LETTER I. SIR, THE HE perusal of your Remarks on the Uses of the Definitive Article in the Greek Text of the New Testament, has led me into an investigation, the result of which I am tempted to lay before you. The subject of my Letters, and the motives from which I write, will, I trust, excuse me from any further apology for the liberty which I am taking. You will not, I think Sir, be surprized to learn, that one of the first feelings which I experienced upon the reading of your Remarks, was a feeling of uncertainty and scepticism. I soon perceived, however, that my doubts originated in the very weight and clearness of the evidence on which your theory was founded. I felt as if it were incredible, but that evidence so remarkable must have occurred, in all its strength, to learned men of former days. How then is it, that this rule should have remained so long unknown, or unacknowledged; and the important texts of the New Testament depending upon it, how is it that the vulgar translation of them is so far from being allowed universally to be erroneous, that public opinion has hardly yet learned of the matter being ever doubted of; that the generality of commentators should uphold the established interpretation; and that no notice should be taken of any thing wrong in it, in works written professedly to point out the errors of our English version; and yet we are told, that the rule, and the interpretation of those dependent examples, were expressly asserted by a writer so long ago as Beza? Surely, said I, Mr. Sharp has only not gone so far in the investigation as earlier critics. There must be some secret fallacy and he is producing to us as a valuable discovery, that which his predecessors, after having for a time followed it, must have found out to be an empty phantom, and so they returned from their pursuit, and sat down again, not venturing to tell the world how idly they had been occupied. : However, I did not acquiesce in these extemporaneous notions. The first step was, to determine to make an actual comparison of your theory with the volume of the New Testament. But, at the same time, it occurred to me, that I should probably find some at least of those texts, the translation of which you had called in question, cited and explained by the Greek Fathers; not indeed as instances of any particular rule, but expounded by them naturally as men would would understand any other form of expression in their native language. If Mr. Sharp's rule be true, then will their interpretations of those texts be invariably in the same sense in which he understands them; unless indeed it should appear, that some change in later times took place in the use of the article. At this instant the note of your learned Editor, in p. 19, presented itself to my observation, and I received no small encouragement from what I had before passed over with indifference. I therefore began my researches with eagerness.. In a short time what I had gathered considerably exceeded my expectations. I thought therefore, Sir, of venturing to communicate to you, in private, the produce. of my search, and to mention at the same time, the feelings from which I had been induced to set about it. With this intention in view, and desirous of making my collections more worthy of such a communication, I went on still further, and finding that in some parts my materials continued to accumulate to a degree which I conceived in general there could be little idea of, the thought occurred of a yet bolder undertaking. I considered, that your rule had once at least before been laid down (though less explicitly), and nevertheless the memory of such a circumstance is almost entirely forgotten. It would be inexcusable, that it should pass by a second time into oblivion, without having undergone B 2 tablished habit, the authority of great names, or an apprehension, to which inductive arguments must always in some degree be liable, that the next step there might rise up an exception to our general principle-if such an one, I say, should find here a sufficient number of quo tations from the Fathers, in which the interpretation was uniformly correspondent to what your theory teaches, then probably this would appear to him the strongest imaginable confirmation, that the notion of any ambiguity in the form of expression in those verses, is a mistaken notion; and he would conclude, that the common translation must be given up, unless they who still maintain it, can produce reasons for so doing, of which we have as yet no conception. But, on the other hand, should there turn out to be a considerable disagreement among these interpretations of the Fathers-then, I conceive, Sir, in spite of all other evidence, it will be thought that their assertion is not false, who declare the phrase to be ambiguous, these examples must be acknowledged to be remarkable ex, ceptions to the general theory, and the vulgar translation cannot be proved to be erroneous. This, Sir, is the purport of the following letters. Your rule is to be taken for granted as generally true: and we are to enquire into the antient interpretations of some particular examples. And, since I have already hinted, that my collections are not inconsiderable in extent, it can hardly fail, whatsoever their nature may turn out to be, be, but that one party or the other of those who shall come hereafter to speak of these examples, will be supplied with a second important argument, which though occasionally glanced at, has never yet, I may venture to say, been drawn out at any length, the only form in which it was likely to produce a considerable effect. But, it is obvious, that more than this which I have mentioned, might have been aimed at. I will just set down the sketch of a bolder analysis, the course of which, if it had been possible for us to have traced upwards, I fancy we might have satisfied the most sceptical examiner. Let us suppose, in this case, that your rule is not the ground-wark of our operations, that we have no knowledge of any such theory, but are wishing merely to satisfy ourselves of the true interpretation of six or seven verses in the New Testament. If now, we had within our reach all that came from the hands of Christian Greek writers, from the times of the Apostles, suppose we say till the end of the sixth century, and found them during all that period, quoting and explaining those verses a competent number of times, and in one constant meaning; suppose also, that we could discover, that the interpretation was never murmured at, but admitted by certain heresies which were conceived to be particularly touched by it; suppose moreover, that within the lapse of those years, matters |