« PreviousContinue »
| 3. ADMITTING, therefore, that, in the expression in the parable quoted by Grotius in support of his opinion, ύςερον δε μεταμεληθεις απηλθε, afterwards he repented and went 113, the word ustavonoas would have been apposite, because the change spoken of is to the better, and had an effect on his conduct; still the word uetaus ouai is not improper, no more than the English word repented, though the change, as far as it went, was a real reformation. Every one who reforms, repents ; but every one who repents, does not reform. I use the words entirely according to the popular idiom, and not according to the definitions of theologians : nay, I that, in this instance, the Greek word uerauenouat is more proper than METAVOEW, and the English repent than reform. The reason is, because the latter expression in each language is not so well adapted to a single action, as to a habit of acting, whereas the former may be equally applied to either. Now it is only one action that is mentioned in the parable.
§ 4. In regard to the other passage quoted by Grotius, to show that petavola also is used where, according to the doctrine above explained, it ought to be ueraue Zela, I think he has not been more fortunate than in the former. The passage is, where it is said of Esau "^, Ye know that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected. For he found no place ofrepentance, μετανοιας τοπον
:13 Matth. xxi. 29.
114 Heb. xii. 17.
ovx évpe, though he sought it carefully with tears. Grotius, in his comment on the place, acknowledges that the word ustavola is not used here literally, but by a metonymy of the effect for the cause. ' found no scope for effecting a change in what had 'been done, a revocation of the blessing given to • Jacob, with a new grant of it to himself, or at least of such a blessing as might, in a great measure, supersede or cancel the former. This change was what he found no possibility of effecting, however earnestly and movingly he sought it. It is plain, that neither μετανοια, nor μεταμελεια, in their ordinary acceptation, expresses this change. For that it was not any repentance or reformation on himself, which he found no place for, is manifest both from the passage itself, and from the story to which it refers. From the construction of the words we learn, that what Esau did not find, was what he sought carefully with tears. Now, what he sought carefully with tears, was, as is evident from the history "15, such a change in his father as I have mentioned. This was what he urged so affectingly, and this was what he, notwithstanding, found it impossible to obtain. Now I acknowledge that it is only by a trope that this can be called either μετανοια Or μεταμελεια. . That it was not literally the regret or grief implied in METAJE dela that he sought, is as clear as day, since the manner in which he applied to his father, showed him to be already possessed of the most pungent grief for what had happened. Nay, it appears from the history, that the good old Patriarch, when he discovered the deceit that had been practis. ed on him, was very strongly affected also: for it is said '16, that Isaac trembled very exceedingly. Now, as METAVOLA implies a change of conduct, as well as sorrow for what is past, it comes nearer the scope of the sacred writer than ustauenela. If, therefore,
115 Gen. xxvii. 30, &c.
μεταμελεια there is some deviation from strict propriety, in the word ustavola here used, it is unquestionable that, to substitute in its place METALE NEld, and represent Esau as seeking, in the bitterness of grief, that he, or even his father, might be grieved, would include, not barely an impropriety, or deviation from the lite. ral import, but an evident absurdity.
§ 5. Passing these examples, which are all that have been produced on that side, are the words in general so promiscuously used by sacred writers, (for it is only about words which seldom occur in Scripture, that we need recur to the usage of profane authors,) as that we cannot, with certainty, or at least with probability, mark the difference ? Though I do not believe this to be the case ; yet, as I do not think the matter so clear as in the supposed synonymas already discussed, I shall impartially and briefly state what appears to me of weight on both sides.
$ 6. First, in regard to the usage of the Seventy, it cannot be denied that they employ the two words indiscriminately; and, if the present inquiry were about the use observed in their version, we could not, with justice, say, that they intended to mark any distinction between them. They are, besides, used indifferently in translating the same Hebrew words, so that there is every appearance that, with them, they were synonymous. But, though the use of the Seventy adds considerable strength to any argument drawn from the use of the New Testament writers, when the usages of both are the same, or even doubtful; yet, when they differ, the former, however clear, cannot, in a question which solely concerns the use that prevails in the New Testament, invalidate the evidence of the latter. We know that, in a much shorter period than that which intervened between the translation of the Old Testament, and the composition of the New, some words may be. come obsolete, and others may considerably alter in signification. It is, comparatively, but a short time (being less than two centuries) that has intervened between the making of our own version and the present hour ; and yet, in regard to the language of that version, both have already happened, as shall be shown afterwards 117 Several of its words are antiquated, and others bear a different meaning now from what they did then.
117 Diss. XI. Part II, § 5, &c.
§ 7. Let us therefore recur to the use of the New Testament. And here I observe, first, that where this change of mind is inculcated as a duty, or the necessity of it mentioned as a doctrine of Christianity, the terms are invariably METAVoew and LETAVola. Thus John the Baptist and our Lord, both began their preaching with this injunction, pleTAVOELTɛ 1.8. The disciples that were sent out to warn and prepare men for the manifestation of the Messiah, are said to have gone and preached ινα μετανοησωOL 119. The call which the Apostles gave to all hearers was, μετανοησατε, και επιςρεψατε, και βαπτισθηTw 'exaços 'vuwv 120, reform your lives, return to God, and be baptized. Peter's command to Simon Magus, on discovering the corruption of his heart, is, (ETAνοησον απο της κακιας ταυτης 121. When it is men. . tioned as an order from God, παραγγελλει τους ανθρωποις πασι πανταχα μετανοειν 122. The duty to which Paul every where exhorted was, μετανοειν και επιςρεφειν επι τον Θεον 123. The charge to reformation given to the Asiatic churches in the Apocalypse, is always expressed by the word ustavondov, and their failure in this particular by oυ μετενόησε 121. The necessity of this change for preventing final ruin, is thus repeatedly expressed by our Lord, Eαν μη μετανοητε, Tavtes anoelo)ɛ 125. And, in regard to the noun,
113 Matth. iii. 2. iv. 17.
119 Mark, vi, 12.