If we would proceed on solid ground in this inquiry justice must first of all be done to the word itself by which this party is designated in the N. T. That word is a formation from the verb ANnviN, which, according to the analogy of verbs in -/Pw, expresses the act or condition of one who, in lan guage, general deportment, and manner of life, appears as a Greek ; so that Hellenist applied to a Jew would indicate that he was a favourer of what was Grecian. There seems no ground for restrict ing this to language • at the same time, this element cannot be ove;looked, because not only is it incredible that any man should be called Hel lenist' who was destitute of the most obvious charac teristic of a Hellene, his language, but the special usage of AX7/1qEa, in the sense of to speak Greek' (comp. Xenoph. Anab. vii. 3, 25 ; Plat. Prot. 327 E. ; Mow. 82, B. ; Arist, Rhet. 5, 1; 12,1; Lobeck, Phryn., p. 379), necessitates our includ ing this meaning in 'EX)opaarhs.' A Hellenist, then, was a Jew who spoke Greek. It does not follow from this, however, that he spoke only Greek, or that those Jews who were not Hellenists were ignorant of Greek. It is probable that the knowledge of Greek was so widely diffused at the time when Christianity appeared, that a was in use throughout the Jewish community. Still it is con ceivable that while some spoke Greek by preference and ostentatiously, others preferred Aramaic, and used Greek only as occasion required, and that the former stood to the latter in somewhat the same relation as the Frenchified Saxons of whom Higden complains (Warton, Hist. of Engl. Poetry, i. 5) stood to their old-fashioned countrymen, both par ties understanding French, but the former using it by preference (which Higden calls Francigenari'), the latter only from necessity. The preference of the Greek language, however, was not the only or even the principal distinction of the Hellenist. What marked him out most, and perhaps excited most the hostility of the Hebrews against him, was his adoption of heathen manners, usages, and modes of thought ; his holding himself free from the restrictions under which the other conceived all true Jews to be plabed ; and especially his claiminff to explain the Mosaic ordinances and the O. f. generally according to a free speculation unfettered by the trammels of tradition. In this we conceive lay the essential characteristic of the Hellenist. With this might coincide other peculiarities ; and in point of fact it is probable that the majority of the Hellenists were born and educated out of Pales tine, and that many of them were proselytes or the sons of proselytes. But these were accidents rather than essentials ; that which constituted the Hel lenist was his acting the Greek, living after Greek fashions, using Greek methods of speculation, affecting the exclusive use of the Greek tong,ue. Meyer tersely defines the word Ein Jude welcher Griechische nationalitat hat, und besonders Grie chisch redet' (Comment. in loc.) The besonders,' however, seems misplaced here ; that which especi ally marked the Hellenist was his leaning to Gentile methods and forrns of religious speculation. Hence to Hellenise came in the writings of the fathers to be used as a current expression for the adopting of Gentile views and doctrines (see Suicer, Thes. Eccl., sub voc.), though it is sometimes also used for the writing of good Greek or the favouring of Greek customs.
On the assumption that the Hellenists were dis tinguished by speaking Greek has been reared the doctrine of a Hellenistic dialect of the Greek 1 language, a doctrine which has no foundation in the actual phenomena of the language as presented' in the LXX. and the N. T. [GREEK LANGUAGE]. —W. L. A.
