An inquiry into the existence of a personal devil / [By John Epps.

Date:
1848
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: An inquiry into the existence of a personal devil / [By John Epps. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    10/104 (page 4)
    4 the eighty-two passages referred to, would be fallacious, because the Devil is not referred to therein. These eighty-two passages can therefore be dismissed for the present, and those passages, namely, the thirty-eight, in which the word, translated devil, occurs, must be gathered, and from them, the only source, as connected with this word, whence any information can be deduced respecting the Devil, must be learned what is to be learned of the Devil. The field of inquiry is thus limited: every product found in that field, pre- sents itself for careful examination. The passages are Matthew 1. 5. 8. 11. 39. 41. Luke iv. 2. iv. 3. iv. 5. iv. iv. iv. iv. xiii. xxv. iv. 6. iv. 13. viii. 12. John vi. 70. viii. 44. xiii. 2. Acts, x. 38. xiii. 10. Ephesians iv. 27. vi. 11. 1 Timothy iii. 6. iii. 7. iii. 11. 2 Timothy ii. 26. iii. 3. Titus ii. 3. Hebrews ii. 14. James iv. 7. 1 Peter v. 8. 1 John iii. 8. iii. 8. iii. 8. iii. 10. Jude — 9. Revelations ii. 10. xn. xii. xx. xx. 9. 12. 2. 10. What then is the word, rendered devil, in these passages ? It is dtd/SoXosv diabolos. What does this word mean P It is derived from §m/3aXXoo, diaballo, this itself being compounded or made up of two words, did, dia, through, and ftaWoo, ballo, to strike, to pierce as with an arrow : 6ta/3aXXco, diaballo, means therefore to pierce through: and as, when a man’s character is attacked by any charge, his character is struck through, he is accused. In this sense it is used in the New Testament, once and only once.10 This piercing happens still more markedly, when character is attacked by the false charges of another; hence, 6ta/3aXXco, diaballo, signifies to ca- lumniate, which is, to pierce through with the darts of calumny. And, as the idea of calumny implies that the accusations are false, the term $ia(3o\os, dia- bolos, means a false accuser, a calumniator. The proper meaning of the word 6id/3oXos, is therefore false accuser, calumniator; the improper meaning is devil: this improper interpretation having been first given by the trans- lators of the Scriptures from the Greek; an interpretation, one of the best Biblical critics, Leigh,11 remarks, “ nowhere else sampled (i. e., so used) in any Greek author.” The very derivation of this word thus proves that false accuser, calumniator, is the correct interpretation. Additional evidence, that false accuser is the correct interpretation, is af- forded in the occasional use of the word in its proper meaning, in the com- mon translation. —“ I have said that each word is translated by one, sole, undeviating meaning, as- suming, as an incontrovertible principle in all languages, that, with very few ex- ceptions, each word has one meaning only, and can usually be rendered correctly into another by one word only, which one word should serve for its representative at all times, and on all occasions.”—p. v., 2nd edition, 1828. 10 “And Jesus said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, who had a steward, who was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.”—Luke xvi., 6 : his character, as a steward, was pierced through by the charge of wasting his mas- ter’s goods.