new,

and the doctrines contained in them fo perfectly remote from the notions that mankind had "been previously acquainted with, that most of the

important terms in them have quite a different fig"nification from what they bear in other dif"courfes."

It is, indeed, 'obvious that Greek, in what is termed its claffical purity, could not furnish words to convey just ideas of religious fubjects, especially where the Christian difpenfation contained doctrines entirely new, or fuch as were derived from the Jewish religion, to be explained only by a reference to the doctrines and the rites of the Mofaic law, or the writings of the Jewish prophets; hence the writers of the New Teftament were compelled to borrow their expreffions from the law and the prophets; to employ Greek words, whofe meaning would be determined, rather by their analogy to the Hebrew terms, to which they most nearly correfponded, than by their original derivation; and to combine them according to the idioms of the Hebrew and Syriac languages, rather than the natural conftruction of Grecian phrafeology: but furely the obscurity which may arise from this cause, bears no resemblance to that which attends the myfticism of incoherent fanatics.

Vid. Dr. Macknight, in his general preface to his new tranflation of St. Paul's epiftles, § 3-vol. 1. p. 26, of the edition in 4 vols.

It is, indeed, peculiarly worthy of remark, that this is one of the many inftances in which those very circumstances, which the rafhnefs of infidelity has prefumed to arraign, as inconfiftent with the suppofition of a divine interference in the promulgation of Christianity, are found, on fober enquiry, to contribute materially to strengthen the evidence of those facts, on which the proof of that interference depends.

Thus, in the present cafe, if we suppose this caufe of obscurity in the facred writings, removed by the total abfence of all Hebrew and Syriac phrases and idioms, and that the divine Spirit, which actuated the apostles and evangelists, had fuffered no phrafe to drop from them, which did not conform to the stricteft purity of the Grecian dialect, as fome

m

fcorners have required it should ; what would be the effect (other circumstances remaining the fame ?) undoubtedly we fhould lofe the very first and. principal mark of authenticity in the New Tefta- ment," even its language. This, as the celebrated Michaelis obferves, is " distinguished by Hebraisms "and Syriafms, which afford the ftrongest prefump❝tion in its favour, as they fhew it to have been "written by men of Hebrew origin, a production "therefore of the first century; fince, after the de

m Lord Shaftsbury in his characteristics.

Vid. Michaelis's introduction to the New Teftament, tranflated by Marth, chap. ii. § 10. vol. 1. p. 45.

❝ cease

"ceafe of the first Jewish converts to Christianity, 66 we find hardly any inftance of Jews who turned "preachers of the gospel, and the Christian fathers

66

were, for the most part, totally ignorant of He"brew. This diftinguishing mark is to be found "in all the books of the New Teftament, though in "different degrees, even in the epiftles of St. Paul, "and the Acts of the apoftles; though the former "fufficiently evince that the author was master of "the Greek, and the latter contains various examples, not only of pure, but elegant language; nor “have these idioms the appearance of art or design, "being exactly fuch as might be expected from per"fons, who used a language fpoken indeed where they lived, but not the dialect of their country."

But to this eminent writer himself I refer my reader, for further illuftration of this important argu. ment. It is fufficient, for my prefent purpose, to observe, that the obfcurity from this cause must peculiarly affect St. Paul's epistles, because the subject they treat of, were very frequently connected with the Jewish religion; and ftill more, because several of these epiftles were defigned principally for the perufal of the Jews. Thus, the whole epiftle to the Galatians, the argumentative part of the epistle to the Romans, many paffages in the epiftles to the Corinthians, the Coloffians, and the Philippians, to Timo

Michaelis, ch. iv. § 4, p. 118.

thy

thy and Titus, are employed in difcuffing the controverfy, concerning the obligation of the Mofaic law on the converts to Christianity, or in reprehending and calming the diffentions it had raised. If we add the epistle to the Hebrews, this is principally occupied in explaining the priesthood and interceffion of Christ, by its analogy to the Jewish priesthood and worship. Hence the language which the apostle would naturally use, was also best adapted to his purpofe" born at Tarfus, his native language was "Greek; but being a Jew, and accustomed from "his childhood to read the Septuagint tranflation, "from the Old Teftament into Greek, it was nå. "tural to fuppofe, his language would be tinctured " by Hebraifms-nor has he ever ftudied to avoid "the air of a Jew or a Cilician; indeed, the half "of his readers would have thought it a token of

contempt, if he had rejected a language which "he spake in common with themselves. Thus the "fear of giving offence to the Jews, to whom he "wifely accommodated, whenever it was allowable, "both his doctrine and his manner, in order to win "them to his party, and the feeming impropriety "of deviating from a language, that was already "confecrated to the fervice of religion, might have "determined him to neglect a style that would have "been more elegant and more fashionable; but on "the subject which St. Paul difcuffed, endued per

P Michaelis, ch. iv. f. 8. p. 152, 155, and 156.

66 haps

q haps with lefs energy and precifion, the venera"ble expreffions of the bible, and the terms of reli

66

gion, which had acquired a prescriptive right from "the practice of the fynagogue, were highly proper, ❝ and even neceffary, in delivering the doctrines of "Christianity; and when once admitted into the "dogmatical parts of his discourse an attick elegance "would have made a useless contraft in the re"mainder of his epiftles."

Thus does an eminent critic defend the apostle, for those deviations from the purity of the Greek style, which have been the subject of fo much obloquy from the adversaries of Christianity, and which have probably rendered it more difficult to interpret the

It is the obfervation of Blackwall, which I think he sup. ports by ftriking examples, that the Hebraifms which are admitted into the New Testament, and the allufions to oriental cuftoms, frequently expreffed the ideas of the writer, with more vigor than any other idiom would admit. He further remarks, that even in these, regard has been had to the genuine analogy, and true propriety of Grammar; fo that we may find expreffions fimilar to the Hebraifms of the New Tefta ment in Plato, Herodotus, and the best Greek writers, while other Hebrew forms of expreffion, though fcarce bolder or harfher than these, are never used by the facred writers, because they would have been violations of the analogy and custom of the Greek and Roman languages, as never admitted into them, or used by their approved writers. Of fuch Hebraifms as thefe he gives many inftances; vid. Blackwall's facred clafficks, defended and illuftrated, part i. paffim, and part ii. chap. i. fect. 1.