The Government, however, and the Assembly, taking into consideration the terms of the treaty, satisfied themselves that, as the Maroons did not come in at the time stipulated, the terms originally settled were not binding on them; and they decreed that the unhappy negroes should be transported. They were consequently conveyed, first to Canada, and finally to Sierra Leone.-General Walpole, as might be expected from a person of his loyalty and high sense of honour, resenting the measure, refused any longer to serve a government that had violated engagements which he deemed sacred.

If we review the conduct of the Council and Assembly of Jamaica, as it respects both the Maroons and their own servants, we perceive no solicitude on their part to gain the character either of magnanimous and generous foes, or of liberal patrons. While their affairs are adverse, they are willing to receive terms from their enemy: but no sooner does fortune place him in their hands, than nothing will satisfy them but his expulsion. Their obligations to General Walpole and to Mr. Quarrel stood acknowleged, yet they are deaf to the just remonstrances of the one, and insult the other by the cold and parsi monious returns which they make for his services.

We have now furnished the reader with an outline of this singular history; and we could fill it up with many interesting and amusing details, if we had adequate space. For these, however, for the subsequent particulars respecting the Maroons after their transportation, and for various additional materials relative to the island of Jamaica, we must advise the inquisitive to consult the volumes of Mr. Dallas; which certainly afford much of both information and entertainment. They are furnished with plates representing old Cudjoe making peace, and a Chasseur of the Island of Cuba with his dogs; a map of Jamaica; and the seat of the Maroon War.

ART. X. Remarks on the Uses of the definitive Article in the Greek Text of the New Testament, containing many new Proofs of the Divinity of Christ, from Passages which are wrongly translated in the common English Version. By Granville Sharp. To which is added an Appendix, containing 1. A Taole of Evidences of Christ's Divinity, by Dr. Whitby. 2. A plain Argument from the Gospel History for the Divinity of Christ, by the former learned Editor (Dr. Burgess, now Bishop of St. David's). And two other Appendixes, added by the Author. Third Edition. 12mo. pp. 188. 3s. 6d. Boards. Vernor and Hood.

ART. XI. Six Letters to Granville Sharp, Esq. respecting his Remarks on the Uses of the definitive Article in the Greek Text REY. AUGUST, 1804.

D d

of

Jo.

of the New Testament. 8vo. pp. 155. 4s. 6d. Boards. Rivingtons.

ART. XII. Six more Letters to Granville Sharp, Esq. on his Re-
marks upon the Uses of the Article in the Greek Testament.
By Gregory Blunt, Esq. 8vo. pp. 220. 4s. Johnson.

IN
IN these publications, the authors have attempted to revive a
controversy which we had flattered ourselves had subsided, at
least among learned men; and we enter on the examination of
them with reluctance, having no desire of signalizing ourselves
as combatants in this wordy warfare. It is impossible, how-
ever, for us to perform our duty, on this occasion, with an
absolute concealment of our opinion. We cannot even express
our surprise at the annunciation of new arguments for the Di-
vinity of Christ, in the 19th century of the Christian Æra,
without being suspected of entertaining doubts, at least, of the
truth of the doctrine itself; and if we farther proceed to accuse
those writers of an indiscreet zeal who seek for proofs of this
system in the use of a grammatical article, we shall probably
subject ourselves to the accusation of coming to the inquiry
with a biassed judgment. Be this as it may, we shall observe
that a mysterious dogma of faith, like a rite or ceremonial in-
stitution, as it cannot be inferred from the light of nature, but
must entirely rest on Revelation, requires to be expressed and
promulgated in terms the most full, direct, and unequivocal;
and that, if such terms are employed in stating it, and in en-
joining the duties immediately connected with it, the plain
and prudent course would be to appeal at once to the broad
letter of the divine statute, and never to aim at deducing it
from weak or dubious premises. What must common Chris-
tians think of being now referred to the use of articles and
copulatives for proofs of a fundamental doctrine? What must
they think of the perspicuity of the N. T. and of all the
learned men who have, from age to age, been employed in
studying, translating, and commenting on it, if new evidences
of the Divinity of that Person are still to be discovered, who
is the great subject of its revelation? Had we been consulted
in this business, we should have advised the parties to make
no public ostentation of these new proofs, and to rest satisfied
with the common mode of defence: but, since they are given
to the world, we must endeavour to report their general sub-
stance, and enable our readers to ascertain their fair amount.
We have not space for entering into the whole of this discus-
sion, nor for displaying the argumentation in all the parts into

which it is ramified; though we trust that we shall put our readers in possession of its force and general purport.

