'^ ^-^ V . '^ A IA. 1

¦ 'An... tS^' HS-^i^iS; •t,^¥*V

If.*;:: 4m, ^V

U^j

"I give thefe Booh
fff thf famuGng if If. Cot^tf^ Ol //if i Canity"

Y^lLE«¥]M]I¥EI^SIIinf-

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

BIBLICAL STUDY.

BIBLICAL STUDY

ITS PRINCIPLES METHODS AND HISTORY

TOGETHER WITH A

CATALOGUE OF BOOKS OF REFERENCE

BY
CHARLES AUGUSTUS BRIGGS D.D.
DAVENPORT PROFESSOR OF HEBREW AND THE COGNATE LANGUAGES IN THE
UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY NEW YORK CITY

SECOND EDITION

NE'W YORK
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS
1884.

COPYRICHT, 1883, BY
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS.

BDWARD O. JENKINS,
Printer and Stereotyper.,
20 North Williani St., New York.

TO
ROSWELL D. HITCHCOCK, D.D., LL.D.,
PRESIDENT OF THE UNIOH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, NEW YORK, AND
WASHBURN PROFESSOR OF CHURCH HISTORY IN THE SAME,
AND TO
ISAAC A. DORNER, D.D.,
PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF BERLIN:
THE SURVIVORS OF TWO NOBLE FACULTIES,
TO WHOM THE AUTHOR OWES HIS THEOLOGICAL
TRAINING,

^his Boob

IS DEDICATED AS A TOKEN OF GRATITUDE AND AFFECTION.

PREFACE.

This work is the product of the author's experience
as a student of the Bible, and a teacher of theological
students in Biblical Study. From time to time, during
the past fourteen years, he has been caHed upon to give
special attention to particular themes in public addresses
and review articles. In this way the ground of Biblical
Study has been quite well covered. This scattered ma
terial has been gathered, and worked over into an or
ganic system.
The following articles and addresses have been freely
used wherever the material contained in them seemed
appropriate : (i) Two articles on Biblical Theology in
the American Presbyterian Review, 1870, pp. 105 seq.,
293, seq. (2) An inaugural address on Exegetical The
ology on the author's induction into the chair of He
brew and Cognate Languages in the Union Theological
Seminary, New York, October, 1876; published in the
Presbyterian Quarterly and Princeton Review, 1877, p. 5,
seq. (3) An address before the Sunday-school Teach
ers' Association of New York on the Languages of the
Bible, in the autumn of 1876, which was published in
the volurae God's Word Man's Light and Guide, New
York, 1877, p. 37, seq. (4) An article in the Presbyte
rian Review, 1881, p. 551, seq., on the Right, Duty,
and Limits of Biblical Criticism. (5) Two articles in the
Homiletical Quarterly, London, r88i, pp. 398, seq., and
535, seq., on Hebrew Poetry. (6) An article in the Pres-
(vii)

yiii PREFACE.

byterian Review, 1882, p. 503, seq., on Biblical Theology.
(7) An article in the Hebrew Student, 1882, p. 6$, seq.,
on the Literary Study of the Bible. (8) An article in the
Presbyterian Review, 1883, p. 69, seq., on the Critical
Study of the Higher Criticism, with special reference to
the Pentateuch. (9) An address upon the Scriptures as
a Means of Grace, delivered before the Sunday-school
Convention of the Presbytery of New York in the
winter of 1882, and then enlarged and delivered before
the Theological Seminary of the Reformed Church, at
Lancaster, Pa., in May, 1883. (10) An address before
the Union Theological Seminary, New York, at the
opening of the term, September 20, 1883, on the Inter
pretation of Scripture. This material has been used by
the author when it suited his purpose, but it will be
found that the additional matter is far greater than
that already given to the public in these scattered
pieces, and that the book is a complete and symmetrical
whole. The author has aimed to present a guide to Bib
lical Study for the intelligent layman, as well as the
theological student and minister of the Gospel. It is
his conviction that the scientific study of the "Word of
God should be combined with a devout use of it. Piety
and scholarship must be wedded in order to the best
results. It is a misfortune that they should ever be
divorced. A great revival of Biblical Study is now in progress
in Great Britain and America. It is all-important that
this revival should be guided in the right direction.
Scholasticism and Rationalism are alike perilous.
Scholasticism is largely responsible for the neglect of a
scholarly study of the Scriptures for a century in Eng
lish-speaking lands. (See pp. 123, seq., 145, seq., 149,

PEEFACE. ix
seq., 206, seq., 209, seq., 345-346, 373, seq>) It is chiefly
responsible for the reaction into the other extreme of
Rationalism. As Scholasticism is the chief provocative
to Rationalism, it can never by any possibility overcome
it. The evangelical spirit of the Biblical authors, the vital
and experimental religion of the Reformers and Puritan
fathers is the only force that will be at all effective. It
is necessary that we should react to their principles and
methods, and build upon them. True progress in the
ology is to be found in the working out of the principles
of the Reformation and of Puritanism, in carrying them
on to higher and grander results. These principles
have been neglected by British and American theo
logians of the past century. If has been a constant aim
in this book to call attention to these principles and to
the methods of Biblical Study based upon them, and to
explain the doctrine of the Bible in the chief Puritan
symbol, the 'Westminster Confession, by citations from
its authors and their forerunners. (See pp. 114, seq., 167,
seq., 335> ^^q., 371, seq>)
At the same time a sketch of the entire history of
each department of Biblical Study has been given, the
stages of its development are traced, the normal is
discriminated from the abnormal, and the whole is
rooted in the methods of Christ and His apostles.
The Literature of Biblical Study has been considered
in its appropriate places in the system. But it has been
deemed best to present a catalogue of a reference libra
ry for Biblical Study by itself at the end of the work.
The labor that has been expended upon this part of the
book will be appreciated by those who have had ex
perience in Bibliography. These will be ready to excuse
any defects or errors that may have arisen from inadver
tence or lack of material.

jj PREFACE.
The ground of Biblical Study has been covered, with
the exception of Biblical History. This department has
been included in the Reference Library because it
seemed necessary for completeness. It has been omit
ted from the discussions because it is usual to classify
Biblical History with Historical Theology. The author
did not care to determine this disputed question in a
work already sufHciently extensive.
In the use of Scripture the freedom which charac
terizes the Biblical authors, the fathers, the reformers,
and the Puritan sires has been followed. The A. V.
and R. "V. have been quoted, or modified, or a new trans
lation from the originals has been given, just as it suited
the author's purpose at the time. He has been con
cerned chiefly to give the sense of the originals of divine
revelation. The three indexes have been prepared by the author's
pupil and friend. Rev. Charles R. Gillett, A.M., the
librarian of the Union Theological Seminary, New York,
to whom he would express his thanks for the great
pains taken in the work.
'With an implicit faith in the God of the Bible, and
the power of grace contained in the holy Word ; and
with an unwavering recognition of the supreme excel
lence of the written 'Word, as the mirror of the eter
nal Logos ; and with an entire submission to its author
ity as supreme over all doctrines of men and ecclesi
astical decisions, this Biblical Study is submitted to the
judgment of the intelligent reader.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

CHAPTER I.
The Advantages of Biblical Study, p. i.
Biblical Study the most important, p. i ; the most extensive, p. I ;
the most profound, p. 2; the raost attractive, p. 3, of all studies.
CHAPTER II.
Exegetical Theologv, p. 10.
Exegetical Theology the most general terra for Biblical Study, p. 10.
I. Biblical Literature, p. 17 : (i) Biblical Canonics, p. 21 ; (2)
Textual Criticism, p. 22 ; (3) The Higher Criticisra, p. 24. II.
Biblical Exegesis, p. 27. III. Biblical Theology, p. 37.
CHAPTER III.
The Languages of the Bible, p. 42.
The languages of the Bible the most suitable for declaring the divine
revelation to mankind, p. 42. I. The Hebrew Language, p. 46.
II. The Aramaic Language, p. 59. III. The Greek Language,
p. 63. CHAPTER IV.
The Bible and Criticism, p. 75.
The necessity of criticism to deterraine the true canon, text, and char
acter of the various writings of the Bible, p. 75. I. What is
Criticism % p. 78. II. Principles of Criticism, p. 82 ; derived
(i) from General Criticism, p. 82 ; (2) from Historical Criticism,
p. 83 ; (3) from Criticisra of the text, p. 85 ; (4) frora Higher
Criticism, p. 86 ; questions to be determined by Higher Criti
cism, p. 87 ; principles of Higher Criticisra, p, 88 ; illustrations,
(xi)

xii CONTENTS.
p. 92. III. Criticism of the Bible, p. 94 ; confronted by tradi
tional views, p. 95 ; based on the principles of the Reforraation,
p. lOI.
CHAPTER V.
The Canon of Scripture, p. loj.
No official determination ofthe Canon in the ancient Church, p. 105.
I. The Canon of the Reformers, p, 106. The Reformation prin
ciple of determining the Canon, p. 107 ; its abandonment by the
scholastics, p. 113. II. The Puritan Canon, p. 114 : The Puri
tan principle discriminated from the Anglican, p. 114 ; the Puri
tan mystic, p. 119; abandonment of the Puritan principle, p.
124. Ill, Criticism of the Canon, p. 125. The LXX and the
Canon ofthe O, T., p. 126. The men ofthe great synagogue, p.
127. Evidence from Philo and Josephus, p. 128; The N. T.
determination of the O. T. Canon, p. 131 ; The N. T. Canon in
the early church, p. 132. The Protestant Canon, p. 133. The
principles for determining the Canon, p. 136.
CHAPTER VI.
The Text of the Bible, p. 139.
I. Textual Criticism in the Sixteenth Century, p. 140 ; of the Re
formers, p. 140; of the Scholastics, p. 141. II. Textual Criti
cism in the Seventeenth Century, p. 142 : Cappellus and Bux-
torf, p. 143 ; Walton and Owen, p. 144. III. Textual Criticism,
in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, p. 148 : New Test.
Criticisra, p. 148 ; Old Test. Criticisra, p. 149. IV. The Text of
the Old Testament, p. 151 : The Vowel points and accents, p. 1 51 ;
the letters, p. 153; the versions, p. 153. V. Textual Criticism
and Inspiration, p. 156: Verbal inspiration rejected, p. 156;
the external word instruraental, p. 158; the internal word
inspired, p. 161. CHAPTER VII.
The Higher Criticism, p. 164.
I. The Higher Criticism in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centu
ries, p. 165 : The freedora of the Reformers and Puritans, p. 165.
The new questions opened in the Eighteenth Century, p. 169.
II. Criticism of the Traditional Theories, p. 171 : The true

CONTENTS. xiii
method and its defence, p. 171. Ill, The Rabbinical Theories, p.
173. IV. Hellenistic and Christian Theories, p. 180. V. The
New Testament 'View of the Old Testament Literature,^. 184.
VI. The Rise of the Higher Criticism, p. 196: Spinoza and
Simon, p. 197 ; Astruc, Lowth,. and Herder, p. 202 ; Eichhorn,
p. 203. VII. The Higher Criticism in the Nineteenth Cent
ury, p. 207. CHAPTER VIII.
Literary Study of the Bible, p. 214.
I. The Integrity of the Scriptures, p. 216, II. The Authenticity op
the Scriptures, p. 220 : (i) Anonyraes, p. 222 ; (2) Pseudonymes,
p. 223 ; (3) Compilations, p. 226. III. Literary forms of the
Scriptures, p. 228 : (i) History, p. 230;. (2) the Oration, p. 234;
(3) the Epistle, p. 237 ; (4) Fiction, p. 238. IV. Credibility of
the Scriptures, p. 240 : Inerrancy not a Protestant doctrine, p.
241. Higher Criticism strengthens the credibility of Scripture,
p. 244.
CHAPTER IX.
Hebrew Poetry, p. 248.
The Hebrews a remarkably poetic people, p. 248. I. Characteris
tics of Hebrew Poetry, p. 250. II. Forms of Hebrew Poetry, p.
255. III. Parallelism of members, p. 272. IV. The Strophe,
p. 272. V. Measurement by Words or Accents, p. 279. VI.
Poetic Language, p. 283. VII. Kinds of Hebrew Poetry, p.
284 : (i) Lyric, p. 284 ; (2) Gnomic, p. 285 ; (3) Composite, p.
288.
CHAPTER X.
The Interpretation of Scripture, p. 296.
The 'Word of God at first oral, p. 296 ; the interpretation of writings,
p. 297. I, Rabbinical interpretation, p. 299 : Rules of the Ha-
lacha and Haggada, p. 301 ; the Sodh, p. 302 ; the Peshat, p.
303. II. Hellenistic Interpretation, p. 305 : Rules of allegory,
p. 306. III. Interpretation of Scripture in the New Testa
ment, p. 307 ; Jesus' use of the Rabbinical and Hellenistic meth
ods, p. 309 ; the distinguishing features of Jesus' method, p. 3 1 1 ;
the apostolic use of Haggada, Halacha, and Allegory, p. 315 ;
the distinguishing features of apostolic interpretation, p, 319.

xiv CONTENTS.
IV. Interpretatiofi of the Fathers and Schoolmen, p. 320 : The
churchly tendency, p. 321 ; the allegorical tendency, p. 322 ; the
Antiochan school, p. 325 ; the traditional interpretation of the
middle age, p. 328. V. The Interpretation of the Reformers and
their Successors, p. 331 : The Huraanists, p. 331 ; the reforma
tion principle of interpreting Scripture by Scripture, p. 332 ; the
scholastic rule of faith, p. 333. VI. The Interpretation of the
Puritans and Arminians, p. 335 : The Puritan principle ofthe
Holy Spirit in Scripture, p. 336 ; Puritan practical interpreta
tion, p. 340 ; Puritan doctrine of the Covenants, p. 342 ; the
Federalists and Pietists, p. 343 ; the Arminian historical inter
pretation, p. 345. VII. Biblical Interpretation of Modern
Times, p. 346 : The grammatico-historical method of Emesti,
Seraler, and Keil, p. 347 ; the older Tubingen school, p. 348 ;
the organic raethod of the school of Schleiermacher, p. 349 ;
the interpretation of the history of rederaption, p. 351. VIII.
Method of Biblical Interpretation, p. 351 : (i) Gramraatical, p.
352 ; (2) Logical and Rhetorical, p. 353 ; (3) Historical, p. 357 ;
(4) Coraparative, p. 358; (5) Use ofthe literature of interpreta
tion, p. 360 ; (6) Doctrinal interpretation, p. 361 ; (7) Practical,
P- 363. CHAPTER XI.
Biblical Theology, p. 367.
1. The Four types of Theology, p. 367 : The mystic, p. 368 ; scho
lastic, p. 369 ; speculative, p. 369 ; evangelical, p. 370 ; their his
toric struggles, p. 371. II. The Rise of Biblical Theology, p.
374 : Zachariah and Aramon, p. 374 ; Gabler, p. 375 ; DeWette
and Von Coin, p. 376. III. Development of Biblical Theology,
p. 377 : The Tubingen school and the school of Neander, p.
377; Reuss, Kuenen, and "Wellhausen, p. 386; the present
problems, p. 389. IV. Position and importance of Biblicai.
Theology, p. 390 : (i) The idea of Biblical Theology, p. 390 ; (2)
Place of Biblical Theology, p. 397 ; (3) Method, p. 399 ; (4) Sys
tem and Divisions, p. 401 ; Unity and variety of the Bible, p. 404.
CHAPTER XII.
The Scriptures as a Means of Grace, p. 406.
The principles of the Reforraation, p. 406. I. The Gospel in the
Scriptures, p. 407. II. The Grace of God in the Scriptures,

CONTENTS.

XV

p. 410: (i) They contain the power of God unto salvation, p.
411 ; (2) The grace of rederaption from sin to holiness, p. 412;
(a) The grace of regeneration, p. 413 ; (b) The grace of sancti
fication, p. 414. III. The efficacy of the Scriptures, p. 416. IV.
The appropriation of the grace of the Scriptures, p. 417: (i)
By prayerful attention, p. 418; (2) by appropriating faith, p.
423 ; (3) by practicing faith, p. 426.

A CATALOGUE
OF BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY, p. 429.
I. Biblical Study in General, p. 429. II. The Languages of the
Bible and Cognates, p. 430 ; Hebrew, p. 430 ; Aramaic, p. 432 ;
Arabic and .^Ethiopic, p. 433 ; Phoenician and Samaritan, p.
434 ; Assyrian and Babylonian, p. 435 ; Greek, p. 435 ; III.
Canon of Scripture, p. 437. IV. Text of Scripture, p. 438 ;
Originals and Versions, p. 438 ; Concordances, p. 441 ; Textual
Criticisra of the Old Testament, p. 442 ; Textual Criticisra of
the New Testaraent, p. 448. V. The Higher Criticism, p. 444 ;
of the Old Testament, p. 444 ; of the New Testament, p. 446.
VI. Interpretation of Scripture, p. 447 ; (i) Hermeneutics, p.
447 ; (2) Commentaries on the whole Bible, p. 449 ; on the
Old Testament, p. 453 ; on the New Testaraent, p. 460. VII.
Biblical History, p. 468 ; Biblical Geography and Natural His
tory, p. 468 ; Old Testament History, p. 470 ; History of the
Jews and their surroundings during the Greek and Roman pe
riods, p. 474 ; New Testament History, p. 476. VIII. Biblical
Theology, p. 480 : of the whole Bible, p. 480 ; of the Old
Testaraent, p. 481 : Theology of the Jews during the Greek and
Roman periods, p. 484 ; New Testament Theology, p. 486.

INDEXES.
I. Texts of Scripture, p. 489. II. Topics, p. 493. III. Books and
Authors, p. 499,

CHAPTER I.
THE ADVANTAGES OF BIBLICAL STUDY.
Biblical study is the most important of all studies,
for it is a study of the 'Word of God, which contains a
divine revelation of redemption to the world. Nowhere
else can such a redemption be found save where it has
been derived from this fountain source or from those
sacred persons, institutions, and events presented to us
in the Bible. The Bible is the chief source of the Chris
tian religion, Christian theology, and Christian life.
While other secondary and subsidiary sources may be
used to advantage in connection with this principal
source, .they cannot dispense with it. For the Bible
contains the revelation of redemption ; the Messiah and
His kingdom are the central theme ; its varying contents
lead by myriads of paths in converging lines to the
throne of the God of grace. The Bible is the sure way
of life, wisdom, and blessedness.
Biblical study is the most extensive of all studies,
for its themes are the central themes which are inextri
cably entwined in all knowledge. Into its channels every
other study pours its supply as all the brooks and rivers
flow into the ocean. The study of the Bible is a study
for men of every class and occupation in life, for all the
world. No profound scholar in any department of in
vestigation can avoid the Bible. Sooner or later his

2 biblical STUDY.
Special studies will lead him thither. The Bible is an
ocean of heavenly wisdom. The little child may sport
upon its shores and derive instruction and delight. The
most accomplished scholar finds its vast extent and mys
terious depths beyond his grasp.
We open the Bible and on its earliest pages are con
fronted with the origin of the world, the creation of
man, the problem of evil. Its histories present, in brief
yet impressive outlines, the struggle of good and evil,
the strife of tribes and nations, and, above all, the inter
play of divine and human forces, showing that a divine
plan of the world is unfolding. The springs of human
action, the secrets of human experience and motive are
disclosed in the measures of psalm and proverb. The
character, attributes, and purposes of God are unveiled
in the strains of holy prophets. The union of God and
man in redemption is more and more displayed in the
progress of its literature. Two great covenants divide
the plan of redemption into two stages, the old cove
nant and the new. The former presents us instructions
which are a marvel of righteousness, holiness, and grace ;
institutions that are symmetrical and grand, combining,
as nowhere else, the real and the ideal, — the light and
guide to Israel bearing on to the new covenant. In the
latter the Messiah presents His achievements of redemp
tion in which are stored up the forces which have shaped
the Christian centuries, and the secrets of the everlasting
future. All the sciences and arts, all the literatures,
histories, and religions of the world gather about the
Bible to contribute to its study and derive help from its
revelations. Biblical study is the most profound of all studies, for
it has to do with the secrets of life and death, of God
and man, of this world and other worlds. Its chief coh-

THE ADVANTAGES OF BIBLICAL STUDY. 3
tents are divine revelations. These were revealed be
cause man could not attain them otherwise. Even those
contents of the Bible that are not revealed are colored
and shaped by the revelations with which they are con
nected. All study which goes beyond the surface soon
reaches the mysterious. There are many mysteries that
patient and persistent investigation has solved, is solv
ing, or may be able to solve. But the mysteries revealed
in the Bible are those which man has not been able to
attain by inductive and deductive investigation. When
the study of the other departments of human learning
has reached their uttermost limits, there still remains a
gulf between those limits and the contents of divine
revelation. Divine revelation is to the other depart
ments of human knowledge what heaven is to earth. It
is above them, it encircles them — it envelops them on
every side. Like heaven, it discloses vast heights.
Those things which are revealed lift the student of the
Bible to regions of knowledge that reach forth to the in
finite. And yet profound as the divine revelation is, it is
simple. It is like the sunlight bearing its own evidence
in itself. It is like the blue vault of heaven clear and
bright. It is a revelation for babes as well as men, for
the simple as well as the learned. The most profound
study cannot master it. Any attentive study of it is
rewarded with precious knowledge.
Biblical study is the most attractive of all studies.
The variety of topic, richness of material, beauty of
form, wealth of illustration, the vast importance of its
themes, the unity in which the amazing variety of au
thor, age, and topic is bound together — all make the Bible
the most interesting and absorbing study for peasant and
prince, for child and sage, for all the world.
If this is not the actual experience of all mankind, it

4 BIBLICAL STUDY.
is not the fault of the Bible, but of the religious teachers
who have obtruded their traditions and theories upon
the Bible as the Pharisees did in the time of our Lord
Jesus (Matt. xv. 6 ; Col. ii. 8). The people and learned
men have been too often driven from the Bible by Prot
estant ministers as well as Roman Catholic priests.
The Bible has been hedged about with awe as if the
use of it, except in solemn circumstances and with de
votional feelings, was a sin against the Holy Spirit.
Men have been kept from the Bible as from the sacra
ments by dread of the serious consequences involved in
their use. The Bible has been made an unnatural and
unreal book, by attaching it exclusively to hours of de
votion and detaching it from the experiences of ordinary
life. The study of the Bible will inevitably lead to holy
and devout thoughts, will bring the student to the pres
ence of God and His Christ — but it is a sad mistake to
suppose that the Bible can be approached only in spe
cial frames of mind and with peculiar preparation. It
is not to be covered as with a funereal pall and laid away
for hours of sorrow and affliction. It is not to be re
garded with feelings of bibliolatry, which are as perni
cious as the adoration of the sacrament. It is not to
be used as a book of magic, as if it had the mysterious
power of determining all questions at the opening of the
book. It is not to be used as an astrologer's horoscope
to determine from its words and letters, the structure of
its sentences, and its wondrous symbolism, through seem
ing coincidences, the fulfilment of biblical prophecy in
the events transpiring round about us or impending over
us. The Bible is no such book as this— it is a book of
life, a real book, a people's book. It is a blessed means of
grace when used in devotional hours,— it has also holy
lessons and beauties of thought and sentiment for hours

THE ADVANTAGES OF BIBLICAL STUDY. 5
of leisure and recreation. It appeals to the aesthetic
and intellectual as well as moral and spiritual faculties,
the whole man in his whole life. Familiarity with the
Bible is to be encouraged. It will not decrease, but
rather enhance the reverence with which we ought to
approach the Holy God in His Word. The Bible
takes its place among the masterpieces of the world's
literature. The use of it as such no more interferes
with devotion than the beauty and grandeur of archi
tecture and music prevent the adoration of God in the
worship of a cathedral. Rather the varied forms of
beauty, truth, and goodness displayed in the Bible will
conspire to bring us to Him who is the centre and in
spiration of them all.
Another sin against the Bible is often committed by
the indiscriminate use of proof texts in dogmatic asser
tion and debate. They are hurled against one another
in controversy with such difference of interpretation
that it has become a proverb that anything can be proved
from the Bible. The Bible has been too often used as
if it were a text-book of abstract definitions giving ab
solute truth. On the contrary, the Bible was not made
for ecclesiastical lawyers, but for the people of God. It
gives the concrete in the forms and methods of general
literature. Its statements -are ordinarily relative ; they
depend upon the context in which they are imbedded,
the scope of the author's argument, his peculiar point of
view, his type of thought, his literary style, his position
in the unfolding of divine revelation. There are occa
sional passages so pregnant with meaning that they seem
to present, as it were, the quintessence of the whole
Bible. Such texts were called by Luther little bibles.
But ordinarily, the texts can be properly understood only
in their context. To detach them from their place and

g biblical STUDY.
use them as if they stood alone, and deduce from
them all that the words and sentences may be con
strained to give, as absolute statements, is an abuse of
logic and the Bible. Such a use of other books would
be open to the charge of misrepresentation. Such a use
of the Bible is an adding unto the Word of God new
meanings and taking away from it the true meaning.
Against this we are warned by the Bible itself (Rev. xxii.
18-19). Deduction, inference, and application may be
used within due bounds, but they must always be based
upon a correct apprehension of the text and context of
the passage. These processes should be conducted with
great caution, lest in transferring the thought to new con
ditions and circumstances, there be an insensible assimi
lation first of its form and then of its content to these
conditions and circumstances, and it become so trans
formed as to lose its biblical character and become a
tradition of man.* It is a melancholy feature of bibli
cal study that so much attention must be given to the
removal of the rubbish of tradition that has been heaped
upon the Word of God now as . in the times of Jesus.
The Bible is like an oasis in a desert. Eternal vigilance
and unceasing activity are necessary to prevent the sands
from encroaching upon it and overwhelming its fertile
soil and springs of water.
The Bible is given to us in the forms of the world's
literature, and its meaning is to be determined by the
reader as he determines the meaning of other literature
by the same principles of exegesis. It is a Protestant
principle that the Word of God should be given to the
people in their own familiar tongue with the right of
private judgment in its interpretation. It is a corollary

* Westm. Confession of Faith, I. 6.

THE ADVANTAGES OF BIBLIGAL STUDY. 7
of this principle that they be taught that it is to be under
stood in a natural sense, as other writings are understood.
Any unnatural and artificial interpretation bears its own
condemnation in itself. The saving truths of Scripture
can be " savingly understood " only through the illumi
nation of the Spirit of God,* but this is not for the reason
that they are not sufficiently plain and intelligible, or
that some special principles of interpretation are needed
of a scholastic or cabalistic sort — but owing to the fact
that in order to salvation they must be applied to the
soul of man by a divine agent, and appropriated by the
faith of the heart and the practice of the life.
We must call attention to a still more serious mistake
in the use of the Bible. There are those who think that
they alone have the truth of God, that the highest wis
dom has already been attained, and that they are the
guardians of orthodoxy. They presume to oppose the
discoveries in science or philosophy, the improvements
in theology and methods of church work, and even the
deeper study of the Word of God itself, by isolated
texts and traditional interpretations. Scarcely a pro
found thinker, since the days of Socrates, who has not
been obliged to pause in his work and defend himself,
like the apostle Paul, against these "dogs" and "evil
workers " (Phil. iii. 2). Galileo was silenced by the
quoting of the Bible against the Copernican theory of
the revolution of the earth around the sun. Descartes
had to defend his orthodoxy. The enemies of the Crit
ical philosophy of Kant charged that no critic who fol
lowed out the consequences of his positions could be a
good man, a good citizen, or a good Christian.f

* Westminster Confession, I., 6.
t These points are discussed by Krug, Ueher das Verhaltniss der Kritischen
Philosophie zur moralischen, folitischen und reltgioscn Ktdtur der Menschen.
Jena, 179S.

8 biblical study.
The results of Geology have been opposed by those
who insist that the world was made in six days of twen
ty-four hours. Biology has to fight its way against those
who afifirm that the doctrine of development is against
the Scriptures. Such use of the Bible has too often the
effect of driving scholars away from it, and especially
from the Old Testament, the most abused part of it.
As Dr. C. A. Row says :
"The fact is therefore indisputable, that theologians have handled
Scripture on such faulty principles, that they have laid down as truths
indisputably divine, a number of dograas -which have brought reve
lation into direct collision with some of the greatest discoveries of
modern science, and that after having, on their first enunciation, de
nounced them as inconsistent with the belief that Scripture contains
the record of a divine revelation, they have been compelled to accept
them as unquestionable verities. Moreover, the general distrust
arising from failures of this kind has been intensified by the pertinac
ity with which theologians have clung to various unsound positions,
which they have only abandoned when further resistance had be
come irapossible. The history of the conflict between Science and
Revelation is full of such instances, and the consequences have been
disastrous in the extreme." *
Such theologians as those here described have brought
disgrace upon the Church and especially upon the Old
Testament Scriptures. Other and better theologians
have taken the side of truth and science, and through
their help progress has been made.
It is ever necessary for the friends of truth, and of
progress in the Church to oppose and to overcome ob
structionists. It is the duty of all lovers of the Bible to
break up the superstitions that cluster about it, to ex
pose the false dogmatic and polemic use of its texts,
and to show that it favors all truth and every form of
¦» Revelation and Modem Theology Contrasted. London, 1883. p. 7.

THE ADVANTAGES OF BIBLICAL STUDY. 9
scholarly investigation. The Bible is an honest book in
all its parts, — it is the Word of God, and every sincere
disciple of wisdom will find in its pages not only the
real and the highest truth, but will be stimulated and
encouraged to press forward under the guidance of the
Holy Spirit unto all truth (John xvi. 13).
The design of this book is to set forth the principles,
methods, and branches of Biblical study, and to give
sketches of their history. It is proposed, first of all, to
survey the whole field, and then to examine the several
departments. We shall aim to explain the true uses of
the Bible and show throughout that Biblical study is,
as we have claimed, the most important, extensive, pro
found, and attractive of all studies.
1*

CHAPTER II.
EXEGETICAL THEOLOGY.
The most general term for the various departments
of Biblical study is Exegetical Theology. Exegetical
Theology is one of the four grand divisions of Theolog
ical Science. It is related to the other divisions, his
torical, systematic, and practical, as the primary and
fundamental discipline upon which the others depend,
and from which they derive their chief materials. Exe
getical Theology has to do especially with the sacred
Scriptures, their origin, history, character, exposition,
doctrines, and rules of life. It is true that the other
branches of theology have likewise to do with the sacred
writings, in that their chief material is derived therefrom,
but they differ from Exegetical Theology, not only in
their methods of using this material, but likewise in the
fact, that they do not themselves search out and gather
this material directly from the holy writings, but depend
upon Exegetical Theology therefor ; while their energies
are directed, in Historical Theology in tracing the de
velopment of that material as the determining element
in the history of the people of God ; in Systematic
Theology, in arranging that material in the form most
appropriate for systematic study, for attack and defence,
in accordance with the needs of the age ; in Practical
Theology, in directing that material to the conversion
(10)

EXEGETICAL THEOLOGY. H
of souls, and training them in the holy life. Thus the
whole of theology depends upon the study of the
Scriptures, and unless this department be thoroughly
wrought out and established, the whole structure of
theological truth will be weak and frail, and it will be
found, in the critical hour, resting on the shifting sands
of human opinion and practice, rather than on the rock
. of infallible divine truth.
The work of Exegetical Theology is all the more im
portant, that each age has its own peculiar phase or
department of truth to elaborate in the theological con
ception and in the life. Unless, therefore, theology
freshen its life by ever-repeated draughts from the Holy
Scriptures, it will be unequal to the tasks imposed upon
it. It will not solve the problems of the thoughtful,
dissolve the doubts of the cautious, or disarm the ob
jections of the enemies of the truth. History will not,
with her experience, unless she grasp the torch of divine
revelation, which alone can illuminate the future and
clear up the dark places of the present and the past.
Systematic Theology will not satisfy the demands of the
age if she appear in the worn-out armor or antiquated
costume of former generations. She must beat out for
herself a new suit of armor from biblical material which
is ever new ; she must weave to herself a fresh and
sacred costume of doctrine from the Scriptures which
never disappoint the requirements of mankind ; and
thus armed and equipped with the .weapons of the Liv
ing One, she will prove them quick and powerful, con-
vincing and invincible, in her training of the disciple,
and her conflicts with the infidel and heretic. And so
Practical Theology will never be able to convert the
world to Christ, and sanctify the Church, without ever
renewing its life from the Bible fountain. The pure.

12 BIBLICAL STUDY.
noble, and soul-satisfying truths of God's Word must
so pervade our liturgy, hymnology, catechetical instruc
tion, pastoral work and preaching, as to supply the ne
cessities of the age, for " man shall not live by bread
alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the
mouth of God " (Matt. iv. 4; Deut. viii. 3).
The history of the Church, and Christian experience,
have shown that in so far as the other branches of the- _
ology have separated themselves from this fundamental
discipline, and in proportion to the neglect of Exegetical
Theology, the Church has fallen into a dead orthodoxy
of scholasticism, has lost its hold upon the masses of
mankind, so that with its foundations undermined, it
has yielded but feeble resistance to the onsets of in
fidelity. And it has ever been that the reformation or
revival has come through the resort to the sacred oracles,
and the organization of a freshly-stated body of doctrine,
and fresh methods of evangelization derived therefrom.
We thus have reason to thank God that heresy and un
belief so often drive us to our citadel, the sacred Script
ures, and force us back to the impregnable fortress of
divine truth, in order that, depending no longer merely
upon human weapons and defences, we may use rather
the divine. Thus we reconquer all that may have been
lost through the slackness and incompetence of those
who have been more anxious for the old ways than for
strength of position and solid truth, and by new enter
prises we advance a stage onward in our victorious progress
toward the end. Our adversaries may overthrow our
systems of theology, our confessions and catechisms, our
church organizations and methods of work, for these are,
after all, human productions, the hastily thrown up out
works of the truth ; but they can never contend success
fully against the Word of God that liveth and abideth

EXEGETICAL THEOLOGY. 13
forever (i Peter i. 23), which, though the heavens fall
and the earth pass away, will not fail in one jot or tittle
from the most complete fulfilment (Matt. v. 18), which
will shine in new beauty and glory as its parts are one
by one searchingly examined, and which will prove itself
not only invincible, but all-conquering, as point after
point is most hotly contested. We are assured that at
last it will claim universal obedience as the pure and
faultless mirror of Him who is Himself the brightness of
the Father's glory and the express image of His person
(2 Cor. iii. 18 ; Heb. i. 3).
It is an important characteristic of the Reformed
churches that they give the sacred Scriptures such a
fundamental position in their confessions and cate
chisms, and lay so much stress upon the so-called
formal principle of the Protestant Reformation. Thus
in both Helvetic confessions and in the Westminster they
constitute the first article,* while in the Heidelberg arid
Westminster catechisms they are placed at the founda
tion — in the former as the source of our knowledge of
sin and misery and of salvation ; f in the latter, as divid
ing the catechism into two parts, teaching " what man
is to believe concerning God, and what duty God re
quires of man";:}: and the authority of the Word of God
as " the only rule of faith and obedience,"§ has ever been
maintained in our churches.
Exegetical Theology being thus, according to its idea,
the fundamental theological discipline, and all-important
as the fruitful source of theology, it must be thoroughly
elaborated in all its parts according to exact and well-

-* Niemeyer, Collect io Confess., pp. 115, 467. Schaff, Creeds of Christendom,
1877, iii., pp. 211, 237.
t Quest, iii. xix.
\ Larger Catechism, Quest, v. ; Shorter Catechism, Quest, iii.
§ Larger Catechism, Ques. v.

14 BIBLICAL STUDY.
defined scientific methods. The methods proper to
Exegetical Theology are the synthetic and the histor
ical, the relative importance of which has been con
tested. The importance of the historical method is
so great that not a few have regarded the discipline, as
a whole, as at once a primary division of Historical The
ology. The examination of the Bible sources, the
sacred writings, being of the same essential character as
the examination of other historical documents, they
should be considered simply as the sources of biblical
history, and thus the writings themselves would be
most appropriately treated under a history of biblical
literature (Hupfeld, Reuss, Fuerst, et al), and the doc
trines under a history of biblical doctrine (the school of
Baur).* But the sacred writings are not merely sources of
historical information ; they are the sources of the faith to
be believed and the morals to be practiced by all the world ;
they are of everlasting value as the sum total of sacred
doctrine and law for mankind, being not only for the
past, but for the present and the future, as God's Holy
Word to the human race, so that their value as historical
documents becomes entirely subordinate to their value
as a canon of holy Scripture, the norm and rule of faith
and life. Hence the synthetic method must predomi
nate over the historical, as the proper exegetical method,
and induction rule in all departments of the work ; for
it is the office of Exegetical Theology to gather frora
these sacred writings, as the storehouse of divine truth,
the holy raaterial, in order to arrange it by a process of
induction and generalization into the generic forms that
may best express the conceptions of the sacred Script
ures themselves.

* Compare the author's articles on Biblical Theology, American Presbyterian
Review, 1870, p. 122, seq. , and Presbyterian Review, July, iSSs, p. 503, seq.
and chap. xi. of this volume.

EXEGETICAL THEOLOGY. 15
From this point of view it is clear that the analytic
method can have but a very subordinate place in our
branch of theology. It raay be necessary in the work
of separating the material in the work of gathering
it, but this is only in order to the synthetic process,
which must ever prevail. It is owing to the iraproper
application of the analytic raethod to exegesis, that
such sad raistakes have been made in interpreting the
Word of God, making exegesis the slave of dogmatics
and tradition, when she can only thrive as the free-
born daughter of truth. Her word does not yield to
dogmatics, but before her voice tradition must ever
give way. For exegesis cannot go to the text with pre
conceived opinions and dogmatic views that will con
strain the text to accord with them, but rather with a
living faith in the perspicuity and power of the Word
of God alone, of itself, to persuade and convince ; and
with reverential fear of the voice of Him who speaks
through it, which involves assurance of the truth, and
submission and prompt obedience to His will. Thus,
exegesis does not start frora the unity to investigate the
variety, but from the variety to find the unity. It does
not seek the author's view and the divine doctrine
through an analysis of the writing, the chapter, the
verse, down to the word ; but, inversely, it starts with
the word and the clause, pursuing its way through the
verse, paragraph, section, chapter, writing, collection of
writings, the entire Bible, until the whole Word of God
is displayed before the mind from the summit that has
been attained after a long and arduous climbing.
Thus Exegetical Theology is a science, whose pre
mises and materials are no less clear and tangible than
those with which any other science has to do, and whose
results are vastly more important than all other sciences

16 BIBLICAL STUDY.
combined, as they concern our salvation and everlasting
welfare ; and if, furthermore, this raaterial, with which
we have to do, be what it clairas to be — the very word
of God to raan, — it is clear that here alone we have a
science that deals with irarautSble facts and infallible
truths, so that our science raay take its place in the cir
cle of sciences, as the royal, yes, the divine science. But
let it be remembered that this position will be accorded
it by the sciences only in so far as theology as a whole
is true to the spirit and character of its fundamental dis
cipline, is open-eyed for all truth, courts investigation
and criticism of its own materials and methods, and
does not assume a false position of dogmatism and tra
ditional prejudice, or attempt to tyrannize over the other
sciences in their earnest researches after the truth.
Exegetical Theology being thus fundamental and im
portant, having such thorough-going scientific methods,
it must have manifold divisions and subdivisions of its
work. These, in their order and rautual relation, are
determined by a proper adjustment of its methods and
the subordination of the historical to the inductive proc
ess. Thus at the outset there are imposed upon those
who would enter upon the study of the sacred Script
ures certain priraary and fundaraental "questions respect
ing the holy writings, such as: Which are the sacred
writings ? why do we call thera sacred ? whence did they
originate? under what historical circumstances? who
were their authors? to whom were they addressed?
¦what was their design ? are the writings that have come
down to us genuine ? is the text reliable ? and the like.
These questions raay be referred to the general depart
ment of Biblical Literature. Then the Scriptures are to
be interpreted according to correct principles and meth
ods, with all the light that the study of centuries may

EXEGETICAL THEOLOGY. 17
throw upon them. This is Biblical Exegesis. Finally, the
results of this exegetical process are to be gathered into
one organic whole. This is Biblical Theology. These
then are the three grand divisions into which Exegeti
cal Theology naturally divides itself, each in turn having
its appropriate subordinate departments.
I. Biblical Literature has as its work to deter
mine all those introductory questions that may arise re
specting the sacred writings, preliminary to the work
of exegesis. These questions are various, yet may be
grouped in accordance with a general principle. But it
is, first of all, necessary to limit the bounds of our de
partment and exclude from it all that does not properly
come within its sphere. Thus Hagenbach* brings into
consideration here certain questions which he assigns to
the auxiliary disciplines of Sacred Philology, Sacred
Archaeology, and Sacred Canonics. But it is difficult to
see why, if these are in any essential relation to our de
partment, they should not be logically incorporated ;
while if they do not stand in such close relations, why
they should not be referred to their own. proper depart
ments of study. Thus Sacred Canonics clearly belongs
to our discipline, whilst Sacred Archaeology no less cer
tainly belongs to the historical departraent ; and as for
Sacred Philology, it should not be classed with theology
at all, for the languages of the Bible are not sacred from
any inherent virtue in them, but only for the reason
that they have been selected as the vehicle of divine
revelation, and thus their connection with the Script
ures is providential rather than necessary. And still
further, all departments of theology are in mutual rela
tion to one another, and in a higher scale all the depart
ments of learning act and react upon one another — such

* Encyklopadie, gte Auf., p. 40.

18 biblical stcdy.
as theology, philosophy, philology, and history. Hence,
that one departraent of study is related to another does
not imply that it should be made auxiliary thereto.
Thus the languages of Scripture are to be studied pre
cisely as the other languages, as a part of General Phi
lology. The Hellenistic Greek is a dialect of the Greek
language, which is itself a prominent meraber of the
Indo-Germanic family, while the Hebrew and Chaldee
are sisters with the Assyrian and Syriac, the Arabic and
Ethiopic, the Phoenician and Samaritan, of the Shemitic
family. The study of these languages, as languages,
properly belongs to the college or university course, and
has no appropriate place in the theological seminary.
Valuable tirae is consuraed in these studies that is taken
from Exegetical Theology itself and never compensated
for. The Shemitic languages are constantly rising into
prominence, over against the Indo-Germanic family, and
demand their appropriate place in the curriculum of a
liberal education.* The tirae has fully corae when phi
lologists and theologians should unitedly insist that a
place should be found for them in the college course ;
and that this valuable department of knowledge, upon
the pursuit of which so rauch depends for the history of
the Orient, the origin of civilization and raankind, as
well as the whole subject of the three great religions of
the world, should not give way to the physical sciences,
which, while properly of subordinate iraportance as deal
ing raainly with material things, have already assumed
an undue prominence in our institutions of learning
over against philology, history, and philosophy, that
deal with higher and nobler probleras.f
-* See A Plea for a more thorough study of the Semitic languages in America.
By Prof. S. I. Curtiss, Jr., Chicago, 1879.
t German theology has a great advantage, in that the theological student is
already prepared in the gymnasium for the university -with a knowledge of He-

exegetical theology. 19
Still further it is to be noticed, that there can hence
forth be no thorough raastery of the Hebrew tongue by
clinging reverently to the skirts of the Jew. We might
as well expect to master the classic Latin from the lan
guage of the monks, or acquire evangelical doctrine
from Rome. The cognate languages are indispensable.
And it is just here that a rich treasure, prepared by
divine Providence for these tiraes, is pouring into our
laps, if we will only use it. The Assyrian alone, as re
cently brought to light, and established in her position
as one of the older sisters, is of inestimable value,
not to speak of the Arabic and Syriac, the Ethiopic,
Phoenician, Samaritan, and the lesser languages and
dialects that the raonuments are constantly revealing.
Immense material is now at hand, and is still being
gathered frora these sources, that will considerably
modify our views of the Hebrew language, and of the
history and religion of the Hebrews in relation to the
other peoples of the Orient. We are only beginning to
learn that the Hebrew language has such a thing as a
syntax, and that it is a highly organized and wonder
fully flexible and beautiful tongue, the result of centu
ries of development. As the bands of Massoretic tra
dition are one after another falling off, the inner spirit
and life of the language are disclosing themselves,
the dry bones are clothing themselves with flesh.

brew relatively equivalent to his Greek. The Presbyterians of Scotland have
advanced beyond us in this respect, by requiring an elementary knowledge of
Hebrew, in order to entrance upon the theological course, at the same time pro
viding such elementary training during the summer vacation. This is a step in
which we might readily follow thera. We cannot afford to wait until all the
colleges follow the noble lead of the University of Virginia, Lafayette, and
others, in giving their students the option of Hebrew instruction ; but must use
all our influence to constrain them to ful£l their duty of preparing students for
the study of theology, as well as of the other professions.

20 biblical study.
and rich, warm blood is animating the frame, giving
to the features nobility and beauty.* If the Church
is to be renowned for its mastery of the Bible, if the
symbols and the life of the Church are to harraon-
ize, we must advance and occupy this rich and fruitful
field for the Lord, and not wait for unbelievers to oc
cupy it before us, and then be compelled to contend at
a disadvantage, they having the prestige of knowledge
and success.
While, therefore, we exclude the study of the Hebrew
and cognate languages from the range of Exegetical
Theology, we raagnify their importance, not only to the
theological student, but also to the entire field of schol
arship. Other scholars raay do without them, but for
the theologian these studies are indispensable, and we
must at the very beginning strain all our energies to the
mastery of the Hebrew tongue. If it has not been done
before entering the seminaries, it must be done in the
seminaries, and those who have no seminary or college
advantages must use the best helps they can find.f
Having excluded Sacred Philology from Exegetical
Theology and from Biblical Literature, we now have to
define more closely the proper field of Biblical Litera
ture. Biblical literature has to do with all questions

* It is exceedingly gratifying that our American gtudents are eagerly entering
upon these studies. The large classes in the cognate languages, in our seminaries
promise great things for the future in this regard. The classes in the Cognates
in Union Theological Seminary, New York, in 1882-3, were, in Arabic, 10 ; in
Assyrian, Junior and Senior, 10 ; in Chaldee, 23 ; in Syriac, g. The Cognates
are taught in many seminaries, such as Andover, Yale, Lane, Princeton, Aubum,
-Western, Northwestern.
t Favorable opportunities are now afforded for the study of Hebrew by Prof.
William R. Harper, Ph.D., of the Theological Seminary at Morgan Park, Chi
cago. He conducts with ability, enthusiasm, and success a Hebrew Correspond
ence school of several classes and also a Hebrew Summer school. Several hun-
dred ministers and laymen have already been trained in them.

exegetical theology. 21
respecting the sacred Scriptures that raay be necessary
to prepare the way of Biblical Exegesis. Looking at
the sacred Scriptures as the sources to be investigated,
we see three fields of inquiry presenting theraselves :
the collection or canon, the text, and the individual
writings ; or, in raore detail, the three groups of ques
tions : I. As to the idea, extent, character, and author
ity of the canon, collected as the sacred Scriptures of
the church. 2. As to the text of which the canon is
composed, the MSS. in which it is preserved, the trans
lations of it, and citations from it. 3. As to the origin;
authorship, time of composition, character, design, and
direction of the individual writings that claim, or are
claimed, to belong to the sacred Scriptures. These sub
ordinate branches of Biblical Literature raay be called
Biblical Canonics, the Lower or Textual Criticism, and
the Higher Criticism.
I. Biblical Canonics considers the canon of sacred Script
ure as to its idea, its historical formation, its extent,
character, authority, and historical influence. These in
quiries are to be made in accordance with the historical
and synthetic methods. We are not to start with pre
conceived dogmatic views as to the idea of the canon,
but derive this idea by induction from the sacred writ
ings themselves ; and in the same manner decide all
other questions that raay arise. Thus the extent of the
canon is not to be determined by the consensus of the
churches,* or by the citation and reverent use of them
in the fathers, and their recognition by the earliest
standard authorities,t for these historical evidences, so

* Indeed, they do not agree -with reference to its extent whether it includes the
Apocryphal books or not, and, still further, they differ in the matter of distin
guishing within the canon, between writings of primary and secondary authority.
t These, indeed, are not entirely agreed, and if they were, could only give us
a human and fallible authority.

22 biblical study.
important in Historical Theology, have no value in Ex
egetical Theology, as they had no influence in the for
mation of the canon itself ; nor, indeed, by their accord
with orthodoxy or the rule of faith,* for it is not only
too broad, in that other writings than sacred are ortho
dox, but again too narrow, in that the standard is the
shifting one of subjective opinion, or external huraan
authority, which, indeed, presupposes the canon itself as
an object of criticism ; and all these external reasons,
historical and dogmatic, after all, can have but a provis
ional and temporary authority — but the only authorita
tive and final decision of these questions is from the in
ternal marks and characteristics of the Scriptures, their
recognition of one another, their harmony with the idea,
character, and development of a divine revelation, as it
is derived from the Scriptures themselves, as well as
their own well-tested and critically-examined claims to
inspiration and authority, and, above all, the divine au
thority speaking by and with them. These reasons, and
these alone, gave thera their historical position and au
thority as a canon. And it is only on this basis that
the historical and dogmatic questions may be properly
considered, with respect to their recognition by Jew
and Christian, and their authority in the church. The
writings having thus been considered collectively, we are
prepared for the second step, the exaraination of the
text itself.
2. Textual Criticism considers the text of the sacred
Scriptures both as a whole and in detail. The sacred
writings have shared the fate of all human productions
in their transmission from hand to hand, and in the

* It was in accordance with this subjective standard that Luther rejected tha
epistle of James, and Esther. Comp. Dorner, Gesch. der Protest. Theologie,
1868, p. 234, seq.

exegetical theology. 23
multiplication of copies. Hence, through the mistakes
of copyists, the intentional corruption of the heretic,
and supposed iraproveraent of the over-anxious ortho
dox, the MSS. that have been preserved betray differ
ences of reading. This departraent has a wide field of
investigation. First of all, the peculiarities of the Bible
language must be studied, and the idiomatic individual
ities of the respective authors. Then the age of the
various MSS. must be determined, their peculiarities,
and relative importance. The ancient versions, now
come into the field, especially the Septuagint, the Chal
dee and Samaritan Targuras, the Syriac Peshitto, and
the Vulgate, which again, each in turn, has to go through
the same sifting as to the critical value of its own text.
Here, especially in the Old Testament, we go back of
any MSS. and are brought face to face with differences
that can be accounted for only on the supposition of
original MSS., whose peculiarities have been lost. To
these may be added the citations of the original text in
the Talmud and Christian scholars. Then we have the
still more difficult comparison of parallel passages, where
differences of text show a difference in MSS. reaching
far back of any historical MSS., or even version.* Text
ual Criticism has to meet all these difficulties and
answer all these questions, and harmonize and adjust all
these differences, in order that, so far as possible, the
genuine, original, pure, and uncorrupted text of the
Word of God may be gained, as it proceeded directly
from the original authors to the original readers. This

* Comp. Psalm xiv. with Psalm Iiii. ; Psalm xviii. with 2 Samuel xxii., and
the books of Samuel and Kings on one hand, with the books of the Chronicles
on the other, and, indeed, throughout. Compare also the Canonical books of
Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel, with the Apocryphal additions and supplements in
the Septuagint version, and finally the citation of earlier writings in the latei
ones, especially in the New Testaraent.

24 biblical study.
departraent of study is all the more difficult for the Old
Testament, that the field is so iraraense, the writings so
numerous, various, and ancient, the languages so little
understood in their historical peculiarities, and, still fur
ther, in that we have to overcome the prejudices of the
Massoretic system, which, while faithful and reliable so
far as the knowledge of the times went, yet, as resting
simply on tradition, without critical or historical investi
gation, and without any proper conception of the gen
eral principles of grammar and comparative philology,
cannot be accepted as final ; for the time has long since
passed when the vowel points and accents can be deeraed
inspired. We have to go back of them, to the unpointed
text, for all purposes of criticism.
3. The Higher Criticism is distinguished from the
Lower or Textual Criticism by presupposing the text and
dealing with individual writings and groups of writings.
The parts of writings should be first investigated, the
individual writings before the collected ones. With ref
erence to each writing, or, it may be, part of a writing,
we have to determine the historical origin and author
ship, the original readers, the design and character of the
composition, and its relation to other writings of its
group. These questions must be settled partly by ex
ternal historical e.v\di&nc&, but chiefly by 2Vz^^r;2<2:/ evidence,
such as the language, style of composition, archaeolog
ical and historical traces, the conceptions of the author
respecting the various subjects of huraan thought, and
the like. Now with reference to such questions as these,
we have little to do with traditional views or dogmatic
opinions. Whatever may have been the prevailing views
in the church with reference to the Pentateuch, Psalter,
or any other book of Scripture, they will not deter the
conscientious exegete from accepting and teaching the re-

exegetical theology. 25
suits of a historical and critical study of the writings
themselves. It is just here that Christian theologians have greatly
injured the cause of the truth and the Bible by dogma
tizing in a department where it is least of all appropri
ate, and, indeed, to the highest degree improper, as if
our faith depended at all upon these huraan opinions re
specting the Word of God ; as if the Scriptures could be
benefited by defending the indefensible, whereas by fre
quent and shameful defeats and routs traditionalists bring
disgrace and alarm even into the impregnable fortress it
self, and prejudice the sincere inquirer against the Script
ures, as if these were questions of orthodoxy or piety,
or of allegiance to the Word of God or the symbols of
the church. The Westminster standards teach that
" the word of God is the only rule of faith and obedi
ence," * and that " the authority of the Holy Scripture,
for which it ought to be believed and obeyed, depend-
eth not upon the testiraony of any raan or church, but
wholly upon God, the author thereof." f The other Prot
estant symbols are in accord with thera. How unortho
dox it is, therefore, to set up another rule of prevalent
opinion as a stumbling-block to those who would accept
the authority of the Word of God alone. So long as the
Word of God is honored, and its decisions regarded as
final, what matters it if a certain book be detached from
the name of one holy man and ascribed to another, or
classed among those with unknown authors ? Are the
laws of the Pentateuch any less divine, if it should be
¦proved that they are the product of the experience of
God's people from Moses to Josiah ? :]: Is the Psalter to

-* Larger Catechism, Quest, iii. t Confess, of Faith, Chap. i. 4.
\ British and Foreign Evang. Review, July, 1868, Art. " The Progress of
Old Testament Studies."
2

26 biblical study.
be esteemed any the less precious that the psalms should
be regarded as the product of many poets singing through
many centuries the sacred melodies of God-fearing souls,
responding from their hearts, as from a thousand-stringed
lyre, to the touch of the Holy One of Israel ? Is the
book of Job less majestic and sublime, as, the noblest
monument of sacred poetry, it stands before us in its
solitariness, with unknown author, unknown birthplace,
and from an unknown period of history ? Are the ethi
cal teachings of the Proverbs, the Song of Songs, and
Ecclesiastes, any the less solemn and weighty, that they
may not be the product of Soloraon's wisdom alone, but
of the reflection of many holy wise men of different
epochs, gathered about Solomon as their head? Is the
epistle to the Hebrews any less valuable for its clear pre
sentation of the fulfilment of the Old Testament priest
hood and sacrifice in the work of Christ, that it must be
detached from the name of Paul ? Let us not be so pre-
suraptuous, so irreverent to the Word of God, so unbe
lieving with reference to its inherent power of convinc
ing and assuring the seekers for the truth, as to condemn
any sincere and candid inquirer as a heretic or a ration
alist, because he may differ frora us on such questions
as these ! The internal evidence must be decisive in all
questions of Biblical Criticism, and the truth, whatever
it may be, will be raost in accordance with God's Word
and for the glory of God and the interest of the church.*
Thus Biblical Literature gives us all that can be learned
respecting the canon of Holy Scripture, its text and the

* The whole of this paragraph was written and delivered before the outbreak
of the Robertson Smith controversy in Scotland and the discussions respecting
the H-igher Criticism in the United States. These controversies emphasize the ira
portance and the correctness of the principles we then stated. We shall come
upon them again in Chapter VII., which is devoted to the subject.

exegetical theology.

