the times of the apostles, the seven persons ordained to distribute the benefactions of the church to the widows and orphans, were called dixovoi, a Greek appellation. In giving names to bishops and presbyters, also, the apostles employed no other than Greek terms, ἐπίσκοπος and πρεσβύτερος, overseer and elder. The new military battalion raised by Alexander Jannæus, had the Greek name Exaτorráμazor, that is, fighting against a hundred. Those persons of Gentile extraction who joined the Jewish people, and who embraced their religion, were called agosλvro, that is, converts. Those who worshipped idols were in like manner distinguished by a Greek appellation, heathen (eos Orixous vocabant Judæi). Those who in the early churches were young converts, were styled ɛóguro, that is, lately planted. Such words as the following also became common in Judæa from that period :—nagáxλŋτος, comforter ; ἄγγελος, messenger ; δαίμων, demon; διάβολος, calumniator; avreisòs, opponent of Christ; ánosárns, deserter; xλīgos, the college of the priests; haïxòs, a laic, from the word λαός, people; καθολικός, universal; κατηχούμενοι, those instructed in the mysteries of religion; naqaviμgn, the bridesmaid ; βίβλια, εὐαγγέλιον, ἀποκάλυψις, and countless others, which are obviously Greek. The same thing may be affirmed of moneys and measures: the names of these, too, are all Greek; for instance, Syrúpior, δραχμή, δίδραχμον, κατὴρ, διπόνδιον, which occur up and down the New Testament, and are mere Greek. To present a few other specimens without selection: the following are of the Greek mint:-uros, a hymn; ¿zivíziov, a song of victory;5 “Çvμos, azymus, or unleavened; naqaoxevǹ, preparation; xaτήχησις, instruction; αἵρεσις, a sect ; παραβολή, a comparison; περίψημα, filth; ἀνάθημα, devoted to the gods ; συναγώγη, α congregation; orádior, a stadium; and others which were then in daily use among the Jews. 1 Act. Apostolorum, eap. 6. Epist. 1 ad Timoth. cap, 3, ver. 8. Matth. 23, v. 15, 5 Lib. 2 Mach. cap. 8, v. 33. Ibid. cap. 5, v. 47. But not alone in the bestowal of names on new objects, but also in changing the names of the old, do we find the Jews habitually Græcizing (Græcizasse tunc eos animadvertimus). The feast of tabernacles was once called by its Hebrew name, in, chag-hassuchoth, but afterwards known by the Greek name, oxyronnyíα. The feast of weeks was called aforetime an, chag-schiavot, but afterwards пertyxos, that is, the fiftieth day. The pond in Jerusalem was once called, beth-tzada, afterwards nooßarixý. The slips of parchment on which they kept the words of the law were formerly, tephilin, but afterwards in Greek guλazrýqior, preserver. The place of judgment was formerly in Chaldee xn, gabbatha, but afterwards 20óoroworos in Greek. The measure once called , bath, was afterwards μezonrýs. word, from the time of the Maccabees the old titles of the Old Testament books were exchanged for new: n, bereshith, became reveow, the generation; b, velle-semoth, éžo8ov; "p", vaikra, Levitixór; b, elle-haddebarim, devτegoróμor, which is the second law; and, thorah, πεντατεῦχον, etc., etc. up § 10. Summary of the chapter. In a To bring this part of our essay to a close, we thus sum the results at which we have arrived. As it is evident, beyond all reasonable doubt, that from the age of the Maccabees the Jews used the Greek language, 1, in the composition of their books, 2, in the inscriptions upon their coins, 3, in edicts and records intended for public perusal, 4, in their own names, 5, in their schools in the instruction of youth, 6, in the public reading of the law, 7, from the testimony of Josephus, a Jew, by which the Jews are incontestably proven to have spoken Greek, 8, from the naming of the divisions of the country and of the new towns that were built, and 9, from the Greek names of the new feasts, magistracies, ranks, moneys, measures, buildings, and many things besides, must he not be absurd (ahoyos) beyond measure, who does not gather from all this, that from the period specified Hellenism was naturalized in Judæa? Who but one so destitute of reason could persuade himself, in the presence of this evidence, that the Jews continued to speak Chaldee? I pledge my word that I do not think it probable posterity could muster as many arguments, at a future day, to prove that we men of Italy now speak Italian for neither is our money struck, nor are our public monuments engraven, nor our sacred books composed, in this tongue, nor even those other works which we throw off from day to day; but to the Jews the reverse of all this accrued. What I have just described as our condition, is equally true of the other nations of modern Europe-the English, the Dutch, the French, the Germans, the Spaniards, etc., etc. From the premises, then, it is evident that the Jews used no other language than Hellenistic; they spake Hellenistic to one another; Hellenistic was the medium of converse with foreigners; their prayers to Deity were offered in Hellenistic; nor did they know any other language than the Greek or Hellenistic. ARTICLE VIII. CRITICAL NOTICES. 1.-Anastasis: or the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body, rationally and Scripturally considered. By GEORGE BUSH. NewYork and London: Wiley & Putnam. 