regulated both by grammar and
by idiom.

The truth of the above remarks is proved by
the fact that —

{d.) When the article is used, ruling, as it
does, like a king, the construction of the Greek
sentence, it disturbs the arrangement by simple
apposition ; because alone, it defines, and thus
qualifies more decidedly than any other word.

> Gr. p. 130.

28 REMARKS, ETCk

^ Therefore, whereas avfip ayaBog and ayaOoc avfip
speak for themselves, if the substantive aviip be
defined by the article whose sway overrules that
of the adjective, the adjective can no longer
command by coming last, but must now take
inferior rank by coming first between the article
and the noun. Thus, we cannot have 6 avfjp
ayaOo^y but 6 ayadoc aviip ; but if the adjective
must come last, so as to place the emphasis upon
it, as it does in avfjp ayadoc, then must the
article be prefixed to both the noun and the
adjective, 6 avrjp 6 KoXhg koI ayaOog, Thus, 6
avfjp 6 awt(TTOQf 'n yvvfj fi awKTTog, 1 Cor. vii. 14 ;
6 TToififiv 6 KaXoQf S. John, x. 11 ; 6 SecnrorTjc &
KoXoCy Apoc. vi. 10 ; tov aywva rov koXov fiy»
2 Tim. iv. 7 ; iv rd^ opei t^ ayla^, 2 Pet. i. 18,
&c.

(e.) Thus TO irvivfia, defined as it is by the
article, means the Spirit, Kar i^oxnvy i,e, the
Holy Ghost, which is more fully described by
putting ayiov after the article, to ayiov TlvevjULa ;
e.g. TO yevvriOev — Ik UvevfiaTog ayiov, 8. Matt, i*
18, 20 ; and to yeyewn/iivov Ik tov HvevfiaTO^y
S. John, iii. 6, 8 — both expressions being the
same as to UvBvfia. But when the emphasis must
rest on ayiov, then the article is prefixed to this
also, TO Hvevfia to ayiov.

The same holds good with Oeog, as regards tl^e
article ; S. Clement of Alexandria telling us with
respect to the article before fltoc, 6 Gtoc — ov yap
deov airXcUc wpoaeiirev 6 awocrroXog, Ty tov ap'

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 29

0/oov irpora^ei rov TLavroKparopa SijXwo-ac,* that .
the Apostle does not simply say deoc* god, but
points to the Almighty, placing the article before
it." When, therefore, Ococ occurs in the N. T.
without the article, it cannot be in the generic
sense of "deity," in which Ococ was used by
Socrates and Plato; but it presupposes in the
reader, as it did in the writer, the knowledge
that Oe6g is now understood differently through
the article which is generally affixed to it, in
order to signify God. The Greek and the Eng-
lish idioms — 6 Gcoc, God — ©coc, a, or the god —
are exactly opposite ; and show, among other
proofs, how difficult a good translation must be,
and how hard is the revision thereof. For in-
stance, what difference can be made in an English
translation between iv Svvo/xet TLvevfiarog aylov
Rom. XV. 13, 19, and Iv Ty Swajuiei rov 11 v. ay.,
8. Matt. iv. 14 ; — elg to Ilvev jULa to ayiov, S. Mark,
ill. 29, and elg to ayiov Uvivfia, S. Luke, xii. 10,
said of the same thing? And thus in numberless
cases.

(2.) Whence it is clear that the omission of
the article " from such words," says Dr. Alford —
what words? — does not, as he seems to think,
ever depend on " the preposition that may pre-
cede the noun;" for the example, elg \ifiiva,
Theaet. i., which he brings forward, has nothing
whatever to do with it. It is the article that

' Strom, iii. p. 460.

30 REMARKS, ETC.

defines the noun ; not so the preposition. Thiis^
when, in the Thesdtetus, Euclides says to Terp-
sion, €cc \ifJiiva KaTa[ialvu}v, he could only mean
the port of NissaBa, which was the port of Me-
gara, situated ftirther inland. Here the article
would have been needless; for the port was
already defined by being the only one at hand.
The same is the case in English, for if two
persons were in conversation at a sea-port town,
and one said, ' A ship is just come into port,'
both would, of course, think of no other port
than the one at hand. Even in the case of a
harbour at some distance £rom the town, one
hears very frequently, * I was on my way to
harbour;' albeit, 'to the harbour,' would, un-
doubtedly, be more correct. As a further proof,
however, that the omission of the article in cic
Xijjiva does not depend on the preposition, when
Socrates alludes to a vessel coming into port at
the Piraeus, he says, etc rbv Xijucva.*

The use or the omission of the article in
Greek must, therefore, depend on the defining
power of the article itself, which is, or is not,
required according to grammar, local circum-
stances, or idiom, which can never be fuUy learnt
in a dead language. Thus, again, when the same
Euclides says, oi yap i} Kara woXiv,^ * I was not in
(or about) town,' he, of course, meant Megara, as
he had meant Nisssea by Xifiiva; Kara ttoXcic,

» Gorg. 143, p. 320, ed. Lond. » Theset. 5. 1.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 19. 31

however, in S. Luke, viii. 4, Acts, xv. 21, Thu-
cyd. i. 3, 5, &c., means " in every town or city," or
" city by city ; " so that here the preposition does
not exclude the article, since we have Kara ttjv
TToXiv, Acts, xxiv. 12. But ij ttoXic was said of
Athens, as also of Jerusalem; so that Kara r^v
iroXiv, in the mouth of Euclides, would have
meant Athens, and not Megara; as Kara woXiv,
said by S. Paul at Caesarea, would have been
taken for CsBsarea, and not, as he meant it, for
Jerusalem.

Ver. 19.

Eec. Text : fifj OiXwv avrrjv wapaSBiyfiarltrai.

Dr. Alford : firi 0i\wv aifTrjv Seiyfiariirai.

Here the Dean discards the Eeceived reading
irapaSBiyjuuiTltrai, which is a Greek term of frequent
occurrence in the LXX. and in later writers, for
another word, ZuyiiarlZuv, which is, Wahl, s. v.,
tells us, " vox GrsBcis incognita," referring us to
Winer's Gr., p. 29, in proof of what he says —
SeiyfiaTiZsiVy being ava^ Xey. only, in Col. ii. 15.

Dr. Alford's authorities for the change are the
Cod. Yaticanus, two other MSS., and a Scholium
taken from Eusebius ad Stephanum, preserved,
but, he says, "blunderingly given," in Dr. Cra-
mer's Catena P. P. on S. Matthew. In this
Scholium, Eusebius is made to say that " he
thinks the Evangelist rightly* used Ssiyfiarlfrat
instead of irapaZuyfiariaaiy which implies public
accusation for a misdeed, while SeLyfiariaai only

32 REMARKS, ETC.

means " to make public/' The Becelved Text, on
the other hand, is sanctioned by Cod. Ephrsemi
and many others, together with the Fathers, who
(like S. Chrysostom) allude to the circumstance.

Besides that the authority of S. Chrysostom
is in all cases preferable to that of Eusebius in
matter of Greek style or scholarship, the two
terms in question are very nearly identical in
this case.

Aecy/ia, whence Secyfiarf^civ, properly means a
sample, coat, or anything which a public crier
or auctioneer holds up for sale proclaiming its
merits, while he walks up and down the public
bazaar or market-place ; as it was and now is
the custom in Greek and other Eastern towns;
whence SriiJ.o(Ti€VHv, the rendering of Hesychius
for SuyiuLaTiZeiv, is correct. Now, it is very clear,
that no woman under the circumstances, which
Joseph suspected, could any how Seiy fmrlfrai, be
made public among the people, especially if the
Jewish law were fully carried out, without
making her by that simple act a public warning
and covering her with infamy.

Whereas, however Seiyfia be correctly said of
things only, wapaSeiyim is said of persons ; while
vapa(io\{i is in the sense of "example" applicable
only to irrational or inanimate beings — ira/oa-
Seiyfia em i/jxpvxov, irapafioXri Itti a\pvxovA As we
cannot suppose tBat Joseph would have proceeded

^ Thorn. Mag. p. 278, ed. Kitsch.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 19. 33

to extremities, and caused Mary to be put to
death, according to law,^ the idea of capital
punishment may, in this case, be dismissed from
Trapa^HyfiariiTaif which is thus reduced to the
sense of " making a pubKc example " of her, by
merely sending her away publicly, instead of
either quietly sending her back to her father's
house, or giving her in private the letter of
divorcement. So that, practically, the amount of
infamy caused either by SeiyfiaTitraL or TrapaSeLy-
liariaai, would be the same.

She is made to say as much in the Protoev.
Jacobi, c. XX., where Joseph, being uncertain as
to what he would do — lav Kpvypw to ajiapTv^fia
ctvrfjc — cav avrfiv <pavepw<T(o roig vioig ^laparjX,^
Mary says to him, M?i Trapa^eiyfiaTlaiig ^e rolg
vioig ^ItTpafjjX, aWa avoSog fie rolg yovevtri fiov,^
that shows irapaiuyfiaTlZto taken only in the
sense of (jiavepota, which, under such circum-
stances, must imply disgrace.

The formal publicity of TrapaSuyfxarlZ^iv, in
this case, consisted in — 8rav avrjp irapa to <tvv^
iSpiov ^ye Trjv vTroTTTevfiivriVf koX KaTriyopei TavTtig,
Koi ovTOjg avTrjv (j^avepiog airiXvev airb Trig olKiag
aifTov* — * the husband bringing the suspected wife
before the sanhedrim, accusing her, and thus
openly dismissing her ifrom his house ;' so that, if

* See Lightfoot, Horee Talm. ad loc.
« C. xiv. p. 97, Fab. C. Ap. N. T.

« C. XX. p. Ill, and p. 225, 251, ed. Thile.

* Euthjm. Zigab. ad loc.

D

O^ REMARKS, ETC.

her dismissal had not been made "public," that is,
made known to the council — with or without in-
dictment — she would not have been ^njnotri^vidv-n ;
and so, neither SeiyfiarnT/iivn, if there be such a
word in Greek : for her being simply sent back to
her parents, was to dismiss her, XaOpa, privily.

We find from other passages that the idea of
'* making an example *' is the meaning of irapa-
oety/xart^eii/, as irapa^uyfxa TroitTv,' TrapaSdyfxari
XpriaraaOai f the infamy, and therefore also the
pimishment, being made to depend on the cause
of the exposure. Thus, we find punishment
added in /uleto, Tifiu>piag Trapa^iy/uLarll^eiv f but only
implied in Esther's (apocryphal) prayer rbv Si
apxovra 1^' vfJ^Q Tra/aaStiy/Ltano-ov,* said in allusion
to Haman ; which could not surely be rendered
that "he might be hanged;" but only made a
public example of. Likewise, in Numb. xxv. 4,
where TrapaSeiy /ulclt ktov renders the Hebrew J^plH,
it does not only imply " hanging up," * but
also making a public example of those men.
Likewise, in Tra/oaSety/xart^wv roig irdvrwv rwv
icaicwv aiTiovg,^ "making an example" of such
malefactors, woidd, of itself, imply the punish-
ment of them ; just in the same way as a woman

* Dem. ^t^t <rns ^ret^et^r^, p. 413, ed. Oxf., &g.
'"^ Polyb. Exc. Leg. xxviii,

* Polyb. Lib. ii. 60, ed. Gronov.

* Chap. xiv. 11, ed. Aid. but c. iv. p. 677. This quotation
is not found in Troramii, Cone. Graec.

« See also Ezek. xxviii. 17. Polyb. lib. xv. 30.
« Polyb. lib. XV. 30.

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 23. 35

sent away for adultery is thereby made a public
example, and thus also covered with infamy, though,
not otherwise punished, whether she be Tra/oaSeiy-
jjLaTKTfiivri or only ^uyfiaTifTfiivri, supposing such
a word occurs in Greek.

So that, without pursuing this subject any
further, we see that we can safely keep to the
Received reading, which is borne out by more
MSS. than the other ; is a good Greek term, and
not " vox Graecis incognita," like its proposed sub-
stitute, which, if mentioned by Eusebius, is, never-
theless, not even alluded to by S. John Chryso-
stom and the other Fathers who adopt the Received
reading Tra/oaScty/Ltaricrai.^

Ver. 23.

"iSov r] TrapOivog, 'behold a virgin.* Dr. Al-
ford makes no comment on this, albeit so
much stress has been laid on the article in ij
irapO. The article ought, unquestionably, to be
rendered in English (1) because it is the exact
rendering of moh^T}, the maid, LXX. ri trap-
Oivog ; inasmuch as (2) we cannot take the article
here as in 17 yw fj kol fi wapOivog — 17 ayafxog,
1 Cor. vii. 34, where it is used like " the " in a
generic sense, " the immarried woman," Le, the

* For fuller information on this passage, see Schleusner's
article, s.v. Wolfii Curse Phil, ad loc. ; Suiceri Thesaurus, s.v.
^at^ahuyfAttTiltn\ Lightfoot's Horse Talm., ad loc: Meuschenii
N. T. ex Talm. illustr, p. 44, and A. Bynaji Nat. D. p. 185, sq.

36 REMARKS; ETC.

whole class of such ; because the prophecy would
not be applicable ; (3) the article is dwelt upon
by the Jewish commentators as referring to a
maid who belonged to Ahaz.

Rabbi D. Kimchi, in his commentary on Isa.
vii. 14, tells us that rroSj^ simply means a young
woman whether married or not, showing that in
this case she must have been married, since she
conceived. And in his Dictionary * he repeats
the same thing, taking this verse as proof of it ;
inasmuch as there is nothing in the other three
passages where noSir occurs, to show that it may
not be rendered maid, irapOivog. We then see
what the dispute about irapdivog and veavtc is
worth, since, after all, it rests on this passage
only, which is by Jews interpreted as applicable
to the days of Ahaz, and by Christians as applic-
able to the Virgin Mary, the blessed Mother of
our Lord. As Dr. Alford quotes Symmachus,
Aquila, &c., ought he also to have mentioned
the very interesting dialogue between Justin
Martyr and the Jew Trypho on this very pass-
age, where J. Martyr contends for irapOivog and
Trypho for veavtg,^ which is a corruption of the
LXX. attributed by S. Chrysostom ^ to the Jews
[Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion ?]. He ac-
cuses them of having altered wapdivog to veavig,
in order to destroy the testimony of the LXX.,

1 D*tt'^lWl"D S. V. Ubv.
« Dial. c. Trj'ph. pp. 291, 297, 310. ' Homil. in Matt. v. 2.

ON S. MATT. CH. T. V. 25. 37

wliicli is far more worthy of credit, he says, than
those who, being Jews, altered the LXX. text
to suit their own ends; and that, too, a long
time after the birth of Christ.

Those who are curious of such things may
consult the oracle of Apollo of Cyzicus, given to
the Argonauts, respecting the birth of Christ,
as reported by Cedrenus, — Oeov — ov \6yog a^Oiroc
cv aSael Kovpy iyKVog itrrai — avrrig Etrrai Sofioc
ovTog* Mapla Si rovvo/ua avTrjg^ * Whose dwell-
ing will this be ? asked they the god. In time,
said he, the Word of God shall be born of a
pure maiden, whose name is Mary, and this shall
be her house.'

Ver. 25.

Here, instead of the Received and familiar
?aic ov sTeKB tov vlbv avTYJg tov TrpwroroKOv, Dr.
Alford gives, in his text, the wholesale alteration,
6WC ov ireKE vlov, that can hardly be rendered
" till she had brought forth a son," that is, not "a
daughter;'* but must be rendered " a child,*' This,
however, is more than we can take in all at once ;
and had Dr. Alford considered the matter more
attentively, he probably would have seen that
the omission of the article in ereKev vlov, which
is the reading of his favouYite Cod. Yaticanus,
must have been a mistake of the copyist.

Without the article creicev vlov simply means
that the Virgin brought forth " a child ;" for to

> Hist. Compend. p. 209, ed. Dindorf. See also Orac. Sibyll.
p. 760, sqq.

38 REMARKS, ETC.

specify that it was a man-child, it would have
been viov app^va, as in Apoc. xii. 5. The article,
however, sreiccv rov vlov, defines *the son* by
referring him to the prophecy, v. 21, and to what
follows as far as v. 25, inclusive.

Thus reads the Coptic, rov viov; and this
would be sufficient, as rov wpwroroKov might
easily be gathered from the context. The Sa-
hidic, however, reads rov viov avrfjcj which is
yet better ; while the Peschito, which is a higher
authority than either of those two versions, rcjads
with the Ethiopic, the Armenian, and the other
old versions, Cod. Ephraem, and a host of other
MSS. rov viov avTYig rov TT/owroroicov, which is
the reading followed by S. Chrysostom.

With due deference to the Dean, therefore,
must I, for my part, demur to trciccv viov, pariet
filium, which, neither in Greek nor in Latin,
determines anything ; and so keep to the Received
text.

CHAPTER II.

Ver. 1.

'iSov, fiayoi airq avaroXwv wapeyivovro elg
'UpocToXv/ia, ' Behold, there came wise men from
the east to Jerusalem.' Authorized Version.

On this Dr. Alford has the following note :

" Magi from the East (not ctTr. arar. irapey,). The
absence of the article after pdyoi is no objection to this

ON s* MATT, CH. n. V. 1. * 39

interpretation. In fact, it could not have been here
expressed, because the concrete noun fiayoi is not dis-
tributed ; as neither could it be in such an expression as
apBpitfTrog iv Trvcw/iari aKaddpra). Mark, i. 23. In the
case of an anarthrous abstract noun, the article mai/
follow^ but may also be omitted," &c.

This is beyond me ; at least, I cannot see what
it has to do with the subject in hand ; but I trust
other students may discover, to their satisfaction,
the connexion between ** concrete magi "and "anar-
throus abstract nouns." So that I must try and
find for myself why fiayoi has no article after it :
in other words, why we have not fxayoi ol airb
ivaroXiov,

First, for the simple reason that /layoi ol airo
avaTo\C)v would imply or create the antithesis,
fxayoi oi diro Sv<r/Ltt5v, * Magi from the west,' who
never were heard of. We have this antithesis
in Isa. xlv. 6, ol air avarokwv koi ol airo Svo-fcwv,
* those from the east and those from the west ; '
To^orai ol ttTTo rrig avaroXfJc?* 'bowmen, those
from the east,' because there were others from
the west ; in other words, ol filv i^ avaroX^C
avOpojTTOt — ol 8* em Oarepcu^

Secondly, we could not have fiayoi ol airo a v.,
because it would be a tautology, inasmuch as they
came from nowhere else than the East. I will
not tarry by the Aryan origin of juayog {XQ in

• Herodian. lib. viii, p. 167, ed. Steph.
» Ibid. lib. iii. p. 72.

40 ' REMARKS, ETC,

Jer. xxxix. 3), but only remark that according-
to Greek writers, such as Strabo,^ and Diogenes
Laertius,* yeyevrjtTdai irapa /jIv Ylipacug Mayovg-,
irapa St Ba/3uXaivfotc ^ ^A<r<Tvpioig XaXSalovg, koi
rviLLvo<TO(jii(TTag Trap' 'Iv8oTc> Trapa re KcXroTc koi
TaXaraig tovq icaXov/Lttvovc ApvtSag kol Se/lcvo-
Oiovg, * that of old there were wise men called
Magi among the Persians {rndgh, ddna u ddnish-
mand ast,^ juayog is a learned and wise man) ;
Chaldeans among the Babylonians and the As-
syrians; Gymnosophists (Brahmins) among the
Indians ; Druids and high-priests among the Celts
and the Gauls ; ' while Michael Glycas says, juaywc
ly\(is)pi(i)Q ol Hipfrai Xiyovrai,* ' that the Persians
are called magoa in their own tongue and country/
and that nayoi ek UeptrlSoQ eIq irpoaKvvr\<nv avrov
irapayivovraiy * Magi of Persia came to worship
Christ/

Justin Martyr ^ says they came from Arabia ;
but even if his opinion were correct, the country
imderstood by Arabia ia his days would yet, like
Persia, be situated within the east, or avaroXat,
successive risings of the sun, as understood by the
Greeks, who held that —

T17V fxiv yap evrog avaroXuyv iratrav (txeSov
oIkov(tlv 'IvSot —

* Lib. xvi. e. ii. 89. • Proem, i.
' Desatir Vocab. of anc. terms, p. 61.

* Annal. ii. p. 244 ; iii. p. 8B7, ed. Dind.

* P. 304.

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 1. 41

*Iv8oi fiev ovv fieraSv depivHjv avaroXwv koI
Xeifiepiviov oIkov<ti^ —

* Indians inhabited the country situated between
the summer and the winter sun-risings (solstices).'
Therefore was avaroXri sometimes used for " the
east/' but avaroXai far oftener, and by certain
writers, almost exclusively to mean the countries
to the east, the east in general.

Thirdly, had the intention of the writer been
to say those fiayot were natives of the east,
inistead of simply telling us they came from
thence, he would, like Eusebius, M. Glycas, and
others, have said I? avaroXtJv, as they do lie
UepaiSog, I? avaroXfjc fJLayoi.^ But knowing well
that as every body believed, jdayoi were at home
in the east, and could originate from nowhere
else, he did not stop to state the place of their
birth or extraction, maybe Persia ; but only told
the fact that they came from the wide east, awb
avaroXiov, to Jerusalem.

For albeit such passages as elg airo ^Traprrig
— EKTog i^ AirwXiag ; ^ ol airo neXoTTOWTjcrov, Lq>
Ii^OTrovvr)<noL \^ Aiopieig ^cv ol awo AcS^ov —
la^ovcTL Sc o£ airo "Idjvog rov !SvOov (jivvreg,^ seem
at first to imply the same kind ojf origin, yet
even here airo means "descent'' as "from;"
whereas bk expresses the real extraction "out

• Scymni Chii, ari^iuy. 170, 175.

* Euseb. ii. Eccles. lib. i. c. viii. ^ Electra, 700, sqq.

* Herod, viii. 70, 79, 114. * Dicsearch. Gresc, iii. 2, 3.

42 REMARKS^ Era

of," as in irar/ooOev, Ik Aioc n^xovrai ;* Ik OecUv —
£^vv ;' Ik row Gcov l^i}X0ov Koi ^koi.' Comp. l^^/o-
\ofiai with awipxofiai — airo Gcov iXriXvOag ;* Nico-
demus could not have said i^riXOf^, as he did
not know of Christ's extraction, but only that,
like a prophet, He was come "from" God ; where-
as the Apostles confessed 8tl airo Gcov iSijX&cv,^
as taught by Him ;^ wherein we can compare the
relative meaning of otto and Ik. So also is light
issuing from the east described as 12 avaroXwv
X/ovcTt^r fiaXiara to (jiiyyoc opaOiv boikev'^ — 12 ava-
ToXwv, rj Svtrewg, el tv\oi, air6 rt fXitnfi^plag ;®
likewise, air avaroXwv lirX Svtr/Jiag ^ipeaOai Trav-
rac rove atrripag.^

Whence it must appear that, in /layoi airo
avaroXtJv irapiyivovro elg 'Ic/o., airo cannot, as
Dr. Alford says, be construed with fxayoi, but
that, as it refers to the place whence they started
on their journey, so also must it be construed with
vapeyivovTOy the place at which they arrived.

On this the Dean writes : —

"De Wette remarks, that if airb dvar. belonged to
wapey., it would probably ^Z/oto that verb, as If otov
does, ref. Luke [i.e. S. Luke, xi. 6]. I may add that
irapaylvofiai occurs with a preposition and a substan-

> 01. vii. 40. • Pyth. i. 79. » S. John, viii. 42, &c.

* Id. iii. 2. » Ibid. xvi. 30. « Ibid. xiii. 3.

f Heraclid. AUeg. Horn. p. 418, ed. Gale.
« Herodian. lib. vii. p. 149, ed. H. Staph.
» Anaxag. ap. Stob. Phys. c. 24.

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 1. 43

tive twelve times in the N. T. , and in no case are they
prefixed.''''

This is an oversight; irapayivojiai thus con-
strued occurs thirteen times in the N.T., and in
Acts, xiii. 14, we read avroX Se StcXflovrec awo
Trig nijoyrjc irapeyevovro elg 'Avrto^etav, which
Wahl rightly mentions as proving, together with
this passage, S. Matt. ii. 1, that airo is to be con-
strued with wapEyivovTo.

And so understand it (1) Protoevang. Jacobi,
0. xxi., where we read irapeyivovro fiayoi airo
avaroXwv elg 'Up. ed. Fabric.,^ rendered ^XOov
yap fiayoi airo avaroXiov, in Thile's ed.,^ thus
placing beyond a doubt that airo is to be con-
strued with irapey., and not with fiayoi* So also
is it rendered by (2) Sahid., (3) Memph., (4)
Syr., (5) Pers., (6) Arab. Erpen., (7) Arab. Pol. ;
while Armen. Georg. and Slav, render the Greek
literally, and are liable to precisely the same
construction. The Ethiopic reads masagalan
amhaher tsdbah, "wizards (not magi) from the
east country " correctly ; since " wizards *' came
from elsewhere than from the east, though
" Magi " did not. (8) Theophylact, (9) A. Saxon
Vers., (10) Evang. Inf. Arab.,' (11) Evang. de
NatiT. B. Marise,* (12) Iren. adv. Hseres.,^ (13)
Evang. S. Matt. Hebr. ed. 1551, (14) Bar He-

> Cod. Pseud. N.T. vol. i. p. J 13. ^ p. 254.
» C. vii. p. 71, ed. Phil. * C. xvi. p. 388, id.

• lib. iii. c. 20.

44 REMARKS, ETC.

brsBus,* (15) Solomon, Bishop of Botsrah,* who,
like Bar Hehraeus, quotes Longinus (?) to show
that the Magi came from the east, and (15) Hist.
J. C. Persicfe autore Hier. Xavier, p. 81.

As regards trapayiyvofxai — TrapayiyvecrOai koX
inroylyveaOatf^ — vyieiag filv irapayiyvofiivriQf v6<tov
Si avoyiyvofiivrig,* &c., — is a verb of very fre-
quent occurrence in Attic writers, by whom it
is used either absolutely or construed with the
dative, and means "to be present," i.e. "to be
by some one." In later writers it is used in
this sense with prepositions, in the sense of " be-
coming present from," i.e. coming, arriving, &c.
But as to the preposition being placed before or
after, or rather as to irapay. being construed with
two prepositions, aTro, lie, and etc, "from — to," it
depends on the writer. Thus, in the LXX., Trapa-
ylvofiai is construed with the prepos. of the place
to which irapay. refers, and is placed after it, e.g.
i^iXOovTeg yap Ik BafivXtJvog — irapeyivovTo etc
'lripov(Ta\{)ij,,^ which is the usual construction in
the LXX.

While, on the other hand, among some him-
dred and twenty places in Polybius, in which
TTapaylvEfrOaL is used, I have noticed such pass-
ages as these in which (1) irapa or airo is placed
before and is construed with irapay ivetrOai — jLtera
St TovTOvg elcTEKoXovvTO iravrag rovg airo rwv

> In Assera. B. Or. vol. iii. p. 316. « Ibid. ib.

» Sophist. § 67. * Alcib. i. § 45, ed. Lond.

» 3 Esdr. viii. 7.

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 1. 45

iOvCjv Ka\ TToXeiov irapayeyovorag ;^ 8ti ol 'Voj/iaioi
Twv airb rrig ^Atriag TrapaysyovoTiov irpetrfievTwv ;^
— Tovg irapa twv 'PoStwv irpEfTJievTag irapayeyovo'
rag virip tov SiaXveiv ;^ (2) the same preposition is
put before, — elg Sc Tfjv 'Pcifirjv icai irXeioviov irapa-
yByovoTwv,* — rwv Se irpefrfietjjv dg 'Pwfiyjv irapa-
yevo/xiviov ',^ — and after, Trapeyivero UToXe/xaiog 6
vedjrepog elg Tfjv 'FdjjULrtv ;^ before, rolg irapa tov
TTpttr^vripov irapayeyovoaL ; ^ — koX twv irapa tov
)3a(r. ^AvTio^ov tt/occ/B. irapeyeyovoTwv ;^ — after,
TTCLpeyivovTO — irapa ^ Kptaparov,^ &C. ; wliile (3)
at other times both prepositions follow ; e,g, irape-
yivovTO irpbg avTOv irpetrfivTai irapa ficv tov twv
'Htt. eOvovg,^^ or (4) they are put the one before
and the other after, as in elg Se ttjv AuKeSaliuLova
irapayevojxevwv rwv 7rpe<T(ievTU}v Ik Trig 'Fw/uLtig ; ^* —
KaTa TTjv IleXo7r6vvr}(Tov Trapayevofxivwv Ik 'FwjuLrig
— (pvyaSiov ; ^^ and (5) several prepositions before
TrapaylvetrOai, and only one after; on twv irepX
TOV n. Kttt TWV irapa tov T,, koX <tvv TOVTOig tov
M. irapayevofxeviov elg Trjv 'PoSov,^^ &c.

These remarks will suffice to show that when
Dr. Alford says " not aTro avaT, irapey.'^ he does '
not seem to have well weighed the matter.

» Excerpt, leg. Ix. p. 1110. * Id. Ixviii.

3 Id. Ixxxviii. et cxiv. * Id. cvi. * Id. cxli.Tiii. p. 1206, 1208.

• Id. cxiii., cxv., xxvi., xxvii. "^ Id. cxiii. p. 1306.

• Id. cxiv. p. 1307, and lib. xv. 12. » Id. cix. »» Id. xii., xlv.

" Id. liii. p. 1207. '« Id. liv. »« Id. Ixxxvii.

46 REMARKS, ETC.

Ver. 2.

Ei8o/X€V yap avrov rov aarripa tv ry avuToXy.
On this the Dean complains :

That " much has been written in no friendly spirit
on his views on the subject, the question being : Have
we here, in the sacred text, a miracle, or have we some
natural appearance which God, in His Providence, used
as means of indicating to the Magi the birth of His
Son?'' and "that no one has right to charge another
with weakening the belief in the facts related in the
sacred text, because he [that other] feels an honest
conviction that he is relating, not a miracle, but a
natural appearance."*

Quite so ; and we will take the Dean at his
word, seeing he feels "honestly convinced " that

"the expression of the Magi, * We have seen His
star,' does not seem to point to any miraculous appearance,
but to something observed in the course of their watch-
ing the heavens'. We know the Magi to have been devoted
to astrology; and on comparing the language of our
text with this undoubted fact, I confess that it appears
to me the most ingenuous way, fairly to take account
of that fact in our exegesis, and nx>t to shelter' ourselves
from an apparent difficulty hy the convenient hut forced
hypothesis of a miracleJ'^^ The italics are the Dean's own.

There is something so mean, so nnworthy,
in this attempt to deny the miracle believed in,

» 5th ed. 1863. » lb. p. 11.

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V, 2. 47

admired, and sung with hosannahs, by the whole
Church of Christ ever since that star shone in
His heavens as harbinger of His birth, that we
must ask the Dean a question or two before pro-
ceeding on our inquiry.

First, How could the Magi express themselves
otherwise than they did, supposing the star to
have been a miracle, seeing they knew it be His ?
How, for instance, did S. John the Baptist ex-
press himself when he saw the Spirit of God
descending like a dove, and lighting upon
Christ?^ He, like the Magi, simply *'bare re-
cord and said, I saw the Spirit descending from
heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him ;'** yet
this miracle was quite as wonderful as the other.