27

various writings ; and presents the sacred Scriptures as
the holy Word of God, all the errors and improvements
of men having been eliminated, in a text, so far as pos
sible, as it came from holy men who " spake as they
were moved by the Holy Ghost " (2 Peter i. 21); so that
we are brought into the closest possible relations with
the living God through His Word, having in our hands
the very form that contains the very substance of divine
revelation ; so that with reverence and submission to
His will we may enter upon the work of interpretation,
confidently expecting to be assured of the truth in the
work of Biblical Exegesis.
II. Biblical Exegesis. And now first of all we have
to lay down certain general principles derived from the
study of the Word of God, upon which this exegesis it
self is to be conducted. These principles must accord
with the proper methods of Exegetical Theology and the
nature of the work to be done. The work of establish
ing these principles belongs to the introductory depart
ment of Biblical Hermeneutics. The Scriptures are
human productions, and yet truly divine. They must
be interpreted as other human writings, and yet their
peculiarities and differences frora other human writings
must be recognized,* especially the supreme determining
difference of their inspiration by the Spirit of God, in
accordance with which they require not only a sympathy
with the human element in the sound judgraent and
practical sense of the grammarian, the critical investiga
tion of the historian, and the aesthetic taste of the raan
of letters ; but also a sympathy with the divine element,
an inquiring, reverent spirit to be enlightened by the
Spirit of God, without which no exposition of the Script-

* Comp. Immer, ffermeneutik der N. T., p. 9.

28 biblical study.
ures as sacred, inspired writings is possible. It is this
feature that distinguishes the discipline from the other
corresponding ones, as Sacred Hermeneutics. Thus we
have to take into the account the inspiration of the
Scriptures, their harmony, their unity in variety, their
sweet simplicity, and their sublime mystery; and all
this not to override the principles of grammar, logic, and
rhetoric, but to supplement them ; yes, rather, infuse
into them a new life and vigor, making them sacred
grammar, sacred logic, and sacred rhetoric. And just
here it is highly important that the history of exegesis
should come into the field of study in order to show us
the abuses of false principles of interpretation as a warn
ing ; and the advantages of correct principles as an en
couragement.* After this preliminary labor, the exegete is prepared
for his work in detail. The immensity of these details
is at once overpowering and discouraging. The extent,
the richness, the variety of the sacred writings, poetry,
history, and prophecy, extending through so many cent
uries, and from such a great number of authors, known
and unknown, the inherent difficulty of interpreting the
sacred mysteries, the things of God — who is sufficient
for these things? who would venture upon this holy
ground without a quick sense of his incapacity to grasp
the divine ideas, and an absolute dependence upon the
Holy Spirit to show them unto him? (John xvi. 15).
Truly, here is a work for raultitudes, for ages, for the
raost profound and devout study of all mankind, for
here we have to do with the whole word of God to man.
The exegete is like the miner. He must free himself as

* Compare especially Dieslel, Gesch. d. A. T. in der Christ. Kirche. Jena,

exegetical theology. 29
far as possible from all traditionalism and dogmatic prej
udice, must leave the haunts of human opinion, and bury
himself in the Word of God. He must descend beneath
the surface of the Word into its depths. The letter must
be broken through to get at the precious idea. The dry
rubbish of misconception must.be thrown out, and a
shaft forced through every obstacle to get at the truth.
And while faithful in the employment of all these powers
of the human intellect and will, the true exegete fears
the Lord, and only thereby hopes through his intimacy
with Him for the revelation of wisdom.*
I. The exegete begins his work with Grammatical
Exegesis. Here he has to do with the form, the dress of
the revelation, which is not to be disregarded or under
valued, for it is the form in which God has chosen to
convey His truth, the dress in which alone we can ap
proach her and know her. Hebrew grammar must
therefore be mastered in its etymology and syntax, or
grammatical exegesis will be impossible. Here patience,
exactness, sound judgment, and keen discernment are
required, for every word is to be examined by itself, ety-
mologically and historically, not etymologically alone,
for Greek and Hebrew roots have not infrequently been
made to teach very false doctrines. It has been forgot
ten that a word is a living thing, and has, besides its
root, the still more important stem, branches, and prod
ucts — indeed, a history of meanings. The word is then
to be considered in its syntactical relations in the clause,
and thus step by step the. grammatical sense is to be as
certained, the false interpretations eliminated, and the
various possible raeanings correctly presented and classi
fied. Without this patient study of words and clauses

» Job xxviii. 28 ; Ps. xxv. 14 ; Prov. viii, 17, seq.

30 biblical study.
no accurate translation is possible, no trustworthy expo
sition can be made.* It is true that grammatical exe
gesis leaves us in doubt between many possible con
structions of the sense, but these doubts will be solved
as the work of exegesis goes on, and then, on the other
hand, it eliminates many views as ungrammatical which
have been hastily formed, and effectually prevents that
jumping at conclusions to which the indolent and ira-
petuous are alike inclined.
2. The second step in exegesis is Logical and Rhetor
ical Exegesis. The words and clauses raust be inter
preted in accordance with the context, the developraent
of the author's thought and purpose ; and also in ac
cordance with the principles of rhetoric, discriminating
plain language from figurative, poetry from prose, history
from prophecy, and the various kinds of history, poetry,
and prophecy from each other. This is to be done not
after an arbitrary manner, but in accordance with the
general laws of logic and rhetoric that apply to all writ
ings whatever. While the use of figurative language
has led the mystic and the dogmatist to employ the
most arbitrary and senseless exegesis, yet the laws of
logic and rhetoric, correctly applied to the text, will clip
the wings of the fanciful, and destroy the assumptions of
the dogmatist, and, still further, will serve to determine
many questions that grararaar alone cannot decide, and,
hence, raore narrowly define the raeaning of the text.
3. The third step in exegesis is Historical Exegesis.
The author raust be interpreted in accordance with his

* ¦yes, we may say that no translation can be thoroughly understood after the
generation in which it was made, without this resort to the original text, which
alone can deterraine in many cases the meaning of the translators tliemselves,
when we come upon obsolete terms, or words whose meanings have become
modified or lost.

exegetical theology. 31
historical surroundings. We raust apply to the text the
knowledge of the author's times, derived from archaeol-
ogYi geography, chronology, and general history. Thus
only will we be able to enter upon the scenery of the
text. It is not necessary to resort to the history of
exegesis ; one's own observation is sufficient to show
the absurdities and the outrageous errors into which a
neglect of this principle leads raany earnest but ignorant
men. No one can present the Bible narrative in the
dress of modern every-day life without making the story
ridiculous. And it must be so from the very nature of
the case. Historical circumstances are essential to the
truthfulness and vividness of the narrative. Instead of
our transporting Scripture events to our scenery, we
must transport ourselves to their scenery, if we would
correctly understand them and realize them. If we wish
to apply Scripture truth we raay, after having correctly
apprehended it, eliminate it from its historical circum
stances, and then give it a new and appropriate form for
practical purposes ; but we can never interpret Scripture
without historical exegesis ; for it serves to more nar
rowly define the meaning of the text, and to eliminate
the unhistorical materials from the results thus far at
tained in the exegetical process.
4. The fourth step in exegesis is Comparative Exegesis.
The results already gained with reference to any partic
ular passage are to be compared with the results attained
in a like manner in other similar passages of the same
author, or other authors of the period, and in some cases
from other periods of divine revelation. Thus, by a
comparison of scripture with scripture, additional light
,will be thrown upon the passage, the true conception
will be distinguished from the false, and the results at
tained adequately supported.

32 biblical study.
5. The fifth step in exegesis is one of vast importance,
which, for lack of a better name, may be called Literary
Exegesis. Great light is thrown upon the text by the
study of the views of those who, through the centuries,
in many lands, and from the various points of view,
have studied the Scriptures. Here on this battle
ground of interpretation we see almost every view
assailed and defended. Multitudes of opinions have
been overthrown, never to reappear ; others are weak
and tottering — comparatively few still maintain the
field. It is among these latter that we raust in the
main find the true interpretation. This is the furnace
into which the results thus far attained by the exegete
must be thrown, that its fires raay separate the dross
and leave the pure gold thoroughly refined. Christian
divines, Jewish rabbins, and even unbelieving writers
have not studied the Word of God for so raany centuries
in vain. No true scholar can be so presuraptuous as to
neglect their labors. No interpreter can rightly claim
originality or freshness of conception who has not famil
iarized himself with this mass of material that others
have wrought out. On the other hand, it is the best
check to presumption, to know that every view that is
worth anything must pass through the furnace. Any
exegete who would accomplish anything should know
that he is to expose himself to the fire that centres
upon any combatant that will enter upon this hotly-
contested field. From the study of the Scriptures he
will come into contact with human views, traditional
opinions, and dogmatic prejudices. On the one side
these will severely criticize and overthrow many of his
results ; on the other his faithful study of the Word of
God will be a fresh test of the correctness of those hu
man views that have hitherto prevailed. Thus, from the

exegetical theology. 33
acting and reacting influences of this conflict, the truth
of God will maintain itself, and it alone will prevail.
We have thus far described these various steps of
exegesis, in order that a clear and definite conception
may be formed of its field of work — not that they are
ever to be represented by themselves in any commen
tary, or even carried on independently by the exegete
himself, but they should be regarded as the component
parts of any thorough exegetical process ; and although,
as a rule, naught but the results are to be presented to
the public, yet these results imply that no part of the
process has been neglected, but that all have harmonized
in them, if they are reliable results.
In advancing now to the higher processes of exe
gesis, we observe a marked difference from the pre
vious ones, in that they have had to do with the en
tire text, these with only select portions of it. And
still further we would remark, that while in these proc
esses the results are to be attained which will be most
profitable to the great masses of mankind, we must
severely criticize those who, without having gone
through them themselves, either use the labors of
the faithful exegete without acknowledgment, or else,
accepting traditional views without examination, build
on an unknown foundation ; for the world does not need
theological castles in the air, o'r theories of Christian
life, but a solid structure of divine truth as the home of
the soul, and an infallible guide for living and dying.
6. The sixth step in exegesis is Doctrinal Exegesis,
which considers the material thus far gathered in order
to derive therefrom the ideas of the author respecting
religion, faith, and morals. These ideas are then to be
considered in their relation to each other in the section
and chapter. Thus we get the doctrine that the author
2*

34 BIBLICAL STUDY.
would teach, and are prepared for a comparison of it
with the doctrines of other passages and authors. Here
we have to contend with a false method of searching for
the so-called spiritual sense, as if the doctrine could be
independent of the form in which it is revealed, or, in
deed, so loosely attached to it, that the grammar and
logic should teach one thing, and the spiritual sense
another. There can be no spiritual sense that does
not accord with the results thus far attained in the exe
getical process. The true spiritual sense comes before
the inquiring soul as the product of the true exegetical
methods that have been described. As the differences
of material become manifest in the handling of it, the
doctrine stands forth as divine and infallible in its own
light. Any other spiritual sense is false to the Word of
God, whether it be the conceit of Jewish cabalists or
Christian mystics.
7. The seventh and final effort of exegesis is Practical
Exegesis, the application of the text to the faith and life
of the present. And here we must eliminate not only the
temporal bearings from the eternal, but also those ele
ments that apply to other persons and circumstances than
those in hand. Everything depends upon the character
of the work, whether it be catechetical, homiletical, evan
gelistic, or pastoral. All Scripture may be said to be prac
tical for some purpose, but not every Scripture for every
purpose. Hence, practical exegesis must not only give
the true raeaning of the text, but also the true applica
tion of the text to the matter in hand. Here we have
to deal with a false method of seeking edification
and deriving pious reflections from every passage, thus
constraining the text to meanings that it cannot bear,
doing violence to the Word of God, which is not only
not to be added to or taken from as a whole, but also a?

EXEGETICAL THEOLOGY. 35
to all its parts. This spirit of interpretation, while nom
inally most reverential, is really very irreverential. It
originates from a lack of knowledge of the Scriptures,
and the neglect to use the proper methods of exegesis,
as if the Holy Spirit would reveal the sacred raysteries
to the indolent, even if they should be pious ; for while
He raay hide the truth from the irreverent critic. He
cannot be expected to reveal it except to those who not
only have piety, but also search for it as for hidden treas
ures. This indolence and presumptuous reliance upon
the Holy Spirit, which too often proves to be a depend
ence upon one's own conceits and fancies, has brought
disgrace upon the Word of God, as if it could be raani
fold in sense, or were able to prove anything that raight
be asked of it. Nay, still worse, it leads the preacher
to burden his discourse with raaterial which, however
good it raay be in itself, not only has no connection with
the text, but no practical application to the circurastances
of the hour, or the needs of the congregation. Over
against, this abuse of the Scriptures, the exegete learns
to use it properly, and while he cannot find everywhere
what he needs, yet he can find by searching for it, far
more and better than he needs ; yes, he will learn, as he
studies the Word, that it needs no forcing, but aptly
and exactly satisfies with appropriate material every
phase of Christian experience, gently clears away every
shadow of difficulty that may disturb the inquiring spir
it, proving itself sufficient for each and every one, and
ample for all mankind.
We have endeavored to consider the various proc
esses of exegesis by which results are attained of es-
sential importance to all the other departments of the
ology. The work of the exegete is foundation work.
It is the work of the study, and not of the pulpit, or

36 BIBLICAL STUDY.
the platform. It brings forth treasures new and old
from the Word of God, to enrich the more prominent
and public branches of theology. It finds the nugget
of gold that they are to coin into the current concep
tions of the times. It brings forth ore that they are to
work into the vessels or ornaments, that may minister
corafort to the household and adorn the home and the
person. It gains the precious gems that are to be set
by these jewelers, in order that their lustre and beauty
may become manifest and admired of all. Some think
it strange that the Word of God does not at once reveal
a system of theology, or give us a confession of faith, or
catechism. But Archbishop Whately correctly explains
it when he says that,
" Since no one of the first proraulgators of Christianity did that
which they raust, some of them at least, have been naturally led
to do, it follows that they raust have been supernaturally withheld
from it." . . . . " Each Church, therefore, was left through the wise
foresight of Him who alone ' knew what is in man,' to provide for
its own wants as they should arise ; — to steer its own course by the
chart and corapass which His holy word supplies, regulating for
itself the sails and rudder according to the winds and currents it
may meet with." *
Indeed experience shows us that no body of divinity
can answer more than its generation. Every catechism
and confession of faith will in time become obsolete and
powerless, remaining as historical monuments and sym
bols, as the worn and tattered banners that our veterans
or honored sires have carried victoriously through the
cvnpaigns of the past — but not suited entirely for their
descendants. Each age has its own peculiar work and
needs, and it is not too much to say, that not even the

* Essays on some of the Peculiarities of the Christian Religion. Fifth edi
tion, London, 1846. Essay vi., pp. 349, 355.

EXEGETICAL THEOLOGY. 37
Bible could devote itself to the entire satisfaction of the
wants of any particular age, without thereby sacrificing
its value as the book of all ages. It is sufficient that
the Bible gives us the material for all ages, and leaves
to man the noble task of shaping that material so as to
suit the wants of his own time. The word of God is
given to us in the Bible, as His truth is displayed in
physical nature — in an immense and varied storehouse
of material. We must search the Bible in order to find
what we require for our soul's food, not expecting to
employ the whole, but recognizing that as there is
enough for us, so there is sufficient for all mankind and
for all ages. Its diversities are appropriate to the vari
ous types of human character, the various phases of
human experience, and no race, no generation, no man,
woman, or child, need fail in finding in the Scriptures
the true soul-food, for it has material of abounding
wealth, surpassing all the powers of human thought and
all the requireraents of human life.
III. The work of Exegetical Theology does not end,
however, with the work of Biblical Exegesis, but advances
to its conclusion in Biblical Theology. Exegetical
Theology not only, in the department of Biblical Exege
sis, produces the material to be used in the other depart
ment of theology, but it has as its own highest problem,
the thorough arrangement of that raaterial in accord
ance with its own synthetic method. As there is a his
tory in the Bible, an unfolding of divine revelation, a
unity, and a wonderful variety, so Exegetical Theology
cannot stop until it has arranged the biblical material
in accordance with its historical position, and its relative
value in the one structure of divine revelation. And
here, first, we see the culmination of the exegetical proc-

38 biblical STUDY.
ess, as all its departments pour their treasures into this
basin, where they flow together and become compacted
into one organic whole— for Biblical Theology rises from
the exegesis of verses, sections, and chapters, to the
higher exegesis of writings, authors, periods, and of the
Old and New Testaments as wholes, until the Bible is
discerned as an organism, complete and symmetrical,
one as God is one, and yet as various as mankind is vari
ous, and thus only divine-human as the complete reve
lation of the God-man.
In this respect Biblical Theology demands its place in
theological study as the highest attainment of exegesis.
It is true that it has been claimed that the history of
Biblical Doctrine, as a subordinate branch of Historical
Theology, fully answers its purpoae ; and again, that
Biblical Dogmatics, as the fundaraental part of Systera-
atic Theology, covers its ground. These branches of the
sister grand divisions of theology deal with many of its
questions and handle much of its material, for the reason
that Biblical Theology is the highest point of exegesis
where the most suitable transition is made to the other
departments ; but it does not, it cannot, belong to either
of them. As Biblical Theology was not the product of
Historical or Systematic Theology, but was born in the
throes of the exegetical process of the last century, so
it is the child of exegesis, and can flourish only in its
own home. The idea, methods, aims, and, indeed, re
sults, are entirely different from those presented in the
above-mentioned parts of Historical and Systematic
Theology. It does not give us a history of doctrine, al
though it uses the historical method in the unfolding of
the doctrine. It does not seek the history of the doc
trine, but the formation, the organization of the doctrine

exegetical THEOLOGY. 39
in history. It does not aim to present the systematic
theology of the Bible, and thus arrange biblical doc
trine in the form that Systematic Theology must assurae
for the purposes of the day ; but in accordance with its
synthetic method of seeking the unity in the variety,
it endeavors to show the biblical system of doctrine, the
form assumed by theology in the Bible itself, the organ
ization of the doctrines of faith and morals in the his
torical divine revelation. It thus considers the doctrine
at its first historical appearance, examines its formation
and its relation to others in the structure, then traces
its unfolding in history, sees it evolving by its own in
herent vitality, as well as receiving constant accretions,
ever assuming fuller, richer, grander proportions, until
in the revelation of the New Testament the organiza
tion has become complete and finished. It thus not
only distinguishes a theology of periods, but a theology
of authors and writings, and shows how they harmonize
in the one complete revelation of God.* It is only from
this elevated point of view that many important ques
tions can be settled, such as the Relation of the Old Tes
tament to the New Testament — a fundamental question
for all departments of theology. It is only when we
recognize the New Testaraent as not only the historical
fulfilment of the Old Testament, but also as its exe
getical corapletion, that the unity and the harmony, all
the grander for the variety and the diversity of the
Scriptures, become evident. It is only from this point
of view that the apparently contradictory views, as, for
instance, of Paul and James, in the article of justifica-

* See author's articles on Biblical Theology, in American Presbyterian Re
view, 1870, and in the Presbyterian Review, 1882, and Chapter XI. of this
volume.

40 ¦ biblical STUDY.
tion, may be reconciled in their difference of types. It
is only here that a true doctrine of inspiration can be
given, properly distinguishing the divine and human
elements, and yet recognizing them in their union. It
is only thereby that the weight of authority of the
Scripture can be fully felt, and the consistency of the
infallible canon invincibly maintained. It is only in
this culminating work that the preliminary processes of
exegesis are delivered from all the imperfections and
errofs that still cling to the raost faithful work of the
exegete. It is only from these hands that Historical
Theology receives its true keys. Systematic Theology
its indestructible pillars, and Practical Theology its all-
conquering weapons.
Thus Exegetical Theology is a theological discipline,
which, in its various departments, presents an inexhaust
ible field of labor, where the raost ambitious may work
with a sure prospect of success, and where the faithful
disciple of the Lord raay rejoice in the raost intimate
fellowship with the Master, divine truths being received
immediately from the divine hand, old truths being il
luminated with fresh meaning, new truths filling the soul
with indescribable delight. The Bible is not a field
whose treasures have been exhausted, for they are inex
haustible. As in the past, holy men have found among
these 4:reasures jewels of priceless value ; as Athanasius,
Augustine, Anselm, Luther, and Calvin, have derived
therefrora new doctrines that have given shape not only
to the church, but to the world ; so it is not too much
to expect that even greater saints than these may yet
go forth from their retirement, where they have been
alone in comraunion with God through His Word, hold
ing up before the world some new doctrine, freshly de-

EXEGETICAJ. THEOLOGY. 41
rived from the ancient writings, which, although hith
erto overlooked, will prove to be the necessary comple-
raent of all the previous knowledge of the church, no
less essential to its life, growth, and progress than the
Athanasian doctrine of the Trinity, the Augustinian doc
trine of sin, and the Protestant doctrine of justification
through faith.

CHAPTER IH.
THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE.
The languages of the Bible were prepared by Divine
Providence as the most suitable ones for declaring the
divine revelation to mankind. Belonging, as they do, to
the two great farailies of speech, the Shemitic and the In
do-Germanic, which have been the bearers of civilization,
culture, and the noblest products of human thought and
emotion, they are themselves the highest and most per
fect developments of those families ; presenting, it is
true, their contrasted features, but yet combining in a
higher unity, in order to give us the complete divine
revelation. Having accomplished this their highest
purpose, they soon afterward became stereotyped in
form, or, as they are commonly called, dead languages ;
so that henceforth all successive generations, and indeed
all the families of earth, raight resort to thera and find
the common, divine revelation in the same fixed and un
alterable forms.
Language is the product of the human soul, as
are thought and emotion, and, therefore, depends upon
the constitution of that soul, the historical experiences
of the family or race speaking it, especially the stage of
development in civilization, morals, and religion. The
connection between language and thought is not loose,
but an essential connection. Language is not merely a
(43)

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE.

43

dress that thought may put on or off at its pleasure ; it
is the body of which thought is the soul ; it is the flesh
and rounded form of which thought is the life and en
ergy. Hence it is that language is raoulded by thought
and eraotion, by experience and culture ; it is, as it were,
the speaking face of the race eraploying it, and it be
comes the historical monument of the experience of that
race ; so that in many nations that have perished, and
whose early history is lost in primeval darkness, their
language gives us the key to their history and experi
ence as truly as the Parthenon tells us of the Greek
mind, and the Pyramids gf the Egyptian.
It is not a matter of indifference, therefore, as to the
languages that were to bear the divine revelation ; for,
although the divine revelation was designed for all races,
and may be conveyed in all the languages of earth, yet,
inasmuch as it was delivered in advancing historical de
velopment, certain particular languages must be em
ployed as most .suitable for the purpose, and indeed
those which could best become the fountains for en
riching the various languages of the earth. Hence it is
that we can confidently claim that there are no lan
guages — not even the English and the German, which
have drunk deepest from the classic springs of the He
brew and the Greek — that there are no languages that
could so adequately convey the divine revelation in its
simplicity, grandeur, fulness, variety, power and impres
siveness, as those selected by Divine Providence for the
purpose. Hence it is that no translation can ever take the place
of the original Scriptures ; for a translation is, at the
best, the work of uninspired raen, who, though holy
and faithful, and guided by the Spirit of God, are yet
unable to do more than give us their own interpretation

44 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of the sacred oracles. They must enter into the very
spirit and atmosphere of the original text ; they must
think and feel with the original authors ; their hearts
must throb with the same emotion ; their minds must
move in the same lines of thinking ; they must adapt
theraselves to the numerous types of character coming
from various and widely different periods of divine rev
elation, in order to correctly apprehend the thought
and make it their own, and then reproduce it in a foreign
tongue. A mere external, grammatical, and lexico
graphical translation is worthless. Unless the spirit of
the original has been not oniy apprehended, but con
veyed, it is no real translation. Hence it is requisite
that all-sided raen should be chosen for this work, or at
least a body of raen representing the various types and
phases of human experience and character. But even
then the translation can only express the theological,
ethical, and practical conceptions of the holiest and
most learned men of the particular age ; and, inasmuch
as the divine revelation was given through holy men
who spake not only from their own time and for their
own time, but from and for the timeless Spirit, the eter
nal ideas for all time ; the advancing generations will
ever need to understand the Word of God better than
their fathers, and raust, if they are faithful, continually
iraprove in their knowledge of the original Scriptures,
in their power of apprehending them, of appropriating
them, and of reproducing thera in speech and life.
How iraportant it is, therefore, if the church is to
maintain a living connection with the sacred Scriptures,
and enter ever deeper into their spirit and mysterious
life, that it should encourage a considerable portion of
its youth to pursue these studies, and at all events in
sist that its ministry, who are to train it in the things

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 45
of God, should have not raerely a superficial knowledge
of the Bible, such as any layraan may readily attain, but
a deep and thorough acquaintance with the original per
ennial fountains of truth ; otherwise, as history has al
ready sufficiently shown, these uninspired versions will
assume the place of the original inspired Word ; and the
interpretations of a particular generation will becorae
the stereotyped dogmas of many generations, and the
life of a Christian people will be cut off from its only
source of spiritual growth, and a barren scholasticism,
with its stereotyped dogmas, mechanical institutions,
and opera operata, will assurae the place and iraportance
of the divine word and living coraraunion with God.
The languages of the Bible being the only adequate
means of conveying and perpetuating the divine revela
tion, it is important that we should learn them not raere
ly from the outside, with grammar and lexicon, but also
from the inside, from a proper conception of the genius
and life of these tongues as employed by the ancient
saints, and especially of the historical genius of the lan
guages as the sacred channels of the Spirit's thought
and life. For language is a living thing, and has its
birth, its growth, its maturity, its decline, and its death.
Language is born, not as a system of roots or detached
words, that gradually come together by natural selection
into sentences. As plants may grow from roots after
they have been cut down, but do not have their birth in
roots, but in the seed-germs which contain the plants in
embryo ; so language, although it may be analyzed into
roots, yet was not born in roots and never existed in
roots, but came into being as sentences,* as thought is
ever a sentence, and not a word. Then as the mind de-

* Sayce, Principles of Comp. Philology, p. 136, seq., 2d ed., London, 1875.

46 BIBLICAL STUDY.
velops, thought is developed with its body, language,
and thus the language grows with the culture of a peo
ple. All languages that have literary documents can be
traced in their historical development. Especially is
this the case with the languages of the Bible ; they have
a long history back of them ; centuries of literary devel
opraent were required to produce thera.
I. THE HEBREW LANGUAGE.
The Hebrew language was long supposed to be the
original language of raankind ; but this view can no lon
ger be held by any philologist, for the Hebrew language,
as it appears to us in its earliest forms in the sacred
Scriptures, bears upon its face the traces of a long-pre
vious literary development.* This is confirraed by com
paring it with the other languages of the same family.
Thus the Shemitic family may be divided into four
groups : I. The Southern group — Arabic, Ethiopic, and
Himjaric. 2. The Aramaic group — Syriac, Chaldee,
Samaritan, and Mandaic. 3. The Hebrew group — the
Phoenician and Hebrew. 4. The As.syrian and Babylo
nian. Now these languages are raore closely related to
one another than those of the Indo-Germanic family,
the people speaking them having been confined to com
paratively narrow limits, crowded on the north by the
Indo-Germanic tongues, and on the south by the Tu
ranian. These languages are grouped in sisterhoods.
They all go back upon an original mother-tongue of
which all traces have been lost. In general the Arabic
or Southern group present the older and fuller forms of
etymology and syntax, the Araraaic or Northern group

¦* Ewald, Gesch. des Volkes Israel, 3te Ausg. ; Gott, 1S64, s. 78, seq.; Ewald,
Ausf. Lehrb. des Heb. Sprache, 7te Ausg ; Gott,, 1863, s. 23.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 47
the later and sirapler forms. The Hebrew and Assyrian
groups lie in the midst of this linguistic developraent,
where the Assyrian is nearer to the Southern group
and the Hebrew to the Northern group.* The differ
ences in stage of linguistic growth frora the common
stock depend not so much upon the period or distance
of separation as upon literary culture. The literary use
of a language has the tendency to reduce the complex
elements to order, and to simplify and wear away the
superfluous and unnecessary forms of speech and syn
tactical construction. These languages have, for the
most part, given us a considerable literature ; they were
spoken by cultivated nations of the ancient world, me
diating between the great centres of primitive Turanian
culture — the Euphrates and the Nile. Everything seems
to indicate that they all emigrated from a common cen
tre in the desert on the south of Babylonia,t the Arabic
group separating first, next the Araraaic, then the He
brew, while the Babylonian gained ultimately the raas
tery of the original Akkadian of Babylonia, and the As
syrian founded the great empire on the Tigris. The
book of Genesis (xi. 31) represents Abram as going forth
from this central seat of Ur of the Chaldees, at first
northward into Mesopotamia, and then emigrating to
Canaan, just as we learn from other sources the Canaan
ites had done before him. The monuments of Ur reveal
that about this time, 2000 B.C., it was the seat of a
great literary development.:]: The father of the faith-

* See Gesenius, Heb. und Chald. Handworterbuch, gte Aufl. neu bearbeitet
iron Mulau und Volck, Leipzig, 1883. Von den Quellen, p. xx., sq.
t Vide Schrader, Die Abstammung der Chaldaer und die Ursitze der Semi-
ten, Zeitschrift d. Deut seh. M. G., 1873.
X Geo. Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis, etc., p. 29, seq. New York,
1876.

48 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ful, whose origin was in that primitive seat of cuUure,
and who lived as a chieftain of military prowess (Gen.
xiv.) and exalted religious and moral character among
the cultivated nations of Canaan, and who was received at
the court of Pharaoh (xii. 14) — that other great centre of
primitive culture — on friendly terms, to sorae extent at
least, raade himself acquainted with their literature and
culture. Whether Abraham adopted the language of
the Canaanites, or brought the Hebrew with him from
the East, is unimportant, for the ancient Assyrian and
Babylonian are nearer to the Hebrew and Phoenician
than they are to the other Shemitic families,* so that if
the languages, as now presented to us, differ less than
the Romance languages — the daughters of the Latin —
in their earlier stages in the tirae of Abraham, their dif
ference could scarcely have been raore than dialectic.
The ancient Phoenician, the nearest akin to the Hebrew,
was the language of coramerce and intercourse between
the nations in primitive times, as the Aramaic after the
fall of Tyre, and the Greek after the conquest of Alex
ander. Thus the Hebrew language, as a dialect of the
Canaanite and closely related to the Babylonian, had
already a considerable literary development prior to
the entrance of Abrara into the Holy Land. The old
idea that Egypt was the mother of Hebrew civilization
and culture has been disproved ; for, though the Hebrews
remained a long period in Egyptian bondage, they re
tained their Eastern civilization, culture, and language,
so that at the Exodus they shook off at once all connec
tion with the Egyptian civilization and culture as alien
and antagonistic to their own. For the very peculiari
ties of the Hebrew language, hterature, and civilization

* Sayce, Assyrian Grammar, p. >, seq. London, 1872.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 49
are those of the Babylonian. The biblical traditions of
the Creation, of the Deluge, of the Tower of Babel, are
those of the Assyrians and Babylonians. The sacred
rest-day, with the significance of the number seven, the
months, seasons, and years, the weights and measures,
coins — all are of the sarae origin. Still further, that
most striking feature of Hebrew poetry — the parallelism
of members — is already in the oldest Akkadian hymns.
Yes, the very temptations of the Hebrews to the worship
of Ashtoreth and Baal, of Chemosh and Moloch, are
those that have ruined the other branches of their com
mon race.* How shall we account for these things un
less we suppose that they were brought with him by
Abram in his emigration to Canaan ? Fixing our atten
tion upon the single feature of the parallelism of mem
bers, how could the Hebrews have retained it as the es
sential feature of their poetry, if they had no poetic
treasures preserved among them, and the poetic spirit
had remained undjpveloped with them ? Without ven
turing upon an opinion with reference to the amount
of literature to be attributed to these early times, but
taking the Pentateuch as it is, we see therein a language
admirably adapted for its purpose, the product of pre
vious literary development. Whether Moses wrote the
entire Pentateuch or not, most scholars will admit a con
siderable Mosaic nucleus. This being true, the princi
ples of language seem to require either that the ancient
records have been improved by later editors, or that
there must have been a body of sacred literature to give
the language that stable character that marks it through
out the entire sacred Scripti^es ; for while there is cer
tainly a development in the Hebrew language of the

* Vide Schrader, Semitismus und Babylonismus. fahrb. v. Prot. Theol.,
1875- 3

50 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Bible, and three periods may be readily distinguished,
yet the differences between the earlier and the classic
period are but slight, the chief distinguishing features
being in the later writings of the Chronicler, Ecclesi
astes, and Daniel, all showing a decline from the classic
models and an approximation to the Aramaic, in ety
mology and syntax. Sacred books give languages a
permanence such as no other literature can give them.
This is evident not only frora the German Bible of Luther,
and King James' English version, which have kept these
great languages comparatively stationary, but also from
the Koran, which has kept the Arabic so fixed to its
classic style that it has taken a thousand years for the
vulgar Arabic to reach that stage of linguistic develop
raent presented in the earliest Hebrew of the Bible.
Hence unless the language of the writings of Moses has
been changed by later editors, at least a considerable
portion of the Pentateuch must be assigned to his times.
Moses is the father of the Hebrew language and litera
ture, as Luther is of the German. He moulded its fun
damental types, and started it in those directions that it
has ever since maintained. As Abraham had gone forth
from the culture of Babylonia to enter upon the pilgrim
life of believing comraunion with El Shaddai, so Moses
went forth from the culture of Egypt to become the
representative of Jahveh, and organize a kingdom of
priests, a holy nation, a theocracy the vital principles of
which became reverential fear and worship of the per
sonal God of the covenant.
Thus the Hebrew language became, in its essential
spirit and genius, a religi^s language, the holy tongue
of the holy people of God, and Moses laid its founda
tions in a literature of sacred history, poetry, and proph
ecy. The histories contained in the Pentateuch ar-e the

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 5I
fountain of all subsequent history. The grand hymn
(Exod. XV.), the prayer (Ps. xc), the prophetic didactic
poem (Deut. xxxii.), are the great boughs of lyric poetry
upon which the Psalter subsequently burst forth in all
its glory ; and the prophetic discourses in Deuteronomy
are the sources, as they give the key to all subsequent
prophecy. Looking now at the language as religious according
to its genius, and considering it in its fundamental types
and their historical development, we observe the follow
ing as some of its most prominent characteristics :
I. It is reraarkably simple and natural. This is indeed
a comraon feature of the Shemitic family. As corapared
with the Indo-Germanic, they represent an earlier stage
in the development of mankind, the childhood of the
race. Theirs is an age of perception, conteraplation, and
observation, not of conception, reflection, and reasoning.
Things are apprehended according to their appearance
as phenomena, and not according to their internal char
acter as noumena. The forra, the features, the expres
sions of things are seen and raost nicely distinguished,
but not their inward being ;- the effects are observed, but
these are not traced through a series of causes, but only
either to the iraraediate cause of else by a leap to the
ultimate cause. Hence the language that expresses such
thought is simple and natural. We see this in its sounds,
which are simple and manifold, disliking diphthongs and
compound letters ; in its roots, uniformly of three con
sonants, generally accompanied by a vowel ; in its in
flections, mainly by internal modifications ; in its simple
arrangement of clauses in the sentence, with a limited
number of conjunctions. Thus the conjunction vav
plays a more important part in the language than all
conjunctions combined, distinguishing by a simple mod-

62 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ification of vocalization, accentuation, or position, be
tween clauses coordinate, circumstantial, or subordinate,
and in the latter between those indicating purpose, or
result. This is the most remarkable feature of the lan
guage, without a parallel in any other tongue. And so
the poetry is constructed on the simple principle of the
parallelisra of raerabers, these being synthetic, antithetic,
or progressive ; and in the latter case advancing, like the
waves of the sea, in the raost beautiful and varied forras.
Hence it is that the Hebrew language is the easiest to
render into a foreign tongue, and that Hebrew poetry
can readily be raade the common property of mankind.
2. We observe a striking correspondence of the lan
guage to the thought. This rests upon a radical difference
between the Shemitic and Indo-Germanic family in their
relative appreciation of the material and the form of lan
guage.* The forra, the artistic expression, is to the
Hebrew a very sraall affair. The idea, the thought, and
emotion flow forth freely and embody themselves with
out any external restraint in the speech. This is clear
from the raethod of inflection, which is mostly by inter
nal changes in the root, expressing the passive by chang
ing the clear vowel into the dull vowel, the intensive by
doubling the second radical, the pure idea of the root by
the extreme shortness of the infinitive and the segholate,
the causative and the reflexive by lengthening the stem
from without, and, so far as cases and moods exist, ex
pressing them harmoniously by the three radical short
vowels. How beautiful in form, as well as sense, is the abstract
plural of intensity by which Elohim expresses the fulness

* Vid. Grill, iiber d. Verhaltniss d. indogerm. u. d. semit. Sprachwurzeln
fn the Zeitschrift D. M. G. 1873.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 53
of the idea of God conceived as the one to be revered ;
by which chayyim expresses the fulness of life, and
which is employed in such passages as Eccles. v. 8,
where the exaltation of God over all earthly judges
would be represented, " For high over high watcheth
The Highest over them."
So in the dependence of the constr«ct relation, and the
use of the suffixes. But perhaps this feature is raost
striking in Hebrew poetry where the absence of an ar
tistic form is more apparent. We see that, with a gen
eral harraony of lines and strophes, the proportion in
length and number is frequently broken through. And
though the Hebrew poet uses the refrain, yet he likes
to modify it, as in the lament of David over Jonathan,
2 Sam. i. 19-27, the 80th Psaira, and the magnificent
prophecy, Isaiah 40-66. Again, though the Hebrew
poet uses the alphabet to give his lines or strophes a
sort of regularity in order, using it as so many stairs up
which to climb in praise, in pleading, in lamentation,
and in advancing instruction, yet he by no raeans binds
himself to an equal number of lines, or even measure of
length ; and, apparently without necessity at times,
breaks through his alphabet itself. Free as the ocean is
the poet's emotion, rising like the waves in majestic
strivings, heaving as an agitated sea, ebbing and flowing
like the tide in solemn and measured antitheses, sporting
like the wavelets upon a sandy beach.
3. The Hebrew language has a wonderful majesty and
sublimity. This arises partly from its original religious
genius, but chiefly from the sublime materials of its
thought. God, the only true God, Jahveh, the Holy
Redeemer of His people, is the central therae of the

54 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Hebrew language and literature, a God not apart from
nature, and not involved in nature, no Pantheistic God,
no mere Deistic God, but a God who enters into sym
pathetic relations with His creatures, who is recognized
and praised, as well as ministered unto by the material
creation. Hence there is a realism in the Hebrew lan
guage that can nowhere else be found to the sarae ex
tent. The Hebrew people were as realistic as the Greek
were idealistic. Th^ir God is not a God thought out,
reasoned out as an ultimate cause, or chief of a Pan
theon, but a personal God, known by them in His asso
ciation with them by a proper name, Jahveh. Hence
the so-called anthropomorphisms and anthropopathisms
of the Old Testaraent, so alien to the Indo-Gerraanic
mind that an Occidental theology must explain them
away, from an incapacity to enter into that bold and
sublime realism of the Hebrews. Thus, again, raan is
presented to us in all his naked reality, in his weakness
and sins, in his depravity and wretchedness, as well as
in his bravery and beauty, his holiness and wisdom. In
the Hebrew heroes we see men of like passions with
ourselves, and feel that their experience is the key to
the joys and sorrows of our life. So also in their con
ception of nature. Nature is to the Hebrew poet all
aglow with the glory of God, and intimately associated
with man in his origin, history, and destiny. There is
no such thing as science ; that was for the Indo-Germanic
raind ; but they give us that which science never gives,
that which science is from its nature unable to present
us : namely, those concrete relations, those expressive
features of nature that declare to raan their Master's
mind and character, and claim human syrapathy and
protection as they yearn with raan for the Messianic fut
ure. Now the Hebrew language raanifests this realism

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 65
on its very face. Its richness in synonyms is remarka
ble. It is said that the Hebrew language has, relatively
to the English, ten times as many roots and ten times
fewer words ; * and that while the Greek language has
1, 800 roots to 100,000 words, the Hebrew has 2,000 roots
to 10,000 words.-f This wealth in synonyms is appal
ling to the Indo-Germanic scholar who comes to the
Hebrew from the Latin and the Greek, where the syno
nyms are raore or less accurately defined. But nothing
of the kind has yet been done by any Shemitic scholar,
so far as we know. What will you do with a language
that has fifty-five words for destroy, sixty for break, and
seventy-four for take ? :j: It is exceedingly doubtful
whether this richness of synonyms can be reduced to a
system and the terms sharply and clearly defined ; the
differences are like those of the peculiar gutturals of the
Shemitic tongues, so delicate and subtle that- they can
hardly be mastered by the Western tongue or ear. So
these synonyms can hardly be apprehended and con
veyed into languages so poor when compared with such
wealth. This wealth of synonym is connected with a corre
sponding richness of expression in the synonymous
clauses that play such an important part in Hebrew po
etry, and indeed are the reason of its wonderful richness
and majesty of thought. Thus the sacred poet or
prophet plays upon his theme as upon a many-stringed
instrument, bringing out a great variety of tone and
melody, advancing in graceful steppings or stately march
ings to the climax, or dwelling upon the therae with an

» Grill, in /. c.
t BSttcher, Ausf. Lehrbuch d. Heb. Sprache, I , p. 8. Leipzig, 1866.
% Girdlestone, Synonytns ofthe Old Test,, p. 15. London, 1871.

56 BIBLICAL STUDY.
inexhaustible variety of expression and coloring. The
Hebrew language is like the rich and glorious verdure of
Lebanon, or as the lovely face of the Shulamite, dark as
the tents of Kedar, yet rich in color as the curtains of
Solomon, or her graceful form, which is so rapturously
described as she discloses its beauties in the dance of the
hosts.* It is true that Hebrew literature is not as exten
sive as the Greek ; it is confined to history, poetry, proph
ecy, and possibly romance ; f but in these departraents it
presents the grandest productions of the human soul. Its
history gives us the origin and destiny of our race, un
folds the story of redemption, dealing now with the in
dividual, then with the faraily and nation, and at tiraes
widening so as to take into its field of representation the
most distant nations of earth ; it is a history in which
God is the great actor, in which sin and holiness are the
chief factors. Its poetry stirs the heart of mankind with
hyrans and prayers, with sentences of wisdom ; and in
the heroic struggles of a Job and the conquering virtue
of a Shulamite, there is imparted strength to the soul
and vigor to the character of man and woman transcend
ing the influence of the godlike Achilles or the chaste
Lucretia ; while the second half of Isaiah presents the
sublimest aspirations of man. Where shall we find such
iraages of beauty, such wealth of illustration, such grand
eur of delineation, such majestic representations? It
seems as if the prophet grasped in his tremendous soul
the raoveraents of the ages, and saw the very future
mirrored in the mind of God.
4. The Hebrew language is remarkable for its life and
fervor. This is owing to the emotional and hearty char
acter of the people. There is an artiessness, self-aban-

* Song of Songs, i. 5 ; vii. 1-7. + See Chapters Vlll. and IX.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 57
donment, and earnestness in the Hebrew tongue ; it is
transparent as a glass, so that we see through it as into
the very souls of the people. There is none of that re
serve, that cool and calm deliberation, that self-conscious
ness that characterize the Greek.* The Hebrew language
is distinguished by the strength of its consonants and the
weakness of its vowels ; so that the consonants give the
word a stability of form in which the vowels have the
greatest freedora of movement. The vowels circulate
in the speech as the blood of the language. Hence the
freedom in the varying expressions of the same root and
the fervor of its full-toned forras. And if we can trust
the Massoretic system of accentuation and vocalization,
the inflection of the language depends upon the dislike of
the recurrence of two vowelless consonants, and the law
of the vocal sheva and the half-open syllable ; and on the
power of the accent over the vocalization not only of the
accented syllable, but also of the entire word, and the law
of the pretonic Qdmetz. This gives the language a won
derful flexibility and elasticity. In the Hebrew tongue
the emotions overpower the thoughts and carry them on
in the rushing stream to the expression. Hence the lit
erature has a power over the souls of mankind. The
language is as expressive of emotion as the face of a
modest and untutored child, and the literature is but the
speaking face of the heart of the Hebrew people. The
Psalms of David touch a chord in every soul, and inter
pret the experience of all the world. The sentences
of Solomon corae to us as the home-truths, as the social
and political maxims that sway our minds and direct our
lives. The prophets present to us the objective omnipo-

* Ewald, in /. c, p. 33; Bottcher, iu /. c, p. 9. Bertheau, in Herzog, Real.
EncyclopSdie, I., Aufl. Bd. v., p. 613.
3*

68 BIBLICAL STUDY.
tent truth, which, according to the beautiful story of
Zerubbabel,* is the mightiest of all, flashing conviction
like the sun and cutting to the heart as by a sharp two-
edged sword. So with the history ; it presents to us the
simple facts of the lives of individuals and of nations in
the light of the Divine countenance, speaking to our
hearts and photographing upon us pictures of real life.
These are some of the most striking features of the
Hebrew language, which have made it the most suitable
of all to give to mankind the elementary religious truths
and facts of divine revelation. The great body of the
Bible, four-fifths of the sum total of God's Word, is in
this tongue. It is no credit to a Christian people that
the Hebrew language has no place at all in the most of
our colleges and universities ; that its study has been
confined, for the raost part, to theological seminaries
and the students for the ministry. It is not strange
that the Old Testament has been neglected in the pul
pit, the Sabbath-school, and the faraily, so that many
minds, even of the ministry, have doubted whether it
was any longer to be regarded as the Word of God. It
is not strange that Christian scholars, prejudiced by
their training in the languages and literatures of Greece
and Rome, should be unable to enter into the spirit, and
appreciate the peculiar features of the Hebrew language
and literature, and so fail to understand the elements of
a divine revelation. Separating the New Testament
and the words and work of Jesus and His apostles from
their foundation and their historical preparation, stu
dents have not caught the true spirit of the Gospel, nor
apprehended it in its unity and variety as the fulfilment
of the law and the prophets. But this is not all, for

* I. Esdras iv. 33-vti.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 59
we shall now attempt to show that the other languages
of the Bible, the Aramaic and the Greek, have been
moulded and transformed by the theological concep
tions and moral ideas that had been developing in the
Hebrew Scriptures, and which, having been ripened
under the potent influence of the Divine Spirit, were
about to burst forth into bloom and eternal fruitfulness
in these tongues prepared by Divine Providence for the
purpose. The Hebrew language is, as we have seen, the
language of religion, and moulded entirely by religious
and moral ideas and emotions. The Greek and the
Aramaic are of an entirely different character ; they were
not, as the Hebrew, cradled and nursed, trained from
infancy to childhood, arraed and equipped in their
heroic youth with divine revelation, but they were
moulded outside of the realra of divine revelation, and
only subsequently adapted for the declaration of sacred
truth. And first this was the case with the Aramaic.
II. THE ARAMAIC LANGUAGE
goes back in its history to the most primitive tiraes.
It is the farthest developed of the Shemitic family,
showing a decline, a decrepitude, in its poverty of forras
and vocalization, in its brevity and abruptness, in its ple-
onasra, and in its incorporation of a multitude of foreign
words. It was the language of those races of Syria and
Mesopotaraia that warred with the Egyptians and Assyr
ians, and possibly, as Gladstone suggests, took part in
the Trojan war,* who, according to Sayce,t used the
earliest systera of writing, and were the agents through
whom both the Hebrew and the Greek alphabets were

* Gladstone's Homeric Synchronism, N. Y., 1876, p. 173.
-t The Hamathite Inscriptions, Trans. Society of Bib. Archceology, London,
1870, p. 30.

60 BIBLICAL STUDY.
conveyed to those peoples. At all events the Aramaic
became the language of comraerce and intercourse be
tween the nations during the Persian period,* taking the
place of the Phoenician, as it was in turn supplanted by
the Greek. The children of Judah having been carried
into captivity and violently separated from their sacred
places and the scenes of their history, gradually acquired
this commercial and common language of intercourse,
so that ere long it became the language of the Hebrew
people, the knowledge of the ancient Hebrew being con
fined to the learned and the higher ranks of society.
Hence, even in the books of Ezra and Daniel, consider
able portions were written in Araraaic. This Aramaic is
called the Biblical Chaldee, to distinguish it from the
Chaldee of the Targums, but really gives us an older
type of the language.
The Aramaic continued to be the language of the Jews
during the Persian, Greek, and Roman periods, and was
the common speech of Palestine in the times of our
Lord,t although it had long ceased to be the language of
coramerce and intercourse, the Greek having taken its
place, which gradually penetrated from the commercial
and official circles even to the lowest ranks of society.
Thus there was a mingling of a Greek population with
the Shemitic races, not only in the Greek colonies of
the Decapolis and the cities of the sea-coast of Palestine,
but also in the great centres of Tiberias, Samaria, and
even in Jerusalem itself. Greek manners and customs
were, under the influence of the Herodians and the Sad
ducees, pressing upon the older Aramaic and Hebrew,

-"- It must also have been widely spoken in the Assyrian period, as we see frora
II. Kings xviii. ii ; see also Fried. Delitzsch, IVo Lag das Paradies. Leipzig,
1881, p. 258.
\ Schurer, Neutestament. Zeit gesch., p. 372, Leipzig, 1874.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. gl
not without the stout resistance of the Pharisees. The
language of our Saviour, however, in which He delivered
His discourses and instructions, was undoubtedly the
Araraaic, although we could hardly deny Hira the
knowledge and use of the Greek. ' For not only do the
Aramaic terms that He used, which are retained at
times by the evangelists, and the proper names of His
disciples, but also the very structure and style of His
discourses, show the Aramaic characteristics. For our
Saviour's methods of delivery and style of instruction
were essentially the sarae as those of the rabbins of
His tirae. Hence we should not think it strange, that
from this Araraaic literature alone we can bring forward
parallels to the wise sentences and raoral raaxiras of the
Sermon on the Mount, the rich and beautiful parables,
by which He illustrated His discourses, and the fiery
zeal of His denunciation of hypocrisy, together with the
profound depths of His esoteric instruction. Our Saviour
used the Aramaic language and raethods, in order there
by to reach the people of His tiraes, and place in the
prepared Araraaic soil the precious seeds of heavenly
truth. It is the providential significance of the Ara
maic language that it thus prepared the body for the
thought of our Saviour. It is a language admirably
adapted by 'its simplicity, perspicuity, precision, and
definiteness, with all its awkwardness, for the associa
tions of every-day life. It is the language for the lawyer
and the scribe, the pedagogue and the pupil ; indeed, the
English language of the Shemitic family.* Thus the
earlier Aramaic of the Bible gives us only official docu
ments, letters, and decrees, or else simple narrative.
As raoulded by the Jewish people after the return from

* Volck in Herzog's Real Encyklopadie, II. Aufl. i, p. 603.

62 BIBLICAL STUDY.
exile, it was through the giving of the sense of the
original Hebrew Scriptures (Neh. viii. 8). The whole
life of the Jewish people, subsequent to the exile, was
in this giving the sense of the Hebrew Scriptures, both
in the Halacha of the rabbinical schools, and the Haggada
of the synagogue and the social circle. It is true that
the Halacha was developed in the rival schools of Shara-
mai and Hillel into the raost subtle questions of casu
istry, and our Saviour often severely reproved the Phar
isaic spirit for its subtlety and scholasticism ; yet not
infrequently He employed their raethods to the discom
fiture of His opponents,* as in Matt. xxii. 15-46, although
His own spirit was rather that of the old prophets than
of the scribes. The Haggada was developed by the rab
bins into a great variety of forms of ethical wisdom and
legend. This we see already in the apocryphal books
of Wisdom, in the stories of Zerubbabel, of Judith, of
Susanna, and of Tobit. -f" This latter method was the
favorite one of our Saviour, as calculated for the com
mon people, and to it we may attribute the parables, and
the sweet sentences of the Sermon on the Mount, which,
though after the manner of the scribes,]: have yet a
clearness and transparency as the atmosphere of the
Holy Land itself, a richness and simplicity as the scarlet
flower of the fields He loved so well, a calm majesty
and profound iriystery as the great deep, for He was the

* Weizsacker, Untersuchungen Uber die ev. Geschichte, p. 358, seq. , Gotha,
1864. + Zunz, Gottesdienstlichen Vortrage der Juden, Berlin 1832, pp. 42, 100,
120 ; Etheridge, Introduction to Hebrew Literature, London, 1856, p. 102,
seq. Those who are interested in this subject may find a large collection of this
Haggadistic literature in the Bibliotheca Rablinica, Eine Sammlung Alter Mid-
raschim ins Deutsche iibertragen von Aug. Wunsche, 20 Lief. Leipzig, i88o-
84. \ Hausrath, Die Zeit Jesus, Heidelberg, 1868, p. go.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 63
expositor of the Divine mind, heart, and being to man
kind (John i. i8).
The office of the Aramaic language was still further
to raediate between the old world and the new — the
Hebrew and the Greek ; for the Greek language was the
chosen one to set forth the divine revelation in its com
pletion. III. THE GREEK LANGUAGE
was born and grew to full maturity outside of the
sphere of the divine revelation, and yet was predestined
"as the most beautiful, rich, and harmonious language
ever spoken or written " " to forra the pictures of silver*
in which the golden apple of the Gospel should be pre
served for all generations." *
For, as Alexander the Great broke in pieces the Ori
ental world-raonarchies that fettered the kingdom of
God, and prepared a theatre for its world-wide expan
sion, so did the Greek language and literature that his
veterans carried with them prove more potent weapons
than their swords and spears for transforming the civili
zation of the East and preparing a language for the uni
versal Gospel. The Greek language is the beautiful
flower, the elegant jewel, the most finished masterpiece
of Indo-Germanic thought. In its early beginning we
see a nuraber of dialects spoken by a brave and warlike
people, struggling with one another, as well as with ex
ternal foes, maintaining themselves successfully against
the Oriental and African civilizations, while at the same
time they appropriated those elements of culture which
they could incorporate into their own original thought
and life ; a race of heroes such as the earth has nowhere

* Sci\a.fi, Hist, of the Apostolic Church, p. n$. New York, 1859. See also
Schaff, History of the Christian Church, I., p 78. New York, 1882.

