of the Gospels can hardly be made by rule. Conjecture must sometimes be applied to the rules of harmonizing, and to the use of them in particular cases. But it is well to observe here, that the subject respects merely occasional historical facts; of which one may be ignorant without endangering his salvation. Nay, better submit to be ignorant here, than to torture one's brain to find out what is not of essential importance.

PART VI.

ON TRANSLATING THE SCRIPTURES.

§1. An interpreter should not only understand the Scriptures, but be able to explain them well, so as to give an exact delineation of the original. An interpreter should not only possess a thorough understanding of the Scriptures, but also the faculty of interpreting and explaining them well. On this subject, it may be proper to say a few things.

The object of interpretation is to give the sense of an author, without addition, diminution, or change. A version ought to be AN EXACT IMAGE OF THE ORIGINAL OR ARCHETYPE, IN WHICH IMAGE NOTHING SHOULD BE DRAWN EITHER GREATER OR LESS, BETTER OR WORSE, THAN THE ORIGINAL; BUT SO COMPOSED THAT IT MIGHT BE ACKNOWLEDGED AS ANOTHER ORIGINAL ITSELF. It follows, that a translator should use those words,

and those only, which clearly express all the meaning of the author, and in the same manner as the author. But this needs illustration.

§ 2. The words of the version ought to correspond as exactly as possible to those of the original. First, as the same meaning must be conveyed, those words are to be selected, the force of which plainly corresponds to that of the original, and which are not ambiguous, but of a plain and established meaning among those for whom the translation is made. Those words are to be preferred (if such can be found) which correspond altogether with the words of the author, in respect to etymology, tropical use, and construction. But great caution is necessary here, in judging whether the usage of the two languages agrees. Otherwise no version can be made, which can be well understood by those who are ignorant of the original language; but rather an obscuration of the author, and not unfrequently a perversion of him. For men will understand the words of a Latin version, according to the Latin usus loquendi, (and so of any modern translation ;) when they ought to be understood, if the rule above be violated, according to the Greek or Hebrew idiom. Or perhaps the unlearned reader will not understand them at all, although from the habit of hearing and using the words he may think he understands them. A frequent case indeed among the unlearned; and I may add, among their teachers also.

§ 3. When one cannot translate ad verbum he must translate ad sensum. But, if appropriate words as above described cannot be selected, on account of the difference of idiom between the two languages (the

original and that of the translator), which often express the same things by words that do not correspond in their etymology or their proper signification, (especially is this the case with the oriental and occidental languages, so that a literal translation of the former would be often unintelligible in the latter,) then we must relinquish the design of translating ad verbum, and content ourselves with merely giving the sense of the original plainly designated. E. g. πίπα, πρόσωπον λαμβάνειν, &c.

עַל־פִּי

§ 4. A knowledge of Hebrew as well as Greek necessary to translate the New Testament. This can be effected only by one who has an accurate knowledge of both languages. To accomplish this in respect to the New Testament, a man, besides the knowledge of his vernacular tongue, must have an accurate knowledge of both Greek and Hebrew. This is necessary, not only to understand the original, but to judge of what is peculiar to each language, and to express the sense of the original in a manner adapted to the genius of his own language.

§ 5. Cases where we must adhere to the mode of translating ad verbum. But various causes operate to prevent a translator from strictly following the rule in § 3. For first, when the form and manner of the Greek words has such a connexion with the things signified, and the method of arguing, that those things cannot be well understood, nor the argument proceed well, if a translation ad verbum be not made, then we must sacrifice the idiom of our own language and adhere to that of the Greek. This frequently happens in respect to the epistles of Paul; e. g. 2 Cor. iii. in regard to the words and γράμματος

πνευ

μaros, also dons; add Gal. iii. 16.; and in respect to allegories, John x.

§ 6. Continued. Antithesis, paronomasia, and the like figures of speech, also require a modification of the rule in § 3. For the grace and beauty of these perish when the language is changed. Paul has many of these figures. But they cannot always be preserved, as another language will not always admit them. E. g. in Matt. xvi. 18, πетрos and πeтρа, the paronomasia can be preserved in Latin but not in English.

§ 7. Continued. Another class of words which must be literally rendered, are those for which no equivalent ones can be found in the language of the translator, so as fully and unambiguously to express the idea. E. g. the word ζωη ; and others, as πίστις, μετάνοια, &c.

§ 8. Continued. In very difficult and doubtful passages also a literal translation must be given, because a version ad sensum would be assuming that one definitely understood the real meaning of the passage. This might do in a commentary, but not in a translation. With propriety, says Castalio, on 1 Pet. iv. 6, "This I do not understand, therefore I translate it ad verbum.”

§ 9. In translating, we ought to lean towards our own vernacular idiom. A good acquaintance with these maxims of translation, especially a practical acquaintance, will enable any one to judge whether a version has preserved the right method in regard to purity of language, or introduced too many of the idioms of the

original. As versions, however, are not made for the learned who can read the original; but for others, and especially for the common people, it is better to incline to the idiom of our vernacular tongue (even in cases where you might with some propriety adhere to the original idiom) for the sake of rendering the translation more intelligible. It was well said by Jerome to Pammachius, when speaking of the best mode of interpretation, "Let others hunt after syllables and letters; do you seek for the sense." But see § 2.