Cor. xii. 28). The Greek word, signifying aids or assistances, has also this meaning,, among others, in the classical writers (e.g., Diod. Sic. i. 87). In the Sept. it answers to Ma) (Ps. xxii. 19), to IBM (Ps. cviii. 12), and to 3.711T (Ps. lxxxiii. 8). It is found in the same sense, Ecclus. xi. 12 ; 2 Maccab. xi. 26 ; and in Josephus (De Bell. yud. iv. 5. 1). In the N. T. it occurs once, viz., in the enumera tion of the several orders or classes of persons possessing miraculous gifts among the primitive Christians (zit supra), where it seems to be used by metonymy, the abstract for the concrete, and to mean helpers like the words Suvciyas, miracles,' e., workers of miracles ; xvii'Eppi7o-cts, govern ments,' that is, governors, etc., in the same enu meration. The Amencans, it is well known, by a similar idiom, call their servants helps.' Great difficulty attends the attempt to ascertain the nature of the office so designated among the first Christians. Theophylact explains eivrah‘frets by dirrexecreat cla8m7w, helping or supporting the infirm. And so Gennadius, in CEcumenius. But
this seems like an inference from the etymology (see Gr. of Acts xx. 35). It has been assumed by some eminent modern writers that the several orders' mentioned in ver. 28, correspond respec tively to the several gifts' of the Spirit enu merated in ver. 8, 9. In order, however, to make the two enumerations tally, it is necessary to make divers kinds of tongues' and inteipretation of tongues,' in the one, answer to diversities of tongues' in the other, which, in the present state of the received text, does not seem to be a comp/ete correspondence. The result of the collation is that iiv-rarjipezs answers to prophecy ;' whence it has been inferrer] that these persons were such as were qualified with the gift of lower prophecy,' to help the Christians in the public devotions (Bar rington's Miscellanea Sao-a, i. 166; Macknight on Cor. xii. ro-28). Another result is, that ‘govelm ments' answers to discerning of spirits.' To both these Dr. Hales very reasonably objects, as un likely, and pronounces this tabular view to be perplexed and embarrassing' (New Analysis, etc., Lond. 1830, iii. 289). Bishop Horsley has adopted this classification of the gifts and office bearers, and points out as helps,' i.e., persons gifted with prophecies or predictions,' such per sons as Mark, Tychicus, Onesimus. Vitringa, from a comparison of ver. 28, 29, 30, infers that the civr/X71,1,Ezr denote those who had the gift of interpreting- foreign languages (De Synag. Vet. ii. 505, Franeq. 1696) ; which, though certainly possible, as an arbitrary use of a very significant word, stands in need of confirmation by actual instances. Dr. Lightfoot also, according to his biographer, adopted the same plan and arrived at the same conclusion (Strype's Life of Lightfoot, prefixed to his Works, P. 4, Lond. 1684). But Lightfoot himself explains the word persons who accompanied the apostles, baptized those who were converted by them, and were sent to places to which they, being employed in other things, could not come, as Mark, Timothy, Titus.' He ob serves that the Talmudists sometimes call the Le vites nrin9 +iron, the helpers of the priests' (vol. p. 781). Similar catalogues of miraculous gifts and officers occur, Rom. xii. 6-8, and Eph. iv. II, 12 ; but they neither correspond in numbo. nor in the order of enumeration. In the ..frrmer prophecy' stands first, and in the latter, second ; and in the former many of the terms are of wide import, as ministering,' while minute a'istinctions are made between others, as between teaching' and exhortation," giving' and showing mercy.' Other writers pursue different methods, and arrive at different conclusions. For instance, Hammond, arguing from the etymology of the word, and from passages in the early writers whicli describe the office of relieving the poor as peculiarly connected with that of the apostles and bishops by the deacons, infers that dvriX. denotes a special tart of the office of those men which are set down at the beginning of the verse.' He also explains avfiep rho-ecs as another part of their office (Hammond, Comment. in loc.) Schleusner understands 'deacons who had the care of the sick.' Rosenmiffler, Diaconi qui pauperibus, peregrinis, mgrotis, mor tais, procurandis przeerant.' Bishop Pearce thinks that both these words may have been originally put in the margin to explain Supciuets, miracles or powers,' and urges that ean-LX. is nowhere men tioned as a gift of the Spirit, and that it is not recapitulated in ver. 29, 30. Certainly the omis sion of these two words would nearly produce ex actitude in the recapitulation. Bowyer adopts the same conjecture ; but it is without support from MSS. or versions. He also observes that to the end of ver. 28 some copies of the Vulgate add in terpretationes sermonum,' ipbmprias ; as also the later Syriac, Hilary, and Ambrose. This addition would make the recapitulation pellect. Chrysostom and all tbe Greek interpreters con sider the dyra. and Kupepp. as importing the same thing, viz., functionaries so called with reference to the tzvo different parts of their Vfice: the dvrtN. superintending the care of the poor, sick, and strangers ; the tospepv. the burial of the dead, and the executorship of their effects, including the care of their widows and orphans, rather managers than governors (13lomfield's Reeensio Synopt.) After all it must be confessed, with Doddridge, tbat 6we can only guess at the meaning of the words in question, having no principles on which to pro ceed in fixing it absolutely' (Family Expositor, on Cor. xii. 28). (Alberti, Glossar. p. 123 ; Suicer, Thesaur. in voc. ; Salmasius2 De Elmore Trapez itico, p. 409; Wolfii CUM Ph11010g., BasiL 17414 —J. F. D.