64 BIBLICAL STUDY.
else produced, fighting their way upward into light and
culture until they attained the towering suramits of an
art, a literature, and a philosophy, that has ever been
the admiration and wonder of raankind. As Pallas
sprang forth in full heroic stature from the head of her
father Zeus, so Greek literature sprang into historical
existence in the matchless Iliad. Its classic period was
constituted by the heroism and genius of the Athenian
republic, which worked even more mightily in language,
literature, and art, than in the fields of politics and war,
producing the histories of Thucydides and Xenophon,
^pthe tragedies of an .^schylus and Sophocles, the philos
ophy of a Socrates and Plato, the oratory of a Demos
thenes and .^schines. Looking at the Greek language
before it became the world-language, and so the lan
guage of a divine revelation, we observe that its charac
teristic features are in strong contrast with those of the
Hebrew tongue.
I. The Greek language is complex and artistic. As
the Hebrew mind perceives and conteraplates, the
Greek conceives and reflects. Hence the Greek ety
mology is elaborate in its development of forms from a
few roots, in the declensions and cases of nouns, in the
conjugations, tenses, and raoods of the verb, giving the
idea a great variety of raodifications. Hence the syntax
is exceedingly coraplex in the varied use of the conjunc
tions and particles, the intricate arrangeraent of the sen
tences as they may be corabined into grand periods,
which require the closest attention of a practiced raind
to follow, in their nice discriminations and adjustraents
of the thought.* Hence the coraplex and delicate rules

•* Curtius, Griech. Gesch., Berlin, 1865, 2d Aufl., I., pp. 19, 20; History op
Greece, New York, 1875, vol. i,, pp. 30, 32.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 65
of prosody, with the great variety of metres and
rhythms. The Greek mind would wrestle with the ex
ternal world, would search out and explore the reason
of things, not being satisfied with the phenomena, but
grasping for the noumena. Thus a rich and varied litera
ture was developed, complex in character, the epos, the
drama, the philosophical treatise, and scientific discus
sion, which are purely Greek, and could have little place
among the Hebrews.*
2. The Greek language is characterized by its atten
tion to the form or style of its speech, not to limit the
freedom of the raoveraent of thought and emotion, but
to direct them in the channels of clear, definite, logical
sentences, and beautiful, elegant, and artistic rhetorical
figures. The Greek was a thorough artist ; and as the
palaces of his princes, the temples of his gods, the im
ages of his worship, his clothing and his arraor, must
be perfect in form and exquisite in finished decora
tion, so the language, as the palace, the dress of his
thought, must be symmetrical and elegant.f Hence
there is no language that has such laws of euphony, in
volving changes in vocalization, and the transposition
and mutation of letters ; for their words must be musi
cal, their clauses harmonious, their sentences and periods
symraetrical. And so they are combined in the raost
exquisite taste in the dialogues of the philosopher, the
measures of the poet, the stately periods of the histo
rian and the orator. The sentences " are intricate, com
plex, involved like an ivory cabinet, till the discovery
of its nominative gives you the key for unlocking the

* Donaldson, The New Cratylus, 3d ed., p. 153.
t Curtius, Griech. Gesch., I., pp. 20, 21 ; History of Greece, New York, 1875,
I., pp. 32-34.

66 BIBLICAL STUDY.
mechanism and admiring the ingenuity and beauty of
its rhetoric." *
3. The Greek language is thus beautiful and finished.
The Greek mind was essentially ideal, not accepting the
external world as its own, but transforming it to suit its
genius and its taste. This was owing to its original hu
manizing genius and its central theme, man as the he
roic, man as the ideally perfect. f As the language and
literature of the Hebrews were inspired to describe " the
righteous acts of Jahveh's dorainion in Israel and the
victories of his holy arm" (Judges v. il ; Psa. xcviii. l),
and thus were majestic and sublime ; so the language and
literature of the Greeks were to sing the exploits of the
godlike Achilles, the crafty Ulysses, and the all-conquer
ing Hercules ; to paint the heroic struggles of the tribes
at Thermopylae, Salamis, and Platea, to conceive a
model republic and an ideal human world, and thus
were beautiful, stately, and charm.ing. The gods are ideal
ized virtues and vices and powers of nature, and con
ceived after the fashion of heroic men and women, ar
ranged in a mythology which is a marvel of taste and
genius. Nature is idealized, and every plant and tree
and fountain becoraes a living being. Indeed, every
thing that the Greek mind touched it clothed with its
own ideals of beauty. Hence the drama is the most ap
propriate literature for such a people, and the dialogue
the proper method of its philosophy.:]:
4. The Greek language has remarkable strength and

* W. Adams, Charge on occasion of the induction of Dr. Shedd as Pro
fessor of Bib. Literature, New York, 1864, p. 10.
-f Schaff, Apostolic Church, New York, p. 145 ; Zezschwitz, Profangrdcitai
und biblischer Sprachgebrauch, Leipzig, 1S69, p. 13.
t Curtius, Griech. Gesch., III., p. 508; History of Greece, New York, 1875,
.vol. v., pp. 169, 170.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 67
vigor. Its stems have been corapressed, vowel and con
sonant compacted together. Its words are complete in
theraselves, ending only in vowels and the consonants
n, r, and" J/ they have a singular independence, as the
Greek citizen and warrior, and are protected from muti
lation and change.* It is true it has a limited number
of roots, yet it is capable of developing therefrom an in
definite variety of words ; f so that although it cannot
approach the wealth of synonym of the Hebrew, yet its
words are trained as the athlete, and capable of a great
variety of movements and striking effects. Its syntax
is organized on the most perfect system, all its parts
corapacted into a solid mass, in which the individual is
not lost, but gives his strength to impart to the whole
the weight and invincible push of the phalanx. Hence
the Greek language is peculiarly the language of ora
tory that would sway the raind and conquer with invin^
cible arguraent. It is the language of a Deraosthenes,
the raodel orator for the world. It wrestles with the
mind, it parries and thrusts, it conquers as an armed
host. Such was the language with which Alexander went
forth to subdue the world, and which he made the com
mon speech of the nations for many generations. It is
true that the Greek was required to forfeit somewhat of
its elegance and refinement in its collision with so' many
barbarous tongues, but it lost none of its essential char
acteristics when it was adopted by the Egyptian, the
Syrian, and the Jew. The Jews were scattered widely
in the earth, engaged in coraraercial pursuits that re-

-* Curtius, Griech. Gesch., I., p. i8 ; Hist, of Greece, New York, 1875, vol. I,
p, 29,
t Jelfs, Greek Gram., 4th. ed., Oxford, 1864, p. 330.

68 BIBLICAL STUDY.
quired them, above all others, to master the common
speech of the nations. Hence those of Europe, Asia
Minor, and Africa, easily adopted the Greek as their
vernacular, and it gradually became more and more the
language of Syria and Palestine. This was furthered by
the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into the Greek
at Alexandria, the centre of the Greek culture of the
times, a translation which shows upon its face the diffi
culties of rendering for the first time foreign conceptions
into a strange tongue,* but which nevertheless became
of incalculable importance in preparing the way for the
New Testaraent writers. The original productions of
the Jews of Alexandria and Palestine, raany of which
are preserved in the apocryphal books of the Old Testa
ment, combined to produce the same result. Gradually
the Jewish mind was raodified by the Greek thought
and culture, and the Greek language was, on the other
hand, adapted to the expression of Hebrew and Ara
maic conceptions. The apostles of our Lord, if they
were to carry on a work and exert an influence, world
wide and enduring, were required, from the very circum
stances of the times, to use the Greek ; for the Aramaic
would have had but a narrow and ever-diminishing in
fluence, even if their labors had been confined to the
synagogues of the dispersed Jews. Hence we are not
surprised that, without an exception, so far as we know,
the New Testament writers composed their works in
Greek, yes, even gave us the Aramaic discourses of our
Saviour in the Greek tongue. Nor was this without its
providential purpose ; for though our Saviour delivered
His discourses in Aramaic, yet they were not taken

* Reuss, Hellenistisches Idiom, in Herzog, Realencyklopadie, I. Aufl. , p.
709, II. , Aufl. p. 74S.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 69
down by the evangelists as they heard thera in that
tongue, but were subsequently recalled to their rainds
by the Holy Spirit, who, in accordance with the promise
of our Lord, brought all things to their reraerabrance
(John xiv. 26) ; so that they recalled the ideas, rather than
the language, and gave the ideas, therefore, the Greek
embodiment ; and so we have no translation of the words
of Jesus, but the words of Jesus as they passed through
the Hellenistic conception of the evangelists, colored by
their minds and human characteristics ; * for it was evi
dently the design of God that the Saviour's words, as
well as acts and His glorious person, should be presented
to the world through those four typical evangelists, who
appropriately represent the four chief phases of human
character and experience.
The New Testament writers used the common Greek
of their time, yet as men who had been trained in the
Hebrew Scriptures and in the Aramaic methods of ex
position, but above all as holy men who spake as they
were moved by the Holy Spirit. Hence, as the Greek
language had now to perform a work for which it had
providentially been preparing, and yet one which it had
never yet attempted, namely, to convey the divine rev
elation to raankind, so it raust be remoulded and shaped
by the mind of the Spirit to express ideas that were new
both to the Greek and the Jew, but which had been de
veloping in the languages and literatures of both nations,
for each in its way prepared for the Gospel of Christ.f
Hence we are not surprised that the biblical Greek
should be distinguished not only from the classic

* Winer, New Test. Gram., Thayer's edit., Andover, 1872, p. 27; Bleek's
Einleit. in d. N. T., 2d Aufl., Berlin, 1866, p. 76 ; Edin., 1869, p. 72, seq.
-t Schaff, Apostolic Church, p. 146 ; also Schaff, History of the Christian
Church, I., p. 76, seq.

70 BIBLICAL STUDY.
models, but also from the literary Greek of the time,
although when compared with the Greek of the Septua
gint and the Apocrypha, it approximates more to the
literary Greek, being " not the slavish idiom of a trans
lation, but a free, language-creating idiom, without, how
ever, denying its cradle." * It is true that rauch of its
elegance and artistic finish has been lost, and the nicely-
rounded sentences and elaborate periods,' with their deli
cately-shaded conceptions, have disappeared, yet its dis
tinguishing characteristics, especially its strength and
beauty, its perspicuity, and its logical and rhetorical
power, have been preserved, while to these have been
added the simplicity and richness, the ardor and glow
of the Aramaic style ; but over and above all these, the
language has been employed by the Spirit of God, and
transformed and transfigured, yes, glorified, with a light
and sacredness that the classic literature never possessed.
It is true that the writings of the New Testament are
not all on the same level of style and language.f The
gospels of Matthew and Mark, and the epistles of Peter
and James, together with the Apocalypse, have stronger
Aramaic coloring, which disturbs the Greek lines of
beauty, the Greek form being overpowered by the life
and glow of the Araraaic emotion ; yet in the writings
of Luke and John, but especially of Paul and the Epis
tle to the Hebrews, the strength and excellence of the
Greek unite with the peculiarities of the Araraaic and
the Hebrew in "striving, under the potent influence of
the Holy Spirit, to convey the new religion in the most
adequate and appropriate language and style.

* Reuss, Hellenistisches Idiom, in Herzog, I. Aufl., V,, p. 710 ; II. Aufl.,
v., p. 747 ; Winer, New Test. Gram., p. 39.
t Immer, Hermeneutik des Neuen Testaments, Wittemberg, 1S73, p. 106, seq. ;
Amer. ed,, Andover, 1877, p. 132 ; Reuss, in /. c, p. 747.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 71
Here the humanizing and idealistic tendencies of the
Greek combine with the theological and realistic tenden
cies of the Hebrew and the Araraaic ; for to these New
Testaraent writers the person of Christ assuraes the
central and deterraining position and influence, as '^aJi-
veh the one God did to the Old Testament writers.
Christ became the emperor of the Scriptures, to use
Luther's expression, and His person irradiated its lan
guage and literature with His own light and glory. Thus
when the mind now strove to conceive no longer the
simple idea of the one God Jahveh, but the coraplex
idea of the person of Christ and the Trinity therein in
volved, the Hebrew language was entirely inadequate ;
and the Greek, as the most capable, raust be strained
and tried to the utraost to convey the idea of the Logos,
who was in the beginning, was with God, and was God,
and yet becarae the Word incarnate, the God-man, the
interpreter in coraplete huraanity of the fulness of the
Deity dwelling in Hira (John i. 1-14) ; for notwithstand
ing the historical preparation for this conception in the
theophanies of the Hebrews, the nous of Plato, the logos
of Philo, and the wisdom of Solomon and Sirach, it was
yet an entirely new conception, which, notwithstanding
the preparation of the Hebrew and the Greek, the world
could not appropriate without the transforming and en
lightening influence of the Spirit of God.* So in an
thropology the apostle Paul corabines the Hebrew and
Greek conceptions in order to produce a new and perfect
conception. Taking the psychology of the Greek as a
system, he gave the central place to the Hebrew ruach or

* Dorner, Entwicklungsgeschichte der Lehre von der Person Christi
Stuttgart, 184s, I, p. 64; Edin., T. & T. Clark, 1861, pp. 44, 45! Schaff, il
Lange, Com. on John, N. Y., p. 55.

72 BIBLICAL STUDY.
spirit, finding, to use the words of Zezschwitz, its " un-
disturbed centralization in living union with the Spirit of
God."* He then brings out the strife of the flesh {ffdpS)
with the spirit {7Cvei)/Aa), and the false position of the
psychical nature {fvx'rj) over against the spirit. So also
for the first he gives to the world the true conception
of the conscience {GvvsiSriaii) as " the remnant of the
spirit in the psychical man," " the divine voice," the
consciousness of which Socrates felt as the " suramit of
the knowledge of the true wisdom by the Greek spirit." f
Hence the developraent of the doctrine of sin with its
technical terras, and of holiness with its new ideas and
language. How infinitely deeper and higher than the
Greek are these conceptions of the New Testament-
language, as the person of Christ, presented by the
omnipotent Spirit, convinces the world of sin, of right
eousness, and of judgment (John xvi. 8). Jesus, as "the
only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth "
(John i. 14), assumes the place not only of the heroic ideal
man of the Greeks, but even of the unapproachable holy
Jahveh of the Hebrews. Hence the elevation of the graces
of meekness, patience, long-suffering, self-sacrifice ; and the
dethronement of the Greek virtues of strength, beauty,
bravery, manhood. And so in all departments of Chris
tian thought, there was a corresponding elevation and
degradation of terms and conceptions. We need only
mention regeneration, redemption, reconciliation, justifi
cation, sanctification, life and death, heaven and hell,
the church, the kingdom of God, repentance, faith.
Christian love, baptism, the Lord's supper, the Lord's
day, the advent, the judgment, the new Jerusalera, ever-

* Zezschwitz, Profangracitat, etc., p. 36, seq,
t Zezschwitz, in /. c, pp. 55-57.

THE LANGUAGES OF THE BIBLE. 73
lasting glory.* Truly a new world was disclosed by the
Greek language, and the literature of the New Testa
ment, as the Hebrew and the Aramaic and the Greek
combined their energies and capacities in the grasp of
the Divine creating and shaping Spirit, who transformed
the Greek language and created a new and holy Greek
literature, as the earth heaves and subsides into new
forms and shapes under the energy of the great forces
of its advancing epochs.
The especial literary development of the New Testa
ment is in the sermon and the theological tract. We
trace these from the first beginning on the day of Pen
tecost through the discourses of the book of Acts, and
parallel therewith the epistles of Peter and Paul and
John. Looking at the sermons we observe that they
are no longer on the Aramaic model as are the dis
courses of our Lord, biit we see the Greek orator as
well as the Aramaic rabbin. So with the epistles, espe
cially of Paul, although he reminds us of the rabbinical
schools in his use of the halacha and haggada raethods,t
yet they exhibit rather the dialectic raethods of the
Greek philosopher. Thus the Greek orator and phi
losopher prepared the language and style of Paul the
preacher and theologian no less than the Hebrew
prophet and wise man gave him the fundaraental prin
ciples of his wisdom and experience. And although
the Greek literature of the New Testament has no De
mosthenes' " On the crown," or Plato's Republic, as it has
no Iliad or Prometheus ; yet it lays the foundation of
the sermon and the tract, which have been the literary

* Bleek, Einleitung, p. 71 ; Immer, Hermeneutik, p. 105 ; Am. ed., Ando
ver, 1877, pp. 129-131 ; Cremer, Bib. Theol. Worterbuck der Neu-Testament.
Gracitat and Trench, New Testament Synonyms under the respective words,
t Gal. iv. 22, seq. ; Rom. iii. i, seq., etc.
4

74 BIBLICAL STUDY.
means of a world-transforming power, as, from the pulpit
and the chair. Christian ministers have stirred the hearts
and rainds of raankind, and lead the van of progress of
the Christian world — for the sermon combines the pro
phetic message of the Hebrew with the oratorical force
of the Greek, as it not only fires the heart, but strives
in the council-chamber of the intellect and pleads at
the bar of the conscience ; while the epistle combines
the sententious wisdom of the Hebrew with the dia
lectic philosophy of the Greek, in order to mould and
fashion the souls of men and of nations, by great vital
and comprehensive principles that constitute the invin
cible forces of Christian history.

CHAPTER IV.
THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM.
The Bible is composed of a great variety of writings
of holy men under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,
in a long series extending through many centuries, pre
served to us in three different original languages, the
Hebrew, the Chaldee, and the Greek, besides numerous
versions. These languages were themselves the prod
ucts of three different civilizations, -which having accom
plished their purpose passed away, the languages no
longer being used as living speech, but preserved only in
written documents. They present to us a great variety
of literature, as the various literary styles and the various
literary forms of these three languages have combined
in this one sacred book of the Christian church, making
it as remarkable for its literary variety as for its religious
unity. The Bible is the sacred canon of the church of Christ,
the infallible authority in all matters of worship, faith,
and practice. From this point of view it has been stud
ied for centuries by Jew and Christian. Principles of in
terpretation have been established and employed in
building up systems of religion, doctrine, and raorals.
The divine element, which is ever the principal thing, has
been justly emphasized ; and the doctrine of inspiration
has been extended by many dogmatic divines so as to
(75)

76 BIBLICAL STUDY.
cover the external letter, the literary forra and style, in
the theory of verbal inspiration. The fact has been too
often overlooked, that it has not seemed best to God to
create a holy language for the exclusive vehicle of His
Word, or to constitute peculiar literary forms and styles
for the expression of His revelation, or to commit the
keeping of the text of this Word to infallible guar
dians. But on the other hand, as He employed men
rather than angels as the channels of His revelation, so
He used three human languages with all the varieties of
literature that had been developed in the various nations,
using these languages in order that He raight approach
mankind in a more familiar way in the huma?i forms with
which they were acquainted and which they could readily
understand, and He permitted the sacred text to depend
for its accuracy upon the attention and care of the suc
cessive generations of His people. Hence the necessity
of biblical criticism to determine the true canon, the
correct text, and the position and character of the vari
ous writings.
These sacred writings might be studied from the histor
ical point of view under the title. History of Biblical Lit
erature, or from the dogmatic point of view as Biblical
Introduction ; but both of these methods of treating
biblical literature, unless they depend entirely upon
traditional opinions, presuppose the work of criticism.
The dogmatic method of Biblical Introduction is con
trary to the genius of biblical study. The Biblical In
troductions constructed on this plan have gathered a
vast amount of material in a dry, scholastic, pedantic,
and iil-adjusted mass, so as to prejudice the student
against the Scriptures when he should be introduced by
the best methods into the sacred halls of its literature.
The addition of the attributes " historical," and " histori-

THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM. 77
co-critical," to " introduction " has been accompanied by
a corresponding internal improvement through the in
troduction of the critical and the historical methods,
but they have been kept in too subordinate a place even
in the works most characterized by freedom of criticisra.
Through the influence of Reuss and Hupfeld the his
torical method carae into use as the dorainant one.*
But such a history of biblical literature can be con
structed only after criticism has accomplished its work
of destruction and of construction, and it will be shaped
and controlled by criticism. Hermann Strack -f thinks
that such a history is at present impossible on account
of the great diversity of opinion among critics. It is
true that any such history will represent the subjective
opinions of the historian and his school. The works of
Fiirst and Reuss are built upon theoretical considera
tions rather than established facts. But a history of
biblical literature might be constructed which would
distinguish between facts and theories, and though it
might be imperfect and not altogether satisfactory, it
might prepare the way for something better, and it would
certainly present the material in a most attractive forra.
But the dominant method in all biblical studies should
be the inductive and not the historical. The construc
tion of a history of biblical literature would not dis
pense with a system of biblical literature as a part of
Exegetical Theology. In the construction of this sys
tem criticism will prove the most important raethod.

* Reuss, die Gesch. d. heil. Schriften N. T., 1842, 5te Aufl., 1874; Hupfeld,
Segrip' und Method d. sogenan. bib. Einleit., 1844 ; Furst, Gesch. d. hih. Lit-
eratur historisch und kritisch behandelt, 1867-70 ; Zahn, Einleitung in das
N. T., in Herzog, Real Encyk. ii. Aufl. iv., p. 147, 1879; Reuss, Gesch. d. heil.
Schriften Alien Test. 1881.
t Zockler, Handbuch der theologischen Wissen^chaften, I., 1S82, p. 122.

78 BIBLICAL STUDY.
It seems best, therefore, to distinguish the three depart
ments of Biblical Literature as. Biblical Canonics, Text
ual Criticism, and Higher Criticism..
The distinction between the lower and the higher
criticism has long been known to scholars. These terms
have been more widely used than any others to discrim
inate between the criticism of the text and the criticism
of the literary forms and contents. They are not al
together satisfactory, but we shall retain them as the
best terms that have been suggested and in accordance
with the established technics of criticism. Hagenbach *
proposes to substitute internal and external criticism for
higher and lower criticism, but we have yet to learn that
any critic has adopted his proposition.
We propose to give in this chapter a general discus
sion of criticism itself, its idea, divisions, principles, and
methods, and the propriety of its application to the
Bible ; in the three following chapters to treat the three
departments of biblical criticisra separately, and in the
two subsequent chapters to present biblical literature in
its two great literary forms, as prose and poetry.
I. WHAT IS CRITICISM?
Biblical criticism is one of the departments of his
torical criticism, as historical criticism is one of the
divisions of general criticism. Criticism is a method
of knowledge, and, wherever there is anything to be
known, the critical method has its place. Knowl
edge is gained by the faculties of the human mind
through sense-perception, the intuitions, and the rea
soning powers. If these were infallible in their work
ing, and their results were always reliable, there would

* Encyklopadie, gte Aufl., 1874, p. 164.

THE BIBLE AND CEITICISM. 79
be no need of criticism; but, in fact, these faculties are
use# by fallible men who do not know how to use them,
or employ them in various degrees of imperfection,
so that human knowledge is ever a mixture of the
true and false, the reliable and the unreliable ; and errors
of individuals are perpetuated and enhanced by trans
mission from raan to man and from generation to gen
eration. Criticism is the test of the certainty of knowl
edge, the method of its verification. It examines the
products of human thinking and working and tests them
by the laws of thought and of history. It eliminates the
false, the uncertain, the unsubstantial from the true, the
certain, and the substantial.
The unthinking rely upon their own crude knowledge
which they have received from their fathers and friends
or acquired by their narrow experience, without reflect
ing upon the uncertainty necessarily attached to it.
But the reflecting mind which has experienced the un
certainty of its own acquisitions and of those things that
have been transmitted to it, cannot rely upon anything
as really known until it has been tested and found reli
able by criticism. For criticism reviews the processes
of thought and the arguments and evidences by which
its results have been acquired. It studies these prod
ucts in their genesis, examines them carefully in the or
der of their production, verifies and corrects them, im
proves upon them where improvement is possible,
strengthens them where strength is needed, but also
destroys them when they are found to be worthless,
misleading, or false, as mere conceits, illusions, or fraudu
lent inventions. Criticism is thus on the one side de
structive, for its office is to detect the false, eliminate it,
and destroy it. This is not infrequently a painful process
to the critic himself, and to those who have allowed

80 BIBLICAL STUDY.
themselves to be deceived, and have been relying
upon the unreliable; but it is indispensable to«the
knowledge of the truth ; it is the path of safety for the
intellect and the raorals ; it reraoves the obstructions to
progress in knowledge. The destruction of an error
opens up a vision of the truth, as a raote rernoved from
the eye or frost brushed from the window. For criti
cism is also constructive. It tests and finds the truth.
It rearranges truths and facts in their proper order and
harmony. In accordance with the strictness of its
methods, and the thoroughness of their application will be
the certainty of the results. But criticism itself, as a
human raethod of knowledge, is also defective and needs
self-criticism for its own rectification, security, and prog
ress. It must again and again verify its methods and
correct its processes. Eternal vigilance is the price of
truth as well as of liberty. It improves its methods with
the advancement of human learning. In the infancy or
growth of a nation, or of an individual, or of the world,
we do not find criticism. It belongs to the manhood
and maturity of a nation and the world's civilization.
Criticism requires for its exercise careful training.
Only those who have learned how to use its tools and
have employed thera with the best masters, and have
attained a mastery of the departments of knowledge to
be criticised, are prepared for the delicate and difficult
work of criticism ; for knowledge must be attained ere
it can be tested. Criticism refines the crude oil of
knowledge. It cleanses and polishes the rough diamond
of thought. It reraoves the dross from the gold of
wisdom. Criticism searches all departments of knowl
edge as a torch of fire consuming the hay, straw, and
stubble, that the truth of God may shine forth in its
majesty and certainty as the imperishable and eternal.

THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM. 81
No one need fear criticism, save those who are uncer
tain in their knowledge, for criticism leads to certitude.
It dissipates doubt. Fiat Lux is its watchword.
We are not surprised that criticism has thus far been
largely destructive, for there were many errors that had
grown up and becorae venerable with age, and were so
interwoven and erabedded in systems of philosophy, of
theology, of law, raedicine, and science, as well as the
manners and customs of raen, that a long conflict was
necessary to destroy them. Mankind in general are more
concerned with the maintenance of established positions
and systems and vested interests than they are interested
in the truth of God and of nature. Scholars, when they
see the venerable errors, hesitate to destroy them for fear
of damaging their own interests or those of their friends,
and soraetimes out of anxiety for the truth, with which
the error is entangled. But in the providence of God,
some great doubter like Voltaire, Hume or Strauss, or
some great reformer like Luther or Zwingli, arises to lay
violent hands upon the systems in which truth and error
are combined, raze them to the ground and trample them
in the dust, that from the ruins the imperishable truth
may be gathered up and arranged in its proper order
and harmony.
The modern world since the Reformation has becorae
more and more critical, until the climax has been reached
in our day. The destruction of error has been the chief
duty of criticism, but its constructive work has not
been neglected, and this will more and more rise into
importance in the progress of knowledge. It is not with
out significance that the age of the world most charac
terized by the spirit of criticisra has been the age of the
most wonderful progress in all departments of human
knowledge. 4*

82 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Criticism divides itself into various branches in accord
ance with the departments of knowledge: (i) Philosoph
ical Criticism ; (2) Historical Criticism ; and (3) Scientific
Criticism. Limiting ourselves to historical criticism
we distinguish it from other criticism, in that it has to
do with the materials of the past, the sources of the his
tory of mankind ; as philosophical criticism has to do
with the facts of human consciousness, and scientific
criticism with the facts of external nature. Historical
criticisra deals with the various sources of history ; liter
ary documents, raonuraents, laws, customs, institutions,
traditions, legends, and myths. The great importance
of the literary sources justifies their separation in the
distinct branch of literary criticisra. Biblical criticism
is one of the sections of literary criticism, as it has to
do with the sacred literature of the Christian Church.
II. THE PRINCIPLES OF CRITICISM.
The principles and raethods of Biblical Criticism will
thus embrace (i) those of Criticism in general, (2) of His
torical Criticism, (3) of Literary Criticism, and (4) of Bibli
cal Criticisra. Biblical Criticism has thus the advantage
of all this preliminary work in other fields to guide and
illustrate its own peculiar work.
I. From General Criticism it derives the fundamental
laws of thought, which must not be violated, such as the
laws of identity, of contradiction, of exclusion, and of
sufficient reason ; * also the laws of probation, which must
be applied to all reasoning : There must be no begging
of the question at issue, no reasoning backward and for
ward or in a circle, no jumping at conclusions, no set-

-¦* Sir Wm. Hamilton, Logic, Boston, i860, p. 57 ; also McCosh, Lanos 0/
Discursive Thought, N. Y., 1871, p. 195, seq.

THE BIBLE AND CEITICISM. 83
ting out to prove one thing and then insensibly sub
stituting another thing in its place.* These laws of
probation are the sharp tools of the critic with which he
tests all the acquisitions of the human mind and all the
reasonings of scholars in all departments of knowledge.f
2. From Historical Criticism Biblical Criticism derives
the principles of historic genesis. The evidences of history
belong to the past. They are oral, written, or monu
mental. They have passed through several stages before
they reached us. They must be traced back to their
origin in order to determine whether they are genuine ;
or whether they have been invented as interesting sto
ries for hours of idleness and recreation, or as forgeries
with the intent to deceive ; or whether there is a min
gling of these various elements that need to be separated
and distinguished.:]:
The order and processes of the development of the
material must be considered in order to determine its
integrity, or how far it has been modified by external
influences or the struggle of internal inconsistencies, and
how far the earlier and the later elements may be distin
guished and the excrescences removed frora the original.
The character of the raaterial raust be studied in order
to determine how far it is reliable and trustworthy ;
whether it is in accordance with the experience of man
kind, and so natural ; or contrary to that experience, and
so unnatural or supernatural ; whether it is in harmony
with itself and consistent with its own conditions and

•* Sir Wm. Hamilton, Logic, p. 369 / McCosh, Laws of Discursive Thought,
p. 183, seq.
t An excellent application of these principles to Biblical Criticism is found in
the article of Wilhs J. Beecher on the Logical Methods of Professor Kuenen, in
the Presbyterian Review, 1882, III., p. 701, seq.
X Gieseler, Text-Book of Church History. N. Y., 1857, I., p. 23.

84 BIBLICAL STUDY.
circumstances ; whether there are disturbing influences
that determine the material so as to warp or color it,
and how far these influences extend.*
The value of the raaterials of history depends upon
such considerations as these; also upon the nearness or
reraoteness of the raaterial to the raatters concerning
which they render testiraony ; upon the extent and vari
ety of evidence, if that extent and variety are primitive
and not derived from an original source upon which
they all depend. The consistency and persistence of
materials are also evidences of vitality and inherent
strength of evidence.
The sources of history that cannot bear this criticism
are not reliable sources. The application of these sim
ple tests removes frora the pages of history numberless
legends, fables, and myths, and deterraines the residuum
of truth and fact that underlies them. It is distressing
to part with the sweet stories which have been told us
in our early life, and which have been handed down by
the romancers from the childhood and youth of our
race. We may still use thera as stories, as products of
the imagination, but we dare not build on them as his
toric verities. As men we must know the truth. We
cannot afford to deceive ourselves or others.
Many of these legends and traditions have strongly
intrenched themselves and lie like solid rocks in the
path of historic investigation.* They must be exploded
to get at the truth, and this cannot be done without
noise and confusion ; and outcries of alarm from the
weak and timid, and those who are interested in the
maintenance of error and court popularity by an ap
peal to prejudices. Sometiraes these traditions may be

* See Droysen, Grundriss der Historik. Leipzig, i858. pp. 16-17.

THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM, 85
overcome by positive evidence obtained by careful re
search in ancient documents, and by parallel lines of evi
dence. But it is not always possible to obtain sufficient
external positive evidence. Sometimes we have to rely
upon a long-continued and unbroken silence, and some
times we have to challenge the tradition and reject it
from sheer lack of evidence and the suspicious circura
stances of its origin and growth.
3. From Literary Criticism Biblical Criticism derives its
chief principles and methods. As literature it must first
be considered as text. The MSS., versions, and cita
tions are studied in order to attain, as far as possible, the
originals.* The laws of the transmission of books are
to be determined. The sources of error in the text are
the carelessness, ignorance, or inadvertence of the copy
ists. We have to consider the raistakes which they were
liable to raake, such as in words of similar sound, in
letters of like form, in the repetition of words in passing
from line to line, in the omission or insertion of words
or clauses by slips of the eye, in the transfer of explana
tory notes from the raargin to the text. The errors in
translation arise frora lack of knowledge of the original,
or inability to give adequate expression to the idea of
the original, save by paraphrase, and in defective judg
ment as to the best way of rendering it. Errors in cita
tion arise from slips of the meraory and the desire to
use a part and not the whole of the passage, or the
adaptation of it to circurastances beyond the scope of
the original. There are also errors in the text because of
the wear and tear of time in the destruction of MSS., ren-

* A statement of the principles of Textual Criticism in relation to the New
Testaraent may be found in the article of Prof. B. B. Warfield on The Greek
Testament of Westcott and Hort. Presbyterian Review, III., 1882, p. 334,
seq.

86 BIBLICAL STUDY.
dering them illegible, indistinct, or mutilated, and through
the efforts to restore them.* The value of the MSS.
must first be considered, their interrelation and antiq
uity and history. They must be arranged in families
or groups that their relative authority may be estab
lished. f The value of the MSS. having been deter
mined, we are prepared to examine the relative value of
the readings. The principles on which this is done are :
(i) The reading which lies at the root of all the varia
tions and best explains thera is to be preferred. (2) The
most difficult reading is more likely to be correct frora
the natural tendency of the scribe to make his text as
easy and intelligible as possible, and the natural process
of simplification in transmission.:]: (3) The reading most
in accordance with the context, and especially with the
style and usage of the author and his times, is to be
preferred. This is on the principle of consistency and
" intrinsic probability." §
4. Having secured the best text of the writings, criti
cism devotes itself to the higher task of considering
them as to integrity, authenticity, literary form, and re
liability. This is appropriately called Higher Criticism.
This branch of criticism has established its principles

 If,
* See Cappellus, Critica Sacra, 1650, Lib. I. ; Scrivener, Introduction to the
Criticism of the New Testament, 1B74, p. 7, seq. ; Isaac Taylor, History of
the Transmission of Ancient Books to Modern Times, new edition. Liver
pool, 1879, p. 22 ; also Westcott and Hort, New Testament in the Original
Greet, Vol. II., Introduction, N. Y., 1S82, p. 5, seq.
-t See Scrivener in /. c, p. 404, seq. Westcott and Hort deserve great credit
for their elaboration of this principle in /. c, p. 39, seq.
X These two principles are corabined by Westcott and Hort in /. c, p. 22, seq.,
under the terra *' transcriptional probability,"
§ See Westcott and Hort in /. c, p. 20, seq. Scrivener expands these princi
ples to seven in nuraber in /. c, p. 436, seq. ; Davidson, Treatise of Biblical
Criticism, Boston, 1853, p. 3S6, seq., gives principles of Textual Criticism for
the Old Testament.

THE BIBLE AND CEITICISM. g7
and methods of work. Thus the learned Roman Cath^
olic, Du Pin, in the introduction to his magnificent
work on ecclesiastical writers, gives an adrairable state
raent of them with reference to those ecclesiastical writ
ers before the higher criticism of the Scriptures had
fairly begun. We shall build largely upon him in the
statement of principles.*
The questions to be deterrained by higher criticism are :
(i) As to the integrity of the writings. Is the writing
the work of a single author or is it a collection of writ
ings of different authors ? Is it in its original condition,
or has it been edited or interpolated by later writers ?
Can the parts be discriminated, the original form of the
writing deterrained, and the different steps in interpola
tion and editing traced ?
(2) As to the authenticity of the writings. Is the writ
ing anonyraous, pseudonymous, or does it bear the au
thor's name ? If the author's name is given, is the title
genuine or is it a forgery ? What reliance can be placed
upon tradition with regard to the authorship of anony
mous writings ?
(3) As to literary features. What is the style of the
author, his method of composition ? What literary
form does he assume, poetry or prose, and what variety
of these general forms ?
(4) As to the credibility of the writings. Is the writ
ing reliable ? Do its statements accord with the truth,
or are they colored and warped by prejudice, supersti
tion, or reliance upon insufficient or unworthy testiraony ?
What character does the author bear as to prudence,
good judgment, fairness, integrity, and critical sagacity ?

* Nouvelle Bibliotheque des Auteurs Ecclesiastiques, Paris, 1694 ; New His
tory of Ecclesiastical Writers, London, i6g6.

88 BIBLICAL STUDY.
These questions of the higher criticism are to be de
terrained by the following principles : *
(i) The writing raust be in accordance with its sup
posed historic position as to time and place and circum
stances. " Time is one of the most certain proofs ; for nothing more evi
dently shows that a book cannot belong to that time wherein it is
pretended to have been written, than -when we find in it some marks
of a later date. These marks, in the first place, are false dates ; for
'tis an ordinary thing for impostors, that are generally ignorant, to
date a book after the death of the author to whom they ascribe it,
or of the person to whom they ascribe it, or of the person to whom
it is dedicated, or written ; and even when they do fix the time right,
yet they often mistake in the naraes of tiie consuls, or in some other
circurastances : All which are invincible proofs that he that dated
this book did not live at that time. Secondly, impostors very often
speak of men that lived long after the death of those persons to
whom they attribute those spurious discourses, or they relate the his
tory of sorae passages that happened afterwards, or they speak of
cities and people that were unknown at the tirae, when those authors
wrote " t
(2) Differences of style imply differences of expe
rience and age of the same author, or, when sufficiently
great, differences of author and of period of composition.
"In short, stile is a sort of touchstone, that discovers the truth
or falsehood of books; because it is impossible to iraitate the stile
of any author so perfectly as that there will not be a great deal of dif
ference. By the stile, we are not only to understand the bare words
and terms, which are easily iraitated ; but also the turn of the dis
course, the manner of writing, the elocution, the figures, and the

•* A brief statement of these principles is presented in relation to Biblical Criti
cism by Prof. Henry P. Smith, in his article on the Critical Theories of Julius
Wellhausen, Presbyte7'ian Review, 1882, HI., p. 370.
t Du Pin, New History of Pcclesiastical Writers. 3d edition, corrected.
London, i6g6, p. vii. seq.

THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM. 89
method : All which particulars, it is a difficult matter so to counter
feit as to prevent a discovery. There are, for instance, certain au
thors, whose stile is easily known, and which it is impossible to im
itate : We ought not, however, always to reject a book upon a sligh
difference of stile, without any other proofs ; because it often hap-
p'ens that authors write differently, in different times : Neither ought
-we immediately to receive a book as genuine, upon the bare resera
blance of stile, when there are other proofs of its being spurious ;
because it may so happen, that an ingenious man may sometimes
counterfeit the stile of an author, especially in discourses which are
not very long. But the difference and reserablance of stile raay be
so reraarkable sometimes, as to be a convincing proof, either of truth
or falsehood " (in /. c., p. viii.).
(3) Differences of opinion and conception imply dif
ferences of author when these are sufficiently great, and
also differences of period of composition.
" The opinions or things contained in a book, do likewise discover
the forgery of it : (i) When we find some opinions there, that were
not raaintained till a long time after the author, whose narae it bears.
(2) When we find some terms made use of, to explain these doc
trines, which were not customary till after his death. (3) When the
author opposes errors, as extant in his own tirae, that did not spring
up till afterwards. (4) When he describes ceremonies, rites and
custoras that were not in use in his time. (5) When we find sorae
opinions in these spurious discourses, that are contrary to those that
are to be found in other books, which unquestionably belong to that
author. (6) When he treats of raatters that were never spoken of
in the time when the real author was alive. (7) When he relates
histories that are manifestly fabulous " (in /. c, p. viii.).
(4) Citations show the dependence of the author upon
the author or authors cited, where these are definite and
the identity of the author cited can be clearly estab
lished. In cases of doubt as to which author uses the
other, or whether two or raore authors may not depend
upon an earlier author ; this doubt can be resolved only
by the careful determination of the exact interrelation

90 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of the passages and the genesis of the one out of the
other. This is the most difficult principle of the higher
criticism in its application. Du Pin simply attaches it
to No. (i), " or lastly, they cite authors that wrote and
lived after those whom they make to mention them."
These four principles are embraced under the internal
evidence. To them we must now add two principles of
external evidence.
(5) Positive testimony as to the writing in other writ
ings of acknowledged authority.
(6) The silence of authorities as to the writing in ques
tion. These are combined by Du Pin :
" The external proofs are, in the first place, taken from ancient
manuscripts ; in which either we do not find the name of an author ;
or else -we find that of another : The more ancient or correct they
are, the more we ought to value them. Secondly, from the testimony
or silence of ancient authors ; frora their testiraony, I say, when they
formally reject a writing as spurious, or when they attribute it to
sorae other author ; or from their silence when they do not speak of
it, though they have occasion to raention it : This arguraent, which
is comraonly called a negative one, is oftentiraes of very great
weight. When, for exaraple, we find, that several entire books which
are attributed to one of the ancients, are unknown to all antiquity :
When all those persons that have spoken ofthe works of an author,
and besides, have made catalogues of thera, never mention such a
particular discourse : When a book that would have been service
able to the Catholics has never been cited by thera, who both might
and ought to have cited it, as having a fair occasion to do it, 'tis ex-
trearaly probable that it is supposititious. It is very certain that this
is enough to raake any book doubtful, if it was never cited by any
of the ancients ; and in that case it must have very authentik char
acters of antiquity, before it ought to be received without contradic
tion. And on the other hand, if there should be never so few con
jectures of its not being genuine, yet these, together with the silence
of the ancients, will be sufficient to oblige us to believe it to be a
forgery " (in /. c, p. viii.).

THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM. 91
The argument from silence has risen to so much
greater importance than it was in the seventeenth cent
ury that we shall venture to define it more narrowly.
{a) Silence is a lack of evidence, when it is clear that
the matter in question did not corae within the scope of
the author's argument.
(b) It is an evidence that it had certain characteristics
that excluded it from the author's argument.
{c) The matter in question lies fairly within the au
thor's scope, and was omitted for good and sufficient
reasons that may be ascertained. The omission was in
tentional. {d) The silence of the author as to that which was
within the scope of his arguraent was unconscious and
implies ignorance of the matter.
(e) When the silence extends over a variety of writings
of different authors, of different classes of writings and
different periods of composition, it implies either some
strong and overpowering external restraint such as divine
interposition, or ecclesiastical or civil power, or it im
plies a general and wide-spread public ignorance which
presents a strong presumptive evidence in favor of the
non-existence of the matter in question.*
The internal evidence must be used 'with great caution
and sound judgment, for an able and learned forger
might imitate so as to deceive the most expert, and the
author of a pseudepigraph might intentionally place his
writing in an earlier age of the world and in circum
stances best suited to carry out his idea. But sooner or
later a faithful and persistent application of the critical

-* For an elaboration and explanation of these principles we must refer to the
author's paper on the arguraent e silentio, read before the Society of Biblical
Literature and Exegesis in June, 1883, and published in their Journal, for
1883.

92 BIBLICAL STUDY.
tests will determine the forgeries and the pseudepigraphs
and assign them their real literary position. As to the
relative value of the internal and external evidence we
cannot do better than use the judicious words of Sir
Wm. Hamilton : " But if our criticism from the internal
grounds alone be, on the one hand, impotent to estab
lish, it is, on the other hand, oranipotent to disprove." *
The importance of this higher criticism is so well
stated by Du Pin, that we will again quote him :
" Criticism is a kind of torch, that lights aud conducts us in the
obscure tracts of antiquity, by raaking us to distinguish truth from
falsehood, history frora fable, and antiquity frora novelty. 'Tis by
this means, that in our times we have disengaged ourselves frora an
infinite number of very common errors, into which our fathers fell
for want of exaraining things by the rules of true criticisra. For 'tis
a surprising thing to consider how many spurious books -we find in
antiquity ; nay, even in the first ages of the Church " (in /. c, p. vii.).
In order to illustrate these principles of the higher
criticism, we shall present a few specimens of their appli
cation. The first illustration that we shall give is with refer
ence to the question of integrity. The so-called Apos
tles' Creed is the most sacred writing exterior to the
canon of Scripture.
" Till the middle of the seventeenth century it was the current be
lief of Roraan Catholic and Protestant Christendom that the Apos
tles' Creed was ' membratum articulatumque,' composed by the apos
tles in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, or before their separation ;
to secure unity of teaching, each contributing an article (hence the
somewhat arbitrary division into twelve articles)."
The arguments adduced by Dr. Schaff to prove that
this tradition is false, are : (i) The intrinsic improba.

* Logic, p. 471,

THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM. 93
bility of such a mechanical composition. (2) The silence
of Scripture. (3) The silence of the apostolic fathers and
all the Ante-Nicene and Nicene fathers and synods. (4)
The variety in forra of the creed down to the eighth
century. (5) The fact that the Apostles' Creed never
had any currency in the East where the Nicene creed
occupies its place.*
Lumby goes into the matter of the structure of the
creed more fully, and shows the process of its formation
and all the changes through which it passed, until it
gradually, in 750 A.D., assumed its present stereotyped
form.f The best illustration of the higher criticism with
reference to the question of authenticity, is afforded
by Bentley in his celebrated work on the epistles of
Phalaris.:]: Bentley proves these epistles to be forgeries
of a sophist : I. By internal evidence, (i) They do not
accord with their presumed age, but with other ages.
They mention {a) Aloesa, a city which was not built till
140 years after the latest year of Phalaris ; (1^) Theridean
cups, which were not known until 120 years after the
death of Phalaris ; {c) Messana, as a different city from
Zaude, whereas it was a later name for the same city,
and not changed till 60 years after the death of Pha-
laris ; {d) Taurominium, 140 years before it was ever
thought of.
(2) Differences of style : {a) the use of the Attic dialect
instead of the Doric, the speech of Phalaris, and indeed
not the old Attic, but the new Attic that was not used
till centuries after Phalaris' time.

* Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, New York, 1877, I., p. 19.
t Lumby, History of the Creeds, Cambridge, 1873, p. 169, seq.
X A Dissertation upon the Epistles of Phalaris, London, 1699, a new edition
edited by Wilhelra Wagner, London, t883.

94 BIBLICAL STUDY.
(3) Differences of thought : {a) reference to tragedy be
fore tragedy carae into existence ; {b) use of Attic and
not Sicilian talents in speaking of raoney ; {c) use of the
word Ttpovola for Divine Providence, which was not
used before Plato, and HOff/.ios for the universe, which
was not so used before Pythagoras ; {d) inconsistencies
between the ideas and raatter of the epistle, which are
those of a sophist, and the historical character of
Phalaris as a politician and tyrant.
(4) Relation to other writers. He uses Herodotus,
Deraosthenes, Euripides.
II. The external evidences are : {^testimony. Atossa
is said to have been the first inventor of epistles.
Hence those that carry the narae of Phalaris two gener
ations earlier must be impostures.
(6) Silence. There is a thousand years of silence as
to these epistles. " For had our letter been used or
transcribed during that thousand years, somebody would
have spoken of it, especially since so many of the an
cients had occasion to do so ; so that their silence is a
direct argument that they never had heard of them."*
We have dwelt at some length upon the principles and
methods of the higher criticism, because of their great
importance in our day with reference to the Scriptures
and the lack of information concerning them that pre
vails to an astonishing degree among men who make
some pretensions to scholarship.
III. THE CRITICISM OF THE BIBLE.
Thus far Biblical Criticism has derived from other
branches of criticism the principles and methods of its
work. Has it not, however, sorae peculiar features of

* New edition, 1883, p. 481.

THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM. 95
its own, as it has to do with the sacred canon of the
Christian Church? Does the fact that the canon of
sacred Scripture is holy, inspired, and of divine author
ity, lift it above criticism, or does it give additional
features of criticism that enable us to test the genuine
ness of these claims respecting it ? We hold that the
latter is the true and only safe position, and that it
should be our effort to determine these principles and
methods. We reserve this question for our following
chapter. In the meanwhile we have to meet on the
threshold of our work the a priori objections that would
obstruct our progress in the application of the principles
and methods of criticism to the Bible.
Biblical Criticism is confronted by traditional views of
the Bible that do not wish to be disturbed, and by dog
matic statements respecting the Bible which decline
reinvestigation and revision. The claim is put forth
that these traditional views and dogmatic statements are
in accordance with the Scriptures and the symbols of
the Church, and that the orthodox faith is put in peril
by criticism.
It should be distinctly recognized at the outset that
such clairas as these can only influence the adherents of
the church, and, at the utmost, debar them from the
exercise of criticisra. They cannot be more than amus
ing to the unbelieving and the sceptical, who care but
little for the church and still less for theologians and
their orthodoxy. They will use the tests of criticism
without restraint. We cannot prevent them. The
question is whether Christian scholars also shall be
entitled to use them in defence of the Scriptures, or
whether that defence is to be left in the hands of dog
matic theologians and scholastics. A still further re
mark is necessary just here in the interests of truth

96 BIBLICAL STUDY.
and honesty. Why should the Scriptures fear the most
searching investigation ? If they are truly the Word of
God they will maintain themselves and vindicate thera
selves in the battle of criticism. If we are sure of this,
let us rejoice in the conflict that will lead to victory ;
if we are in doubt of it, it is ' be.st that our doubts
should be removed as soon as possible. Then let the
tests be applied, and let us know in whom and what we
believe.* It is pretended that the Church doctrine of inspira
tion is in peril, and that the authority of the Scriptures
is thereby undermined. If there were one clearly de
fined orthodox doctrine of inspiration to which all
evangelical men agreed, as supported by Scripture and
the Protestant confessions, our task would be easier.
But, in fact, there are various theories of inspiration,
and several ways of stating the doctrine of inspiration
that are without support in Scripture or syrabol. It is
necessary, therefore, to discriminate, in order to deter
mine exactly what is in peril, whether inspiration itself
and the authority of the Scriptures, or some particular
and false theory of inspiration and the authority of some
theologian or ^hool of theology.
The doctrine of inspiration may be constructed (i)
by a careful, painstaking study of the sacred Scriptures
themselves, gathering together their testimony as to
their own origin, character, design, value, and authority.
This gives us the biblical doctrine of the Scriptures and
the doctrine of inspiration as a part of Biblical Theology.
(2) The doctrine of inspiration may be constructed from
a study of the symbolical books of the Church, which
express the faith of the Church as attained in the great

* Robert Rainy, Bible and Criticism, London, 1878, p. 33.

THE BIBLE AND CEI-nCISM. 97
crises of its history, in the study of the Scriptures, in the
experiences and life of raen. This gives us the symbol
ical, or orthodox, or Church doctrine of inspiration. (3)
The doctrine of inspiration may be constructed by a
study of Scripture and symbol, and the logical unfold
ing of the results of a more extended study of the
whole subject in accordance with the dominant philo
sophical and theological principles of the times. This
gives us the dogmatic, or school, or traditional doctrine
of inspiration as it has been established in particular
schools of theology, and has become traditional in the
long-continued teaching of the Church and the pulpit, in
the various particular theories of inspiration that have
been formulated.
As we rise in the doctrinal process from the sim
ple biblical statements, unformulated as they lie in the
sacred writings or formulated in Biblical Theology, to
the more complex and abstract statements of the sym
bols expressing the formulated consensus of the leaders
of the Church in the formative periods of history, and
then to the raore theoretical and scholastic statements
of the doctrinal treatises of the theologians, while the
doctrine becomes raore and raore complex, massive, con
sistent, and imposing, and seems, therefore, to become
more authoritative and binding ; in reality the authority
diminishes in this relative advance in systematization, so
that what is gained in extension is lost in intension ; for
the construction is a construction of sacred materials by
human and fallible minds, with defective logic, failing
sometimes to justify premises, and leaping to conclu
sions that cannot always be defended, and in a line and
direction determined by the temporary and provisional
conditions and necessities of the times, neglecting modi
fying circumstances and conditions. The concrete that
5

98 BIBLICAL STUDY.
the Bible gives us is for all time, as it is the living and
eternal substance ; though changeable, it reproduces and
so perpetuates itself in a wonderful variety of forms of
beauty, yet all blending and harmonizing as the colors
of the clouds and skies under the painting of the sun
beams ; but the abstract is the formal and the perish
able, as it is broken through and shattered by the pulsa
tions and struggles of the living and developing truth of
God, ever striving for expression and adaptation to
every different condition of raankind, in the different
epochs and araong the various races of the world.
The course of religious history has clearly established
the principle that there is a constant tendency in all re
ligions, and especially in the Christian religion, in the
systeraatic or dograatic statement to constrain the sym
bol as well as the Scriptures into the requirements of
the particular formative principle and the needs of the
particular epoch. The dogmatic scheme is too often
the mould into which the gold of the Scriptures and the
silver of the creed are poured to coin a series of defini
tions, and fashion a system of theology which not only
breaks up the concrete and harmonious whole of the
Scriptures into fragments, stamping thera with the im
print of the particular conception of the theologian in
order to their reconstruction ; but not infrequently the
constructed system becomes an idol of the theologian
and his pupils, as if it were the orthodox, the divine
truth, while a raass of valuable scriptural and syraboli
cal material is cast aside in the process, and lies neg
lected in the workshop. In course of time the syrabols
as well as the Scriptures are overlaid with glosses and
perplexing explanations, so that they become either
dark, obscure, and uncertain to the ordinary reader, or
else have their meanings deflected and perverted, until

THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM. 99
they are once more grasped by a living, energetical faith
in a revived state of the Church, and burst forth from
their scholastic fetters, that Scripture, creed, and life
may once more correspond. While traditionalism and
scholasticism have not prevailed in the Protestant
Church to the same extent as in the Greek and Roman
churches, for the right of private judgment and the uni
versal priesthood of believers have maintained their
ground with increasing vigor in Western Europe and
America since the Reformation ; yet it is no less true
that the principle of traditionalism is ever at work in
the chairs of theology and in the pulpits of the Church ;
so that in seeking for truth and in estimating what is
binding on faith and conscience, even Protestants must
distinctly separate the three things : Bible, syrabol, and
tradition ; the Bible, the sole infallible norm ; the sym
bol, binding those who hold to the body of which it is
the banner ; while tradition demands at the most our re
spect, and reverence, and careful consideration, and the
presumption in its favor; but must be tried and criti
cised by every thinking man, and every living, energetic
Christian. It is of vast importance that we should make these
distinctions on the threshold of the study of the critical
theories ; for there is no field in which tradition has
been more hasty in its conclusions, more busy in their
formatien, more dogmatic and sensitive to criticism,
more reluctant and stubborn to give way to the truth,
than in the sacred fields of the Divine Word. Thus
criticism is confronted at the outset now as ever with
two a priori objections.
1st. There are those who raaintain that their tradi
tional views of the sacred Scriptures are inseparably
bound up with the church doctrine of inspiration, so

100 BIBLICAL STUDY.
that even if they should be in some respects doubtful
or erroneous, they must be left alone for fear of the de
struction of the doctrine of inspiration itself. This is
true of those traditional theories of inspiration which in
some quarters have expanded so as to cover a large part
of the ground of Exegetical Theology, and commit them
selves to theories of text and author, date, style, and in
tegrity of writings, in accordance with a common, but,
in our judgment, an injudicious method of discussing
the whole Bible under the head of bibliology in the pro
legomena of the dogmatic system ; but this is not true of
the symbolical doctrine of inspiration, still less of the
scriptural doctrine. The most that this objection can
require of the critics is, that they should be careful and
cautious of giving offence, or of needlessly shocking prej
udices ; that they should be respectful and reverent of
the faith of the people and of revered theologians ; but
it is not to be supposed that it will make them recreant
to their trust of seeking earnestly, patiently, persist
ently, and prayerfully for the truth of God. It may be
found that the school doctrines of inspiration have ob
truded themselves in place of the symbolical and script
ural doctrine, and it may be necessary to destroy these
school doctrines in order to the safety of the biblical
and symbolical doctrine. However distressing this may
be to certain dogmatic divines and their adherents, it
may afford gratification to all sincere lovers of fhe truth
of God.
2d. There are those who claim that their traditional
theory is the logical unfolding of the doctrine of the
Symbols and the Scriptures. But this is begging the
very question at issue which will not be yielded. Why
should dogmatic theologians claim exemption from criti
cism and the testing of the grounds of their systems ?