Mr. Granville Sharp, in the first of the three publications before us, is announced as the author of the discovery respecting the uses of the definitive article in the Greek Text of the N. T. for which he is complimented by his learned editor Dr. Burgess, now Bishop of St. David's; and he is supported in his remarks by a learned coadjutor, Mr. C. Wordsworth, of Trinity College, Cambridge, in the Six Letters to Granville Sharp, Esq.Against all the learning and ingenuity of these gentlemen, however, an individual, who has chosen to subscribe himself Gregory Blunt, [that there may be Blunt versus Sharp,] has ventured to stand forwards, and in the Six more Letters to G. S. Esq.' has endeavoured to subvert the groundwork of their reasoning and deductions. Conceiving that he is a complete match for his opponents, he amuses himself with capering and curveting, and makes his thrusts not only with dexterity, but with playfulness. He is blant in his style, though not obtuse; and from the manner in which Mr. Sharp replies to him, in the preface to the third edition of his Remarks, we should suppose that, whatever Mr. S. may think of Gregory's faith, he has no mean opinion of his talents and acquisitions.

Mr. Sharp is desirous of correcting the translation of several important texts in the present English version of the N. T. in order that they may speak decidedly (as he supposes the original passages to do,) in favour of the Divinity of Christ, or assert Jesus Christ to be truly God. To prepare the way for this new translation, he lays down several rules respecting the use of the definitive article, subjoining various examples, and giving such exceptions and limitations as he deems necessary to complete accuracy and precision. Since the author allows that the first rule is of more consequence than any of the rest, we shall transcribe it, with the example with which it is illustrated, as a specimen of the whole.

Rule I. When the copulative nos connects two nouns of the same case, [viz. nouns (either substantive or adjective, or participles) of personal description respecting office, dignity, affinity, or connection, and attributes, properties, or qualities, good or ill,] if the article &. or any of its cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle: i. e. it denotes a farther description of the first-named person; as,—x fɛgαπευσεν αυ]ον, ὡς: ΤΟΝ τυφλον ΚΑΙ κωφον και λαλειν και βλεπειν. Matth. xii. 22. And, again, Ευλογητος Ὁ Θεὸς ΚΑΙ Πατης τε Κυρίε ήμων Ιησε Χρισε, Ὁ Πατης των οικτιρμων ΚΑΙ Θεός πάσης παρακλήσεως. 2 Cor. i. 3. This last sentence contains two examples of the first rule. See also in 2 Cor. xi. 31. Ὁ Θεὸς ΚΑΙ Πατηρ τε Κυρίε ήμων Ιησε Χρισου οίδεν, &c. Also in Eph.

Ddz

Eph. vi. 21. Τυχικό; Ο αγαπηλος αδελφος ΚΑΙ πιςος διάκονος εν Κυρίῳ. Also i Heb. iii. 1. κατανοήσαλε ΤΟΝ αποςολος ΚΑΙ αρχιερέα της ὁμολογίας ήμων Ιησεν Χρισον, &c. See also in 2 Pet. ii. 20. Emryswch TOY Kugia KAI Σωτήρος Ιησε Χριστό, &c. And again, in 2 Pet. iii. 2. xI TNG TWY ATOπόλων ήμων εντολης, ΤΟΥ Κυριε ΚΑΙ Σωτηρος. And again, in 2 Pet. iii. 18. Αυξάνετε δε εν χαριτι και γνώσει ΤΟΥ Κυριε ήμων ΚΑΙ Σωτηρος Ιησε Χρισ8ο αυτῳ ἡ δόξα και νυν και εις ἡμέραν αιώνων, αμην.

The use which Mr. S. would make of this rule, (which, as a general one, will not be controverted,) in correcting the common translation, will be seen in his first example of sentences which fall under the first rule, and are improperly rendered, according to his judgment, in the English version.

