the warrior was called the therapon of Mars, and of the muses and kings of the gods generally. Thus, Menelaus is called the therapon of his chief, &c. &c. (See Iliad, viii. 113, xviii. 244, xix. 143.)

A similar error is occasionally found in the use of the terms to serve, served, service, &c., as if they were legitimately derived from some form of doulos. Thus, Luke ii. 37: "But served God with fasting and prayers night and day,"-" served," 2aτpevovoα, latreuousa, from latreuo. The more appropriate term is "to worship," &c.

The term was used by the Greeks, "to worship" the gods by sacrifices and offerings. (See Euripides, Electra, 131; Iphagenia in Tauris, 1115.) So in Acts vii. 7: "And after that shall they come forth and serve me in this place,"—" serve," 2ατpevσovoi, laλατρεύσουσι, treusousi. It should have been, "and worship me in this place." Rom. ix. 4: "And the service of God, and the promises," λatpɛia, latreia, worship, &c. So also Heb. ix. 1: "Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service," λarpeias, latreias, worship. So also Heb. xiii. 10: "We have an altar whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle,"-" serve," λaτperOVTES, latreuontes, who are worshipping in the, &c. &c.

Aiáxovos, diakonos, is also sometimes erroneously translated servant, service, to serve, &c. An instance occurs, John ii. 5: "And his mother saith unto the servants," diazóvois, diakonois, from diakonos: as a verb, it means to minister unto, to wait upon, to manage affairs, to perform some function to another; and hence, in English, we may occasionally require some other term of cognate meaning. From this term our word "deacon" has been legitimately derived. The word is of less elevated import in Greek than therapon (see Aristophanes, Ornithes, line 1322, ws Bλaxıxws Siaxoveis,) but never consorts in the least degree with the idea slavery. "Saith unto" them who ministered, who waited upon the guests, &c. So also John ii. 9: "But the servants which drew the water knew," servants, diánovoi, diakonoi, "they who ministered unto." See also Rom. xvi. 1: "I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church," &c., Sáxovor', diakonon, one who ministers unto, &c. So also John xii. 26: "If any man serve," Siaxovy, diakone, wait upon, minister unto me. "And where I am there shall my servant be," duáxovos, diakonos, one who waits upon, who ministers unto; "him will my Father honour." It is not always in English easy to select a phrase distinctly the best adapted

to express the precise difference between the words diakonos and huperetes, but it may be remarked that the huperetes was of an employment more of public character: hence those who in the ships held certain banks of oars were called by that name; also those of a particular rank in the army, or in civil government; but the word diakonos was used as a term more applicable to domestic, personal, or private life. Keeping this distinction in mind, the same word may often, in English, give the sense of either; yet huperetes will often appear in Greek where diakonos would be ill used. A more correct use of this word than the preceding will be found in Matt. iv. 11: "Then the devil leaveth him, and behold, angels came and ministered unto him," Sinxóvovv, diekonoun, ministered unto, attended to.

Matt. xx. 26: "But whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister," diánovos, diakonos, minister, &c. And here is shown the distinction between this word and doulos, a slave; for he proceeds," And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant," dovλos, doulos, slave. Also, Luke viii. 3: "And Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod's steward, and Susanna, and many others which ministered unto him of their substance," Sinxóvovv, diekonoun, ministered, &c. We have deemed it proper to notice these inaccuracies in our translation, to prevent the word servant, &c., when used to mean slave, &c., being confounded with its use when given in translation as above; and it may be proper also to notice that the hired labourer, a freeman hired into the employ of another, is never described by any term implying slavery, or even having any analogy with it, as examples will show:

"For the kingdom of heaven is like a man that is a householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers (mobi oaolai épɣátas, misthosasthai ergatas, to hire labourers) into his vineyard." "They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us," (poláσato, emisthosato, hath hired.) "So when the evening was come, the Lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, call the labourers and give them their hire," uolov, misthon, wages, &c. "And when they had received it, they murmured against the good man of the house." Matt. xx. 1, 7, 8, 11. himself, he said, How many hired servants persons) of my father's have bread," &c. that is a hireling, (mowτos, misthotos, a person hired,) and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf, &c. and the wolf catcheth them and scattereth the sheep. The hireling

"And when he came to (uiolio, misthioi, hired Luke xv. 17. "But he

(uolatos, misthotos, a person hired) fleeth because he is a hireling (uolatos, misthotos, a person hired,) and careth not for the sheep." John x. 12, 13. "For the labourer is worthy of his hire," TOù uolov, hire, wages, payment, &c. Luke x. 7. "Behold,

the hire (o uolos, payment for being hired) of the labourers (tàv ¿pyatàv, ton ergaton, the labourers, not slaves) who have reaped down your fields." James v. 4.

