3. When βασιλεία means reign, and is followed by τῶν οὐρανῶν, the translation kingdom of heaven evidently tends to mislead the reader. Heaven, thus construed with kingdom, ought in our language, by the rules of grammatical propriety, to denote the region under the kingly government spoken of. But finding, as we advance, that this called the kingdom of heaven is actually upon the earth, or as it were travelling to the earth, and almost arrived, there necessarily arises such a confusion of ideas as clouds the text, and by consequence weakens the impression it would otherwise make upon our minds. It may be said indeed, that the import of such expressions in Scripture is now so well known that they can hardly be mistaken. But I am far from thinking that this is the case. Were it said only that they are becoming so familiar to us, that, without ever reflecting on the matter, we take it for granted that we understand them; there is no sentiment to the justness of which I can more readily subscribe. But then the familiarity, instead of answering a good, answers a bad purpose, as it serves to conceal our ignorance even from ourselves. It is not, therefore, the being accustomed to hear such phrases, that will make them be universally, or even generally apprehended by the people. And to those who may have heard of the exposition commonly given of them, the conception of the kingdom of heaven, as denoting a sort of dominion upon the earth, a conception which the mind attains indirectly by the help of a comment, is always feebler than that which is conveyed directly by the native energy of the expression. Not but that the words Baoilla tav ovgavav are sometimes rightly translated kingdom of heaven, being manifestly applied to the state of perfect felicity to be enjoyed in the world to come. But it is equally evident that this is not always the meaning of the phrase.

4. There are two senses wherein the word heaven in this expression may be understood. Either it signifies the place so called, or it is a metonymy for God, who is in Scripture, sometimes by periphrasis, denominated "he that dwelleth in heaven." When the former is the sense of the term ovoavoi, the phrase is properly rendered the kingdom of heaven; when the latter, the reign of heaven. Let it be remarked in passing, in regard to the sense last given of the word ovoavoì, as signifying God, that we are fully authorized to affirm it to be scriptural. I should have hardly thought it necessary to make this remark, if I had not occasionally observed such phrases as the assistance of heaven and addresses to heaven, criticised and censured in some late performances, as savoring more of the Pagan or the Chinese phraseology than of the Christian. That they are perfectly conformable to the latter, must be clear to every one who reads his Bible with attention. Daniel, in the interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream, says, (4: 26) "Thy kingdom shall be sure unto thee, after that thou shalt have known

that the Heavens do rule.” The prophet had said in the preceding verse, "Seven times shall pass over thee, till thou know that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men." Thus he who is denominated the Most High in one verse, is termed the Heavens in the following. The Psalmist Asaph says of profligates, "They set their mouth against the Heavens," Psal. 73: 9; that is, they vent blasphemies against God. The phrase in the New Testament, ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν, is almost as common as ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ εou. And though it may be affirmed that the regimen in the one expresses the proprietor of the kingdom, in the other place, it is evident that this does not hold always. In parallel passages in the different Gospels, where the same facts are recorded, the former of these expressions is commonly used by Matthew, and the other as equivalent by the other evangelists. Nay, the phrase Paolɛia Tov ovoavov is adopted, when it is manifest that the place of dominion suggested is earth, not heaven; and that, therefore, the term can be understood only as a synonyma for os. The prodigal says to his father, "Father, I have sinned against Heaven and before thee," Luke 15: 18, 21; that is, against God and thee; otherwise, to speak of sinning against an inanimate object would be exceedingly unsuitable both to the Christian theology and to the Jewish. "The baptism of John," says our Lord, "whence was it; from Heaven, or of men?" Matt. 21: 25. From Heaven, that is, from God. Divine authority is here opposed to human. This difference, however, in the sense of ovoavós, makes no difference to a translator, inasmuch as the vernacular term with us admits the same latitude with the Hebrew and the Greek.