Secondly, To which of the several sects among
the Magi did those belong who came to Christ,
that Dr. Alford should affirm "they were de-
voted to astrology?" It would be a great gain
to science if he could tell us. Al-shahrestanI,' to
whose writings I can only allude at present, tells
us that the Magi were originally disciples of
Abraham, during whose lifetime they split into
Sabseans and Hanefites. But that the original
Magi, who continued true, yet were divided
amoDg themselves on the subject of the nature
and existence of light and darkness, whence re-
sulted three great sects ; the Kayomersites, who
hold Kayomers to have been Adam, &c. ; the

> S. Matt. iii. 16. ' * S. John, i. 32,

» P. 179, sqq, Arab, text. ed. Cur.

48 REMARKS, ETC.

Zervanites, who hold the great Zervan, uncreated
Time, to be the origin of all things, and of
luminaries, &c. ; and the Zerdushtites, or Zoroas*
trians, who follow the religion of Zerdusht, who
lived in the time of Ghustasp, Darius Hystaspes.

Now, albeit all these Magi more or less wor-
shipped light and darkness, yet considering that
there are few, if any, traces of astrology in the
Avesta, if the Magi who came to Christ were of
this sect, they were the least likely to be devoted
to the stars. At the same time they were the
most likely to know something of the prophecies
about the coming of Christ, attributed to Zerd-
usht, by Al-shahrestanI ;^ by the Bishop of Bots-
rah,* and by Abulpharaj, who gives, in Zer-
dusht's own words, the birth of Christ and the
prediction "of the star who was to appear to
Zerdusht's children, the Magi." * I have looked, as
yet in vain, in the Avesta for this prophecy, which,
I fear, may prove very much like the oracle of
Apollo at Cyzicus, given to the Argonauts* about
the same event ; there are, however, in the Avesta
several remarkable passages about the resurrec-
tion at the end of the world ; but one, especially,
in which the Saviour of the world is mentioned
with His saints.* Certain passages in this extract,

» Ibid. p. 188.

' Deburitho, c. xxxviii. See also Evang. Infant. Arab.
c. Yii. note.

* Hist. Dyn. Arabice, p. 83, ed. Pococke. * See above, p. 35.

* Zamyad Yasht, xix. 14-96. See also Kossowicz's edition
of the same, p. 187, and 47, tr.

ON 8. MATT. CH. H. V. 2. 49

wMch is not certamly known to be Zerdusht's
own, correspond with Al-sharestani's statement ;
and also with a striking passage in the Chung-
yung of Confucius, about " the Holy One com-
ing at the end of the world ;"^ showing, together
with the statements of Tacitus and of Suetonius,
that there was a feeling of expectation widely
spread over the East, far and near ; and that,
somehow, people were looking for the end of the
weeks of Daniel, for the Star that was to rise out
of Jacob, once foretold by Balaam, and for the
coming of the Prince of Peace.

Thirdly, having shown of what sect were the
Magi, Dr. Alford should inform us of what there
was in the star to tell the wise men that the
"King " of the Jews," and no other sovereign, was
bom. We lack a few particulars on this point
that would throw light on what the Dean further
says:

" Fearless of consequences," he tells ns that (l)"m
the year of Borne 747, on the 20th or 29th of May, there
was a conjanction of Jupiter and Saturn in the 20th
degree of Pisces, close to the point of Aries, which was
the part of the heavens noted in astrological science as
that in which signs denoted the greatest and most no-
table events.

" (2) That there was another conjunction of those
planets on the 27th of October or 29th of September,
and again on the 12th of November or 5 th of Decem-
ber, all in the year of Rome 747.

' Ch. 7g. c. xzzziz. 4, 5.

E

50 REMABKS, ETC.

" (3) That the Magi wonld see the first coBJtinc-
tion ' in the East ' three honrs before sunrise ; and if
they were ^Ye months on their journey, and went from
Jerusalem to Bethlehem in the eyening, as it is implied,
they would see the December conjunction in the direction
of Bethlehem.

" (4) These circumstances are in no wise inconsist-
ent with the word atrripa, which cannot surely be
pressed to its mere literal sense of one single star, but
understood in its wider astrological meaning. No part
of the text respecting the star asserts or even implies a
miracle,

" (5) During the year b.o, 7 the planets did not
approach each other so as to be mistaken by any eye
for one star, indeed not * within double the apparent
diameter of the moon,' yet the conjunction of the two
planets, complete or incomplete, would have arrested
the attention of the Magi both in the East and at
Bethlehem, and this appearance would have been de-
nominated by them 6 atrr^p ahrovJ**

Not in Greek, assuredly, as we shall see pre-
sently. But let us now look at the Dean's scholar-
ship a little in detail, for it deserves it.

I. (1) This conjunction took place a.u.c. 747
or B.C. 7, only seven years before the reputed date
of our Saviour's birth, which happened a.u.c. 753,
or, according to Dionysius Exig., a.u.c. 754 ;* or
even after another reckoning, a.u.c. 750. Three,
six, or seven years' difference may be a mere trifle
for the boasted science and criticism of the pre-

* Ideler, Techn. Cbron. vol. ii. p. 384, sq.

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 51

sent day ; yet ought Dr. Alford honestly (1) to
have reconciled these dates ; (2) to have shown
which of the two, our era or the conjunction, is
wrong ; (3) to have given correct astronomical
calculations, and not merely guesses a month apart
one from another ; and then, since he is so certain
of it, ought he (4) boldly, and like a man, to remove
the date of Christ's birth so as to make it fit in
with his conjimction; instead of thus puzzliQg the
student and leaving him to reconcile "seven
years' diflference" in date, as best he may. Slip-
shod teaching of this kind is neither honest nor
scholarlike ; but it condemns itself.

(2) As to the inference that conjunctions in
Pisces or Aries were ominous of great events,
we should like to see proved (1) that it was so
thought by the Magi, and (2) that Greek and
Aryan or Magian astrology agree on the subject
in all respects. Dr. Alford ought to give us ir-
refragable Eastern (Aryan) authorities to that
effect, and show that they influenced the wise
men. I regret that, never having studied astro-
logy and having no special books on the subject,
I cannot help the Dean. But to talk of astrology
in connexion with our Saviour's coming into the
world, as if to draw His horoscope, is derogatory
from His majesty; especially when that horo-
scope is seven years out of reckoning. Were the
conjunction exact to a day, a week, a month, or
months even, and were the words of the Evan-
gelist framed so as to imply such a phenomenon.

52 REMASKS, ETC.

then, indeed, might we look on and admire. Sot
seeing these conjunctions happen every twenty
years, more or less — Aristotle mentions two in
his time — Koi aitrot iwpaKafuv rhv iarripa ror
Tov Ac^Cy ^<«iv Iv Toec SiSvftoic mnftkOovra rivt Sig
^8ij Koi a^av/cTuvra,* * in Gemini,* — ^unless we can
lay the finger on the day and the hour, aa we
do thousands of years back upon the date of an
eclii)se, it is but doing what in astronomy, where
seconds and minims are required, wotdd be
eoimted mockery; and is assuredly not better as
regards the rising of the Sun of Bighteousness
over this world.

II. With S. Basa,« then, ^i»8«lc cXjcfrw rfiv
Trig aarrpoXoytag KaTatFKtvfiv €ic rrjv tov atrripog
avaToXyjVf ' let no one drag the conceits of astro-
logy into the appearing of the star.' Fancy draw-
ing the horoscope and determining the birth in
this world of Him who Himself made those stars,
and calls them by their names; of our Master,
whom we shall one day see face to face, either
for weal or for woe, by —

^alvfjjv fdv T£ Aihg Zfl^oig fuyaKvSeag avSpag

T£U\H, Kol (ia<Tl\BV<TlV l8' avS* iTCLpOKTlV avcLKTfav

ig ^iXfijv l^eOywffi'^
' When Saturn is in the sign of Jove he makes

» I. Meteorol. i. 6, 15.

' Or the Author of Homil. in Chr. Gen. in S. Basil, 0pp.
vol. iii. col. 1409, ed. M.
• Manetho, Uh. ii. 150, sq.

ON S. MATT. CH. II, V. 2. 63

fftmous men, and also maizes friendsliipB among
kings and princes ;' or lie may, according to —

Ziijvl uvvipv Kpovo^ anrvg rj u<Top6(ov Ttrpaytovog
ri 8 yi Koi SiajULerpog airo TrXsvprjg re rpiytovov^
StopBLTai j^iklriv (iaaiXiiiov rj icai ava^iv
UKcXiwv avSpwv'^

*When Saturn is in conjunction with Jupiter,
stands above or is at right angles with him, or
when Saturn stands on the opposite side of the
triangle, he bestows the friendship of kings, and
to princes that of their equals.'

"We might as well, and much more to the
purpose, because ia better style, quote

*^ micat inter omn«s

Julium sidus, yelut inter ignes

Luna minores.
Gentis humanas pater atque custos,
Orte Saturno, tibi cura magni
Cfissaris fatis data: tn secundo

Cflesare regnes.
Hie— Te minor latum reget «equus orbem;
Tu gravi cnrru quaties Olympum ;
Tu parum castis inimica mittes

Fulmina lucis."*

But the mind wearies of this ; and it is of no
use multiplying quotations or arguing about a phe-
nomenon which happened seyen, six, or at the least

» lb. lib. iii. 234 sq. « Hor. Od. i. 12.

54 REMABKSy ETC.

three years before the birth of Christ, and yet the
end of which at Bethlehem was seen fire months
only after the beginning of it, if the wise men
took no longer coming. Can Dr. Alford be in
earnest P

Let us, then, come at once to the word on
which it all partly hinges — aaripa — which the
Dean says,

" cannot be pressed to its literal sense of one star, but
must be taken in its wider astrological meaning.**

III. What meaning? What astrologers ?
And where has he found that in Greek, or in any
other tongue, two planets at a distance from each
other of two diameters of the Moon — say some six
degrees — can be taken for aaripay one star P

First, then,

(1) Eratosthenes says on the difference be-
tween atJTpov and aarrip — AiatfiipBi Si afrrpov
a(TTipog' TO fxev yap B(mv eiSwXov bk ttoWwv
aariptjv fiejULOpfjtwfxivov'Tb Si Kara fxlav ypa(jifiv nepi-
opiZoimevov.^ An atrrpov differs from an atrrrip
in that it is a figure made up of many stars,
whereas a star is one, and drawn with one line
or circumference.

(2) Achilles Tatius — 'A<ttt}/) l<m trtjfxa Oeiov
ovpaviov — (TC)jJia \afXTrpoVy kcli ovSi wore oracrtv
e^ov — Itti plv ru}V irXavfiTwv ovrwg Hpri<TdaL SokcT.
01 yap HvOayopeioi oi fJi6vov rove irXavijrac

* Ad Arati Phsen. p. 263, ed. Petav.in UranoL

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 55

aoTBpag j3oi;Xovrai iSiay icivri<riv €X^*^ aWa Kal
rove cnrXavHg : ^ ' A star is a divine, heavenly
body, a brilliant body, tbat is, never still, so that
"star" is also said of a planet. The Pythago-
reans say that not only the planet-stars, but the
fixed stars also, have a revolution of their own.'

(3) And, again, speaking of the difference
between aarpov and atrrrip, the same author says :
^AtTTYip €<TTi wg av 6 rov K/oovov, t} rou 'Epfxov, elg
apiOfit^, *'A(TTpov Si TO tK TToWtJV aoriptov (Tvcrrrifxa,
ijg ri 'AvS/oo/ulSa* oiSc Si rr/v Sia^opav Kal "Aparog'^

"AcTT/oa SiaKplvag' ItrKi^paro S' ug iviavTov
^A(jripag.^

* A star is like that of Saturn or of Mercury,
one in number. A constellation (sidus), however,
is a system of many stars, as, for instance, Andro-
meda. Aratus knew well the difference when he
distinguished the afrrpa from the stars which he
considered with regard to the year.'

Diodorus and other mathematicians c^U the
signs of the zodiac and the seven planets acrrpa ;
Tov Kvva jjivTOi aaripa ovra, ev t(^ j3f«j> a<TTpov
\iyofiev' aXX' 6 juiev a(jrrip kolI atrrpov' ovk^ti Sc to
avairaXiv. ' The Dog-star also, though it be a star,
we, in common life, call an aor/oov, sidus ; for a
star may be called an atrrpovy a heavenly body,
though never, on the contrary, can an atrrpov be

» Isag. in Arati Phaen. p. 132, ib. « lb. p. 134.
* Arat. PhflBn. 11, 13, ed. Bekk.

56 RKMAKK8, ETC.

called aaripa, a star/ Callimacliiis,^ therefore, is
wrong in calling the seyen stars in the hair of
Berenice aaripa, a star. £ci| oifv 6 fiev aartip
<r(upa ivwpivov' to Si aarpov Ik Su<rrwTwv, Koi
itpidpivwv, * Let us, then, understand bj a star a
body which is alone ; and by an aarpov, or con-
stellation, one made up of separate stars, but de-
fined in its outline/

(4r) No wonder, then, if astronomers call Sa-
turn and Mercury each a star, aaripa ; astrologers,
speaking of a conjunction of two planets, should
call them — not afrrlpa, one star, as Dr. Alford
says, but — aarlp^Q afi^w, "the two stars," thus: —

El 8' apa Sij Miivijv ScKarrfwa aariptq afii^w
"Apcoc Si Kpovoio, At^c Si r airoorpo^oc aarrip
E?ii«

*But if the two stars, Mars and Saturn, deci-
mate the Moon, and the star of Jupiter be op-
posed to them,' &c.

(5) Likewise does the Scholiast in Aratus say,
l<rriov Si 6ti aarfjp filv lariv S icat fiovov iarl koL
oif icaO* avTov KtvHrai, olov KpovoQy Ztvg KaX to.
TOiavra' atrrpov Si, r6 re Kivovfuvov koi to Ik
wXdoTwv a<rrip(jjv (rvcmjfca, olov KapKtvog, Aia)v.^
* Bear in mind that afrrfip is that which is alone

> *Arr>i^ is not mentioned in CaUimachns, Fragm. ad Comam
Beren. i. ed. J. Blomf. but ni^t.

* Manetho, lib. vi. (iii.), ^84, sq.

* Phsen, 10, p. 00, ed, Bekk.

ON S. MATT. car. II. V. 2. 67

and does not revolve upon itself, as Saturn, Jupi-
ter, and sucli like ; whereas aarpov is taken both
for that which revolves upon itself and for that
which is made up of other stars.'

(6) So also Poseidonius — Sm^l/oav 8l aaripa
atrrpov, says that a star differs from an aarpov —
atTTpov 8e elvai atjfia deiov Xafxirpov Koi wvpwSegf
ovSIttotc (TTCKTiv ^x^^* ^^ A^^^ J^P '''^^ l(mv aarrfipy
Kol aarpov ovo jULaffOfitrerai ScrfvrwCj^ ov fxfjv avdira-
Xiv. * For an aarrpov is a divine and brilliant body
of fire, never at rest. If, however, some such be
a star it will of course be called aarpov, though
never the contrary.' Thus is the Dog-star called
a<rrfip in Plut. Is. and Os. Or. iElian H. An. xiv.
24, &c., and atrrpov in -SUan H. An. fr. 115 ;
Died. Sic. I. 19, &c.

So that the two stars, Jupiter and Saturn, in
the Dean's conjunction, would not have been
called affrpov, since, according to Greek astrono-
mers, atTTpov consists of stars Siccttwtwv, ' apart,*
and wpKTjuLivwv, * defined as to place and number;*
a description that would not apply to two planets
gradually changing their relative positions ; neither
woidd those two stars have been called atrripa, *one
star,' since two such planets in conjunction are
by Greek astrologers distinctly said to be atrrlpeg
afc^oi, ' the two stars,' atrriptQ tv^eyyzig or aivoi :^
neither would they have been mentioned as tijc

> In Stob. Eclog.Phys. c. 24.

* Man. lib. vi. (iii.), 661, sq. 686, &c.

58 REMARKS, ETC.

7cvl9Xiic aarpa^^ unless, as in Manetho's case, the
Sun and Moon, Yenus, Mars and Saturn, Jupitor,
and Mercury, yea, even the Centaur, had all
joined together.

IV. The wise men, however, most likely did
not either right themselves according to Greek
astrologers, nor speak Greek. But their astro-
nomy or astrology was their own, and when at
Jerusalem they probably spoke Syriac or Ara-
mean, in order to make themselves understood of
the people whom they asked where the King of
the Jews was bom.

As to their astrology, if they were genuine
disciples of Zerdusht, it was but scanty. No-
where in Zoroaster's genuine writings are even
the signs of the zodiac mentioned, much less the
planets; albeit in later portions of the Avesta,
attributed to him, frequent homage is paid to the
Sun and Moon, to the star Tistrya (the Dog-star)
and to the stars Catavae9a that joins with Tistrya
in procuring rain, &c. ; to Yanant, to Hapto-
iringa and other stars, supposed to preside over
the several quarters of the earth. But never is
more than one of these stars called ^tarey atrriip ;
when many, then always gtaroy atrripeg ; e.g. Tis-
trim gtarem — yim ration pairi-daemcha vigpaeshdm
gtaram fradadat Ahur. M.^ Tistrya, the star
which Ahura Mazda created to be lord and in-

» lb. V. 739.

* Tir-yasht, xiii. 44, p. 184, ed. Westerg.

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 59

tendent over all other stars.' Likewise when the
Pairikas are alluded to as clusters of evil stars^
are they styled stars, yao gtaro keremao patmti
antare zdm asmanemcha,^ * worm-stars («.^. creeping,
shooting-stars), which fall between earth and
heaven/ and whose evil influence is overruled by
Tistrya.

When, however, only two heavenly bodies are
mentioned, then is the dual used, as in Greek —
aaripag afif^w — thus: nivaedayemi — Ahura^bya
MithraMhya — ashavanaeibya, gtaramcha gpento^
mainyavanam damanam.^ *I proclaim the two,
Ahura [Jupiter], and Mithra [the Sun], pure
beings, and the stars created by the Holy Spirit
[Ahura Mazda] / exactly as again in Greek, 6
riXiog KaX 6 atrrfjp ajxt^OT^poi 8vvovr€C>' the sun
and the star, both setting together.'

If the Magi were Zervanit«s, and thus more
likely to be better astrologers than the Zarathus-
trians, still would they greatly differ from their
Greek brethren, who placed all planets under the
lower heaven — ahroi Si iirra ovrec Karwripu) rov
ovpavoi)* — whereas, according to the Zervanites,
who worship uncreated Time as Father of all
things and Creator of Fire and Water, whence
Ahura Mazda came into existence — the four bad
planets, ofifepring of the evil Spirit, are made fast

« lb. V. 8, p. 178.

• Ga9na 1. 11 , p. 5, ed. West.

* Gemin. Astron. c. xi. p. 47.

♦ A.chill. Tat. Isag. p. 132, ed. Pet.

60 REMARKS, ETC.

to the eightli heaven; Zohal or Saturn to the
seventh ; Jupiter to the sixth ; and Mars to the
fifth. In the fourth heaven abides the Sun ; in
the third Yenus ; in the second Mercury ; and ia
the first heaven is the Moon.^ With these Magi,
also, Jupiter, which is the best planet among the
Greeks, is one of evil omen.^ So that, probably,
the same conjunction could not have the same
meaning for astrologers east and west.

Likewise, if those wise men were Sabians, a
conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn must have
been rather dreaded than looked to as an aus-
picious event; judging, at least, from what we
read of their estimate of these planets. As to
Saturn, ^'to this planet was given a spirit of
wickedness, whence come all defects and wasting
away.*** "Hail, Qod, thou whose essence is
evil and wickedness,'* * was the beginning of the
worship of Saturn, in his Sabian temple ; while,
as regards Bel or Jupiter, to his planet was
given a secret connected with water, wherewith
he should disturb all creatures ; and by so doing,
inflict evil on the good." '^

The chance might have been better, in the

* Zarath. u, die Lebre des Av. in Spiegel, vol. ii. of Z.
Avesta, tr. p. 221.

' Spiegel, ibid. p. 40, note 2. See also Spiegel's Tradit.
Lit. d. Parsen. p. 161, 199.

» Liber Ad. I, p. 212.

< Dimeshqi. in Cbwols. Sab. II. p. 384, &o. See also A'*
B. Talib, on the same subject, and others.

^ lib. Adam, ibid.

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 61

opinion of those wise men, if they came, as J.
Martyr says, from "Arabia ;** for there Jupiter,
called "the great Fortune,"^ was held in high
honour, however ill they thought of Zohal or
Saturn. Yet, from whencesoever, in the East,
they came, and whether they spoke in their own
tongue or in Syriac, must they have meant " one
star," and not a constellation or a conjunction of
two planets, when they said, " We have seen His
star in the East, and are come to worship Him."

V. It was left to the shallow-hearted doubters
of this age of discovery and of ignorance, to try
and press into their service, however climisily,
one of these periodical conjunctions of planets,
which, from their own showing, must have taken
place, unless we all be out of reckoning, six or
seven years before the birth of Christ ; and thus
rob Him of the star lit on purpose to herald His
boming, and the whole Church of her faith. It
Was no common star turned to that purpose, but
a new one, as those believed who lived near the
time.

ITaJc ovv ifftavepwOri roig alCjtriv ; ' How then
was He manifested to the world?' asks S. Igna-
tius. 'A<rri)/o iv oifpavd^ eXafi\pev virep iravrag
Tovg atrripag, ical to ^wc avrov aviKXaXifrov ijv,
Ktti %evi(Tfiov irapeixev ii Kaivorrig avrov, Ta Si
\oiwa iravra atrrpa, ajia ri\((j^ Kot (xeXrivyy X^P^^
iyivero rt^ atrripC avrbg St ijv vwepfiaXXtov to ijiCjg

" Chwols. II. 226. Pococke Spec. H. Arab. p. 129, sqq.

62 REMARKS, ETC.

airrov virip wavra.^ * A star shone fortli in heaven
above all other stars ; the light thereof it was
impossible to describe, and it made everybody
wonder at the new sight. But all the other
heavenly bodies, with the sun and moon, were as
an escort to the star, the light of which far out-
shone that of the sun.* Better such a description
as this, which errs on the side of love and wor-
ship, than astrological reckonings, three, six, or
seven years out. "There is One," says Justin
Martyr, " whose name is the Day-spring, avaroXfif
from on high ; avarelXavrog ovv koi Iv ov/oavqi
afjui T(j» yevvfiBiivai avrbv acrripog, wg yiypairrai tv
Totg aTTOfivriiJovevfUKTi tS)v aTTooroXwv airrovy /xayoe
waptyivovTO koI TrpotreKivtitrav avru^y^ *at whose
birth a star rose in the heavens, as it is written
in the records left us by His apostles, when
Magi from Arabia, who knew of His name, and of
the star that was to rise out of Jacob,- came to
worship Him.*

VI. They were taught of God, and could be
taught of no one else, that the star they saw was
"His star;** and this, too, in fulfilment of the
prophecy, that " Gentiles should come to His
light, and kings to the brightness of His rising;*'*
which must have been ratified. And to try and
explain it away by a natural phenomenon that
will not serve, is but to play the part of Celsus,
who said that avri rtov iv rti^ evayyeXtti) fiaywv,

» Ad. Ephes. xix. * Dial. c. Tryph. p. 334.

» Is. Ix. 3.

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 63

XaXSaiouc ^*)0'iv vtto tov 'Irjcrov Xekl^Oai, Kivri-
Otvrag Itti ry yevioret avrov iXrjiXvOivai TT/ooencvvrj-
tTOvrag avrov ert vtiiriov wq Gcov/ ' instead of the
Magi mentioned in the Gospel, Jesus had said
that Chaldaeans had been moved at his birth to
come and worship Him as God while yet an
infant.^ " See, then, his error/' says Origen, in
this instance, unable, as he is, to distinguish
Magi from Chaldaeans, or to see that their re-
lative callings were different, and thus giving the
lie — Karaxpevaafiivov — to the writings of the
Gospel. OvK oiSa S* Siroyg koX to Kivrjorav roue Ata"
70VC <Te<Ti(oTrriK£. *' Neither do I know why he says
nothing of that which moved the Magi to come,
nor yet that it was the star seen by them in the
East, according to what is written."

Let us, however, see what there is to be said
about it. Tov otpOivra aaripa Iv ry avaroXy Kai-
vbv elvai vojuLlZojuieVf koX firfSivi tCjv (rvvriOtjjv ira-
pairXricriov, ovre ru)v iv awXavd, ovre rwv Iv raig
Karvjripw fftpalpaiQ' aXXa n^ yivu toiovtov yeyo-
vivai, oTToTot Kara Kaipbv yivojuiEvoi icojuijrat, rj 80-
KiSsQ, rj ywvtai. * We believe the star which was
seen in the east, to have been a new one, and
like unto none of those to which we are accus-
tomed, neither to those in the firmament or in
the lower spheres ; but to have been of the same
sort as those which appear from time to time,
such as comets, and other luminous bodies of the

* Origen contra Cels. p. 45, ed. J 677.

64 REMABKS, ETC.

kind, according to the name it pleases Greeks to
call them ; and we think so for this reason. It
has been observed that in great events, and about
great changes upon earth, stars of that kind arise,
foretelling changes in kingdoms, or wars, or other
such things, which happen among men, and pro-
duce great commotion.' This star seen by the
Magi was the star foretold by Balaam,* t6v iv rg
avaroXy <pavivTa acrripa S£Si7/xcovp7^<r0ai, f/rot
Sfioiov 6vTa ToiQ Xonroig aoT/t>occ> V ^axa Koi ic/wfr-
rova, ars rov iravroQ Sia<l>ipovTog yevofitvov frtf
fjLHov^ — * the star which appeared in the East, as
hand-maid to Jesus, was made for the occasion,
either somewhat similar to other luminaries, or
far above them, as being the sign of Him who is
far above all creatures.*

Tivog Si Trig ytviaetiJQ irpoiSpajuLev aarfjp Iv
oifpavoXg ; * of whose advent did ever a star act as
forerunner ?' asks S. Athanasius. Ovroc yap itrnv
6 Koi rov atrripa <nifJLalvuv rriv rov (rdjULaTog ylve-
mv irotritTag. iou yap a7r6 rov ovpavov Kanp^ofUr
vov rov \6yoVy 1% ovpavov KaX rfjv orifiatTlav cxctv.'
* He it is who made a star announce the formation
of His body; for it was meet that the Word
coming down from heaven should have a token
thereof also from heaven ; and that the Eing of
all creatures, at His coming, should be made known
to the whole creation.'

' Numb. xxiv. 25. Orig. contra Cels. ibid.

* Orig. in Johan. vol. ii. p. 27.

» De Incam. V. Dei, vol. i. p. 88, sq.

ON S. MATT. CH. H. V. 2. 65

" We may further observe/* says the Dean, —

" that no part of the text respecting the star, asserts,
or even implies, a miracle; and that the very slight
apparent inconsistencies with the above explanation are
no more than the report of the Magi themselves, and
the general belief of the age, would render unavoidable."

VII. "No miracle''!— what would the Fathers
have thought — what does the Church of Christ
think of this teaching from one of her doctors
and teachers of us ignorant clergy, from a guide
of us, poor blind men as we are, who tell our
people that, as the sun hid his light from the
throes of Christ on the Cross, so also did a star
shine in heaven at His birth, as a bright, glad-
some harbinger of Him who came from thence to
preach "Peace on earth and good- will towards
men?''

"No miracle"!— 'AXX' ?va /X17 cFvvawrovr^Q
airoptaq airoptaig iXiyyi^v vpag iroiCjpBv — "lest,
then, adding difficulty to difficulty," says S. Chry-
sostom,* " I should make everything dark to you,
let me explain the matter, and that, too, from the
star itself. For if we learn rig 6 aarrip, koL Tro-
ravoQ, Kcix u tHjv ttoXXwv Big, rj ^evog irapa rovg
SXXovg, Km H <(tv<TBi a<TTfjp rj 6\pei /xovov atrrrip,
— evKoXwg Ka\ ra aXka iravra eKTOjULeOa, — "what
and what manner of star it was, whether it was
one of the many others, or one different from
them, whether it really was a star, or such in

» Homil. in Matt. tI. 2.

66 BEMARKSy ETC.

appearance only, we shall easily come to know
tlie rest.

*' Whence, then, will all this be made clear ?
From what is written. First, we gather from
the course of the star, that it was not one star of
the many others, — yea, rather no star at all, —
but, as it seems to me, some inyisible yirtue or
power — Svvafug — transformed into the appear-
ance of a star. For no star moves in that direc-
tion. The sun and moon, and all other stars,
move from east to west, and not, like this star,
from north to south, which is the direction from
Persia to Palestine.'*

" Secondly, from the time of its appearance —
for it did not shine at night only, but at noon-
day also, in bright sunshine ; which is the case
neither with the moon nor any other luminary ;
all of which disappear when the sun sheds abroad
his light. But this star outshone the brilliancy
of the sun.** [The Dean makes the Magi travel
at night only.]

"Thirdly, from its appearing and then dis-
appearing ; for it led the Magi, showing the way
as far as Palestine ; when, however, they came to
Jerusalem, it hid itself and again showed itself,
when, after they had told Herod their errand,
they started for Bethlehem; a kind of appear-
ance which belongs to no star, but is of some
power, endued with supreme intelligence — dvva-
fjiewg TivoQ XoyiKwrarrig ; for it did not follow its
own natural course, but it went whither the Magi

ON S. MATT. CH, II. V. 2. 67

went; it stood still when they rested^ like the
pillar of cloud over the Israelites, wpbg to Slov,
iravra otK^vojuLwv — iiviKa i'xpiiv, ministering to
their wants as required.

** Fourthly, from the way it shone we learn
this clearly; for it did not show the place by
continuing above in heaven, since the Magi never
could have learnt it thus ; but it did so by
alighting from above. For you know that a star
could not point to so small a spot as that of a hut
or a cottage, much less to that in which the body
of a child lay, 'EvetS^ yap airtipov to v\pog oiic
ripKU oSrw (TTSvov tovov "xapaKTiipiaai jcat yvwpi^
aai Tolg fioyXofnivoic iSsiv — since, owing to the
immense height at which a star is in heaven, it
could not from thence single out so small a spot,
and make it known to those who wished to see it.
We see this by the moon which, though so much
nearer the earth, yet never points to any one
object in particular. 11 wc ovv 6 iorij/o, eliri /xoe,
Toirov ovTUf ^Tsvov j>aTvriQ kol KuXvfirig iSeiKvv, d
fifl TO v\pri\bv eKtivo aj>sig Kona) Karifiri, kol iirep
avTtig iffTTd Tijg K£^aXrig tov iraiSiov ; ' how then,
tell me, could the star point to so small a spot as
that of the hut and of the manger, unless it
came down from on high, and rested over the
head of the little child P ' The Evangelist says as
much: Lo, the star went before them, till it came
and stood over where the young child was. Thou
seest, then, by how many proofs we come to know
that the star neither was one of the many others,

68 REMARKS, ETC.

nor followed the course one would naturally hare
supposed from its outward appearance as a star,'^

"A star/* says S. EphrcMn/** whose bright-
ness was not in nature, shone forth at once. It
was smaller and yet greater than the stm;
smaller in the light it gaye, but far greater in
the hidden virtue of its mysterious nature.
One star of the Day-spring {denhOf avaroXrig)—
darted His rays into the region of death, and led
as by the hand, like blind men, the inhabitants
thereof, who came and received great light.
They oflfered Him their gifts, they received life,
they worshipped, and returned home. The Son
had two heralds, one on high and one bdow:
the star sang in the heavens, and John pro-
claimed His coming upon earth.'* .