THE BIBLE AND CRITICISM. 101
Such an arbitrary claim for deductions and conse
quences is one that no true critic or -historian ought to
concede; for, by so doing, he abandons at once the
right and ground of criticism, and the inductive meth
ods of historical and scientific investigation, and sacri-.
fices his material to the dograatist and scholastic, sur
rendering the concrete for the abstract. The very sensi
tiveness to criticisra displayed in sorae quarters justifies
the critics in their suspicion that the theories are weak
and will not sustain investigation.
Traditional theories cannot overcorae critical theories
with either of these a priori objections of apprehended
peril to faith or logical inconsistencies, but must submit
to the test of the symbol and the Scriptures to which
the critics appeal as the arbiters against tradition. The
characteristic principle of Puritanism is that :
" God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from
the doctrines and comraandments of men, which are in anything
contrary to His Word or beside it in matters of faith and worship ;
so that, to believe such doctrine, or to obey such commandments
out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience ; and the
requiring an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is
to destroy liberty of conscience and reason also."*
Biblical criticism bases its historic right on the princi
ples of the Reformation and of Puritanism over against
the Roman Catholic principle of the supremacy of tradi
tion and dogma. On this basis the Protestant symbols
have been accepted and subscribed by honest and faith
ful men for the.\r face value for all that is fairly contained
therein, and not for certain unknown and undiscovered
consequences which raay have a chance raajority or the
most authoritative teachers. Symbols of faith are the ex-

-* Westminster Conf. of Faith, xx. 2 ; see also A. F. Mitchell, Tlie Westmin
ster Assembly : its History and Standards, London, 18S3, pp. 8, seq., 465.

102 BIBLICAL STUDY.
pression of the faith of those who constructed them, and
of those who subsequently adopted them, so far as they
give expression to Christian doctrine ; but, with regard
to those questions not covered by their stateraents,
which they raay have held in abeyance, or purposely
omitted on account of disagreement, and in order to lib
erty, or because they were not suited for a national con
fession or a child's catechism, or because they had not
yet arisen in the field of controversy, — to bring these in
by the plea of logical deduction, is to elaborate and en
large the creed against the judgment of those who
framed it, is to usurp the constitutional methods of
revision, is to dogmatize and obstruct those active, ener
getic scholars, who, having accepted them for their face
value as a genuine expression of their faith, push forth
into the unexplored fields of the Bible and theology, in
order, by the inductive method and the generalization
of facts, rather than by deductions from symbolic or
scholastic statements, to win new triumphs for their
Divine Master.
These preliminary observations are necessary, in order
to clear the ground and make the distinction evident
between the symbolical, the truly orthodox doctrine of
inspiration from which true criticism has nothing to fear,
and any traditional, scholastic, or professedly orthodox
doctrine of inspiration, such as those that have waged
war with criticism so often since the Reforraation.
Recent critical theories arise and work as did their pred
ecessors, in the various departments of exegetical the
ology. Here is their strength, that they antagonize
scholastic dogma with the Bible itself, and appeal from
school theology to biblical theology. Unless traditional
theories of inspiration can vindicate themselves on Bible
grounds, meet the critics, and overcome them in fair

THE BIBLE AND CEITICISM. 103
conflict, in the sacred fields of the Divine Word, sooner
or later traditional theories will be driven from the ffeld.
It will not do to antagonize critical theories of the Bible
with traditional theories of the Bible, for the critic ap
peals to history against tradition, to an array of facts
against so-called inferences, to the laws of probation
against dogmatic assertion, to the Divine Spirit speaking
in the Scriptures against external authority. History,
facts, truth, the laws of thought, are all divirfe prod
ucts, and most consistent with the Divine Word, and
they will surely prevail.
It is significant that the great majority of professional
biblical scholars in the various universities and theologi
cal halls of the world, erabracing those of the greatest
leaming, industry, and piety, demand a revision of tradi
tional theories of the Bible, on account of a large induc
tion of new facts from the Bible and history. These
critics must be met with argument and candid reasoning
as to these facts and their interpretation, and cannot be
overcome by raere cries of alarra for the Church and the
Bible which, in their last analysis, usually amount to
nothing more than peril to certain favorite views. What
peril can come to the Scriptures from a more profound
critical study of them ? The peril is to scholastic dog
mas and to tradition. But what then are we contending
for as evangelical men, for the faith of the Scriptures, the
faith of Wittenberg, of Geneva, and of Westminster, or
for the faith of the Reformed scholastics, and the faith of
certain schools of theology and their chiefs ? We must
recognize in order to meet this issue, upon which every
thing depends, that biblical critics cannot afford to carry
the load of the school theology into the conflicts of the
nineteenth century, but must strip to the symbols for a
conflict with rationalism and materialism ; and we should

104 BIBLICAL STUDY.
not fear as evangelical biblical scholars to accept the
challenge of our adversaries and go forth from the breast
works of our symbols to raeet thera in fair and honor
able warfare in open field with the biblical material itself
on the principles of induction.* The sword of the
Spirit alone will conquer in this warfare. Are Christian
men afraid to put it to the test ? For this is a conflict
after all between true criticism and false criticism ; be
tween the criticism which is the product of the evangel
ical spirit of the Reformation, and critical principles
that are the product of deism and rationalism. Evan
gelical criticisra has been marching from conquest to
conquest, though far too often at a sad disadvantage, like
a storraing party who have sallied forth from their breast
works to attack the trenches of the enemy, finding in
the hot encounter that the severest fire and gravest peril
are from the misdirected batteries of their own line. Shall
evangelical criticism in searching the Scriptures be per
mitted to struggle unhindered with rationalistic criticism,
or must it protect itself also frora scholastic dogmatism?
We do not deny the right of dogmatism and the a priori
method, nor the worth of tradition, within their proper
spheres ; but we maintain the equal right of criticism and
the inductive method, and their far greater importance
in the acquisition of true and reliable knowledge. If
criticism and dogmatism are harnessed together, a span
of twin steeds, they will draw the car of theology rap
idly toward its highest ideal ; but pulling in opposite di
rections, especially in the present crisis, they will tear
it to pieces.

* See author's article on the Right, Duty, and Limits of Biblical Criticism,
Presbyterian Review, II. , p. 557, seq.; Willis J. Beecher, art. Logical Meth
ods of Prof. Kuenen, Presbyterian Review, HI., p. 703 ; Francis L. Patton,
art. Pentateuchal Criticism, Presbyterian Review, IV., p. 356, seq.

CHAPTER V.
THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE.
Biblical Criticism in its larger sense, embracing
the several departments of biblical literature after its
early activity in the Christian schools of Alexandria and
Syria, and in the rabbinical schools of Tiberias and
Babylon, in the study of the canon and the text of
Scripture, gave place to a long supremacy of dogma
and tradition. The Septuagint version became the in
spired text to the Greek church, the Massoretic te.xt of
the Hebrew Scriptures to the Jews, and the Vulgate
version to the Roman church. The canon of the Old
Testament having been determined by the asserably at
Jamnia toward the close of the first Christian century
by rabbinical authority, became limited in the Talmud
to the 24 books. These are raentioned in the order:
(i) The five books of the law; (2) eight books of the
prophets— Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Jeremiah,
Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the twewe minor prophets; (3)
eleven other books — Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Eccle
siastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Daniel, Esther,
Ezra, and Chronicles.*
The Christian church made no official determination
of the canon of Scripture save in provincial synods, such
as the Council of Laodicea and the synod of Carthage,

« Talm. Babli, Baba Bathra, p. 14 a.
5* (105)

106 . BIBLICAL STUDY.
both in the fourth century, whose decisions express the
differences of opinion which have always been in the
church. In part the theologians have followed the
stricter Hieronymian canon which corresponds with the
Talmudie with reference to the Old Testament, but
chiefly the fuller Hellenistic and Augustinian canon
including the apocryphal books of the Old Testament.
In the New Testament, by general consent, the four
gospels, the book of Acts, the thirteen epistles of Paul,
the epistle to the Hebrews, the first epistle of Peter,
and first epistle of John were recognized, while the
doubts of the early church as to the epistles of James,
Jude, 2d Peter, 2d and 3d John, and the Apocalypse
became more and more feeble and infrequent.* These
sacred books were interpreted by the body of tradition
that had become solidified in the Talmud among the
Jews, and in the fathers and schoolmen in the various
Christian churches.
I. THE CANON OF THE REFORMERS.
The Protestant Reformation was a great critical
revival, due largely to the new birth of learning in
Western Europe. The emigration of the fugitive
Greeks from Constantinople after its capture by the
Turks, had planted a young Greek culture. A stream
of thought burst forth, and poured like a quicken
ing flood strong and deep over Europe. Cardinal
Xiraenes, with the aid of a number of Christian and
Jewish scholars, such as Alphonso de Zamora, Demetrius
Ducas, and Alphonso de Alcala, issued the world-re
nowned Coraplutensian Polyglot, 1513-17. The Greek
* Reuss, Histoire du Canon des Saintes Ecritures II. Edition, Strasbourg,
1S64, pp. \gT.seq., 218 seq., 221 seq., 274 seq. ; Charteris, The New Testa
ment Scriptures, N. Y., 1882, p. 163, seq.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. 107
New Testaraent was studied with avidity by a series of
scholars, among whom Erasmus was pre-erainent. He
published the first Greek Testaraent in 1516. Ehas
Levita and Jacob ben Chajim, in whom Jewish learning
culrainated, introduced Christians into a knowledge of
the Hebrew Scriptures. Reuchlin laid the foundation
for Hebrew scholarship araong Christians, by publish
ing the first Hebrew grammar and lexicon combined in
1506.* This return to the original text of the Old and
New Testaments aroused the suspicions of the scholas
tics and monks, and the new learning was assailed with
bitterness. Even Levita had to defend hiraself against
the charge of heterodoxy for teaching Christians the
Hebrew language, the law of Moses, and the Talmud. f
But the reformers took their stand as one raan for the
critical study of the sacred Scriptures, and investigated
the original texts under the lead of Erasraus, Elias
Levita, and Reuchlin, and laid down what must be
regarded as the fundamental principle of Biblical Criti
cism for the determination of the canon. Thus Luther
in his controversy with Eck said, " The Church cannot
give any more authority or power than it has of itself.
A council cannot make that to be of Scripture which is
not by nature of Scripture." % Calvin says :
"But there has very generally prevailed a most pernicious error
that the Scriptures have only so much weight as is conceded to
them by the suffrages of the Church, aS though the eternal and in
violable truth of God depended on the arbitrary will of men." ....
" For, as God alone is a sufficient witness of Himself in His own

* Gesenius, Gesch. d. hebr. Sprach., p. 106, seq.
t See his Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, edited by Ginsburg, London, 1867, p. 97,
seq. X Disputatio excel. D. theolog. Joh. Eccii. et Lutheri, hist. IIL, 129, seq.
Berger, La Bible au Siezihme Siicle, Psiris, 1879, p. 86.

108 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Word, so also the Word will never gain credit in the hearts of men
till it be confirmed by the internal testimony of the Spirit. It is
necessary, therefore, that the same Spirit, who spake by the mouths
of the prophets, should penetrate into our hearts, to convince us
that they faithfuUy delivered the oracles which were divinely in
trusted to them."*
This principle is well expressed in the 2d Helvetic
Confession, the raost honored in the Reformed church :
"We believe and confess the canonical Scriptures of the holy
prophets to be the very true Word of God and to have sufficient
authority of themselves, not of men " (Chap. 1.). "Therefore in
controversies of religion or matters of faith we cannot admit any
other judge than God Himself, pronouncing by the holy Scriptures
what is true and what is false ; what is to be followed, or what is to
be avoided " (Chap. II.).
The Galilean Confession gives a similar stateraent :
" We know these books to be canonical, and the sure rule of our
faith, not so rauch by the coraraon accord and consent of the Church,
as by the testimony and inward persuasion ofthe Holy Spirit, which
enables us to distinguish them from other ecclesiastical books "
(IV. Art.).t
Thus while other testimony is valuable and important,
yet, the evangelical test of the canonicity and interpre
tation of the Scriptures was, God Himself speaking in
and through them to His people. This alone gave the
fides divina. This was the so-called forraal principle of
the Reforraation, no less important than the so-called
material principle of justification by faith.:]:
The reformers applied this critical test to the tradi-

* Institutes, I. 7. -f See also the Belgian Confession, Article V.
X Dorner, Gesch. Prot. Thea., p. 234, seq., 379, seq. JuUus MuUer, Das
Verhaltniss zwischen der Wirksamkeit des heil. Geistes und de?n Gnaden-
tnittel des gottlichen Wortes, in his Dogmat. Abkandlungen, 1871, p. 139, seq.
Reuss, Histoire du Canon, p. 308, seq.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. 109
tional theories of the Bible, and eliminated the apocry
phal books from the canon. They also revived the an
cient doubts as to Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs,
Epistle of James, 2d Peter, Jude, and the Apocalypse.
The Reformed symbols elaborated the forraal principle
further than the Lutheran, and ordinarily specified the
books that they regarded as canonical. In this they re
jected the traditions of the early Christian church which
followed the Hellenistic rather than the Palestinian Jews,
and, in its use of the Septuagint version, used also the
apocryphal writings, and did not sharply separate them
from the canonical ; indeed, with the exception of a few
critics, such as Origen and Jerome, it cited without
discrimination the many Jewish apocalypses and Sibyl
line oracles which sprang up in the first and second cent
uries of our era, as well as in the first and second centu
ries B.C.* The church of Rome, in accordance with its
reliance upon the support of tradition, determined the
apocryphal books to be canonical at the Council of
Trent. That the reformers accepted only the present
canon of our symbols, excluding the apocryphal books,
was not due to the Jewish tradition, which they did
not hesitate to dispute, as they did that of the church
itself. It is doubtless true'f that the reforraers fell
back on the authority of Jerome in their determination
of the canon, as they did largely upon Augustine for the
doctrine of grace ; but this was in both cases for support
against Rome in authority which Rome recognized,
rather than as a basis on which to rest their faith and
criticism. They went further back than Jerome to

* Sanday, Value ofthe Patristic Writings for the Criticism and Exegesis of
tlie Bible. Expositor, Feb., 1880. Davidson, Canon, p. loi, seq.
t Robertson Smith, Old Testament in the Jewish Church, 1881, p. 41.

110 BIBLICAL STUDY.
the evangelical Christian and genuine Hebrew principle,
of the common consent of the believing children of God,
which in course of time eliminated the sacred canonical
books from those of a merely national and temporary
character, because they approved themselves to their
souls as the very word of God. As Dr. Charteris says :
" The Council of Trent had forraally thrown down a challenge.
It recognized the canon because ofthe traditions of the Church, and
on the same ground of tradition accepted the unwritten ideas about
Christ and His apostles, of which the Church had been made the
custodian. The reformers believed Scripture to be higher than the
Church. But on what could they rest their acceptance of the canon
of Scripture ? How did they know these books to be Holy Script
ures, the only and ultimate divine revelation ? They answered that
the divine authority of Scripture is self-evidencing, that the regener
ate man needs no other evidence, and that only the regenerate can
appreciate the evidence. It follows from this, if he do not feel the
evidence of their contents, any man may reject books claiming to be
Holy Scripture." *
It is true this evangelical critical test did not solve all
questions. It left in doubt several writings which had
been regarded as doubtful for centuries. But uncer
tainty as to these does not weaken the authority of
those that are recognized as divine ; it only affects the
extent of the canon, and not the authority of those writ--
ings regarded as canonical.
" Suppose we were not able to give positive proof of the divine in
spiration of every particular Book that is contained in the Sacred
Records, it does not therefore follow that it was not inspired ; and
yet rauch less does it follow that our religion is without foundation.
Which I therefore add, because it is well known there are sorae par
ticular Books in our Bible that have at some times been doubted of
in the church, whether they were inspired or no. But I cannot con-

* The New Testament Scriptures ; their Claims, History, and Authority.
Croall Lectures, 18S2. N. Y., 1883, p. 203.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. m
ceive that doubt conceming such Books, where persons have sus
pended their assent, without casting any unbecoming reflections,
have been a hindrance to their salvation, while what they have
owned and acknowledged for truly divine, has had sanctifying effect
upon their hearts and lives." *
This is the true Protestant position. For unless
these books have given us their own testimony that
they are divine and therefore canonical, we do not re
ceive them with our hearts ; we do not rest our faith
and life upon them as the very Word of God ; we give
mere intellectual assent ; we receive them on authority,
tacitly and without opposition, and possibly with the
dogmatism which not unfrequently accompanies incipi
ent doubt, but also without true interest and true faith
and assurance of their divine contents. We believe that
the canon of Scripture established by the Reformed
symbols can be successfully vindicated on Protestant
critical principles. We are convinced that the church
has not been deceived with regard to its inspiration.
Esther, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, and the Apoc
alypse will more and raore establish themselves in the
hearts of those who study them. But we claira that it
is illegitimate to first attempt to prove their canonicity
and then their inspiration, or to rely upon Jewish rab
binical tradition any more than Roman Catholic tradi
tion, or to anathematize all who doubt some of them in
the spirit of Rabbi Akiba and the Council of Trent.
The only legitimate method is that of our fathers, the
Reforraers and Puritans : first prove their inspiration
from their own internal divine testimony, and then ac
cept them as canonical because our souls rest upon them
as the veritable divine word. " For he that believes that

* Ed. Calamy, Inspiration ofthe Holy Writings, Lond., 1710, p. 42.

112 BIBLICAL STUDY.
God saith, without evidence that God saith it ; doth not
believe God, while he believes the thing that is from
God, et eadem ratione, si contiguisset Alcorano Turcico cre-
didisset." *
The same critical principle was applied by the re-
¦forraers to the text of Scripture. They rejected
the inspiration of the ancient versions, the Greek and
the Vulgate, and against the Greek and Roman
churches resorted to the original text. They bat
tled against the Vulgate version, in behalf of versions
for the people, and for a simple gramraatical exegesis
against traditional authority and the manifold sense.
They laid down the hermeneutical rule that the Spirit
of God, speaking in His Word, alone could decide the
meaning of the text ; and that difficult passages must be
interpreted by plain ones. In the various departments
of exegesis they went diligently to work. Hebrew and
Greek graramars, lexicons, texts, versions, and commen
taries poured from the press. If the reformers were
great dogmatic theologians, they were greater biblical
scholars, and their theology was fresh, warm, and vigor
ous, because derived from a critical study of Scripture.
The greatest dogmatic writer of the Reformation, John
Calvin, was also its greatest exegete.f
So long as the controversy with Rome was active and
energetic, and ere the counter-reformation set in, the
Protestant critical principle maintained itself; but as
the internal conflicts of Protestant churches began to
absorb more and more attention, and the polemic with

* Whichcote, Eight Letters of Dr. A. Tuckney and Benj. Whichcote, 1753,
p. III.
t Tholuck ( Vermischte Schriften, IL, 341) correctly describes him as distin
guished alike for dogmatic impartiality, exegetical tact, many-sided scholarship,
and deep Christian spirit.

THE CANON OP SCRIPTURE. II3
Rome became less and less vigorous, the polemic against
brethren more and raore violent, the Reformed systera
of faith was built up by a series of scholastics over
against Lutheranisra, and Calvinistic orthodoxy over
against Arrainianisra. The elaboration of the Protest
ant Reformed system by a priori deduction carried with
it the pushing of the peculiar principles of Protestantism
more and more into the background. The authority of
the Reformed faith and tradition assumed the place of a
Roman faith and tradition, and the biblical scholarship of
Protestant churches, cut off frora the line of Roraan tra
dition, worked its way along the line of Jewish rabbini
cal tradition, and began to establish a Protestant ortho
doxy — in the Swiss schools under the influence of Bux-
torf, Heidegger and Francis Turretine; and in the Dutch
schools under the influence of Voetius.
Lutheran theology had the sarae essential develop
ment through internal struggles. The school of Calix-
tus at Helmstadt had struggled with the scholastic
spirit, until the latter had sharpened itself into the
most radical antagonism to the Reformed church and
the Melancthon type of Lutheran theology. Carlov
stated the doctrine of verbal inspiration in the sarae es
sential terras as the Swiss scholastics, and was followed
therein by the Lutheran scholastics generally.
" It treated Holy Scripture as the revelation itself, instead of as
the memorial of the originally revealed, ideal, actual truth ; the con
sequence being that Holy Scripture was transformed into God's ex
clusive work, the huraan element was explained away, and the orig
inal hving power thrust away behind the writing contained in let
ters. Faith ever draws its strength and decisive certainty from the
original eternally living power to which Scripture is designed to lead.
But when Scripture was regarded as the goal, and attestation was
sought elsewhere than in the experience of faith through the pres
ence of truth in the Spirit, then the Reformation standpoint was

114 BIBLICAL STUDY.
abandoned, its so-called material principle violated, and it became
easy for Rationalism to expose the contradictions in which the in
quirers had thus involved themselves." *
II. THE PURITAN CANON.
The Thirty-nine Articles take an intermediate position
between the reformers and the Roman Catholic church
in their doctrine of the canon :
" In the name of holy Scripture, we do understand those Canon
ical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was
never any doubt in the Church." The 24 books ofthe Hieronymian
canon of the Old Testament are then mentioned. It then continues :
" And the other books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for
example of life and instruction of manners : but yet doth it not ap
ply them to establish any doctrine." It then names 14 apocr^-phal
books, and concludes : " All the books of the New Testament, as
they are commonly received, we do receive and account them for
Canonical." (Art. VL).
The Thirty-nine Articles thus base theraselves on the
Hieronyraian tradition as the Roraan Catholic church
did on the stronger Augustinian tradition.
The Scotch Confession of 1560, however, maintains
the position of the reforraers :
"As we beleeve and confesse the Scriptures of God sufficient to
instruct and make the man of God perfite, so do we affirme and
avow the authoritie of the sarae to be of God, and nether to depend
on men nor angelis. We affirme, therefore, that sik as allege the
Scripture to have na uther authoritie bot that quhilk it hes re
ceived from the Kirk, to be blasphemous against God, and injurious
to the trew Kirk, quhilk alwaies heares and obeyis the voice of her
awin spouse and Pastor ; bot takis not upon her to be maistres
over the samin." (Art. XIX.).
Thos. Cartwright, the chief of the English Puritans,
takes the same view :

* Dorner, System of Christian Doctrine, Vol. II., p. 186.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. II5
" Q. How may these bookes be discerned to bee the word of God ?
"A. By these considerations following :
" First, they are perfectly holy in theraselves, and by themselves :
whereas all other writings are prophane, further then they draw
holinesse from these ; which yet is never such, but that their holi-
nesse is imperfect and defective.
" Secondly, they are perfectly profitable in theraselves, to instruct
to salvation, and all other are utterly unprofitable thereunto, any
further then they draw from them.
" Thirdly, there is a perfect concord and harmonie in all these
Bookes, notwithstanding the diversity of persons by whora, places
where, and tirae when, and matters whereof, they have been written.
" Fourthly, there is an admirable force in them, to incline men's
hearts from vice to vertue.
" Fifthly, in great plainenesse and easinesse of stile, there shineth
a great Majesty and authority.
" Sixthly, there is such a gracious simplicity in the writers of these
Bookes, that they neither spare their friends, nor themselves, but
most freely, and impartially, set downe their owne faults and infirmi
ties as well as others.
" Lastly, God's owne Spirit working in the harts of his children
doth assure thera, that these Scriptures are the word of God."*
The Westminster Confession gives expression to the
mature Puritan faith respecting the Scriptures :
§ 2. " Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the word of God
written, are now contained all the books of the Old and New Testa
ment, which are these" (mentioning the 66 books comraonly re
ceived). "All which are given by inspiration of God to be the rule
of faith and life."
§ 3. " The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine
inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture ; and therefore
are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any otherwise
approved, or made use of, than other huraan writings."
§ 4. " The Authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to
be believed and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testiraony of any
man or church, but wholly upon God, (who is truth itself,) the au-

' Thos. Cart-wright, Treatise ofthe Christian Religion. London, 1616.

116 BIBLICAL STCDY.
thor thereof ; and therefore it is to be received, because it is the
word of God,"
§ 5. " We raay be moved and induced by the testimony of the
church to an high and reverent esteem for the Holy Scripture ; and
the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the maj
esty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole,
(which is to give all glory to God,) the full discovery it makes of the
only way of man's salvation, the many other incomparable excel
lencies, and the entire perfection thereof, are arguments whereby it
doth abundantly evidence itself to be the word of God ; yet, not
withstanding, our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible
truth, and divine authority thereof, is frora the inward work of the
Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the word in our hearts."
(!•> § 2-5)-
The Westminster Confession distinguishes in its state
ments (i) the external evidence, the testimony of the
church ; (2) the internal evidence of the Scriptures
themselves ; (3) the fides divina. Here is an ascending
series of evidences for the authority of the Scriptures.
The fides humana belongs strictly only to the first class
of evidences. This testimony o.f the church is placed
first in the Confession because it is weakest. The sec
ond class not only gives fides humana, but also divina,
owing to the complex character of the Scriptures them
selves ; but the third class as the highest gives purely
¦jides divina. The Confession carefully discriminates the
weight of these evidences. The authority of the church
only induces " an high and reverent esteem for the
Holy Scripture." The internal evidence of the " excel
lencies and entire perfection thereof are arguraents
whereby it doth abundantly evidence itself to be the
word of God "; but our " full persuasion and assurance
of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof "
come only from the higbeit evidence, " the inward work
of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the word

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. 117
in our hearts." In accordance with this, " The authority
of the Holy Scripture dependeth wholly upon God"
(§ 4). On this principle, then, the canon is determined.
The books of the canon are named (§ 2), and then it is
said, "All which are given by inspiration of God to be
the rule of faith and life." The apocryphal books are
no part of the canon of Scripture because they are not
of divine inspiration (§ 3). It is, therefore, the authority
of God himself, speaking through the Holy Spirit, by and
with the word to the heart, that determines that the
writings are infallible as the inspired Word of God, and
it is their inspiration that determines their canonicity.
Thus the Westminster divines maintained the Refor
mation point of view. They were not as a body scho-
Icistics, though there were scholastics among thera ; but
were preachers, catechists, and expositors of the Script
ures, with a true evangelical spirit. They were called
from the active work of the ministry, and from stubborn
resistance to dogmatic authority, to the active work of
reforming the church of England into closer conformity
with the Reformed churches of the continent. Among
the doctrines to be reformed was the doctrine respecting
the Scriptures. There was a difference between the
Puritans and Prelatists on this subject, as we have seen.
in placing the XXXIX Articles alongside of the Scottish
Confession and the statement of Thos. Cartwright. This
difference was still further developed. The Prelatical
view is stated by Bishop Cosin :*
" For though there be many Internal Testimonies belonging to
the Holy Scriptures, whereby we may be sufficiently assured, that
they are the true and lively oracles of God  yet for the par
ticular and just number of such books, whether they be more or less,

* Scholastic History ofthe Canon. London, 1657, p. 4, seq.

118 BIBLICAL STUDY.
then either some private persons, or sorae one particular churck oi
late, have been pleased to make thera, we have no better nor other
external rule or testiraony herein to guide us, then the constant
voice of the catholic and tmiversal church, as it hath been delivered
to us upon record frora one generation to another.''
The Puritans in the Westminster Assembly in revis
ing Article VI. of the XXXIX Articles, erased the state
ments upon which the Prelatists built : " Of whose au
thority was never any doubt in the church "; " And the
other books (as Hierome saith) the church doth read for
example of life and instruction of manners ; but yet
doth it not apply thera to establish any doctrine." And
they changed the stateraent : " All the books of the
New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do
receive and account them for canonical "; so as to ex
press the Puritan doctrine : " All which books, as they
are comraonly received, we do receive and acknowledge
thera to be given by the inspiration of God ; and in
that regard, to be of the raost certain credit, and high
est authority."
Chas. Herle, the Prolocutor, admirably states the
Protestant position over against the Romish :
" They (the Papists) being asked, why they believe the Scripture
to be the Word of God? Answer, because the Church says 'tis so ;
and being asked againe, why they beleeve the Church ? They an
swer, because the Scripture sales it shall be guided into truth ; and
being asked againe, why they beleeve that very Scripture that says
so ? They answer, because the Church says 'tis Scripture, and so
(with those in the Psaira xii. 8), they walk in a circle or on every
side. They charge the like on us (but wrongfully) that we beleeve
the Word, because it sayes it self that it is so ; but we do not so re
solve our Faith ; we believe unto salvation, not the Word barely,
because it witnesses to itself, but because the Spirit speaking in it
to our consciences witnesses to thera that it is the Word indeed ; we
resolve not our Faith barely either into the Word, or Spirit as its

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. Hg
single ultimate principle, but into the testimony of the Spirit speak
ing to our consciences in the Word." '*'
It has been objected by a recent writer :
" It does not tend in the slightest degree to reconcile us to these
opinions to say that the reformers entertained them. It would not
be strange if in their opposition to the claims of the church of Rome,
they went to the opposite extreme and were in danger of falling into
the errors of the mystics." t
It is true that in this matter the reformers and Pu
ritans were in radical opposition to Rome. This was
the so-called /i7r»««/ principle, one of the essential prin
ciples of Protestantism. If they had not taken this po
sition they would have been powerless against the Roraan
claim of tradition.
As Reuss well says :
"Nothing was raore foreign tb the spirit of Luther, of Calvin, and
their illustrious, fellow-laborers, nothing was more radically contrary
to their principles, than to base the authority of the sacred scriptures
upon that of the Church and its tradition, to go in effect, to mount
guard over the fathers, and range their catalogues in line, cause their
obscurities to disappear by forced interpretations and their contra
dictions by doing violence to thera, as is the custora of our day. They
very well knew that this would have been the highest inconsistency,
indeed the ruin of their system, to attribute to the church the right
of raaking the Bible after they had contested that of making the doc
trine ; for that which can do the greater can do the less." \
It is true that the mystic element was strong among
the reformers and the Puritans. This is indeed the chief
feature which distinguishes them from the Swiss, Dutch,
and Lutheran scholastics and 'their modern followers.

* Detur Sapienti, pp. 152-3. London, 1655.
+ Francis L. Patton, article, Pentateuchal Criticism, Presbyterian Review,
IV;, p. 346-
X Reuss, Histoire du Canon, p. 313.

120 BIBLICAL STUDY.
But their mystic was not mysticism. There never have
been times in the history of the church when mys
ticism prevailed in such a variety of forms and persist
ence of energy as in the times of the Reformation and
of the Westminster divines. They had to guard their
doctrines at every point against mysticism. It is
strange reading of history to represent either the re
forraers or the Puritans as going too far in the direction
of mysticism.
The statements of the Westminster divines were raade
in the face of the strongest force of mysticism that has
ever manifested itself. Thus, in 1647, the London min
isters (many of whom were raembers of the Westminster
Asserably) issued their testiraony against this false mys
ticism and the heresies of their time. They mention as
"Errors against the Divine Authority of the Holy Scripture, That
the Scripture, whether true Manuscript or no, whether Hebrew,
Greek, or English, it is but huraan ; so not able to discover a divine
God. Then where is your coraraand to raake that your rule or disci
pUne, that cannot reveal you God, nor give you power to walk with
God ? That, it is no foundation of Christian Religion, to believe
that the English Scriptures, or that book, or rather volume of books
called the Bible, translated out of the originall Hebrew and Greek
copies, into the English tongue are the Word of God. That, ques
tionless no writing whatsoever, whether translations or originalls,
are the foundation of Christian Religion." *
Wm. Lyford, an esteemed Presbyterian divine, invited
to sit in the Westminster Asserably, but preferring his
pastoral work, wrote a coraraentary on this testiraony of
the London rainisters.f

¦* A Testimony to the Truth of Jesus Christ and to our solemn League and
Covenant. Subscribed by the ministers of Christ within the Province of Lon
don, Dec. 14, 1647. London, 1648.
t Th£ Plain man's sense exercised to discern good and evil, or A Discovery

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. 121
In his chapter on the Divine Authority of Scripture,
he says :
"I shall not trouble ^ou with the Popish controversies concerning
the Scripture, but apply myself to the errors of the present age."
He then quotes the language from the Testimony given above. He
then goes on to give the properties of Scripture, and after brief men
tion of the error of making " the Church the judge over Scriptures "
(p. 7), he says : " But the error I am now to deale with, is that of
the blasphemous Anti-Scripturist, under which name 1 comprehend
all such as either deny them to be divinely inspired and given of God,
or else allowing their divine authority, yet refuse to subrait to Script
ure as the supreme and all-sufficient Judge, pretending to other divine
revelations, besides and beyond the written word, unto which upon
all occasions they appeal, as if the Scriptures were not able to ac
quaint the soul with the highest discoveries of God's truth and mind.
If they be urged with any proof out of the Old Testament, they re
ject it, as if the Old Testament were antiquated, and out of date :
if they be pressed with a place in the New Testament, then they
say, that is not the meaning, which we produce because (say they)
you have not the spirit, the spirit teacheth us otherwise. And thus
under pretence of Inspirations ofthe Holy Ghost, and improveraents
beyond and above all Scripture, they strike at the root, and blow up
the very foundations of all faith and religion, of all our hopes and
coraforts ; these are the devill's engineers — ."(p. 17).
Our author knows how to steer between the Scylla of
Roraanisra and the Charybdis of raysticism. The re
formers and Puritans knew their work better than some
of our modern theologians.
" It is one thing to say the Spirit teacheth us by Scripture, and
another thing to pretend the Spirit's teaching besides or beyond, or
contrary to the Scripture ; the one is a divine truth, the other is vile
montanisme" (p. 20).
After controverting the " foure fold error: (i) of them

of the Errors, Heresies, and Blasphemies of these Times, and the Toleration
of them, as they are collected and testified against by the ministers of London,
in their Testimony to the Truth of Jesus Christ. London, 1655.

122 BIBLICAL STUDY.
that would place this authority (of scripture) in the
Church ; (2) of them who appeale frora scripture to the
spirit ; (3) of thera that make reason the supreme Judge ;
(4) of them that expound scripture according to Provi
dences," he goes on to expound the position of our
Protestant symbols :
" The authority and truth of God speaking in the Scripture, is that
upon which our faith is built, and doth finally stay itselfe : The min
istry of the Church, the illumination of the Spirit, the right use of
reason are the choicest helps, by which we beUeve, by which we see
the law and will of God ; but they are not the law itself; the divine
truth and authority of God's word, is that which doth secure our
consciences  If you ask what it is that I believe ? I answer, I
believe the blessed doctrines of salvation by Jesus Christ ; if you
ask, why I believe all this, and why I will venture my soul to all eter
nity on that doctrine ? I answer, because it is the revealed will of
God concerning us. If you ask further. How I know that God hath
revealed thera ? I answer, by a two-fold certainty-; one of faith, the
other of experience ; (i) I do infallibly by faith believe the Revela
tion, not upon the credit of any other Revelation, but for itselfe, the
Lord giving testiraony thereunto, not only by the constant Testimony
of the Church, which cannot universally deceive, nor only by rairacles
frora heaven, bearing witness to the Apostle's doctrine, but chiefly
by its own proper divine light, which shines therein. The truth
contained in Scripture is a light, and is discerned by the sons of
light : It doth by its own light, persuade us, and in all cases, doubts,
and questions, it doth clearly testifie with us or against us ; which
light is of that nature, that it giveth Testimony to itself, and receiv
eth authority from no other, as the Sun is not scene by any light but
his own, and we discerne sweet from soure by its own taste. . .
(2) Whereunto add, that other certainty of experience, which is a
certainty in respect ofthe Affections and ofthe spiritual man. This
is the Spirit's seal set to God's truth (namely), the light of the word ;
when it is thus shewnen unto us, it doth work such strange and su
pernatural effects upon the soul ; . . . .It persuades us of the truth
and goodness of the will of God ; and of the things revealed ; and
all this by way of spiritual taste and feeling, so that the things ap
prehended by us in divine knowledge, are more certainly discerned

THE CANON OF SCRIPTUEE. 123
in the certainty of experience, than anything is discerned in the light
of naturail understanding " (p. 39).
"They that are thus taught, doe know assuredly that they have
heard God hiipselfe : In the former way, the light of Divine Rea
son causeth approbation of the things they beheve. In the later,
the Purity and power of Divine Knowledge, causeth a taste and feel
ing of the things they heare : And they that are thus established in
the Faith, doe so plainly see God present with them in his Word,
that if all the world should be turned into Miracles, it could not re
move them from the certainty of their perswasion ; you cannot un-
perswade a Christian of the truth of his Religion, you cannot make
him thinke meanly of Christ, nor the Doctrine of Rederaption, nor
of duties of Sanctification, his heart is fixed trusting in the Lord.
So then we conclude, that the true reason of our Faith, and ground,
on which it finally stayeth itself, is the Authority of God hiraself,
whom we doe most certainly discerne, and feele to speake in the
word of faith, which is preached unto us " (p. 39.)
This is the true doctrine of the Reformation and of
the Westminster divines, in which they know no antago
nism between the human reason, the religious feeling,
and the Divine Spirit in the Word of God. It is a mer
ciful Providence that they were guided to this position,
for, if they had gone with the Swiss scholastics in basing
themselves on rabbinical tradition as to the Old Testa
ment, they would have committed the churches of the
Reformation to errors that have long since been ex
ploded by scholars. This is the true Puritan raystic in
conflict with raysticism and its best antidote. It is the
mystic element that needs above all things to be revived
in the British and American churches. It brings the
people face to face with the Bible and with the Divine
Spirit working in and with it, so that they need no mediat
ing priesthood of theologians, no help of apologetics or of
polemics to convince them of the authority of the Bible
and enable them to maintain it against ah cavilling.
It is also objected that this resting upon the fides divina

124 BIBLICAL STUDY.
for the proof of the inspiration and canonicity of the Script
ure implies that " every Christian makes his own Bible."*
True, but this right of private judgment is the Protestant
position. Are we prepared to abandon it ? Shall it be
maintained with reference to other doctrines and aban
doned with reference to the source of these doctrines ? This
would be a fatal inconsistency to Protestantism. The
right of private judgment must apply to the authority, in
spiration, and canonicity of Scripture, as well as to the doc
trines of atonement, justification by faith, and original
sin. It is no more difficult of application in the one
case than the others. It may be an unfarailiar practice
to those who rest on the authority of the church for the
authority of Scripture. But it is no raore unfamiliar to
them than the right of private judgment itself is unfa
railiar to those who rest upon the authority of an infal
lible church for all doctrines. The right of private
judgment with reference to the authority of a book of
Scripture no more prevents the cqnsensus of individuals
in a confession of faith on this subject than on any
other. It is important that the individual Christian
should have his own convictions on all of these sub
jects. The consensus of such Christians who know
what they believe is much stronger than the consensus
of those who rest merely upon the external authority
of the testimony of the church. We accept the doc
trine of the Westminster Confession with reference to
the Bible, because it coincides with our convictions and
experience with reference to the Bible. We would not
subscribe to it otherwise. Our faith in divine things
rests upon divine and not on human authority.
It is still further objected that, " If, however, canon-

* F. L. Patton in /. c, p. 350.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE, \25
icit}- be, as wc beHe\-e it is, a purely historical question,
it is only in a very limited way that subjectixe tests
can be eniplo\-ed in determining it." * If canonicitx-
be a purel\- historical question, then the reformers and
the Westminster Confession and the other reformed
creeds were in error when the\- made it purely a
question of inspiration and of the internal divine au
thority of the Scriptures themselves. To abandon this
position is to accept essentially the Roman Catholic
position. The difference then amounts to this : At what
historic point shall we stand, or on what historic names
sliall we base our faith in the canon ? Shall we go with
Rome and base the canon on the authority of the living
church as the heir of Catholic tradition, or shall we go
M'ith the XXXIX Articles and rely on the authority
of Jerome and the Jewish assembly at Jamnia, or shall
we accept the consensus of the Ante-Xiccne church and
sliare their doubts as well as their certainties? Which
ever of these positions we may take, we still build on
uncertain and fallible authority, and dishonor tlie suffi-
cienc\- and authority of the Scriptures themselves. We
violate one of the Reformation principles upon which
our Protestantism depends, and the most consistent
course would be to follow Cardinal Newman in his path-
wa\- to Rome. III. CRITICISM OF THE C.\NOX.
It is all the more nccessar\- to apply to the canon the
critical test est.iblished by the refonners, now that we are
much better informed as to the relation of the Jews to
the canon than the\- were. The Xew Testament writers
and the fathers generallv depended upon the Septuagint
• F, L. Patton in /. c, p. 349.

126 BIBLICAL STUDY.
version of the Old Testament. The story of its transla-
tion by means of seventy-two accomplished scholars
chosen from the twelve tribes of Israel, with the co-oper
ation of Ptolemaeus Philadelphus, king of Egypt, and the
Jewish high-priest of Jerusalera, and inspired to do their
work by the Divine Spirit, — which prevailed for many
centuries in the Eastern and Western churches, — has
been traced to its sirapler form in Josephus* and
Philo,t and from these to the original letter of Aris-
teas, and that has been proved to be a forgery :]: and its
statements wide of the truth. For an internal examina
tion of the translation itself proves it to have been made
by different men on different principles and at different
times. Frankel is followed by a large number of scholars in
the opinion that it was a sort of Greek Targum which
grew up gradually at first from the needs of the syna
gogue worship, and then from the desire of the Hellen
istic Jews to collect together the religious literature of
their nation, as the Palestinian and Babylonian Targums
were subsequently made for the Jews speaking Aramaic.§
Some of the sacred books — such as Daniel, Esther, and
Jeremiah — have additional matter not found in the
Hebrew Massoretic text. The apocryphal writings are
mingled with those taken into the Hebrew canon with
out discrimination. As Deane || says :
" If we judge from the MSS. that have come down to us, it would
be impossible for any one, looking merely to the Septuagint version and

* Antiq. XII. li. t Vita Mosis, II., § 5-7.
I The original text of the letter is best given in Mene., Archiv fUr Wissen-
ichaftliche Erforschung des Alien Testaments, I., p. 242, seq. Halle, 1870.
§ Frankel, Vorstudien n. d. Septuaginta, Leipzig, 1841; S<^(iA2., Alexand
Uebersetz. d. Buch lesaias, 1880, p. 7, seq.
\ Book of Wisdom, Oxford, 1881, p. 37, seq.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. 127
its allied works, to distinguish any of the books in the collection as of
less authority than others. There is nothing whatever to raark off
the canonical writings from what have been called the deuterocanon-
ical. They are all presented as of equal standing and authority, and,
if we must make distinctions between them, and place sorae on a
higher platform than o'chers, this separation raust be raade on
grounds which are not afforded by the arrangement of the various
documents themselves."
The scholastics depend upon the tradition that
the Old Testament canon was determined by the so-
called men of the great synagogue. They rely for this
upon Elias Levita* and the long Jewish tradition that
goes back to a slender support in the Misnaic tract,
Aboth (I. i-2).f But back of this there is no historical
evidence whatever. The silence of all the writings from
the first century A.D. backwards is absolute. They could
not have oraitted to raention such a body as this if it
ever had an existence, and determined the canon and
everything else upon which the Jewish religion depended.
The Apocryphal Literature, in its wide and varied
extent, knows of no such body. The nuraerous pseu-
depigraphical writers are also silent. Philo and Josephus
know of nothing of. the kind. The New Testament
writers do not recognize it. On the other hand, the
apocalypse of Ezra, frora the first century A.D., repre
sents the whole canon as deterrained by Ezra, who com
mitted the whole to writing by divine inspiration.:]:
How could it do so in the face of the great synagogue ?
There are well-established disputes as to the canon
among the Jews in the first Christian century which

* Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, edited by Ginsburg, 1867, p. 112, seq.
^ S'aaxiL, Die SprScher der Vdter ; Ein ethischer Mischna-Traktat, Karls
ruhe, 1882. Taylor, Sayings of tlie Jewish Fathers, Cambridge, 1877.
X XIV. 19, seq.

128 BIBLICAL STUDY.
could not have taken place if a venerable body like the
supposed men of the great synagogue had determined
everything. This tradition must go with the letter of
Aristeas out of the field of history into the realm of
shadowy and unsupported legends.
Another evidence for the fixture of the Old Testament
canon has been found in a supposed writing of Philo of
the first Christian century.* This work speaks of the law,
the prophets, hymns, and other writings, raaking either
three or four classes, but without specification of partic
ular books. But this writing has recently been proved
to have been written in the third century A.D. , and wrongly
attributed to Philo. ¦]• The position has been accepted
by scholars, :]: and is invincibly established. The testi
mony of Philo is therefore reduced to the books that he
quotes, as of divine authority. He omits to mention Nehe
miah, Ruth, Esther, Chronicles, Ezekiel, Lamentations,
Daniel, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. § He uses
Proverbs and Job. This we would expect from Philo's
type of thought and the subject-matter of his writings.
But his omission of Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs
is surprising. These writings belong to the sarae class
of wisdom-literature as Job and Proverbs. They would
have given him the very best field for his peculiar
method of allegory. The omission in this case weighs
against them. Ezekiel and Daniel, the symbolical proph
ets, we would expect him to make use of. Josephus ||
raentions 22 books as raaking up his canon — 5 of the law,
13 of the prophets, and 4 of poems and precepts, but

* De Vita Contemp., ». III.
+ Lucius, Die Therapeuten und ihre Stellung in der Askese, Strassburg, i88a.
} Strack, art. Kanon in Herzog, II. Aufl., vii., p. 425.
§ Eichhorn, Einleitung, 3te, Ausgabe, 1803, I., p. 98.
1 Contra Apion, I., 8.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. 129
does not define which they are. He uses all of the
Talmudie canon except Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of
Songs, and Job.* The silence of Josephus as to these
cannot be pressed, because they did not clearly come
within his scope. Various efforts have been raade to
determine his books, but without conclusive results.
The lists of subsequent writers have been used. Here,
if on the one hand the lists of Origen and Jerome
favor the Talmudie, the list of Junilius Africanus
favors the exclusion of Chronicles, Ezra, Job, Song of
Songs, and Esther.f Graetz j^ seems to us to corae
nearer the mark in excluding the Song of Songs and
Ecclesiastes from the list of Josephus. He falls, then,
by his 22, just these two short of the Talraudic list
of 24. We are left by Josephus in uncertainty as to
certain Old Testaraent books. Moreover, the state
ments of Josephus do not carry with them our confi
dence as to the views of the raen of his tirae ; for we
know that several books were in dispute araong the
Pharisees, such as Ezekiel, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes,
and Esther. They were generally, but not unanimously
acknowledged. The Sadducees are said by some of the
fathers to have agreed with the Samaritans in rejecting
all but the Pentateuch. This must be a mistake. But
we can hardly believe that they accepted Ezekiel and
Daniel in view of their denial of angels and the resurrec
tion. The Essenes and the Zelots agreed in extending
the canon to esoteric zvritings. The apocalypse of Ezra
mentions 70 of these as given to Ezra to interpret the
24, and so of even greater authority. These parties

* Eichhorn in /. c.,\., p. 123.
t See Prof. Kihn, Theodore von Mopsuestia und Julius Africanus ais
Exegeten, Frei., 1880, p. 86.
X Gesch. d. Juden, III., p. 501, Leipsig, 1863.
6*

130 BIBLICAL STUDY.
differ from the Pharisees only in that they committed
the esoteric wisdom to writing, whereas the Pharisees
handed it down as an infallible tradition, and prohibited
the committing it to writing, until at last it found em
bodiment in the Misnayoth and the Talmuds.
The eminent Jewish scholar, Zunz, is correct in his
stateraent: "Neither Philo nor Josephus irapart to us
an authentic list of the sacred writings."* It seeras
clear that the Jewish canon was not definitely settled
until the assembly at Jamnia, during the Jewish war
with- Titus (about 70 A.D.), and the decisions were car
ried through by a majority of votes, accompanied with
acts of violence toward the dissenting parties.f We
doubt not that the canon of the Palestinian Jews re
ceived its latest addition by comraon consent not later
than the tirae of Judas Maccabeus,:]: and no books
of later composition were added afterward ; yet the
schools of the Pharisees continued the debate with
reference to some of these writings until the assembly
at Jamnia, and the Hellenistic Jews had a wider and
freer conception of the canon.§ We cannot rely upon
the deterraination of the canon of the Old Testaraent
by the authority of the Pharisees, who, after the rejec
tion of the true Messiah, brought on the ruin of their
nation in the Jewish war. We cannot yield to the
authority of Rabbi Akiba, the supporter of Bar Khokba,
the false messiah, and his coadjutors, any more on this

* Gottesdienstlichen Vortrage der Juden, 1832, p. 18.
+ Graetz, Gesch. d. Juden, 1863, III., p. 496, seq. ; Robertson Smith, The
Old Testament in the Jewish Church, N. Y., 1881, p. 172, seq., and 412 seq. ;
S. Ives Curtiss in Current Discussions in Theology, p. 63 ; see also the Misnaic
tract, Jadaim, HI. 5.
I Strack, Herzog, Real Encyk., II. Aufl., vii., p. 426; Ewald, i«/2?-« rf. Bibel
von Gott, I., p. 363.
§ Ewald in /. t., p. 364.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. 131
subject of , the canon than we can accept their dicta with
regard to Jesus Christ, the observance of the Sabbath,
or the faith of ancient Israel.
Nor does the New Testament deterraine the canon of
the Old. Jesus gives His authority to the law, the proph
ets, and the psalms (Luke xxiv. 44), which alone were
used in the synagogue in His times ; but the psalras only
of the Hagiographa are raentioned. There are no suffi
cient reasons for concluding that by the psalms Jesus
meant all the other books besides law and prophets.
The New Testament uses for the Old Testament the
following general terms : (i) the term scriptures for the
whole (Acts xvii. 2 ; xvii. 1 1 ; xviii. 24 ; xviii. 28) ; or sacred
writings (2 Tim. iii. 15) ; (2) law (John x. 34 referring to
the Psalter ; xii. 34 referring to several passages of the
prophets; xv. 25 to the Psalter; I Cor. xiv. 21 to Isa
iah) ; {¦^prophets (Luke xxiv. 25 ; Acts xiii. 27) ; (4) law
and prophets (Matt. v. 17; Acts xiii. 15), Moses and
prophets (Luke xvi. 29, 31; xxiv. 27 ; Acts xxvi. 22) ;
law of Moses and the prophets (Acts xxviii. 23) ; (s)
law of Moses and prophets and psalms (Luke xxiv. 44).
This fluctuation shows that in the rainds of the writers
of the New Testaraent there was no definite division
known as law, prophets, and other writings.* Indeed
the New Testaraent carefully abstains from using the
writings disputed among the Jews. It does not use at
all Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah ;

* The statement of the prologue of Ecclesiasticus or the Wisdom of Sirach
as to the three classes : " Law, Prophets, and other books of our fathers," does
not prove that the last was a technical term of a special class. How could Jose
phus have given such a different arrangeraent of the writings from that found
anywhere else, if that had been the case ? How could he have given up the
technical "other writings,'* and used hymns, etc. ? The term, other writings, to
Sirach means nothing more than an indefinite number which did not belong to
the classes law and prophets.

132 BIBLICAL STUDY.
and only incidentally Ezekiel and Chronicles in the same
way as apocryphal books and the pseudepigraphical are
used. Was this silence discretionary, in order to build
only on books recognized by all, or does it rule from the
canon those books so ignored ? *
Prof. Charteris f says:
" It may be a raere coincidence, but it is at least noteworthy, that
the only books of the Old Testaraent not quoted in the New are the
three books of the writings of Soloraon, Esther and Ezra and Nehe
miah. Ezra and Nehemiah are historical books, which there was
probably no occasion to quote : but the other four unquoted books —
Esther, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles — are those books which
were not accepted by all at the tirae of our Lord."
We shall confine ourselves to the same competent au
thority for a summary as to the canon of the New Tes
tament : :]:
" We see that there were other books accepted by most, but not
with the same heartiness by all ; and the notes we have made on ear
lier lists have prepared us to learn what these books were. They
are James and Jude, 2d Peter, and 2d and 3d John. Sorae add the
Apocalypse of John. All these books, save Jaraes, were wanting in
the New Testament of the Syriac Church, which being the earliest
collection of Christian Scriptures for the East, had great influence
on the views of all the Oriental Churches for which Eusebius was
specially qualified to speak. When we turn to the Western or Latin
Church, we find that James was probably omitted in the old Italic
collection current in Africa, and that 2d Peter certainly was. What
Eusebius, therefore, tells us with his usual candid trustfulness, is
what we should have known from those other sources ; and it may
be regarded as established beyond dispute."
The criticisra of the canon has thus determined a gen-

* Eichhorn in I. u., I., p. 104.
t The New Testament Scriptures : Their Claims, History, and Authority
CroaU Lectures for 1882. New York, 1882, p. 88.
X In/, c, p. 169.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. I33
eral consent to the raost of the books defined as canon-
ical in the Reforraed creeds, and that with regard to
those others about which there has always been dispute,
the preponderance of testimony is in their favor. The
books of primary and secondary authority have kept the
same relative position. Those doubted among the Jews
were doubted by Christians. Those doubted in the early
church were doubted by the reformers, and are doubted
by sorae critics now. In giving our testimony to the
canonicity of all the books specified in the Reformed
creeds, we do it on the principles of criticism laid down
by the reformers and tested by the fires of modern in
vestigation. But we recognize that the evidence for
some is less than for others.
The conflicts of conforraists and non-conforraists, and
the struggle between evangelical faith and deism in
Great Britain, and of scholasticism with pietism on the
continent, caused the scholastics to antagonize more
and more the human element in the Scriptures, and to
assert the external authority of traditional opinions and
Protestant orthodoxy, over the reason, the conscience,
and the religious feeling ; while the apologists, following
the deists into the field of the external arguments for
and against the religion and doctrines of the Bible, built
up a series of external evidences which are strong and
powerful, and which did, in fact, overcome the deists
intellectually, or rather drive them into atheisra and
pantheism ; but at the expense of vital piety in the
Church — the true Puritan inheritance ; for the stronger
internal evidence was neglected. The dogmatists for
got the caution of Calvin : " Those persons betray great
folly who wish it to be demonstrated to infidels, that the
Scripture is the Word of God, which cannot be known

134 BIBLICAL STUDY.
without faith " * and exposed the church to the severe
criticism of Dodwell :
" To give all men Liberty to judge for theraselves and to expect at
the same tirae that they shall be of the preacher's mind, is such a
scheme for unanimity as one would scarce imagine any one would
be weak enough to devise in speculation, and much less that any
could ever prove hardy enough to avow and propose to practice," f
and led some to the conclusion that there was an " ir
reconcilable repugnance in their natures betwixt reason
and belief.":]:
The efforts of the more evangelical type of thought
which passed over from the Puritans into the Cambridge
men, and the Presbyterians of the type of Baxter and
Calamy, to construct an evangelical doctrine of the rea
son and the religious feeling in accordance with Protestant
principles, failed for the time, and the movement died
away, or passed over into the merely liberal and compre
hensive scherae, or assuraed an attitude of indifference
between the contending parties. The Protestant rule of
faith was sharpened more and more, especially among
the Independents, and the separating Presbyterian
churches of Scotland, after the fashion of John Owen,
rather than of the Westminster divines ; whilst the apolo
gists pressed raore and more the dogmatic method of
demonstration over against criticism. §
The Reforraed faith and evangelical religion were about
to be extinguished when, in the Providence of God, the
Puritan vital and experimental religion was revived in
Methodism which devoted itself to Christian life, and so
proved the saving element in modern British and Amer
ican Christianity. The churches of the continent of

* Institutes, VIII., 13. -f Religion not founded on Argument, p. go, seq.
X In /. t., p. 80. § Lechler, Gesch. d. Deismus, 1841, p. 411, seq.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. I35
Europe were allowed, in the Providence of God, to raeet
the full force of rationalisra and pay the penalty of the
criminal blunders of the scholastics. Schleiermacher
was raised up to be the father of raodern evangelical
Gerraan theology. He began to recover the lost ground
and to build the structure of raodern theology in the
true raystic spirit on the religious feeling apprehending
Jesus Christ as Saviour. A series of intellectual giants
have carried on his work, such as Neander, Tholuck,
Rothe, Miiller, and Dorner..
It is not safe to follow these foreign divines in all their
methods and statements. These depend upon the cent
ury of conflict which lies back of them and through which
we have not passed. British and American theology
has its own peculiar principles, methods, and work to
perform. It is rapidly approaching the crisis of its his
tory, the same essentially that German theology had to
meet at the close of the eighteenth century. The tide
of thought has ebbed and flowed between Great Britain
and the continent several times since the Reformation.
The tide has set strongly now in our direction. It is
perilous to follow the blind guides of British and Amer
ican scholasticism, and fall in the ditch that lies in their
path (Matt. xv. 14). It is wise to learn from the expe
rience of those who have passed through the conflict and
achieved the victory. It is prudent to do all that is pos
sible to prevent the ruin to American Christianity that
is sure to come if we commit the old blunders over again.
It is our conviction that the revival of true evangelical
religion, and the successful progress of the theology of
our Reformed churches, in the working out of the princi
ples inherited from the Reformation, depend upon a
speedy reaction from the scholastic theology of the Zu
rich Consensus and the Puritanism of John Owen, and

136 BIBLICAL STUDY.
an immediate renewal of the evangelical life and unfet
tered thought of the Reformation and the Puritans of
the first half of the seventeenth century.
It has become more and more evident since Seraler*
reopened the question of the canon of Scripture, that
the only safe position for evangelical raen is to build on
the rock of the Reforraation principle of the Scriptures.
This principle has been enriched in two directions — first
by the study of the unity and harraony of the Scriptures
as an organic whole, and second by the apprehension of
the relation of the faith of the individual to the consen
sus of the churches. The principles on which the canon
of Scripture is to be determined are, therefore, these :
(l) Thg^testimony^Lthe^jhurch, going back by tradition
and written documents to primitive times, presents prob
able evidence to all men that the Scriptures, recognized
as of divine authority and canonical by such general con
sent, are indeed what they are claimed to be.
(2) The Scripturesthemselves, in their pure and holy
character7satisfying~tlie conscience ; their beauty, har
mony, and majesty satisfying the aesthetic taste ; their
simplicity and fidelity to truth, together with their ex
alted conceptions of man, of God, and of history, satis
fying the reason and the intellect ; their piety and devo
tion to the one God, and their revelation of redemption,
satisfying the religious feelings and deepest needs of
mankind — all conspire to more and more convince that
they are indeed sacred and divine books.
(3) 'rhe_S£irit of_God_beara_mtaiess by and with the
particular writing, or part of writing, in the heart of the
believer, removing every doubt and assuring the soul of
its possession of the truth of God, the rule and guide of
the life.

