beft way to make an ancient misshapen elifice regular and uniform, is to pull it down, and build it all anew. As the moft approved versions are those, that adhere not too close to the letter, nor deviate too far from it, our authors profeís to have kept between both. Indeed they have often, out of a regard to the facred text, and a deference to the opinion of the generality of the world, not taken the liberty neceffary to an exact and perfect tranflation. But left the : liberties they have fometimes taken, may not be relished by thofe, who have not fufficiently attended to the rules of a good tranflation, they thought proper to make the following remarks upon that fubject. 1. In the first place it must be obferved, that in tranflating we are not to render word for word, but fenfe for fenfe, and that the most literal verfions are not always the most faithful. There is a great deal of difference between the letter and the literal fenfe. The letter is the word explained according to its etymology. The literal fense is the meaning of the author, which is frequently quite different from the grammatical fignification of the words. The defign of a verfion is not to explain the words of a book, that is the office of a grammarian, the intent of a tranflator ought to be to exprefs the thoughts. Thus a man may be a good grammarian, and at the fame time. wretched tranflator. 2. Nothing is more common than for the fame words, in the mouths of different nations, to have different fignifications. In this cafe to confult your dictionary would be a certain means to put you wrong as to the literal fenfe of an author. For inftance, were we to render the Greek word fcandalizein by the English word to fcandalize, we fhould be far from expreffing the meaning of the facred penmen. For fcandalizein, in Greek, fignifies to lay a fnare, to put an obstacle in the way, to difhearten, to caufe to waver and fall, &c. Whereas in English, to fcandalize, is properly to speak ill of a perfon, to defame, and the like. 3. It often happens that one author ufes a word in a different fense from that of another. Of this, to justify and juftification are inftances. In English to justify a perfon, is, to speak in his defence, to clear him from what he is accufed of; whereas in the fcripture language, to justify, is an act of God's mercy, whereby pardoning our fins, in confideration of our faith and repentance, he declares us juft or righteous, and treats us as fuch, for the fake of Jefus Chrift. There are abundance of words of the like nature; the faced writers of the New Teftament forming their Style upon the Hebrew and Septuagint verfion, often give a particular meaning to the Greek words. If therefore we were to render fuch words by their moft ufual fignification, we fhould indeed render them according to the letter, but at the fame time we fhould be far from expreffing the ineas annexed to them by the author. The fame writer alfo very often ufes the fame word in different fenfes, not only in different places, but fometimes in the fame fentence. If we were to render them always by the fame word, on pretence of being faithful and exact, we should on the contrary, exprefs ourselves in a very improper and frequently in an unintelligible manner. The Greek word, for example, that fignifies faith * Πισίδο G 4 is is made ufe of by St. Paul in very different fenfes; fometimes he means by it the being perfuaded of a thing †, fometimes trust or reliance ‡, and fometimes the object of faith §, that is, the gospel. As these are very diftinct ideas, the rules of a good tranflation require, that in each place we give the word faith the meaning which is agreeable to the context. 4. It is well known, that in Hebrew, upon which the Greek of the New Teftament is formed, there are certain expletives, or fuperfluous particles, which in that tongue may poffibly have their graces, or at least may not be fo difagreeable as in ours. Such is the conjunctive copulative, kai, and, which commonly in the New Testament inftead of conne&ting begins the difcourfe. Hence it is that we meet with fuch multitudes of ands, without any meaning at all, and which in the living languages found very odd. Of the fame nature is the adverb behold or lo. It often has its meaning and emphafis, but for the most part it is a mere Hebraism without any particular fignification. 5. As for the other particles, for, but, as, now, then, &c. the criticks have very well obferved, that they have not determinate fignifications, and therefore it would be very wrong to render them always in the fame manner. In fixing their fenfe the context and connection of the difcourfe must be our guide. These feveral meanings of the fame particle are owing to the Hebrew, where the particles vary extremely in their fignification*; but the fame thing is to be met with in both Greek and Latin authors. 6. As feveral may think it ftrange that in this verfion thou and thee are changed into you, it will be proper to remove their fcruples, which can proceed only from their being ufed and accustomed to the contrary. But fuch fhould confider, That no prefeription ought to be pleaded against reafon, and that to fpeak in a barbarous ftyle in a polite age and language, is highly unreasonable. Thofe, who object againft this, either torget or do not know that the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin tongues having no you in the fingular number, it was impoffible for the facred penmen to speak otherwife. The pretended dignity of THEE and THOU in the gospels, is to be met with in all the difcourfes and books of thofe times, because they could not talk to one another in any other manner. But now-a-days that you is made use of in the fingular number, when we would fpeak handfimely, and that to fay THOU is extremely rude and uncivil, or a fign of great familiarity, or of the meaneft dependance, there can be no reafon of admitting this indecent manner of expreffion in the verfion of the New Tefiament. What can be more grating than to hear the difciples calling their Lord, thou, and thee, and our Saviour talking to the Apoitles as to the meaneft of fervants? It is not the fame thing when we addrefs ourselves to God, as when men are talking to one another. God is infinitely above the little rules of our breeding and civility, and as the addreffes of the faithful to this Supreme Being are of a jupernatural order, it is proper their language Heb xviii. &c. + Rom. xiv. 23. guage fhould in fome measure be fo too. Upon this occafion the oriental ftyle has a certain fublimity in it, which may be much eafier conceived than expreffed. And if, when we fpeak to kings in an heroick ftyle, we find thou has fomething very noble, grand, and refpectful, how much more fo when we addrefs ourselves to the King of kings! 