IIov Si Tov btfI BnOXtlfjL ipafJL6vTa vporepov €k
Trig etjjag atrripa, tov 68»ryov rtjv fiajbfv Koi 7rp6-
^evov ; i)(fo rl K^yii) Xiyeiv Ik rwv ovpavttov* lic€t-
voc rfjv XpiTTOv wapovtrtav avcS^Xcixrcv 6 atrrffp'
ovroQ Trig Xpi<rrov v^kijc 6 aTi(f>avog. " Where is
that star," asks S. Gregory^ of Nazianzus, " that
first rose in the east and then went to Bethlehem,
the guide and companion of the wise men of old?
I also have somewhat to say to thee about hea-
venly things. That star made known the birth
of Christ ; that star was the crown of Christ's
victory."

IX. But enough. It is of little use to mul<>

* In Nat. Dom. Serm. It.

• Drat. iv. De Bapt.

ON S. iMATT. CH. II. V. 2. 69

liply examples of faith from faitliM men that
stand in bright contrast to the Dean's conjunc-
tion of Jupiter and Saturn, such as it is. He
tells us (1) thdt this conjunction began on the
20th or 29th of May, b. c. 7, and ended that same
year, November 12 or December 6 ; " seven years/'
he owns, before the birth of Christ ; let him ar-
range it ; and (2) that the two planets, some six
degrees apart, "are yet to be taken in the wide
sense of aorij/o, star; stella, as understood by
Greek astrologers/' Let him prove it, whether
from the Greek or Latin, the Zend, Pehlevi, or
sny other grammatical language spoken by any
inhabitants, rCtv avarokCtVy of the East. » We then
will believe there is something in it, and hearken
to his teaching.

We now come to smaller matters. I pass
over the unsound criticism that settles whether
an adverb, e.g. aKpi^wq, or any other element
of grammar, should come first or last in the
Greek text, from the use of it in versions, the
genius of whose languages is wholly distinct from
that of the Greek, as e. g. the Syriac, which eould
not put haffoith before the verb; but I must say
one word about the Dean's correction of the Re-
eeived aKpifitjg i^eratrare into i^STaaare aKpi^Qg.
fie seems imfortunate in his choice ; for, as we
saw above in yivB<rig, irapaSeiyiiartaaif &c., he
does not always choose the best. Now here aic/ot-
/3wff i^eTaaare clearly is the better Greek of the
two ; for whereas we read, uKpi^^g ^vXa^ai, aKpi'

70 KBlCARKSy ETC.

/3a^ SioplK^iVf aKpij3a»c <Fico9re7o-9a£ ;^ aKpifiHc fttv
yap TOTt ti<r6fuOa* — aic/o</3a>c awtprfaaatrdcLi^ — expi-
/3elic wpoaioBawioOai^ — aKpi(i&g wiwuKa ;^ oKpifiwc
elSivtu, aKpijiiog 6/o^v ;^ aKpifUg riOivai ;^ and in
other instances, repeatedly, inasmuch as the ad-
yerb in Greek is usually placed before the Terb,
it only comes after it, when the emphasis is to
be on the adverb ; thus Hke 6 Kpoiaog, yfypajuLfuUva
ix<iov aKpifiwQ,^ olS* aKpi^Q ; ^ although, owing
to the rules of the metre, no great stress can be
laid on these exam|des from the Poet& The
received aK/oij3a>c before iK^aaars is not "/or
emphasis,** as Dr. Alford thinks, but because it ia
a far more usual construction than the other
reading, and is supported by more MSS.
At Tov ')(p6vov Tov ^atvo/iivov aaripoq,

Ver. 8,
we read, —

" 0aii/o/i£v<w— lit. the time (or duration: perhaps as
an element in his calculation of age) of the star which
appeared : 0. being the part. pres. referred bach to the
time when they saw the star. The position of 0. between
the art. and its subst. forbids such rendering as ^ ike
time when the star appeared.* '*

» Plato, Resp. i. 17, 18. • 1 Alcib. 53.

» Reap. viii. 3. * Plut. De Is. Os. 75.

• Herodiau. I. p. 6.

« Xen. Oc. ii. 5, viii. 10 ; Cyrop. i. 3, 16; Mem. iv. S, 14;
Eph. V. 15 ; 1 Thess. v. 2.

▼ Eurip. Med. 532. • Cyrop. iv. 12.

• Eurip. Rhes. 284 ; Aristopb. Nub. 101, &c. ; Acts, xviii.
25.

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 71

It is amusing to see how the Dean, with an
inkling of the truth in this case, is yet unable to
account for it on grammatical principles, but, as
above, in dg Xifiiva, here also charges the article
with much that does not belong to it.

(1.) He says to us that ^aivoiiivov, being the
part. pres. refers to the past. How, then, would
he render this and hundreds of like sentences,

TTf/Ol fJilv OVV TWV £V TC^ TTpWTif} OVpaVlJ^ (ftaiVOjULl'

vtt)v atrrpwv SieXeXvOajULev irporepov,^ — ' as regards,
then, the luminaries [that were seenP or] that
are seen in the first heaven — we have just de-
scribed them P '

The fact is, however, (a), that the part, pre-
sent deals with th0 time present when the event
to which it refers takes place, whether it be
"now" or "then;" e.g. &v wc evofiiKero^ — KaO"
fip,ipav ovTog fiov fi^ff vfitjv ' — ere wv iv ry FaXi-
\ai(g, — <Tuv vfxiv^ — tv^Xoc wv apri jSXIirw* — 6 ©xXoc
6 wv jiiBT avTov,^ &c., in which the pres. participle
refers to the time then present, which must,
therefore, be rendered in English mostly by the
past ; " when he was yet in Galilee," " while I
was yet with you," &c., 8 irore ov lerri to vvv.^

(b.) Here, therefore, <(taivofiivov being part,
present, does not refer to the past, but -^povog
refers it to a time past; yet not necessarily.

* Arist. de Coelo, iii. 1. ' S. Luke, iii. 28.

» Id. xxii. 53. < Id. xxiv. 6, 44.

» S. John, ix. 25. « Ibid. xu. 17.
^ Arist. Nat. Ausc. iv. ii. 9.

72 REMARKS^ BTC.

Xpovoc '' time/' says Aristotle^ apiOfioc lari Ktvtf^
o-ecuC)^ is the reckoning a number of successrve
motions or progress; to yip &piZ6fuvov r^ vvv
X/mJvoc ilvai SoKct — "Orav Si to wpSrtpov xal v<r-
TBpov, t6tb Xiyofitv ')(p6vov' rovro yap loriv o
yp6voQy apiOfiog Kivri<nu}g Kara ro irp6TBpov xai
voTCpov. — TO §€ vvv Tov \p6vov fJLsrpUf y 7rp6T£pov
y voTBpov :* * For " time " seems to be that which
is determined [or limited] by "now." When,
therefore, we talk of " before " and " after," we
call that " time " — for such it is — the reckoning
of progress, according to before and after. But
" now " measuxes the time, whether as regards
the past or the future.*

'O \p6voq TOV f^aivopivov atrripog then means
the time elapsed from the first appearance of the
star, to the moment Herod inquired of the wise
men; and (ftaivo/uiivov either refers to first ap-
pearance of the star at the time, Ka6* ov Koipov
vrrlp TOV bplKovTa iOewpHro^ — or it may also
imply that the star was yet appearing, i, e. ;i£-
riiopog ^aivofitvog vTrip tov opiZovTog,* above the
horizon ; inasmuch as had ^aivopivov referred
only to the first appearance of the star, we
should, most probably, have had toi; <^avivTog aa-
ripog, as rou Si ^Qpiojvog ^avlvroc yvuKrovrai irocrn
Trig vvKTog Itrnv wpa,^ ^ sailors will know how late

» De Cflelo, i. 9, 13. • Nat. Ausc. iv. 1, 11, 6, sq.

» Schol. in Arat. 724. * Aust Meteor, i. 6, 9.

» Schol. in Arat. 730.

ON S. MATT. CH. IT. V. 8. 73

is tke lidur of nighty the moment Orion is seen,
[or has appeared].

But (2), what does the Dean mean by —

" the position of ^aevo/uevov between the article and
its substantive forbids such readings as the time when
the star appeared f^^

He ought, indeed, to have given us his rea-
sons, and to have explained what the article has
to do with it, or (paivojiivov either. Here, how-
ever, the place of the qualifying participle or ad-
jective is determined by the article which rules
atrrepog.^ The sentence is therefore "the time of
the appearing star,*' and not " the time of the
star which appeared,'* according to the Dean's
rendering. The English reader may then judge
for himself which of these two he prefers — "the
time of the star which appeared," which is very
peculiar English, and certainly not Greek, or
" the time when, or, at which the star appeared,''
which is flowing, is better style, and expresses
the intention of the original, which is " the space
of time elapsed since the star appeared." But so
little is the Dean certain of what he says, that in
his New Testament for English readers he gives,
"what time the star appeared," the rendering of
the A. Version, without note or comment,, though
it be yet further from " the time of the star which
appeared," as here amended by him.

* See above, p. 27.

74 REMAKKSy ETC.

At y. 9, Dr. Alford alters the BeceiTed text
twc iXOwv i<mif to twQ ikOwv iaradfif not aware, it
seems, that in so doing he contradicts himself.

For iarriv, nc> n> 2 Aor. Act. of fonifu has, we
all know, an intransitive signification; and is,
therefore, constantly used for he, she, it, Ac.,
" stood still," whereas iaraOri, 1 Aor. pass., which
is comparatively of rare occurrence, implies an
agent who " sets up/' or " makes to stand," what-
ever icrraOi? is thus described as being acted upon
by some one else. Thus in Sirach, xlv. 83, ifrraOn
is said of the covenant " made to stand " or " esta-
blished " by God with Phinehas ; as at Dan. vii.
4, 6, iaraOri is said of a beast "made to ^stand"
(Chaldee Hoph. riO'^prj and ritt'^pPj) on his feet
like a man, and on one side. 'Eoradn occurs also
twice in the K T. Apoc. viii. 3 and xiii. 1, and is
then rendered " stood ;" but there is nothing in
the context to forbid one to take iaraOri at its real
value, Le, as passive.

Since, therefore. Dr. Alford tells us that there
is nothing in this account that implies a miracle,
but that this conjunction stood ^^over that part of
Bethlehem where the young child was, which the wise
men might have ascertained by inquiry," he
ought to have retained the Received reading, c<rri|,
that implies no other agent than Jupiter and Sa-
turn taken as one star, and no doubt moved by the
same spirit, since, according to Origen, whom Dr.
Alford quotes as an authority for €<rra0i?, the stars,
tida v.<n Xcyifca icai cnrovSaia, kclL itftuyritrdriaav rd^

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 8. 75'

^ft>ri Trig yvCjtTefjjg, * are rational and wise Kving-
beings, lightened up with the light of knowledge/
and " together with the sun and moon/' evxc<r0ac
r«j» hri tckti Gec^Sia rov jujovoyevovg avrov, *pray to
God who is over all through His only begotten
Son.'i

Whereas itrraOri impKes the agent God, who
made the star to stand over the place where the
young Child was. The MSS. B.C.D. are given as
authority for iaraOri ; but as already said, one or
two MSS. should be chosen and adhered to
throughout, to the exclusion of all others ; for the
moment readings are borrowed from elsewhere,
and the individual critic takes to picking and
choosing as he likes, there begins his own autho-
rity where that of the MSS. ceases. Origen, in-
deed, uses i<TTaOri in this verse, though S. Chry-
sostom, Theophylact, and others, have corij. But
Origen and S. Chrysostom believed in the miracle
which Dr. Alford says is nowhere implied. So
that whether they use iarrt or iaraOri does not
much matter, because anyhow they do not contra-
dict themselves.

Ver. 11.

Here Dr. Alford adopts cISov, which is well
supported, and makes no important diflference, in-
stead of the Eeceived reading, dpov.

Ver. 15.
On €$ AlyiiTTov the Dean says :

^ Contra Cels. lib. v. p. 236, sqq.

76 KEMARKS, ETC.

'' It seems to have been a reoeired axiom of inter-
pretation (which has, by its adoption in the N. T., rfr*
ceived the sanction of the Holy Spirit himself, and now
stands for oar guidance) that the subject of all alia-
sions, the represented in all parables, &c., was He who
was to come," &c.

Assnredly the wbole law and the prophets
centered on the Desire of Nations and watched
for the Day-spring from on high, and for the
rising of the Sun of Righteousness with healing
on His wings — from the Fall in Eden to the close
of prophecy with Malachi. Yet " all allusions "
and " all parables " did not refer to Him ; as that
of Jotham, of Nathan, &c. But what does Dr.
Alford mean by saying that the application of
prophecies found in the New Testament are fox
that reason sanctioned by the Holy Ghost P Was
the New Testament, then, written without the
Holy Ghost, who only afterwards, and after
approving of the Gospels and Epistles, then gave
His sanction to the application of such prophecies
by the Evangelists P The Dean's meaning is far
firom clear, especially to students like myself.

Ver. 17.

Dr. Alford tells us no part of this prophecy,
"In Eamah was there a voice," &c., should be
strictly taken. No doubt that the Bethlehemites
were not strictly speaking of Rachel's children ;
although they might be so called by figure of

ON S. MATT. C?H. II. V. 17. 77

speecli common in prophetic style, seeing RacIiePs
death took place close to Ephrath, which is Beth-
lehem-Judah.

As to Eamah, however, it is sing^ar that no
one sees the probable way in which the word
should be taken. " Eamah " (non fem. of on,
high, lofty) properly means a high city, hill, &c.,
and Ramah of Benjamin, which stands on the top
of a high hill, as a conspicuous object from a
great distance, doubtless got its name from that
circumstance. Eamah, therefore, in this place
seems to mean "a high place," and to apply to
Bethlehem, which, like Eamah, is built on a hill,
or to the immediate neighbourhood of Eachel's
sepulchre, which also stands high. In the words
of this prophecy, noi, Eamah, should be taken
for "a high place '* or *'city ;" as in Ezek. xvi;
24, and as it often is in the plural with the same
meaning ; and not for Eamah of Benjamin, which
makes no sense of the quotation. Moreover, had
Dr. Alford turned to the A. Saxon version, he
would have got a hint from it; for, although
singular in this respect, it yet reads stefn wees on
hehnysse gehyred, * a voice was heard on a height ;'
the probable reading of the old Latin version,
from which the A. Saxon tr. was made ; or, may-
be, it was borrowed from S. Jerome, whose ren-
dering it is, according to Mill. Wycliffe followed
it, and rendered it ** a voice is herd an hee^e,"
while Tyndal has "on the hilles was a voyce
herde.''

78 BEMABXSy Era

This seems a better interpretation of the prc^
phecy than to refer it to Ramah of Benjamin,
and to make Benjamin Bachel's son the link be-
tween the two.

Here Dr. Alford rejects Oprivog before icXaiiO-
fioc, because, though it be supported by many
MSS., among others Cod. EphrsBm, the Philoxen-
ian, and the Armenian versions, it is yet omitted
by Cod. Vatic, and others, as well as by the Pes-
chito, Coptic, and Ethiopic versions. But the
Dean gives a singular reason both for the inser?
tion of Oprivog in the text and for the rejection of
it by him. It was inserted, he says, from the
LXX. But whence did it come to the LXX. ?
At all events, the insertion must be of old stand*
ing for the Armenian version has it, without, it
appears, any difference in any of the thirty MSS.
consulted for the critical edition published at
Venice in 1805. The Arabic version, published
by Erpenius, or Fayyumiyehy as it is called, for
having been made at an early date in the Fayum,
a province of Egypt, has d/Dijvoc ; so also read the
Slavonic and Georgian versions. The A. Saxon
and Wycliffe omit it, but Tyndal renders it
" moumynge.'*

So much, however, is made of the real or sup-
posed quotations from the LXX. in the New Tes-
tament, that it is predseworthy in Dr. Alford not
to wish to retain Oprivog on that account. Mill
also considers the reading without it genuine;*

» Proleg. 884.

ON S. MATT. CH. III. V. 1. 79

and Justin Martyr, who quotes this passage,
quotes it without OpYJvog ;^ S. Chrysostom omits
dprjvog kX. k. o8.* albeit some MSS. of his Homilies
give the passage in full. The Received Text, how-
ever, agrees with the LXX. and the LXX. with
the Hebrew ; so that it has right on its side.

CHAPTER ni.
Ver. 1.

The Dean here rejects koX after 'lovSa^ac, so
as to read Kripv(T<T(»>v Xeycov, thus making of it a
"manca oratio." Besides that two or more par-
ticiples one after the other, without a copula, fall
heavy on the ear, except imder circumstances not
applicable to this case, we may doubt if ic»?-
pv(T(Twv \iywv is grammatically correct. Clearly,
without Koi, \iy<t)v must mean the same as ki?-
pv(T<r(M)Vy whereas the insertion of kol makes Xly wv,
and what follows, only a part of the uripvyfia ;
which evidently is the case.

For when two participles are thus placed toge-
ther, aoi/vSerwc, without copula, seeing that they
both express the same state of action or being,
they naturally form a climax whereby the mind
is led up to the last participle, which, in this case,
sums up the whole. Kripv<T<T(»)v X^ywv, therefore,
implies that S. John the Baptist^s preaching con-

> Dial.-c. Tr. p. 304. " Homil. in Matt ix.

80 REMARKS, ETC.

sisted in saying, ** Repent ye, &c." He no donbi,
however, said much else. Since, then, his saying
" Repent ye, Ac.," is only a part of his preaching,
Koi is needed before Xlyoiv in order to express
that. This is proyed by the fact that when the
first yerb is in the indicative, koI is not needed,
e.g. Ufipvaae Xiyu)v^ because the participle or
gerund, Xlyoiv, qualifies the act direct, eKripvinre.
But if the first verb and the second be both in the
indicative, infinitive, or any other mood, and thus
express both the same state of action, then the
same climax exists as in the above case of two
participles joined, iunfvSerwgy and it also renders
the copula necessary, e. g. fip^aro tcripiatTuv koI
Xfyciv;* — SiSatTKHv koI KripiatTHv;^ — Ifc/Da^ovXlyov-
TEc>* hut KpaZovTtg kol Xiyovreg ;^ — ipxovrai Kal
Xiyovffiv ai/Ti^f^ but Tpotripxovrai Xlyovrcc/ &c.

This also is an instance in which it is unsound
scholarship to guide oneself by versions of a
wholly difierent genius. Thus Dr. Alford quotes
the Coptic and the Ethiopic versions to show that
they leave out koi, and the Syriac and others to
show that they retain it. But although the Cop-
tic has icai Xiytov in S. Mark, i. 14, to follow the
Greek, yet it is more correct according to the
Coptic syntax to omit Kai between two participles,
which in Coptic are not considered as two par-

1 S. Mark, L 7. • S. Matt. h. 17.

» Ib.xi. 1. * lb. xxi. 2.

• Ib.ix. 27. • S.Mark,ii. 18.

f S. Matt. XV. i.

ON S. MATT. CH. III. V. 1. 81

tidples, but are read as if the first were in tlie
indicative.

Likewise tlie Ethiopic could not express ical
before Xlywv without giving a totally different
meaning to the sentence, as e,g. S. Mark, i. 16,
where kclL is expressed before the participle irapa-
ywv, and reads like, "and while he was going
along." So here, had the Ethiopic inserted koL
it would read, " he came preaching, aud while he
was saying,'' or " as he was saying,'' &c. So also
the Peschito reads, " he came to preach and to
eay.'* Then, again, when Dr. Alford, at S. Mark,
i. 14, quotes the Gothic version in favour of
<nnitting koi, which is well supported even by
Cod. Vatic, but does not seem to suit the Dean,
he altogether loses sight of the construction of the
sentence. In Gothic thatet, &ti, follows qithands,
" aaying," clearly joining X^ywv with Srt and the
following, e.g. " He came preaching the kingdom
of God ; saying that, &c." This construction re-
quires no fcai, because of the influence of thatei^
or£, that.

More care is required than Dr. Alford seems
to think necessary, in order to ascertain the real
equivalent of a Greek term in another language.
How, for instance, would he, or any one else, de-
fine the presence or the absence of the article in
Greek, in a particular text, from the rendering of
it in Latin, which has no article P

Here also does Dr. Alford omit to quote the
Coptic in favour of Sm 'H<ra£ov, though he mCTi-

G

82 REMARKS, ETC.

tionB the Sahidic. Both versions read alike : Sah.
hith, and Copt, hitoot, Sm.

Ver. 4.
Again, when he thinks necessary to change
the Keceived text, ii r/>o^v| airrov ^v into ri rpo^ri
fiv airrov, he certainly alters for the worst. The
meaning is precisely the same, so that, let tlie
Eyangelist have the credit of having written, or
his translator of having rendered, the original in
by far the more flowing reading of the two, fi
rpo^i) avrov ijv, seeing it is followed by a vowel in

Ver. 6,

Albeit my object is only to examine Dr. Al-
ford's treatment of the Received text and of the
Authorised version, and not his notes, I must just
remark on his note on baptism, that according to
Jewish doctors, the baptism of proseljrtes began
at the washing that took place before the giving
of the law, Ex. xix. ; and that the rite itself was
among the Jews thought of more weight even than
circumcision, seeing it took in the whole people,
and not men only.' Some Christian Fathers, how-
ever, dated the institution of baptism from the
Spirit of God moving upon the face of the waters
(Gen. i. 2), or from the Flood ; but all of them
agree in considering the passage of the Red
Sea the real institution of baptism whereby the

* See especially J. A. Banzii De Bapt. Proselyt. in Meu-
sobenii N. T. on Talm. ill. pp. 233-306.

ON S. MATT. CH. III. V. 8. 83

Church of God was then for ever severed from
the world — Egypt. The only difference of opinion
between them is, whether the cloud represented
the Spirit ; but the Spirit probably was typified
by the wind from the East, and the cloud was in-
tended to continue the rite of baptism in the
wilderness, while the children then bom were
yet uncircumcised.

Ver. 8.

Here Dr. Alford throws out the Received text
KapTToifg a^iovg, and substitutes Kapirbv a^iov.
Both readings are well supported, so that the
Received Kapwohg a^lovg need not be rejected.
Origen, indeed, says that here the ^Baptist, ad-
dressing Pharisees and Sadducees, makes use of
the singular Kapirov a^iov, but that S. Luke,
making him speak to the multitude, uses the
plural Kapiroifg d^lovg. Such criticism, however,
speaks for itself, inasmuch as had S. John the
Baptist aimed at the Pharisees and Sadducees
alone, he would, on this principle, have used the
dual ; and they were quite numerous enough to
justify the use of the plural

The reading, therefore, must stand on its own
merits, which are very evenly balanced. At S.
Luke, iii. 8, the Dean keeps the plural Kapirovg
a%iovgy on the authority of Cod. Vat., and Origen,
and rejects it here on the strength of the same MS.
Cod. Ephr., Origen, and some of the old versions.
But here again the plural Kapirol is against the

84 REMARKS, ETC.

genius of tlie Armenian languages, in whicli it is
yeiy seldom nsed, e.g. here and at cli. vii. and in
8. Luke, iii. 8, it has the singular ; a few MS!?,
only reading KapwovQ a^. in this last Terse. On
the other hand, the plural is more usual in
Syriac. In Ethiopic, on the contrary, it is the
singular ; as also in Coptic ; so that yery Kttle
of sound criticism can be made to rest on such
unsafe ground ; and the friends of the Beceived
text need not be disquieted, as the change is not
worth making. Dr. Alford, however, omitted to
add the Sahidic yersion to his authorities in
fayour of Kapnrov a^cov.

Yer. 10.
So also as regards the insertion of ical after
^8i? Si, ri^r) Sc Kol, as in the Receiyed text, or the
omission of that koL ; it is not worth a thought,
although the reading in S. Luke, iii. 9, ^Si? Si ical
ii a^iv7\y is more idiomatic and more expressive,
considering the place it occupies in the context.
The Old versions, however, makes no difference in
their reading here and in S. Luke, iii. 9 ; but they
all omit Kai; so truly is the insertion of it of
purely Greek idiom alone ; possibly first adopted
by S. Luke, who was a better Hellenist than the
other Evangelists.

Ver. 16.
Dr. Alford rejects the Received text koL /3atr-
ri(T0€ic 6 'Ii?<rouc> aiid adopts ^am-KrOeXg 81 6 *i.

ON S. MATT. CH. Ill, V. 16, 85

Whetlier the cliange be for the better, or at all
necessary, let others judge. Both readings are
veil supported; but koi fiairTi<rOB\g 6 'I., seems pre-
ferable, inasmuch as kol forms the sequel to what
precedes and connects it with what follows;
whereas Sk makes an antithesis which exists no-
where. Christ came to John to be baptized;
John forbade Him, but yielded. And when Jesus
was^ baptized then, &c. Whereas jiawTKrOelg St
would imply that Christ came to John " either to
be baptized or not." But having been baptized,
x&c. There is here no antithesis as in ch. i. 1 and
19 : )3//3Xoc jiviaewc — 11 Sc yivvmaig ovr4afg ijv.

The Dean may add the Sahidic to his list of
authorities for 81. "We must bear in mind, how-
ever, that Si is not a Coptic or Sahidic particle,
and that it is used to suit the Greek original, so
that it is all the better authority in this case.

Dr. Alford tries to defend the interpretation
of the bodily shape of a dove in which the Spirit
came down ; but he does not point to the student
why the Greek does not allow of any other ren-
dering. If the meaning were that the Spirit, in
whatever shape, came down as a dove flies down
from a height, then it would be eiSev to ttv. Kara-
(iaivov waei Trepiarepa [icorajSafvci] ; whereas the
accusative vEpitrrtpav cannot be governed by the
neuter verb KaTa(iaXvov, but must be governed by
the active verb elSev, to which it refers. John saw
the Spirit like a dove coming down, &c. I do not
fit present remember a Greek Father who under-

86 REMARKS, ETC.

stands it otherwise. S. Chrysostom says plain
enougli, ixu koi ri Trepitrrtpa S<a rovro totb etf^avti,
iv Sfowip avTi SaKTvXov rivbg Sef^y roig irapovai kol
TfjJ 'loiovvp Tov Yibv Tov 0COV :' 'wherefore also
did the dove then appear in order, as it were with
a finger, to show the Son of God, both to John
and to those who were present.'

In this same verse Dr. Alford encloses koi
within brackets, ixril trBpiarepav [icai] Ip^ojuvov
Iv avToVf as if doubtful; and he quotes with
other authorities the Coptic version to that effect.
But it can hardly be omitted in Greek, epxo/Mvov
coming, as it does, inmiediately after trepurrepav,
though referring to irvtvfia at the beginning of
the sentence. Without it the Greek would be
involved and almost ungranmiatical ; and in the
Coptic, ip)(ofievov refers to Trtpiar^pa and not to
TTvcvjua ; so that no icai is wanted ; while the Ar-
menian reads, icat ciSev to livvbfia tov Geou o lica-
r£j3aiv6v ixiii irtpifTTepcLf koi sTriipxtTO Itt* avrov.
The Ethiopic b'kewise, koi ctScv to Ilv.rov G.icara-
fiaXvov ixTti irepKTTepa, koi ifxeivev iir avTti^. While
the Peschito has, icat elSev to irv. tov G. o eKaTe-
fiatvev (jjfTEi 7repi<TTepa, koi ^\9ev [ri irepi<TTEpa] Itt*
avTov ; so that of all these the Greek original is
the clearest.

* Homil. in Matt. zii.

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 4. 87

CHAPTER IV.

Ver. 1.

Dr. Alford adopts, perhaps because Cod. Vatic,
spells it so, the Ionic form, rco-o-cpaicovTa, instead
of the usual common and straghtforward r£o-<rapa-
Kovra. But one fails to see the merit of such
arbitrary changes.

Ver. 3.

The Received Text, TrpotreXOtov avn^ 6 wupa-
Z(t)v eiireVf el vfoc, is changed by Dr. Alford to
TrpotreXOijv 6 Trttjoa^wv elrrev avrcf, el viog. Both
readings are well supported, and the change is
immaterial. At the same time Dr. Alford's al-
teration reads best.

Ver. 4.

Here he introduces the article 6 before av
OptJirog — Z^aerai 6 avOp(»>7rog, from Cod. Vatic, and
other MSS. The article is in the LXX., and the
insertion of it into the Received Text is an im«?
provement. The article, by defining the being
man " the man," in fact generalizes the term as
understood in such a case in Greek, and extends it
to the whole human race ; whereas avdpwtrog is,
properly speaking, " a -man," and not " maii,V

88 BEMABKSy ETC.

which is here the rendering for 6 ivOpunroic ;
showing how little one can be guided in the nae
of one idiom by the use of another. This case is
similar to diSc, *' a god," or *' the god," whereas
Gk>D is 6 6i6c.

Instead of ovic iw* ipn^ fi6vf^ — oAX' hrX iravri
pflftari, which is the usual reading borrowed from
the TiXX., and used by S. Ghrysostom and other
Fathers, Dr. Alford sees fit — but why, does not
appear — to alter it to oiic iir apn^ — ciXX' iv vavri
prifiari. At one time it was the fashion to find
quotations from the LXX. everywhere in the
New Testament, and in truth the niunber and
nature of them is wonderful ; now, however, the
tide sets in the other way, and a reading is thrown
out because it is foimd in the LXX. Truly there
is no pleasing everybody; but sober common
sense forms a better ingredient in real scholarship
than fashion or the love of change. Change ! let
us go back to our forefathers for scholarship and
learning; they were the men.

Now, no one can imagine why Dr. Alford
mangles this reading from the TiXX., which is
correct in every way ; the less so as he here for^
sakes his God. Vatic, that generally lays down the
law, and follows later MSS. for the sake, it seems,
of making a change, but assuredly not for the
better.

(1) The reading of the LXX. ovic Iir' ifyrt^
liovi^ Zfiaerat 6 avOpwirog, aXX' IttI iravri piifwn
Ti^ iKiropivopivt^ Sia <rT6fiaTog Qeov, is a faithful

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 4. , 89

rendering of the Hebrew, nw naS crhn'^ nS
?nn>-»B N^o-Va-Sr o Di»n (Deut. viii. 3).

(2) As a Greek sentence the LXX. is far
better than Dr. Alford's alteration; inasmuch
as by introducing Iv in the second member of the
sentence he destroys the antithesis or comparison
there is between zurhn'h^^y iir a/t)rcji,and J<2no-S3-Vjr,
hrl Travri pruuLari r<(? BKirop. ; between living on
bread alone, and living on every word that comes
out of the mouth of God. For —

(3) Had he considered the matter in a purely
grammatical point of view, even setting aside all
respect for the text, he would have seen that, Zyv
hrl, Zyv eK, Zyv Iv, Zyv airo, Zyv rivt, koX avXwg
?pv, all differ very materially. "What Dr. Alford
imderstands by ^T^o-Erac iv Travri /o. does not appear,
since Zyv iv is used in the New Testament for
" to live in God," Acts, xvii. 18 ; "in sins,"
Eom. X. 5, Col. iii. 7 ; "in the world," Col. ii. 20 ;
"in the flesh," Phil. i. 22 ; "in the faith," Gal.
ii. 20, &c. Or else Christ, Zy iv rifiivy lives " in
us," id. ; so that it is difficult to see what Zr\(Terai
iv wavrX p. ' man shall live in every word,' can
possibly mean; for, assuredly. Dr. Alford could
not propose to take this Iv in the very rare mean-
ing of " by " as instrument ; making it an ava^
Xcyo/Lccvov in the N. T. for no reason whatever.