He who is seeking to obtain a correct view of the truth will perceive the propriety of keeping in mind the distinction between the different characters thus in our version called by the same name, "servants," and not suffer his mind to be governed, or even influenced, by any bias which has been produced by an incomplete examination of the whole gospel of God.

Study VH.

LESSON I.

THE Hebrew letters ain, beth, and daleth, compose the word by which the Hebrews meant what we mean by the word slave. There is some variation among men of letters, even among the Jews themselves, as to the pronunciation of this word, some following the Asiatic, some the Portuguese, and some the Polish method.

Out of respect and in deference to King James's translators of the Old Testament, of the learned and critical Dr. Blany, and of that indefatigable biblical scholar, Dr. Bagster, we have adopted their pronunciation of this word, and call it ebed.

This word, as left untranslated by them, will be found in Jer. xxxviii. 7-12; also xxxix. 16, 17, thus :-"Now, when Ebedmelech the Ethiopian, one of the eunuchs which was in the king's house." "Ebed-melech went forth out the king's house." "When the king commanded Ebed-melech the Ethiopian." "So Ebedmelech took the men with him." "And Ebed-melech the Ethi

opian said to Jeremiah." "Go, speak to Ebed-melech the Ethiopian." The words Ebed-melech are here left untranslated, because we have not, in English, words to express the idea conveyed by them, except by paraphrasis, as, for instance, they would have had to have said, his majesty's private, or principal, and confidential body-servant: and this is the exact meaning implied by the words Ebed-melech, as here used: the word servant, meaning a slave. In Judges ix. 26, 28, 30, 31, 35, the word Ebed is also left untranslated. Also in Ezra viii. 6: "Ebed, the son of Jonathan." And in some other places.

We trust that our authority for the pronunciation of the word Tayebed, will be deemed sufficient: yet, we admit that, in He

brew pronunciation, it will be varied by suffix, affix, and points, as has been found by the learned rabbis long since to best agree with their rules of cantation and the idiomatic construction of the language.

This word ebed is used as a noun, verb, adjective, participle, and adverb; but we make the proposition, that, however used, and in whatever form, it is never used disconnected from the idea of slavery. Philological history will develop to us, at least, one human weakness:-pride to be thought learned, has more or less, among the European nations and languages, had its effect in the compilation of dictionaries.

In some instances, men of learning have undertaken their compilation without using their ability to fathom the depths of language, or to discover the sources of its streams, or describe the qualities of their combinations. And the world is full of servile imitations of former and old errors; and each one seems to think that the authority of a book warrants their perpetuation.

But there will occasionally arise, in the walks of knowledge, some Moses, some Confucius, some Homer, some Euclid, some Socrates, some Bacon, some Newton, some Franklin, some Champollion, before the fire of whose genius and mental power, all imitations of error wither away.

Touching the subject of the Asiatic languages generally, and the darkness that has for ages overspread them, may we not fondly hope that such a luminary is now culminating in the region of the universities of England. Permit us, at least, to have some hope for the Regius Professor of Cambridge.

But to our subject:-We sometimes find the philologist yield his sceptre and borrow his definitions from a bad translation. And we often find the translator sacrificing his original upon the altar of his own imperfections. Now, it is not uncommon that a word in one language may be in such peculiar use, that, consistently with the constitution of some other language, it cannot be translated therein by any one single term; and even if so, not always by the same word. Should all the different terms and words that might thus be legitimately used in translation, be collected together, and put down as the descriptive meaning of some foreign or ancient term, our lexicons would, of necessity, contain some portions of For example, suppose we take the Arabic word abed, which means absolutely a slave in that language: we all know that an Arabian, speaking or writing to one far his superior,

error.