5. That pasikeia ought sometimes to be rendered reign, and not kingdom, I shall further evince when I illustrate the import of the words xnovoow, evaɣyelíšw, and some others. Isaiah, Daniel, Micah, and others of the prophets, had encouraged the people to expect a time when the Lord of Hosts should reign in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, when the people of God should be redeemed from their enemies, and made joyful in the Messiah their King. It was this happy epoch that was generally understood to be denominated by the phrases βασιλεία τοῦ Θεοῦ, and βασιλεία τῶν οὐ pavov, the reign of God, and the reign of Heaven: the approach of which was first announced by the Baptist, afterward by our Lord himself and his apostles. Baokia is applicable in both acceptations, and it needs only to be observed, that when it refers to the time, it ought to be rendered reign, when to the place, kingdom. For this reason, when it is construed with the verb xnovoow, εvayγελίζω, καταγγέλλω, or the noun εὐαγγελίον, it ought invariably to be reign, as also when it is spoken of as come, coming, or approaching.

6. The French have two words corresponding to ours, règne,

reign, and royaume, kingdom. Their interpreters have often fallen into the same fault with ours, substituting the latter word for the former; yet, in no French translation that I have seen is this done so uniformly as in ours. In the Lord's Prayer, for example, they all say, ton règne vienne, not ton royaume, thy reign come, not thy kingdom. On the other hand, when mention is made of entrance or admission into the Baoksia, or exclusion from it, or where there is a manifest reference to the state of the blessed hereafter; in all these cases, and perhaps a few others, wherein the sense may easily be collected from the context, it ought to be rendered kingdom, and not reign.

7. There are a few passages, it must be acknowledged, in which neither of the English words can be considered as a translation of Parisia, strictly proper. In some of the parables (Matt. 18: 23,) it evidently means administration, or method of governing; and in one of them, (Luke 19: 12, 15), the word denotes royalty, or royal authority, there being a manifest allusion to what had been done by Herod the Great, and his immediate successor, in recurring to the Roman senate in order to be invested with the title and dignity of king of Judea, then dependent upon Rome. But where there is a proper attention to the scope of the place, one will be at no loss to discover the import of the word.

PART II.

OF THE NAME τὸ Εὐαγγέλιον.

I PROCEED to inquire into the meaning of the word rò EvayyéLov. This term, agreeably to its etymology, from ɛv, bene, and ayyɛlia, nuncium, always in classical use, where it occurs but rarely, denotes either good news, or the reward given to the bearer of good news. Let us see what ought to be accounted the Scriptural use of the term. Εὐαγγέλιον and εὐαγγελια occur six times in the Septuagint in the books of Samuel and Kings. I reckon them as one word, because they are of the same origin, are used indiscriminately, and always supply the place of the same Hebrew word besharah. In five of these the meaning is good news; in the sixth, the word denotes the reward given for bringing good news. In like manner, the verb εὐαγγελίζειν, or, εὐαγγελίζεσθαι, which occurs much oftener in the Septuagint than the noun, is always the version of the Hebrew verb bashar, læta annunciare, to tell good news. It ought to be remarked also, that evayyelito is the only word by which the Hebrew verb is rendered into

Greek nor do I know any word in the Greek language that is more strictly of one signification than this verb. In one instance (1 Sam. 4: 17,) the verbal mebasher, is indeed used for one who brings tidings, though not good; but in that place the Seventy have not employed the verb svayyeλiço, or any of its derivatives. One passage, (2 Sam. 1: 20,) wherein the Septuagint uses the verb EvayyeliSoua, has also been alleged as an exception from the common acceptation. But that this is improperly called an exception, must be manifest to every one who reflects that the total defeat of the Israelitish army, with the slaughter of the King of Israel and his sons, must have been the most joyful tidings that could have been related in Gath and Askelon, two Philistine cities. The word occurs several times in the prophets, particularly in Isaiah, and is always rendered in the common version, either by the phrase "to bring good tidings," or by some terms nearly equivalent. It is sometimes also rendered in the New Testament; Luke 1: 19. 2: 10. 8: 1. Acts 13: 32. Rom. 10: 15. 1 Thess. 3: 6.