The correct reading, Zyv itriy is not a very com-
mon one. I have as yet met with it only in this
verse in the LXX. and in Gen. xxvii. 4, koX Itti
fp fia\a[pq, aov Zvf^y which is a true rendering of

90 • REMARKS, ETC.

n^nn T3^n-Spi, ' and by thy sword shalt thou live/
We also find it in Medea, 123,

TO yap u6l<T6ai ^yv £7r' taoimv
KpuaaoVf

" to live on equal terms." Zyv awo, " to live of"
— as "to live from," would not be idiomatic —
occurs more frequently in Herodotus, Aristopha-
nes, &c., and we may compare the relative force
of inl and airo when construed with ^y v, in this
passage from Andocides, iwi roig al<T\l<TToig IpyoiQ
€$ijc, ' thou livest on the most shameful works,'
and these lines of Aristophanes (Etp. 814 sq.) —

OIK. OvK av tri Solriv rutv Oetov rpidj^oXov

el TTopvoliotTKOiKT SxTwep tifieXg ol jS/oorof*
TPY. 05ic, akXa Koice? ^cjcriv airo tovtwv rivig'

where we have Zyv Ini r. al<T\, and Zyv airo riov
avTutv at<rX' 'T0/ovoj3o<ric. ic.r.X. " to live on " the
most shameful, and "to live of" the same.

Dr. Alford's alteration in this case is singu-
larly unhappy and uncalled for. It is such hand-
ling of the sacred text that makes one lose all
confidence in the critic.

Ver. 5.

Here, again Dr. Alford chooses the worse of
the two, when he discards the Received Text
%<TTTi<Ttv, and adopts etrrriaiv from sundry MSSm

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 5. 91

not seeing tliat by so doing, he disarranges the liis-
torical time of the whole verse. Both "<TTTi<Ttv
and €<rr»|flr€v are well supported ; the choice, then,
lies between them as to which is the better of
the two in point of grammar.

Now, clearly, if we have the so-called " his-
torical present " in rorc TrapaXafi^avu, we must
keep it throughout the verse, and have also the
present "cFrriaiv, and not the past ifrrriaev ; for
this would refer to another time. It is true that
Cod. Vatic, reads irapaXa/JL^avei — itrrriaev, but it
is no doubt in order to correct this anomaly in
style, that larriaiv was introduced at so early a
date, if indeed, "(TTtiaiv was not the original read-
ing, and ecFTfifTEv a later mistake or inaccuracy of
the scribe. Dr. Alford ought, then, either to have
looked for irapiXa^^v if he wished to have ioTriaiVy
or to retain *i(TTr\(nv if he keeps irapaXafi^avu ;
wherein he might have copied S. Luke, who,
reading ccmiflrcv also has riyay^v ; thus keeping
the past tense throughout. Here, in sooth, is
the mistake, not in the Received Text, but in
those who wiU mend it.

It is needless to say that not one of the Old
versions is guilty of such a confusion of tenses as
Dr. Alford proposes, irapakaji^avH — i(TTr\(TEv — icat
\iyEL. But the Ethiopic, Memphitic, Sahidic,
Syriac, Arabic, Persian, Georgian, Slavonic, An-
glo-Saxon and Vulgate, use the preterit ; while the
Armenian reads : rorc TrapaXa^wv [arkyeal^, ayei
avTOV 6 'SittTava^ dg rfjv ayiav iroXiv, Koi Itrrriaiv

92 BEMABXSy ETC.

avT6v. The Dean, therefore, when quoting the
Sahidic yersion in fayour of i<mi<nv, ought, in
truth, to have said that it has iaTii<nv because it
also has wapiXaPev, as also do the other versions
I have mentioned ; but he probably did not see
this.

Ver. 9.

Here, again. Dr. Alford creates the same con-
fusion of tenses. Instead of the Received text
Kai Xiyu airri^, coming, as it does, after wapaXufA^
/3av€i — Kcu BtUwiTiv, all in the present tense — he
changes Xiyu into elntv. S. Luke, however, who
has tlirtv has also avayayCtv — and cSei^cv, and is
thus consistent with himself, using the preterit
throughout. The Dean tells us that he "con-
structs his text with that only on which he can
entirely depend." He had better, perhaps, ex-
plain the construction of the existing text than
construct a new one.

Ver. 11.

ToT€ a<l>lti<Tiv — Koi cSou ayy. rrpoariXOov icat Sii|-
Kovovv ain-^. The Dean rightly makes no alter-
ation to this ; for the pros, aipiiiai is in nowise
connected with the pret. TrpofrriXOov koi Sit^icovoiiv,
that refer to two different subjects, and at two
different seasons ; and do not, as above, wdpaXafi*
/3av£i — iarriaev — Xiyei, refer to the same person
and to the same time. The Old versions, how-
ever, read the preterit throughout.

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 12, 13. 93

Ver. 12.

Dr. Alford throws out 6 'I^aoiJc, as having
been inserted at the beginning of this " ecclesi-
astical portion.'' Yet since he makes this, as it is
in fact, the beginning of a new paragraph, it
' would seem better to keep 6 'Iijaovc? which does
not appear for two verses before nor for three
after. The Armenian, Georgian, Syriac, &c,
versions which, like Dr. Alford, begin a fresh
paragraph at this verse, all retain 6 'Ii)flrot>c, al-
beit the paragraphs are not marked by a break
in the lines of the text, but continue from end
to end of the chapter. The Ethiopic version,
which does not begin a paragraph at ver. 12, but
at ver. 17, keeps 6 'Itiaovg in this verse, and does
not, as Dr. Alford says, omit it.

Ver. 13.

Here he tells us that his reading KaraXiirwv
is supported by Cod. Vatic, and several others ;
a fact we are glad to hear, as it is the Received
Text, though he does not allude to it as such.

The Dean, however, adopts rfiv Na^apa in-
stead of Trjv Na^a/olr, without even alluding either
to the different readings, or to the source whence
he borrows Na^a^oa. It occurs, I find, in a mar-
ginal note of Cod. Vatic, while "SaZaplr is in the
text. Mill also mentions Na^apa from some other
MS. Anyhow it is a very needless innovation,

94 BEMABKS, BTC.

and a very summary way of " constructing the
text."

Ver. 16.

For the Received koO fi/uvog iv cricorcc, Dr. Al-
ford adopts ica0. iv <TKOT(q. Both readings are
well supported ; (tkotIu, however, being found in
Cod. Vatic, which is set aside when convenient,
as we saw at ver. 4. Why, then, should aKorla
be preferred to {tkotoq by the Dean ? He must
know best. Thomas Magister,^ however, says :

6 tTKOTOg KOI TO fTKOTOg, TO St (TKOrla oifK €V "XpiJfTU.

£ir/otirtSi7C iv ^oivlatraig'

flTicoroc SeBopKwg.

" Sicrfroc is either masculine or neuter ; but
(TKorla is not in use, as shown by Euripides,"
Moeris, however, qualifies this so far as to say,
ffKoroc oirSerl/ociiC ^AttikoI,^ (tkotlo. "EXXiivcc* Sko-
Tog, in the neuter, is used by Attic writers;
oKorla, however, by Hellenes.

Neither author, however, is quite correct, for
Euripides has trKOTia, in this one instance, oricorf^
KpvTTTiTat.^ It may, however, be a "lapsus
pennae;" for aKOTog alone occurs in Homer, So-
phocles, Pindar, jEschylus, Plato, Callimachus,
and Aristotle, who uses aKOTog in the masc. tp
describe dark spots before the eyes. Whereas
(TKOTla occurs two or three times in ApoUonius

» Eclog. Voc. Attic, p. 333.
' Harpocrat. Mceris, p. 209. * Phceniss. 336.

ON MATT. CH. IV. V. 17. 95

Rhodius, and only once in the LXX., Job, xxviii.
3. On the other hand, (tkotoq occurs very fre-
quently in the LXX. (ninety-six times), and in
this very passage the LXX. read ; 6 Xaoc 6 wop-
evofiivog Ik aicoref, iSe (f><og fiiya, Isa. ix. 2.
Despite, then, B D », &c., which Dr. Alford
quotes, the Received text, Kad-qfuvog Iv <tk6th
is the better of the two ; and to it we will keep.

Ver. 17.

Here the Received Text, HyyiKe yap, is by the
Dean changed to fiyyiKev yap, without his giving
any reason or authority for it. Surely it must
be an oversight of his, as the " v '^ c^eXk. is never
used before a consonant except in poetry, to
make long a short vowel. The Cod. Vatic,
reads, I see, riyyiK^v yap ; but if the Dean will
follow it even when it is wrong, as in this case,
why does he not keep to it altogether, instead of
only choosing the readings he likes? "Hyyticev
yap in a good Greek author would make us doubt
that either copyist or editor had done his duty.
It is, therefore, hard to believe that by adopting
r)yyiKiv yap at the Dean's recommendation, we
have a more inspired reading, or are nearer the
original **Word of God,'' he is kindly "con-
structing " for us, with that only on which " he
can entirely depend," — than by keeping the Re-
ceived Text, ^yyiKC yap, which alone is correct
in this place.

96 KEMAKK8, ETC.

Ver. 23.

Again, koI wtpifiyiv jXi}v rfiv TakiXalav 6 *I.
is clianged by tlie Dean to koI wepinytv iv SXy
ry FaXiXalij^y which is found in Codd. Vatic, and
Ephrsem ; while the Keceived Text is supported
by many other authorities and " omg cv {homceo^
Ul)y* which doubtless is of great use to other
students, but utterly baffles me.

Both readings are well supported ; but irf/oiir/.
Iv jXy rf FaX. is found in the Vatican MS. that
gives us ^yiKcv ya/o, and Iv r^ (fkot'k^ for Iv
(TKorce, &c. Let us, then, see which is the better
Greek of the two.

Now, iTipia'ytiv is both transitive and intran-
sitive. When transitive it means " to lead about,*'
as in 1 Cor. ix. 6, iiri ovk exofccv i^ovaiav aSeX^i7v
yvvaiKa Trepiayeiv ; and is thus used in the middle
voice by Xenophon, aicoXo^dovc iroXXoic wept'
ayovrai^ — wepiayy rovro to /nupaKiov,^ — "to lead
about with one ;" " to lead or bring round," as in
Euripides, vepiayovtrlv tre irpbg rapifrrtpa ; ' * they
bring thee round to the left ; ' weptaystv rfiv fiu-
Xijv, * to turn the mill.' * When made intran-
sitive by understanding ifiavT6v, ir^piayfa BfiavrSv,
' I lead myself about,' — Trepiayeiv means " to go
about " a place, and governs the accus. of the

* Mem. I. vii. 2.

' Cyrop. ii. ii. 29, &c.

' Cycl. 680. See also Herodian. lib. iv. 8, 2 ; 2 Mace. it.
88 ; yi. 10 ; Plato, Laches. 15; 2 Kep. 3, &c.

♦ Jul. PoU. On. viii. 180.

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 23. 97

place or country, through the prep, irept with
which ayeiv is combined.

Thus, Trepirjyev 6 'Itjctovc fag woXeig ^ — rag k^-
fiag,^ irepiayeTE Trjv OaXarraav,^ &c. ; and said ab-
solutely for " going about,'* as irepLaywv l^ijrct
X^ipay(oyovg,^ said of Elymas " who went about
seeking some to lead him by the hand." Uepiayatv
in this sense, however, does not frequently occur ;
it is not once found in the LXX. ; and the parallel
passages in the New Testament, irepiriy. rag iroXeig
" — KdjjULag, &c., certainly go to prove that, even
though irepiriye be taken for irepifipx^o,^ it is best
construed with the ace. of the place or country,
and that the Received Text is better Greek than
the Dean's emendation from the Cod. Vati-
canus.

But this is one of the many cases in which it
is not safe to quote the old versions as authorities.
Thus the Ethiopic Version which Dr. Alford
quotes to support his choice, reads idiomatically,
ansdsawa wasta, " ho walked about in," both here,
at ix. 35, and at S. Mark, vi. 6 ; as does also the
Armenian version ; so that no conclusion can be
drawn thence in favour of irepiriy. Iv Sky rg T.
Likewise does the Peschito render this verse,
chap. ix. 35, and S. Mark, vi. 5, all alike, "he
went about in," idiomatically. So that, maybe,
the reading of Cod. Vatic, is an Aramaism, if it

» S. Matt. xvii. 35. • S. Matt. vi. 6.

' S. Matt, xxiii. 15. * Acts, xxiii. 11,

* Euthym. 2, od loc.

H

98 REBCARKS, BT€.

be not an idiom of the copyist himself. The
Coptic Version reads here^ '' he went about in all
Gal./' and at ix. 35, ''he went about in all
cities;'' but at S. Matt. yi. 6, it makes use of
quite a different verb.

EEMARKS

SUNDRY CHAPTERS OF DR. ALFORD'S NEW
TESTAMENT IN ENGLISH.

The foregoing remarks on the first four chap-
ters of S. Matthew will probably suffice to show
how far we may trust Dr. Alford's corrections in
the Received Greek text. We now must examine
a few of his alterations in the text of the Author-
ised Version ; and we cannot do better than take
his own revision^ as a sample of what might
possibly be substituted for the best of all modem
versions, — for one that formed the language of
the nation, and is still as well understood of the
poor, and as much prized by Englishmen of taste
who are masters of their mother tongue, as when
it was first published more than two centuries
and a half ago.

* The New Testament for'Eiiglish Readers ; containing the
Authorised Version, with a revised English text, marginal re-
ferences; and a critical and explanatory Commentary. By
Henry Alford, D.D., Dean of Canterbury. In two volumes.
Rivingtons, 1B05.

100 REMARKS, ETC.

I will pass over sundry expressions in the
Dean's preface which lead one to fear lest the
Revision would be no gain whatever, but on
the contrarj% a very great loss, even as regards
style and grammar; my object being only to
examine the principal corrections he proposes to
make in the English text. In order to act quite
fairly by him, I will not choose here and there
the passages that might be most open to criti-
cism ; but as with the Greek, so also with the
English, will I begin at the beginning.

S. MATTHEW.
CHAPTER I.

Ver. 6.
The first information the Dean gives us is
that the words, " that had been the tPi/e/* are " not
expressed in the original." But these words
being in italics, speak for themselves, as not
being stated in so many terms in the Greek.
For, how would Dr. Alford render Ik rijc row
Oijofou, " of her of Uriah," without inserting the
words, ^'that Jmd been the wife** seeing such is
the meaning here of the Greek r^c tov Ovplov ?

Ver. 18.

Next, in " Now the birth of Jesus Christ was
on this wise," the Dean says : "read generation,"

S. MATT. CH, I. V, 6. 101

instead of birtli. Having already discussed this
subject, I will not further dwell upon it, beyond
remarking that most English readers will feel
that, as it is, the Evangelist now introduces,
neither the " Book of the generation,'' or genea-
logy of Christ, already given, nor the eternal
generation of the only-begotten of the Father,
but His coming into the world ; and that, both
in Greek and in English, is " birth," and not
*' generation/'

For A. V. " when as his mother," read *'for
when as his mother," Dr. Alford wishes to ren-
der the yap, which in his Greek text is enclosed
within brackets, as doubtful. " For," however, in
this place, falls upon the ear more heavily than
the Greek yap, which, like y\ apa, it often is very
difficult, if not impossible, to render accurately.
Thus, in ScjJij yap trot 6 ic., yap cannot be rendered
** for;" neither can it in many other cases. In this
place, the connexion of yap, which by some is
said to be superfluous (?) (" redundat," Schleusn.)
with ovrwc ^v is felt to be more natural than that
of "for " with *'in this wise ;" because, whereas
yap here introduces what follows, somewhat like
** namely " — "for" in English is more the con-
sequence of what comes before. The same may
be said of the French "car ;" it is, in theory, the
same as "for" and yap; and yet it could not
always be used like either of these conjunctions.

This great difficulty of idiom was, no doubt,
felt by the translators of the A. V., who rendered

102 BEMABES, ETC.

yap by " as " in " when as," which is not a bad
equivalent; inasmuch as fivfiarevOelaric r^c ftif-
rpog avT. would be ''his mother having been
espoused," or " when his mother was espoused."
So that if "for" is introduced, "as" must be
left out; for three conjunctions together read
badly. On the whole, then, the proposed altera-
tion is no great gain, and need not therefore
trouble much the English reader for whom it is
made.

Ver. 20.

"AyycXoc K. " the angel of the Lord," A. V.—
" an angel," Dr. A., better.

Ver. 23.

" Behold, a virgin," A. V.—" Behold, the vir-
gin," Dr. A., better. As we saw above p. 35,
ri irapOivog, "the virgin," is an exact rendering
of both the Hebrew and the Greek, in which the
article is not, and cannot be left out. For here,
in ri vapOivog, "the virgin," the article does not
generalize the race as in 6 avOptamoc, chap. iv. 4,
that must be rendered "man," and not "the
man," the Greek article not being, in such a case,
admissible in English ; therefore must it be ren-
dered in 1^ irapOivog, and the application of the
meaning conveyed in the definite article be left
to the reader now, as it was to the hearer in the
days of Ahaz.

S. IVIATT. CH. I. V. 25. 103

Ver. 25.

" Till she had brought forth her first-bom
son," A. V. is changed by Dr. Alford to " till
she had brought forth a son"! His reasons for
this change are, that the Vatican MS. and a very
few others make it; whereas the reading of the
Auth. Version, which is that of the Received
Text, is far better supported, and by many more
MSS. The English reader may refer to p. 37,
for a discussion on this passage ; but if he knows
no Greek, he may rest assured the Authorised
Version is right and far better than the Dean's
alteration **till she brought forth a son/' that
means nothing, and does not necessarily refer to
the preceding verses, of which this verse is,
nevertheless, the complement and fulfilment. The
reading of the Vatican MS. must be a mistake of
the copyist, who either left out the article, or
had some ideas of his own on the subject. Dr.
Alford rates at the Received Text and at those
who justly feel great respect for it ; but he cer-
tainly does his best to increase that respect and
affection by his proposed alterations.

104 BEMAJiKS, Era

CHAPTER II.

Ver. 13.

"The angel/' A.V.; "an angel," Dr. A-,
better.

Ver. 16.

" In all the coasts thereof/' A.V., " render,
borders/' Dr. A. ; who refers to ch. iv. 13, where
the same Greek word is rendered "borders.''
For the sake of uniformity, perhaps, the Dean's
suggestion might be adopted. But the change
is immaterial, as " coasts thereof " is perfectly
plain,inasmuch as coast y^ or "tractus," is "the ex-
terior line, limit, or border, of a country," as well
as that same border on the sea-shore.^

Ver. 18.

" Lamentation and weeping, and great mourn-
ing," A.V. Here Dr. Alford tells us to omit
" lamentation and." This alteration rests on his
rejecting Oprjvog koi, on the strength of the Vati-
can and Sinaitic MSS., &c. But inasmuch as the
verse, such as it stands in the Received Text and
in the Auth. Version, is a correct quotation, and
rendering of the verse, ai3 it stands in the LXX.*

> Junii Etym. s.v. * Webst. Diet. s.v.

' Jer. xud. 15.

ON S. MATT. CH. 11. V. 22. 105

which exactly gives the Hebrew original, we may
be allowed to pause ere we give up the authority
of the Hebrew and Greek originals of the Old
Testament, together with that of the New, in
order to bow to the authority of one MS. which,
as we have seen, is in many ways a worse guide
than the Received Text, wherein we do not read
ereKSv vlov, fiyyiKEv yap, iir* aprt^ — iv pr]fiari, &c.
as we do in the Vatican MS. For nothing will
make me believe that the worse the Greek the
nearer it is to being inspired,

Ver. 22.

" Arphelaus did reign in Judaea," A.Y., " ren-
der over Judaea," Dr. A., a better rendering of
IttL

" Notwithstanding being warned," A.T. " ren-
der and being warned," Dr. A. If "notwith-
standing " be not the best rendering for 8l in
this place, ** and " proposed by the Dean is as-
suredly much worse. Ae very seldom, indeed, if
ever, means icai ; but assuredly not here. " But
being warned," would, perhaps, be a better ren-
dering of ^i[\fxaTi(jQuQ Si ; yet " notwithstand-
ing," the meaning of which is more indefinite
than " and," is the better rendering of the two,
A..Y. and Dr. A. But if Dr. Alford renders 8i
by " and " here, why does he alter the A.V. in
Tit. iii. 14, where 8l is rendered "and," and
change it to " moreover " P

106 REMARKS, ETC.

CHAPTER III.

Ver. 7.

" O generation of vipers," A.Y., " rendevy O
o£Espring of vipers," Dr. A. ; a very unnecessary
alteration.

As we saw when speaking of y^veaic and
yivvrim^, p. 4 sq. ylvvtifia is " a thing engender-
ed ;" thus it is said metaphorically of the fruits of
the earth, which is the common mother of all ; of
animals, and of human beings. ^ Whereas "off-
spring," according to its etymology, though it be
sometimes taken for yivvr\jjia that which' is ycye-
vrifjiivov, engendered, a child, or the young of
animals, may also be taken for the result of a
very different origin. Thus is yivvriiiia said of
God, tyrants, &c. ; as vov yevvrnuLaray^ the progeny,
productions, or so-caUed creations of the mind :
Trig ^v;(^c ^at row (r, yivvr]jJLaTa ; * the progeny, or
the children of the soul and body ; fleov ycvv^-
fiara,* the children engendered by God ; rvpavvwv
yevvriiuLaTa — 'EvpvTov cnropa,* &c., all of which
imply TO yevv^v, to beget or engender, not neces-
sarily implied in "offspring," but expressed in
" generation," which therefore is the better of
the two.

* Deut. xxxii. 22 ; Hab. iii. 16 ; Zech. viii. 12, &c.

* Plato, Leg. X. p. 474. » Epinom. 7.

* Sophist, iii. * Soph. Trach. 315, 316.

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 12. 107

Yer. 10.

" And now also is the axe/* A.Y., " omit also/*
Dr. A.

This depends, as we saw p. 84, on whether
icai is genuine or not. Though not in Ood. Vatic.
Ka\ is, nevertheless, found in the parallel passage,
S. Luke, iii. 9, and is supported in this place by
sufficient authorities. Moreover, it clearly makes
the best Greek, it lays an emphasis on " the axe,**
which is apparently the gist of the sentence.
" But now is even (icae) the axe laid ; — the time is
short, the old dispensation is about to be done
away, the nation to be judged and scattered
abroad." Instead of omitting Kal, it would be
best, perhaps, to render it by " even ** instead of
" also ; " though in truth, the change is of very
little importance, as "also** lays the stress on
" the axe."

CHAPTER IV.

Ver. 12.

"Now when Jesus," A.V., "omit Jesus,*'
Dr. A.

The Dean is of opinion that our Saviour's
name was inserted in this verse, as being at the
head of a " pericope," or ecclesiastical division of
the Gospels before they were divided into chap-

108 REMA&KS, ETC.

ters and verses. Whether it be so or not, seeing
the reading is supported by great many author-
ities, the change is, to say the least, needless,
since both the Authorised Version and Dr. Al-
ford follow here the ancient custom and begin a
fresh paragraph. So that by retaining JesiLS in
this and other like places, we are in company
with the Syrian and other Churches of the first
and three following centuries.

"Cast into prison," A. V., ^^ read delivered
up," Dr. A.

A better rendering, perhaps, of vapeioOn,
which does not necessarily imply being "cast
into prison." Nevertheless, siuce being cast into
prison," is the way in which John the Baptist
was " delivered up," the rendering of the A.V.
points in so many words to the event which must
occur to our mind when reading of his being
"delivered up." The change, therefore, is im-
material, although it is the more literal of the
two renderings.

CHAPTER Y.

Yer. 9.

"Shall be called the children of God," A.Y.,
" render sons of God," Dr. A.

" Sons of God " is the literal rendering of the
Greek ; but " children of God," gives the mean-

S. MATT. CH. V. V. 9. 109

ing of viol Tov 0€ov both in Greek and in Hebrew.
Yiol in the plural was taken for children in
general, offspring, a family, tribe, race, or people.
This idiom originated from the Eastern habit of
counting men only, and of looking upon the birth
of a daughter in a family rather as a trial than a
blessing. Thus when numbering the four or
the seven thousand whom our Saviour fed in the
wilderness, men alone were reckoned ; women and
children not being at aU numbered, but only
spoken of as " besides.''

In English, however, " sons of God " cannot
mean " children of God " except by common con-
sent, as a Scriptural expression: inasmuch as it
excludes women and children, who have the same
right to being children of God as men. The
A. v., therefore, in this place, writes English, as
the Evangelist wrote Aramaic Greek ; for we
find that S. John, whose style greatly differs
from that of S. Matthew, uses rlicva 0€oi;, "child-
ren of God,"^ in precisely the same sense, and
more idiomatically ; since reKvov is said of " a
child," whether male or female, and Plato speaks
of 060 V yivvriiiaTa, ' God's progeny.' The A.Y.,
however, in both cases introduces the article which
is not in the Greek, and which is not necessary
in English ; yet by a strange oversight, render-
ing viot by "children" here, and riKva, 'children,'
by " sons " in S. John, i. 12.

* John, i. 12. See Apoc. zii. 4, 5.

110 REMARKS, BTa

Ver. 22.

" Thou fool," A. V. " render Moreh/' Dr. A.

This is, indeed, a singular emendation. The
first term of special insult, Baca, is in the text, le£fc
in the original Syriac, not only because it was
well understood of those for whom the Gospel
was either first written in Aramaic, or of those
for whom it was soon after translated into Greek,
but perhaps, also, because there is no real equi-
valent for it in Greek. The second term, how-
ever, was rendered into Greek, fiwpi, " thou fool,"
as an equivalent for the original Aramaic term,
possibly used by S. Matthew. The old versions,
either, like the Syriac and Coptic, give the first
term like the A. Y., and, like it also, translate the
second; or, like the Armenian, Ethiopic, &c.,
translate both terms ; in order to be understood.
For iiwpt, mor^, thus transcribed, would, in those
languages, mean very different things ; as, e, g. in
Syriac, it would be, Lord ! &c. Neither does
any of those versions render jjLwpi in the sense of
fnarehy the Hebrew for " rebel." They all imder-
stood and rendered " thou fool," or " foolish," in
order to be plain.

The Dean, however, proposes to do precisely
the reverse; that is, to substitute for the ren-
dering of iKjjpi, " thou fool," which is well un-
derstood, the original term itself, which no one
would understand. For, if written mareh with
an '* h," one would at once think of the plain of

ON S. MATT. CH. V. V. 22. Ill

Moreh; for, as there is no "h'' in juLwpi, mor^y
the Greek term would not readily occur to those
who know Greek ; the Hebrew would be still less
obvious ; and those who do not know these lan-
guages would be as much puzzled with mor^ as
with moreh. Cleg^rly, in a version intended for
all, let us, of two terms, choose the easier. If any
correction were made in this verse, better would
it be to translate Haca into English, than to
create greater diflBculty by rendering "thou fool"
into moreh.

Ver. 27.

'* By them of old time," A. Y., " omit/' says
Dr. A.

These words are, it is true, left out in many
MSS., as also in most of the old versions. The
Gothic omits them, but the A. Saxon, that repre-
sents readings of the old Latin version, has " in
olden sayings ;" while Wycliffe and Tyndale both
read rote apxaioigy " to olde men," and " to them
oflP olde tyme," thus taking the dative in its
obvious sense ; and not as instrumental, which is
far less common. The importance, " by them of
old time," of the reading, however, is not so great
as to render a change necessary. For albeit the
weight of evidence is in favour of the omis-
sion, the insertion of " to men of olden time," is,
nevertheless, warranted by several MSS., and by
S. Chrysostom.

112 REMARKS, ETC.

Ver. 28.

" Hath committed adultery with her/' A. V.,
" render hath adulterously used her/' Dr. A-

It is hard to see the distinction, which is
without a difference, and therefore unnecessary.
yioi\tvuv yvvaiKa^ as used by Plato, Aristophanes,
&c., means " to commit adultery with a woman ;**
inasmuch as fxoixarai 6 avi)p fioi\tvvrai 8c r\ yvvri :*
whence 6 fioix^vwv koi ri fioixivofiivri : ' he who
commits adultery, and she with whom adultery is
committed, shall surely be put to death.'-

Dr. Alford's correction does not seem ad-
visable ; and A. V. is best.

Ver. 44.

" Bless them that curse you, do good to them
that hate you" — " despitefully use you, and/'
A.V.

" Omity^ says Dr. Alford, without giving the
English reader, for whom he is constructing the
text, one word, either of apology or of explanation
for so summary an injunction.

This wholesale dealing with the sacred text
can only puzzle, unsettle, or alarm those who,
from want of knowing better, conclude they are
to obey such peremptory orders issued from the
decanal seat of learning. Let them, however, feel
quite comfortable about it ; they may keep their
own favourite text, and obey it in perfect peace.
* Thom. Mag. s. v. • Lev. xx. 10.

ON S. MATT. CH. V. V. 47. 113

It is hardly worth one's wliile to discuss tlie
reason that makes the Dean " agree with Lachm.^
Tisch., and Treg., in expunging these words
here."^ Good; but then, in this case, since S.
Luke, vi. 27, sq., gives almost the same words,
which of the two Evangelists was inspired, if this
verse be here thus shorn in this way p Without
further going into the matter, we may think the
authority of some of the oldest MSS., and that of
the Peschito, Armenian, Ethiopic, A. Saxon, Ara-
bic, Georgian, Slavonic, and Gothic versions, at
least equal to that of the Coptic version which
is younger than the Syriac, and to that of the
Codd. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, in favour of a
text quoted by S. Chrysostom* and by Justin
Martyr,' whose authority Dr. Alford does not
mention, either here or at S. Luke, vi. 27.

" The children," A.Y., ''render the sons," Dr.
A. See above, p. 108.

Ver. 47.

" Do not even the publicans so ? '* A. Y. In-
stead of *' publicans so," Dr. Alford says that " the
oldest and best authorities have Gentiles the same." ,
Saying this, he ought, therefore, also to have said
that the same authorities read " publicans so," in
the preceding verse; as neither originals nor

* In his Greek T. vol. i. p. 53. ^ Horn, xviii. in Matt
* ApoL ii. p. 62.

114 SEMARKSy BT&

tranfllations have precisely the same expression in
both verses.