* Abhandlung von freier Untersuchung des Kanon. 4Bde., 1771-1775.

THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE. I37
(4) The Spiritof God bears witness by and with the
several writings in such a manner as to assure the be
liever in the study of them that they are the several
parts of one complete divine revelation, each writing
having its own appropriate and indispensable place and
importance in the organism of the canon.
(5) The Spirhci God bears witness to the church as
an orgarrtzerbodj^oT^uch believers, through their free
consent in various communities and countries and cent
uries, to this unity and variety of the Scriptures as the
one complete and perfect canon of the divine word to
the church.
And thus the human testimony, the external evidence,
attains its furthest possible limit as probable evidence,
bringing the inquirer to the Scriptures with a high
and reverent esteem of thera, when the internal evi
dence exerts its powerful influence upon his soul, and
at length the divine testimony lays hold of his entire
nature and convinces and assures him of the truth of
God and causes him to share in the consensus of the
Christian church.
" Thus the Canon explains and judges itself ; it needs no foreign
standard. Just so the Holy Spirit evokes in believers a judgment, or
criticisra, which is not subjective, but in which freedom and fidelity
are corabined. The criticisra and interpretation, which faith exercises,
see its object not from without, as foreign, or as traditional, or as in
bondage, but frora within, and abiding in its native element becomes
more and more at horae while it ascribes to every product of apostolic
men its place and proper canonical worth." " True faith sees in the
letter of the documents of Revelation the religious content brought to
an immutable objectivity which is able to attest itself as truth by the
divine Spirit, which can at once warm and quicken the letter in ordei
to place the living God-man before the eyes of the believer."*

* Dorner, System der Christlichen Glaubenslehre, Berlin, 1879, I., pp. 667
seq. ; System of Christian Doctrine, Edin,, 1881, II., p. 229, seq.

138 BIBLICAL STUDY.
The reason, the conscience, and the religious feeling,
all of which have arisen during these discussions of the
last century into a light and vigor unknown and unantic
ipated at the Reformation, should not be antagonized the
one with the other, or with the Spirit of God, but will
all be included in that act and habit of faith by which
we apprehend the Word of God. These cannot be satis
fied with the external authority of scholars or schools,
of Church or State, of tradition or human testimony,
however extensive, but only by a divine authority on
which they can rest with certainty. Men will recognize
the canonical writings as their Bible, only in so far as
they may be able to rise through them as external media
to the presence of their divine Master, who reigns in and
by the Word, which is holy and divine, in so far and to
that extent that it evidently sets Him forth.

CHAPTER VI.
THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE.
Biblical Criticism suffered an eclipse in the 17th
century among the reformed scholastics of Switzerland
and Holland, but raaintained itself in France and araong
the Puritans of Great Britain, where the conflict with
Rome continued as a life and death struggle. The re
formed scholastics and the Lutheran scholastics alike
fell back upon Jewish rabbinical tradition and formu
lated that tradition in Protestant forms of scholasticism
and with hair-splitting results. The reformers had given
their chief attention to the criticism of the canon, the
establishment of the sole authority of the Scripture, and
to its proper interpretation, but they had not overlooked
the criticism of the text. With reference to the Old
Testament, they had been chiefly influenced by two Jew
ish scholars, the one Elias Levita, who lived and died in
the Jewish faith, the other Jacob ben Chajim, who be
came a Christian. Chajim edited the second edition of
Bomberg's Rabbiftical Bible and issued an elaborate in
troduction to it. He also edited, for the first time, the
Massora. It was a comraon opinion araong the Jews
that the vowel points and accents of the Hebrew Script
ures came down from Ezra, and even Moses and Adam.
Levita explodes these traditions by the following simple
line of argument : (139)

140 biblical study.
" The vowel points and the accents did not exist either before
Ezra or in the time of Ezra or after Ezra till the close of the Talmud.
And I shall prove this with clear and conclusive evidence (i) In all
the writings of our Rabbins of blessed memory, whether the Talmud,
or the Hagadah, or the Midrash, there is not to be found any men
tion whatever of or any allusion to the vowel points or accents."
(2) and (3) The Talmud in its use of the Bible discusses how the
words should be read and how divided. This is inconsistent with
an accented official text. (4) " Almost all the names of both the
vowel points and the accents are not Hebrew, but Aramean and
Babylonian." *
I. TEXTUAL criticism IN THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY.
The reformers rejected the inspiration of the Mas
soretic traditional pointing and only accepted the un
pointed text. Luther does not hesitate to speak of the
points as new huraan inventions about which he does
not trouble himself, and says, " I often utter words
which strongly oppose these points," and " they are raost
assuredly not to be preferred to the siraple, correct, and
grammatical sense." ¦f He goes to work with the best
text he can find to give the Word of God to the people.
So Calvin :]: acknowledged that they were the result of
great diligence and sound tradition, yet to be used with
care and selection. Zwingli gave great value to the
LXX and the version of Jerome, and disputed the
Massoretic signs. § Though searching for the nearest
grammatical and logical sense, they were not anxious as
to the inspiration of the grammar or the logic of the au
thors. Luther does not hesitate to dispute the validity
of Paul's argument in Galatians iv. 22, seq. ; Calvin does

* Levita, Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, edited by Ginsburg, p. 127, seq. London,
1867. -f- Com. on Gen. xlvii. 31 ; on Isaiah ix. 6.
X Com. on Zech. xi. 7. § Opera ed. Schult., V., p. 556, seq.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. 141
not meet the objection that Paul violently and inaptly
wrested the words of Moses and David, by showing that
he gives the meaning, syllable by syllable, but represents
the apostle as polishing and embellishing and applying
the words to his own purposes.* He is not anxious
about the error of Matthew xxvii. 9, in the citation
of Jeremiah instead of Zechariah. So Luther points
out two errors or slips of meraory in the discourse of
Stephen, Acts vii. The reformers laid down no theory
of inspiration, such as would cover accent and letter,
word, logic, and grararaar. They regarded the external
word as the instrument ; they sought the sense, the infal
lible Divine .Word contained in the Scriptures, applied
by the Holy Spirit to their souls.f
It is astonishing how far the Swiss Protestant divines
had allowed themselves to drift away from this position
of liberty, and how greatly they had entangled them
selves once more in the bonds of traditionalism. This
was chiefly due to another Jewish scholar, Azzariah de
Rossi,:]: who claims, to use the concise statement of Dr.
Ginsburg : §
" That as to the origin and developraent of the vowels their force
and virtue were invented by, or communicated to, Adam, in Para
dise ; transmitted to and by Moses ; that they had been partially
forgotten, and their pronunciation vitiated during the Babylonian
captivity ; that they had been restored by Ezra, but that they had
been forgotten again in the wars and struggles during and after the
destruction of the second temple ; and that the Massorites, after the
close of the Talmud, revised the system, and permanently fixed the
pronunciation by the contrivance of the present signs. This accounts

* Com. on Rom. x. 6 ; Heb. iv. 4.
t Compare Tholuck, art. Inspiration in Herzog Bncy., I. Aufl., VI., 696, seq.
X The Light of the Eyes, '^'^T'S "IISTO "L .i9, i574-s'
§ Life of Elias Levita, in connection with his edition of Levita's Massoreth
Ha-Massoreth, London, 1867, p. 53.

142 BIBLICAL STUDY.
for the fact that the present vowel points are not mentioned in the
Talmud. The reason why Moses did not punctuate the copy ofthe
law which he wrote, is that its import should not be understood
without oral tradition. Besides, as the law has seventy different
meanings, the writing of it, without points, greatly aids to obtain
these various interpretations ; whereas the affixing of the vowel
signs would preclude all permutations and transpositions, and
greatly restrict the sense by fixing the pronunciation."
His principal reliance was upon some passages of the
book Zohar and other cabalistic writings, which he
clairaed to be older than the Mishna, but which have
since been shown to be greatly interpolated and of ques
tionable antiquity.*
Relying upon these the elder Buxtorf with his great
authority misled a large nuraber of the most prominent
of the Reforraed divines of the continent to raaintain the
opinion of the divine origin and authority of the Mas
soretic vowel points and accents. f In England, Fulke,:]:
Broughton,§ and Lightfoot || adopted the same opinion.
These rabbinical scholars exerted, in this respect, a dis
astrous influence upon the study of the Old Testaraent.
II. TEXTUAL CRITICISM IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.
The Protestant critical principle reasserted itself
mightily through Ludwig Cappellus, of the French
school of Saumur, where a freer type of theology had
maintained itself. A new impulse to Hebrew scholar
ship had been given by Amira, Gabriel Sionita, and

* Ginsburg in /. c, p. 52 ; 'Wogue, Histoire de la Bible, Paris, 1881, p. I2i.
t Tiberius sive Commentarius Masorethicus, Basle, 1620.
X A defence of the sincere and true translations of the Holy Scriptures into
the English Tongue, etc., 1583 ; Parker Society edition, 1843, pp. 55 and 578.
§ Daniel : his Chaldee visions and his Hebrew, London, 1597, on chap. ix. 26.
I C/iorographical Century, c. 81; Works, Pitman's edition, 1823, Vol. IX,,
p. 150, seq.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. 143
other Maronites who brought a wealth of Oriental
learning to the attention of Christian scholars. Po
cock journeyed to the East, and returned with rich
spoils of Arabic literature. France, Holland, and Eng
land vied with one another in their use of these literary
treasures, and pushed them for the study of the Hebrew
Scriptures over against the rabbinical tradition. Erpen-
ius in Holland, the great Arabist, ^as the teacher of
Cappellus, and first introduced his work to the public.
Cappellus fell back on the views of Elias Levita, the
teacher of the reformers, and the reformers themselves,
and denied the inspiration of the Hebrew vowel points
and accents, and the comraon Massoretic text, and in
sisted upon its revision, through the comparison of
MSS. and ancient versions.* Cappellus was sustained
by the French theologians generally, even by Rivetus,
also by Cocceius, the father of the Federal school in
Holland, who first gave the author's name to the pub
lic, and the body of English critics.f
In this connection a series of great Polyglots ap
peared, beginning with the Antwerp of the Jesuit
Arias Montanus, assisted by And. Masius, Fabricus
Boderianus, and Franz Rapheleng ; :]: followed by the
Paris Polyglot of Michael de Jay,§ edited by Morinus
and Gabriel Sionita; and culminating in the London
Polyglot of Brian Walton, in which he was aided by
Ed. Castle, Ed. Pococke, Thos. Hyde, and others || —
the greatest critical achievement of the 17th century.

* His work was published anonymously in 1624 at Leyden under fhe title Ar
canum punctuationis revelatum, though completed in 1621.
+ Comp. Schnederraann, Die Controverse des Lud. Cappellus mit den Bux-
torfen, Leipzig, 1879.
X Biblia Regia, 8 vols, folio, 1569-72. § zlaai)-'^^, 10 vols, folio.
I 6 vols, folio, 1657.

144 BIBLICAL STUDY.
which remains as the classic basis for the comparative
study of versions until the present day.
The work of Cappellus remained unanswered, and
worked powerfully until 1648. In the meantime the
Roman Catholic Frenchman, Morinus, taking the same
position as Cappellus, pressed it in order to show
the need of Church authority and tradition.* This
greatly complicatecj the discussion by raaking the view
a basis for an attack on the Protestant position. The
younger Buxtorf was stirred up to maintain the scho
lastic position against Cappellus.f The three universities
of Sedan, Geneva, and Leyden were so aroused against
Cappellus that they refused to allow the publication of
his great work, Critica Sacra, which, however, appeared
in 1650; the first of a series pf corresponding produc
tions.:]: Heidegger and Turretine rallied the universities
of Zurich, Geneva, and Basle to the Zurich Consensus,
which was adopted in 1675, against all the distinguish
ing doctrines of the school of Saumur, and the more
liberal type of Calvinism, asserting for the first and only
time in the symbols of the church the doctrine of verbal
inspiration, together with the inspiration of accents and
points. Thus the formal principle of Protestantism was strait
ened, and its vital power destroyed by the erection of
dogmatic barriers against biblical criticism. " They for
got that they by this standpoint again made Christian
faith entirely dependent on church tradition: yes, with
respect to the Old Testament, on the synagogue." §
The controversy between Brian Walton and John

* Exercitationes tiblicce, 1633.
t Tract, depunct. vocal, et accent, in libr. V., T., heb. origine antiq., 1648.
X See Tholuck, Akadem'. Leben, II., p. 332.
S Dorner, Gesch. Prot. Theologie, p. 451.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. 145
Owen is instructive just here. John Owen had pre
pared a tract,* in which he takes the scholastic ground,
" Nor is it enough to satisfy us that the doctrines men
tioned are preserved entire ; every tittle and iota in the
Word of God must come under our consideration, as be
ing as such from God." f
Before the tract was issued he was confronted by the
Prolegomena to Walton's Biblia Polyglotta, which, he
perceived, undermined his theory of inspiration, and,
therefore, added an appendix,:]: in which he maintains
that :
" The Scriptures of the Old and New Testament were iraraedi
ately and entirely given out by God hiraself. His mind being in them
represented unto us without the least interveniency of such mediums
and ways as were capable of giving change or alteration to the least
iota or syllable."
Brian Walton admirably replies to him :
" For when at the beginning of the Reformation, divers questions
arose about the Scriptures and the Church ; the Romanists observ
ing that the punctuation of the Hebrew text was an invention of the
Masorites, they thereupon inferred that the text without the points
might be taken in divers senses, and that none was tyed to the read
ing of the Rabbins, and therefore concluded that the Scripture is
ambiguous and doubtful without the interpretation and testimony
of the Church, so that all must flee to the authority of the Church
and depend upon her for the true sense and meaning of the Script
ures. On the other side, some Protestants, fearing that some ad
vantage might be given to the Romanists by this concession, and not
considering how the certainty of the Scriptures might well be main
tained though the Text were unpointed, instead of denying the con-

* The Divine Original, Authority, and Self-evidencing Light and Purity of
the Scriptures.
t Works, xvi. p. 303.
X Of the integrity and purity of the Hebrew Text of the Scriptures, with
considerations of the Prolegomena and Appendix to the late ^^ Biblia Poly
glotta," Oxford, 1659.
7

146 BIBLICAL STUDY.
sequence, which they might well have done, thought fit rather to
deny the assumption, and to maintain that the points were of Di
vine original, whereby they involved themselves in extreme laby
rinths, engaging theraselves in defence of that which might be easily
proved to be false, and thereby wronged the cause which they
seeraed to defend. Others, therefore, of raore learning and judg
ment knowing that \!!\\?, position of the divine original of the points
could not be raade good ; and that the truth needed not the patron
age of an untruth, would not engage themselves therein, but granted
it to be true, that the points were invented by the Rabbins, yet de
nied the consequence, maintaining, notwithstanding, that the reading
and sense of the text raight be certain without punctuatfon, and that
therefore the Scriptures did not at all depend upon the authority of
the Church: and of this judgment were the chief Protestant Di
vines, and greatest linguists that then were, or have been since in
the Christian world, such as I naraed before ; Luther, Zwinglius,
Calvin, Beza, Musculus, Brentius, Pellicane, Oecolarapadius, Mercer,
Piscator, P. Phagius, Drusius, Schindler, Martinius, Scaliger, De
Dieu, Casaubon, Erpenius, Sixt. Araana, Jac. and Ludov. Capellus,
Grotius, etc. — araong ourselves. Archbishop Ussher, Bishop Pri-
deaux, Mr. Mead, Mr. Selden, and innumerable others, whom I for
bear to name, who conceived it would nothing disadvantage the
cause, to yield that proposition, for that they could still make it
good, that the Scripture was in itself a sufficient and certain rule
for faith and life, not depending upon any huraan authority to sup
port it." *
We have quoted this extract at length for the light it
casts upon the struggle of criticism at the time. John
Owen, honored as a preacher and dogmatic writer, but
certainly no exegete, had spun a theory of inspiration
after the a priori scholastic method, and with it did bat
tle against the great Polyglot. It was a Quixotic at
tempt, and resulted in ridiculous failure. His dogma is
crushed as a shell in the grasp of a giant. The indigna
tion of Walton burns hot against this wanton and un
reasoning attack. But he consoles himself with the
* The Considerator Considered, London, 1659, p. 220, seq.

THE TEXT OF TIIE BIBLE. 147
opening reflection that Origen's Hexapla ; Jerome's
Vulgate ; the Coraplutensian Polyglot ; Erasmus' Greek
Testament ; the Antwerp and Paris Polyglots have all
in turn been assailed by those whose theories and dog
mas have been threatened or overturned by a scholarly
induction of facts.
The theory of the scholastics prevailed but for a brief
period in Switzerland, where it was overthrown by the
reaction under the leadership of the younger Turretine.
The theory of John Owen did not influence the West
minster men :
" In fact, it was not till several years after the Confession was
completed, and the star of Owen was in the ascendant, that under
the spell of a genius and learning only second to Calvin, English
Puritanism so generally identified itself with what is termed his less
liberal view." '•'
Owen's scholastic type of theology worked in the doc
trine of inspiration, as well as in other dogmas, to the
detriment of the simpler and more evangelical West
minster theology ; and in the latter part of the seven
teenth century gave Puritan theology a scholastic type
which it did not possess before. But it did not prevent
such representative Presbyterians as Matthew Poole,
Edmund Calamy, and the Cambridge men, with Baxter,
from taking the more evangelical Westminster position.
The critics of the Reformed church produced master
pieces of biblical learning, which have been the pride
and boast of the churches to the present. Like Cappel
lus, they delighted in the name critical, and were not
afraid of it. The Critici Sacri of John Pearson, Anton
Scattergood, Henry Gouldman, and Rich. Pearson, fol
lowed up Walton's Polyglot in 1660 (9 vols, folio), and
* Mitchell, Minutes of Westminster Assembly, p. xx.

148 BIBLICAL STUDY.
this was succeeded by Matthew Poole's Synopsis Criti-
corum in 1669 (5 vols, folio).
III. TEXTUAL CRITICISM IN THE EIGHTEENTH AND
NINETEENTH CENTURIES.
Biblical criticism continued in England till the midst
of the eighteenth century. Mill issued his critical New
Testament in 1707, the fruit of great industry, and was
assailed by unthinking men who preferred pious igno
rance to a correct New Testament.* But Richard Bent
ley espoused the cause of his friend with invincible
arguments, and he himself spent many years in the
collection of manuscripts, but died leaving his magnifi
cent work incomplete, and his plans to be carried out
by foreign scholars.
For " now original research in the science of Biblical Criticism,
so far as the New Testament is concerned, seems to have left the
shores of England to return no more for upwards of a century ; and
we must look to Germany if we wish to trace the further progress of
investigations which our countrymen had so auspiciously begun." t
Bishop Lowth did for the Old Testament what Bent
ley did for the New. In his works \ he called the atten
tion of scholars to the necessity of emendation of the
Massoretic text, and encouraged Kennicott to collate
the manuscripts of the Old Testament, which he did and
published the result in a monumental work in 1776-
l78o.§ This was preceded by an introductory work in
1753-59-il

* Scrivener, Introduction to the Criticism ofthe N. T., 2d edit. 1874, p. 400.-
t Scrivener in /. c, p 402.
X De Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum, 1753, and Isaiah : A New Translation, with
a Preliminary Dissertation and Notes, 1778, 2d edition, 1779.
§ Vetus Test. Heb. cum var. lectionibus, 2 torn., Oxford.
I The state of the printed Hebrew Text of the Old Testament considered.
2 vols., 8vo. Oxford.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. 149
After this splendid beginning, Old Testament criti
cism followed its New Testament sister to the conti
nent of Europe and remained absent until our own day.
On the continent the work of Mill was carried
on by J. A. Bengel * J. C. Wetstein,f J. J. Gries-
bach,:]; J. M. A. Scholz,§ C. Lachmann,|| culrainating in
Const. Tischendorf, who edited the chief uncial authori
ties, discovered and edited the Codex Sinaiticus,^ and
issued nuraerous editions of the New Testament, the
earliest in 1841. He crowned his work with the eighth
critical edition of the New Testament, which he lived
to complete, but had to leave the Prolegomena to
another.** Tischendorf is the greatest textual critic the
world has yet produced.
In the Old Testaraent, De Rossi carried on the
work of Kennicott. ff Little has been done since his day
until recent times, when Baer united with Delitzsch in
issuing in parts a revised Massoretic text, 1869-1882;
Hermann Strack examined the recently-discovered Ori
ental manuscripts, the chief of which is the St. Petersburg
codex of the Prophets of the year 916 A.D,:]::]: and Frens-
dorf undertook the production of the Massora Magna.%^

* Prodromus, N. T. Gr., 1725. Novum Test., 1734.
t New Test. Gr. cum lectionibus variantibus Codicum, etc. Amst. 1751-2.
X Symbolae Criticae, II. tom., 1785-93.
§ Bib. krit. Reise Leipzig, 1823 ; N. T. Graece, 2 Bde. Leipzig, 183&-36.
I Novum. Test. Graece et Latine, 2 Bde., Berlin, 1842-50.
IT Bibliorum Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus, St. Petersburg, 1862 ; Die
Sinaibibel, Ihre Entdeckung, Herausgabe und Erwerbung, Leipzig, 1871.
** Novum Testamentum Graece^ Editio octava : Critica Major, Lipsiae,
1869-72. The Prolegomena is in the hands of an Araerican scholar, Dr. C. R.
Gregory. +t Variae lectiones Vet. Test., 4 torn., Parm,, 1784-178S.
XX Prophetarum Posteriorum Codex Babylonicus Petropolitanus, Polropoll,
1876. §§ Die Massora Magna; Erster Theii, Massoretisches Worterbuch, Hanovei
und Leipzig, 1876.

150 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Within recent times textual criticism has taken strong
hold again in England. S. P. Tregelles,* F. H. Scrivener,f
B. F. Westcott, and F. J. A. Hort ^ have advanced the
textual criticism of the New Testament beyond the
mark reached by continental scholars. In Old Testa
ment criticisra England is advancing to the front rank.
The work of Ginsburg on the Massora § is the greatest
achieveraent since the unpublished work of Elias Levita.
But the Massoretic text is only the beginning toward a
correct text of the Old Testament.
The Textual Criticism of the Old Testament is at
least half a century behind the New Testament.! And
the reason of it is, that scholars have hesitated to go
back of the Massoretic text. Few have given their at
tention to the literary features of the Bible and espec
ially its poetic structure. But it is just here that the
eyes of the student are opened to the necessity of emen
dation of the text where we can receive no help from
the Massorites, who seem to have been profoundly igno
rant of the structure of Hebrew poetry. Prof. Gratz,
the Jewish scholar, has recently said that we ought not
to speak of a Massoretic text that has been made sure
to us, but rather of different schools of Massorites, and
follow their example and remove impossible readings
from the text.^f

* The Greek New Testament edited from ancient authorities, etc., 4to, 1857-
1872, pp. 1017.
+ Plain Introduction to the Criticism ofthe New Testament,'!,^ edition, 1883.
X The New Testament in the Original Greek. Vol. II. Introduction and
Appendix. N. Y., 1882.
§ The Massorah compiled from Manuscripts Alphabetically and Lexically
arranged, Vol. Land II. Aleph — Tav, London, 1880-83.
I Davidson, Treatise of B-iblical Cr.ticism, Boston, 1853, 1., p. 160, seq.
^ Krit. Com. zu den Psalmen nebst Text und Uebersetzung, Breslau, I.,
1882, p. 118, seq.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. igi
Bishop Lowth, with his fine aesthetic sense and in
sight into the principles of Hebrew poetry, saw and
stated the truth :
" If it be asked, what then is the real condition of the present He
brew Text ; and of what sort, and in what number, are the mistakes
which we must acknowledge to be found in it : it is answered, that
the condition of the Hebrew Text is such, as from the nature of the
thing, the antiquity of the writings themselves, the want of due care,
or critical skill (in which latter at least the Jews have been exceed
ingly deficient), might in all reason have been expected, that the mis
takes are frequent, and of various kinds ; of letters, words, and sen
tences ; by variation, omission, transposition ; such as often injure
the beauty and elegance, embarrass the construction, alter or obscure
the sense, and sometimes render it quite unintelligible. If it be ob
jected, that a concession, so large as this is, tends to invahdate the
authority of Scripture ; that it gives up in effect the certainty and
authenticity of the doctrines contained in it, and exposes our religion
naked and defenceless to the assaults of its eneraies: this, I think, is
a vain and groundless apprehension  Important and funda
mental doctrines do not wholly depend on single passages ; and uni
versal harmony runs through the Holy Scriptures ; the parts mutually
support each other, and supply one another's deficiencies and obscu
rities. Superficial daraages and partial defects may greatly diminish
the beauty of the edifice, without injuring its strength, and bringing
on utter ruin and destruction." *
The views of the critics prevailed over those of the
scholastics, and no one would now venture to dispute
their conclusions. IV. THE TEXT OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
It has become more and more evident that the He
brew vowel points and accents were not attached to
the original MSS. of their authors, but that they have
been the product of a long historical development.
The Arabic Koran gives us doubtless the simplest sys-

• Lowth, Isaiah, ad ed., London, 1779, pp. Ux., Ix.

152 BIBLICAL STUDY.
tern. The Syriac gives us a double systera, the Greek and
the Syrian proper, standing between the Arabic and the
Hebrew. The Hebrew has also two systems, the Pales
tinian and the Babylonian, the latter preserved in the
Codex Petripol., 916 A.D., which was unknown until re
cent times. These two evidently developed side by side
and go back on an earlier, sirapler systera, soraewhat
like the Arabic, which has been lost.* The origin of the
system of pointing the Shemitic languages was proba
bly in the Syrian school at Edessa, and from thence it
passed over from the Syriac text at first to the Arabic
and afterward to the Hebrew texts. The raoveraent be
gan with diacritical signs to distinguish certain letters
and forms, such as we find in the Syriac. This gave
place to a systera of vowel points. Among the Hebrews
the Babylonian is the earlier, and is characterized by
placing the vowel points above the letters ; the Tiberian
is the later and more perfect systera, and has therefore
prevailed. The systera did not reach its present condi
tion until the seventh century at Babylon and the mid
dle of the eighth century of our era, in Palestine,f al
though Ginsburg attributes the origin of the Babylonian
system to Acha, about 550, and the Tiberian to Mocha,
about ^^o.X It was the work of the Massoretic Jewish
critics. The accents went through a similar course of
development. They serve for a guide in the cantillation
of the synagogues even raore than for division of the
sentences and the deterraination of the tone. These also
were raodelled after the rausical notation of the Syrian
Church.§ Hence the double tradition as to the place of
-* Gesenius, Hebr. Gram., ed. RSdiger and Kautzsch, 22 Aufl., p. 31.
¦ t Dillmann, Bibeltext. A. T., in Herzog, Ency. II. , pp. 394-6.
X Life of Elias Levita, in /. c, p. 61, seq.
% 'Wickes, Treatise on the Accentuation of the Three so-called Poetic Books
of the Old Testament. Oxford, 1881.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. 153
the accent, the German and Polish Jews placing it after
the Aramaic on the penult, whereas the Spanish and
Itahan Jews followed by Christians place it on the ulti
mate. Bickell has recently decided against the present
accepted method.*
Still further the square Aramaic characters used in
our Bible were exchanged for earlier Hebrew letters,
such as we see upon ancient coins, in the Samaritan MS.
of the Pentateuch, the Siloam Inscription, f and on the
Mesha stone. This change was made not earlier than
the fourth century B.C.,:]: and upon it the Massoretic
pointing depends. It is true that the present consonant
text was fixed before the Talmudie era by the Jewish
school of Tiberias, and the differences in reading since
that time are few and comparatively unimportant in the
MSS. thus far colIated,§ but the ancient Syriac version,
and especially the LXX, and the Samaritan copy, go back
of the labors of the Massoretic period and the work of
the schools of Tiberias and Babylon, and give testimony
to an earlier text than that presented to us in the pres
ent Hebrew text.
It is characteristic of scholastics that they underrate
these versions. Even Keil, in his anxiety to raaintain
the present Massoretic text, charges the LXX version
with the carelessness and caprice of transcribers and an
uncritical and wanton passion for emendation. But this
is in the face of the fact that the LXX version was the
authorized text of the ancient church, that the New
Testament citations are generally supposed to be large-

• Carmina Veteris Testamenti Metrice, Oeniponte, 1882, p. 219, seq.
t See author's article on the Siloam Inscription in Presbyterian Review, III.,
p. 401, seq.
X Dillmann, Bibeltext. d.A. T. Herzog, II., p. 384.
§ Strack, Proleg. Critica, Leip., 1873, p. 66 /.
17*

154 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ly from it, and that its testimony is centuries earlier
than that of the Jewish school of Tiberias. The Phar
isaical authority was directed to destroy the confidence
of the Hellenistic Jews in it, and the version of Aquila
was made to supplant it and rally the Jews of the world
around an ofificial and universally received text.* But
whether a deliberate attempt was raade to suppress and
destroy all varying copies, as W. Robertson Sraith fol
lowing Noeldeke supposes,f is questionable. We doubt
not that those zealots, who under the lead of Rabbi
Akiba brought about the destruction of their country
and the universal hatred of their race, were capable of
this wickedness, but we have not learned that there is
sufficient historical evidence to sustain this opinion.
There can be no doubt, moreover, as Robertson Smith
states : " It has gradually become clear to the vast ma
jority of conscientious students that the Septuagint is.
really of the greatest value as a witness to the early
state of the text.":]: Bishop Lowth already § calls the
Massoretic text
"The Jews' interpretation of the Old Testament." "We do not
deny the usefulness of this interpretation, nor would we be thought
to detract from its merits by setting it in this light ; it is perhaps,
upon the whole, preferable to any one of the ancient versions ; it has
probably the great advantage of having been formed upon a tradi
tionary explanation of the text and of being generally agreeable to
that sense of Scripture which passed current and was commonly re
ceived by the Jewish nation in ancient times : and it has certainly
been of great service to the moderns in leading them into the knowl
edge of the Hebrew tongue. But they would have made a much

* Graetz, Gesch. der Juden, 1866, IV., p. 437 ; Joel, Blicke in die Religions
geschichte zum Anfang des zweiten Christlichen Jahrhunderts, I., 1880, p.
43, ^«?.
t Old Test, in Jewish Church, p. 74. J In /. c, p. 86.
§ In his Preliminary Dissert, to Isaiah, 2d edit., London, 1779, p. Iv.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. I55
better use of it, and a greater progress in the explication of the
Scriptures of the Old Testament, had they consulted it, without ab
solutely submitting to its authority ; had they considered it as an as
sistant, not as an infallible g^ide."
Probably few scholars would go so far as this, yet there
is a strong tendency in that direction. It is a raost sig
nificant fact that the New Testaraent does not base its
citations upon the original Hebrew text in literal quota
tion, but uses ordinarily the LXX and sometimes the
Hebrew and possibly ancient Araraaic Targums with
the utmost freedom. This question of citation has ever
given trouble to the apologist. Richard Baxter meets
it in this way :
" But one instance I more doubt of rayself, which is, when Christ
and his apostles do oft use the Septuagint in their citations out of
the Old Testament, whether it be alwaies their meaning to justifie
each translation and particle of sense, as the Word of God and
rightly done ; or only to use that as tolerable and containing the
main truth intended which was then in use among the Jews, and
therefore understood by them ; and so best to the auditors. And
also whether every citation of nuraber or genealogies from the Sep
tuagint, intended an approbation of it in the very points it differeth
from the Hebrew copies." *
Professor Bohl, of Vienna, has recently advanced the
theory that these citations are all from a Targum used
in the synagogues of Palestine in the first Christian cent
ury, which has been lost.f The book of Jubilees of the
first Christian century and other pseudepigraphs of the
time testify with the Saraaritan text and Targura to
differences of text not represented in the Massoretic
system.:]: * More Reasons, 1672, p. 49 ; see also p. 45.
+ Forschungen 7iach einer Volksbibel zur Zeit Jesu, 'Wien, 1873 ; Alttestament-
lichen Citate in Neuen Test., ¦Wien, 1878.
X Noldeke, Alttestamentliche Literatur, 1868, p. 24r ; Dillmann, Beitrage
aus dem Buch der Jubilaen zur Kritik des Pentateuch Textes, 1883.

156 BIBLICAL STUDY.
But we must go still further back than the versions
and citations to the parallel passages and duplicate
psalms, prophecies, and narratives of the Old Testaraent
in our study of the original text. No one can study at
tentively the texts of Pss. xiv. and Iiii., Ps. xviii. and i
Chron. xvi., Micah iv. and Isa. ii., not to speak of the
many other parallel passages, without being impressed
with the liberty that has been taken, in the most ancient
times, in making intentional changes, showing :
'' With what freedom later authors -worked over ancient docu
ments, and also that they were not accustomed to regard the preser
vation of every word and letter as necessary." *
V. TEXTUAL CRITICISM AND INSPIRATION.
So far as the Old Testament is concerned, the the
ory of Buxtorf, Heidegger, Turretine, Voetius, Owen,
and the Zurich Consensus, as to vowel points and ac
cents, has been so utterly disproved that no biblical
scholar of the present day would venture to defend
them. But can their theory of Verbal Inspiration
stand without these supports? Looking at the doc
trine of inspiration from the point of view of textual
criticism, we see at once that there can be no inspira
tion of the written letters or uttered sounds of our pres
ent Hebrew text, for these are transliterations of the
originals which have been lost, and the sounds are uncer
tain, and while there is a general correspondence of
these letters and sounds so that they give us essentially
the original, they do not give us exactly the original.
The inspiration must therefore lie back of the written
letters and the uttered sounds and be sought in that
which is comraon to the old characters and the new,

» Dillmann, Bibeltext. A. T., Herzog, II. Aufl., 11., p. 383.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. I57
the utterance of the voice and the constructions of the
pen, namely, in the concepts, the sense and meaning
that they convey :
" All language or writing is but the vessel, the symbol, or declara
tion of the rule, not the rule itself. It is a certain form or means by
which the divine truth coraeth unto us, as things are contained in
words, and because the doctrine and matter of the text is not made
unto one but by words and a language which I understand ; there
fore 1 say, the Scripture in English is the rule and ground of my
faith, and whereupon I relying have not a humane, but a divine
authority for ray faith."*
For the divine Word was not meant for the Hebrew
and Greek nations alone, or for Hebrew and Greek
scholars, but for all nations and the people of God.
It is given to the world in a great variety of languages
with a great variety of letters and sounds, so that the
sacred truth approaches each one in his native tongue
in an appropriate relation to his understanding, just as
at Pentecost the same Divine Spirit distributed Himself
in cloven tongues of fire upon a large number of differ
ent persons. Thus every faithful translation as an in
strument conveys the divine Word to those who read
or hear it :
" For it is not the shell of the words, but the kernel of the matter
which commends itself to the consciences of men, and that is the
same in all languages. The Scriptures in English, no less than in
Hebrew or Greek, display its lustre and exert its power and discover
the character of its divine original." t
This is shown by the process of translation itself.
The translator does not transliterate the letters and syl
lables, transmute sounds, give word for word, transfer

* Lyford, Plain Man's Sense Exercised, etc., p, 49.
+ Matthew Poole, Blow at the Root, London, T679, p. 234.

158 BIBLICAL STUDY.
foreign words and idioms, but he ascertains the sense,
the idea, and then gives expression to the idea, the sense,
in the most appropriate way. It is admitted that close,
literal translations are bad, misleading, worse than para
phrases. The Midrash method of Ezra is far preferable,
to give the sense to the people without the pedantry
and subtilties of scholarship. As another Puritan says :
" Now, what shall a poor unlearned Christian do, if he hath noth
ing to rest his poore soul on ? The originals he understands not ; if
he did, the first copies are not to be had ; he cannot tell whether the
Hebrew or Greek copies be the right Hebrew or the right Greek, or
that which is said to be the meaning of the Hebrew or Greek, but
as men tell us, who are not prophets and may mistake. Besides, the
transcribers were men and raight err. These considerations let in
Atheisrae like a flood." *
It is a merciful providence that divine inspiration is
not confined to particular words and phrases and gram
matical, logical, or rhetorical constructions ; and that
the same divine truth may be presented in a variety of
synonymous words and phrases and sentences. It is
the method of divine revelation to give the sarae laws,
doctrines, narratives, expressions of eraotion, and proph
ecies in great variety of forras, none of which are ade
quate to convey the divine idea, but in their corabination
it is presented from all those varied points of view that
a rich, natural language affords, in order that the mind
and heart may grasp the idea itself, appropriate and
reproduce it in other forras of language, and in the
motives, principles, and habits of every-day life. The
external word, written or spoken, is purely instrumental,
conveying divine truth to the soul of man, as the eye
and the ear are instrumental senses for its appropriation

* Rich. Capel, Remains, London, 1658.

THE TEXT OF TIIE BIBLE. 169
by the soul. It does not work ex opere operato by any
mechanical or magical power. •
As the Lutherans tend to lay the stress upon the
sacraments, in their external operation, and the Angli
cans upon the external organization of the church, so
the Reformed church has ever been in peril of laying
the stress on the letter, the external operation of the
Word of God. The Protestant principle . struggles
against this confounding of the means of grace with
the divine grace itself, this identification of the instru
ment and the divine agent, in order therefore to their
proper discrimination. This is the problem left unsolved
by the Reformation, in which the separate churches of
Protestantism have been working, and which demands
a solution from the church of the nineteenth century.
Here the most radical question is, that of the divine
Word and its relation to the work of the Holy Spirit.
This solved, all the other questions will be solved.
Herein the churches of the Reformation may be har
monized. The Reformed churches have a peculiar call
to grapple bravely with the problem. Its solution can
come only from a further working out of the critical
principles of the Reformation and Puritanism, not by
logical deduction from the creeds and scholastic dogmas
alone, but by a careful induction of the facts frora the
Scriptures themselves, a comparison of these results with
those obtained by the dogmatic process, in order that
the dogmatic and critical methods may act and react
upon one another, to that most desired conclusion. But
both must maintain the fundamental distinction be
tween the external and the internal word, so well stated
by John Wallis, one of the clerks of the Westminster
Assembly :
" The Scriptures in themselves are a Lanthorn rather than a Light ;

160 BIBLICAL STUDY.
they shine, indeed, but it is alieno lumine ; it is not their own, but a
borrqwed light. It is God which is the true light that shines to us
in the Scriptures ; and they have no other light in them, but as they
represent to us soraewhat of God, and as they exhibit and hold forth
God to us, who is the true light that ' enlighteneth every raan that
comes into the world.' It is a light, then, as it represents God unto
us, who is the original light. It transmits some rays ; some bearas
of the divine nature ; but they are refracted, or else we should not
be able to behold thera. They lose rauch of their original lustre by
passing through this raedium, and appear not so glorious to us as
they are in themselves. They represent God's simplicity obliquated
and refracted, by reason of many inadequate conceptions ; God con
descending to the weakness of our capacity to speak to us in our
own dialect."*
The Scriptures are lamps, vessels of the most holy
character, but no less vessels of the divine grace than
were the apostles and prophets who spake and wrote
them. As vessels they have come into material contact
with the forces of this world, with human weakness, ig
norance, prejudice, and folly ; their forras have been
raodified in the course of the generations, but their
divine contents remain unchanged. We will never be
able to attain the sacred writings in the original letters
and sounds and forms in which they gladdened the eyes
of those who first saw them, and rejoiced the hearts of
those who first heard them. If the external words of
these originals were inspired, it does not profit us. We
are cut off from them forever. Interposed between us
and them is the tradition of centuries and "even millen
niums. Doubtless by God's " singular care and provi
dence they have been kept pure in all ages, and are
therefore authentical," f Doubtless throughout the
whole work of the authors " the Holy Spirit was pres
ent, causing His energies to flow into the spontaneous

* Sermons, Lond., 1791, pp. 127-8. f Conf. of Faith, I., viii.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. Igl
exercises of the writers' faculties, elevating and directing
where need be, and everywhere securing the errorless
expression in language of the thought designed by
God "; * but we cannot in the symbolical or historical use
of the term call this providential care of His "V^rd or
superintendence over its external production — inspira
tion. Such providential care and superintendence is%ot
different in kind with regard to the Word of God, the
visible church of God, or the forms of the sacraments.
Inspiration lies back of the external letter — it is that
which gives the word its efficacy, it is the divine afflatus
which enlightened and guided holy men to apprehend
the truth of God in its appropriate forms ; assured
them of their possession of it ; and called and enabled
them to raake it known to the church by voice and pen.
This raade their persons holy, their utterances holy,
their writings holy, but only as the instruraents, not as
the holy thing itself. The divine Logos — that is the
sura and substance of the Scripture, the holy of holies,
whence the Spirit of God goes forth through the holy
place of the circurastantial sense of type and symbol,
and literary representation, into the outer court of the
words and sentences, through them to enter by the ear
and eye into the hearts of raen with enlightening, sanc
tifying, and saving power :
" Inspiration is raore than superintending guidance, for that ex
presses but an external relation between the Spirit and writer. But
Inspiration is an influence within the soul, divine and supernatural,
working through all the writers in one organizing raethod, raaking
of the raany one, by all one book, the Book of God, the Book for
man, divine and human in all its parts ; having thef same relation to
all other books that the Person of the Son of God has to all other

* A. A. Hodge and B. B. Warfield, art. Inspiration, Presbyterian Review,
II, 231.

162 BIBLICAL STUDY.
men, and that the church of the living God has to all other institu
tions." *
True criticisra never disregards the letter, but rever
ently and tenderly handles every letter and syllable of
the Word of God, striving to purify it from all dross,
brushing away the dust of tradition and guarding it from
the'ignorant and profane. But it is with no supersti
tious dread of magical virtue or virus in it, or anxious
fears lest it should dissolve in the hands, but with an
assured trust that it is the tabernacle of God, through
whose external courts there is an approach to the Lord
Jesus himself. " Bibliolatry clings to the letter ; spirit
uality in the letter finds the spirit and does not disown
the letter which guided to the spirit." f
Such criticism has accomplished great things for the
New Testament text. It will do even more for the Old
Testament so soon as the old superstitious reverence for
Massoretic tradition and servitude to the Jews has been
laid aside by Christian scholars. Critical theories first
corae into conflict with the church doctrine of inspira
tion when they deny the inspiration of the truth and
facts of Scripture ; when they superadd another author
itative and predorainant test, whether as the reason, the
conscience, or the religious feeling. But this is to go
beyond the sphere of evangelical criticism and enter into
the fields of rationalistic, ethical, or mystical criticism.
Evangelical criticisra conflicts only with false views of
inspiration. It disturbs the inspiration of versions, the
inspiration of the Massoretic text, the inspiration of
particular letters, syllables, and external words and ex
pressions ; and truly all those who rest upon these exter
nal things ought to be disturbed and driven from the

* H. B. Smith, Sermon on Inspiration, 1855, p. 27. -t In /. c, p. 36.

THE TEXT OF THE BIBLE. 163
letter to the spirit, from clinging to the outer walls, to
seek Him who is the sum and substance, the Master and
the King of the Scriptures.
Here the people and critics are agreed, who can doubt
it? " As if the vast multitude of Christian souls who really used it did
not believe in a Bible, which in its parts is vital and saving as well
as in the whole, which is superior in its central lessons to all the
errors of editors and translators, and which can even convey eternal
life by its reproduction in sermons, however weak, that are faithful
to its spirit, though they do not literally give back one of its sen
tences." *
As Tyndale, our great English reformer, says :
" The Scriptures spring out of God and flow unto Christ, and
were given to lead us to Christ. Thou raust therefore go along by
the Scripture, as by a line, until thou come to Christ who is the
ways end and resting-place." t " For though the Scripture be an
outward instrument and the preacher also to move men to believe.
Yet the chief and principal cause why a man believeth, or believeth
not, is within ; that is, the Spirit of God leadeth His children tc
believe." J

* Prin. Cairns, Unbelief in iSih Century, p. 152.
t Works, Parker Series, I., p. 317. X W^orks, III., p. 139.

CHAPTER VII.
THE HIGHER CRITICISM.
We have shown in our previous chapters that the Ref
ormation was a great critical revival ; that evangelical
biblical criticism was based on the formal principle of
Protestantism, the divine authority of the Scriptures
over against ecclesiastical tradition ; that the voice of
God Hiraself, speaking to His people through His Word,
is the great evangelical critical test ; that the reforraers
applied this test to the traditional theory of the canon
and elirainated the apocryphal books therefrora ; that
they applied it to the received versions, and, rejecting
the inspiration and authority of the Septuagint and Vul
gate versions, resorted to the original Greek and Hebrew
texts ; that they applied it to the Massoretic traditional
pointing of the Hebrew Scriptures, and, rejecting it as
uninspired, resorted to the divine original unpointed
text ; that they applied it to the traditional raanifold
sense and allegorical raethod of interpretation, and, re
jecting these, followed the plain graramatical sense, in-
terpi-eting difficult and obscure passages by the raind of
the Spirit in passages that are plain and undisputed.
We have also described the second critical revival under
the lead of Cappellus and Walton, and their conflict with
the Protestant scholastics who had reacted from the crit
ical principles of the Reformation into a reliance upon
a64)

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 165
rabbjnical tradition. We have shown that the Puritan
divines still held the position of the reforraers, and were
not in accord with the scholastics. We have now to
trace a third critical revival which began toward the
close of the eighteenth century in the investigations of
the poetic and literary features of the Old Testament by
Bishop Lowth in England and the poet Herder in Ger
many, and of the structure of Genesis by the Roman
Catholic physician Astruc. The first critical revival had
been mainly devoted to the canon of Scripture, its au
thority and interpretation. The second critical revival
had been chiefly with regard to the original texts and
versions. The third critical revival now gave attention
to the investigation of the sacred Scriptures as literature.
I. THE HIGHER CRITICISM IN THE SIXTEENTH AND
SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES.
Little attention had been given to the literary features
of the Bible in the sixteenth century. How the reformers
would have met these questions we may infer from their
freedom with regard to traditional views in the few cases
in which they expressed theraselves. Luther denied the
Apocalypse to John and Ecclesiastes to Soloraon. He
maintained that the epistle of James was not an apostolic
writing. He regarded Jude as an extract from 2d Peter,
and said, What matters it if Moses should not himself
have written the Pentateuch?* He thought the epistle
to the Hebrews was written by a disciple of the apostle
Paul, who was a learned man, and made the epistle as a
sort of a coraposite piece in which there are sorae things
hard to be reconciled with the Gospel. Calvin denied the
 •
* See Diestel, Gesch. des Alien Test, in der christlichen Kirche, 1869, p. 250,
seq.; and Vorreden in 'Walch edit, of Luther's Werken, XIV., pp. 35, 146-153 ;
Tischreden, I., p. 28.

166 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Pauline authorship of the epistle to the Hebrews and
doubted the Petrine authorship of 2d Peter. He taught
that Ezra or sorae one else edited the Psalter and raade
the first Psaira an introduction to the collection, not hes
itating to oppose the traditional view that David was
the author or editor of the entire Psalter. He also re
garded Ezra as the author of the prophecy of Malachi
— Malachi being his surname. He furthermore con
structed, after the model of a harmony of the gospels, a
harmony of the pentateuchal legislation about the Ten
Commandments as a centre, holding that all the rest of
the commandments were mere " appendages, which add
not the smallest completeness to the Law." *
Zwingli, CEcolampadius, and other reformers took
similar positions. These questions of authorship and
date troubled the reformers but little ; they had to bat
tle against the Vulgate for the original text and popular
versions, and for a simple grammatical exegesis over
against traditional authority and the manifold sense.
Hence it is that on these literary questions the symbols
of the Reforraation take no position whatever, except to
lay stress upon the subliraity of the style, the unity and
harraony of Scripture, and the internal evidence of its
inspiration and authority. Calvin sets the example in

* " Therefore, God protests that He never enjoined anything with respect to
sacrifices ; and He pronounces all external rites but vain and trifling if the very
least value be assigned to them apart from the Ten Commandments. 'Whence
we more certainly arrive at the conclusion to which 1 have adverted, viz. : that
they sfte not, to speak correctly, of the substance of the law, nor avail of them
selves in the worship of God, nor are required by the Lawgiver himself as nec
essary, or even as useful, unless they sink into this inferior position. In fine,
they are appendages which add not the smallest completeness to the Law, but
whose object is to retain the pious in the spiritual worship of God, which con
sists of Faith and Repentance, of Praises whereby their gratitude is proclairaed,
and even of the endurance of the cross " \Preface to Harmony of the Four Last
Books of the Pentateuch).

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 167
this particular in his Institutes, and is followed by
Thomas Cartwright, Archbishop Usher, and other Cal-
vinists. The Westminster Confession is in entire accord with
the other Reformed confessions and the faith of the
Reformation. It expresses a devout admiration and
profound reverence for the holy majestic character and
style of the Divine Word, but does not define the human
authors and dates of the various writings. As Prof. A.
F. Mitchell, of St. Andrew's, well states :
" Any one who will take the trouble to compare their list of the
canonical books with that given in the Belgian Confession or the
Irish articles, may satisfy himself that they held with Dr. Jameson
that the authority of these books does not depend on the fact whether
this prophet or that wrote a particular book or parts of a book,
whether a certain portion was derived from the Elohist or the Jeho
vlst, whether Moses wrote the close of Deuteronomy, Solomon was
the author of Ecclesiastes, or Paul of the Epistle to the Hebrews,
but in the fact that a prophet, an inspired man, wrote them, and that
they bear the stamp and impress of a divine origin." *
And Matthew Poole, the great Presbyterian critic of
the seventeenth century, quotes with approval the fol
lowing from Melchior Canus :
" It is not much material to the Catholick Faith that any book was
written by this or that author, so long as the Spirit of God is be
lieved to be the author of it ; which Gregory delivers and explains :
For it matters not with what pen the King writes his letter, if it be
true that he writ it." t
Andrew Rivetus, one of the chief Reformed divines

* Minutes of the Sessions of the Westminster Assembly of Divines, Nov.,
1644— Mch., 1649, edited by A. F. Mitchell and J. Struthers. Edin., 1874, p.
xlix. + Blow at the Root, 4th ed., 1671, p. 228.