7. In this verfion the tranflators had folely in view the thoughts of the facred penmen, without any regard to the particular explanations and applications of divines. Syftems of divinity are to go by the fcriptures, and not the fcriptures by them. To prove a doctrine by a text, which in its natural fente proves it not, or does not do it without a ftrained and forced interpretation, is to betray at once both the fcriptures and doctrine too. Divines, who go this way to work, expofe at the fame time the Chriftian religion in general, and their own principles in particular. In each communion a man is obliged to adhere to the articles, therein eftablished, but then every one ought to be left free to interpret the fcriptures, by the fame rules that are neceffary for explaining any other book whatsoever. Befides, when a doctrine is proved by feveral exprefs texts, or by one fuch, to endeavour to prove it by paffages quite foreign to the purpofe, is unfair dealing, a pious fraud very blame-worthy, or at leaft fhews fuch a ftrong prejudice and blind obftinacy, as can never make for the credit of any fect or party. Calvin was a truly orthodox But he ingenuoufly difclaimed both the ancients and moderns, when in proof of certain myfteries they alledged texts, which in his opinion had no manner of relation with the matter in hand. However, the like liberty is not here taken, but without confuting any particular explanation, our authors have laid it down as a law, to reprefent the text just as it is, and to have every one at liberty to judge of the truths therein contained. 8. There are two forts of Hebraisms in the New Teftament. Some there are, which all the world understand, having been accuftomed to them; but there are others, which would be unintelligible, if not explained. The first of these are preferved, in order to give the Verfion the air of an original, which is effential to a good tranflation. The others have an [English] turn given them, and the Hebraifm is marked in the Comment. For inftance, as it is ufual in all languages, as well as in Hebrew, to term the difciples or followers of any perfon, his children, this expreffion is retained, as the children of God, and the children of the devil. The Hebrews fay, to eat bread, when they would exprefs eating in general or making a meal. Now this Hebraifm cannot be rendered. literally without ambiguity. Again, for the edge of the word, they say, the mouth of the fwordt, which is unintelligible in English. For a thing they fay, a word; for poflerity, they fay, feed; for a tree, they fay, wood; and make ufe of the word, to answer, in the beginning of a difcourfe, before any perfon has fpoke. It is evident in thefe and the like cafes the Hebraism muft be dropt, and the author's meaning, not his expreffions, must be kept to. To give the Verfion a certain oriental turn, * John xiii. 18. + Luke xxi. 24. natural natural to the New Teftament, all the figures are carefully preferved, as far as perfpicuity and the purity of language will admit. There are feveral ellipfes, that is, words understood, which it was neceffary to fupply; and feveral enallages, or changes of tenfes and persons which cannot be imitated without barbarijm, and leaving the fenfe obfcure, equivocal, and fometimes entirely wrong *. In fine, there are feveral allufions to words, which are very feldom capable of being tranflated from one language to another. This is done where the words in our language would bear it; for inftance, let the dead bury their dead, which is a fort of an enigmatical expreffion, the underftanding whereof depends on the taking the word dead in two different fenfes. 'To conclude, nothing has been omitted to keep up the character, genius, and style of the facred penmen, as far as was confiftent with preferving their fenfe. If there are any fupplemental words, they are no more than the text neceffarily requires. They, for whom the facred writings were at firft defigned, fupplied without any difficulty the words that were wanting, being used to that way of expreffion. But our laoguage will not admit of any of thefe ellipfes. All modern and affected expreffions are carefully avoided, and though the familiar and popular ftyle of the Evangelifts is closely imitated, yet is it done without defcending to any mean or low expreffion. There is a nobleness in the fimplicity of the language of the facred authors, which diftinguishes them in an eminent manner from common writers, and no endeavours have been wanting to follow them in that particular. IV. The NOTES. The Notes were defigned for the following uses. 1. They fhew the difference between the [English] and Greek, to the end they, who understand the original, may the better judge of the faithfulness of the tranflation. 2. They ferve to clear up the literal fenfe, when any obfcurity occurs. 3. They defcribe the places, perfons, and ufages, spoken of or alluded to, as well as explain the proverbial fayings, ways of expreffion, and the like, the knowledge whereof gives great light to the meaning of a paffage. For inftance, our Saviour prefers the whiteness of the lily before all the magnificence of Solomon's royal robes. Now the beauty and force of this comparison are much more confpicuous, when we are told, the robes of the eastern princes were white. 4. When a paffage may be rendered feveral ways, or is not understood in the fame manner by interpreters, the different fenfes are taken notice of in the Notes, and either that, which is thought the beft, is remarked, or the reader is left to judge for himfelf, when the cafe is doubtful. 5: The various readings, that make any alteration in the fenfe, are fet down. 6. Our authors candidly own, they know not the meaning of * See Luke xiii. 34. Mat. xxiii. 37. fome fome paffages, They lay nothing down for certain but what appears 10, and what they cannot rationally explain, they leave as they found it, doubtful and obfcure. It is impoffible, a work of fo great antiquity, hould be every where equally clear, fince we are deprived of many belps, which would have given great light into feveral difficult places. It is fufficient that every thing, relating to our faith and morals, is delivered with all imaginable plainnefs and perfpicuity. V. The PREFACE S. As there will be an occafion to mention the Prefaces to each book of the New Testament, in the Introduction, the reader is referred thither, in order to avoid repetition. 2 AN |