· Example II. Eph. v. 5.

ΤΟΥ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΥ ΚΑΙ ΘΕΟΥ.

εκ έχει κληρονομίαν εν τη βασιλεια

In the common English version the sentence is rendered, "No whoremonger, &c. bath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ, and of God." As if two persons had been mentioned in the original text; but as the part of the sentence above cited is the generally-approved reading of the printed Greek copies, and as this reading is confirmed by the Alexandrian MS. and by all other Greek MSS. of known authority, it affords an unquestionable proof against the apostacy of the Socinians in their denial of divine honour to our Lord the Christ, or Messiah, who, according to the idiom of the Greek tongue, is in this text expressly intitled Oos, "Gon," though the proof does not appear in the English version. Let it be remarked that the two substantives of personal description X and , are joined by the copulative xa, and that the article & precedes the first, and that there is no article before the word 8, whereby, according to the first rule, both titles are necessarily to be applied to one and the same person, and (if literally rendered in English) should be," hath no inheritance in the kingdom of the Christ and God." But this literal rendering does not sufficiently express the necessary doctrine of the Greek, that the Christ is also God and therefore to help the English idiom, and to accommodate the rendering more strictly to the true meaning of the Greek, the name of Jesus, which is necessary to be understood, might very fairly be inserted in italic, or between hooks, as a paren thesis, to supply the necessary sense of the Greek; as, "in the kingdom of (Jesus) the Christ and God:" or else to be rendered, "in the kingdom of Christ, (even) of God."

From the first of Mr. Sharp's correspondents, (Mr. Wordsworth,) he derives much encouragement to believe in the absolute truth of his principle of translation; for he is assured, in addition to a host of learned quotations from the later Fathers marshalled on his side, that, exclusively of the few passages in which he wishes to reform the common version, there is not one exception to his first rule in the whole New Testament. Mr. W. declares, moreover, that the idiom is not "anceps," not "ambiguum;" and he adds that the Greek must be a strange language if such a thing were possible.'

Not

Not so complaisant and flattering is Mr. Sharp's second correspondent, Gregory Blunt. In the Six more Letters,' more is advanced against Mr. Sharp's rules, as universal grammatical positions, than the six preceding Letters produce in their favour. It is not allowed by this writer that the due distinction of persons is peculiarly maintained in the Greek tongue by the use of its article; and he reminds Mr. S. of a remark in Bishop Lowth's Grammar to an opposite effect; where the Bp. observes" on the near affinity between the Greek article and the English definite article, and the excellence of the English language in this respect, which, by means of its two articles, does most precisely determine the extent of signification of common names: whereas the Greek has only one article, and it has puzzled all the grammarians to reduce the use of that to any clear and certain rules."

As to the affinity between the two languages in the use of the article, Mr. Blunt first attempts to shake the universality of Mr. Sharp's rule, by appealing to modes of expression in the vernacular tongue :

Some Goth, regardless of beauty and ingenuity, might take it into his head to ask you, if you had no faint idea of ever having, in print, or in manuscript, such as you could read without any suspicion of its having been tampered with by Socinians, met with expressions like these:-the king and queen; the husband and wife; the father and son; the mother and daughter; the master and mistress, &c. &c.? And this question might tempt some daring despiser of authority, without having the fear of the Fathers before his cyes, and destitute of all proper veneration for the cobwebs of Duck lane, to put it to your correspondent, whether, in the many volumes of sound divinity, which a man of his immense reading must have waded through,' he too had never met with such a phrase as: the father, sun, and holy ghost?"

Apprehensive that this mode of reply might be thought to be too playful, and not sufficiently learned and profound, Mr. B. advances to the charge in the panoply of Greek criticism; and while he contends that the true sense and meaning of an author's words will be better decided by the context than by any petty, minute, and verbal criticism on articles and conjunctions, he does not decline the contest even on the ground which Mr. Sharp and his coadjutor have chosen. He first shews that Mr. Wordsworth is unfortunate in his quotations from the Fathers, and then discusses the 1st example given in Mr. Sharp's Remarks.

There is an example, which overturns your ingenious theory, and which is placed beyond the reach of your limitations, to be found in the following words, which your correspondent has quoted in

Dd3

page