2. Now, let it be observed, that when the word is introduced in the Gospels, it is generally either in a quotation from the Prophets, or in evident allusion to their words. Thus лшуоì εvaуyeLisovrat, which our translators render, (Matt. 11: 5. Luke 7: 22), "to the poor the gospel is preached," the whole context shows to be in allusion to what is said by the prophet Isaiah, (61: 1), in whom the corresponding phrase is rendered "preach good tidings to the meek." But nothing can be more to my purpose than that noted passage wherein we are told, that the place in Isaiah was read by our Lord in the synagogue of Nazareth. The words in the common translation of the Gospel are these: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel, evayyedisεoda, to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord," Luke 4: 18, 19. Now I cannot help observing of this passage, that the meaning would have been more perspicuously conveyed, and its beauty and energy would have been better preserved, if our translators had kept closer to the manner in which they had rendered it in the Old Testament. There the term evayyelisendat is rendered "to preach good tidings." And though it is certain, agreeably to our Lord's declaration, that the gospel with its spiritual blessings are here held forth to us, it is still under the figure of temporal blessings; and therefore it is very improperly introduced by its distinguishing appellation into the version, which ought to convey the literal, not the figurative sense of the original.

Evayyeliseovai newyois, "to bring good tidings to the poor" or afflicted, agreeably to the extensive signification of the Hebrew VOL. I.

18

word, is the general title of the message, and comprehends the whole. It is explained by being branched out into the particulars which immediately follow. For if it be asked, What is the good tidings brought to the afflicted? the answer is, a cure to the broken-hearted, deliverance to the captives, sight to the blind. It is the Lord's jubilee, which brings freedom to the slave, acquittance to the debtor, and relief to the oppressed. Now that the gospel is herein admirably delineated is manifest; but still it is presented to us under figures, and therefore, to mention it by its peculiar title, in the midst of the figurative description, is to efface in a great measure that description; it is to jumble injudiciously the sign and the thing signified. It is as if one should confound, in an apologue or parable, the literal sense with the moral, and assert of the one what is strictly true only of the other; by which means no distinct image would be presented to the mind. Or it is as when a painter supplies the defects in his work by labels, and instead of a picture, presents us with a confused jumble, wherein some things are painted and some things described in words. But it is not in our version only, but in most modern translations, that this confusion in rendering this beautiful passage has appeared.

3. I shall add but one other instance of a quotation from the prophets: Ως ὡραῖοι οἱ πόδες τῶν εὐαγγελιζομένων εἰρήνην, τῶν εὐ αγγελιζομένων τὰ ἀγαθά: in the common version, as quoted in the New Testament, "How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things," Rom. 10: 15. It would have been better here also, on many accounts, to keep closer to the original in Isaiah 52: 7, whence the passage was taken, and to translate it thus: "How beautiful are the feet of them who bring the joyful message of peace, the joyful news of good things" at the same time I acknowledge, it is with a particular allusion to that spiritual peace, and those eternal good things, procured to us by Jesus Christ. But the beauty and energy of the allusion and implied similitude are destroyed, or rather there is no more allusion or similitude in the words, when the characteristic description intended by the prophet is in a manner thrown aside, and in its stead is inserted the name appropriated to the dispensation. This, at least, is in part done; for the prophet's figures are neither totally laid aside nor totally retained. Instead of imitating his simplicity of manner, they have made a jumble of the sense implied and the sense expressed. For this purpose they have rendered the same word (which is repeated in the two clauses) in one clause, "preach the gospel," according to the sense justly supposed to be figured by it in the other clause, " bring glad tidings," according to the letter. I can see no reason for this want of uniformity, unless perhaps the notion that "the gospel of good things" sounded more awkwardly than "the gospel of peace.'