1845. pp. 396, 12mo. THIS book has awakened as much interest as any other which has appeared among us for a long time. The subject is, in itself, interesting, and the boldness of the Professor's theory prompts men to desire, at least, to know for themselves, what it is and whereof the author affirms. We have never been of the number of those who make a man an offender for a word, and would persecute a brother unto death, for writing a book which does not tally precisely with their own sentiments. Nor, on the other hand, do we feel ourselves at liberty to be indifferent as to what is written and circulated through the community A bad book will do more evil than a bad man; and it, consequently becomes the duty of those who are watchmen on the walls, to give note of alarm, when danger approaches from this quarter. Yet we would not fix the finger of scorn on a man, by trying his book instead of himself; but when he has manifestly broached dangerous error, we deem it to be the straightforward course, to deal with the author personally, and in the way prescribed by the Book, considering ourselves, lest we also be tempted. In respect to the case before us, our humble opinion is, that Professor Bush has begun at the wrong end, in his search for truth, and, in consequence of advancing backwards, has fallen into great perplexity before reaching the desired goal. It seems to us that, on a subject so momentous, one that cannot be apprehended by intuition, nor reasoned out by logic; one that lies beyond human ken, and must be developed by divine intelligence, it were wise not to commence with theorizing, and exalting human reason, but to go and sit, like a little child, looking up into the face of Infinite Wisdom, imploring a revelation of the truth. The "Argument from Reason" is well conducted, but proves nothing; for to us it seems to amount to no more than conjecture, at best, and not to be a whit more rational than the ordinary understanding of the subject. The analogies are often pressed beyond measure, and sometimes there seems to be the straining out of a gnat and the swallowing of a camel. To our apprehension, it lies as much within the precincts of probability, that departed spirits will all, at once, assume their spiritual bodies, at the consummation of all things, as that each, as it departs from the body, enwraps itself in one evolved from some germ of the vital principle caught up from the clayey tenement, as it makes its escape forever. It is not necessary for us to believe that the identical particles of matter which constituted the body, at death, are re-formed at the resurrection into a spiritual body, but that such a body will then be given to cach as to secure personal identity: and to contravene the whole of the author's philosophy and hermeneutics, it seems to us only necessary to adduce one or two testimonies of the word of God-e. g. 1 Cor. 15: 20, 23. On this we have only to remark: (a) An incongruity in Prof. Bush's paraphrase. He interprets v. 23, thus: "Christ the first fruits, not in the order of time, but first in rank, the author of the resurrection of the saints.” Then a few lines further on: "Every man," (of the family of Adam's race.) "is to be quickened 'in his own order,' or, as he dies, from Christ down to the last generation." In the latter case, 'every one in his own order' is referred to time as he dies; but in the former, in respect to Christ, to rank. (b) The quickening, or being "made alive at Christ's coming," can only refer to a resuscitation of the body, at that period, for every other quickening has already taken place in respect to 'them that have fallen asleep.' (c) The common-sense meaning of Christ's resurrection from the dead, here spoken of, is the rising of his body.—John 5: 28, 29-Prof. Bush here feels that he has met a serious difficulty, and labors hard to make the passage conform to his theory, but we must say, we think he fails, and is fanciful in his exposition. "The hour is coming," (yet future,) "in the which all that are in the grave" (all the dead) "shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." Can this, by any possibility, be so interpreted, as to exclude a general rising of the dead, and to signify any thing consistent with only the assumption of a spiritual envelope by each individual at his death? Our space forbids more at present, but we must add, that we hope our friend, the Professor, will begin the study of the subject anew, as it is revealed in the word of God, independent of any merely philosophical theories, and subject his philosophy to the simplicity of faith. For, be it remembered that, in this case, there is no certain, demonstrated science to conflict with the orthodox view. 2.-Sermons. By HUGH BLAIR, D. D., F. R. S. Ed. To which is prefixed the Life and Character of the Author, by JAMES FINLAYSON, D. D. Complete in one volume. From the last London edition. New-York: John S. Taylor & Co. 1844. pp. 622, 8vo. This is a neat and convenient edition of Dr. Blair's Discourses, compressed into one volume, yet printed in a type sufficiently large for reading. The author, as Professor of Rhetoric in the University. of Edinburgh, and Minister of the High Church of that city, paid much attention to style. And, although his sermons want the unction which belongs to the pulpit performances of evangelical preachers of the present day, they are not devoid of interest as specimens of chaste, lucid, and often beautiful composition. And if we regard the times and the seasons in which the author wrote, we shall not be too forward to blame him for his want of what we now denominate revival-preaching. His sermons, in his own day, were highly prized, and he was manifestly among the most popular preachers of the age. Although wanting in the fervor of Dr. Grifin's sermons, this volume of Dr. Blair's deserves a place on the shelf for "Sermons." 3.-The Philosophy of Rhetoric. By GEORGE CAMPBELL, D. D., F. R. S., Edin., Principal of the Marischal College, Aberdeen. A new edition, with the author's last additions and corrections. New-York: Harper & Brothers. 1844. pp. 435, 12mo. We are pleased to find the great press of the Harpers bringing out so many valuable standard works at present. It augurs well for the public taste, which, for some years past, has been any thing but ele |