Auctoribus quidem ad istam sententiam quam yis obtineri uti optimis CICERO. London: Printed by J, Hodson, Cross-Street, Hatton-Garden, FOR F. AND C RIVINGTON, ST. PAUL'S CHURCH-YARD; W. H. LUNN, 1802. ADVERTISEMENT. THESE HESE Letters being merely supplemental to Mr. Sharp's Remarks*, cannot well be understood without some knowledge of that work. The following extract will supply what is most necessary; and I make it the rather, because I understand that it is already very difficult to procure a copy of Mr. Sharp's pamphlet ↑. "Rule I. When the copulative na 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 it's cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is * "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, Esq. Durham, 1798." Further information may be obtained by consulting the British Critic for Jan. 1800. I do not know that the work has yet been noticed by any other Review. See also Musei Oxoniensis Fascicul, secund. Londini 1797. not 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 further description of the Grst-named person as και εθε ράπευσεν αυτόν, ώστε ΤΟΝ τυφλον ΚΑΙ κωφον και λαλειν και βλεπειν. Matt. xii. 22. Matt. xii. 22. And again Ευλογητος ο θεος ΚΑΙ Πατηρ του κυριου ήμων Ιησου Χριστου, Ο Πατηρ των οικτίρμων ΚΑΙ θεος πατης παρακλήσεως. 2 Cor. i. 3. This last sentence contains two examples of the first rule. See also in 2 Cor. xi. 31, ο θεος ΚΑΙ πατηρ του κυριού ήμων Ιησου Χριστου οιδεν &c. Also in Eph. vi. 21. Τυχικός ο αγαπητος αδελφος ΚΑΙ πιστος διάκονος εν κυ ριφ. Also in Heb. iii. 1, κατανοητάτε ΤΟΝ αποστολου ΚΑΙ αρχιερέα της ὁμολογίας ήμων Ιησουν Χριστον, &c. See also in 2 Pet. ii. 20, εν επιγνώσει ΤΟΤ κυριου ΚΑΙ σωτη ρος Ιησου Χσιστου, &c. And again in_2 Pet. iii. 2,—και της των αποστολων ήμων εντολης ΤΟΥ κυρίου ΚΑΙ σωτη ρος. And again in 2 Pet. iii. 18, Αυξανετε δε εν χαριτ και γνώσει ΤΟΥ κυρίου ήμων ΚΑΙ σωτήρος Ιησου Χριστου αυτή ἡ δόξα και νυν και εις ήμεραν αιώνος, αμην. Also in Philippians iv. 20,—τῳ δε θεῳ και πατρι ἡμῶν ἡ δόξα, &c. In Rev. xvi. 15, μακάριος Ο γρηγόρων ΚΑΙ τηρῶν τὰ ἱματια αύτου, ἵνα μη γύμνος περιπατη, &c. And in Col. ii. 2,-εις επιγνωσιν του μυστηρίου ΤΟΥ θεου ΚΑΙ πατρος και του Χριστου εν ῳ εἰσι πάντες οι θησαυροι της σοφί ας, &c. And in 1 Thes. iii. 11, Αυτός δε ο θεος ΚΑΙ πατηρ ήμων και ο κυριος ήμων Ιησους Χριστος, κατευθυναι * τα The distinction of persons mentioned in this sentence is preserved by the insertion of the article του before χριστον, which had been omit ted before πατρος. την вид. την όδον ήμων προς ὑμας. This solemn ejaculation for the divine direction is addressed jointly to the God and Father, and to our Lord Jesus; (so that here is good authority for offering up prayers to Christ, which some have lately opposed) and the distinction of the persons is preserved (as in the last example) by again inserting the article before nugos, which had been omitted before naκύριος, The apostle James also used the same mode of expression-θρησκεια καθαρά και αμιαντος παρα τῷ θεῷ και πατρι αυτη εστιν, επισκέπτεθαι ορφανους και χήρας εν τη JEI AUTWV, &c. James i. 27. And there are at least a dozen other places, viz. (Rom. xv. 6. 1 Cor. xv. 24. Gal. i. 4. Ephes. v. 20. Col. i. 3, and 12. and iii. 17. 1 Thes. i. 3. 1 Thes. iii. 13. 2 Thes. ii. 16. James iii. 9. Rev. i. 6.) wherein " the God and Father," is mentioned exactly according to this rule; and there is no exception or instance of the like mode of expression that I know of, which necessarily requires a construction different from what is here laid down; EXCEPT the nouns be proper names, or in the plural number; in which cases there are many exceptions; though there are not wanting examples, even of plural nouns, which are expressed exactly agreeable to this rule. "As the examples which I have annexed to my first rule consist of texts, wherein the sense is so plain, that there can be no controversy concerning the particular persons to whom the several nouns are applicable, it will be thought, I hope, that I have already cited a sufficient number of them to authenticate and justify the rule. There |