This is one of those cases in which, to use a
familiar phrase, it is '' six of one and half-a-dozen
of the other/' and which therefore is hardly
worth a correction. The question is whether
'' publicans so'' should be read in v. 46, and
'^ Gentiles the same," in v. 47. So reads the
Ethiopic v.; while the Armenian V. reads " pub-
licans the same," at both places ; the Peschito,
" publicans this," also at v. 46, 47 ; the Gothic,
" heathens the same," and " publicans the same ;"
the Coptic, '^ publicans this way (thus)," and
" heathens this way (thus)." S. Ghrysostom alao
reads '' publicans the same," and '^ heathens the
same," v. 46, 47; while Justin Martyr says,
w6pvoi and rtXtivai, whoremongers and publicans.
If, therefore, the change be thought of sufELcient
importance, " heathens " may be substituted for
"publicans," in v. 47, but not " Gentries," as the
adj. 10vik6c, 'ethnic,' is not the same as the
subst. TCL Wvti, the nations, or "the Gentiles."
Mill,^ however, considers iOviKoi an interpolation,
and says that teXCjvcu, 'publicans,' is the true
reading in both verses.

> Proleg. 888.

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. 115

CHAPTER VI.

" That ye do not your alms before men,'* A. V.,
for " ahm^^ read " righteousness," Dr. A.

Here, again, the Dean gives no reason what-
ever for his alteration ; so that the English reader
is left in total ignorance of it. In a note, indeed,
he says, that it is not to be understood in the
sense of " benevolence " or " ahm^'' but in that of
righteousness, aa in oh. v« 20. He does not, how-
ever, say that there we find SiKaioavvii^ 'right-
eousness, but here cXeq/iocrvvq, 'alms.' And so
read together with the Received Text, several good
MSS. ; the Peschito, that reads here iXei^fxoirvvnv
and SiKaio<TvvriVy at v. 20 ; the Gothic, Georgian,
Coptic, and the Ethiopic, while the Arabic, Ar-
menian, and Slavonic, read " not show your com-
passion.'' S. Chrysostom, also reads iXerifiofrvvriVy^
and discourses upon it ; so that, even though Cod.
Vatic, read SiKaioavvriVy instead of iXeri/notrvvnv,
which Dr. Alford says is " a mistaken gloss, the
general nature of this opening caution not being
perceived," 2 yet may we keep to the Received
Text in company with S. Chrysostom.

Whether, however, we read ScKaeocHivi} or IXctj-
fio<yvvri matters little; the meaning is much the
same. For SiKaiotrvvn has in the New Testament

' Homil. six. in Matt. * Greek T. voL L p. 55.

116 KBUASXB, ETGp

many significations, chiefly deriyed from its we-
ceptation in the LXX., where it is often put for
npi», " almsgiving," and also " righteousness,'' and
for ion, iXcocy mercy, Ac. But for 1 John, ii, 29,
iii. 7, 10, where righteousness, iiKouxrvvn, cannot
be taken in the sense of ahnsgiving or of mercy,
one would have thought that wouiv Suzaio<r6viiv
could not mean anything but "doing alms;''
" doing," or " working righteousness," properly
so said, being l/oyaZ^ecrOai SiJcacoir6vf}v, as in Acts,
X. 35 ; Heb. xi. 33, &c.

When, however, Dr. Alford says that Sucaeo-
(fuvrif in the sense of showing mercy and giving
alms, is not found in the New Testament, he must
have overlooked such passages as ra yvviifxara
TfiQ SiK. vfiu)v, * the fruits of your righteousness,'
being — irrKopirKnv, eSa>K€ roig wlv., fi Sue. avrov
filvH Big Tov al^va,^ 'he hath dispersed abroad, he
hath given to the poor; his righteousness re-
maineth for ever,' &c. So far, however, fi^om
reading here SiKaio<Tvvriv in the sense of ch. v. 20,
S. Chrysostom rather speaks of the matter men-
tioned before this verse as Ixcfvi} yap ri e/JirpoaOev
t\pTi\fiivr\, TOV 0€oi; Itrnv iXcTj/iocW/vij, * the alms-
giving, or mercy, before mentioned, is that of God*'

Ver. 4.

" Himself shall reward thee openly," A. V.
Some of the best MSS. omit ** himself" and

» 2 Cor. ix. 9, 10. ' Hqinil. xix. in Matt.

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. V. 12, 13. 117

**x>penly" here and at v. 18, says Dr. Alford.
On the other hand, these words are well sup-
ported: "himself" by several MSS., but espe-
cially by the Peschito and Latin versions ; while
** openly" is found in a far greater number of
MSS., and most of the old versions. So that no
alteration is necessary.

Ver. 12.

*^ As we forgive," A. V., " readhsLve forgiven,"
Dr. A.

The Dean grounds his alteration on the read-
ing ajtriKafieVf which is not nearly so well sup-
ported as the Received Text, dj^Uinev, " we for-
give." Not only is this the reading adopted by
a great number of MSS. — though not by Cod.
Vatic. — but also by the Ethiopic, Gothic, Arme-
nian, Coptic, and Sahidic versions, and S. Chry-
sostom ; while other MSS. read d^lofievy another
form of the present; whereas only three MSS.
and of the Old versions the Syriac alone, read,
"we have forgiven." We may, therefore, keep
to the Received reading.

Ver. 13.

*' For thine is the kingdom, and the power,
and the glory, for ever. Amen," A. V.

" Omit/' says Dr. Alford ; and in a note, adds,
" We find absolutely no trace of it in early timesy
in any femily of MSS., or in any expositors."

118

REMARKS, ETC.

Without entering upon the controyersy of this
doxology, I will simply remark, —

(1.) That S. Ghrysostom not only has it, but
discourses upon it ;i so that, unless we doubt the
authenticity of this homily — and there is no
ground for so doing — he must have had good
reason for what he wrote.

(2.) That it is found in the Peschito, Gothic,
Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic (Fayyum and O.
Sion.), Persian (Whel. and Pol.), Slayonic, and
Georgian versions.

(3.) That it exists almost whole in the Sahidic
version, though the Coptic omits it; as do also
the A. Saxon, Wycliffe, and Tyndale. So that
in such good company, we may keep that to which
they were accustomed, as well as we ; for, seeing
there is so much to be said on both sides, the
advantage of Dr. Alford's proposed alterations
would assuredly be far less than the confusion
caused by this needless change in the English
Bible.

" Openly,*' A.V.,
See above, at v. 4.

Ver. 18.

says Dr. Alford;

Ver. 23.

" How great is that darkness,*' A. V., ^^remkr,
How dark is that darkness," Dr. A.

* Homil. zix. 6, in Matt.

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. V. 25, 27, 28. 119

" Why ? The Greek to aKorog Tr6<Tov, means
" the darkness of what greatness or quantity ; "
wherefore is the A. V. a good rendering of the
Grreek ; but if any alteration were made, " how
thick is that darkness,'' would be better than
" how dark is that darkness." IIoo-oc occurs in
the same way in 2 Cor. xii. 11. Iloinjv <nrov8i?v
rendered "what zeal" in A. V. and left unal-
tered by Dr. Alford in his Revised A. V. ; why
not on the same principle alter it there to " what
zealous zealP" "What eager, or earnest zeal,"
however, would be better; but, as no change is
required at 2 Cor. vii. 11, so also here may
A. V. remain as it is ; since it renders the Greek
literally, and is well understood.

Ver. 25, 27, 28.

" Take no thought," A. V., " render take no
anxious thought," Dr. A.

If the words of the A. Y. could be misimder-
stood, then some such alteration as that proposed
by the Dean would be necessary; but, as they
are perfectly clear here, so are they also at Phil,
iv. 6, where the same Greek term rendered,
" Be careful for nothing," A. V., is by every-
body understood to mean " be full of care " for
nothing. Yet, so far from there being any doubt
as to the meaning of, " take no thought," this ex-
pression is quoted as an authority for "to be
solicitous," in Webster's Dictionary. And rightly
too, for it is so used in Shakspeare :

120 REMABKs^ Era

" Mer. All lie can do

Is to himflelf ; take thought, and die for Caesar.^'

It isy however, interesting to notice how the
kindred versions render this verse. The Gbihie
has, m maumaith nu; lit. Do not mourn now;
and uses the same word at v. 27, 31 ; while, at
V. 28, it has hva saurgaithy "what care ye?"
WycliflPe, "that ye ben not besie to your lif;*'
Tynd., "be not carefull for youre lyfe;" A. S.^
" Dhset ge ne sin ymbhydige eowre s&wle," that
that ye be not anxious, careful, or solicitous, &c.

Ver. 27.

" One cubit to his stature," A. V. ; " render to
his age," Dr. A.

One cubit to one*s " age " is not very clear,
neither is the Dean's correction to be commended.
'HXiKfa, from riXiK6Q, * how great,' * how much,*
• how long,' or * how large,' means " the size of
the body ;" riXiKla, to /u^koc, 17X. is * the length,'
says one Gloss; 17X. ^iyeOoQ tnljjJLaro^y jxirpov ri
-qX. is the size of the body ; a certain measure.

The same term is, of course, used, especially
by Attic writers, to mean the size or propor-
tion of life, i.e, " the age of man." Here, how-
ever, that rikiKla is to be taken for "stature,"
and not for " age," seems settled by the use of
irrixo^, * cubit,' as measure; inasmuch as it is
customary to use measures suited to the thing

' Jul. Csa. Act ii. sc, 1»

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. V. 31. 121

measured. No one measures Kquids by the yard,
nor stuffs by the bushel ; but length by length,
and time by time. If, therefore, riXiKla were to be
taken here, as the Dean proposes, for " age," in-
stead of " one cubit," we should have one month,
one year, &c. Thus fifteen years, and not fifteen
cubits, were added to Hezekiah's life. Moreover,
TiXiicla must be taken in the sense of " stature "
in Luke, xix. 3, where it is said of Zacchsous,
who was " little of stature ;" and also in S. Luke,
ii. 52, where Dr. A. does not alter " stature "
into " age," albeit other critics understand it of
age and not of " stature." At S. John, ix. 23,
however, fiXtKia means age, for the growth of the
body.

It is almost needless to add that the Dean's
alteration of " stature " into " age " in this verse
did not occur to any of the translators of the Old
versions, nor yet to S. Chrysostom, who under-
stands it of the nourishment and growth of the
body, i.e. of " the stature " thereof.

Ver. 31.

" Take no thought," A. V. ; " render take not
anxious thought," Dr. A.

The Dean probably meant " take no anxious
thought ;" " no " is, strictly speaking, an adjec-
tive, " not," however is an adverb. " Take not,"
therefore, means " do not* take," which is better
English ; whereas " take no anxious thought "

122 REMARKS, ETC.

means ''take no thought that is anxious;" and
this is the obvious meaning of " take no thought."
This is Airther proved by the fact that, in order
to make grammar of " take not anxious thought/'
one must introduce " an " before " anxious
thought." And so we find it in Shakspeare;
both—

" K, Hen, Hence I took a thought,
This was a judgment on me ;"^
and —

" CcBS, Take to you no hard thoughts ;
The record of what injuries yoa did us,
Though written in onr flesh, we shall remember
As things done bj chance ;"<

expressions which entirely bear out the above
remarks. A philosophical grammar of the Eng-
lish language, on the plan of many excellent
works of the kind for almost every other Euro-
pean language, would be a great boon to many,
who are at present left to their own thoughts
and instinct in the matter.

Ver. 34.

" For the things of itself," A. V., read " for
itself," Dr. A.

This proposed alteration, that will not be very
soon adopted, rests on the Dean rejecting ra

* K. H. VIII. Act ii. Bc. iv. ' Ant. and Oleop. Act. v. sc. ii.

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. V. 34. 123

[^Xprifiara] after fjLcpiiJLvfiarnre, on tlie strength of
some MSS., and thus, probably, making far worse
Greek of it than need be.

MEpifivatOf i.e, lupL'jxvawy simply means that
the thoughts or the mind are divided; whether
(1) ' by care for a particidar object/

. tpyov jMpifJLvC>v TTotoVy r\ fitov rlva ;*

* engaged in what work, or in what pursuit in
life/ or (2) more seldom by ' doubt or trouble ;'
for when Plato talks of XctttoJc fiepiiJLv^v,^ * trou-
bling oneself very little/ he does not mean to im-
ply any great anxiety. Mepi/iv^v is thus, strictly
speaking, a neuter verb, "to trouble oneself or
" to busy oneself in thought " or in deed ; and
when it occurs in classic authors, and that is but
seldom — once only in Sophocles, Demosthenes, and
Xenophon — it is either construed with the accu-
sative or with the case governed by the preposi-
tion following ; thus in Xenophon,* ^epifiv. irepi
rwv, ic.r.X. In the LXX. it occurs only in the
sense of " take thought," " dwell upon," or " care
for," or " consider," Wisd. xii. 22, and of busying
oneself " with a calling," Prov. xiv. 25, as in the
line just quoted from Sophocles. It is then con-
strued either with the accusative or with a pre-
position and the case governed by it, whether
genitive or dative.

» Soph. (Ed. R. 1124. « X. Rep. 607. • Memor. i. 1, 14.

124 REMABKSy ETC.

Moreover, in fjupifivritrH avrficy Dr. Alford's
reading, one may well doubt whether it does not
strictly refer to the avptov aforesaid, and not to
this av/ofovy morrow, itself. So that, although it
be the same thing in fact, yet is it not certainly
so in grammar; wherefore do some MSS. read
lavr^C* "itself," instead of avr^c» which in this ob-
lique case may be "it," and not "itself." K,
therefore, ra be thrown out after fupi^vritrei, inpl
or virl/o must be introduced before atrr^c to make
good Greek of it. But better let things be as
they are ; the change is not worth the trouble it
gives ; for whether it be " the morrow shall take
thought for the things of itself," or " the morrow
jBhall take thought for itself," means pretty much
the same thing. In all these cases the only
change needed, if so be " take no thought " won't
do, is to render fiij fiepifivfitrnre, &c., by " trouble
not yourselves ;" which is the exact equivalent of
the Greek in familiar English.

But why does not the Dean alter " take no
thought" in this verse to "take no anxious
thought," as in the preceding verses ? The Old
versions render idiomatically, the morrow will
take thought either "of itself" or "of its own
business."

I

ON S. MATT. CH. VII. V. 29. 125

CHAPTER VII.

Ver. 15.

" Beware of false prophets/' A. V. ; ''render
but beware/' Dr. A.

Here is tbe Dean right.

Ver. 29.

** The scribes," A. V. ; '* read their scribes,"
Dr. A.

This alteration rests on the addition of avrutv
after ypafifiareigy on the authority of several MSS. .
It is, however, left out in many others, as well as
in the Coptic and Armenian versions. The Syriac
reads " their scribes and Pharisees ;" the Coptic
Sahidic, Ethiopic, A. Saxon, and Arabic, read
" their Scribes ; " while Wycliffe has " as the
scribes of him, and Pharisees ; '* and Tyndale,
"and act as the scribes.''

The alteration, however, from " the scribes "
to " their scribes " is quite unnecessary ; inas-
much as the Received Text, oi ypafifiarng, " the
scribes," is perhaps the better Greek of the two.
Whose were the scribes if they were not their
own ? Therefore is the addition of the pronoun
entirely useless ; and ol ypafifiaTBiQ, " the scribes,"
is alone found in S. Mark, i. 22.

126 KBMARKSy RTC

CHAPTER Vm.

Ver. 12.

" But the children of the kingdom/' A. V. ;
** render, but the sons of the kingdom," Dr. A.

What, only sons and no daughters P Surely
the Dean could not be in earnest when he wrote
this. Yiof, thus in the plural, in Hebrew and in
Hellenic Greek, means " a progeny, race, family,
tribe," therefore, sons and daughters, men and
women. "The children of the kingdom" is a
correct rendering of the Greek ; and is also ap-
plicable to the Jewish nation, evidently alluded
to in this place ; which was not all made up of
men. 2 Cor. vL 18, with Jer. xxi. 1, and Bev.
xxi. 7.

Ver. 15.

He " ministered unto them," A. V. ; " read
him," Dr. A.

S. Chrysostom, the Gothic, and Arabic (Fay-
yum) versions, with some MSS., read "him;"
while the Peschito, Ethiopic, Armenian, Coptic,
and Arabic Pol., read " ministered unto them ;"
that is most likely to have been the case. For
our Saviour was not alone there, and most as-
suredly Peter's mother-in-law would with Peter's
wife wait on the whole company, including our

ON 8. MATT. CH. VIII. V. 28. 127

Saviour and her son-in-law. Dr. AKord, how-
ever, wrongly quotes the Armenian version both
in this verse and at ch. vii. 29.

Ver. 16.

"With his word," A. V. ; "with a word,"
Dr. A.

Perhaps better ; especially when compared
with S. Luke, vii. 7, to which the Dean refers.
WycMe has "by word;" Tyndale, "with a
worde ;" Gothic, waurda, " with a word " or " by
word ;" Syriac, " with the word ;" so also Coptic ;
Armenian, " by word ; " Ethiopic, " with his
word ;" and Sahidic, " by the word of his mouth."
So that after all the Authorised Version agrees
with versions of the fourth, and perhaps of the
second century. For clearly the word with which
He cast out devils must have been " His " word.

Ver. 24.

"Insomuch that the ship was covered with
the waves," A. V. ; ^^ render was being covered,"
Dr. A.

A better rendering.

Ver. 28.

"Of the Gergesenes," A. V.; "of the Gada-
renes," Dr. A.

This is probably the correct reading ; as "Ger-

128 RBMAKKS, ETC.

geea " is not known, whereas " Gktdara " is. Of
the old versions the Armenian, Ethiopia, Coptic,
Gothic, Arabic Pol. and Fayy. read "Gerge-
senes ;" the Peschito, " Gudarenes ;" the Sahidic
and A. Saxon, " Qerasenes," as if from Gerasa ;
Wycliffe, " Genazereth ; " and Tyndale, "Ger-
gesens.*'

Ver. 29.

" Jesus, thou Son of God,'* A. V. ; « omit
Jesus," Dr. A.

Our Saviour's name does not indeed occur in
the Cod. Vat. and one or two more ; but it is
foimd in very many others, and in the Peschito,
Sahidic, Gothic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and Arabic
versions ; the Coptic alone omits it. So that here,
as almost always, we may in such good company
keep the name of Jesus, the Name which is above
every name, even when uttered by devils.

CHAPTER IX.

Ver. 2.

" Thy sins be forgiven thee,*' A. V. ; " omit
thee," Dr. A.

Here again the reading of the A. V., which is
that of the Received Text, is far better supported
than the other. All the Old versions read thus.

ON S. MATT. CH. IX. V. 2. 129

6z:cept the A. Saxon ; and Dr. Alford must have
overlooked the Ethiopic when he says that it
reads otherwise. On the other hand, S. Chryso-
stom reads with the Cod. Vat., " thy sins be for-
given/' omitting <rot, thee. Assuredly, the Eng-
lish reader need not make himself the leaat
uneasy about such questions, and the reading of
the A. V. may remain as it is. For not only has
it great authority, but the emphasis is also much
greater ; " thy sins be forgiven thee '' being so
far, more pointed than *' thy sins be forgiven.*'

Nay, we may well suspect a mistake of the
copyist in changing trol into <rov ; for there is
something lame in cKftiiovrai trov al afiaprlai, inas-
much as ai a/uLaprlai here must be rendered " thy
sins," so that <rov is hardly necessary. But <rot
is required after a<jii(ovrai. In proof of which, at
V. 5 and at S. Mark, ii. 9, we have only a(l>i(ovTai
<roi ai afiaprlai, *to thee are forgiven the (thy)
sins,' that must be rendered, "thy sins be for-
given thee,'' as well as in this place. Likewise
a^£C avT(j) Koi to l/iaTiov, * give him thy cloak
also,' &c., and at S. Mark, iv. 12, koi dfjteOy avroXq
ra a/iapTri/MiTa,

On the other hand, not a single instance oc-
curs in the New Testament of af^lr\fu in the
sense of " forgiving sins," without the dative
after it of the person to whom the sins are re-
mitted. So that while the genitive of the person
whose sins are remitted is not necessary so long
as the definite article- qualifies the term " sins,"

K

130 BF.MARKS, ETC.

flu afULfyrlai — the dative, is indifipensable after
ii^liifu. Whence we may conclude that the read-
ing of the Brcceiyed Text is better Greek than
that of the Cod. Yaticanus, and that the criticism
is not sound that rejects a reading because it is
** generally received," and adopts another only
because it is in the Vatican MS., the exact date
of which, after all, cannot be determined.

Ver. 8.

" They marvelled," A. V. ; " read were afraid,"
Dr. A.

Here again is the Dean's alteration grounded
on a reading in the Vatican MS., l^oj3?i0T}crav
for iQaifxavav. The Received Text, however, is
well supported ; not only by many MSS. but also
by S. Chrysostom,* the Armenian, Ethiopic, and
Arabic versions, while the Peschito, Coptic, and
Sahidic, read " were afraid ;" the Gothic, " feared
wondering ; " and the A. Saxon, " reverenced
Him," or " were in awe of Him,"

Both readings, however, come very much to
the same thing, for they could not marvel at Him
without a certain degree of awe.

Ver. 12.

" He said unto them," A. V. ; " omit unto
them," Dr. A.

* Homil. XXX. in Matt.

ON S. MATT. CH. IX. V. 13. 131

This is not of the slightest consequence. The
reading of the A. V. is supported by a number
of MSS. and by all the Old versions, except the
Sahidic and the A. Saxon. Dr. Alford cannot
have read aright the Ethiopic when he quotes it
as omitting " unto them," for it has the words.

Ver. 13.

" But sinners to repentance,'' A. V. ; " omit
to repentance," Dr. A.

This is the same kind of alteration as the pre-
ceding one. Both readings are well supported,
though "to repentance" is left out in the Vatican
MS. and a few others, as well as in the Gothic,
A. Saxon, Peschito, and Armenian versions ; but
it occurs in the Coptic, Sahidic, and Ethiopic.
Here, again, the Dean cannot have read aright
the Ethiopic, which he quotes as omitting the
reading ; while he did not look at the Sahidic,
which has the words " to repentance." They are
all good authorities ; and this shows what a waste
of labour it is to work at unsettling one's mind
and that of others by the fruitless attempt to settle
such a question as whether St. Matthew originally
did or did not write these words — seeing they are
found in S. Luke, v. 32, and are there said to be
genuine.

132 REMARKS, ETC.

Ver. 16.

" The rent is made worse/' A. V. ; " render
a worse rent is made/' Dr. A.

This may be an improvement, and a better
rendering; although A.Y. is also correct.

Ver. 35.

" Among the people/' A. V. ; " om«^/' Dr. A.

This rendering in English first appears in
Tyndale's version. It is not found in the Sahidic,
Peschito, Gothic, Arabic, Coptic, and A. Saxon
versions; but it exists in the Armenian, Georgian,
Slavonic, and in the Ethiopic, which, here again,
the Dean must have overlooked, in saying that
it omits the reading. According to him it is not
found in the three oldest MSS., though it is sup-
ported by very many.

Ver. 36.

"They fainted," A. V.; ''r^arfwere harassed/'
Dr. A.

This alteration rests on the Received Text
IfcXeXufclvoi, "faint" or "weary," being replaced
by l(TKv\^ivoLy " harassed" or " worried," which
is a somewhat uncommon term, and is, therefore,
supposed to have been explained by the more
usual word, which gradually crept into the text.
The Gothic reads afdauidai, kXcAvfilvot, "faint-
ing;" A. Saxon, gedrehte, troubled or vexed; Wy-
cliffe, " thei were traveilid;" Tyndale's, " they were

ON S. MATT. CH. X. V. 4. 133

pined awaye ;" Syriac, "wearied ; '* Coptic, "wan-
dering and scattered abroad;*' Sahidic, "were
$eullei and scattered abroad," using the Greek
term, an authority which Dr. Alford overlooks ;
Armenian and Ethiopic, " wearied and scattered
abroad.'*

The authorities seem to be in favour of ItricvX-
fdvoi, harassed or troubled, tired or weary ; as in
Herodianus, <rKv\ag Sc ical vjipttrac,^ after weary-
ing, worrying, or harassing and insulting the
troops ; and %va St| /ut| iravra rov (rrparbv xrKvXy,^
* that he should not weary the whole army.' If
an alteration be made in the Greek text, and thus
also in the A. V., since the term used is supposed
to refer both to the multitudes being weary of
the way and wearied out by the Pharisees and
Scribes, instead of " they fainted," one might per-
haps adopt, "they were wearied." But "they
fainted " is well enough understood.

CHAPTER X.
Ver. 4.

** Simon the Canaanite,'* A. V. ; " Simon the
Gananaoan," Dr. A.

The A. V. reads as if Simon was a Canaan-

* Lib. Tii. p. 149, ed. Steph.

^ lib. iv. See also H. Stephen's remarks on rxvXXtt in his
pfefaqe to Herodianus.

134 REMARKSj £TC.

ite, inhabitant of Canaan ; which is not the niiean*
ing of the term. It most likely stands here for
" 2ielote8," i.e. one of the Zelots, a nmnerous sect
among the Jews, who called themselves followers
of Fhinehas, in his zeal for the law, and took the
law in their own hands. Nevertheless, neither
Kavavtrtic nor KavavdioQ seem regularly derived ;
Kawlrtic and Kavvmoc apparently being more
correct. One circumstance, however, deserves
notice ; the Syriac, whence Kavavlrri^, Kaw/riic»
or Kavavdioc, is derived, reads here Qanonoyd;
whereas in S. Luke, v., and Acts, i., it renders the
Greek ZijXciTijc by the equivalent thannono. How,
then, did the translator understand it here ?

Ver. 10.

"Nor yet staves," A. V. ; "Nor yet a staff,"
Dr. A.

Better on all accounts, the singular, pa^Sov,
being better Greek, and better grammar in Eng-
lish. And so read most of the Old versions.

Ver. 19.

" But take no thought," A. V. ; " But take
not anxious thought," Dr. A.

See above, ch. vi. v. 25, p. 119 sq.

Ver. 23.

"Ye shall not have gone over the cities,*'
A. V. ; " Te shall not finish the cities," Dr. A*

ON S. MATT. CH. X. V. 39. 135

This is a more literal rendering of re\i<rnrs,
yet not so clear as the rendering of the A. V.,
which expresses the Greek, that the Apostles
would not have ended their preaching among the
cities of Israel when the Son of Man came.
Whereas " to finish a city, or cities," may have
more than one meaning.

Ver. 39.

" He that findeth — that loseth," A. V. ; read
" hath found— hath lost," Dr. A.

It is not so certain that the second aor. evpwv
may not be rendered by the present ; the first
aor. airoXiaaQ, however, is more definite in point
of time. Hence this passage is read differently
by the several versions ; thus the Gothic, Arme-
nian, Wycliffe, and Tyndale, read like the A. V. ;
A. Saxon, "he that met (found) his life — he that
loseth," with which agree the Syriac and the
Coptic ; while the Ethiopic reads " hath found-—
hath lost." This tense, however, can hardly
apply, as Dr. Alford would have it, to the time
when he that shall have found (this life) shall
lose (the next), and he that shall have lost (this
life) for His sake shall find (the next). Besides,
TJjvxVf ' soul,' though often taken for " life," need
not be so understood in this place.

We have examined all the alterations pro-
posed by the Dean in the first ten chapters of

136 REHABKS, BTC.

8. Matthew. It seems but fair to him tliat yre
should also look at a chapter or two in the other
Gospels.

S. MARK.
CHAPTER XIIL

Ver. 1.

" See, what maimer of stones and what build-
ings are here ?^' A. V. ; " render See, what great
stones and what great buildings ! ^' Dr. A.

If the Dean had considered the matter, he
probably would have written otherwise, and would
have rendered here as everywhere else — John, iii.
1 ; S. Luke, i. 29, &c. — woraTrog, by "what man-
ner of,'* and thus have let alone the reading of
the A. Version.

Uorawog is indeed rendered "qtmntus de rebus
et qualis, i.q, troXog de personis ;"* but also, and
more correctly, is TrorairoQ, " qualis de rebus," as
in this place. For norairSg — which is a degene-
rate form of TToSaTToc, "of what soil, or coun-
try, or kindred*' — means "what manner of.*'
To TToraTTOQ 8l, itrri TrorawoQ rov rpoirov' ^pvvi\ogy
^/oovc/ioc iiruiKfig, IIoraTrcJc means " of what
manner is," say, Phrynicus P prudent, gentle ;

» Wahl. CL N. s. y.

ON S. MARK, CH. XIII. V. 1. 137

JQ^V ovv ovTwg ipwr^v TTotifc T?c <foi Soke? eivaty^
f'aad ttus/' says Nunnesius, "must I ask the
question when I wish to know what manner or
what sort of a person so-and-so appears to be."

IIoSaTroc* then, which is the correct form,
answers to ct{/as, qualis. T(g, ijv 8' iyw, koi TroSa-
TToc ; Evijvoc, B(t>ri, (S ^wKpaTBQy TLapioQ,^ * Socra-
tes cum rogaretur, cujatem se esse diceret, mun-
danum inquit, totius enim mundi se esse incolam
et civem esse arbitrabatur.''* IIoSaTroc, says
Thom. Magister,* Itti yivovg \iywv bpdwq bIttoiq,
is rightly said of kind or kindred ; but when
speaking "of what manner,'* irepl rov rpoirov
ipwTwv ovTWQ ipBiQ' TTOTavog rov Tp6irov 6 ^wKpa-
riic ; iiruiKriQ, ' Say thus, of what manner or what
manner of man is Socrates P gentle.' Yet as
TToraTToc is inferior Greek, koXXcov 8' av eiri to
ovrwc ipwT^v, 67roi6g <roi riQ Sokbi elvai, rj irorairogy
^ it were better to say, of what sort or manner so
and so appears to thee to be, than to use TroraTroc-'

The reading of the A. V. is, therefore, quite
correct, and Dr. Alford's proposed alteration is a
mistake. He quotes Josephus; it is, therefore^
singular that he did not notice what Josephus
says, that the stones were not all " great,'' but
that some were of diflferent shapes and kinds, and
more or less ornamented ; the whole of which is

' Schleusn. s. v. and Lobeck Fhrynichus, s. v. p. 56.

• Apol. Socr. par. 4. * Cicero Tusc. 9. lib. v. 108.

* P. 389, ed. Kitscbel. » lb.

138 BEMARKS, ETC.

correctly rendered by " what manner of " of the
A. Version.

Ver. 2.

" And Jesus answering said," A. V. ; " omit
answering," says Dr. Alford.

This summary injunction is again to be traced
to the Vatican MS., in which the reading is not
found; but it is found in many of the Old versions
and in some MSS. ; and as it does no harm here
we need not reject it.

Ver. 4.

*'When all these things shall be fulfilled,"
A. V. ; " read and render when these things are
about to be all fulfilled," Dr. A.

We demur to this. (1) MiXXeev does not
necessarily mean '* to be about to do," or " on
the point of doing;" on the contrary, while it
points to the future, it rather implies delay than
haste; and implies " futurity" by implying " de-
lay." Thus—

fiaKpa /xlXXcr', aWa raxvvare'^

So little is fjiiWeiv *' about to," that we have
in Antigone, 611 —

TO r eireira, koI to /xIXXov,
KOI TO irpiv iirapKEtTEi,

» (Edip. Col. 218, 1627, and Philoct. 1449.

ON S. MARK, CH. XIII. V. 6. 139

where ro /xlXXov is yet farther off than cTrctra,
' deinde/ and comes after ifc.

Tl julXXcrc;! *why do you delay? 'says Clytem-
nestra to her attendants ; for jiaKpov ro fxiWuv,^
* to be " about to," is a long time coming,! ' Fur-
ther examples are needless to show that fxiWuv
implies delay, and that, therefore, " shall " of the
the A. v., which only points to the future with-
out specifying the time, is more correct than Dr.
Alford's "about to be." »

(2) The Greek does not say when these things
are all fulfilled, but " when all these things shall
be ftdfilled." "AH" qualifies "these," and not
" to be fulfilled," as Dr. Alford seems to under-
stand it by placing " all " before " fulfilled," and
not at its proper place, before " these things."