168 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of the continent,* after discussing the various views of
the authorship of the Psalms, says :
" This only is to be held as certain, vyhether -David or Moses or any
other composed the psalms, they theraselves were as pens, but the
Holy Spirit wrote through them : But it is not necessary to trouble
ourselves about the pen when the true author is established."
In his Introduction to the sacred Scriptures,f he en
ters into no discussion of the literary questions. This
oraission raakes it clear that these questions did not
concern the raen of his times. Until toward the close
of the seventeenth century, those who, in the brief pre
liminary words to their comraentaries on the different
books of Scripture, took the trouble to mention the au
thors and dates of writings, either followed the tradition
al views without criticism or deviated from them in en
tire unconsciousness of giving offence to the orthodox
faith. This faith was firmly fixed on the divine author
of Scripture, and they felt little concern for the human
authors employed. One looks in vain in the commen
taries of this period for a critical discussion of literary
questions.:]:

* In his Prolog, to his Com. on tlie Psalms.
t Xsagoge seu Introductio generalis ad scripturam sacram, T627.
X As specimens we would present the following frora the Assembly's Annota
tions, (i) Francis Taylor on Job : "Though most excellent and glorious
things be contained in it, yet they seem to partake the same portion with their
subject ; being (as his prosperity was) clouded often with much darkness and ob
scurity, and that not only in those things which are of lesse moment and edifica
tion (viz. : the Time and Place and Penman, etc.), but in points of higher doc
trine and concemraent. The Book is observed to be a sort of holy poera, but
yet not a Fable ; and, though we cannot expressly conclude when or by whom it
was written, though our maps cannot show us what Uz was, or where situate,
yet cannot this Scripture of Job be rejected until Atheisrae grow as desperate as
his wife was, and resolve with her to curse God and dye." The traditional
view that Moses wrote Job is simply abandoned and the authorship left unknovm.
(2) Casaubon, Preface to the Psalms : " The author of this book (the immedi-

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. Igg
The literary questions opened bj- Lowth, Herder, and
Astruc were essentially iiew questions. The revived at
tention to classical and oriental historj- and literature
carried with it a fresh stud}- of Hebrew history and
literature. The battle of the books waged between
Bentley and Boyle, which was decided in the interests
of literarj' criticism by the masterpiece of Bentley,* was
the prelude of a struggle over all the literar}- monu
ments of antiquit}-, in which the spurious was to be sep
arated from the genuine. It was indispensable that the
whole Greek and Latin and Hebrew literatures should
pass through the fires of this literary and historical crit
icism, which soon received the name of Higfter Criticism.
As Eichhorn savs :

ate and secondary, -we mean, besides the original and general of all true Script
ure, the Holy Ghost ....), though named in some other places of Scripture
David, as Luke xx. 42, and elsewhere, is not here in the title of the book ex-
pr^sed. The truth is, they are not all David's Psalms, some having been made
before and some long after him, as shall be shown in due place." The tradi
tional -view as to the Davidic authorship of the Psalter is abandoned -without hes
itation or apology, ^3'i Francis Taylor, Preface :o the Proverbs: " That Solo
mon is the author of this book of Proverbs in general is generally acknowledged ;
but the author, as David of the Psalms, not because all made by him, but be
cause either the maker of a good part, or collector and approver of the rest. It
is not to be doubted but that many of these Proverbs and sentences were known
and used long before Solomon  Of them that were collected by others as
Solomon's, but long dnce his death, from chap, xxv.-vyy. , and then of those that
bear Agiur's name, ttt,, and Lemuel's xxxi  If not all Solomon's, then,
bnt partly his and parUy collected by him and partly by others at several times,
no wonder if diverse things, -with httle or no alteration, be often repeated."
Joseph Mede {Worts, IL, pp. 963, 1022, London, 1664), Henry Hammond
{Par.ipkraseand Annotations upon the N^r^ Testament, London, 1S71, p. I35\
Kidder {Demonstration of the Messias, London, 1726, II. , p. 76), and others
denied the int^rity of Zechariah, and, on the ground of Matthew xxvii. 9, as
cribed the last six chapters to Jeremiah. The Mosaic authorship of the Penta
teuch -was questioned by Carlstadt (De Scrip!. Canon, 1521, § 85), who left the
author undetermined. The Roman Catholic scholar, Hasius (Com. in Jt'si.,
1574, Fraef, p. -^ and chap. x. 13 ; six. 47 ; Critica Sacr., II., p. 1892, London,
1660) and the British philosopher, Hobbes (Leviathan, 1651 ; part iii., c xxxiii.),
distinguished between Mosaic originals and our present Pentateuch.
• Epistles of Phalaris and Fables of JBsop, 1699 ; see Chap. IV., p. 93.
s

170 BIBLICAL STUDY.
" Already long ago scholars have sought to determine the age of
anonymous Greek and Roraan writings now from their contents,
and then since these are often insufficient for an investigation of this
kind, frora their language. They have also by the same raeans sep
arated from ancient works pieces of later origin, which, by accidental
circumstances, have become mingled with the ancient pieces. And
not until the writings of the Old Testament have been subjected to
the sarae test can any one assert with confidence that the sections
of a book all belong in reality to the author whose narae is prefixed." *
II. CRITICISM OF THE TRADITIONAL THEORIES.
The traditional views of the Old Testament literature,
as fixed in the Talmud and stated in the Christian
fathers, carae down as a body of lore to be investigated
and tested by the principles of this Higher Criticism..
There were four ways of raeeting the issue : (i) By at
tacking the traditional theories with the weapons of the
higher criticism and testing them at all points, dealing
with the Scriptures as with all other writings of antiqui
ty. (2) By defending the traditional theories as the es
tablished faith of the Church on the ground of the au
thority of tradition, as Buxtorf and Owen had defended
the inspiration of the Hebrew vowel points against Cap
pellus and Walton. (3) By ignoring these questions as
matters of scholarship and not of faith, and resting on
the divine authority of the writings themselves. In
point of fact, these three methods were pursued, and
three parties ranged themselves in line to meet the
issues; the deistic or rationalistic, the traditional or
scholastic, the pietistic or mystical, and the battle of the
ages between these tendencies was renewed on this line.
There was a fourth and better way which few pursued.
The evangelical spirit would work in the line of the

' Einleit, iii., p. 67.

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 171
Reformation and apply the critical test established by
the reforraers and (i) inquire what the Scriptures teach
about theraselves, and separate this divine authority
frora all other authority ; (2) apply the principles of the
higher criticism to decide questions not decided by divine
authority ; (3) use tradition, in order to determine as far
as possible questions not settled by the previous methods.
We are not surprised that this method of criticism*
has been objected to from the three points of vigw indi
cated above. We shall notice only the objection that
it " begs the whole question." — " It is the divine author
ity of Scripture that constitutes the question in de-
bate."f This objection arises frora a raisapprehension
of the real state of the question. The questions of
the higher criticism are questions of integrity, au
thenticity, credibility, and literary form of the vari
ous writings that constitute the Bible. The inspira
tion and authority of Scripture may be concerned with
the results of the higher criticism, but they are ques
tions with which higher criticism itself has nothing to
do. The authority and inspiration of the Scriptures
are properly considered in connection with biblical ca
nonics, where they were discussed by the reformers and
have been discussed by us.:): If the higher criticism
should result in showing that any of the sacred books
have characteristics that are inconsistent with the doc
trine of the inspiration and authority of the Scriptures,
we should have to inquire first whether the conflict is
with certain theories of inspiration or the biblical and

* See author's article A Critical Study of the History of the Higher Criti
cism, with Special Reference to the Pentateuch, in Presbyterian Review, IV., p.
74, seq.
^ F. L. Patton, article Pentateuchal Criticism, in Presbyterian Review, IV.,
p. 353. ^eq.
X In Chap. V.

172 BIBLICAL STUDY.
symbolical doctrines of inspiration. We have found
that the results of the textual criticism are in conflict
with verbal inspiration,* but not with the symbolical
doctrine of inspiration. If it should be found that the
results of the higher criticism are in conflict with other
school doctrines of inspiration, it is important that these
doctrines should be changed as soon as possible to accord
with these results. If it should be found that they are in
conflicfiwith the biblical or syrabolical doctrine, it would
place the critic in an erabarrassing situation, where he
would be obliged either to reject the authority of the
Scriptures or his critical results. Rationalistic critics
have chosen the forraer alternative. This has been due,
in our judgment, to the rationalism with which they
began and carried on their criticism and not to the re
sults of criticism itself. The critic, as, indeed, every
thinker, must confront this dread alternative. It is one
of the perils of scholarship. We can only express our
own convictions that while the traditional teachings of
the schools will have to be modified to a considerable
extent in the several departments of biblical study, there
has nothing been established by raodern critical work
that will at all disturb the statements of the symbols of
the Reformation with reference to the authority of the
Word of God.
The raethod we have given is a raethod of evangelical
criticisra and not a method of proving inspiration.
When, therefore, we state that the evangelical critic must
first " inquire what the Scriptures teach about them
selves and separate this divine authority from all other
authority," we might omit the adjectives " divine " and
" evangelical " and then the statement would apply

• Chap. VI., p. 156, seq.

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. I73
equally well to all critics. They set out by finding what
the biblical writings have to say about themselves. Evan
gelical critics are satisfied with this. Rationalistic critics
are not. Here, after ascertaining what the Scriptures
teach, the critics divide in accordance with their precon
ceptions. In the conflict of opinion, evangelical critics
will waive their opinions as to the divine authority of
this testimony, but in their own convictions, critical
work, and teachings they will not waive thera. The
second step of the evangelical critic is to " apply the
principles of the higher criticism to deterraine questions
not decided by divine authority." As an evangelical
critic this will be his raethod. In conflict with the ra
tionalistic critics he will not hesitate to test the state
ments of the Scripture about themselves, but in doing
this it is not necessary, nor is it possible for him to di
vest hiraself of the conviction that they are stateraents
carrying with thera divine authority.
III. THE RABBINICAL THEORIES.
In order to present the subject in its historical order,
we shall state the traditional views as they came down
to the critics at the close of the 17th century.
The orthodox rabbinical theory of the Old Testament
literature is contained in the tract Baba Bathra of the
Talmud. This tract is of the oxAex Nezikin ; and is found
in part in both the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds.
These Talmuds differ from one another in the particular
tracts that they contain and in the matter in the tracts,
so that the Babylonian Talmud is four times greater
than that of Jerusalem. Both Talmuds in the treatises
and tracts are composed of various elements or layers
which are discriminated from one another by certain
formulas of citation. The best known of these is the

174 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Mishna of Rabbi Jehuda.* But there are also Be-
raitha and Toseptha and Gemara in the Talmud. If the
Talmud be divided into Mishna and Gemara, it is more
proper technically to attach the Beraitha and Toseptha
to the Mishna section, for the Gemara is a commentary
not on the Mishna of Rabbi Jehuda alone, but also on
the Beraithoth, which it cites.f
The relation of the Beraitha and the Toseptha to the
Mishna of the Rabbi Jehuda is not of inferior authority
or of more recent origin. Some of thera represent a
more ancient tradition of the school of R. Akiba. They
are all Mishnayoth. But the collection of Rabbi Jehuda
is the Mishna, by eminence as the first collection, and
the Beraithoth give other Mishnayoth not erabraced in
his collection, but collected by others, such as R. Jan-
nai, R. Chija, Bar Cappara, etc.:]: The Mishna has re-

* This has been published apart in various editions, e. g., i v. folio, Naples,
1492 ; Surenhusius, 6 v. folio, Amsterdam, 1698-1703 ; Jost, 6 thle, Berlin,
1832-34 ; Sittenfeld, 6 thle, Berlin, 1863, and others.
+ To distinguish between the Mishna of Rabbi Jehuda and all the other ele
ments as Gemara, is incorrect and misleading unless we use these terms in a purely
formal sense, and distinguish in the Gemara the Mishnaic elements from the
commentary of the Gemara upon them. Thus Emanuel Deutsch in his Liter
ary Remains (p. 40): "Jehuda the 'Redactor' had excluded all but the best
authenticated traditions as well as all discussion and exegesis, unless where par
ticularly necessary. The vast mass of these materials was now also collected as
a sort of Apocryphal oral code. We have dating a few generations after the
Redaction of the official Mishna, a so-called external Mishna (Beraitha) ; further
the discussions and additions belonging by rights to the Mishna called Toseptha
(Supplement) ; and finally, the exegesis and methodology of the Halacha (Sifri,
Sifra, Mechilta), much of which was aftenvards introduced into the Talmud."
So Levy in his Neu Hebraisches und Chaldaisches Worterbuch (1. 260), defines :
"b^ri''"!^ as properly that which is outside of the Canon (we must supply
!Sn''5ri'3 to i4f|Ti;n). that is, every Mishna (or HalacJia, doctrine) which
was not taken up into the collection of the Mishna by R. Jehuda Hanasi and
many of which collected separately by his later contemporaries are contained in
different compendiums."
X See Gratz, Geschichte der Juden, iv. 232/. ; Wogue, Histoire de I'Exiglse
Biblique, 18.S1, p. 185.

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 175
mained fixed and definite since the imraediate disciples
of Rabbi Jehuda completed it, although it was probably
not comraitted to writing until the raiddle of the sixth
century as Luzzato and Gratz show,* when the entire
Talrauds were written out together. The Toseptha gives
other Mishnayoth added as an appendix. The Gem.ara
is then a comraentary on these Mishnayoth.^ In the
passage on the books of the Old Testaraent of the
Babylonian Talmud we have only to distinguish the
Beraitha from the Gemara. The Beraitha is introduced
regularly by " Our rabbins teach," " It is taught.":]:
We present in translation a section of the tract Baba
Bathra, foi. 14 a., containing the most important refer
ences to the Old Testament writings.
Beraitha. — The Rabbins have taught that the classification of
the Prophets is, Joshua and Judges, Sarauel and Kings, Jereraiah
and Ezekiel, Isaiah and the twelve (rainor prophets).
Gemara. — {Question) : How is it ? Hosea is first because it is
written, " In the beginning the Lord spake to Hosea.'' But how
did he speak in the beginning with Hosea .? Have there not been
so many prophets from Moses unto Hosea .' Rabbi Johanan said
that he was the first of the four prophets who prophesied in the

* Gratz, Gesch. d. Juden, iv., p. 494.
t Chiarini, Le Talmud de Babylone, 1831, p. 19, go so far as to say : " Les
Mekiltoth, les Tosaphoth et les Beraitoth ont aussi parte le litre de tlVS^Tj
ou de fllDHtJ inT^SIB^i peirce qu'elles jouissarent de la mime aucterite
que la Mischna de Judaic Saint, et qu'elles itaient plus riputies encore que
cette derniire des cote de I'ordre et de la clarte." But they are regarded as
apocryphal Mishnayoth by some. But this does not decide their intrinsic
value. See also Pressel, in Herzog Real Ency., 1 Aufl., xv., p. 661 ; Gelbhaus,
Rabbi Jehuda Hanassi, Wien, 1876, p. 92. Schurer, Lehrb. d. N. T. Zeitge-
schichte, p. 42 ; Zunz, Gottesdienstlichen Vortrage der Juden, Berlin, 1832,
p. 49, seq.
X We follow the editio princeps, 12 vols, folio, Venitia, Bomberg, 1520, but
have also consulted the edition published at Berlin and Frankfort-on-the-Oder by
Jablonsky, 1736, which follows the Basle edition -in expurgating the anti-Chris
tian passages. Both of these are in the library of the Union Theol. Sem., N. Y.

176 BIBLICAL STUDY.
same period, and these are : Hosea, Isaiah, Amos, and Micah.
Should then Hosea be placed before at the head ? {Reply) : No ,
since his prophecies had been written alongside of Haggai, Zecha
riah, and Malachi, and Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi were the
last ofthe prophets, it was counted with them. (Question) : Ought
it to have been written apart and ought it to have been placed be
fore } (Reply) : No ; since it was little and might be easily lost.
(Question) : How is it ? Isaiah was before Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
Ought Isaiah to be placed before at the head ? {Reply) : Since the
book of Kings ends in ruin and Jeremiah is, all of it, ruin, and
Ezekiel has its beginning ruin and its end comfort, and Isaiah is all
of it comfort ; we join ruin to ruin and corafort to comfort.
Beraitha. — The classification of the Hagiographa, is Ruth and
the book of Psalms, and Job, and Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of
Songs and Laraentafions, Daniel and the roll of Esther, Ezra and
Chronicles. Gemara. — (Question) : But according to the Tanaite who said
Job was in the days of Moses, ought Job to be placed before at the
head ? {Reply) : 'We begin not with afflictions. {Question) : Ruth
has also afflictions ? (Reply) : But afflictions which have an end.
As Rabbi Johanan says, 'Why was her name called Ruth ? Because
David went forth from her who refreshed the Holy One, blessed be
He ! with songs and praises.
Beraitha. — And who wrote them ? Moses wrote his book, the
chapter of Balaara and Job; Joshua wrote his book and the eight
verses of the law ; Samuel wrote his book and Judges and Ruth ;
David wrote the book of Psalms with the aid of the ten ancients,
with the aid of Adam the first, Melcbizedek, Abrahara, Moses,
Heraan, Jeduthun, Asaph, the three sons of Korah ; Jereraiah wrote
his book, the books of Kings and Lamentations ; Hezekiah and his
company wrote Isaiah, Proverbs, Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes,
whose sign is pTD)^"' '• the men ofthe great synagogue wrote Ezekiel
and the twelve (minor prophets), Daniel and the roll of Esther,
whose sign is 2";5p ; Ezra wrote his book and the genealogy of
Chronicles until himself.
Gemara. — This will support Rab, for Rab Jehuda told that Rab
said : Ezra went not up from Babylon until he had registered his
own genealogy, then he went up. (Question) : And who finished it
(his book)? (H-ply) : Nehemiah, son of Hachaliah. The author

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 177
(of the Beraitha) said Joshua wrote his book and the eight verses of
the law ; this is taught according to him who says of the eight
verses of the law, Joshua wrote them. For it is taught : And Moses
the servant of the Lord died there. How is it possible that Moses
died and wrote : and Moses died there ? It is only unto this pas
sage Moses wrote, afterwards Joshua wrote the rest. These are
the words of Rabbi Jehuda, others say of Rabbi Nehemiah, but
Rabbi. Simeon said to him : Is it possible that the book of the law
could lack one letter, since it is written : Take this book of the law ?
It is only unto this the Holy One, blessed be He ! said, and Moses
said and wrote. From this place and onwards the Holy One,
blessed be He, said and Moses wrote with weeping 
(Question) : Joshua wrote his book ? But it is written there : And
Joshua died. (Reply) : Eleazar finished it. (Question) : But yet it is
written there : And Eleazar the son of Aaron died. (Reply) : Phineas
finished it. (Question) : Samuel wrote his book ? But it is written
there : And Samuel died, and they buried him in Rama. (Reply) :
Gad the seer and Nathan the Prophet finished it.
We have to distinguish the view of the Tanaim in the
Beraitha and the view of the Amoraira in the Gemara.
The Tanaim do not go beyond the scope of giving (i)
the order of the sacred writings, (2) their editors.
(i) In the order of the writings we observe several
singular features, which lead us to ask whether the order
is topical, chronological, liturgical, or accidental. The
Amoraira explain the order generally as toffical, although
other explanations are given, but their reasons are in
consistent and unsatisfactory. Is there a chronological
reason at the bottom ? This is clear in the order of the
three classes — law, prophets, and other writings. But
will it apply to the order of the books in the classes ?
There seems to be a general observance of the chrono
logical order if we consider the subject raatter as the
determining factor, and not the time of composition.
In the order of the prophets Jeremiah precedes Eze
kiel properly. But why does Isaiah follow ? Is it out
8*

178 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of a consciousness that Isaiah was a collection of several
writings besides those of the great Isaiah,* or from the
feeling that Isaiah's prophecies had more to do with the
restoration than the exile, and so naturally followed Eze
kiel ? The minor prophets are arranged in three groups,
and these groups are chronological in order. Hosea
was placed first out of a mistaken interpretation of his
introductory words. Malachi appropriately comes last.
But this order of the prophets in the Beraitha is aban
doned by the Massorites, who arrange Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Ezekiel. In the other writings there is a sort of chrono
logical order if we consider the subject matter, but the
Massoretic text differs from the Beraitha entirely, and
indeed the Spanish and Gerraan manuscripts from one
another. We cannot escape the conviction that there
was a liturgical reason at the basis of the arrangement ;
which has not yet been deterrained. At all events,
its authority has little weight for purposes of higher
criticisra. (2) As to their editorship. The verb kathabh=." wrote,"
cannot iraply coraposition in the sense of authorship in
several cases of its use ; but must be used in the sense
of editorship or redaction. Thus it is said that the men
of the great synagogue wrote Ezekiel, the minor proph
ets, Daniel, and the roll of Esther. This cannot mean
that they were the original authors, but that they ^/ere
editors of -these books. It is not stated whether they
edited them by copy from originals or from oral tradi
tion. Rashi takes the latter alternative, and thinks that
holy books could not be written outside of Palestine.f
An insuperable objection to this editing of Daniel and
* Strack in Herzog, Real Encyk., vii., p. 43.
t Strack in Herzog, Real Encyk., vii., p. 418 ; Wright, Koheleth, p. 454, seq. ;
Wogue, Histoire de la Bible, p. 19, seq.

THE HIGHER CEITICISM. I79
Esther at the same tirae as Ezekiel and the twelve,
is their exclusion frora the order of the prophets, where
they would have naturally gone if introduced into the
canon at that tirae ; Esther with the prophetic histories,
and Daniel with Isaiah, Ezekiel, and Jeremiah.
Again, when it is said Hezekiah and his company
wrote Isaiah, Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes,
this can only raean editorship, and not authorship. The
Tosaphoth on the Beraitha says : " Hezekiah and his
college wrote Isaiah ; because Hezekiah caused thera to
busy themselves with the law, the matter was called
after his narae. But he (Hezekiah) did not write it hira
self, because he died before Isaiah, since Manasseh, his
successor, killed Isaiah." The redaction of Proverbs,
Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes by Hezekiah's company, is
probably a conjecture based upon Proverbs xxv. I. But
the whole -story is incredible. It carries with it a canon
of Hezekiah, and would be inconsistent with the subse
quent positions of these books in the canon.
David is represented as editing the Psalter with the
aid of ten ancients — that is, he used the psalms of the
ten worthies and united thera with his own in the collec
tion. Moses is represented as writing his book, the chap
ter of Balaam and Job. The chapter of Balaam is distin
guished probably as edited and not composed by Moses.
In view of the usage of the rest of this Beraitha, we
cannot be sure whether it means that Mose* edited the
law and Job, or whether here " wrote " raeans author
ship. The same uncertainty hangs over the references
to Joshua, Samuel, Jeremiah, and Ezra.
The statements of the Beraitha, therefore, seem rather
to concern ofificial editorship than authorship, and it dis
tinguishes no less than eight stages of redaction of the
Old Testament Scriptures : (i) By Moses, (2) Joshua,

180 BIBLICAL STUDY.
(3) Samuel, (4) David, (5) Hezekiah and his college, (6)
Jereraiah, (7) the raen of the great synagogue, (8) Ezra.
The Geraara in its coramentary upon this passage en
larges this work of redaction so as to give a number of
additional prophets a hand in it. Joshua, completes the
work of Moses, Eleazar the work of Joshua, and Phineas
his work ; Gad and Nathan finish the work of Samuel,
then corae David, Hezekiah, Jeremiah, the men of the
great synagogue ; and Nehemiah finishes the work of
Ezra. It is easy to see that all this is pure conjecture,
and of little value for purposes of criticism.
IV. HELLENISTIC AND CHRISTIAN THEORIES.
Having considered the Rabbinical Tradition, we are
now prepared to examine that of the Jewish historian,
Josephus. His general statement is :
" 'We have not myriads of books among us disagfreeing and con
tradicting one another, but only twenty-two, comprising the history
of all past time, justly worthy of belief. And five of them are those
of Moses, which comprise the law and the tradition of the genera
tion of mankind until his death. This time extends to a little less
than three thousand years. From the death of Moses until Arta
xerxes, the king of the Persians after Xerxes, the prophets after
Moses composed that which transpired in their times in thirteen
books. The other four books present hymns to God and rules of
life for men."*
" And now David, being freed from wars and dangers, and enjoy
ing a profound peace, composed songs and hymns to God of several
sorts of metre : sorae of those which he made were trimeters, and
some were pentameters." t
Josephus' views as to Hebrew literature vary some
what frora the Talmud. He strives to exalt the Hebrew
Scriptures in every way as to style, antiquity, and variety
* Contra Apion., i. , § 8. t Antiq., vii. 12.

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 131
above the classic literature of Greece. He represents
Moses as the author of the Pentateuch, even the last
eight verses describing his own death.* We do not
hesitate to reject his views of the number and arrange
ment of the books in the canon, or his statements as to
the metres of Hebrew poetry ; we certainly cannot ac
cept his authority, without criticisra, in questions of
authorship. Philo agrees with Josephus in making
Moses the author of the narrative of his own death,f
but has little to say about matters that concern the
higher criticism.
A still more ancient and higher authority in some
respects than the Talmud or Josephus is the apocalypse
of Ezra, from the first Christian century, printed among
the apocryphal books in the English Bible, and pre
served in five versions, and used not infrequently by
the fathers as if it were inspired Scripture. This tradi
tion represents that the law and all the holy books were
burned at the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchad
nezzar and lost ; that Ezra under divine inspiration
restored them all, and also composed seventy others to
be delivered to the wise as the esoteric wisdom for the
interpretation of the twenty-four.J

•* Antiq., iv. 8, 48. t Life of Moses, III. 39.
X Ezra saith : " For thy law is burnt, therefore no raan knoweth the things
that are done of thee, or the works that shall begin. But if I have found grace
before thee, send the Holy Ghost unto me, and I shall write all that hath been
done in the world since the beginning which were written in thy law, that raen
may find thy path," etc  " Come hither, (saith God), and I shall light a
candle of understanding in thine heart which shall not be put out till the things
be performed which thou shalt begin to write. And when thou hast done, some
things shalt thou publish, and some things shalt thou show secretly to the wise.
.... The first that thou hast written publish openly, that the worthy and the
unworthy may read it ; but keep the seventy last, that thou mayest deliver them
only to such as be wise among the people, for in thera is the spring of under
standing, the fountain of wisdom and the stream of knowledge " (xiv. 19-46).

182 BIBLICAL STUDY,
This view of the restoration of the Old Testament
writings by Ezra was advocated by some of the fathers.
Clement of Alexandria * says :
" Since the Scriptures perished in the captivity of Nebuchadnezzar,
Esdras the Levite, the priest, in the time of Artaxerxes, king of the
Persians, having become inspired, in the exercise of prophecy re
stored again the whole of the ancient Scriptures."
So, also, Tertullian,f Chrysostom,:]: an ancient writing
attributed to Augustine,§ the heretical Clementine hom
ilies. | Another comraon opinion of the fathers is repre
sented by Irenaeus : T
" During the captivity of the people under Nebuchadnezzar, the
Scriptures had been corrupted, and when, after seventy years, the
Jews had returned to their own land, then in the time of Artaxerxes,
King of the Persians, [God] inspired Esdras the priest, of the tribe
of Levi, to recast all the words of forraer prophets, and to re-estab
lish with the people the Mosaic legislation."
So, also, Theodoret** and Basil.ff Jerome:]::]: says
with reference to this tradition : " Whether you wish to say
that Moses is the author of the Pentateuch, or that Ezra
restored it, is indifferent to me." Bellarmin §§ is of the
opinion that the books of the Jews were not entirely
lost, but that Ezra corrected those that had becorae cor
rupted, and improved the copies he restored.
Jerome, in the fourth century, relied largely upon

* Stromata, i. 22. + De cultu foeminarum, c. 3.
X Horn, viii., in Epist. Hebraeos, Migne's edition, xvii. p. 74.
§ De mirabilibus sacrae script urae, II, 33, printed with Augustine's works, but
not genuine.
1 Hom. iii. c. 47. IT Adv. Hiereses, iii. 21, 2.
*•* Praef. in Psalmos.
'[\ Epist. ad Chilonem, Migne's edition, IV., p. 358. See Simon, Hist. Crit.
de Vieux Test., Amsterd. 1685, and Fabricius, Codex Pseudepigraph. Ham
burg, 1722, p. 1156, seq.
XX ''idv. Helvidium. §§ De verba Dei., lib. ^.

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. I33
Jewish rabbinical authority, and gave his great influence
toward bringing the fluctuating traditions in the church
into raore accordance with the rabbinical traditions, but
he could not entirely succeed. He held that the orphan
Psalms belonged as a rule to the previous ones, and in
general followed the rabbins in associating the sacred
writings with the familiar names — Moses, David, Solo
mon, Jeremiah, Ezra, and so on. There is, however, no
consensus of the fathers on these topics.
Junilius, in the midst of the sixth century, author of
the first extant Introduction,* a reproduction of a lost
work of his instructor, Paul of Nisibis, of the Antiochian
school of Exegesis, presents a view which may be re
garded as representing very largely the Oriental and
Western churches. He divides the Scriptures of the
Old and New Testaments into 17 histories, 17 prophe
cies, 2 proverbial, and 17 doctrinal writings. Under
authorship, he makes the wise discrimination between
those having their authors indicated in their titles and
introductions, and those whose authorship rested purely
on tradition, including in the latter the Pentateuch and
Joshua.f This work of Junilius held its own as an authority in
the Western church until the Reformation. It would

* Institutio regularis Divinae Legis.
t " Scriptores divinorum librorum qua ratione cognoscimus ? Tribus modis :
aut ex titulis et proemiis ut propheticos libros et apostoli epistolas, aut ex titulis
tantum ut evangelistas, aut ex traditione veterum ut Moyses traditur scripsisse
quinque primes libros historias, cum non dical hoc titulus nee ipse rcferat ' dixit
dominus ad mc,' sed quasi de alio 'dixit, dominus ad Moysen.' Similiter et
Je.su Nave liber ab eo quo nuncupatur traditur scriptus, et primum regum librum
Samuel scripsisse perhibetur. Sciendum praeterea quod quorundam librorum
penitus ignorantur auctores ut Judicumet Ruth et Regum iii. ultimi et cicra
similia, quod ideo credendum est divinitus dispensatum, ut alii quoque divini
Hbri non auctorum merito, sed sancti spiritus gratia tantum culmen auctoritatis
obtinuisse noscantur," (§ viii. 2 ; see Kihn, Theodor von Mopsuestia und Jun
ilius Africanus ais Exegeten, pp. 319-330).

184 BIBLICAL STUDY.
be difficult to define a consensus of the first Christian
century or of the fathers in regard to the authorship of
the historical books of the Old Testament or other ques
tions of the higher criticism. The variant traditions,
unfixed and fluctuating, came down to the raen of the
eighteenth century to be tested by the Scriptures, and
by the principles of the higher criticism, and they found
no consensus patrum and no orthodox symbolical doctrines
in their way.
V. THE NE'W TESTAMENT VIEW OF OLD TESTAMENT
LITERATURE.
It is claimed, however, that Jesus and His apostles
have determined these questions for us, and that their
divine authority relieves us of any obligation to investi
gate further, as their testimony is final. This does not
seem to have been the view of Junilius or the fathers.
So far as we can ascertain, this argument was first urged
in opposition to Peyrerius by Maresius,* and pressed by
Heidegger, the Swiss scholastic, who sided with Buxtorf
and Owen against Cappellus and Walton. But the argu
ment having been advanced by these divines, and forti
fied by the Lutheran scholastic Carpzov, and maintained
by Hengstenberg, Keil, and Horne, and by a large num
ber of scholars who lean on these authorities, it is neces
sary for us to test it. Clericus went too far when he
said that Jesus Christ and His apostles did not come
into the world to preach criticisra to the Jews.f The

-* Maresius, Refutatio Fabulie Preadamitce, 1656 ; Heidegger, Exercit. Bib-
licm, 1700 ; Dissert, ix., p. 250, seq.
+ In Sentimens de quelques Theologiens de Holland sur I' Histoire Critique,
p. 126, Amst., 1685, Clericus says: "Jesus Christ et ses Ap6tres n'etant pas
venus au monde, pour ensSgner la Critique au Juifs, il ne faut pas s'etonner,
s'ils parlent selon I'opinion commune."

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 185
response of Hermann Witsius, that Jesus came to teach
the truth, and could not be imposed upon by comraon
ignorance, or be induced to favor vulgar errors, is just.*
And yet we cannot altogether deny the principle of
accommodation in the hfe and teachings of Jesus. The
principle of accommodation is a part of the wonderful
condescension of the divine grace to human weakness,
ignorance, and sinfulness. Jesus teaches that Moses,
because of the hardness of their hearts, suffered ancient
Israel to divorce their wives for reasons which the
higher dispensation will not adrait as valid (Matt.
xix. 8). The divine revelation is a training-school for
the disciple, ever reserving from him what he is unable
to bear, and holding forth the proraise of greater light to
those using the light they have.
" It is not required in a religious or inspired teacher, nor indeed
would it be prudent or right, to shock the prejudices of his unin-
forraed hearers, by inculcating truths which they are unprepared to
receive. If he would reap a harvest, he must prepare the ground
before he attempts to sow the seed. Neither is it required of such
an one to persist in inculcating religious instruction after such evi
dence of its rejection as is sufficient to prove incurable obstinacy.
Now it must be granted that in most of these cases there is accora
modation. The teacher omits, either altogether or in part, certain
religious truths, and, perhaps, truths of great importance, in accom
modation to the incompetency and weakness of those whom he has
to instruct  It appears, then, that accommodation may be
allowed in matters which have no connection with religion, and in
these, too, so far as regards the degree and the form of instruction.

* " Enim vero non fuere Christus et Apostoli Critices doctores, quales se
haberi postulant, qui hodie sibi regnum litterarum in quavis vindicant scientia ;
fuerunt tamen doctores veritatis, neque passi sunt sibi per communem ignoran-
tiara aut procerum astum imponi. Non certe in mundum venere ut -vulgares
errores foverunt, suaque auctoritate munirent, nee per Juda^os solum sed et popu-
los unice, a se pendentes longe lateque spargerent." — Misc. Sacra, 1., p. 117.

186 BIBLICAL STUDY.
But positive accommodation to religious error is not to be foimd in
Scripture, neither is it justifiable in moral principle." *
Jesus withheld from the twehe apostles many things
of vast importance which they could not know then, but
should know hereafter (John xiii. 7). Jesus did not enter
into an}- further conflict with the errors of His time than
was necessary for His purposes of grace in the Gospel.
He exercised a wise prudence and a majestic reserve in
matters of indifference and minor importance, and was
never preraature in declaring Hiraself and the principles
of His Gospel. There were no sufficient reasons ^\hy He
should correct the prevailing views as to the Old Testa
ment books, and by His authority determine these liter
ary questions. He could not teach error, but he could
and did constantly forbear with reference to errors.
Polygamy and slavery have been defended from the
New Testament because Jesus and His apostles did not
declare against them. If all the views of the men of
the time of Christ are to be pronounced valid which
He did not pronounce against, we shall be involved in
a labyrinth of difficulties.
The authority of Jesus Christ, to all who know Him
to be their divine Saviour, outweighs all other authority
whatever. A Christian man must follow His teachings
in all things as the guide into all truth. The authority
of Jesus Christ is involved in that of the apostles.
What, then, do Jesus and His apostles teach as to the
questions of higher criticism? If they used the lan
guage of the day in speaking of the Old Testament
books, it does not follow that they adopted any of the
various views of authorship and editorship that went

* Dr. S. H. Turner, in his edition of Planck's Introduction to Sacred PkHoU
egy. Edin., 1834, pp. 275-^77. New York, 1834, p. 280, seq.

THE HIGHER CBI-nCISM. Ig7
with these terms in the Talmud, or in Josephus, or in
the apocalypse of Ezra, for we are not to interpret their
words on this or on any other subject by Josephus, or
the Mishna, or the apocalypse of Ezra, or any such ex
ternal authorities, but by the plain grammatical and
contextual sense of their words themselves. From the
various New Testament passages we present the follow
ing summary of what is taught on these subjects :
I. Of the Hagiographa the only ones used in the
New Testament in connection with names of persons are
the Psalter and Daniel. With reference to Chronicles,
Ezra, Nehemiah, Proverbs, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes,
Esther, and Ruth, the New Testament gives no evi
dence whatever in questions of the higher criticism.*
(i) With reference to the Psalter, citations are made
from Ps. Ixix. 26; cix. 8 (in Acts i. 16-20); ii. i, seq.
(in Acts iv. 25) ; as "by the mouth of David "; frora
xxxii. I, seq. (in Rom. iv. 6) ; Ixix. 23 (in Rom. xi. 9) ;
xvi. 8-1 1 (in Acts ii. 25-29) ; ex. i (in Acts ii. 34), as
" David saith "; and ex. I (in Matt. xxii. 43-45 ; Mark
xii. 36, 37 ; Luke xx. 42-44) ; under various terms in
the parallel passages as, " David in the Spirit calls him
Lord "; " David himself said in the Holy Spirit "; " Da
vid himself saith in the book of Psalms." The maxi
mum of evidence here is £is to the Davidic authorship
of Pss. ii., xvi., xxxii., Ixix., cix., and ex., in all six
psalms out of the 150 contained in the Psalter. As to
the rest, there is no use of them in connection with the
name of an author. There is, however, a passage upon
which the Davidic authorship of the entire Psalter has

* For a fuller discussion of this subject, we would refer to the exhaustive paper
of Prof. Francis Brovm, The New Testament Witness to tlie Authorship of
Old Testament Books in the Journal of the Society of Biblical Literature and
Exegesis, 1882, p. 95, seq.

188 BIBLICAL STUDY.
been based, e. g., Heb. iv. 7 ; * where a citation from Ps.
* Thus, William Gouge, one of the most honored Puritan di-vines, in his
Commentary on Hebrews, in discussing this passage, says :
" From the raention of David in reference to the Psalm, we may probably con
clude that David was the penman of the whole Book of Psalms, especially from
this phrase, ' David himself saith in the Book of Psalras' (Luke xx. 42). Some
exceptions are made against this conclusion, but such as may readily be an
swered. " Objection i. — Sundry psalms have not the title of David prefixed before
them ; they have no title at all, as the first, second, and others. Ans. — If they have
no title, why should they not be ascribed to David, rather then to any other, con
sidering that the Book of Psalms is indefinitely attributed to him (as we heard
out of the forementioned place, Luke xx. 42), which is the title prefixed before
all the Psalms, as comprising them all under it ? Besides, such testimonies as
are taken out of Psalms that have no title are applied to David, as Acts iv. 25,
and this testimony that is here taken out of Psalm xcv. 7.
" Objection 2. — Some titles are ascribed to other authors; as Psalms lxxii.,
cxxvii. to Solomon. Ans. — The Hebrew servile lamed is variously taken and
translated ; as sometimes, of. Psalm iii. i., ' A Psalm of David.' Then it signi-
Ceth the author : Thus it is used in most titles, especially when they are applied
to David. Other time this is translated far, as Psalm lxxii. 1 and cxxvii. In
these it implieth that the Psalm was penned for Solomon's use or for his in
struction. It may also be thus translated, concerning Solomon. That the kxii.
Psalm was penned by David is evident by the close thereof, in these words :
' The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended.'
" Objection 3. — Some titles ascribe the Psalm to this or that Levite, as Psalm
Ixxxviii. to Heman, and lxxxix. to Ethan. Yea, twelve Psalms to Asaph and eleven
to the sons of Korah. Ans. — All these were very skillful, not only in singing,
but also in setting tunes to Psalms. They were musick masters. Therefore, Da
vid, having penned the Psalms, committed thera to the foresaid Levites to be
fitly tuned. ... It will not follow that any of them were enditers of any of the
Psalms, because their name is set in the title of some of them.
" Objection 4. — The xcth Psalm carrieth this title : ' A Prayer of Moses the
Man of God.' Ans. — It is said to be the prayer of Moses in regard of the sub
stance and general matter of it ; but, as a Psalm, it was penned by David. He
brought it into that forra. David, as a, prophet, knew that Moses had uttered
such a prayer in the substance of it ; therefore, he preCxeth that title before it.
"Objection^. — The cxxxviith Psalm doth set down the disposition and car
riage of the Israelites in the Babylonish Capti-vity, vfhich was six hundred
fourty years after David's time, and the cxxvith Psaira sets out their return from
that Captivity. Ans. — To grant these to be so, yet might Da-vid pen those
Psalms ; for, by a prophetical spirit, he might foresee what would fall out and
answerably pen Psalms fit thereunto. Moses did the hke (Deut. xxix. 22, etc.,
and x.vxi. 21, 22, etc.). A man of God expressly set down distinct acts of Jo
siah 330 years before they fell out (i Kings xiii. 2). Isaiah did the like of Cyrus
(Is. xliv. 28 ; xlv. i), which was about two hundred years beforehand."

THB HIGHEE CBlTICISir. ]^s9
xcv. 7-8 is given " as the Holy Spirit saith in David,
f*' —a-valo." This cr_Iy means that David was the name
of tne Psalter and this title was used interchangeably
w:tn the book of Psalms, or Psalms. The question of
integrfty is raised hy the citation of our Psaira iL as
P^alm L, according to the best manuscripts in Act= xiii.
35-* ^^ ere these two Psalms combined in one at the
time, or was the first Psalm r^arded as iatroductory
and not counted ? Both views are supported by 3155.
and citations.
• 2j Daniel xL 31 or xiL il is used in iMatt. xxiv. 15
'under the formula, " that which was spoken by Daniel
the prophet." With reference to this, we wiU simply
quote the judicious words of Prof. Brown :
" It win be remembered that the passage cited in Ma-n:. xxiv. 15 -Is
frcm ihe second diviaon of the book, a dirisior. which, with the ex
ception of certain brief ir-rr'-^Tictory notes, contains prophecies exc.u-
sively, and that this drrision is distinctly marked off from the pre-
ceciaj by the nar^e of its contents, and by the brief in troduction,
Dan. TiL l. 'Sott, sttppose evidence were to be presented from othei
ctarters to she?.' that witiie the acck as a whcle was not written by
Daniel, the last sis c'napters contained prophecies of Daniel, which
the later anther had irjcorporated in his bock. On that sapposition,
the words of Jesos taken in their most rigii. literal meaning- would
te terfectiv satisfied. We may go vet farther. If other evidence
should be adduced tendii^ to =ho-s- xh?.t ' Daniel, the prophet,' was
a pseudonym, still there would be nothing in Jesas' use of the ex
pression to coDnnit Him to any other vie ,v. For the words v.ere
certainly -s-ritteii, and written in the fortri of a prophecy, and -;',-ere a
prophecv, and the book containing them was an inspired, canonical,
and authoritatire book : the citation was, therefore, snitable and
forc-lble fcr Jesos' purposes, v.hcever the author may hare been,
and the use of a current pseudonym to deagnate the a'ithcr no
more comraitted Jesos to a declaration that that was the a'.tthor's
real nance, than ot^r use of the expression ' Juni'is says ' would com-

* So Tisdieodocf, Critica Major, Editie Octavo.

190 BIBLICAL STUDY.
mit us to a declaration that the ' Letters of Junius ' were composed
by a person of that name ; or than, on the supposition already dis
cussed, that ' Enoch ' was regarded as a pseudonym, Jude 14
would indicate the belief of the author that Enoch himself actually
uttered the words which he quotes."*
II. The Prophets, (i) The only one of the prophetic
historical books mentioned in connection with a name is
Sarauel, in Acts iii. 24 : " All the prophets from Sarauel
and them that followed after, as many as have spoken,
they also told of these days." The reference here is to
the book of Samuel, for the reason that there is no Mes
sianic prophecy ascribed to Samuel in the Old Testa
ment. The context forces us to think of such an one.
We find it in the prophecy of Nathan in the book of
Samuel. These historical books then bore the name' of
Samuel, and their contents are referred to as Samuel's.
As to Joshua, Judges, and Kings we have no use of
thera in such a way as to raise questions of higher criti
cism. (2) Of the prophetic writings in particular the New
Testaraent refers only to Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, and
Joel in connection with names. Ezekiel and ten of the
minor prophets are not used in such a way as to raise ques
tions of higher criticism except Jonah, who is referred
to as a prophet in connection with his preaching to the
Ninevites and to his abode in the belly of the great fish
(Matt. xii. 39-41), but no reference as such is made to
the book that bears his narae in connection with his
narae. The question whether Jonah is history or fiction
is not decided by Jesus' use of it — for as a parable it
answered His purpose no less than if it were history.
(3) Hosea i, 10; ii. 23 are quoted Rom. ix. 25, as " in

* In /. c, pp. 106, 107.

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. igj
Hosea." This is probably nothing raore than the name
of the writing used. Joel ii. 28-32 is quoted in Acts ii.
16 as, "This is that which was said through the prophet
Joel." (4) Jeremiah is cited in Matt. ii. 17 ; xxvii. 9, under the
formula, " that which was spoken through Jeremiah the
prophet saying." The former citation is from Jereraiah
(xxxi. 15), the latter from Zechariah (xi. 12-13). This
raises the question of the integrity of Zechariah. On the
basis of this passage chaps, ix.-xi. of Zechariah were as
cribed to Jeremiah by Mede, Hamraond, and Kidder
(see p. 169). But it is now generally conceded that the
evangelist has made a mistake, and this raises the ques
tion how far errors of this character affect the credibility
of a writing.
(5) Isaiah is frequently used in the forraula, " through
Isaiah the prophet saying ": Is. xl. 3 (in Matt. iii. 3) ; Is.
ix. I seq. (Matt. iv. 14); Is. Iiii. 4 (in Matt. viii. 17) ; Is.
xlii. 1-4 (in Matt. xii. 17) ; Is. vi. 9 seq. (Acts xxviii.
25) ; so with the forraula " Isaiah said," Is. xl. 3 (John
i. 23) ; Is. vi. 9 seq. (in John xii. 39-41) ; Is. Iiii. i (in
Rom. x. 16) ; Is. Ixv. i seq. (Rom. x. 20) ; Is. xi. 10
(Rom. XV. 12); "the book of the prophet Isaiah," Is.
xl. 3-5 (Luke iii. 4) ; Is. Ixi. 1-2 (Luke iv. 17) ; " word ol
Isaiah the prophet," Is. Iiii. i (John xii. 38); "reading
the prophet Isaiah," Is. Iiii. 7 (Acts viii. 28-30) ; " Isaiah
cries out," Is. x. 22 seq. (Rom. ix. 27) ; " Isaiah foretold,"
Is. i. 9 (Rom. ix. 29) ; " the prophecy of Isaiah," Is. vi.
9 (Matt. xiii. 14); "Isaiah prophesied," Is. xxix. 13
(Matt. XV. 7) ; Is. xxix. 1 3 (Mark vii. 6). Besides these
there is a passage of more difficulty in Mark i. 2,
where, with the formula, " written in Isaiah the proph
et," are cited Mai. iii. i and Is. xl. 3. This seems to
be a clear case in which the evangelist has overlooked

192 BIBLICAL STUDY.
the fact that one of his citations is from Malachi. This
raises the question how far a slip like this is consist
ent with credibility. The various forraulas of citation
seem on the surface to imply the authorship of our
book of Isaiah by the prophet Isaiah, and also its essen
tial integrity, inasmuch as the citations are from all parts
of the book. But we have found that Samuel is repre
sented as prophesying, when the prophecy is by Nathan
in the book that bore the narae of Samuel. How can
we be sure that this is not the case with Isaiah, likewise
in the phrases, "through Isaiah the prophet, saying,"
" Isaiah said," " words of Isaiah the prophet," " Isaiah
cries out," " Isaiah foretold," " Isaiah prophesied " ? The
phrases, " book of the prophet Isaiah," " reading the
prophet Isaiah," " prophecy of Isaiah," certainly imply
nothing more than naming the book. The presuraption
of the New Testament is in favor of the authorship of
Isaiah, but, in the face of other decisive evidence to the
contrary, does not force us to any other conclusion than
that the book as a whole bore the name of Isaiah.
III. Of the Pentateuch, (i) Jesus speaks of the law
of Moses (John vii. 23) and the book of Moses (Mark
xii. 26). The evangelist uses Moses for the Pentateuch
(Luke xxiv. 27). So the apostles refer to the law of
Moses (Acts xxviii. 23), and use Moses for the Penta
teuch (Acts XV. 21 ; 2 Cor. iii. 15). These are all cases
of naming books cited. They have as their parallel
David as the name of the Psalter in Heb. iv. 7 ; Acts
iv. 25 ; Samuel, also of the book of Samuel, Acts iii. 24.
It is certainly reasonable to interpret Moses in these
passages in the same way as the name of the work con
taining his legislation, and the history in which he is
the central figure.
(2) Jesus represents Moses as a lawgiver, giving the

THE HIGHEE CRITICISM. I93
Ten Commandments (IVIarkvii. lo), the law of the lepers'
offering (Mark i. 44, etc.), the law of divorce (Matt. xix.
7), the law in general (John vii. 19). The epistle to the
Hebrews represents Moses as giving the law of priest
hood (Heb. vii. I4\ and as a lawgiver whose law when is
sued at the time could not be disobeyed with impunity
(Heb. x. 2SV These passages all represent Moses to be
the lawgiver that he appears to be in the narratives of
the Pentateuch, but do not. by any means, imply the
authorship of those narratives that contain these laws,
any more than the reference in i Cor. ix. 14, to the com
mand of Christ in Luke x. 7, and the institution of the
Lord's supper by Jesus (i Cor. xi. 23 seq.'). imply that
Jesus was the author of the gospels containing His
words. (3) Jesus represents !\Ioses as a prophet who wrote of
Him (John v. 46. 47) : so Philip i^John i. 45') ; Peter (Acts
iii. 22-24'* ; Stephen (^Acts vii. 37) ; Paul (Acts xxvi. 22\
and in Rora. x. 5, 19 the apostle refers to the address in
Deut. xxx. and the song Deut. xxxii. These passages
maintain that certain propJucies came from ]\Ioses, but
do not maintain that the Pentateuch, as a whole, or the
narratives in which these prophecies occur, were written
by Moses.
(4) Certain historical events narrated in the Penta
teuch in which ^Moses takes the lead, are mentioned (in
Heb. viii. 5, ix. 19, xii. 21, etc.V but these simply teach
the historical character of the transactions, not the ex
clusive Mosaic authorship of the writings containing
these historical incidents.
(5) In the pjissage, Acts iii. 22, " For Moses truly said
unto the fathers, -A. prophet shall the Lord God raise up
unto you, etc  Yea, and all the prophets from
Samuel, and those that follow after, as man>- as have
9

194 BIBLICAL STCDY.
spoken, have likewise foretold of these days," it is nee
essary to interpret " Samuel " of the book of Samuel, and
think of the prophecy of Nathan ; and if this be so, is
it not most natural to interpret " Moses " here as also re
ferring to the book of Deuteronomy rather than the
person of Moses ? If that be true in this case, it raay
also be true of other cases classed under (2) and (3).
Sarauel cannot, it is now generally adraitted, be regarded
as the author of the book that bears his narae ;-why,
then, are we forced to conclude from these passages that
Moses is the author of the books that bear his name ?
It has been objected that this raethod of deterraining
what the words of Jesus and His apostles may raean in
detail does not show what they must mean when taken
together. It has, however, been forgotten by the ob
jectors that the proper exegetical method is inductive
and that the path of exegesis is to rise from the partic
ulars to the general. The dogmatic raethod is in the
habit of saying a passage must raean thus and so frora
dograatic presuppositions. The exegete prefers the may
until he is forced to the must. He has learned to place
little confidence in the " must mean " of tradition and
dogmatism ; for he has so often been obliged to lay it
aside as impossible from exegetical considerations. Who,
then, is to say must in the interpretation of the New
Testament exterior to itself? Is the Talmud to say
must to the words of our Lord Jesus ? Is the traitor
Josephus, or the pseudepigraph IV. Ezra to say must in
an interpretation of the apostles ? Nay. We let thera
speak for theraselves, and if we are to choose between a
variety of possible interpretations of their words we
prefer to let higher criticism decide. For higher criti
cism is exact and thorough in its methods and prefers
the internal evidence of the Old Testament books them-

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. I95
selves to any external evidence. This may bring Jesus
into conflict with Josephus and the rabbins and with
traditional theories ; but it is more likely to bring Him
into harmony with Moses and the prophets. Prof. B.
Weiss has well said in another connection :
" However certainlj', therefore, the religious ideas of later Judaism,
as well as the doctrines of Jewish Theology, had an influence upon
the forming of the religious consciousness as it is exhibited in the
writings of the New Testament, our knowledge of the extent in
which these ideas and doctrines lay within the field of vision of the
writers of the New Testament is far from being precise enough to
permit us to start from them in ascertaining that religious conscious
ness. It is only in the rarest cases -that biblical theology will be
able to make use of them with certainty for the purpose of eluci
dation." *
No one could emphasize the importance of historical
exegesis raore than we- are disposed to do; but we can
not allow traditionalists — ^who are the last to use this
method except when, for the time being, it serves their
purposes — by the improper use of it, to force upon crit
icism interpretations that are possible but not necessary,
and which are excluded by other and higher considera
tions presented by the word of God as contained in the
Scriptures of the Old Testament.
It has been a coraraon literary usage for centuries to
represent a book as speaking by the name by which it is
known, whether that be a pseudonyme, or indicate the
subject matter or the author. To insist that it must al
ways in the New Testament indicate authorship is to go
in the face of the literary usage of the world, and against
the usage of the New Testaraent itself, certainly in the
cases of Samuel and David and, therefore, possibly in
other cases also, such as Moses and Isaiah.

* Biblical Theology of the New Testament, T. & T. Clark's edition. Edin.,
1882, L, p. 14.

196 BIBLICAL STUDY.
We have shown that the questions of higher criticism
have not been deterrained for us by the ecclesiastical au
thority of creeds or the consensus of tradition. And it
is a raerciful Providence that this has not been the case.
For it would have coraraitted the church and Christians
to raany errors which have been exposed by a century
of progress in the higher criticism. Those who still insist
upon opposing higher criticism with traditional views and
with the supposed authority of Jesus Christ and His apos
tles, do not realize the perils of the situation. Are they
ready to risk the divinity of Christ, the authority of
the Bible, and the existence of the church, upon their in
terpretation of the words of Jesus and His apostles?
Do they not see that they throw up a wall that will pre
vent any critic who is an unbeliever from ever becoraing
a believer in Christ and the Bible ? They would force
evangelical critics to choose between truth and scholarly
research on the one side, and Christ and tradition on
the other. The issue is plain, the result is not doubtful
— the obstructionists will give way in this raatter as
they have already in so raany other matters. The Bible
will vindicate itself against those who, like the friends of
Job, have not spoken right concerning God (Job xlii. 7),
in presuming to defend Him.
VI. THE RISE OF HIGHER CRITICISM.
The current critical theories are the resultants of forces
at work in the church since the Reformation. These
forces have advanced steadily and constantly. In each
successive epoch scholars have investigated afresh the
sacred records and brought forth treasures new as well
as old. Various theories have been proposed from tirae
to tirae to account for the new facts that have been
brought to light. Biblical science has shared the fortune

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 19Y
of the entire circle of the sciences. The theories have
been modified or discarded under the influence of addi
tional investigations and the discovery of new facts for
which they could not account. The facts have remained
in every case as a permanent acquisition of biblical criti
cism, and these facts have gradually accumulated in mass
and importance until they now command the services of
a large body of enthusiastic investigators. They have
gained the ear of the literary world and enlist the inter
est of all intelligent persons. The questions of biblical
criticism have arisen to a position among the great issues
of our time, and no one can any longer ignore them.
All great movements of human thought have their
preliminary and initial stages, and are preceded by spas
modic efforts. Even the enemies of the true faith not in
frequently become the providential agents for calling the
church to a fresh investigation of the sacred oracles.
Thus Spinoza, the apostate Jew and pantheistic philos
opher, applied historical criticism to the Old Testament
books,'* and concluded that Moses could not have written
the Pentateuch, and that the historical books from Gen
esis through the books of Kings constitute one great
historical work, a congloraeration of many different orig
inals by one editor, probably Ezra, who does not suc
ceed in a reconciliation of differences, and a complete
and harmonious arrangement. The books of Chronicles
he places in the Maccabean period. The Psalms were
collected and divided into five books in the time of the
second temple. The book of Proverbs was collected at the
earliest in the time of Josiah. The prophetical books are
collections of different fragments without regard to their
original order. Daniel, Ezra, Esther, and Nehemiah are

* Tract. Theo. Polit., 1670, c. 8,

19S BIBLICAL STUDY.
from the same author, who would continue the great his-
tcrical work of Israel from the captivity onwards, writ
ten in the ^laccabean period. Job was probably, as
Aben Ezra conjectured, translated into Hebrew from a
foreign tongue.* This criticism was shrewd, but chiefly
co/t/ecf. ¦/'¦,!/. It paved the wa}- for future systematic in
vestigations. Soon after Spinoza, Richard Simon,f a Roman Cath
olic, began to apply historical criticisra in a systematic
manner to the study of the books of the Old Testament..
He represented the historical books as made up of the
ancient writings of the prophets, who were public scribes,
and wrote down the histon,- in official documents on the
spot, from the time of Moses onward, so that the Penta
teuch in its present shape is not bj' IMoses. Simon dis
tinguished in the Pentateuch bet\\een that which was
written by Closes, e.g., the commands and ordinances;
and that written by the prophetical scribes, the greater
part of the historj'. As the books of Kings and Chron
icles were made up b}- abridgments and summaries of
the ancient acts presen'^ed in the archives of the nation,
so was the Pentateuch (p. 17. ,\-<-t;.V The later prophets
edited the works of the earlier prophets and added ex
planatory- statements. Simon presents as evidences that
Moses did not write the Pentateuch : (i) The double ac
count of the deluge. (2) The lack of order in the ar
rangeraent of the narratives and laws. (3) The diversity
of the style. The Roman Catholic scholar goes deeper
into the subject than the Pantheist Spinoza has gone.
He presents another class of evidences. These three
lines were not sufficiently worked by Simon. He fell

» See Siegfried, Spinoza ais Kritiier und Ausleger des Alien Testament.
Berlin, 1867.
t Histoire Critique du Vieux Testament, 1678.

