nuncium, what had these words to do in the version? And if the Latin evangelium is of the same import with the Greek ευαγγελιον, the sentence is a mere tautology; as if he should say, The poor receive the good news of glad tidings. And, if the import of the adoptive Latin word evangelium be different, which is in fact the case, from that of the Greek, which is fully interpreted by the two words lætum nuntium, evangelii is a mere interpolation. The words of the original are general, and have equal latitude of signification with the Latin lætum nuncium, or the English good news. The addition of the word evangelii limits the sense in a way which the Prophet's expression does not warrant. Nor does an interpreter's opinion concerning the completion of the prophecy (however true, nay, however certain, that opinion be) entitle him to express the prediction with greater speciality of meaning than has been done by his author. Erasmus does not seem himself to have been entirely satisfied with this circumlocution, as he has rendered the same words in Luke in the common way, and in this also has been followed by the Tigurine translator. Beza has in all the passages above referred to, (except that in which the Vulgate was right,) followed the Vulgate, and has been followed by most of the early Protestant translators.

8. SOME may imagine, that I am here pleading for what, on other occasions, I have shown no partiality to, a translation of the words servilely li

teral or etymological. But, let it be observed, that I am never for tracing in the translation, the etymology of the words of the original, when the etymology does not give the just import of the words, according to the received use at the time when the speeches or dialogues related were spoken, or when the book was composed. The Greek verb evayyeλw, when first used by the Evangelists, or the Hebrew I bashar, when used by the Prophets, or the Syriac 30 sabar, as most probably used by our Lord and his Apostles, conveyed to their countrymen only one and the same idea, which is precisely what the phrase to bring good tidings conveys to us. The appropriation of the word to the religious institution called the Gospel, is of a later date, and has gradually arisen out of the former usage. When etymology and use entirely coincide, as they often do, we cannot be too literal in our interpretations; when they differ, which does not seldom happen, the latter is to be followed, and not the former.

In some respects, similar, though apparently, contrary, to the above objection, is that of those who urge that our term gospel, in its Saxon etymology, is an exact counterpart to the Greek ευαγγελιον, being compounded of two words, which conjoined denote good news. But, the only pertinent question is, in this case, Is this the present meaning of the English word gospel? The first objectors would assign to the Greek word evayyɛ2ov, a sense which it had not during our Lord's ministry, but which it acquir

ed soon after the second would put upon the English word gospel, a sense which it once had, but now has not. That this is the case is evident.

21

Should one, for example, bring us word 20 that an end is put to hostilities, and that the powers at war have at last agreed upon a peace, ought we, in reporting this intelligence, to say, that one had come preaching to us the gospel of peace? Whoever should express himself thus, would, I am afraid, be thought to talk both absurdly and prophanely. At least, he would be said to employ a very bold and far-fetched metaphor. Yet, not the metaphorical, but the proper expression, in the language of the Apostles, would be, ευηγγελίσατο ημιν ειρηνην, οι even εκήρυξεν ήμιν το ευαγγέλιον της ειρήνης. Jo sephus, in his History of the Jewish War 2, acquaint.. ing us that Titus sent to his father the good news of his taking Tarichea, says, Τιτος δε εκπέμψας τινα των ἱππεων ευαγγελίζεται τω πατρι το εργον. How would it sound in our ears to render it, preached to his father the gospel of the action? Nothing can be a stronger evidence that the Greek phrases above mentioned, and the English preached the gospel, are not equivalent. All, therefore, that can be concluded from the primitive import of the word Gospel, in a different, though related, language, is that, in the Anglo-Saxon, not the English, version of the New Testament, the word Evayyɛ2ov

20 This was written towards the end of the American war. 21 Lib. iii. ch. 34.

was rightly so translated. Certain it is, however, that the error remarked in the English version, runs through all the modern translations, as well as the Vulgate which gave it birth, and is a remarkable instance of the truth of an observation formerly made 22 that, sometimes, by consulting other versions, we may be confirmed in an error, instead of having it corrected. Indeed the old Latin translation has served, in many things, as will appear more fully afterwards, as a model to the translators in the West.

9. BUT, though the noun evayyɛλov was equally unequivocal with the verb evayyɛ2, in its acceptation in the Old Testament, and commonly in the Evangelists, it must be owned that, from its original signification, it came insensibly afterwards to vary and receive other meanings, in the way I shall now attempt to explain. The word occurs very often in the New Testament, where, as it is a term of principal importance, its different significations deserve to be investigated, with the greatest accuracy. That the radical signification, good news, is not only the most common, but, in some respect, a concomitant of every other meaning affixed to the word, must be evident to every one who is conversant with the original. Yet this allusive concomitance, if I may so express myself, is an advantage which cannot be obtained in a translation. As use, which governs language, will not bend to our inclinations, we must

22 Diss. II. Part III. § 6.

change the word in the version, when the import of the original name is so far different, that the same term, in another language, will not answer; yet, by 'changing it, we may lose the emphasis, which results from the allusion to the primitive and predominant application of the word. It will sometimes happen, in a train of reasoning, where the same word is used in the original, in different, but related, senses, that the change of the corresponding term, in the version, will hurt perspicuity, and yet may be necessary, because the same word in another language, whose idiom does not admit the same extent of signification, would hurt it more.

10. THE first meaning of the word then in the New Testament, especially in the Gospels, is, as has been observed, good news, a signification which, though always implied, is not always what is chiefly intended; and therefore the word cannot, without a sacrifice of propriety, be uniformly rendered so. The name, from being expressive of an eminent quality in the dispensation introduced by the Messiah, and from being most frequently applied to it, came gradually to serve as a name for the dispensation itself. When it is thus employed, it is in our tongue properly rendered gospel. This is the second meaning of the word. Of the other senses which it has in Scripture, I shall take notice afterwards. The two above mentioned are the chief. And, first, I shall consider the cases wherein that