Ver. 6.

" I am Christy^ A. Y. ; "I am He, is more
faithful;' Dr. A.

"He" is not in the Greek, which simply
means " I, I am ;" A^ or Christ being understood
in this case. 'Eyco uyn is thus said very often :
e,g. Acts, xiii. 25 ; S. John, i. 21, and viii. 24,
&c. " I myself " being avroc tycJ u\iiy S. Luke,
xxiv. 39. Since, then, " he " forms no part of
the text, and must be understood as referring to

» Agam. 908, 1858. * Bacch. 178, CEd. Col. 1074, &c.
' On ^iXAiiy, see Lobeck's Farerg. to Phiyn. p. 747, sq.

140 BEHARKS, ETC.

Christ, it is yery clear that " I am Christ,** A, V.,
is far plainer than '' I am he" which may refer
to anybody.

Yer. 9.

" But take heed to yourselves," A. V. ; " ren-
der Take ye — ye has the emphasis — ^let your care
be," Dr. A.

The construction in fall of iavrov, with the
pronoun to which it refers, is so rare — and then,
of course, in the same case — ^that we had better
look at this sentence as if written v/ue?c Sc /SXlircrc
iavTovQy as at t. 28, so as to lay the emphasis on
vfuiQ ; in which case it cannot be rendered as Dr.
Alford does. It should then be,. ^' But ye take
heed to yourselves," and at v. 23, " But ye take
heed." For since jSXIttctc is fully rendered here
by '^ take heed," which is also like it made the
second person plural by placing "ye" af^r
" take," one then says, " Take ye heed to your-
selves," that is, " Let no one else do so for you."
But if " ye " is put at the head of the sentence,
thus, " But ye," it means, " Let others do what
they like; you, however, take heed to your-
selves."

Ver. 10.

" Among all nations," A. V. ; " render Among
all the nations," Dr. A.

We demur to this. (1) The use of the defi-
nite article in Greek is, of course, often diametri-

ON S. MARK, CH. XIH. V. 11, 12. 141

cally opposed to tte English idiom. (2) In this
case ra iOvri was consecrated to mean " the Gen-
tiles,'' gentes, all the nations that were not Jews,
and it is the meaning of it here ; so that " among
all the Gentiles " would render the Greek in the
sense given to ra Wvri by our Saviour in Hiw
conversation with His disciples. But, since *^ the
nations " in English has not the same meaning
as ra Wvri in Greek, " all the nations " requires
in English some such complement as "of the
earth," " of the world," &c. On the other hand,
" all nations " answers the purpose perfectly well,
since it impKes all the nations of the earth, and
no others. The same thing applies to such pass-
ages as S. Matt, xxviii. 19, where " all nations " is
a fit rendering for Travra ra lOvij.

Ver. 11.

. "And deliver you up," A. V. ; "to deliver
you up," Dr. A.

A better rendering.

Yer. 12.

" Shall cause them to be put to death," A. V.:
" render Shall put them to death," Dr. A.

Dr. Alford seems to forget that 0avaT6w means
both "to put to death" and "to condenm to
death," which is very much like " to cause to be
put to death." Thus, in Themistocles, c. xxiv.,
Plutarch tells us that ^EirtKparrig 6 'Axa/ovcvc
airiiTTBikev 8v iirl roirt^ Kifiwv varepov Kplvag iOa'

142 BEMABKS, ETC.

varoiorev. In the same sense also, oSr<i> Si) rov
Havcavlov OavariMtOivTog, * having been caused to
be put to death/ t. e. by Themistoeles, on whom
the suspicion rested.^ So also in Xenoph., /j.ri'
iiva airoOvijiTKEiv avev rijc vfX^Tipaq i/;t)^ov, rdv 8*
i^iM> rov Karakoyov Kvplovg ilvai rove rpiaKOvra
davarovv.^ Oavaroia is also found in the same
sense in Plato, IX. Leg., Antiphon and others ; so
that the rendering of the A. V. is correct.

Yer. 14.

"Spoken of by Daniel the prophet," A. V.;
" omit," Dr. A.

This clause is not, indeed, in the Vatican
MS., but is found in others, as well as in the
Syriac, Georgian, Slavonic, and Ethiopic versions.
So that we need not obey Dr. Alford's peremptory
order to omit it.

Yer. 19.

" For in those days shall be affliction such as
was not," A.Y. " For those days shall be afflic-
tion such as hath not been," Dr. A.

Dr. Alford's correction reads rather odd at
first ; yet it is borne out by Eccles. ii. 23.
" For all his days are sorrow, and all his travail
grief."

But as regards the rendering of yiyove by

' Ibid. c. xxiii. and Agesilaus, c. xxzii.
' Hellen. lib. ii. c. iii. 51.

ON S. MARK, CH. XIII. V. 20. 143

" hath been/' it must depend entirely on whether
yiyov£ was said with regard to the time when our
Saviour spoke those words, or to the time when
the affliction should happen. As it most likely
refers, to the time when there should be affliction,
" hath been " cannot be construed with a future
tense, because the pret. def. ** hath been " must
refer to a time present, when the action spoken
of has already taken place. One cannot say,
" To-morrow there will be a storm such as there
has not been for months," since "hath been"
ends to-day and at present ; and yet the question
is about to-morrow; for between to-day and to-
morrow another and greater storm may happen.
One might, however, say, " as was not since the
foundation of the world," because the indef. pret.
" was," embraces all past tenses, especially in
English, in which it is used idiomatically far
oftener than in many other languages ; the same
may be said of the second pret. yiyove, which is a
sort of past present, and implies a thing done or
completed, and which, therefore, is said to " be "
at any time past, present, or future.

Ver. 20.

" Those days," A. Y. ; " the days," Dr. A.

What days ? — Good grammar teUs everything;
and if it leaves aught to be understood, it must
be so grammatically.

Here, however, whereas in rag rnuiipag, either
ravrag may be understood, or rag may be taken

144 REMARKS, ETC.

in a demonstrative sense ; '' the " in English has
a defining and distinguishing sense, though now
no longer the demonstrative power of the article
in Greek. Tclq vfifpaQ, then, may be said in
Oreek ; but seeing it points to the days already
alluded to, it must be rendered in English by
" those days."

" No flesh should be saved," A. V. ; « should
have been saved," Dr. A.

" Should have been saved " is a tense which is
rather difficult to thread out in connexion with
what comes before ; and *' should be saved," seems
to answer the purpose, which is, to say that,
imless those days had been shortened, no flesh
should, or more familiarly, would ultimately be
saved; whereas "should have been saved," can
only be said relatively to the time preceding the
days of affliction, and ending with them ; but it
cannot, like " should be saved," embrace also the
time that may follow. So that A. V. seems best.

Ver. 25.

"Shall fall," A. v.; "shall be faUing," Dr,
A., rightly.

Ver. 28.

" Now learn a parable of the fig-tree. When
her branch is yet tender," &c., A. V. " Now
learn the parable from the fig-tree. When now
her branch becometh tender," &c., Dr. A.

ON S. MARK, CH. XHT. V. 28. 145

At first it wotild seem as if A. V, "a parable/'
were a bad rendering for rriv irapa^oXriv, Yet it
is preferable to Dr. Alford's "the parable/' tbat
starts on the unsound principle that the Greek
article must always be rendered in English, but
which here cannot make sense, without " which
I have spoken,'' or " which I will now speak,"
for complement.

The intention of the Greek, however, is " this
parable," which would be a good rendering for
rrjv wapa^oXriv in this place. Failing this, "a
parable," that requires no complement, being
indefinite, is best; especially as by being stated
to be the parable which the fig-tree teaches, it is
thus clearly defined. 'Atto is as well rendered
"of," as irapa in "learned of the Father," &c.
S. John, vi. 45. The reading of A. V., " When
her branch is yet tender," however, is in one
respect preferable to Dr. Alford's, "when now
her branch becometh tender," although he is,
perhaps, right in rendering here yivrirai, by " be-
cometh." But he writes as if " now " qualified
"when;" whereas ^8ij is said of aTraXoc yivnrai.
" Now " is either conjunction or adverb of time
very much like vvv ; but where it stands, in Dr.
Alford's sentence, it reads like a conjunction,
which is not the intention of ^Sij, that is best
rendered "yet," said of the time at which the
branch is, or becomes, tender.

*' Ye know," A. V., v. 29, " read it is known,"
Dr. A.

146 RKMAKKg, XTC.

This is a singular rendering of yiv4t&tta%
which can only mean " ye know," or " know ye."

Ver. 30.

'' Shall not pass/' A. Y. ; " shall not pass
away," Dr. A. Better.

Ver. 32.

" But of that day and that hour," A. V. ;
** but of that day or hour," Dr. A,

This alteration comes from ^, "or," which
is found in the Godd. Alex., Yat., and Ephr.,
instead of xat of the Received text. This Kal,
however, which is the reading of S. Matthew, is
also found in every one of the Old versions, one
and all of which read here, " that day and that
hour." Wycliffe alone has, " Treuly of that day
or our;" while Tyndale reads, " but of the daye
and the houre."

" But of that day or hour," however, is not a
correct rendering of wBpl Bi rrig -fiinipaQ sKelvrig 3
Trig wpag : inasmuch as iKdvriQ relates to the day
only, and not to the hour, as in English : this is
proved by the article before hour, rijc &/t>ac> after
which ainrrig is understood. " But of that day or
of the hour" [in it], or more literally, though too
familiarly, " but of that there day or of the
hour," &c. Yet, since "hour" is evidently a
portion of " that day," and not distinct from it
in point of time, it is clear that ico(, "and,"
which restricts the event to that one momesit, is

ON S. MARKy CH. XIII. V. 34. 147

a mofe logical reading than 3, *' or." "No wonder,
then, if all the Old yersions read " and," and thus
aglree with A. V.

" No man," A. V., " render for perspicuity
none," Dr. A-

Dr. Alford must surely mean "no one;" for
"none" would not be so perspicuous as "no
man." But " no one " is best ; though it matters
very little.

" Neither the Son," A. V., " read nor even,"
Dr. A.

" Nor yet," would be better.

Ver. 33.

"Watch and pray," A.V. Dr. Alford en-
closes [and pray] within brackets, saying that
" it %% omitted in several ancient authorities.*'

But it is found in Codd. Alexandr. and Ephr.
though not in Cod. Vatic. It is also in all the
Old versions and many MSS., as well as in S.
Matt. xxvi. 41. With such authorities for it,
what is the use of unsettling the mind of the
English reader, who may doubt on reading this
whether he need pray at all, so that he watches ;
as if he could do the one without the other ?

Ver. 34.

" As a man taking a far journey," A. V., " the
original has only going jfrom home," Dr. A.

" Otoing from home," or " gone from home,"

148 BBMASKS^ STC.

would be aiTfTviu— av^/» awtov Ik 8«/nara>v*— or iic
i6fiwv ;* whereas aTr6Srifio^y which is not of fre-
quent occurrence, SicSnfcoc being preferable,^ de-
rives its meaning from airoirifuiv, which means
to go not " from home," i. e, the " house," but
from the people or country into foreign parts; the
difference between awufUf * to be absent/ and airo-
SrifJuf, * to go away/ being beautifully drawn in
aireifu S' wc ioUt rriiiupov — KaX yap — irpiwu /[ilX-
Xovra ciccf (Tc airoST}/u€tv — Seao-KOircTv w^pii rijc airo-
irifJttag^ — where it is said of a long journey —
death, and what was to follow.

IloT ytig airiSfifMi^ ;

'To what part of the world didst thou gpP'
said Hercules to his wife, who answers, lirc/Sa-
Tcuov K\H<yOivei, * I sailed with Cleisthenes ; ' ica-
vaviiiaxn<r€ig ; 'And thou didst fight at seaP'^
For a7roSi}/u^ci> is " proficiscor," and a7roSi}/ufa is,
according to Phavorinus, Srav tiq Ik r^c irarpf8oc
fic aXXoSaTTi^v inripxtrai — 'when one goes away
from his own native land into another country ;'^
iirt (TTparetav arroSrifiriaaiy on foreign service;^ ug
Xd)pav jxaKgav — ' into a far country.'®

'A7r<J8»jjuoc here answers to aTroStiM^Vf ioi S.
Matt. XXV. 14 ; the same parable as in S. Luke,
xix. 12, where inroSniaCfv is explained by IwoptvOri

» Eurip. Or. 662. « Med. 1147.

' Thorn. Mag. s. v. * Phedo, p. 143, 146, dd. Lond.

* Aristoph. Ran. 48, sq« ' Schleusn. 8. v.

» -ffilian, Var. H. xxvii. about Plato. • S. Luke, xt. 13.

ON S. MARK, CH. XIIT. V. 34. 149

€tc X&pov fxaKpiiVy * he went into a far country/
So did Antoninus, when a7roSt}ju^<rae rijc 'FwfiriQ
ri9i\ri<yEVy wg Sfj BioiK-qawv ra iv roig (TTparoTriSoigy
KOI ra iOvri iiroypofiBvoQ, awapag Se t^c 'IrdXtac,
hrl rs rate oyQaig rov "Iot/oov yevo/j^vog, k. t. X.,*
* he planned to depart from Borne, in order both
to set in order his various camps and to see the
world ; having left Italy, therefore, and landing
on the banks of the Danube,' &c. Or, as he
would do of whom spake Socrates, — ottotb otto-
Snfiotrig — oTT^re eXOoig elg rriv eKelvov — oTTcJre ekOoi
^AOrivaZe,'^ or he to whom Plato alludes, who was
to airoSrifiBiv koL cnriaeaOcu avxvov ypovov^ — 6c
aTTcSii/iijcTf "xpovovg iicavovc,* * who went into a far
country for a long time/ El 8' av olov airoSij/Lt^-
<ra( BfTTiv o Oavarog ivOivSe Big aXXov roirov —
at^iKOfuvog elg AiSov — apa ^avXq av €tij ri aTToSi]-
/Ltfa. ' If, however, death is like departing hence
to another place — ^when I reach Hades, and, being
rid of unrighteous judges here — I there meet
Minos and Bhadamanthua : will that be so bad a
journey, after all?'*

So then avOpwwog aTroSrifwg is something
more than a man merely *^ going from home ; "
oiKTiTiop /ulv &v iv 2kv/o(^, Iv Si r«{» irapovTi iff kripq
iwoSrifitJv ljxiropl(^.^ Nay, the very passage (S.
Matt. XXV. 41) referred to by the Dean, in con-

* Herodian, lib. iv. p. 95, ed. St.

' Memor. Socr. lib. ii. c. iii. 12, sq.

* Politic, p. 665, &c. * S. Luke, xx. 9.

* ApoL Socr. p. 363. * Dem. ir^ x»AX. p. 1345.

150 BKXARKS, ETC.

fiimatian of his rendetrmg, proyes the oontruy ;
nnoe it is rendered by S. Luke, zix. 12, *^ a man
who went into a far oonntry."

The Syriac and Ethiopia read, " who went on
a journey/' and the Coptic and Armenian, ^ who
went into foreign parts/' The AnthorLsed ver-
sion, therefore, is right.

CHAPTER XIV.
Ver. 1.

" After two days was the feast of the passorer,
and of unleavened bread," A. V., " render the
passover, and the [^fecKt of] unleavened bread."
Dr. A.

This proposed alteration is unnecessary, and
the A. V. is quite right.

It is, indeed, true that in Numb. xvi. 17, the
Passover is mentioned first, on the 14th, and then
the feast of unleavened bread, on the 15th day^of
the first month. But it is equally certain that
the term "Passover" is applied to the whple
feast, in Scripture — ^whether or not, as S. Clwient
Al. says, it was to be reckoned from the IQth
day, when the lamb was chosen, to the 2l8t, and
thus occupied the best part of two weeh^ ac-
cording to Philo. Thus the Passover itseK is
called " the feast " of the Passover, MDCn ^1, in

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 1. 161

Exod. xxxiy. 25 ; fi iofyrfj tQv iZviifov, -fi Xiyofiivri
mtcffxa, ' the feast of unleavened bread [which]
is called the Passover/ S. Luke, xxii. 1 ; and
the two were called ij kofyrri, 'the feast,* to
Tra(T')(a fi eofyrfj twv 'lovSofoiv, * the Passover, the
feast (not ' a feast,' A. V.) of the Jews/ S. John,
vi. 4.

Likewise does Philo speak of loprfj — ra Sm-
fiarfipia, fjv oi 'E^pdioi watrxa K&Xovtnv — * the
feast, " the passing through," which the Hebrews
call the Passover,' virofivriTiKfi rrjc fiey(<rTrig inroi"
Klag loTiv -fi BopT-fjy Koi \api(rTripiog'y 'that feast was
instituted as a conunemoration of the great ex-
odus, and is to be kept with thanksgiving/ Suv-
airrei Si roig SiafiarTipioig eoprri^ — aZvfia; *but to •
the Passover is attached (or, immediately follows
the P.) a feast — the unleavened bread,' &c*
Here, therefore, both the Passover and the un-
leavened bread are alluded to, each as " a feast/'
Hence, the custom among the Fathers of calling
the Passover, ri iopT-fj rov ira<r)^a rov irporipov
rvwiKov, vvv 8c aXriOivov,^ 'the Feast of the Pass-
over, of the first that was tjrpical and of the
present one, which is the true/ So that, as the
Passover was " the Feast " of the Jews, is it also
fl ^atrtXiaaa rwv ri/iipiovy ' the queen of days,' for
Christians, says S. Gregory of Nazianzus.'

When, therefore, the A. V. says, " After two
days was the feast of the passover and of un-

* De Sept. Festis, p. 1189, sq.

• S. CyiiL Hier. Cat liv. » Orat. xlii.

152 BBMABKS, STC.

leavened bread, it speaks correctly, both as to
fact, and also according to the usual idiom of
those days.

Ver. 2.

" Not on the feast efcy," A. V. ; " render during
the feast," Dr. A.
A better rendering.

Ver. 3.

** And being in Bethany," A. V. ; " render
when he was," Dr. A.

Here also is A. V. best. "Ovroc, * being,'
expresses a length of time during which tlie
circumstances told took place; whereas "when"
only points to the time or instant — e.g. "when
the gun went off" — without implying any dura-
tion whatever. If any alteration were necessary,
it should be " while he was." Yet, " being " is
literal, perfectly correct, and readily imderstood.

Ver. 6.

** For it might have been sold," A. V. ; " read
for this ointment might," &c.. Dr. A.

The principal MSS. and all the Old versions,
except the Arabic, Pol., and Fayy., the Peschito
and the Coptic read tovto to fivpov, " this [here]
ointment ; to fiipov, however, is omitted, in those
four versions, as well as in some MSS., and in the
Beceived text. Here the Dean introduces it into

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 6. 153

tke text, partly because it is found in S. Matt.
xxvi. 9, wliile, as we have seen, he removes from
the text of. S. Matthew the very words that occur
in parallel passages of S. Luke. One is, indeed,
sadly put out by all this shifting, the merit of
which it is impossible to see.

Surely these two places are not parallel. In
S. Matthew, " ointment '' is only mentioned twice
at V. 7; and in the 8th verse, we only have,—'
"To what purpose is this waste?" (v. 9), "For
this ointment might have been sold,'' &c. So
that TO fivpov may well come after tovto, in S.
Matthew. Here, in S. Mark, however, " oint-
ment " would occur three times, at v. 3, 4, 6, if
Dr. Alford's emendation were adopted. Surely
one's ear has claims on the consideration of text-
constructors ; and — " Why was this waste of the
ointment made? For it might have been sold,"
reads assuredly better than " Why was this waste
of the ointment made ? For this ointment might
have been sold," &c. ; while the meaning of both
readings is precisely the same. Here, then, also,
is the A. y . best.

" Three himdred pence," A. V. ; " read three
hundred denarii," Dr. A.

Alterations like this seem intended only to
make one doubt the wisdom of the reviser. For,
what do the people, for whom the common
version is made, know of " denarii " or " dena-
rius," either, albeit they have it in the " df." of
" £. 8. d. ? " Whereas they know all about a

154 uofABxSy Era

pezmj, wliichy in tlie ITth century, answered well
enough to the value of the ''denarius'' in the
days of Tiberius, 7i^., to stand as an equivalent
in the English translation. A labourer's wi^ies
was then a penny a-day, as was a denarius in the
days of our Saviour.^ The Saxon penig, which
was derived from the Eoman denarius, was, ii; is
true, worth only threepence of the present cur-
rency; but the Eoman denarius greatly duni*
nished in value towards the end of the Empire,
and after that. So that anyhow, since ''penny,"
which originally meant caUle and money ^ was the
Saxon equivalent for the Roman "denarius," it
dearly is the best rendering for it, in a version
intended for the people; irrespectively of the
actual value of the penny at that time or at
present

Ver. 8.

" She is come beforehand to anoint," A. V. ;
" render she hath by anticipation anointed," Dr.
A.

Yery little need be said about this. The
A. V. is plain, Saxon, and true. Dr. Alford's
"anticipation" looks very strange side by code
with "hath" and other English words. lipo-^
IXa/3e fwptaai, moreover, could not be rendered
better than "anointed beforehand;" but how
could the woman do so without "coming" for
that purpose?

' Ackerm. Numism. HI. p. 8 ; Bibl. Numism. von C Cave-
doni. lib. Ton Warlhof, p. 105, sq.

ON S, MABK, CH. XIV. V. 10. 166

Ver. 10.

" One of the twelve/' A. V. ; " literally, the
one, or that one of the twelve," Dr. A.

This alteration rests on the insertion of the
article before cic in the Vatican MS. 'O elc does
not, I believe, occur, said thus absolutely; but
always when mention is made " of two or more "
of " the one and the other," &c. 6 elc . . . 6 cic ;
b cic • • • 6 Sc inpoQy or aXKog ; ol Svo, 6 cTc • • • ical
6 lr€/9oc. No instance of 6 cTc* as the Dean puts
it, is found in the New Testament, neither does
the Vatican MS. insert the article before elc in
any of the following parallel passages, S. Matt,
xxvi. 14, 47; S. Luke, xxii. 47; where cic rS>v
&J&ica is said of Judas Iscariot.

This one instance, then, looks more like an
error of the Vatican copyist than like a true
reading ; for it is not, I believe, good Ghreek.
The expression, ical l^rikQ^v 6 cic air' ifiov, Gen.
xliv. 28, at first seems to bear out Dr. Alford's
reading, 6 cic; but it depends on Svo ctekc fioi
4 yvirq: 6 cic iKri^OBv — "one of the two." So
also ScJScica aSeX^oC iafiev — 6 cic ov virap\H' 6 Si
fUKpog fura tov tt., ch. xlii. 32 ; which is like,
dAw — ^<rav, 6 cic — 6 8a trtpog, S. Luke, vii. 41 ;
but iio viol — elc «« 8. kcX elc tS eiwv S. Matt.
XX. 21 ; S. Mark, x. 37. OJ irlvre ^amXeig iweaav,
Koi 6 elc iarlv, 6 aXXoc oinru) ^X0e, &c.. Rev. xvii.
10. The A. v., therefore, requires no alteration
in this place.

156 REMARKS, ETC.

Ver. 14.

" Where is the guest chamber P" A. V. ; " read
my guest chamber," Dr. A.

This also rests on iiov inserted after KaraXv/ia
in the Vatican and other MSS. : though neither
in the Alexandrine MS. nor in any of the Old
versions, except, indeed, in the " Sahidic," says
Dr. Alford. This verse, however, is neither in
the Sahidic N. T. of Woide, nor in " Miinter's De
indole Sah. Vers. ;" nor yet in Mingarelli's " Codd.
Bibl. NaniansB." Perhaps Dr. AKord consulted
some Sahidic MSS. ; if so, it would be well to
have stated the fact. Likewise, does he quote
the Armenian edition of Bp. XJskan ; but, though
beautifully printed, it is, nevertheless, not to be
trusted; as it was altered from the Vulgate.
The best critical edition of the Armenian Bible is
that of Venice, 1805, 4to.

Dr. Alford adopts fiov here on the authority
of the Vatican, Ephraem and other MSS, and of
the Sahidic version, which he does not specify;
while, at S. Luke, xxii. 11, where Cod. Ephr.
and the Sahidic of Woide read to KaraXvfia fiov,
he does not adopt fiov. Why then, here, and not
there P Somehow this arbitrary handling of the
Sacred text does not gain one's confidence.
Surely, if to KaToXvfia fiov, ' my guestchamber or
my lodging,' is so right here as not to require a
change in the text, and in the A. V., common
minds cannot see why, on nearly the same au-

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 15, 18. 167

thority, it would not be quite as desirable in S.
Luke, xxii. 11.

Ver. 15.

" There make ready for us," A. V. ; *' and
there make ready," &c.. Dr. A.

Dr. Alford inserts icat before licet, on the au-
thority of the Vatican MS. and of the .Coptic,
Gothic, and Ethiopic versions. On the other
hand, the Alexandrine MS., the Armenian, Pes-
chito, Georgian, Slavonic, and Arabic versions do
not read icai, but agree with the A. V., that reads
much the best. For " and " befpre " there make
ready," does not suit the cadence of the verse.
Dr. Alford, however, overlooked the Syriac Pes-
chito, when he said that it inserts Kal; for it
omits it.

Ver. 18.

" One of you which eateth with me, shall
betray me," A. V. ; '* render one of you shall
betray me, he that eateth with me," Dr. A.

It is not easy to discover the merit of this
correction; inasmuch as both renderings mean
the same thing ; the A. V. being the clearer of
the two. " One of you, he that eateth with me,
shall betray me," might, perhaps, be more literal ;
yet is no alteration required. 'O i(rOlo)v must be
taken in a future sense ; unless we think that
V. 19 took place while Judas, 6 lywjSaTrro/xfvoc, was
dipping in the dish with the Saviour.

158 SEMA&KS, ETC.

Ver. 22.

" Take, eat," A. V. ; " omit eat, as in all the
most ancient authorities, and read, Take [this],"
Dr. A.

The mass of evidence is decidedly in fayonr of
Dr. Alford's correction. Not only do most MSS.
and all the Old versions omit "eat," but even
Wycliffe has only ''Take ye;" while Tyndale
gives : " Take, eat." This reading yet increases
the difficulty of the question connected with the
words of institution or consecration of the Eu-
charist, which are differently given in the four
places where they are mentioned; and that go
to prove, says Bp. Jeremy Taylor, that Christ
left us nothing definite on the subject. This, too,
shows how wholly the matter lies between Him
and the communicant; since four priests, admi-
nistering the Holy Communion, according to
Scripture, would do it in four different ways.

Ver. 24.

" Of the new Testament," A. V. ; " omit new ;
better render in conseqmnce, covenant instead of
testament," Dr. A.

Here the same authorities do not favour the
Dean. The Alexandr. MS. and others, together
with the Sahidic, Peschito, Ethiopic, Armenian,
Arabic, &c., except the Coptic, read " of the new
covenant or testament," the word being the same,
as in S. Luke, xxiL 20 ; S. Matt. xxvi. 28 ; and in

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 27, 31. 159

1 Cor. xi. 25. Why tlien strive to prove the
reading false in this place?

Ver. 27.

"Because of me this night," A.V. ; "(ww»Y,"
Dr. A.

The Vatican MS. and many others omit this
clause, " as taken from S. Matthew " (?) says the
Dean. The Alexandr. MS. and others, however,
together with all the Old versions, the Coptic of
Wilkins (though not that of Schwartze) included,
have it. Likewise Wycliflfe reads, " All ye shal
be hurtt thorowe me thys nyght." The A. V.,
therefore, requires no alteration.

" Scattered," A. V. ; " scattered abroad," Dr.
A.

Better, perhaps, as it is the same word as in
S. Matt. xxxi. 31.

Ver. 31.

" K I should die," A. V. ; " render must," Dr.
A.

We should say not. " Should," not only in
its original meaning, but in its present usual ac-
ceptation, renders the subjunctive of Siy, which
"must" does not; because it is not in English,
conjugated, as in Icelandic and other Scandi-
navian dialects, and is, therefore, of no particular
tensa Thus, "if I must die," said thus abso-
lutely, and without some adverb of time, means
" if I must die now." Whereas, " if I should

160 &SMABK8, Bra

die," ''if it behoue me to dye to gidere with
thee," Wycliffe ; " K I shulde dey with the,"
Tyndale — leaves the question as it is in Chreek,
uncertain, conditional, and ftiture.

Ver. 38.

« The spirit truly is ready," A. V. ; "is wiU-
ing," Dr. A.

Better, perhaps, since the word is the same
as in S. Matt. zxvi. 41.

Ver. 45.

"Master, Master," A. V. ; "render Rabbi,
Rabbi," Dr. A.

The change does not seem desirable. " Rabbi,
Rabbi," means nothing for the common people ;
whereas " Master, Master," which they all under-
stand, and which renders the Hebrew Rabbi,
" My Master, or Superior," conveys to them the
meaning of the words spoken by Judas to the
Saviour.

Ver. 47.

" A sword," A. V. ; " render his sword," Dr.
A.

Right, and so reads the A. Saxon, " his swurde
dbrffid."

" A servant," A. V. ; " render the servant,"
Dr. A.

Also best, for tov SovXov.

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. T. 48, 49, 51. 161

Ver. 48.

" Are ye. come out ? " &c., A. V. ; " Ye are
come out,'' Dr. A.

The punctuation in the Greek text is, of
course, of Kttle authority. Of all the Old ver-
sions, the Ethiopic and Slavonic alone read it as
an interrogation, that seems also to read best in
English.

" Against a thief," A. V. ; " render a robber,"
Dr. A.

A much better rendering. " Thief," A. Sax.,
iheof, is icXiTmjc, and robber, A. S., reafere, is
Xyarrig; both agreeing in their respective ety-
mology ; reafere, from reqf, spoil, as Xyarrig also
from Xrfig and Xtj'/^o/xae. See S. John, x. 1, 8.

Ver. 49.

" But the Scriptures must be fulfilled," A. V. ;
" render but that the Scriptures may be fulfilled,"
Dr. A.

This rendering is more literal^ but not so
correct in this place as that of A. V. The Dean's
correction requires " but so it is," or " it is so,"
&c., as complement, to make sense ; whereas
A. V. implies this, and conveys nearly the same
meaning.

Ver. 51.

" And the young men," A. V. ; " read they,"
Dr. A.

M

162 REMARKS, ETC.

Dr. Alford tells us that the Received text in-
troduces viavhKoi, from v€av/<ncoc in the former
part of the verse, or from v. Kparovatv airov.
This, however, is hardly probable. The reading
is found in the Alexandr. MS. and several others,
in the Gothic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Sclavonic, and
Sahidic versions; the Coptic, Arabic, and A. Saxon,
however, omit it ; while the Sahidic reads " the
officers " for ol vsavi<rKoi. This is a familiar ex-
pression in some Eastern languages, for ^'sol-
diers." The reading, therefore, is not without
authority, and may be kept.

"Followed him," A. V. ; ''read with him,"
Dr. A.