THE HIGHEE CRITICISM. I99
into the easy temptation of expending his strength on
the elaboration and justification of his theory. The
facts he discovered have proved of permanent value, and
have been worked as a rich mine by later scholars, but
his theory was at once attacked and destroyed. The
Arminian Clericus, in an anonymous work,* assailed Si
mon for his abuse of Protestant writers, but really went
to greater lengths than Simon. He distinguishes in the
Pentateuch three classes of facts, those before Moses,
those during his time, and those subsequent to his death ;
and represents the Pentateuch in its present forra as
coraposed by the priest sent frora Babylon to instruct
the inhabitants of Saraaria in the religion of the land,
2 Kings xvii.f Afterward he gave up this wild theory
and took the raore tenable ground:]: of interpolations
by a later editor. Anton Van Dale§ distinguishes be
tween the Mosaic code and the Pentateuch, which latter
Ezra composed from other writings, historical and pro
phetical, inserting the Mosaic code as a whole in his work.
This is also essentially the view of Seraler. ||
These various writers brought to light a raost valuable
collection of facts that deraanded the attention of bibli
cal scholars of all creeds and phases of thought. They
all made the mistake of proposing untenable theories of
various kinds to account for the facts, instead of working
upon the facts and rising from them by induction and
generalization to permanent results. Some of them.

* Sentimens de quelques theologiens de Holland sur V Histoire Critique,
Amst., i68s.
t In /. c, pp. 107, 129.
X Com. on Genesis, introd. de Scriptore Pent., § xx. Simon replied to Cler
icus in Riponse au Livre intitule Sentimens, etc. Par Le Prieur de Bolleville,
Rotterdam, 1686.
§ De origine et progressu idol., 1696, p. 71, and epist. ad Morin., p. 686.
I Apparatus ad liberalem Vet. Test. Interp., 1773, p. 67.

200 BIBLICAL STUDY.
like Spinoza, were animated by a spirit more or less hos
tile to the evangelical faith. Others, like Clericus, were
heterodox in other raatters. The most iraportant inves
tigations were those of the Roman Catholics.
Over against these critical attacks on the traditional
theories, we note the scholastic defence of them by Huet,
a Jesuit ; * Heidegger,t and Carpzov.J These scholastic
divines, instead of seeking to account for the facts
brought to light by the critics, proceeded to defend tra
ditional views and explain away the facts.
There were, however, other divines who looked the facts
in the face and took a better way. Thus Du Pin § Wit
sius,] Spanheim,Tf Prideaux,** Vitringa, ff and Calmet,^:]:
sought to explain the passages objected to either as im
properly interpreted or as interpolations, recognizing the
use of several docuraents and a later editorship by
Ezra and others. They laid the foundations for evan
gelical criticism, which was about to begin and run a
long and successful course.
It is instructive just here to pause by Du Pin, who
lays down such admirable rules of literary criticism §§
with reference to ecclesiastical books. When Simon
raises the question why he does not apply these rules to
the Pentateuch, he replies by saying :
" A man may say, that all these rules which I have laid down, are
convincing and probable in different degrees, but that the sovereign

* In his Demonstraiio Evangelica, 1679, IV., cap. xiv.
t Exercitiones Bihlicae, T700, Dissert, ix. 7.
X Introduction ad Libros Canonic OS Bib. Vet. Test. Edit, ii., Lipsize, 1731.
§ Dessert, prelim. Bib. des auteurs eccl., Paris, 1688. A new History of Ec
clesiastical Writers, 3d edition, London, i6g6, p. 1, seq.
\Misc. Sacra, 1692, p. 103. U Historia ecclesiast. V. T., I., p. 260.
*-'^ Old and New Testaments connected, 1716-18, I., 5 (3),
ft Observa. Sacra., c. IV., 2, 1722. XX Com. litterale, 1722, I., p. xiii.
§§ See Chap. IV., p. 88 se^., of this book.

THE HIGHER CEITICISM. 201
and principal rule is the judgment of equity and prudence, which in
structs us to ballance the reasons of this and t'other side, in distinct
ly considering the conjectures that are made of both sides. Now
this is the general rule of Rational Criticism, and we abuse all the
rest if we don't chiefly make use of this " (in I.e., p. i8).
In this way the difference between Simon and himself
was easily reduced to good sense and nonsense. This
method of settling difficult questions certainly stops de
bate between the parties for the moment, but is far from
convincing. Before passing over to the higher criticism of the
Scriptures we shall present the views of this master of
the literary criticism of his tirae, respecting the biblical
books :
" Moses was the author of the first five books of the Pentateuch "
(except sundry interpolations)  " 'We can't so certainly tell
who are the authors of the other books of the Bible : some of 'em
we only know by conjecture, and others there are of which we have
no manner of knowledge." . . . , " The time wherein Job lived, is
yet more difficult to discover ; and the author of the book, who has
compiled his history, is no less unknown." . . . . " Though the
Psalms are commonly called the Psalms of David, or rather the
Book of the Psalms of David, yet 'tis certain, as St. Jerom has ob
served in many places, that they are not all of 'em his, and that there
are some of them written long after his death. 'Tis therefore a col
lection of songs that was made by Ezrah." .... " The Proverbs or
Parables belong to Solomon, whose name is written in the beginning
of that book  We ought therefore to conclude  that the
24 first chapters are Solomon's originally, that the five following ones
are extracts or collections of his proverbs, and tliat the two last
chapters were added afterwards  The book of Ecclesiastes is
ascribed to Solomon by all antiquity : And yet the Talmudists
have made Hezekiah the author of the book, and Grotius, upon some
slight conjectures, pretends it was composed by Zerubabel. It be
gins with these words. The Words of t^e PrcMher, the Son of Da
vid, King of Jerusalem ; which may be applied to Hezekiah as well
as to Solomon : .... we ought rather to understand it of Solomon.

202 BIBLICAL STUDY.
.... The Song of Songs, .... is allowed to be Solomon's by the
consent of the s)'nagogue and the church. The Talmudists attribute
it to Ezrah, but without grounds. The books of the Prophets carry
the names of their authors undisputed" (in /. c, pp. 1-5).
About the same time several Roraan Catholic divines,
as well as Vitringa, took ground independently in favor
of the theory of the use of written docuraents by Moses
in the coraposition of Genesis. So Abbd Fleury,* and
Abb6 Laurent Frangois ; f but it was chiefly Astruc, a
R. C. physician, who in 1753 :}: made it evident that
Genesis was composed of several documents. He pre
sented to the learned world, with sorae hesitation and
tiraidity, his discovery that the use of the divine names,
Elohim and Jehovah, divided the book of Genesis into two
great raemoirs and nine lesser ones.
This was a real discovery, which, after a hundred years
of debate, has at last won the consent of the vast major
ity of biblical scholars. His analysis is in some respects
too mechanical, and, in not a few instances, is defective
and needed rectification, but as a whole it has been main
tained. He relies also too much upon the different use
of the divine naraes, and too little upon variations in
style, language, and narrative. The attention of Ger
man scholars was called to this discovery by Jerusalem.§
Eichhorn was independently led to the same conclu
sion.! But still more important than the work of As-

* Moeurs des Israelites, p. 6, Bruxelles, 1701. This was translated into Eng
lish and enlarged by Adam Clarke. 3d edition, 1809.
t Preuves de la Religion de Jesus Christ, contra les Spinosistes et les De.
isles, 1751, I. 2, c. 3, art. 7.
X In his Conjectures sur les Memoires originaux dont il paroit que Moyst
s'est servi pour le livre de la Gen^se.
\ In his Brief e fiber d. Mosaischen Schriften, 1762, 3te Aufl., 1783, p, 104,
seq. 1 Urgeschichte in the Repertorium, T. iv., 1779, especially T. v., 1779.

THE HIGHEE CRITICISM. 203
true was that of Bishop Lowth,* who unfolded the prin
ciples of parallelism in Hebrew poetry, and made it pos-
sible to study the Old Testament as literature, discrim
inating poetry from prose, and showing that the greater
part of prophecy is poetical. His work on Hebrew po
etry was issued in Germany by Michaelis, and his trans
lation of Isaiah by Koppe, who took *he position that
this prophetical book was made up of a number of docu
ments loosely put together from different authors and
different periods.f Lowth himself did not realize the
importance of this discovery for the literary criticism
of the Scriptures, but thought that it would prove of
great service to textual criticism in the suggesting of
emendations of the text in accordance with the parallel
ism of raerabers.
The poet Herder :j: first caught the Oriental spirit and
life and brought to the attention of the learned the va
ried literary beauties of the Bible,§ and " reconquered, so
to say, the Old Testaraent for Gerraan literature." ||
But these writers were all preparatory to the work of
J. G. Eichhorn, in 1780.1" Eichhorn combined in one
* In De Sacra Poesi Hebrieorum, 1753, and 1779 in Prelim. Diss, and Ti-ans-
lation ofthe Prophecies of Isaiah.
t Koppe, Robert Lowth' s Jesaias neu Ubersetzt nebst einer Einleitung ....
mit Zusatze und Anmerkungen, 4 Bde., Leipzig, 1779-80.
X In 1780 he published his Briefe Uber das Studium der Theologie, and in
1782 his Geist der Heb. Poesie.
§ Herder in his ist Brief sa.'ys : " Richard Simon is the Father of the Criticism
of the Old and New Testaments in recent times." — "A Critical Introduction to
the Old Testament, as it ought to be, we have not yet." 1780. In 2d Auf.,
1785. It is said on the margin, " We have it now in Eichhom's valuable Ein
leit. ins Alt. Test., 1780-83."
[ Dorner in Johnson's Encyclopedia, II. , p. 528.
H Einleit. ins Alt. Test. As Bertheau remarks in Herzog's Real Ency., I.
Aufl., iv., 115: "In Eichhom's -writings the apologetic interest is everywhere
manifest, to explain, as he expresses it, the Bible according to the ideas and
methods of thought of the ancient world, and to defend it against the scorn of
the enemies of the Bible. He recognized the exact problem of his times clearer

204 BIBLICAL STUDY.
the results of Simon and Astruc, Lowth and Herder,
embracing the various . elements in an organic raethod
which he called the Higher Criticism. In the preface to
his second edition, 1787, he says :
" I am obliged to give the most pains to a hitherto entirely un-
worked field, the investigation of the internal condition of the par
ticular writings of the Old Testament by help of the Higher Criti
cism (a new name to no Humanist). Let any one think what they
will of these efforts.my own consciousness tells me that they are the
result of very careful investigation, although no one can be less wrapt
up in them than I their author. The powers of one man hardly suf
fice to complete such investigations so entirely at once. They de
mand a healthful and ever-cheerful spirit, and how long can any one
maintain it in such toilsome investigations ? They demand the keen
est insight into the internal condition of every book ; and who will
not be dulled after a while .? "
He begins his investigation of the books of Moses
with the wise stateraent :
" 'Whether early or late .' That can be leamed only from the writ
ings themselves. And if they are not by their own contents or other
internal characteristic traces put down into a later century than they
ascribe to themselves or Tradition assigns them, then a critical in
vestigator must not presume to doubt their own testimony — else he
is a contemptible Rasonneur, a doubter in the camp, and no longer
an historical investigator. According to this plan I shall test the
raost ancient Hebrew writings, not troubling myself what the result
of this investigation maybe. And if therewith learning, shrewdness,
and other qualifications which I desire for this work should fail me,
yet, certainly no one will find lacking love of the truth and strict in
vestigation."

than most of his contemporaries ; he worked with unwearied diligence over the
whole iield of Biblical literature with his own independent powers ; he paved
the way to difficult investigations ; he undertocik many enterprises with good
success, and conducted not a few of them to safe results. With Herder in
common he has the credit of ha-ving awakened in wide circles love to the Bible,
and especially the Old Testament writings, and excited enthusiasm carefully tc
investigate them."

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 205
These are the principles and methods of a true and
manly scholar, the father of higher criticism. It is a sad
reflection that they have been so greatly and generally
ignored on the scholastic and rationalistic sides. Eich
horn separates the Elohistic and Jehovistic docuraents
in Genesis with great pains, and with such success that
his analysis has been the basis of all critical investiga
tion since his day. Its great advantages are admirably
stated :
" For this discovery of the internal condition of the first books ot
Moses, party spirit \\'ill perhaps for a pair of decennials snort at the
Higher Criticism instead of rewarding it with the full thanks that are
due it, for (ij the credibility of the book gains by such a use of more
ancient documents. (2) The harmony of the two narratives at the
same time with their slight deviations proves their independence and
mutual reliability. (3) Interpreters vnW be relieved of difficulty by
this Higher Criticism which separates document from document.
(4) Finally the gain of Criticism is also great. If the Higher Criti
cism has now for the first distinguished author from author, and in
general characterized each according to his own ways, diction, fav
orite expressions, and other peculiarities, then her lower sister who
busies herself only with words, and spies out false readings, has
rules and principles by which she must test particular reading^." *
Eichhorn carried his methods of higher criticism into
the entire Old Testament with the hand of a master,
and laid the foundation of views that have been main
tained ever since with increasing determination. He
did not always grasp the truth. He sometimes chased
shadows, and framed \'isionary theories both in relation

* In /. c, II., p. 329; see also Urgeschichte in Repertorium, 1770, V., p.
187. We cannot help calling attention to the fine literary sense of Eichhorn as
manifest in the foUowii^ extract : " Read it (Genesis) as two historical works of
antiquity, and breathe thereby the atmosphere of its ^^ and country. Forget
then the century in which thou livest and the knowledge it affords thee ; and if
thou canst not do this, dream not that thou wilt be able to enjoy the book in
the spirit of its origin."

206 BIBLICAL STUDY.
to the Old and New Testaraents, like others who have
preceded him and followed him. He could not tran
scend the limits of his age, and adapt himself to future
discoveries. The labors of a large number of scholars,
and the work of a century and more, were still needed,
as Eichhorn modestly anticipated.
These discussions produced little impression upon
Great Britain. The conflict with deism had forced the
majority of her divines into a false position. If they
had raaintained the fides divina and the critical position
of the reforraers and Westrainster divines, they would
not have hesitated to look the facts in the face, and
strive to account for them ; they would not have com
mitted the grave raistakes by which biblical learning
was alraost paralyzed in Great Britain for half a century.*
Eager for the defence of traditional views, they, for the
raost part, fell back again on Jewish rabbinical authority
and external evidence, contending with painful anxiety
for authors and dates, and so antagonized higher criti
cisra itself as deistic criticisra and rationalistic criticism,
not discrirainating between those who were attacking
the Scriptures in order to destroy thera, and those who
were searching the Scriptures in order to defend them.
It is true that the humanist and the purely literary in
terest prevailed in Eichhorn and his school ; they failed
to apply the fides divina of the reformers, but this was
lacking to the scholastics also, and so unhappily tradi
tional dogmatism and rationalistic criticism corabined to
crush evangelical criticisra.

¦"•Mozley in his Reminiscences, 1882, Am. edit.. Vol. II., p. 41, says : " There
was hardly such a thing as Biblical Criticism in this country at the beginnmg of
this century. Poole's Synopsis contained all that an ordinary clergyman could
wish to know. Amold is described as in all his glory at Rugby, with Poole's
Synopsis on one side, and Facciolati on the other."

THE HIGHER CRITICISM. 207
vn. THE HIGHER CRITICISM OF THE NINETEENTH
CENTURY.
There is a notable exception to the absence of the
critical spirit in Great Britain, and that exception proves
the rule. In 1792 Dr. Alexander Geddes, a Roraan
Catholic divine, proposed what has been called the frag
mentary hypothesis to account for the structure of the
Pentateuch and Joshua.* But this radical theory found
no hospitality in Great Britain. It passed over into
Germany through Vater,f and there entered into conflict
with the documentary hypothesis of the school of Eich
horn. Koppe had proposed the fragmentary hypothesis
to account for the literary features of the book of Isaiah
(see p. 203), and so it was extended to other books of the
Bible. Eichhorn had applied the docuraentary hypoth
esis to the gospels, Isaiah, and other parts of Scripture.
The first stadiura of the higher criticism is characterized
by the conflict of the documentary and fragraentary hy
potheses along the whole line. The result of this dis
cussion was that the great variety of the elements that
constitute our Bible became more anc^ raore manifest,
and the problem was forced upon the critics to account
for their combination.
De Wette :j: introduced the second stadium of the
higher criticism by calling the attention of the critics to

* The Holy Bible ; or, the books accounted sacred by Jews and Christians,
etc. London, I., p. xviii., seq.
t Comment ar Uber den Pentateuch mit Einleitungen zu den einzelnen Ab-
schnitten der eingeschalteten von Dr. Alex. Geddes' merkwurdigeren kritischen
und exegetischen Anmerkungen, etc. HaUe, 1805.
X Kritik der israelitischen Geschichte, Halle, 1807 ; Beitrage zur Einleit.
1806-7 ; Lehrb. d. hist. krit. Einleit. in d. Bibel Alien und Neuen Testaments,
Berlin, 1817-26.

208

BIBLICAL STUDY.

the genesis of the documents.* Gesenius supported
hira,t and sharply opposed the fragraentary hypothesis
of Koppe, and strove to account for the genesis of the
docuraents of Isaiah and their corabination. Other crit
ics in great nurabers worked in the same direction, such
as Bleek, Ewald, Knobel, Hupfeld, and produced a great
mass of historical and critical work upon all parts of the
Old Testament. The same problems were discussed in
the New Testament, especially with reference to the
gospels, the order of their production, and their inter
relation.:]: A great number of different theories were
advanced to account for the genesis of the different
books of the Bible. The result of the conflict has been
the conviction on the part of raost critics that the unity
of the writings in the raidst of the variety of docu
raents, has been accomplished by careful and skilful
editing at different periods of biblical history.
It becarae more and more evident that the problems
were assuming larger dimensions and that they could not
be solved until the several edited writings were compared
with one another and considered in their relation to the
development of the biblical religion. The higher criti
cism thus entered upon a third stadium of its history.
This stadium was opened for the New Testaraent by the
Tubingen school, and for the Old Testaraent by the
school of Reuss. These entered into conflict with the
older views and soon showed their insufficiency to ac
count for the larger problems. They reconstructed the
biblical writings upon purely naturalistic principles, so

-* See author's article A Critical Study of the History of the Higher Criti
cism, with special reference to the Pentateuch, Presbyterian Reveiw, IV. , p. 94,
seq. t Com. ii. d. Jesaia, Leipzig, 1821.
X See Weiss, Leben Jesu, I., p. 30, seq.

THE HIGHER CEITICISM. 209
emphasizing differences as to make them irreconcilable,.
and explaining the development in biblical history and
religion and literature, by the theory of antagonistic
forces struggling for the mastery. These critics were
successfully opposed by the schools of Neander, Hof-
mann, and Ewald, and have been overcome in the New
Testament by the principle of diversity of views com
bining in a higher unity. The same principle will over
come them in the Old Tes'taraent likewise, so soon as
evangelical critics learn to apply it.''^
The higher criticism during the first and second
stadia of its development in Germany made little irapres
sion upon Great Britain and America. In 1818 T. Hart
well Horne issued his Lntroduction to the Critical Study
and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures,^ which has been
highly esteemed for its many excellent qualities by
several generations of students. His statement in
the preface to the second edition of his work shows
^w far Great Britain was behind the continent at that
time : " It (the work) originated in the author's own
wants many years since .... when he stood in need
of a guide to the reading of the Holy Scriptures 
At this time the author had no friend to assist his
studies, — or remove his doubts, — nor any means of pro
curing critical works. At length a list of the raore emi
nent foreign Biblical critics fell into his hands, and di
rected him to some of the sources of information which
he was seeking ; he then resolved to procure such of
them as his limited means would permit, with the design
in the first instance of satisfying his own mind on those

* See author's article Critical Study of the Higher Criticism, etc., Presby
terian Review, IV., p. 106, seq. ; also Chap. VIII., p. 225 ; Chap. XI., p. 387 of
this book.
-I- It passed through many editions, 4th, 1823 ; loth, 1856.

210 BIBLICAL STUDY.
topics which had perplexed him, and ultimately of laying
before the Public the results of his inquiries, should no
treatise appear that might supersede such a publication."
This dependence of Great Britain and America on the
biblical scholarship of the continent continued until the
second half of our century. Most students of the Bible
contented themselves with raore or less raodified forras
of traditional theories. Some few scholars made occa
sional and cautious use . of German criticism. Moses
Stuart, Edward Robinson, S. H. Turner, Addison Alex
ander, Samuel Davidson, and others depended chiefly
upon Gerraan works which they translated or reproduced.
At last the Anglo-Saxon world was roused from its un
critical condition by the attacks of Bishop Colenso, on
the historical character of the Pentateuch and book of
Joshua, and by a number of scholars representing free
thought in the " Essays and Reviews." * These writers
fell back on the older deistic objections to the Pentateuch
as history, and as containing a supernatural religion, ^d
mingled therewith a reproduction of German thought,
chiefly through Bunsen. They magnified the discrep
ancies in the narratives and legislation, and attacked the
supernatural element, but added nothing to the sober
higher criticism of the Scriptures. So far as they took
position on this subject they fell into line with the more
radical element of the school of De Wette. They called
the attention of British and American scholars away
frora the literary study of the Bible and the true work of
the higher criticisra, to a defence of the supernatural,
and the inspiration of the Bible. They were successfully
attacked by several divines in Great Britain and Araer-

* The Pentateuch and Book of Joshua critically examined, Part i.-vii., i86»
79 ; Recent Inquiries in Theology by eminent English Churchmen, being Essays
and Reviews, 4th Am. edition from 2d London, 1862.

THE HIGHEE CEITICISM. 211
ica.* The work of Colenso had little support in Great
Britain or America at the time, but it made a great ira
pression upon the Dutch scholar, Kuenen, who had al
ready advanced to the most radical positions. Through
Kuenen's influence it has, however, again come into no-
tice.f It is only within a few years that any general interest
in matters of the higher criticism has been .shown in
Great Britain or America. This has been due chiefly in
Great Britain to the influence of Bishop Lightfoot J and
Dr. W. Robertson Smith,§ and in the United States to
the discussions of the higher criticism in the Presbyterian
Review, Bibliotheca Sacra, Journal of the Society of Bib
lical Literature and Exegesis, and other periodicals.
The ground had, in part, been prepared for these discus
sions by the translation of many of the most iraportant
foreign works of criticisra, and their publication, especial
ly by T. & T. Clark, of Edinburgh, the Foreign Transla
tion Fund Society, aiid others. Starting in the churches
of England and France, the higher criticism was not de
veloped in the lands of its birth, but passed over into
Lutheran Germany and Reformed Switzerland to the
headwaters of the Reformation, to attach itself to the

* Among these we may mention the authors of Aids to Faith, being a reply
to " Essays and Reviews," American edition, 1862 ; W. H. Green, The Penta
teuch vindicated from the Aspersions of Bishop Colenso, N. Y., 1863.
t Godsdienst van Israel, 1869-70, the English edition. Religion of Israel,
1874 ; De vijf Boeken van Mozes, 1872 ; De Profeten en deprofetieon der Israel,
1875, translated into English, The Prophets and Prophecy in Israel, 1877, and
numerous articles in Theologisch. Tijdschrift since that time, and last of all,
Hibbert Lectures, National Religions and Universal Religions, 1882. Kuen
en's views are presented in a popular form in the Bible for Learners, 3 vols.,
1880. X Articles in the Contemporary Review, against the author of Supernatural
Religion, xxv. and xxvi.
§ The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, 1881 ; The Prophets of Israel,
1882.

212 BIBLICAL STUDY,
principles of the Reforraation after a hard and long
struggle with rationalism, atheism, and pantheism.
In its historic unfolding in Germany and Switzerland
in the nineteenth century, we observe that biblical crit-
icism is represented by three antagonistic parties : scho
lastic critics, evangelical critics, and rationalistic critics.
That the discussion has until recently been chiefly con
fined to the continent of Europe and foreign tongues,
raay account for the prejudice against it in Great Brit
ain and Araerica during the long neglect of biblical studies
and the alraost exclusive attention to the discussion of
dograas and the practical work of the church. But the
renewed attention to biblical studies in Great Britain
and Araerica has brought us face to face with the critical
theories of Gerraany, Holland, and Switzerland, and the
question arises how to raeet them. Shall it be with dog
matic opposition to criticisra altogether? This would
be unreasonable, unhistoric, and unprotestant. Or shall
we not rather take our stand with the evangelical critics
of Europe against the rationalistic critics, and conquer
the latter by a raore profound critical interpretation of
the literature, the history, and the religion of the Bible ?
We should not allow ourselves to be influenced by the
circurastance that the majority of the scholars who have
been engaged in these researches have been rationalistic
or semi-rationalistic in their religious opinions ; and that
they have employed the methods and styles peculiar to
the Gerraan scholarship of our century. Whatever raay
have been the raotives and influences that led to these
investigations, the questions we have to determine are:
(i) what are the facts of the case? and (2) do the theo
ries account for the facts ?
We have thus far been, at the best, spectators of the
battle that has raged on the continent of Europe over

THE HIGHEE CEITICISM. 213
the biblical books. The Providence of God now calls us
to take part in the conflict. Our Anglo-American schol
ars are but poorly equipped for the struggle. We should
prepare ourselves at once. We should give our imme
diate attention to the history of this great raoveraent,
the stadia through which it has passed, and the present
state of the question, in order that as soon as possible
our scholars may attain the highest marks reached by
our foreign brethren and advance to still greater achieve
ments.

CHAPTER VIII.
LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE.
The sacred Scriptures are composed of a great variety
of literary products, the results of the thinking, feeling,
and acting of God's people in many generations. Though
guided by the Divine Spirit so as to give one divine rev
elation in continuous historical development, they yet,
as literary productions, assurae various literary styles in
accordance with the culture, taste, and capacity of their
authors in the different periods of their coraposition.
Especially is this true of the Old Testament, which
contains the sacred literature of the Hebrews through a
long period of literary developraent. For their proper
interpretation, therefore, we need not only the relig
ious spirit that can enter into sympathetic relations with
the authors, and through vital union with the Divine
Spirit interpret them from their inraost soul ; we need
not only training in grararaar and logic to understand
the true contents of their language and the drift of their
discourse ; we need not only a knowledge of the archas-
ology- geography, and history of the people, that we
may enter into the atmosphere and scenery of their life
and its expression ; we need not only a knowledge of the
laws, doctrines, and institutions in which the authors
were reared, and which constituted the necessary grooves
of their religious culture- but in addition to all these
^214)

LITEEAEY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 215
we need also a literary training, an cBsthetic culture, in
order that by a true literary sense, and a sensitive and
refined aesthetic taste, we may discriminate poetry from
prose, fact from fiction, the bare truth frora its artistic
dress and decoration, the fruit of reasoning from the
products of the imagination and fancy.
Every race and nation has its peculiarities of literary
culture and style, so that while the study of the best lit
erary models of the Greeks and Roraans, and modern
European languages, may be necessary to develop the
best literary taste ; yet in entering upon the study of
Hebrew literature we come into a field that was not in
fluenced at all by any of these, — to the literature of a
race radically different from all the families of the Indo-
Germanic race — one which declines to be judged by the
standards of strangers and foreigners, but requires an
independent study in connection with the literature of
its own sisters, especially the Arabic, Syriac, and Assyr
ian. A special training in these literatures is, therefore,
necessary in order to the proper estimation of the He
brew literature ; and criticism from the point of view of
our ordinary classic literary culture alone is unfair and
misleading. And it is safe to say that no one can thor
oughly understand the Greek New Testament who has
not made himself familiar with the Old Testament liter
ature, upon which it is based. The student must enter
into sympathetic relations with the spirit and life of the
Orient that pervades it.
The literary study of the Bible is essentially the higher
criticism of the Bible. A reader may enjoy the literary
features of Shakespeare, Milton, and Homer without him
self taking part in critical work, but consciously or un
consciously he is dependent upon the literary criticism
of experts, who have given him the results of their la-

216 BIBLICAL STUDY.
bors upon these authors. So is it with the Bible : the
ordinary reader raay enjoy it as literature without being
a critic — but the labors of critics are necessary in order
that the Bible raay be presented to him in its proper
literary character and forras. Biblical literature has the
sarae probleras to solve, and the same raethods and prin
ciples for their solution, as have been employed in other
departments of the world's literature (p. 87 seq^ It has
to determine the integrity, authenticity, literary form,
and credibility of the writings.
I. THE INTEGRITY OF THE SCRIPTURES.
The first questions with "reference to a writing are:
is it the product of one mind as an organic whole
or coraposed of several pieces of the sarae author ; or
is it a collection of writings by different authors ? Has
it retained its original integrity or has it been interpola
ted ? May the interpolations be discrirainated from the
original ? *
The twelve rainor prophets are regarded as one book
in most of the ancient Jewish and Christian catalogues.
The Baba Bathra represents them as edited by the men
of the great synagogue after the exile (p. 176). This is
a conjecture without historical evidence. These proph
ets in modern times have ordinarily been treated sepa-
, rately and their original corabination to a great extent
forgotten. Each one of thera may be tested as to its
integrity. The only one about which there has been any
general questioning, is Zechariah. The earlier doubts
were based upon Matt, xxvii. g, which ascribes Zech. xi.

* For general statements of the problems of higher criticism in our time, see
Hermann Strack and L. Schulze, in Zockler, Handbuch d. theologischen Wis-
senschaften, I., 1882, pp. 135, seq., 382 seq. ; also, S. I. Curtiss and H. M. Scott,
in Current Discussions in Theology, Chicago, 1SS3, p. 26 seq.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 217
12-13 to Jeremiah (p. 169). If that passage be free from
error, the section of Zechariah in which the citation is
contained raust be separated from that prophet and at
tached to the prophecies of Jeremiah. It is now gener
ally conceded that this cannot be done, and that the
evangelist has made a slip of memory in citation.
The integrity of Zechariah has been disputed in recent
times from literary grounds. Many scholars of the
present day attribute the second half to one or more
pre-exilic prophets. Others, as Wright * and Delitzsch,f
still raaintain the integrity of the book. The book of
Proverbs is represented by the Baba Bathra (p. 176) as
edited by the college of Hezekiah. This is based upon
a conjecture founded on Proverbs xxv. i. It has also
been held that it was edited by Soloraon hiraself, and,
indeed, that Soloraon was the author of the whole. It
is now generally agreed that the book is made up of
several collections, and that it has passed through the
hands of a number of editors at different times.:): The
Psalter is coraposed of 150 Psalms in 5 Books. The
Baba Bathra (p. 176) makes David the editor, and states
that he used with his own Psalms those of ten ancient
worthies. It has been held by some that David wroti
all the Psalms (p. 188). Calvin, Du Pin, and others make
Ezra the editor (p. 201). It is now generally agreed that
the psalm-book is made up of a nuraber of collections,
and, like the book of Proverbs, has passed through a
number of editings. Some have thought it to be the
psalm-book of the first temple. Others, and indeed most

* Zechariah and his Prophecies, considered in relation to Modern Criticism,
Bampton Lectures, 1878, London, 1879, p. xxxv.
-t Messianic Prophecies, translated by S. I. Curtiss, Edinburgh, 1881.
tDeUtzsch, Bib. Com. on the Proverbs, T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh, 1874;
Zockler in Lange, Biblework, Com. on the Proverbs, N. Y., 1870.
10

218 BIBLICAL STUDY.
raoderns, think that it was edited in its present form for
the second temple.* Gratz thinks that the Psalter was
finally edited for the worship of the synagogue.f Isaiah
is represented by the Baba Bathra as edited by the col
lege of Hezekiah (p. 176). Its integrity was disputed by
Koppe (p. 203), who maintained that it was a collection
of pieces of various prophets loosely associated. It is
generally held by foreign scholars that the first half of
Isaiah is coraposed of groups of prophecies gathered
about those of Isaiah as a nucleus, and that the second
half (xl.-lxvi.) is by an unknown prophet of the exile.:]:
The integrity of Isaiah has recently been defended by
W. H. Cobb.§
There are interpolations in the Septuagint version in
connection with Jereraiah, Daniel, and Esther. They
are also found in the New Testament by the general
consent of scholars — in Mark xvi. 9-20 ; || in the gospel
of John viii. i-ii \\ in the famous passage of the heav
enly witnesses, the first epistle of John v. 7, and elsewhere.
We have seen that many scholars of the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries found such interpolations in
the Pentateuch (p. 200). They are found by scholars in
other books of the Bible. It will be sufficient to give
the judicious remarks of Perowne on the Psalter :

* Perowne, Book of Psalms, 2d edition, London, 1870, p. 78 ; 3d edition,
Andover, 1876, p. 63 ; Murray, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of the
Psalms, N. Y., 1880.
t CoTn. zu. d. Psalmen, I., p. 62, seq.
X Ewald, Die Propheten, Gottingen, 1868, 2te Ausg., III., p. 20, seq.; De
litzsch, Messianic Prophecies, 1S81, p. 84 ; Cheyne, Propliecies of Isaiah, i88r,
II., p. 201 seq. ; Cross, Introductory Hints to English Readers of the Old Testa
ment, London, 1882, p. 238.
§ Several articles in the Bibliotheca Sacra, April and October, 1881, Jan. and
July, 1882.
I See the marginal note of the revisers in the Revised Version of 1881.
IT Bracketed in the Revised Version of 1881.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 219
" It is plain that these ancient Hebrew songs and hyrans must
have suffered a variety of changes in the course of time, similar to
those which maybe traced in the older religious poetry of the Chris-
tian Church, where this has been adapted by any means to the object
of some later compiler. Thus, hymns once intended for private use
became adapted to public. 'Words and expressions appUcable to
the original circumstances of the writer, but not applicable to the
new purpose to which the hymn was to be put, were omitted or
altered. It is only in a critical age that any anxiety is manifested
to ascertain the original form in which a poem appeared. The
practical use of hymns in the Christian Church, and of the Psalms
in the Jewish, far outweighed all considerations of a critical kind,
or rather these last never occurred. Hence it has become a more
difficult task than it otherwise would have been to ascertain the
historical circumstances under which certain Psalms were written.
Some traces we find leading us to one period of Jewish history ;
others which lead to another. Often there is a want of cohesion
between the parts of a Psalm ; often an abruptness of transition
which we can hardly account for, except on the hypothesis that we
no longer read the Psalm in its original form."*
All these questions are to be determined by the prin
ciples of the higher criticisra. The authority of the
Bible does not depend upon the integrity of particular
writings. If the editing and interpolating were done
under the influence of the Divine Spirit, this carries with
it the same authority as the original document. If the
interpolations are of a different character, such as are
found to be the case in the apocryphal additions to
Daniel and Esther, they should be removed from the
Bible. If the authority of the Bible depended upon
our first finding who wrote these interpolations and who
edited the books, and whether these interpolators and
editors were inspired men, we could never reach convic
tion as to many of them. But inasmuch as the author
ity of the Bible depends not upon this literary question
•»In/, <,,, p. 82.

220 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of integrit}' of writing, but upon the Word of God
recognized in the writing ; and we prove the inspiration
of the authors from the authority of the writings rather
than the authority of the writings from the inspiration
of the authors ; the authoritj- of the Bible is not dis
turbed by any changes in traditional opinion as to these
writings. The only question of integrity with which
inspiration has to do is the integrity of the canon,
whether the interpolations, the separate parts, the
writings as a w hole are real and necessary parts of the
system of divine revelation — whether they contain the
Divine Word. This can never be determined by the
higher criticism, which has to do only with literary in
tegrity and not with canonical integrity. \Ye doubt
not the canonicity of ^Nlark xvi. 9—20, although it seems
necessary to separate it from the original gospel of
Tilark.

II. THE AUTHEXTICITY OF THE SCRIPTURES.
Several questions arise under this head. Is the
author's name given in connection with the writing?
Is it anonyraous ? Can it be pseudonymous ? Is it a
compilation ? All these are ordinary features of the
world's literature. Is there any sound reason why they
should not all be found in the Bible ? There has ever
been a tendency in the synagogue and the church to
ascribe the biblical books to certain well-known holy
men and prophets. Tradition has been busy here.
There is no book of the Bible that has not one or more
traditional authors. And so in all departments of liter
ature there is scarcely a great name which has not been
compelled to father writings that do not belong to it.
The genuine w ritings of Athanasius, Jerome, Augustine.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 221
and Ambrose have to be separated by careful criticism
from the spurious ; for exaraple :
"Of the thirty to a hundred so-called Ambrosian h5-mns, however,
only twelve in the view of the Benedictine editor of his works are
genuine, the rest being more or less successful imitations by un
known authors. Neale reduces the number of the genuine Am
brosian hymns to ten." *
It is well known that Shakespeare's genuine plays
have to be discrirainated from the large number of
others that have been attributed to him. Shakespearian
criticism is of so great importance as to constitute a
literature of its own.f Soraetiraes the writings of a well-
known author have been, in the process of tirae, attrib
uted to another. We have an example of this in the
Paradoxes of Herbert Palmer, which have been regarded
as Lord Bacon's.:];
To question the traditional opinion as to authorship
of a writing is not to contest the autltenticity of the
writing. Authenticity has properly to do only with the
claims of the writing itself, and not with the claims of
traditional theories. The Baba Bathra does not dis
criminate between editorship and authorship (p. 1 78). It
is evident that to the Tanaim of the second century the
principal thing was official coramitting to writing and
not the original production of the writing. The Tal
mudie statements as to authorship are many of them
absurd conjectures. Josephus and Philo, when they
make Moses the author of the narrative of his own
death, go beyond the Baba Bathra and indulge in folly.
The titles found in connection with the biblical books

* Schaff, History ofthe Christian Church, HI., 186S, p. 591.
t Knight's Shakespeare, Supplemental Volume.
X See Grosart, Lord Bacon not tlie autlior of tlie " Chistian Paradoxes."
Printed for private circulation, 1865.

222 BIBLICAL STUDY.
cannot always be relied upon, for the reason that we
have first to determine whether they came from the
original authors, or have been appended by inspired
editors, or have been attached in the rabbinical or Chris
tian schools. Thus the difference in the titles of the
several psalms between the Septuagint version and the
Massoretic text are so great as to force the conclusion
that many of the titles are of late and uncertain origin,
and that raost, if not all, are of doubtful authority.*
In considering the question of authenticity, we have
first to exaraine the writing itself. If the writing claims
to be by a certain author, to doubt it is to doubt the
credibility and authority of the writing. If these claims
are found to be unreliable, the credibility of the writing
is gone, and its inspiration is involved. But if the credi
bility of the writing is not impeached, its inspiration
has nothing to do with the question of its huraan author
ship. The higher criticisra has been corapelled by Deism
and Rationalism to meet this question of forgery of
biblical writings. This phase of the subject has now
been settled so far that no reputable critics venture to
write of any of our canonical writings as forgeries.
(i) There are large nurabers of the biblical books that
are anonymous: e.g., the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges,
Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esthe-u,
Job, Jonah, Ruth, many of the Psalms, Lamentations,
and the epistle to the Hebrews.
Tradition has assigned authors for all of these. It is
also maintained that the internal statements of some of
these books point to their authorship by certain persons.

•"- Murray, Lectures on the Origin and Growth of the Psalms, 1880, p. 79,
seq. ; Perowne in /. c, p. 94, seq.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 223
These latter are questions of interpretation. The vast
weight of the biblical scholarship of the present day is,
however, with reference to the books raentioned above,
against any such interpretation of them as discovers
authorship in their statements. Such interpretation is
forced, and is regarded as based on preconceptions and
dogmatic considerations.
(2) Are there pseudonymous books in the Bible ? This
is a well-known and universally recognized literary style
which no one should think of identifying with y^r^^rj/
or deceit of any kind. Ancient and modern literature
is full of pseudonymes as well as anonyraes. One need
only look over the bibliographical works devoted to this
subject,* or have a little farailiarity with the history ,of
literature, or examine any public library, to settle this
question. There is great variety in the use of the pseu
donyme. Sometimes the author uses a surname rather
than his own proper name, either by it to conceal hira
self frora the public or to introduce hiraself by a title of
honor. Thus Calvin follows the opinion of some of the
ancients that the prophecy of Malachi was written by
Ezra, who assuraed the surname Malachi in connection
with it. Then again some descriptive term is used as
by the authors of the celebrated Martin Marprelate
tracts. Then a fictitious name is constructed as in the
t^e of the famous tracts vindicating Presbyterianism
against Episcopacy ; the authors Stephen Marshall, Ed
mund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew Newcommen,
and William Spurstow coined the name Smectyranuus
from the initial letters of their names. Araong the
ancients it was mor6 common to assume the naraes of

* Barbier, Dictionnaire des Ouvrages anonymes et pseudonymes, 4tom., Paris,
1872-78 ; Halkett and Lang, Dictionary ofthe Anonymous and Pseudonymous
Literature of Great Britain, 1882, seq.. Vol. I., A-E, II. F-N.

224 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ancient worthies. There is an enormous number of
these pseudonymes in the Puritan literature of the 1 6th
and 17th centuries. The descendants of the Puritans
are the last ones who should think of any dishonesty or
impropriety connected with their use.
Why should the pseudonyrae be banished from the
Bible? Among the Greeks and Romans they existed
in great nurabers. Among the Jews we have a long
list in extra canonical books, e. g. : The apocalypses
of Enoch, Baruch, Ezra, Assumption of Moses, Ascen
sion of Isaiah, Testaraents of the Twelve Patriarchs, the
Psalter of Soloraon, covering several kinds of literature.
Why should there not be sorae of these in the Old Tes
taraent ? It is now conceded by raost scholars, even
Keil and Delitzsch, that Ecclesiastes is such a pseudo
nyme, using Soloraon's name.* It is clairaed by some
that Daniel f and Deuteronoray :]: are also pseudonyraes.
If no a priori objection can be taken to the pseudonyme

* This is invincibly established by Wright, Book of Koheleth, London, 1883,
p. 79, seq. ; '* Solomon is introduced as the speaker throughout the work in the
same way as Cicero in his treatise on ' Old Age,' and on ' Friendship,' selects
Cato the elder as the exponent of his views, or as Plato in his Dialogues brings
forward Socrates." See Presbyterian Review, IV., p. 649, seq.
t See Strack in /. c, p. 164, seq., and p. 189 of this vol.
X So Riehm, Gcsetzgebung Mosis im Lande Moab, 1854, p. 112, represents
the Deuteronomic code as a literary fiction. The author lets Moses appear as a
prophetic popular orator, and as the first priestly reader of the law. It is a liter
ary fiction as Ecclesiastes is a literary fiction. The latter uses the person of Solo
mon as the master of wisdom to set forth the lessons of wisdom. The former
uses Moses as the great lawgiver, to promulgate divine laws. This is also the
view of Noldeke, Alttest. Literatur, 1868, p. 30 ; and W. Robertson Smith,
The Old Testament in the Jewish Church, N. Y., 1881, p. 384, seq., who uses
the term legal fiction as a variety of hterary fiction. We cannot go with those
who regard this as an absurdity, or as involving Uterary dishonesty. Drs. Riehm
and Smith, and others who hold this view, repudiate such a thought with
abhorrence. The style of literary fiction was a familiar and favorite one of the
later Jews. And there can be no u priori reason why they should not have
used it in Bible times.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 225
as inconsistent with divine revelation, — if one pseudonyme,
e. g., Ecclesiastes, be adraitted in the Bible, then the
question whether Daniel and Deuteronoray are pseudo
nymes must be determined by the higher criticisra, and
it does not touch the question of their inspiration or
authority as a part of the Scriptures at all. All would
adrait that no forger or forgery could be inspired. But
that every one who writes a pseudonyme is a deceiver or
forger is absurd. The usage of literature ancient and
modern has established its propriety. If it clairas to be
by a particular author, and is said by a critic to be a
pseudonyme, then its credibility is attacked, and the
question of its inspiration is raised. In the New Tes
tament the gospel of John is thought by some to be a
pseudonyrae of the second Christian century. The gos
pel of John has been the centre of the conflict of the
higher criticisra in the New Testaraent. Here the lines
of battle were sharply drawn by the schodls of Baur and
Neander. The vindication of the Johanaic authorship
is the grandest critical achievement of our century, for
which all men ought to be grateful to the principles and
methods of the higher criticism. Traditionalists have
contributed nothing of value to this discussion, but have
only impeded the evangelical critics in their struggles
with the rationalistic critics.* We shall give an extract
frora Weiss as it not only bears on the authenticity of
John, but also on the general question of the pseu
donyme :
"There was certainly in antiquity a pseudonymous literature,
which cannot be criticized from the standpoint of the literary cus-

*SeeGodet, Com. on the Gospel of John, T. & T. Clark, Edin., 1876, I.,
3. 8, seq. Luthardt, St. John's Gospel, T. & T. Clark, Edin., 1876, 1., pp. 211,
seq. ; Ezra Abbot, Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, Boston, 1880 ; Weiss,
Veben Jesu, 1882, I.-, p. 88, seq.
10*

226 BIBLICAL STUDY.
toms of our day, or judged as forgery. For it is just the naiveti
with which the author strives to find a higher authority for his words
by laying them in the mouth of one of the celebrated men of the
past, in whose spirit he desires to speak, which justifies this literary
form. Quite otherwise is it in this case ; the author mentions no
name ; he only gives it to be understood that it is the unnamed dis
ciple so repeatedly introduced who is writing here frora his own per
sonal knowledge ; he leaves it to be inferred from the comparison
of one passage with another that this eye-witness cannot be any one
but John. It was Renan, who in the face of modern criticism,
said that it was not a case of pseudonymous authorship such as was
known to antiquity, it was either truth or refined forgery — plain de
ception." *
The authenticity of the Pauline epistles of the im
prisonment, and the pastoral epistles has been contested
in a similar way. The higher criticisra has shown that
the differences in the Pauline epistles represent three
stages of growth in the experiences and doctrinal teach
ing of the apostle Paul himself. And it is not neces
sary to think of his disciples as their authors, or to de
scend into the second century.-f- The Apocalypse has
been disputed from ancient times. It has been assigned
by sorae of the ancients to a presbyter John. Recent
criticism is raore and more decided in favor of the au
thorship of the apostle John and against placing it with
the pseudonyraous apocalypses of Peter and Paul. The
differences, which are recognized to be very great in
language and style, and in doctrine, are best explained
by regarding the Apocalypse as an earlier writing, and
the gospel as the raost raature writing of the apostle.:]:
(3) Compilations. The historical books of Kings and

* Weiss, Life of Jesus, T. & T. Clark, Edin., 1883, I., p. 94.
t See Schaff, History ofthe Christian Church, 1882, p. 784, seq. ; Weiss, Bib.
lical Theology of the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1882, I., p. 285.
X Schaff, History ofthe Christian Church, N. Y., 1882, pp, 716, seq. ; S34.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 227
Chronicles,* and the gospel of Luke (i. 1-4) represent
theraselves as corapilations. They use older docuraents
which are soraetiraes raentioned by narae. The ques
tion then is, how far this compilation has extended,
and whether it has been once for all, or has passed
through a number of stages. Thus the books of Kings
refer to books of Chronicles which are not our books
of Chronicles, and our books of Ghronicles refer to books
of Kings which are not our, books of Kings. Both of
these historical writers seem to depend upon an an
cient book of Chronicles — only our book of Chronicles
has used it in its citation in another book of Kings
than the one presented to us in the canon, for it
gives raaterial not found therein.f The question
arises whether the other historical books are not also
compilations. In the New Testament the chief dis
putes have been as to Matthew and Mark ; :]: in the
Old Testament as to the Pentateuch. It is now con
ceded by raost critics that the Pentateuch is coraposed
of four separate historical narratives, each with its code
of legislation, and that these have been compacted into
their present form by one or more editors. The Baba
Bathra makes Moses the editor or author of the Penta
teuch. If the inspiration of the Pentateuch depends
upon the sole Mosaic authorship, then criticism has come
into irreconcilable conflict with its inspiration. But
this is only a presumption of tradition. The inspiration
and authority of the Pentateuch are as safe, yes, safer.

» 1 Kings xi. 41 ; xiv. 19, 29 ; xvi. 5 ; 3 Kings i. 18 ; viii. 23 ; xx. 20 ; i Chron.
xxfac. 29 ; 2 Chron. ix. 29 ; xii. 15 ; xiii. 22 ; xvi. 11 ; xxiv. 27 ; xxvi. 22, etc. ;
xxxiii. 18, 39 ; xxxv. 27 ; Neh. xi. 23.
t Noldeke, Alttest. Literatur, Leipzig, 1868, p. 57, seq.
X Weiss, Leben Jesu, I., 1882, p. :-4, seq., gives the latest and best statement of
this discussion and its results.

228 BIBLICAL STUDY.
with the view that these books were corapiled, as were
the other historical books of the Old Testaraent.* The
question as to the authenticity of the Bible is whether
God is its author ; whether it is inspired. This cannot
be deterrained by the higher criticisra in any way, for
the higher criticism has only to do with human author
ship, and has nothing to do with the divine authorship,
which is determined on different principles, as we have
seen in our study of the canon (Chapter V.).
III. THE LITERARY FORMS OF THE SCRIPTURES.
The literary forms have not shared to any great extent
in the revival of biblical studies. And yet these are ex
actly the things that raost need consideration in our
day, when biblical literature is compared with the litera
tures of the other religions of the ancient world, and the
question is so often raised why we should recognize the
Bible as the inspired word of God rather than the sacred
books of other religions; and when the higher criticism
is becoming the raost iraportant factor in biblical studies
of our day.
Bishop Lowth in England, and the poet Herder in
Gerraany, toward the close of the last century called
the attention of the learned world to this neglected
therae, and invited it to the study of the Scriptures as
sacred literature ; but little advance has been made since
that day, owing, doubtless, to the fact that the conflict
between the churches and rationalism has been raging
about the history, the religion, and the doctrines ; the
original text, and the higher criticisra in questions of
authenticity, integrity, and credibility of writings; but

« See Critical Study of the History of the Higher Criticism, Presbyterian
Review, IV., pp. 105, 129, seq.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 009
the finer literary features have not entered into the con
troversies to any extent until quite recent times. De
Wette, Ewald, and especialh- Reuss, have made valuable
contributions to this subject, but e\en these masters of
exegetical theology have given their strengtii to other
topics. There lies open to the student of our day one
of the most interesting and inviting fields for research,
whence he may derive rich spoil for himself and the
church. The most obvious divisions of literature are poetry
and prose. These are distinguished on the surface by
different modes of writing, and to the ear by different
modes of reading ; but underneath all this is a difference
of rhythmical movement. It is indeed difficult to draw
the line scientifically between poetry and prose even
here, for as Lanier says : " Prose has its rhythms, its
tunes and its tone-colors, like verse ; and, while the ex
treme forms of prose and verse are sufficient!)- unlike
each other, there are such near grades of intermediate
forms, that they may be ssiid to run into each other,
and any line claiming to be distinctive must necessarily
be more or less arbitrary." * Hence rhetorical prose and
works of the imagination in all languages approximate
closely to poetrv'. The poetr>- of the Bible is written in
the MSS., and is printed in the Hebrew and Greek texts,
as well as the versions with few exceptions exacth- as if
it were prose ; and the Hebrew scribes who divided the
Old Testament Scriptures and pointed tliem with vo\\els
and accents dealt with them as if they were prose and e\-en
obscured the poetic form by their ignorant and careless
divisions of verse and sections, so that the poetic form
in many cases can be restored only by a careful study of

• Science of EngUsh Verse, N. V., iSSo, p. S7-

230 BIBLICAL STUDY.
the unpointed text and a neglect of the Massoretic
sections. We reserve the subject of Hebrew Poetry for our
next chapter, liraiting ourselves in this chapter to the
Prose Literature of the Bible. This is found in rich
variety. (i) History constitutes a large portion of the Old and
New Testaraents. In the Old Testament there are two
distinct kinds of history : the priestly and the prophetic.
The priestly is represented by Chronicles, Ezra, and Ne
heraiah, and extends backward into the Elohistic section
of the Pentateuch. It is characterized by the annalistic
style, using older sources, such as genealogical tables,
letters, official docuraents, and entering into the rainute
details of the Levitical systera, and the organization of
the State, but destitute of iraagination and of the artistic
sense. The prophetic is represented by the books of
Sarauel and Kings and extends backward into the Jeho
vistic sections of the Pentateuch. It is characterized by
the descriptive style, using ancient stories, traditions,
poetic extracts, and entire poems. It is graphic in de
lineation, using the imagination freely, and with fine
artistic tact.*
In the New Testament we have four biographical
sketches of the noblest and most exalted person who
has ever appeared in history, the God-Man, Jesus Christ,
in their variety giving us meraoirs in four distinct types,
the highest in the gospel of John, where the person of
Jesus is set in the halo of religious philosophical reflec
tion frora the point of view of the Christophanies of
Patmos.f The book of Acts presents the history of
* Dillmann, Genesis, 4te. Aufl., Leipzig, 1882, p. xi. seq. ; Noldeke, Alttest.
Literatur, Leipzig, 1868, p. 15, seq.
f Weiss, Leben Jesu, Berlin, 1882, I., p. 103.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 231
the planting and training of the Christian church, using
various sources and personal reminiscences.
All these forras of history and biography use the
sarae variety of sources as histories in other ancient
literature. Their historical material was not revealed
to the authors by the Divine Spirit, but gathered by
their own industry as historians from existing raaterial
and sources of inforraation. The most that we can
claim for them while distinguishing inspiration from
revelation, is that they were inspired by God in their
work so that they were guided into truth and thereby
preserved frora error — certainly as to all matters of relig
ion, faith, and morals ; but to what extent further in the
details and external matters of their composition is still
in dispute araong evangelical men. It is also disputed
to what extent their use of sources was liraited by in
spiration, or, in other words, what kinds of sources were
unworthy .of the use of inspired historians. There are
those who would exclude the legend and the myth which
are found in all other ancient history. If the legend in it
self implies what is false, it would certainly be unworthy
of divine inspiration to use it ; but if it is the poetical em
bellishraent of bare facts, one does not readily see why
it should be excluded frora the sacred historians' sources
any raore than snatches of poetry, bare genealogical ta
bles, and records often fragraentary and incoraplete, such
as are certainly found in the historical books. If the
myth necessarily iraplies in itself polytheism or panthe
ism, or any of the elements of false religions it would be
unworthy of divine inspiration. It is true that the classic
myths which lie at the basis of the history of Greece and
Rome, with which all students are familiar, are essential
ly polytheistic ; but not raore so than the religions of
these peoples and all their literature. It is also true

232 BIBLICAL STUDY.
that the myths of Assyria and Babylon as recorded on
their raonuraents are essentially polytheistic. Many
scholars have found such rayths in the Pentateuch. But
over against this there is the striking fact that stands
out in the coraparison of the biblical narratives of the
creation and the flood, with the Assyrian and Babylo
nian ; namely, that the biblical are monotheistic, the
Assyrian polytheistic. But is there not a monotheistic
myth as well as a polytheistic ? In other words, raay
not the poetic form of the myth be appropriate to mo
notheistic as well as to polytheistic conceptions ? May
it not be an appropriate literary form for the true bibli
cal religion as well as the other ancient religions of the
worid ? *
However we raay answer this question a priori, it is
safe to say that the term myth at least has becorae so
associated with polytheisra in later usage and in the
comraon raind, that it is unwise, if not altogether im
proper, to use it in connection with the pure monothe
ism and supernatural revelation of the Bible, if for no
other reason — at least for this — to avoid misconception,
and in order to make the necessary discriminations. For
the discriraination of the religion of the Bible frora the
other religions raust ever be raore iraportant than their
coraparison and features of reserablance. There is no
such objection to the terra legend,f which in its earliest
and still prevalent use, has a prevailing religious sense,
and can cover without difficulty all those eleraents in the
biblical history which we are now considering. There
is certainly a resemblance to the myth of other nations

* Lenormant, Beginnings of History, N. Y., 1882, p. 187.
+ George P. Marsh, article Legend, in Johnson's New Universal Cyclopcedia,
1876, II., p. 1714, and the Legenda Aurea, or Historia Lombardica, of Jacobus
de Voragine, of the ijth century.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 233
in the close and farailiar association of the one God with
the ancestors of our race, and the patriarchs of Israel,
however we may explain it. Whatever names we may
give to these beautiful and sacred traditions which were
transmitted in the families of God's people from genera
tion to generation, and finally used by the sacred histo
rians in their holy books ; whatever names we may give
them in distinction from the legends and myths of other
nations, none can fail to see that poetic erabellishment
natural and exquisitely beautiful, artless and yet most
artistic, which coraes frora the iraagination of the cora
raon people of the most intelligent nations, in these
sources that were used by divine inspiration in giving
us ancient history in its most attractive form. Indeed
the imagination is in greater use in Hebrew history than
in any other history, with all the oriental wealth of color
in the prophetic historians.
The dialogues and discourses of the ancient worthies
are simple, natural, and profound. They are not to be
regarded as exact reproductions of the words originally
spoken, whether preserved in the meraory of the people
and transmitted in stereotyped form or electrotyped on
the mind of the historian, or in his writing by divine in
spiration ; but they are rather reproductions of the situ
ation in a graphic and rhetorical raanner, differing from
the like usage in Livy and Thucydides, Herodotus and
Xenophon only in that the latter used their reflection
and imagination merely ; the former used the same fac
ulties guided by divine inspiration into the truth and
restrained frora error.
In biblical history there is a wealth of beauty and re
ligious instruction for those students who approach it
not only as a work of divine revelation frora which the
maximum of dogma, or of examples and maxims of prac-

234 BIBLICAL STUDY.
tical ethics are to be derived; but with the higher
appreciation and insight of those who are trained to
the historian's art of representation, and who learn from
the art of history, and the styles and raethods of his
tory, the true interpretation of historical books, where
the soul enters into the enjoyraent of the concrete,
and is unwilling to break up the ideal of beauty, or
destroy the living reality, for the sake of the analytic
process, and the abstract resultant, however iraportant
these raay be in other respects, and under other circum
stances. (2) Advancing from historical prose, we corae to the
Oration. The Bible is as rich in this forra of literature
as in its history and poetry. Indeed, the three run in
sensibly info one another in Hebrew prophecy. Rare
models of eloquence are found in the historical books,
such as the plea of Judah (Gen. xliv. 18-34); the charge
of Joshua (Jos. xxiv.) ; the indignant outburst of Jothara
(Judges ix.) ; the sentence pronounced upon Saul by
Samuel (i Sam. xv.) ; the challenge of Elijah (i Kings
xviii.). The three great discourses of Moses in Deuter
onomy are elaborate orations, combining great variety
of raotives and rhetorical forras, especially in the last
discourse, to impress upon Israel the doctrines of God,
and the blessings and curses, the life and death, involved
therein. The prophetical books present us collections -of in
spired eloquence, which for unction, fervor, impressive
ness, grandeur, sublimity, and power, surpass all the elo
quence of the world, as they grasp the historical past
and the ideal future, and entwine thera with the living
present, for the comfort and warning, the guidance and
the restraint of God's- people. Nowhere else do we find
such depths of passion, such heights of ecstasy, such

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 235
dreadful imprecations, such solemn warnings, such im
pressive exhortations, and such sublime promises.
Each prophet has his own peculiarities and excel
lences. " Joel's discourse is like a rapid, sprightly
stream flowing into a delightful plain. Hosea's is like a
waterfall plunging down over rocks and ridges ; Isaiah
as a mass of water rolling heavily along." * Micah has
no superior in siraplicity and originality of thought,
spirituality and subliraity of conception, clearness and
precision of prophetic vision. " Isaiah is not the espec
ially lyrical prophet, or the especially elegiacal prophet,
or the especially oratorical or hortatory prophet, as we
would describe a Joel, a Hosea, or Micah, with whom
there is a greater prevalence of some particular colors ;
but just as the subject requires, he has readily at com
mand every different kind of style, and every different
change of delineation ; and it is precisely this, that, in
point of language, establishes his greatness, as well as,
in general, forms one of his most towering points of ex
cellence. His only fundamental peculiarity is the lofty,
majestic calmness of his style, proceeding out of the
perfect command which he feels that he has over his
matter." f Jeremiah is the prophet of sorrow, and his
style is heavy and raonotonous, as the same story of
woe must be repeated again and again in varied strains.
Ezekiel was, as Hengstenberg represents, of a gigan
tic appearance, well adapted to struggle effectively with
the spirit of the times of the Babylonian captivity — a
spiritual Samson, who, with powerful hand, grasped the
pillars of the teraple of idolatry and dashed it to the
earth, standing alone, yet worth a hundred prophetic
schools, and, during his entire appearance, a powerful

* Wunsche, Weissagungen des Prophten Joel, Leipzig, 1872, p. 38.
t Ewald, Die Propheten, Gottingen, 1867, I., p. 279.