Dr. Alford adopts oi;vt)koXov06< for TiKoXovOu,
on the authority of the Vatican, and one or two
more MSS. ; but how could that yoimg man
follow Christ with Him P The crvv, * with,' refers,
in such a case, not to the person one follows, but
to some other person with whom one follows a
third. The only two instances in which avva"
icoXov0av occurs in the New Testament prove the
case. In S. Mark, v. 37, He suflTered- no one
ovvaKoXovOriaaiy 'to follow Him together,' save
Peter, James, and John ; and S. Luke, xxiii. 49,
the women, ai (rvvaKoXovOrfaaaai avrt^f * who toge-
ther followed Him from Galilee. '

Here, however, that young man followed alone,
and, therefore, could not follow "with" Him. K
avvriKoXovOet must be adopted, then render " fol-
lowed Him with the rest of the band," &c. Alto-

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 53. 163

gether, then, the Received reading i7JcoXoi;0£i is
best.

Ver. 53.

" Were assembled with him," A. V. ; " render
come together to him," Dr. A.

The rules of grammar that guide the Dean in
his renderings are not always clear. Here he ren-
ders (Tvvip^ovrai avrd^ as if it were ep^ovrai, they
come, ariv, 'together,' avrdf, *to Him;' but, besides
that this very peculiar rendering would stand
alone in the New Testament, we may doubt whe-
ther epxeadai rivi, 'to come to some one,' be good
Greek.

"Epx'^f^Oai often is in the tragics construed with
the dative, for to come "as a dream," to happen,
ep^eral aoi iriKpov Oia/ia,^ ov <toi raS' ^\0e icaica,^
and in prose we find tpxeaOai Xoyc^,^ * to come to
the point ;' but when said of one person coming
to another, ip^ofiai is mostly construed with some
preposition like tt/ooc, c. ace. or Itti, c. dat. &c.
^vvip\ofial Tiviy therefore, always is "to come
with some one else," even with the pronoun un-
derstood, as avvipxofiai Ig j3ovX^v, ' I come to the
council with [the others].' Thus TLirpog (rvvriX'
Oev avTOLc* * Peter came with them;' avvriXOov
avTt^J^ 'they had come with him;' the women
(TuviXijXv Ovcai aitru^^ ' who had come with him ;'

» Eurip, Op. 940. « Hippol. 838.

^ Plato, X. Rep. p. 183. * Acts, in. 39.

* Id. X. 33, 45. • S. Luke, xxiii. 55.

164 REMARKS, £1X7.

and so in every other instance. But in order to
make the reading better Greek, as well as clearer,
when <rvv{p\ofiai air^ is not intended to mean
" to come together with him," but " to come toge-
ther to him,'* then is <n)v(px'^<rOai construed with
TTpoc airrov ; as in seyeral MSS. in this place and
in S. Mark, vi. 33. Here, therefore, (rvvipxovrai
avTfi^ must be rendered "they came together with
him," unless we prefer the reading trvvipx- ^P^
airrov. The A, V. might, perhaps, be altered to
" and with him assembled ;" as the histor. present
may well be rendered in English by the preterit.

Ver. 54.

" Even into the palace," A, V. ; " render even
within into," Dr. A.

Hardly. ''Ewe fo'w «Jc rriv avXriv means " as
far as the interior, into the hall of the high-
priest." It is not, therefore, " even within into,**
that reads somewhat rugged, but " followed him
within, even into." This rendering is not literal ;
yet, inasmuch as Isojg, * as far as,' refers to the
innermost part of the building into which Peter
went, " even" must in English refer to the hall
of the high-priest, and not to "within;" since that
hall was farther in than " within."

"And sat," A. V. ; "and was sitting,** Dr. A.

Right.

" And warmed himself,'* A. V. ; " and was
warming himself," Dr. A. Also right

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V, 62, 68. 165

Ver. 62.

" In the clouds of heaven," A. V. ; " render
with the clouds of heaven," Dr. A.

"In" must in this place be taken to mean
" on," as it often does now, and did yet oftener in
A. Saxon ; e.g. " militant here in earth." Taken
in this sense it is preferable to " with," as render-
ing for )Lt£ra, which, if rendered " with," followed
by the definite article " with the clouds," must
mean " in company with them." This, however,
is not the intention of the passage, which simply
says that the Son of Man will come, borne on the
douds of heaven. If, therefore, neither " in " nor
" or " wiU do, and " with " is adopted, then rwv
vf^cXfaiv must be rendered " clouds," without the
article, "and coming with clouds;" because,
when thus construed, " clouds " accompany Him,
and not He them.

Ver. 68,

" I know not, neither understand ;I," A, V. ;
'lender I neither know Him, nor understand,"
Dr. A.

This alteration rests on Dr. Alford's reading
ovrc o78a cure Marafiai, for the Received Text,
ovK ocSa ovSl hrltrrafiai. Both readings are well
supported ; the Received Text by the Alexandr.

166 REBiAKKS, ETC.

MS. and others ; and Dr. Alford's rendering by
the Vatican MS. and one or two more. Other
MSS. vary the negations.

The only question of interest is, what does
olSa refer to : to Christ, or to " what thou sayestP"
Now it is self-evident that two connected nega-
tions, "neither — nor," naturally refer to the
same person or thing, unless otherwise expressed,
e.g. "I neither know nor love him;" "I neither
know nor xinderstand what thou sayest," &c.
Whereas two difiPerent negations not necessarily
dependent on each other, like " not " — " nor,"
may apply, the one to one person or thing, the
other to another. Oiic otSa ouSi ivlfrrafiai means,
therefore, " I know (perceive) not, nor yet under-
stand what thou sayest;" or else, but not so
naturally, " I know him, not, nor yet understand
what thou sayest." So that Dr. Alford, by adopt-
ing ovrc— ovrc, limits it to rf <n; \iyug ; whereas
ouK — oh^i may possibly refer, the one to "what
thou sayest," and the other to Christ.

The Pesohito reads, " I know not what thou
sayest;" the Coptic, oiSi — ov^l said of rl trv
Xiyug ; so also the Gothic, Armenian, and Ethio-
pic, while the Sahidic says in so many words, Dje
ude andisoun ammoph an, ude andighn eredjo ammos
an dje u, * that I neither know him, nor find out
that which thou sayest, what it is.'

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 69, 70. 167

Ver. 69.

''And a maid," A. V.; " and the maid," Dr. A.
Of course ; since it was the same maid who had
spoken to him before ; 17 ^aeSferici}, like ri 'irapOivog,
S. Matt. i. 23, is definite.

" Saw him again," A. V. ; " omit again,"
Dr. A.

Dr. Alford rejects irdXiv as an interpolation ;
but it seems to come naturally after 17 iraiSiaKti,
*the maid,' showing that she was the one who
had said so before, and now said it again. The
Received reading and A. V. are both supported
by the Peschito, Armenian, Slavonic, Georgian,
and Ethiopic versions, as well as by the Alexandr.
MS. and others. The Gothic version connects
fraXiv with ^p^aro, which seems to be its proper
place ; but the Coptic and Sahidic versions omit
it ; and the Arabic and A. Saxon versions read,
"and another maid saw him," &c.

Ver. 70.

" For thou art a Galilean," A. V. ; " render for
thou art also a Galilean," Dr. A.

Better; inasmuch as in koi yap, yap cannot be
left out. We might, however, doubt whether
" for thou also art a Galilean," is not better. But
if it were so, perhaps should we then have icaJ yap

168 BEMASXS, ETC.

roXiXacoc cT (r6, aa in the Coptic^ antok u Galileos
pe.

" And thy speech agreeth thereto," A. V. ;
" omit;' Dr, A.

This clause, howerer, is supported by the
Alexandrine and other MSS., and by the Old
versions, except the Coptic and Sahidic.

S. LUKE.
CHAPTER XIX.

" And Jems entered," A. V. ; " render and he
entered," Dr. A.

As Jeam is in italics in A. Y. no one can mis-
take it for an incorrect rendering. But being at
the beginning of a chapter, seldom read in con-
nexion with the preceding one, especially in
church, Jeatia is well put there to introduce the
narrative. K the two chapters were read together,
and here .clcrcXflaJv were only rendered " he en-
tered," it would refer to Bartimaeus, the last
subject named« And if this chapter were read
singly, no one would know who entered Jericho,
unless Jems were said to be here alluded to.

ON S. LUKE, CH. XIX. V. 3. 169

Ver. 3.

" For the press," A. V. ; " render multitude,"
Dr. A.

The A. V. is not amiss, but, on the contrary,
it is well rendered here ; and in the parallel pass-
ages, S. Mark, v. 27, 30 ; S. Luke, viii. 19.

"OxXog implies two principal ideas : (1) a mul-
titude of people, and (2) the thronging and jos-
tling or pressing of the same ; hence 6)(\ei(r6ai aTro
TTv. does not mean to have a multitude of unclean
spirits within one, but to be knocked about and
tormented by them, S. Luke, vi. 18 ; Acts, v. 16.
Thus ©xXoc has a very different meaning in S.
Matt. ix. 25, where it is put for the people that
were in one small room ; and in ch. xiv. 5, where
it is said of the multitude of which Herod was
afraid, &c. Such a crowd thronged Christ, S.
Mark, iii. 9 ; t. 31, &c., as on the present occa-
sion, when it evidently was not the thousands or
the hundreds of people that would hinder Zac-
chseus from seeing Jesus; but, being little of
stature, he might have been prevented from so
doing by only twenty people around the Saviour.
It was very much the same thing in the case of
the woman who came through the press to touch
the hem of His garment. Here, then, "the
press " conveys the idea implied in ©xXoc, 8<ttcc
£0Xc/3» rov K. ' the multitude that pressed the Sa-
viour,' 8. Mark, iii. 9.

170 REMARKS, ETC.

Ver. 13.

" His ten servants," A. V. ; " render his own
ten servants," Dr. A.

'Eavrov is in the Greek here ; and iS/ovc i^^ 3*
Matt. XXV. 14, and there rendered " his own ser-
vants;" so that it should be so rendered here
also, if no number were given, as in S. Matthew.
But seeing the iSioi SouXoi mentioned there are
here limited to " ten," that tell how many were
iavrovy "his own"; "own" is not necessary in
English, because whereas " his " can only apply
to the man himself, and " ten " says how many
were his servants, the Greek construction here
would hardly suffer another pronoun than kavrov ;
as avToxf might refer to some one else, than to the
master himself. "His ten servants," therefore,
may remain ; " own " being implied in " ten,"
inasmuch as there were in the household many
servants not " his own," but belonging to other
"inembers of the family, or to the family in gene-
ral. " His own" servants, however, were " ten" in
number.

"Ten pounds," A. V.; ''literally, minae,"
Dr. A.

Exactly; but the conmion people would no
more imderstand "minaB" for pounds, than
" denarii " for pence. The object is not to give
the exact amount in avoirdupois of the sum given.

ON S. LUKE, CH. XIX. V. 15. 171

for even a " mina " would be somewhat difficult
to calctdate ; but the object is to give the Eng-
lish people a correct idea of our Saviour's mean-
ing, in words they can understand. And they
all understand pounds, shillings, and pence.
" MinsB " and " denarii " are suitable for notes
or commentaries, but not for the text itself.

Ver. 15.

" How much every man had gained by
trading," A. V. ; " read and render what business
they had carried on," Dr. A.

A. V. is by far the better rendering of the two.
AiairpayfiaTevo/nai occurs but seldom; once here
and twice in the Phaedo of Plato, where Sm-
frpayfjLaTevaaaOai tov Xoyov,^ means to treat a
subject ; " pertractare quaestionem ;" or Siairp. rfiv
alrlav,^ to discuss and examine a cause in all its
bearings ; and when said of money, " to turn over
money, to make money by trading with it." This
is the meaning of it here, and not " what business
they had carried on," for the lord did not care to
know that, so much as to know what interest he
would receive together with his money.

Besides, the Dean, in his eagerness to find
fault with the Received Text, even when, as in
this place, it is borne out by the Alexandrine MS.
and others of note, and by most of the Old ver-
sions, not only rejects rtg, but also reads Siairpay

» P. 327, ed. Lond. » Ibid. p. 310.

172 REBIARKS, ETC.

fwrewiavTO — rt Siairpayfiart6<ravTO, thus waatonly
spoiling the elegant and pointed oonstruction of
the original cva yvdf tIq ti itairpayfiaTevaaTOi ' ut
Bciret qms et quid lucratus fuerit;' ''that he
might know who among them and how much
every one had gained by trading." The rendering
of the A. V. is, therefore, better than the Dean's,
as the Beceived Text is also better Greek than his
own, and, probably, nearer being " the "Word of
God " he is trying to " discover.''

The Gothic reads wha tcharaizuh gavaurhtetU,
*'what every one had wrought out, or made."
The Syriac, " what every one of them had traf-
ficked." The Armenian, "who, what he had
gained," rfc rt Biavp. The Coptic, Arabic, and
Slavonic versions, however, read with the Dean ;
while the Georgian has " how much the money
had increased." The Dean's reading is also that
of the Vatican MS., while that of the Received
' Text is the Alexandrine MS., which is, at least, as
good as the Vatiban copy.

Ver. 18.

" Hath gained," A. V. ; *' render hath made,"
Dr. A.

Hardly idiomatic, though here we have Ivotrias,
while at v. 16, there is ^pofTBipyaaaro,

Ver. 20.

" And another came," A. V. ; " read the
other," Dr. A.

ON S. LUKE, CH. XIX. V. 26. 173

Here, again, the Dean reads 6 trepog, ' the
other,' with the Vatican MS., and others that
follow it ; while the Received Text very properly
omits the article with the Alexandrine and other
MSS. also. For 6 erepog can only mean *' the
other " than the two already mentioned ; so that
"the other" must be "the third;" but there
were ten servants, every one of whom received a
pound. " The other " cannot, therefore, mean the
tenth, or the one, whoever he be, who hid his
lord's money, since there were seven other ser-
vants not mentioned ; it must be " another," one
of the eight remaining after the first two
already spoken of.

In a case like this, the versions that use no
article can be no authority, as regards the use
of it in this place, e.g. the Vulgate renders
6 SevTBpog, V. 18, and either 6 hepog or hepog
here by "alter;" the Armenian, Slavonic, A.
Saxon, and the Syriac read " another ; " the Ara-
bic, probably revised on the Coptic, which has
"the other one," reads "the other;" the Gothic
has "some one;" while the Ethiopic, WycliflFe,
and Tyndale, read " the third." \

Ver. 26.

"Taken away from him," A.V.; "from him
is omitted in many ancient authorities/' Dr. A.

So it may be; but those ancient authorities
are assuredly not free from error. For aw* avrov
is clearly needed here ; and neither the sense nor

174 REMARKS, ETC.

the sentence are complete without it. Accordingly,
it is found in the Alexandrine and other good
MSS., and the Sjrriac, Armenian, Ethiopic, Oo-
thic, Arabic, Coptic, &c. versions also have it.
Nevertheless, in spite of such authorities, Dr.
Alford thinks best to reject av airrov from his
text, because the Vatican MS. does not adopt the
reading. It is, indeed, difficult to see the merit
or the object of such criticism.

Ver. 34.

" The Lord hath need," A. V. ; " literally that
the Lord," Dr. A.

Dr. Alford adopts on before 6 Kvpio^, to tally
with V. 31 ; and also because it has most autho-
rities in its favour. The addition is of no great
importance ; yet are v. 31 and 34 not parallel
At V. 31 the Lord said, " If any man ask you.
Why loose ye the colt P thus shall ye say unto him
[we do so] because the Lord hath need of him."
Here, however, the disciples spake as of their own
accord; &ti here being no part of the order re-
ceived from their Master ; as in many like
instances.

Ver. 40.

" If these should hold their peace," A. V. ;
" render shall hold their peace," Dr. A.

'Eav, with the subjunctive friiayTrYitrwcriv, ren-
dered " if they shall hold their peace," as if it
were the indicative with h? Well might the

ON S. LUKE, CH. XIX. V. 45, 46. 175

stones cry out. The pret. indie, is, of course,
right in the apodosis, therefore have we KeKpa-
^ovrat ; but, as the protasis must be rendered, " if
these should hold their peace," so must the
apodosis in English be also in the subjunctive;
as the same rules of syntax do not hold good in
both languages. The A. V., therefore, is right.

Ver. 45.

" That sold therein," A. V. ; " therein is
omitted hy many ancient authorities,^^ Dr. A.

By the Vatican MS. and two more, and by
the . Coptic and Armenian versions ; but it is
sanctioned by the Alex. MS. and several others ;
by the Syriac, Gothic, Ethiopic, Arabic, and Sla-
vonic versions. The A. V. may, therefore, retain
it.

'^ And them that bought," A. V. ; " omit, with
many ancient authorities, and the express testimony
of Oriffen,'' Dr. A.

This clause, however, is found in the Alex,
and Ephr. MSS., with several others, as well as in
S. Matt. xxi. 12 ; in the Gothic, Syriac, Ethiopic,
Armenian, and Arabic versions ; so that the au-
thorities are more than evenly balanced in favour
ofA.V.

Ver. 46.

" My house is," A. V. ; " read and my house
shall be," Dr. A.

This is the reading introduced by Dr. Alford

176 REBIARKS, ETC.

from the Vatican MS. The Received Text, how-
ever, follows the Alexandrine and Ephraem MSS.,
with others also, and several of the Old versions,
viz., the Coptic, Gothic, Syriac, Arabic, and Sla-
vonic ; while the Armenian reads iirrcu, and the
Ethiopic, " shall be called."

S- JOHN.
CHAPTER XV.

Ver. 2.

" He purgeth it," A. V. ; " render cleanseth,"
Dr. A.

Dr. Alford's rendering is no better than A.V.,
for "to cleanse" a tree, is not a very common
idiom. If any alteration were made, it should be
" he pruneth it." But A. V., as it stands, is
perfectly well understood.

" That it may bring forth," A. V. ; " render, as
above, bear," Dr. A.

Rightly, for there is no reason why the same
word should not be rendered alike in the same
verse.

ON S. JOHN, CH. XV. V. 3, 5. 177

Ver. 3.

" Now ye are clean tkrough/' A. V. ; " render
ye are clean already by reason of," Dr. A.

Dr. Alford probably means, " Ye are already
clean," &c., as the adverb qualifies the verb, and
not " by reason of." But no change is necessary ;
and I need not bring forward examples to show
that riSi?, though it mean (1) " already," with
respect to the time past, also (2) means " now,"
with respect to the time to come ; and (3)
sometimes "now," conj. with regard neither to
the past nor to the future ; exactly in the way in
which "now " is used as conjunction in English.^
And such a conjunction is needed in this place,
which begins, as it were, a new paragraph of
application or address to the disciples. So that
A. V. is right.

Ver. 5.

" For without me," A. V. ; " for apart from
me," Dr. A.

A very much better alteration by the late
Prof. Scholefield is "severed from me;" "for,
severed from me, ye can do nothing;" which is
the real meaning of this passage. When the
A. V. was made, however, " without " was often
used for " outside," its true meaning ; and even
now its usual acceptation renders this place suf-
ficiently well.

* See above, p. 145.

N

178 REMARKS, ETC.

Ver. 6.

" And men gather them," A. V. ; " render and
they," Dr. A.

A. Y. is best, inasmuch /as, grammatically,
" they " refers to " branches ;" but, as it does not
80 intellectually, thence follows confusion of style.
So that *' men gather," which exactly renders the
idea implied in arvvayovtriv^ is best.

" And they are burnt," A. V. ; " reneler and
they bum," Dr. A.

We should say not : Katofiai means, mid,
" I am being burnt," i. e. " I bum," intrans. ; or
it may be passive, for " I am lighted or burnt.'*
And this seems here the intention ; not that the
branches should go on burning, to give light like
a lamp, or warmth, like fire on the hearth ; but
that they should be consumed. Kaltrcu is here,
then, in the sense of KaraKakrai, &c. — koi opq, &ri
6 /3aroc KaUrai irvpl, 6 8l jSaroc ov icarcicafcro.*
Therefore do many MSS. read KaroKaierai for
KaUrai, in the parallel expression, S. Matt. xiii.
40, which is the reading of the Received Text and
of the Vatican MS., and is, nevertheless, rejected
by the Dean.

The remarks I made on this passage in my
** Gospel of St. John," do not appear to me quite
correct. I treated KaUrai, in the sense of icmo-
fievog Xuxv., without suf&cient attention to the
meaning of it here.

' Exod. iii. 2.

ON S. JOHN, CH. XV. V. 7. 179

Ver. 7.

" Ye shall ask," A. V. ; " read ask (impe-
rative)," Dr. A.

The imperative, which is not so ufigoal in the
apodosis after lav with the subj. in the protasis,
is, nevertheless, supported in this place by most
MSS., and the Coptic, Gothic, A. Saxon, Arme-
nian, and Ethiopic versions; and does, indeed,
read better than the fixture.

" What ye will," A. V. ; " render whatsoever,"
Dr. A.

"O lav filXijrc, does not mean " whatsoever ye
will," but "that which — what ye may will, or
wish for." The Syriac reads, "All that you may
like to ask for, shall be done unto you." " What-
soever " is o n ov, V. 16.

Ver. 8.

" So shall ye become," A.V. ; " read and render
and so shall ye become my disciples," Dr. A.

A better rendering. Evidently, if the part of
a disciple is to be like his master, then does the
disciple of Christ become His, by growing like
unto Him. But this is very slow work.

Ver. 9.

" Continue ye," A. V. ; " rendevy as below,
abide," Dr. A.
Rightly.

180 REMARKS, ETC.

Ver. 12.

" I have loved you," A. V. ; omit " have,"
Dr. A.

The Ist aor. rrfairriaa is also better rendered
" I loved," than " I have loved."

Ver. 15.

" Henceforth I call you not servants," A. V. ;
" render no more do I call you servants," Dr. A.

OitKiri is " no more," " no longer." The
reading of the A. V., therefore, though not so
literal as Dr. Alford's, has, nevertheless, the same
meaning. The Gothic reads: Thanmeiths izuia
ni qitha skalkam, " No more, or no longer call I you
servants ;" A. Saxon only : N^e telle ic eow to
theowan ; " I do not reckon you to servants." Wy-
cliffe : " Now I schal not seye you servantis ; "
and Tyndale : " Hence forth call I you nott ser-
vauntes." The Old versions agree in rendering
the Greek, " No more call I you servants, or my
servants," &c. Correctly speaking of time, how-
ever, it should be " no longer."

** For the servant," A. V. ; " Because the ser-
vant," Dr. A.

Perhaps better.

" For all things that I have heard of my Fa-
ther I have made known imto you," A. V. ; "Be-
cause I made known imto you all things that I
heard from my Father," Dr. A.

ON S. JOHN, CH. XV. V. 16. 181

The Dean^s construction is that of A. Y. in-
verted. A. V. is Kteral, and quite as intelligible.

Ver. 16.

" Ye have not chosen me," &c., A. Y. ; " Ye
did not choose me," &c., Dr. A.

The 1st Aor. i^eke^dfirtv is better rendered, not
"I chose," &c., but " I chose you for myseK," mid.

" Ordained," A. Y. ; " appointed," Dr. A.

"EdrfKa may be rendered either way ; but the
rendering of A. Y. is, perhaps, the better of the
two in this place.

" Whatsoever ye shall ask," A. Y. ; " omit
shall," Dr. A.

Then it would be the present subj. instead of
the fut. indie. "O ri av aln^o-Tjrc — is " whatsoever
ye may ask ;" av cannot be left out.

Yer. 18.

" If the world hate you," A. Y. ; " render
hateth," Dr. A.

Rightly, £1 — julkteX implies a certainty that
should be expressed also by the indicative in
English.

" Ye know," A. Y. ; " better imperative,
know," Dr. A.

Perhaps ; it is, however, a matter of choice.
Yet the Gothic, A. Saxon, and Wycliflfe, read it
in the imperative, "wite ye;" while Tyndale
altered it to ^' ye knowe."

182 REMARKS, ETC.

" It hated,'' A. V. ; retider " hath hated," Dr. A.
A better rendering for lUfiltniKt.

Ver. 20.

"The servant is not greater than his lord,"
A. V. ; " render there is no servant greater than
his lord," Dr. A.

This at first looks like a singular render-
ing of oiic ioTi \l<mvj Cod. Vat.] SouXoc fiei-
Zwv Tov K. air., though it be the rendering of
the Peschito, " there is no servant that is greater
than his lord;" of the Ethiopic and Arabic ver-
sions ; while the Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, and
Slavonic, agree with the Gothic, A. Saxon, Wy-
cliffe, and Tyndale, in reading, "The servaunte
is not greater than his lorde." And this ren-
dering seems justified by the parallel passages,
S. Matt. X. 24, S. Luke, vi. 40, where iMlZtov is
rendered irrip ; oiic i<m fmOrtvfie inrip tov S«Sacr-
KoXov, oif^i SoOXoc inrip rbv Kipiov avrov, " the
disciple is not above his master, nor the servant
above his lord."

" If they have persecuted," A. V. ; " omit
have," Dr. A.

The first aorist of this verse had better be so
rendered.

" My saying," A. V. ; " render word," Dr. A.

Rightly.

" But aU these things," A. V. ; " howbeit all
these things," Dr. A.

ON S. JOHN, CH. XV. V. 22. 183

** Howbeit " may, perhaps, be a better con-
junction in this place than " but ; " yet is it a
mere matter of taste ; and not worth the change.

Ver. 22.

"They had not had," A. Y. ; "they would
not have had," Dr. A.

This also is preferable ; yet is the change not
necessary.

"No cloke," A. V. ; ^^ render, for perspicuity,
no excuse," Dr. A.

The change, here also, is not necessary, inas-
much as " cloke " is consecrated by occurring in
this and other places in the New Testament ; and
having thereby become a household word, is per-
fectly understood.

Ver. 26.

"He shall testify," A. V.; '' rendsr bear wit-
ness," Dr. A.

Better. It is very evident, from the style of
the A. v., that more than one mind worked at it,
as e. $r. in the use of " testify " side by side with
" witness," which is a much better term.

Ver. 27.

" Ye also shall bear witness," A. V. ; " render
ye are witnesses," Dr. A.

The A. v. "bear witness" — "ye also bear
me witness" — underst. i^iol — might, perhaps, be

184 REMARKS, ETC.

better than " ye shall be witness/' For there is
no future in Greek. At the same time fiafyrvpHn
is in the present like t<m, though this refers
to the past. This, then, should be altered to " be-
cause ye are with me from the beginning,"
which is as idiomatic in English as in Greek.
"And ye also bear me witness, because ye are
with me from the beginning."

These few chapters from the Gospels, in
Greek and English, will enable one to judge of
the kind of alterations the Dean of Canterbury
would make both in the Received Text and in the
English version of the Bible. In this first half
of the New Testament for English readers, he
gives the text of the Authorised Version so cut
up with words and passages in italics, with
clauses enclosed within brackets as doubtful, and
the words " omit," " render," " read," &c., occur
so often, with no explanation beyond the Dean's
ipse dixit, that the English reader — for whom, as
wholly ignorant of Greek and criticism. Dr. Al-
ford prepared his work — must either turn aside
from it, or think the Version he was taught to
venerate a mass of corruption, and the language
he ought to follow little else than an uncouth
idiom, to be set aside and forgotten.

In the latter half of the work, containing the
Epistles, the Dean prints the Authorised Ver-

ON THE EPISTLE OF S. PAUL TO TITTJS. 186

sion unaltered, and his own Revised version, side
by side in parallel colnnms ; an arrangement
which is, on the whole, better. In order to do
him justice, therefore, we will briefly examine the
chief alterations he has made in the short Epistle
of S. Paul to Titus.

THE EPISTLE OF S. PAUL TO
TITUS.

CHAPTER I.

Ver. 1.

*' An apostle of Jesus Christ," A. V, ; " An
apostle of Christ Jesus,'* Dr. A.

As I have not at hand Dr. Aiford's Greek
Epistles, I do not know whether or not this be a
translation of his Greek Text. But any how,
the A. V. reads much better ; the cadence and
rhythm of the sentence are better in " an apostle
of Jesus Christ," than " of Christ Jesus ; " and,
since the sense is the same, the advantage of the
alteration does not appear.

"According to the faith," AY.; "for the
faith," Dr. A.

icaro TTioTtv, ho\rever, is "according to the
faith."

186 REMARKS, ETC.

" And the acknowledging/' A* V. ; " and the
knowledge," Dr. A.

^Eirlyvwmg is more than " knowledge/' which
simply means " acquaintance with ; " for it im-
plies the act of the mind, which, being satisfied
with the certainty of a lore of any kind, assents
to it as true ; t. e. acknowledges it. Now, in a
sensible man, such an act can only proceed from
research and conviction, which are both implied
in iTrlyvwaig.

" After godliness," A. V. ; " according to god-
liness," Dr. A.

No great difference, though A. V. is best.

Yer. 2.

" Before the world began," A. V. ; " before
eternal times," Dr. A.

This, indeed, is a new reading in English.
Xprfvoc, in Greek, is very seldom found in the
plural; once or twice in Plato; in Sophocles
also ; but never either in ^schylus or Homer ;
and only once or twice in the LXX. ; very sel-
dom in Demosthenes ; never in Aristophanes ;
neither has it occurred to me in Aristotle ; but I
have not yet read the whole of his works.

The reason for which )(p6voQ seldom occurs in
the plural is, that 6 Si )(p6vog ifrrt to apiOfiov*
fi£vov, Kal ov\ i} apiOfiovfiiVf^ " time is not
that by which we reckon, but that which is
reckoned ; " hence xpovoc came to mean a period
* Arist. Nat. Ausc. iv. 11, 8.

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. I. V. 2. 187

of time — rlXcioc S' av uri xpovog, 8croi/ avOpwiroQ
/3ioT^ — )(p6vo€ T<{icov-^a year, or a month, and,
therefore, used in the plural ; e. g.

1^ ^pog elg apKTOvpov eKfifivov^ '\p6vovg.^

* Six months from the spring to the autumn;'
wpo Slica "XpovwVf rj fiera Slica IVtj,^ * ten " times "
ago,' or after ten years ; therefore, also, are xpovo<
said to be iroXacof, fiaKpoi, iroXkoty iKavoi, &c.

fiaKpol waXaiol t av fierprfiutv xpovoi.*

XpovoL aliivioiy however, is so unusual an ex-
pression, that, even in the LXX., we have -^povoi
alufvo^f Esdr. iv. 15, instead of it, inasmuch as,
with regard to aicJv, taken for " the existence of
the gods,*' Aristotle says that it is a word of divine
origin, and that, rovro rovvofia ddwg e^Oeyicrac
irapa riov ap^alijjv. To yap riXog rh irepiixov rov
Trig eKatTTOv Z^co^c Xpovov — alojv licdoTov icIicXirrae
— * the span of every man's life is said to be his
seon, or lifetime/ Kara rov avrov Si \6yov Koi
TO Tov wavTog ovpavov riXog kqX to rov navra
'Xp6vov Koi rfjv aTTUplav wipiixov riXog aiwv loriv,
aTTO rov aei elvai ukritf^tog Tfjv itrtavvfilav, aOavarog
KaX flaoc.* " In the same way, seen (eternity), so
called from dd, * always,' is immortal and divine,
and embraces the end of the whole heaven, and
the bounds of the whole time and of infinity."

» Eth. Magn. i. 4, ft. » (Ed. Tyr. 1137.

' Ammon. i. v. xat^ig. * (Fd. T. 561.

^ Arifit. De Coelo, 9, U, 10.

188 REMARKS, ETC.

Clearly, then, every xpovog, or period of time,
be it a year or a month, or a number of years,
included in " ')(p6voiy^ cannot be aicJvcoc, itself
" eternal," since it is, de facto, a measured period.
Neither can xpovoe be literally rendered in Eng-
lish; for "t^es,*' or "the times," is said in a
yery different way ; so that " eternal times " re-
quires some explanation, and, any how, is not
i^omatic. Therefore, does the Dean render xjmJ-*
vo(c aiwvloiQy Rom. xvi. 25, " during eternal
ages ; " albeit, in 2 Tim. i. 9, he adopts " eternal
times" instead of it. But the truth is, that
aiiivioQ here is not ** eternal," but " of eternity ;"
now " times, or years of eternity," are very much
like eternity itself; so that, either "from all
eternity," or "before the world began," &c., is
quite as true as "before eternal times," and far
more idiomatic.

Ver. 3.

" But hath in due times manifested his word
through preaching which is committed to me
according to the commandment of God our Sa-
viour," A. Y.

"But in its own seasons made manifest his
word in the preaching, with which I was en-
trusted according to the commandment of our
Saviour God," Dr. A.

These two renderings ought never to have
been set side by side; leastwise by the Dean
himself. For in the A. V. we have the most per-

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. I. V. 8. 189

feet sequence of — subject [God] "hath*' — then
the adverb, " in due times," qualifying the verb
"manifested," and therefore placed before it;
then the object, "his word," which is, therefore,
placed after the verb.

Whereas Dr. Alford says: But *'in its own
seasons :" whose is " its," and where is the sub-
ject P It is a frequent mistake to put the genitive
before the subject, e. g. " his business being over
the man came," &c., whose business — the man's,
or that of some one else ? But here, " its own
seasons " is made to relate to " word " that comes
after "his" referring to "God" in the pre-
ceding verse, so that the order is: (1) no subject ;
(2) genitive of the object ; (3) no adverb, as " own
seasons " belongs to " word " ; (4) the verb ;
(5) the genitive of the subject which is not men-
tioned, and (6) the object itself. Such grammar,
though " revised," is assuredly not so good as that
of the English version.

" In due times," A. V. ; "in its own seasons,"
Dr. A.

There is here an antithesis between ^ovoi
aliovioi, and Kaipol i'Sioi, Kaipog being fxipog xpovov
— rj TToiorijc XP^^®^' — " ^ portion or a quality
of time." Granted, then, that Kaipoig, is 'sea-
sons;' iSioig does not assuredly qualify \6yov avrov,
as Dr. Alford seems to think, in "its own seasons"
— but iStoig qualifies Kaipoig, as altovitoy does xpo-

^ Thorn. Mag. p. 207, and Ammon. s. v.

190 REMARKS, ETC.

vufv, SO that KaipoiQ iStoic means " in due, or proper
seasons."

" Through preaching," A. V. " in the preach-
ing," Dr. A.

'Ev KtipvyfAarif may be rendered either " with,
through, or in preaching," yet not " in the preach-
ing." But since the word of God was not made
manifest by the preaching of S. Paul alone, there-
fore is there no article before KtipvyimTi ; for were
it iv Ti^ Krip. 5 iirKTrevOrtv it would then imply that
S. Paul's preaching alone was of the word of God.
But since there were other apostles and evan-
gelists who made manifest the word of God, Iv
Ktipirffiari implies that fact and embraces the
whole of that preaching ; and 8 imariidriv applies
only to that portion of it which was committed to
S. Paul. Therefore must it also be " through the
preaching ;" ' the preaching ' being the means of
making manifest the word of God.

"Which is committed to me," A. V. "with
which I was entrusted," Dr. A.

There is, of course, no comparison between
the flow of A. V. and the ruggedness of the
revision. A. V. renders traparlQr^fjLi and irKXTsvoficu
by "to commit to," which implies trust; and
TTKTTevofiai by " to be put in trust," as im(TTevdriv is
rendered in 1 Thess. ii. 4, and "committed to
trust," 1 Tim. i. 11. As all these expressions are
good renderings of the Greek, the choice lies
between the better or the worse combinations of
vowels and consonants.

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. II. V. 3. 191

" Of God our Saviour," A. Y. " of our Saviour
God,'' Dr. A.

Nothing is gained by tliis very strange con-
struction ; for of two substantives in apposition,
the first qualifies the second : thus, " our family
name" does not mean that "our family" is a
" name," but it means that such a " name " is that
" of the family." So that, as Dr. Alford cannot
surely read the Greek as if it were " our Saviour
God," that is, "our Saviour who is God ;" " God "
in "Saviour God" is qualified by "Saviour;"
and brings it to the correct rendering of the
A. v., " of God our Saviour," whether this be
said of the Father or of the Son.

'O (Turrrip, ' the Saviour,' thus said absolutely of
Christ, never occurs in the New Testament ; but
either Qeog or 'Irjaovc Xpiarog is added, to show
of whom (TtoTTip, which means both Saviour and
Preserver, is predicated as an epithet, iwlKXrjmg,
which, of course, never takes the article, except
when the subject or noun has one also, as tov Aia
Tov (Ttorripa^ So that the article in tov (ruyrripog
rifiiov Qeov must refer to Geov, and not to o-cur^poc,
as, e.g. in this line of Aristophanes — ^

TOV atJTtipog iepevg itv Aiog,

that must be rendered " being priest of Jupiter
Soter," or " Jupiter the Saviour." This is a very
common epithet of " Zevg/' originally the same
as " Geoc ;" but having become a proper name, it

» Aristoph. Plut. 1186. » lb. 117.'i.

192 REMABKS, ETC.

is seldom found with the article, except when
particularly specified, as in this case.

There is, then, no difference between Upov
<rwTi}poc iirUXriiTiv A(oc/ and Aiog iepov, iTrficXijo-iv
(TwrripoQ ;* but in either case it is a temple of
Jupiter, sumamed Soter, or Saviour. So that,
whether we have rov awrripoQ r\fih}v Geov, as in
this place, and in 1 Tim. ii. 3, Titus, ii. 10, iii. 4,
as we have rov trwrripoQ Ai6g, and

Tov Kara x^ovoc

"AiSov v^Kputv (rurrripog,^

or read Gcov (rwrripog fifiiov, as in 1 Tim. i. 1,
like Aiog (ruyrrjpog, which occurs continually —
matters very little. In all these cases b-eurijp, in
the New Testament, is an epithet, whether of
" Saviour," for Christ, or of " Saviour " and
" Preserver," said of the Father ; as e.g, inl Tim.
iv. 10, where (rwrfip means " Preserver " of all
men, specially of those that believe. Aristotle
uses trtoTYip in precisely the same way : ^wrrjp fiiv
yap ovTtjg awavrwv lorl koI yevirwp — 6 Geoc,*
' God really is the Preserver and Father of all
things ;' (rtjrrip te Xiyerai koi eXevOipiog, Brvjuuogy
wg 8l TO wav eliniv, ovpavi6g re icat ^OSviog —
TtavTiov avTog airiog &v f 'but He is called Saviour
[or Preserver], and bountiful withal, from the

* Fausan. Arcad. c. 30. * lb. Cor. ii. c. 31.

3 ^sch. Ag. 13C0. '• De Mundo, 6, i.

* lb. 7, 3.

ON EP. TO TITUP, CH. I. V. 4. 193

very nature of the case ; since, in one word, He
fills heaven and earth, being, as he is, the Origin
and Cause of all things ; ' <rvvlxwv rijv rwv oXtJv
cLQfJLovlav Koi o-ftiTTjpfav,* * holding together the har-
mony and preservation of the whole.'

The A. Y., then, is right in rendering alike
this and 1 Tim. i. 1, and the other parallel pass-
ages, thus agreeing with S. Chrysostom. While
the Syriac, Armenian, Coptic, &c., versions read
both places (this and 1 Tim. i. 1) alike, " of God
our Saviour ;" and the Gothic follows the Greek
literally.

Ver. 4.

" To Titus, mine own son," A. V. ; " To Titus,
my true child," Dr. A.

Tvr\<TLo^y said of a child, is opposed to voftoc,
'bastard'^ — v69o^ yap el kov yvri<Tiog, *for thou
art a bastard, and not legitimate.'

Noflcji Si fifi elvai ayxiaralav
walSwv 6vT(0v yvri<rlwvy^

' for if there be any legitimate children, illegiti-
mate ones have no right of kin.' Fvijo-^oc waig, 6
yov^t yeyovwc is also opposed, as by Demosthenes,
to T^J TToiTjrc^, * to a factitious,' or adopted child.
So that yvri<rlt^ riKvt^ cannot be " true " child, for
this would be akriOy riKvt^, and Would mean not
that the child was " genuine or legitimate," but

> De Mundo, 6, 30. * Thom. Mag. s. v. nVn.
» Aristoph. Av. 1650, 1654.

O

194 REMARKS, ETC.

that lie was "true," i.e. truthfiil. Then, again,
rlicvov, which means child of either sex, said of a
man, may well be rendered "son." So that
yvfitrlt^ rlicvc^ means, here, "to my genuine or
legitimate [child] son," yovcji ytyoviig, i.e. be-
gotten through the Gospel, 1 Cor. iv. 15 ; Philem.
10 ; 1 Pet. i. 3 ; and this is far better rendered
" my own son," A. V., than " my true child,"
Dr. A.

But Dr. Alford makes so many alterations in
his Revised Version that I will only notice the
principal ones.

Yer. 9.

" As he has been taught," A. V. ; '•' according
to the teaching," Dr. A.

Kara rriv SiSax^iv may mean either -the doc-
trine of the apostles, or that which Titus had
taught by their authority. In this case "the
teaching " does not render rfiv SiSaxnv, because
whereas fi SiSa^^ is here well defined, and was
well understood by Titus, " the teaching " may
mean any kind of teaching.

" Be able by sound doctrine, both to exhort
and to convince," A. Y. ; "be able both to exhort
in the sound doctrine and to rebuke," Dr. A.

" To exhort "may not, like "to convince," refer
to the gainsay ers ; but kv ry SiSacricaXe^ must be "by
or with sound doctrine," inasmuch as the sense of
"to exhort in soimd doctrine" is not very clear.

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. I, V. 11, 15. 195

Ver. 11.

"For filthy lucre's sake," A, V.; "for the
sake of base gain,'' Dr. A.
A. V. is assuredly best.

Ver. 14.

" That turn away from the truth," A. V. ;
*'that turn themselves away from the truth,"
Dr. A.

'ATTOcrrpe^o/Lilvwv, though a middle verb, is well
rendered by the neuter " to turn away ;" for " to
turn oneself" means "to turn oneself round."

Ver. 15.

" But even their mind and conscience is de-
filed," A. v.; "but both their mind and con-
science is defiled," Dr. A.

A. V. by aflBxing "their " only to "mind" looks
upon "mind and conscience" as a compound
substantive, and thus says, " is " defiled ; and so,
does not exactly render the Greek which has
icot 6 vovc ical Yi (TvvelSrimg. Dr. A I ford's render-
ing is more correct in this respect; but not in
writing " both their mind and their conscience is
defiled ;" he probably meant to say " are defiled."

196 BSMABKSy ETC.

Ver. 16.

"They profess," A.V. ; "they make confes-
sion," Dr. A.

Why not say,"" they confess," if a change is
necessary P But A. V. renders well Oeov 6/ioXo-
yowiv ciSlvoc. Moreover, if Dr. Alford thinks
"profess" a bad rendering here, why does he
keep it in S. Matt. vii. 25, kqi rors o/ioXoY^o'ai,
" And then will I profess unto them," &c.P

CHAPTER n.

Ver. 2.

" Temperate," A. V. ; "discreet," Dr. A.

If Aristotle* correctly describes rov trw^ova,
A. V. is assuredly right.

" Sound in faith," A. V. ; " sound in their
faith," Dr. A.

^Yyialvovrag ry ir(<rr«, is "sound in the faith."
*' The faith " means " the faith once delivered to
the saints," the Christian faith; "their faith"
may mean anything they choose to believe. A. Y.
omits the article, wrongly ; but Dr. Alford does

■ Eth. Nic.iy. 14,8.

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. 11. V. 3, 4. 197

not mend matters by introducing " their " instead
of "the."

" In charity, in patience," A. V. ; "in their
love, in their patience," Dr. A.

Neither charity nor patience could take the
article, because neither is like " the faith," defined
and limited to one kind ; but in rendering the
article by " their," it means that the aged should
be sound not in charity and patience as each vir-
tue is in itself; but in the particular kind of love
and of patience they choose to practise.

Ver. 3.

"Not given to much wine," A. V. ; " not en-
slaved to much wine," Dr. A.

A singular expression. Dr. Alford seems to
forget that the first requisite of a Common version
of the Bible is that it should be " understanded of
the people." Now, if any alteration were neces-
sary, "in bondage, or slaves to much wine" would
be preferable to "enslaved to [by] much wine"
But no change is needed. "Given to much
wine " is quite clear and correct enough.

Ver. 4.

" To love their husbands, their children,"
A.V. ; " to be lovers of their husbands, — of their
chUdren," Dr. A.

This, too, falls oddly upon the ear. " Lover "

198 BEMARKS; ETC.

is SO generally used as an adjective in the mascu-
line that it seems to have no feminine. " To love
their husbands/' &c., however, renders the Greek,
and is assuredly more idiomatic.

Ver. 5.

"Keepers at home," A. V.; "workers at
home," Dr. A.

Dr. Alford here adopts the Alexandrine read-
ing with preference to the Vatican, which is fol-
lowed by the Received Text, olKovpovg, instead of
oiicovpyov^, the Alex. MS. The Armenian reads
" good managers " or " good housekeepers ;" the
Coptic, " good managers ;" Syriac, " who manage
well their houses;" the Ethiopic, "good tem-
pered and manage well their houses."

OlKovpog means " one who takes care of the
house and manages it ; " and that it implies
" keeping at home " is proved by these lines of
Aristophanes :

6 8' ?rcpoc oloc i(TTiv oiKOvpog fiovovy
avTov fiivwv yap — *

Ver. 9.

" Exhort servants," A. V. ; " exhort bond ser-
vants," Dr. A.

Here and everywhere else ia the " Authorised

* Vesp. 970sq.

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. II. V. 9. 199

Version revised,'* does Dr. Alford print as of the
text words that are not in it, as e,g, " exhort ;*'
while he is at great pains to tell, in his notes, that
the words printed in italics in the A. V. are not
in the text ; a very gratuitous information, since
the italics speak for themselves. This is indeed
" constructing the text '* with the version thereof
as well; and also treating the English reader with
no great consideration.

Here Dr. Alford renders SovXoc by " bond-
servant,'* as also in Eph. vi. by "bondmen,*'
giving his reason for it. Why, then, does he
render iovXoi by "servants," in Col. iii. 22, a
parallel passage to this ? and in Phil. i. 1, &c.,
where Paul and Timotheus are mentioned as Sov-
Xo£, why not "bondmen" of Christ? The Dean
renders this word either way, it appears, to suit
his own convenience ; yet has the term SovXoc the
same meaning everywhere. And the A. V. is
right in rendering it " servant " and " servants,"
the question being not between " lords of life and
death over slaves," but between "masters and
servants," in all countries alike ; the social posi-
tion of each depending on the custom of the
country.

If the Dean chooses to render SovXoc by
" bondman," he must do so everywhere, and call
S. Paul, Timothy, and ourselves also, "bondmen
of God," " of the Lord Jesus Christ." He does
not do so, because in such cases it would not be
readable. But it is no wiser in the case of ser-

200 REMARKS, ETC.

vants ; for if the English reader of his Beyised
Version happen to be a servant, he may naturally
conclude that what refers to "bondmen" does
not in the least concern him; so that he may
"answer again, purloin, and be imfaithful;" as the
apostle's words only apply to "slaves." Therefore
does S. Chrysostom render SovXoc> in his Homily
on this chapter, by olKirrig, * household servant,'
throughout, and not " slave."

" For the grace of God that bringeth salva-
tion hath appeared to all men," A. V. ; " for the
grace of God was manifested bringing salvation to
all men," Dr. A.

Here is the A. V. right. The construction of
the Greek is ri xapig yap rov Oeov ri trwrripiogf
cTTc^avij iratriv avOp. * for the saving grace of God
appeared, or hath appeared to all men.' The
original and the A. V. imply that the grace of
God is trt&riipiog, * saving,' or salutary, under all
circumstances ; and that it appeared or was mani-
fested. Whereas Dr. Alford, rendering the ad-
jective as if it were a pres* part., like wai^ovaa,
makes " bringing salvation " an accident of the
manifestation of that grace ; thus giving a very
different sense to the passage.

" Teaching us that, denying," &c., A. V. ; "Dis-
ciplining us, in order that, denying," &c.. Dr. A.

If the Dean wished to be literal, he ought not
to have rendered iraiSeiovtra by "disciplining,"
for this would be ^aQrjfr^itovtra, His intention,
however, is good ; and he seems right in under-

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. 11. V. 13. 201

standing 7raiSevov(ra vfiag, tva, 'teaching, train-
ing us so, that denying,' &c. Thus Plato, ravra
8' iiroiet /3ovXofC€voc iraiSeveiv rovg TroXfrac, Jv' wc
jScXr^oTwv airaiv apx'^h^ ^-

Ver. 13.

"Of the great God and our Saviour Jesus
Christ," A. V. ; " of the Great God, and of qur
Saviour Jesus Christ,*' Dr. A.

I will not enter upon the controversy connected
with this passage. Every one knows that the ren-
dering adopted by Dr. Alford was made most of
by the Arians of the fourth and following cen-
turies. Wherefore do the Fathers, S. Cyril of
Alexandria,^ S. Athanasius,' and others, read with
the A. v., " of the great God and Saviour Jesus
Christ," meaning that Jesus Christ is here the
great God; at which S. Chrysostom asks — 11 ov
Biatv oi Toif TlaTpog iXarrova tov Ylbv Xiyovreg ;*
* Where are those who make the Son inferior to
the Father ?"

Dr. Alford seems aware of the unanimous opi-
nion of the Fathers on this verse, but does not
think it so weighty as his own interpretation.
If, however, he had looked at the Greek he would
have seen (1) that €?rc0av£m is never said but of
God the Son ; and (2) that, in order to read the

* Hipparch. p. 35. * Admon. in Gent. p. 6.
' Cont. Ar. vol. p. 159 ; De Ess. P. F. S. S. p. 225.

* In Tit. Homil. v.

202 REMABKS, ETC.

text as he does, it should have been rov fiBySiXov
Seov Koi fov (TUfT. rifiwv 'Iijcroi) Xpttrrov ; whereas
the absence of the article before awrfipog is con-
clusive on this point ; showing that icai (rcur^poc
I. X. belongs to rov imjoXov Qsov, and qualifies it ;
making One Person of the whole.

Even the Dean's MS., the Vatican, omits the
article before o-oir^poc, giving here precisely the
same construction as at 1 Tim. i. 1, kut iTrirajfiv
Qeov (Fiorripog 7)iiC)v koi K. I. X., which Dr. Alford
does not alter there (except in omitting "lord "),
but follows the A. V. Why, then, not render the
same construction in the same way here also,
where even his favourite Vatican MS. fails him for
his own rendering P

CHAPTER III.

Ver. 2.

" To be no brawlers, hut gentle," A. V. ; " to
be not quarrelsome, forbearing," Dr. A.

As we saw above,^ the Dean makes no distinc-
tion between the adjective " no " and the adverb
"not." "No brawlers" means that Christians
were not to be among such people ; " not quarrel-
some " means that they were to be not quarrel-

* See aboye, p. 119, sq.

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. III. V. 3. 203

some, but sometliiiig else. The negative should,
therefore, be put before the verb, "not to be
quarrelsome ; " in either case, however, it requires
a "but" after it; otherwise the " not " applies also
to the following " forbearing."

This " but " is not required with the Greek
ajJLaxoQ, because this contains no negation, but
only an a privative ; so that ifiaxog is treated as a
positive term, ajJLa\ovQ elvai, to be diJ,axovg, * gen-
tle,' &c. The negation " not," however, or the
negative adjective "no," denies what follows,
and turns the Greek order " to be dfiaxovg/' into
the veto " not to be brawlers," &c., and thus re-
quires a different construction, with "but" follow-
ing, whether in Greek or in English, oiic fiXOov —
aXXa ; ovk e<mv ifiov ^ovvai — aXka ; vjihq 8I ov\
ovTwg, aAAa ; ov yap oi aicpoarai — aAAa.

From the nature of the case this antithetic
construction with " but " cannot very often occur
with ij,{i ; yet does it sometimes happen, e.g. fjifj Iv
6<^da\jmoSovX£iaig — aXXa ; fjri wg kx^pov riy' —
dXXa, &c. So also in English, " to be no brawlers,
but gentle," A. V., is right.

Ver. 3.

" For we ourselves also were sometimes fool-
ish," A. V. ; " for we ourselves also were once
foolish," Dr. A>

As in the former verse, so also in this does
Dr. Alford seem to care neither for Greek nor for

204 KE3(ABK8, ETa

English. (1), Ilorl does not mean aira^, 'once»'
but '^sometimes/' aliqnandoy nnqaam — opposed
to fifiKOTB, * never.' Thus, speaking of the man
bom blind, rov irorl Tv^\6vy A.V. rightly ren-
ders it, " that aforetime was blind ;" a rendering
which the Dean does not alter there. Ilorl is,
however, well rendered, "once," at one time,
in Bom. vii. 9, where the short period of man's
innocence in Eden may be spoken of as of
" once," when compared with the time that fol-
lowed ; but irorl is well rendered " in times
past," in Bom. xi. 30 ; a reading which the Dean
also adopts. It is so rendered likewise in Gal. i.
13, 23, and also " once," t. e. " at one time," &c.
In English, however, "once," properly means
"once, and not twice," and is only known by
the context to mean " at one time," which "time"
may have been of some duration.

Here, therefore, does the A. V. render irorl
correctly by " sometimes," for they were " fool-
ish," more than once, and at various times ;
whereas the Dean, by using "once," which is
liable to misconstruction, but, especially by put-
ting it before " foolish," instead of before " were,"
makes the Apostle say, " For we ourselves also
were once foolish;" that is, not "twice;" inas-
much as "once," thus prefixed to "foolish,"
qualifies it precisely in the same way as would
"very;" "once foolish" being "foolish, once
only," as " very foolish " is " foolish in a great
degree." If the Dean wiU have "once," he must

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. III. V. 4. 205

construe it thus: "For once we ourselves also
were foolish," &c. But A. V. is much better.

Ver. 4.

"But after that the kindness," A. V.; ''But
when the kindness," Dr. A.

Here the Dean's rendering seems best, and
most natural.

" The washing of regeneration," A. V. ; "the
font of regeneration," Dr. A.

This, in sooth, is a strange alteration. Aov^
Tp6v means, in general, both " a bath or bathing*
place," and "water used for bathing or wash-
ing ;" a particular kind of swimming or plunging
bath, however, was called (iaim<TTripiov, or KoXvfi"
(ifiOpa; two terms which were adopted by the
Fathers and other ecclesiastical writers, for a
" baptistery," the place, bath, or vessel, in which
holy baptism was administered in the Church.
In English, however, " baptistery " is said only of
the part of the Church set apart for that purpose,
while the term " font," from " fons," is used for
the vessel that contains the water used for
baptism.

But, inasmuch as (1) " regeneration," as it is
here understood, does not depend on the shape of
the vessel, or on the place, be it a river or a lake,
in which a person is baptized, but on the washing,
which is the outward and visible sign of that
regeneration; and as (2), a "baptistery," or

206 KEMARKS, ETC.

"font," is a species of "bath," \owp6v — not
only may we not say " font " for Xovrpov, but
must render it by the evident intention of the
Apostle — washing.

Ver. 7.

" That being justified," A. V. ; " that having
been justified," Dr. A.

If Dr. Alford can prove that the justification
once wrought does not either last to the present
time, or was not lasting at the time then present,
when the Apostle wrote, then is he right in
rendering SiKaiwOdg as he does. If so, however,
why does he render it by " being justified," and
not by " having been justified," in Rom. v. 1,
and what difference is there between the "justi-
fication " aUuded to there and the "justification "
mentioned in this verse ?

Ver. 8.

"And these things I will that thou aflirm
constantly," A. V. ; " and concerning these things
I will that thou aflBb:Tn constantly," Dr. A.

The Greek sentence may be imderstood in two
ways, either " as regards these things, I will that
at all times thou use persuasive language," or,
" I will that thou at all times persuade others of
these things." If Dr. Alford's construction be
adopted, then, assuredly must either " that they

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. III. V. 8. 207

are so," or some suet complement, be added after
" affirm constantly," inasmucli as " one affirms a
thing," and not " concerning " it. But the A. V.
is correct enough to require no alteration ; since,
"to affirm concerning a thing that it is so," is
the same as "to affirm the thing itself."

" To maintain good works," A. V. ; " to prac-
tise good works," Dr. A.

One really would think that the Dean alters
for the pleasure of altering.

IIpo'/aTo/iai properly means " I place myself
before," or " at the head," with a genitive of the
thing, governed by irpo ; thus 7rpotoTa(T0at twv
irpayiJLarwv,^ " to be put at the head of affairs ; "
Trpoi(TTa<r0ai rwv 'EXXtjvwv* — Trpotora/icvof tov Srj-
fjLov^ — those at the head of the people to protect
and govern, and to provide for it ; irpotrravTeg tov
irpayfiaTog* — Trpo(rTrivai Trjg elprivrig^ — all imply
not " practising," but being at the head of affairs
or of business, to see to, provide for, and maintain
it. The sense, therefore, of irpoiaTatrOat KoXiov
ipywvy is to be at the head of good works, fore-
most in suggesting, doing, and forwarding them ;
all of which are included in A. V., " to maintain
good works;" while the Dean's, " to practise good
works," looks like an oversight.

^ Herodian. lib. vii, p. 162. ' Demosth.

' Pint. Ljsand. 19. * Demosth.

* iEschin.

208 REMABKS, ETC.

Ver. 10.

"After the first — reject/* A.V.; "avoid,"
Dr. A.

Uapairiojuai means both " to reject, renounce,
avoid, and eschew ;" also "to excuse oneself." The
rendering must depend on the sense put apon the
Apostle's words.

Ver. 12.

" For I have determined there to winter,"
A. V. ; good English, which the Dean alters to
" for there I have determined to winter " — which
contains two inaccuracies. (1), It should be, " for
there have I determined;" and (2), by putting
"there" before "determined," he makes the
Apostle say that, when at Mcopolis, he had deter-
mined to winter — somewhere else. The A. V.,
however, by placing " there " before " to winter,"
determines that the Apostle's intention was to
winter at Mcopolis, and nowhere else.

Ver. 13.

"Bring Zenas — diligently," A.V.; "Forward
zealously on their journey, Zenas — and Apollos,"
Dr. A.

Here again does the Dean alter for the worse
the grammatical English of the A. V., which very
properly places first "Zeno and Apollos," and
"their journey" after them; while the Dean

ON EP. TO TITUS, CII. III. V. 14. 209

speaks of "their journey," before mentioning
them. Whose journey is it, then ? It is the
same inaccurate grammar as above, at ch. i. v. 3,
p. 189.

npo7rl/[i7ra> also means both " to send before, to
forward," and " to accompany ; " also, by impli-
cation, " to provide the necessary things for a
journey." Thus airiovra Se rbv Kvpov wpovireiuL-
irov aTTavregy^ * When Cyrus departed, they all
accompanied him.' So, also, irpovwifjLireTo ev ra^ei,^
— 'he sent on, made to move forward.' The
question is, therefore, whether Titus was to bring
them on, by coming with them, or only to pro-
vide for their wants. In either case, airovSaifjjg is
better rendered "diligently" or "carefully" than
" zealously."

Ver. 14.

" And let ours also learn to maintain good
works for necessary uses," A. V. ; " Moreover, let
our people also learn to practise good works for
the necessary wants," Dr. A.

The alteration proposed by the late Professor
Scholefield, " to profess honest trades," instead of
"to maintain good works," deserves attention,
standing, as it does, in connection with " neces-
sary uses." It certainly is better than " to prac-
tise good works for the necessary wants." What
necessary wants ? "The" defines and determines

» Cyrop. I. iv. 25. ^ Id. V. iii. 53.

P

210 REMARKS, ETC.

a certain set ; whereas A. V. leaves that open ;
which is a better and more idiomatic rendering of
rag avayKa(ag ^pdaCt though the article be found
in Greek. Xpda also is used by the best authors,
for both " use ** and for " want/' e. g, by Aristotle
himself, iv xpdfi uvai,^ " to be in want," and clc
rac icafl' -qjdpav xpeiac,^ may mean either " daily
wants" or "daily uses." But rfjv /ulv yap roirwv
Xpdav paSiwg siSfiang,^ clearly means " thou shalt
easily perceive the use of these things," while twv
jULtv yap aXAciiv c3v av iv XP^^? yevtiifieOa means
"of the other things, of which we may be in
want." ♦

Ver. 15.

" Greet them that love," A. V. ; " Salute
them," Dr. A.

The same word occurs twice in the same
verse ; wherefore does A. V. give us the Latin
" salute " once, and the Saxon " greet " also onceP
This is more agreeable to the ear, and means the
same thing as " salute," said twice.

Those few chapters will suffice to show the
nature of Dr. Alford's work.

After making allowance for the errors in judg-
ment or in scholarship, into which I may have

> Politic, i. 9, 18. » (Econ. ii. 17, 2:

• Isocr. Orat. I. p. 13, ed. Oxf. * Ibid. Orat. x. p. 293.

REMARKS, ETC. 211

fallen while endeavouring to ward, from the
Received Text and the Authorised Version, the
Dean's attacks upon both, there will yet be good
reason left for thinking that it is not his place
to despise either ; as well as for wishing that he
had a deeper knowledge of the Greek text, and
was thorough master of his mother-tongue, ere he
attempted to correct the one and to construct the
other.

A man who, like him, sets to a work of this
kind, apparently without the slightest hesitation
or misgiving in his own powers, thinking it the
easiest thing in the world to make wholesale
changes in the Greek text and in the joint
labours of more than fifty learned men of old,
instead of dealing with the utmost reverence and
caution, not only forms an unworthy estimate of
the work he undertakes — but he also recklessly
wounds the feeling of deep respect and affection
with which men, nowise his inferiors in judg-
ment or scholarship, still continue to look upon
the Received Text and the English Bible.

Both these have, indeed, lasted more than
two centuries ; a long time, in truth, for those
who think that wisdom, learning, and scholarship
have only just dawned on the land, and that,
until now, all was darkness and ignorance.
"Wise men, however, do not think so ; but rather
take the long life of those two monxmients of
ancient piety and learning as a proof of their
real merit and excellence. And while such men

212 REMARKS, ETC.

readily give the Dean of Canterbury full credit
for his plodding industry, and also for sundry
useful hints in his renderings — they yet, on the
whole, confess, that a better acquaintance with
his work only tends to deepen their reverence
and to strengthen their affection for their old
friends and companions, the Received Greek
Text of the New Testament and the Authorised
Version of it — Neither of which they ever intend
to give up ; not even at the Dean's bidding.

LONDON :

Stramgewats a Waldeh, Printen,

GasUe St. Leicester Sq.

/ *^

s^

• !■

w

JT-

% *

Y

ll