236 BIBLICAL STUDY.
proof that the Lord was still among His people, although
His visible temple was ground to powder.* Malachi
closes the line, "Although like a late evening closing
a long day, he is yet at the same time the gray of dawn,
bearing a noble day in its bosom." f
In the New Testaraent the three great discourses of
Jesus and His parabolic teaching present us oratory of
the Aramaic type ; simple, quiet, transparent, yet reach
ing to unfathomable depths, and as the very blue of
heaven, — every word a diamond, every sentence alto
gether spirit and life, illuminating with their purfe,
searching light, quickening with their warra, pulsating,
throbbing love.:]:
The discourse of Peter at Pentecost will vie with Cicero
against Catiline in its conviction of the rulers of Israel,
and in its piercing the hearts of the people. The dis
courses of Paul on Mars' Hill, and before the Jews in Je
rusalem, and the magnates of Rome at Caesarea, are not
surpassed by Demosthenes on the Crown. We see the
philosophers of Athens confounded, sorae mocking, and
others convinced unto salvation. We see the Jewish
mob at first silenced, and then bursting forth into a
frantic yell for his blood. We see the Roman governor
trembling before his prisoner's reasonings of justice and
judgment to corae. We do not compare the orations
of Peter and Paul with those of Cicero and Demos
thenes for completeness, syraraetry, and artistic finish ;
this would be impossible, for the sermons of Peter and
Paul are only preserved to us in outline ; but, taking
them as outlines, we maintain that for skilful use of

* Hengstenberg, Christology, T. &. T. Clark, Edin., 1864, Vol. IL, p. 3.
t Nagelsbach, article Maleachi, in Herzog, i Aufl., -viii., p. 756.
X See A. B. Bruce, Parabolic Teaching of Christ, London, 1882, for a fine
appreciation of the literary forms of the parables.

LITEEAEY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 237
circumstance, for adaptation to the occasion, for rhetor
ical organization of the therae, for rapid display of argu
raent, in their grand raarch to the cliraax, and above all
in the effects that they produced, the orations of Peter
and Paul are pre-eminent.
Nowhere else save in the Bible have the oratorical
types of three distinct languages and civilizations com
bined for unity and variety of effect. These biblical
models ought to enrich and fortify the sermon of our
day. If we should study thera as literary forras, as rauch
as we study Cicero and Demosthenes as models of sa
cred eloquence, the pulpit would rise to iiew grandeur
and sublimer heights and more tremendous power over
the masses of raankind.
(3) The Epistle may be regarded as the third form of
prose literature. This is the contribution of the Ara
maic language to the Old Testament in the letters con
tained in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. But it is
in the New Testament that the: epistle receives its raag
nificent development in the letters of Jaraes, Peter, Paul,
J^ude, and John — some familiar, some dogmatic, sorae
ecclesiastical, sorae pastoral, sorae speculative and pre
dictive, and in the epistle to the Hebrews we have an
elaborate essay.
How charraing the letters of Cicero to his several fa
miliar friends ! What a loss to the world to be de
prived of them ! But who among us would exchange for
them the epistles of the apostles? And yet it is to be
feared that we have studied them not too much as doc
trinal treatises, perhaps, but too little as familiar letters
to friends and to beloved churches, and still less as lit
erary models for the letter and the essay. It might re
fresh and exalt our theological and ethical treatises, if
their authors would study awhile with Paul in his stvle

238 BIBLICAL STUDY.
and method. They raight form a juster conception of
his doctrines and principles. They certainly would un
derstand better how to use his doctrines, and how to
apply his principles.
(4) Fiction is represented in the New Testament in
the parables of Jesus. It is also represented in the apoc
ryphal books of Tobit and Susanna, and in the 4th
book of Maccabees in the story about the seven heroic
Maccabee sons, and, in i Esdras iv., in the legend about
Zerubbabel and Truth. It is true these are not canonical,
but they illustrate the part that fiction played in the lit
erature of the Hebrews of the centuries between the
Testaments. We might also bring into consideration
the fiction of the Haggada of the Jews in the various
midrashim.* Many divines have thought that the books of Esther
and Jonah should be classed as fiction. f Any a priori
objection to fiction as unworthy of inspiration is de
barred by the parables of Jesus. With reference to these
books it raust, therefore, be entirely a question of induc
tion of facts. The beautiful story of Zerubbabel and.
Truth, with its sublirae lesson, " Truth is raighty, and
will prevail," loses nothing in its effect by being a story
and not history. The wonderful devotion and self-sac
rifice of the Maccabee mother, and the patient endur
ance of the most horrible tortures by her sons, which
have stirred and thrilled many a heart, and strengthened
many a pious raartyr to the endurance of persecution,
are no less powerful as ideal than as real. So it would
be with Jonah and Esther if they could be proved to be
fiction. The raodel of patriotic devotion, the lesson of

¦* See the great collection in Wunsche, Bibliotheca Rabbinica, Leipzig,
1880-84. -I Noldeke, Alttest. Literatur, 1868, p. 71, seq.

LITEEAEY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 239
the universality of divine providence and grace, would be
still as forcible, and the gain would be at least equal to
the loss, if they were to be regarded as inspired ideals
rather than inspired statements of the real. The sign of
the prophet Jonah as a syrabol of the resurrection of Je
sus Christ is as forcible, if the syrabol has an ideal basis,
as if it had an historical basis. Be this as it raay, the
element of fiction is sufficiently well represented in the -
Old Testaraent in the story of the Shulamite in the
Song of Songs, and in the elaboration of the historical
person and trials of Job into one of the grandest ideals
of the imagination, and in the soul struggles of Kohe
leth. These are then the most general forras of prose litera
ture contained in the sacred Scriptures. They vie with
the literary models of the best nations of ancient and
modern times. They ought to receive the study of all
Christian raen and women. They present the greatest
variety of form, the noblest themes, and the very best
models. Nowhere else can we find more admirable
aesthetic as well as moral and religious culture. Chris
tian people should urge that our schools and colleges
should attend to this literature, and not neglect it for
the sake of the Greek and Roraan, which with all their
rare forras and extraordinary grace and beauty, yet lack
the oriental wealth of color, depths of passion, heights
of rapture, holy aspirations, transcendent hopes, and
transforraing raoral power.
Our college and university training and the drift of
mocfern thought lead us far away from oriental thought
and eraotion, and the literature that expresses thera.
Few there are who have entered into the spirit and life
of the Orient as it is presented to us in the sacred
Scriptures. It is not reraarkable that the Old Testa-

240 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ment has been to many a dead book, exciting no living,
heartfelt interest. Here is a new and interesting field
for the student of our day. The young men are enter
ing into it with enthusiasm. The church of Christ will
be greatly enriched by the fruits of their labors.
IV. THE CREDIBILITY OF THE SCRIPTURES.
This is the raost delicate and difficult question of the
higher criticism with reference to all literature, but es
pecially with reference to biblical literature. That there
are errors in the present text of our Bible, and inconsist
encies, it seems to us vain to deny. We have come
upon sorae of thera in the course of our investigations
(pp. 191, 192). There are chronological, geographical, and
other circurastantial inconsistencies and errors which we
should not hesitate to acknowledge. These errors arise
in the departraent of exegesis raore than in higher criti
cisra. It does not follow, however, that circurastantial,
incidental errors, such as raight arise from the inadver
tence or lack of inforraation of an author, are any im-
peachraent of his credibility. If we distinguish between
revelation and inspiration, and yet insist upon inerrancy
with reference to the latter as well as the forraer, we vir
tually do away with the distinction ; for no mere raan
can escape altogether huraan errors unless divine revela
tion set even the most familiar things in a new and in
fallible light, and also so control him that he cannot
make a slip of the eye or the hand, a fault in the imagi
nation, in conception, in reasoning, in rhetorical figure,
or in grammatical expression ; and indeed so rais^ him
above his fellows that he shall see through all their
errors in science and philosophy as well as theology,
and anticipate the discoveries in all branches of knowl
edge by thousands of years. Errors of inadvertence in

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 241
minor details, where the author's position and charac
ter are well known, do not destroy his credibility as a
witness in any literature or any court of justice. It is
not to be presumed that divine inspiration lifted the
author above his age any more than was necessary to
convey the divine revelation and the divine instruction
with infallible certainty to raankind. We have to take
into account the extent of the author's huraan knowl
edge, his point of view and type of thought, his raeth
ods of reasoning and illustration. The question of credi
bility is to be distinguished from infallibility. The form
is credible, the substance alone is infallible. It is clairaed
by sorae divines that the inerrancy * of Scripture is es
sential to the inspiration of the Scriptures, and that " a
proved error in Scripture contradicts not only our doc
trine, but the Scripture claims, and therefore its inspira
tion in making those claims. "f But inerrancy is neither
a scriptural nor a symbolical nor a historical term in
connection with the subject of Inspiration. These rep
resentations of the doctrine of inspiration have no sup
port in the symbols or faith of the Reformation, or in
the Westminster Confession, or in the Scriptures. We
hold with our revered instructor, the late Henry B.
Smith, to plenary inspiration rather than verbal. It may
be as it is stated. " It (plenary inspiration) is in itself
indefinite, and its use contributes nothing, either to the
precision or the emphasis of the definition "; % but this
is as far as the Scriptures or the symbols of faith war
rant us in going ; it is as far as it is at all safe in the
present juncture to advance in definition. Verbal inspi
ration is doubtless a raore precise and emphatic defini-
* F. L. Patton, Pentateuchal Criticism, Presbyterian Review, IV., p. 363.
t Drs. Hodge and Warfield, art. Inspiration, Presbyterian Review, II., p.
a4S. X Drs. Hodge and Walrfield in /. <r., p. 23a.
11

242 BIBLICAL STUDY.
tion than plenary inspiration ; but this very emphasis
and precision imperil the doctrine, of inspiration itself
by bringing it into conflict with a vast array of objec
tions along the whole line of Scripture and history,
which raust be raet and overcorae in incessant warfare,
where both sides raay count on doubtful victories, but
where the weak, ignorant, and hesitating, stumble and
fall into divers temptations, and raay make shipwreck of
their faith. From the point of view of biblical criticism,
we are not prepared to admit errors in the Scriptures in
the original autographs, until they shall be proven.
Very many of those alleged have already received suffi
cient or plausible explanation ; others are in dispute
between truth-seeking scholars, and satisfactory explana
tions raay hereafter be given. New difficulties are con
stantly arising and being overcorae. It is difficult on
the one side to deraonstrate an error, as it is on the
other side to demonstrate that the Scriptures must be
absolutely errorless. It is a question of fact to which all
theories and doctrines must yield. It cannot be deter
mined by a priori definitions and statements on either
side. Indeed the original autographs have been lost for
ages and can never be recovered. How can we deter
mine whether they were absolutely errorless or not ? To
assurae that it raust be so, as a deduction frora the theory
of verbal inspiration, is to beg the whole question.
In the raeanwhile we confidently affirra that the doc
trine of inspiration as stated in the syrabols of faith will
maintain its integrity in spite of any circumstantial errors
that may be admitted or proved in the Scriptures, so
long as these errors do not directly or indirectly disturb
the infallibility of its matters of faith or of the historic
events and institutions with which they are inseparably
united.

LITERARY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 243
We are convinced that Richard Baxter more correctly
states the church doctrine when he says :
" And here I must tell you a great and needful truth, which ....
Christians fearing to confess, by overdoing tempt men to Infidelity.
The Scripture is like a man's" body, where some parts are but for
the preservation of the rest, and may be maimed without death :
The sense is the soul of the Scripture ; and the letters but the body,
or vehicle. The doctrine of the creed, Lord's Prayer and Decalogue,
Baptism and the Lord's Supper, is the vital part, and Christianity
itself. The Old Testament letter (written as we have it about Ezra's
time) is that vehicle which is as imperfect as the Revelation of these
times was : But as after Christ's incarnation and ascension, the
Spirit was more abundantly given, and the Revelation more perfect
and sealed, so the doctrine is more full and the vehicle or body, that
is, the words are less imperfect and more sure to us ; so that he that
doubteth of the truth of some words in the Old Testament, or of
some circumstances in the New, hath no reason therefore to doubt
of.the Christian religion, of which these writings are but the vehicle
or body, sufficient to ascertain us of the truth of the Histoty and
Doctrine." *
Higher criticism coraes into conflict with the authority
of Scripture when it finds that its statements are not
authoritative and its revelations are not credible. If the
credibility of a book is impeached, its divine authority
and inspiration are also impeached. But to destroy his
credibility something more raust be presented than
trivial matters and minute details that do not affect the
author's scope of arguraent or his religious instructions.
We hold that it is an unsafe position to assume, that we
must first prove the credibility, inerrancy, and infallibil
ity of a book ere we accept its authority. If inquirers
waited until all the supposed errors in our canonical
books were satisfactorily explained they would never
accept the Bible as a divine revelation. To press the

* The Catechizing of Families, 1683, p. 36.

244 BIBLICAL STUDY.
critics to this dilemma, inerrancy or uninspired, might
catch the critics on one of the horns if they were not
critical enough to detect the fallacy and escape, but it
would be more likely to catch the people, who know
nothing of criticisra, and so undermine and destroy their
faith. The higher criticism has already strengthened the
credibility of Scripture. It has studied the huraan feat
ures of the Bible and learned the wondrous variety of
form and color assuraed by the divine revelation. Many
of the supposed inconsistencies have been found to be
different modes of representing the same thing, comple
mentary to one another and combining to give a fuller
representation than any one mode could ever have given,
as the two sides of the stereoscopic view give a represen
tation superior to that of the ordinary photograph. The
unity of statement found in the midst of such wondrous
variety of detail in form and color is vastly more con
vincing than a unity of mere coincidence such as the
older harmonists sought to obtain by stretching and
straining the Scriptures on the procrustean bed of their
hair-splitting scholasticism. Many of the supposed in
consistencies have been found to arise frora different
stages of divine revelation, in the earlier of which God
condescended to the weakness and the ignorance of raen,
and gave to them the knowledge that they could appro
priate, and held up to them ideals that they could under
stand as to their essence if not in all their details. The
earlier are shadows and types, crude and imperfect rep
resentations of better things to follow.* Many of the
supposed inconsistencies result from the popular and
unscientific language of the Bible, thus approaching the

* Hebrews viii. s ; a. i ; xi, 40 ; Col, ii. 17.

LITEEAEY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 245
people of God in different ages in concrete forras and
avoiding the abstract. The inconsistencies have resulted
from the scholastic abstractions of those who would use
the Bible as a text-book, but they do not exist in the
concrete of the Bible itself. Many of the supposed in
consistencies arise from a different method of logic and
rhetoric in the Oriental writers and the attempt of mod
em scholars to measure them by Occidental methods.
Many of the inconsistencies result from the neglect to
appreciate the poetic and imaginative element in the
Bible and a lack of esthetic sense on the part of its in
terpreters. The higher criticisra has already reraoved a
large number of difficulties and will remove many more
when it has become a more common study among
scholars. " The Bible conveys to us its didactic lesson in a very occasional,
indirect, and indefinite way. Its method is literar)-, not dogmatic.
It teaches, as it were, without intending to teach ; relates a historj',
and leaves us to infer the lesson ; indites a psalm expressive of the
sentiments awakened in the writer's mind by contemplation of the
manifestation which God has made of Himself, and leaves us to find
out by poetic sympathy the thought embodied. The Bible contains
all sorts of literature — histories, prophecies, poems lyric and dramat
ic, proverbs, parables, epistles. All are profitable for doctrine, but
none are dogmatic ; all are excellent for religious edification, but dis
appointing from the point of view of scholastic theology. Not even
the epistles of Paul can properly be characterised as dogmatic in the
scholastic sense. The four great epistles are full of doctrine of the
most important character, but it is conveyed in an occasional, ab
rupt, vehement way, by a man engaged in a great controversy as to
the meaning of Christianity, — whose bosom is agitated by strong
emotion, and whose language is a faithful reflection of his feelings —
eloquent, but inexact ; crowded with deep, grand thoughts, but with
thoughts that struggle for utterance, and are sometimes only half
uttered in broken sentences, in which grammar is shipwrecked on
the rock of heroic passion. The writing is noble. Divine, inspired
in every sense of the term, most profitable for doctrine ; but how dif-

246 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ferent Irom the style of dogmatic theology, with its careful defini-
tions, and minute distinctions, and cold, passionless, scientific dic
tion ! " '''
The literary study of the Bible is appropriately called
higher criticism to distinguish it from lower criticism
which devotes itself to the study of original texts and
versions. There are few who have the patience, the per
sistence, the life-long industry in the examination of the
minute details that raake up the field of the lower or
textual criticism. But the higher criticism is more at
tractive. It has to do with literary forms and styles and
models. It appeals to the imagination and the aesthetic
taste as well as to the logical faculty. It kindles the en
thusiasra of the young. It will more and more enlist
the attention of men of culture and the general pub
lic. It is the most inviting and fruitful field of biblical
study in our day. Many who are engaged in it are ra
tionalistic and unbelieving, and they are using it with
disastrous effect upon the Scriptures and the orthodox
faith. There is also a prejudice in some quarters against
these studies and an apprehension as to the results.
This prejudice is unreasonable. This apprehension is
to be deprecated. It is irapossible to prevent discus
sion. The church is challenged to meet the issue. It
is a call of Providence to conflict and to the triuraph of
evangelical truth. The Divine Word will vindicate it
self in all its parts. These are not the times for negli
gent Elis or timorous and presumptuous Uzzahs. Brave
Samuels and ardent Davids who fear not to employ new
raethods and engage in new enterprises and adapt thera
selves to altered situations, will overcorae the Philistines
with their own weapons. The higher criticism has rent

¦» A, B. Bruce, Tlie Chief End of Revelation, London, 1881, p. 284, seq.

LITEEAEY STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 247
the crust, with which rabbinical tradition and Christian
scholasticism have encased the Old Testament, overlay
ing the poetic and prophetic elements with the legal and
the ritual. Younger biblical scholars have caught glimpses
of the beauty and glory of biblical literature. The Old
Testament is studied as never before in the Christian
church. It is beginning to exert its charming influence
upon rainisters and people. Christian theology and
Christian life will ere long be enriched by it. God's
blessing is in it to those who have the Christian wisdom
to recognize and the grace to receive and employ it.

CHAPTER IX.
HEBREW POETRY.
The Hebrews were frora the most ancient times a re
markably literary and poetic people. Poetry pervaded
and influenced their entire life, and history. The Bible
has preserved to us a large amount of this poetry, but it
is almost exclusively religious poetry. And notwith
standing that the most ancient poetry of Assyria, Baby
lon, and Egypt is likewise religious, we yet have abun
dant evidence from the poetic lines and strophes quoted
in the historical books, as well as stateraents with regard
to other poetry not included in the collections known to
us, — abundant evidence that a large proportion of the
poetic literature of the Hebrews, relating to the every
day life of the people, and to those national, social, and
historical phases of experience that were not strictly re
ligious, has been lost to us. For reference is made to
the book of the wars of Jahveh (Num. xxi. 14), and the
book of Yashar (Josh. x. 13 ; 2 Sam. i. 18), anthologies of
poetry earlier than any of the poetic collections in the
Hebrew Scriptures ; and also to a great number of songs
and poems of Solomon with reference to flowers, plants,
trees, and animals (i Kings iv. 32, 33). The mention of
Ethan, Heraan, Chalcol and Darda, the sons of Mahol,
in connection with the wisdora and poems of Soloraon,
(348)

HEBEEW POETEY. 249
opens a wide field of conjecture with regard to the great
amount of their poetry which has been lost (i Kings
iv. 31). And if we consider that such a raasterpiece as
the book of Job is the product of a sacred poet whose
name, or at least connection with the poem, has been
lost, how many more such great poems and lesser ones
may have disappeared from the memory of the Hebrew
people during their exile and prolonged afflictions. For
we cannot believe that such sublime odes as Exod. xv.
and Judges v. could exist alone. These masterpieces of
lyric poetry raust have been the flower and fruit of a
long and varied poetical development.
Prof. Reuss admirably states the breadth of Hebrew
poetry :
" All that moved the souls of the multitude was expressed in song ;
it was indispensable to the sports of peace, it was a necessity for the
rest from the battle, it cheered the feast, and the marriage (Is. v. 12 ;
Amos. vi. 5 ; Judges xiv.), it lamented in the hopeless dirge for the
dead (2 Sam. iii. 33), it united the masses, it blessed the individual,
and was everywhere the lever of culture. Young men and maidens
vied with one another in learning beautiful songs, and cheered with
them the festival gatherings of the villages, and the still higher assem
blies at the sanctuary ofthe tribes. The maidens at Shilo went yearly
with songs and dances into the vineyards (Judges xxi. 19), and those
of Gilead repeated the sad story of Jeptha's daughter (Judges xi. 40),
the boys learned David's lament over Jonathan (2 Sam. i. 18) ; shep
herds and hunters at their evening rests by the springs of the wilder
ness sang songs to the accompaniment of the flute (Judges v. 11).
The discovery of a fountain was the occasion of joy and song (Num.
xxi. if). The smith boasted defiantly of the products of his labour
(Gen. iv. 23). Riddles and witty sayings enlivened the social meal
(Judges xiv. 12 ; i Kings x.). Even into the lowest spheres the spirit
of poetry wandered and ministered to the most ignoble pursuits '
(Is. xxiii. 15 segf).*

* Art. Heb. Poesie, Herzog Encyklopadie, ii. Aufl., V., p. 672, seq.
II*

250 BIBLICAL STUDY.
I. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF HEBREW POETRY.
In the Hebrew poetry preserved to us in the sacred
Scriptures we observe the following characteristics :
I. It is religious poetry. Indeed it was most suitable
that Hebrew poetry should have this as its fundamental
characteristic ; for the Hebrews had been selected by
God from all the nations to be His own choice possession.
His first-born among the nations of the earth (Exod. iv.
22 ; xix. 5) ; and therefore it was their distinctive inher
itance that they should be a religious people above all
things else. And it is of the very nature of religion that
it should express itself in song ; for religion lays hold of
the deepest emotions of the human soul, and causes the
heart-strings to vibrate with the raost varied and power
ful feelings of which man is capable, which can only find
expression through the voice and pen in those forras of
huraan language which alone by their varied raoveraent
can express these varied emotions. From this point of
view Hebrew poetry has unfolded a rich and manifold
literature that not only surpasses in this regard the no
blest products of the most cultivated Indo-Gerraanic
races, the Greek, the Roraan, and the Hindu ; but also
lies at the root of the religious poetry of the Jewish
synagogue and the church of Christ, as their fruitful
source, their perennial well-spring of life and growth.
No poetry has such power over the souls of men as He
brew poetry. David's psalms, Soloraon's sentences, Isa
iah's predictions, the trials of Job, are as fresh and
potent in their influence as when first uttered by their
raasterly authors. They are world-wide in their sway ;
they are everlasting in their sweep. The songs of Moses
and the Larab are sung by heavenly choirs.
2. It is simple and natural. Ewald states that " He-

HEBEEW POETEY. 251
brew poetr>- Jias a simplicity and transparency that can
scarcely be found anywhere else — a natural sublimity
that knows but little of fixed forras of art, and even
when art coraes into play it ever reraains unconscious
and careless of it. Compared with the poetry of other
ancient peoples, it appears as of a raore simple and child
like age of raankind, overflowing with an internal fulness
and grace that troubles itself but little with external or
nament and nice artistic law."* Hence it is that the
distinction between poetry and rhetorical prose is so
slight in Hebrew literature. The Hebrew orator, espec
ially if a prophet, inspired with the potent influences of
the prophetic spirit, and stirred to the depths of his soul
with the divine impulse, speaks naturally in an elevated
poetic style, and accordingly the greater part of prophecy
is poetic. And so when the priest or king stands before
the people to bless thera, or lead thera in their devo
tions, their benedictions and prayers assume the poetic
movement. Thus there is the closest correspondence
between the eraotion and its expression, as the eraotion
gives natural movement and harmonious undulations to
the expression by its own pulsations and vibrations.
These pulsations are expressed by the beat of the accent,
which, falling as a rule on the ultimate in Hebrew words,
strikes with peculiar power ; and the vibrations are ex
pressed in accordance with the great variety of movement
of which they are capable in the parallelism of merabers.
As Robertson Sraith correctly says : " Araong the He
brews all thought stands in imraediate contact with liv
ing irapressions and feelings, and so if incapable of rising
to the abstract is prevented from sinking to the unreal. "f
This faithful mirroring of the concrete in the poetic ex-

* Die Dichter, I., p. 15. t British Quarterly, January, 1877, p. 36.

252 BIBLICAL STUDY.
pression is the secret of its power over the masses of
mankind who are sensible of its imraediate influence
upon them, although they may be incapable of giving a
logical analysis of it.
3. // is essentially subjective. The poet sings or writes
from the vibrating chords of his own soul's emotions,
presenting the varied phases of his own experience, in
sorrow and joy, in faith and hope, in love and adoration,
in conflict, agony, and despair, in ecstasy and transport,
in vindication of hiraself and imprecation upon his ene
mies. Even when the external world is attentively re
garded, it is not for itself alone, but on account of its
relation to the poet's own soul as he is brought into
contact and sympathy with it. This characteristic of
Hebrew poetiy is so marked in the Psalter, Proverbs,
and book of Job, as to give their entire theology an an
thropological character. Man's inmost soul, and all the
vast variety of huraan experience, are presented in He
brew poetry as the coraraon experience of huraanity of
all ages and of all lands.
4. It is sententious. The Hebrew poet expresses his
ethical and religious emotions in brief, terse, pregnant
sentences loosely related with one another, and often
without any essential connection, except through the
common unity of the central theme. They are uttered
as intuitions, that which is immediately seen and felt,
rather than as products of logical reflection, or careful
elaborations of a constructive iraagination. The parts
of the poera, greater and lesser, are distinct parts, the
distinction often being so sharp and abrupt that it is dif
ficult to distinguish and separate the various sections of
the poem, owing to the very fact of the great variety of
possibility of division, in which it is a question simply of
more or less. The author's soul vibrates with the beat-

HEBEEW POETEY. 253
ings of the central therae, so that the raoveraent of the
poem is sometimes from the sarae base to a more ad
vanced thought, then from a corresponding base, or from
a contrasted one ; and at tiraes, indeed, step by step in
marching or climbing measures. As Aglen says, " He
brew eloquence is a lively succession of vigorous and in
cisive sentences, producing in literature the same feffect
which the style called arabesque produces in architect-
iire. Hebrew wisdom finds its complete utterance in
the short, pithy proverb. Hebrew poetry wants no fur
ther art than a rhythmical adaptation of the sarae sen
tentious style."* Hence the complexity and confusion
of Hebrew poetry to minds which would find strict
logical relations between the various members of the
poem, and constrain thera after occidental methods.
Hence the extravagance of Hebrew figures of speech,
which transgress all classic rules of style, heaping up and
mixing metaphors, presenting the theme in such a variety
of images, and with such exceeding richness of coloring,
that the western critic is perplexed, confused, and bewil
dered in striving to harmonize them into a consistent
whole. Hebrew poetry appeals through numberless con
crete images to the eraotional and religious nature, and
can only be apprehended by entering into sympathetic
relations with its own poetic spirit, and by following the
guidance of its members to their central theme, to which
they are all in subjection as to a prince, while in com
parative independence of one another.
5. It is realistic. Professor Shairp says: "Whenever
the soul comes into living contact with fact and truth,
whenever it realizes these with more than common viv
idness, there arises a thrill of joy, a glow of emotion.

• Bible Educator, Vol. II., p. 340,

254 BIBLICAL STUDY.
And the expression of that thrill, that glow, is poetry
The nobler the objects, the nobler will be the poetn,- they
awaken when they fall on the heart of a true poet." *
Now the Hebrew poets entered into deep and intimate
fellowship with external nature, the world of animal. \eg;-
etable, and material forces : and by regarding them as in
imraediate connection with God and man, dealt only
with the noblest themes. For to the Hebrew poet all
nature was animate with the influence of the Divine
Spirit, who was the agent in tlie creation, brooding over
the chaos, who conducts the whole universe in its devel
opraent toward the exaltation of the creature to closer
communion with God, so that it may attain its glorj' in
the divine gion,-. Hence all nature is aglow with the
gion.- of God, declaring Him in His being and attributes,
praising Him for His wisdom and goodness. His minis
ters to do His pleasure, rejoicing at His advent and tak
ing part in His theophanies. And so it is the represen
tation of Hebrew poetrj- that all nature shares in the
destiii}- of man. In its origin it led by insensible grada
tions to man, its crow-ii and head, the masterpiece of the
divine workman. In his fall it shared with him in the
curse ; and to his redemption it ever looks forward, with
longing hope and throes of expectation, as the redemp
tion of the entire creation. And so. there is no poetrv
so sympathetic with nature, so realistic, so sensuous and
glow-ing in its representations of nature, as Hebrew poe
try-. This feature of tlie sacrei writings, which has ex-
posed thein to the attacks of unbelieving men of science,
presenting a wide amd varied field of criticism, is really
one of their most striking features of excellence : com
mending itself to the believing student of nature in that,

* Poetic Interpretation of Nature, p. 15.

HEBREW POETRY. 255
while it does not teach truths and facts of science in sci
entific forms, yet it alone, of ancient poetry, has laid
hold of the eternal principles, the most essential facts
and forras of objects of nature, with a sense of truth and
beauty that none but sacred poets, enlightened by the
Spirit of God, have been enabled to do. Hence it is
that not even the sensuous roraantic poetry of raodern
times, enriched with the vast stores of research of mod
ern science, can equal the poetry of the Bible in its
faithfulness to nature, its vividness and graphic power,
its true and intense admiration of the beauties of nature
and reverence of its sublimities.
II. THE FORMS OF HEBREW POETRY.
The leading characteristics of Hebrew poetry deter
mine its forms of expression ; its internal spirit sways
and controls the form with absolute, yea, even capricious,
power. The Hebrew poets seem acquainted with those
various forms of artistic expression used by the poets of
other nations to adorn their poetry, measure its move-
- ments, and mark its lines and strophes ; yet they do not
employ them as rules or principles of their art, constrain
ing their thought and emotion into conformity with
them, but rather use thera freely for particular purposes
and raomentary effects. Indeed Hebrew poetry attained
its richest development at a period when these various
external beauties of forra had not been elaborated into
a system, as was the case at a subsequent time- in other
nations of the same family of languages.
I . The form of the verses. There are various ways era
ployed in the poetry of the sister languages of measur
ing and adorning the verses. Thus rhyme is of exceed
ing importance in Arabic poetry, having its fixed rules*

* Wright, Arabic Grammar, 2d edit., II., pp. 377-81.

256 BIBLICAL STUDY.
carefully elaborated. But no such rules can be found in
Hebrew poetry. Rhyrae does exist, and is used at tiraes
with great effect to give force to the variations in the
play of the emotion by bringing the variations to har
monious conclusions ; but this seldom extends beyond
a couplet or triplet of verses. So also the Hebrew poet
delights in the play of words, using their varied and
contrasted raeanings, changing the sense by a slight
change of a letter, or contrasting the sense all the more
forcibly in the use of words of similar form and vocali
zation, and sometiraes of two or three such in the paral
lel verses. Alliteration and assonance are also freely
eraployed. All this is in order that the forra raay cor
respond as closely as possible to the thought and erao
tion in their variations, as synonyraous, antithetical, and
progressive ; and that the coloring of the expression may
heighten its effect. The principle of rhyme, however,
remains entirely free. It is not developed into a system
and rules of art.
So also the measureraent of the verses, or the princi
ple of metres, is thoroughly developed in Arabic poetry,
where they are ordinarily reckoned as sixteen in nuraber.*
Repeated efforts have been made to find a systera of me
tres in Hebrew poetry. Thus Josephus f represents
Exod. XV. and Deut. xxxii. as written in hexameters,
and that the Psalras were written in several raetres, such
as trimeters and pentameters. Eusebius % says that
Deut. xxxii. and Ps. xviii. are in heroic metre of sixteen
syllables, and that trimeters and other metres were em
ployed by the Hebrews. Jerome § compares Hebrew
poetry with that of the Greek poetry of Pindar, Alcaeus,

* Wright, Arabic Grammar, 2d edit., IL, p. 3S7.
+ Antiquities, ii. 16 ; iv. 8 ; vii. 12.
X De Prcep. Evang., xi. 5. § Preface to the book of Job.

HEBREW POETRY. 257
and Sappho, and represents the book of Job as composed
rtiainly of hexameters with the raoveraent of dactyls and
spondees; and* finds in the Psalter iambic trimeters,
and tetrameters. But these writers seem to have been
misled by their desire to assimilate Hebrew poetry to
the great productions of the classic nations with which
they were familiar. No such system of metres can be
-found in connection with the accepted systera of Hebrew
accentuation "and vocalization. The Jews, who became
for many centuries the sole custodians of the Hebrew
text, did not accept any such system, but arranged the
system of poetic accentuation simply for cantillation in
the synagogues.
More recent attempts have been made to explain and
raeasure Hebrew verses after the raethods of the Arabic
and Syriac. Thus William Jones f endeavored to apply
the rules of Arabic raetres to Hebrew poetry ; E. J.
Greve, also, in 1791 and 18 10; but this involves the rev
olutionary proceeding of doing away with the Massoretic
system entirely, and in its results is far from satisfactory.
The Arabic poetry raay be profitably corapared as to
spirit, characteristics, figures of speech, and emotional
language, as Wenrich has so well done,:]: but not as re
gards metres, for these, as the best Arabic scholars state,
are of a comparatively late period when compared with
Helj)»ew poetry, and were possibly preceded by an earlier
and freer poetic style.
Saalchiitz § endeavored to construct a system of He
brew metres, retaining the Massoretic vocalization, but

* In his Epist. ad Paulam.
\ Com. Poet. Asiat. curav., Eichhorn, 1777, p. 61, seq.
X De Poeseos Heb. atque Arabic, orig. indole mutuoque consensu atque dis-
crimine, Lipsiae, 1843.
I Von der Form der Hebraischen Poesie, 1825.

258 BIBLICAL STUDY.
contending that the accents do not determine the ac
cented syllable, and so pronouncing the words in accord
ance with the Aramaic, and the custom of Polish and
Gerraan Jews, on the penult instead of the ultimate.
More recently, Bickell* strives to explain Hebrew poetry
after the analogy of Syriac poetry. His theory is that
Hebrew poetry is essentially the same as Syriac, not
measuring syllables, but counting them in regular order.
There is a constant alternation of accented and unac
cented syllables, a continued rise and fall, so that only
iambic and trochaic feet are possible. The Massoretic
accentuation and vocalization are rejected and the Ara
raaic put in its place. The gramraatical and rhythmical,
accents coincide. The accent is, like the Syriac, general
ly on the penult. The parallelism of verses and thought
is strictly carried out.
Dr. Bickell, whose familiarity with Syriac literature
and Hebrew scholarship are well known, has, as must be
adraitted, carried out his theory with a degree of mod
eration and thoroughness which raust coraraand adraira-
tion and respect. Not distinguishing between long and
short syllables, and discarding the terrainology of classic
metres, he gives us specimens of raetres of 5, 7, 12, 6, 8,
10 syllables, and a few of varying syllables. He has ap
plied his theory to the whole of Hebrew poetry,f and
arranged the entire Psalter, Proverbs, Job, Laraentafions,
Song of Songs, raost of the poeras of the historical
books, and much of the prophetic poetry in accordance
with these principles. He has also reproduced the effect
in a translation into Gerraan, with the same number of

¦* Metrices Biblicce, 1879 ; Carmina Veteris Testamenti Metrice, 1882.
t Zeitschrift d. D. M. G., 1880, p, 557 ; Carmina Veteris Testamenti Me
trice, 1882.

HEBREW POETRY.

259

syllables and strophical arrangement.* The theory is
attractive and deserves fuller consideration than can be
given to it here ; yet it must be rejected on the ground
that it does away with the difference between the He
brew and the Aramaic families of the Shemitic lan
guages ; and would virtually reduce the Hebrew to a
mere dialect of the Aramaic. It overthrows the tradi
tional accentuation upon which Hebrew vocalization and
the explanation of Hebrew gramraatical forms largely
depend. Hebrew poetry, as Ewald has shown, may, on the Mas
soretic system of accentuation and vocalization, be re
garded as generally composed of verses of seven or eight
syllables, with soraetiraes a few raore or a few less, for
reasons that can be assigned.f This is especially true
of the ancient hyrans,:]: and those Psalras having certain
melodies indicated in their titles ; yet even here we
must regard Hebrew poetry as at an earlier stage of
poetic development than the Syriac. The poet is
not bound to a certain number of syllables. While in
the main making the length of the verses correspond
with the parallelism of the thought and emotion, he
does not constrain himself to uniformity as a principle
or law of his art ; but increases or diminishes the length
of his verses in perfect freedora in accordance with the
rhythmical movements of the thought and emotion them
selves. The external form is entirely subordinated to the
internal emotion, which moves on with the utraost free
dom, and assuraes a poetic forra raerely as a thin veil
which does not so rauch clothe and adorn as shade and
color the native beauties of the idea. This raoveraent

* Dichtungen der Hebraer. I, Geschichtliche und Prophetische Lieder.II.Hiob.
III. Der Psalter.
t Dichter, I., p. io8, seq. X Exod. xv,, Deut. xxxii., and Judges v.

260 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of emotion gives rise to a general harmony of expres
sion in the parallelism of structure in lines and strophes
— a parallelisra which affords a great variety and
beauty of forras. Sometiraes the raoveraent is like the
wavelets of a river flowing steadily and sraoothly on,
then like the ebbing and flowing of the tide in raajestic
antitheses, and again like the madly-tossed ocean in a
storm, all uniformity and syraraetry disappearing under
the passionate heaving of the deepest eraotions of the
soul. The first to clearly state and unfold the essential prin
ciple of Hebrew verse was Bishop Lowth,* although
older writers, such as Rabbi Asarias, and especially
Schoettgen,'!' called attention to various forms of paral
lelism. Lowth distinguishes three kinds.
(i) Synonymous.
" O Jehovah, in Thy strength the king shall rejoice ;
And in Thy salvation how greatly shall he exult !
The desire of his heart Thou hast granted unto him.
And the request of his lips Thou hast not denied." Ps. xxi. I, 2.
(2) Antithetical... " A wise son rejoiceth his father ;
But a foolish son is the grief of his mother."
Prov. x. i.
(3) Synthetic. " Praise ye Jehovah, ye of the earth ;
Ye sea monsters, and all deeps :
Fire and hail, snow and vapor.
Stormy wind, executing His command."
 Ps. cxlviii. 7, 8.

* De Sacra Poesi Hebr. xix., 1753 ; also Preliminary Dissertation to hia
work on Isaiah, 1778.
+ Horce Heb., Diss, vi., De Exergasia Sacra.

HEBREW POETRY. 261
Bishop Lowth's views have been generally accepted,
although open to various objections ; for the majority
of the verses are synthetic, and these in such a great va
riety that it seems still more important in many cases
to classify and distinguish them than to make the dis
criminations proposed by Bishop Lowth. There is a
general mingling of the three kinds of parallelism in
Hebrew poetry, so that seldom do the synonymous
and antithetical extend beyond a couplet, triplet, or
quartette of verses. The poet is as free in his use of
the various kinds of parallelism as in the use of rhyme
or raetre, and is only bound by the principle of parallel
ism itself. Bishop Jebb * added a fourth kind, which he
called the introverted parallelism, where the first line
corresponds with the fourth, and the second with the
third, thus : " My son, if thine heart be wise,
My heart also shall rejoice ;
Yea, my reins shall rejoice,
¦When thy lips speak right things." Prov. xxiii. 15, 16.
But this is a difference in the structure of the strophe
and of the arrangement of the parallelism, rather than
of the parallelism itself, as Wright properly states.f
Other schemes have been proposed, but none have
been exhaustive and satisfactory, and none have found
acceptance generally among scholars. It is sufficient
for us at present to recognize in Hebrew poetry the es
sential principle of parallelism itself. This parallelism
of members was until recently thought to be a peculiar
ity of Hebrew poetry, as a determining principle of po-

* Sacred Literature, § iv., 1820.
t Art. Hebrew Poetry in Smith's Diet, ofthe Bible.

262 BIBLICAL STUDY.
etic art, although it is used araong other nations for cer
tain raomentary effects in their poetry ; but recent dis
coveries have proved that the ancient Assyrian, Baby
lonian, and Akkadian hymns have the sarae dorainant
feature in their poetry, so that the conjecture of Schra
der,* that the Hebrews brought it with them in their
emigration frora the vicinity of Babylon, is highly prob
able. Indeed, it is but natural that we should go back
of the raore raodern Syriac and Arabic poetry to the
more ancient .Assyrian and Babylonian poetry for illus
trations of the poetry of the Hebrews, which was histor
ically brought into connection with the latter and not
with the former. Taking these ancient Shemitic poe
tries together, we observe that they have unfolded the
principle of parallelism into a most elaborate and or
nate artistic systera, which among other nations has
been known and used, but remained comparatively un
developed, whilst other nations have developed the prin
ciples of rhyrae and raetre which have been known and
used, but reraain undeveloped by the Hebrews, Assyr
ians, and Babylonians.
2. In addition to the principle of parallelisra, others have
sought a principle of measureraent of the verses of Hebrew
poetry by the accent. Thus Lautwein,-|- Ernst Meier,:]: and
raore recently Julius Ley.§ The latter has elaborated
quite a thorough system, with a large number of examples.
Pie does not interfere with the Massoretic systera, except
in the use of the maqqeph and metheg, and his theory of
a circumflex accentuation in raonosyllables at the end of

* Jahrb.f Prot. Theo., i., 122.
t Versuch einer richtigen Theorie von d. biblischen Verskunst, 1773.
X Die Form der Hebr. Poesie, 1853.
§ Grundziige d. Rhythmus des Vers-und Strophenbaues in d. Hebr. Poesie
1875.

HEBREW POETRY. 263
a verse ; but his arrangement of Hebrew poetry into
hexameters, octameters, decameters, etc., depends largely
upon his views of substitution and compensation, which
are to account for the irregularities of the verses ; and
upon the variety of the breaks or caesuras, as, for in
stance, in the octameter, which raay be coraposed of 4
-i- 4 tones, or 2 -f 6, 3 -h 5, or 5 -I- 3. His theory also re
sults in producing longer verses than seera suited to the
principle of the parallelisra, and the spirit of Hebrew po
etry. At the sarae time it seems to us evident that the
accent has great power in Hebrew verse. The thought
is measured by the throbbings of the soul in its emotion,
and this is naturally expressed by the beat of the accent.
The accent has no unimportant part to play in English
verse, but in Hebrew, as the poetic accent always cor
responds with the logical accent, and that is as a rule
on the ultimate, it falls with peculiar power. Even in
prose the accent controls the vocalization of the entire
word, and in pause has double strength. How much
more is this the case in poetry, where the emotion ex
pressed by homogeneous sounds causes it to beat with
exceeding power and wonderful delicacy of rnoveraent.
This can hardly be reproduced or felt to any great ex
tent by those who approach the Hebrew as a dead lan
guage. We can only approxiraate to it by frequent
practice in the utterance of its verses. The accent may
be used as a principle of measurement to a very large
extent in Hebrew poetry, but it is not an absolute law,
for whilst many poems and strophes are uniform in this
respect, the poet breaks away from it and increases or
diminishes the nuraber of accents, as well as words, to
correspond with the raoveraents of his thought and
eraotion. Upon these two principles of the parallelism of mem-

264 BIBLICAL STUDY.
bers and the play of the accent the form of Hebrew
verse depends. The ancient verse divisions have been
obscured and lost, even if they were ever distinctly
marked. We can recover them only by entering into
the spirit of the poetry, and allowing ourselves to be
carried on in the flow of emotion, marking its beats and
varied parallelism. These features of Hebrew poetry
make it a " universal poetry," for the parallelism can be
reproduced in the main in most languages into which
Hebrew poetry may be translated, and even the same
number of accents may be to a great extent preserved ;
only that the coloring of the words, and the varied
rhythm of their utterance, and the strong beating of the
accent, can only be experienced by a Hebrew scholar
in the careful and practiced reading of the Hebrew text.
III. THE PARALLELISM OF MEMBERS.
Having considered the characteristics of Hebrew
poetry and the forms of its verses in general, we have
now to exaraine raore particularly the various kinds of
parallelisra. The siraplest form of the parallelism of Hebrew
poetry is the distich, where two lines or verses balance
one another in thought and expression, as in the earliest
specimen of poetry in the Bible (Gen. iv. 23, seq.), called
the sword song of Lemekh :
" 'Adah and Zillah, hear my voice ;
¦Wives of Lemekh, oh, give ear to my song ;
Surely a man do I slay for wounding me.
And a boy for hurting me.
If sevenfold Cain be avenged,
Then Lemekh seventy and seven."
We have here six lines in three couplets. In the first

HEBREW POETEY.

265

couplet the parallelism is completely synonymous ;
"wives of Lemekh" being synonymous with "'Adah
and Zillah ;" and " give ear to my song " with " hear my
voice"; that is to say, the same essential idea is ex
pressed in the two lines in language which varies only
as synonymous terms and expressions vary. In the
second couplet the terms are also synonymous, except
in one particular, where there is an eraphatic progress
in the descent from " man " to " boy." In the third
couplet, whilst the thought is synonyraous, there is yet
an eraphasis in the changing of two terras, frora " Cain "
to " Leraekh," and from " sevenfold " to " seventy and
seven." A beautiful exaraple, resembling the last couplet, is
given in the chorus of the damsels in praise of the vic
tories of David (i Sam. xviii. 7) :
" Saul smote his thousands,
And David his myriads."
Antithetical distichs are most numerous and varied in
the book of Proverbs, thus (Prov. x. 1-5) :
"I.A wise son maketh glad his father ;
But a foolish son is the grief of his mother.
"2. Treasures of wickedness profit not;
But righteousness delivereth from death.
" 3. Jehovah will not let the desire of the righteous famish ;
But the craving of the wicked He disappointeth.
"4. He becometh poor that worketh with an idle hand ;
But the hand of the diligent maketh rich.
" 5. He that gathereth in fruit harvest is a, wise son ;
But he that lies in deep sleep in grain harvest is a base son."
In the second of these couplets the antithesis is through
out : " Righteousness " to " treasures of wickedness,"
and " delivereth from death " to " profit not." Usually,
12

266 BIBLICAL STUDY.
however, there are one or more synonymous terms to
make the antithesis more emphatic. In the fourth
couplet " hand " is a common term, and the contrast
is of "idle" and "diligent," "becometh poor" and
" maketh rich." In the third couplet "Jehovah" is a
coraraon term with " He," and " desire " synonymous
with " craving," in order to the antithesis of " righteous "
with " wicked," and " will not let famish " with " disap
pointeth." In the first couplet " son " is a comraon
terra ; " father " and " mother " are synonymous, in or
der to the antithesis of " wise " and " foolish," " maketh
glad " and " grief." In the fifth couplet " son " is a com
mon term, " fruit harvest " is synonymous with " grain
harvest," whereas " wise " has as its antithesis " base,"
and " gathereth " " lies in deep sleep."
Sometiraes the antithesis is limited to a single term,
as in Prov. xvi. 9 :
" Man's heart deviseth his way ;
But Jehovah directeth his steps. "
Here the contrast is between " man's heart " and " Jeho
vah," the remaining terras are synonymous.
The antithesis sometimes becomes more striking in
the antithetical position of the terms themselves, as in
Prov. xiii. 24 :
" He that spareth his rod, hateth his son ;
But he that loveth him seeketh him chastisement."
The common terms are "father" and "son," the anti
thetical, " spareth his rod " with " seeketh hira chastise
ment," and "hateth" with " loveth "; but that which
closes the first line begins the second, and that which
begins the first closes the second.
Parallelism is ordinarily progressive in that great

HEBEEW POETEY. 267
variety of forms which such a rich and powerful language
as the Hebrew renders possible.
The blessing of Abram by Melcbizedek (Gen. xiv. 19,
20) is composed of two progressive distichs :
" Blessed be Abram of God Most High,
Founder of heaven and earth ;
And blessed be God Most High,
¦Who hath delivered thy adversaries into thy. hand."
In the first of these couplets the second line advances
from the idea of " God Most High " into that of " Found
er of heaven and earth." In the second couplet, the
second line advances from " God Most High " into " who
hath delivered thy adversaries into thy hand."
The blessing of Rebekah by her brothers (Gen. xxiv.
60) is a progressive distich :
" O thou our sister, become thousands of myriads,
And may thy seed inherit the gate of those that hate them."
The second line sums up the "thousands of myriads"
of the first, in order to give the climax of the wish, in
the inheritance of the gate of their eneraies.
The words of Moses when the ark of the covenant set
forward and when it rested are couplets (Num. x. 35) :
" Arise, Jehovah, and let Thine enemies be scattered ;
And let tliose who hate Thee flee from before Thee.
Return, Jehovah,
To the myriads of thousands of Israel."
The first of these couplets is synonymous throughout ;
the second is an example of an unfinished line, the pause
in the poetical movement is to give more emphasis to the
second line wh^.n its advanced idea is expressed.
The tristicit is developed from the distich with the

268 BIBLICAL STUDY.
same variety of parallelisms. The song of Sarah (Gen.
xxi. 6, 7) gives us both a distich and tristich :
" Laughter hath God made for me.
Whosoever heareth will laugh with me.
Who could have said to Abraham,
Sarah doth suckle children.
For I have borne a son for his old age."
The distich is synonyraous in general, although there is
an advance in thought by bringing in " whosoever hear
eth " to take part in the laughter of joy. The tristich
is progressive in that the second line gives the object of
the saying of the first, and the third the reason of it ;
while at the same time, the terra " borne a son " is synon
ymous with " suckle children " of the second line, and
the term "for his old age " is synonymous with "Abra
ham " of the first line.
The blessing of Noah (Gen. ix. 25-27) is comprised of
two distichs and a tristich.
" Cursed be Canaan.
A servant of servants shall he be to his brethren.
Blessed be Jehovah, God of Shem,
And let Canaan be their servant.
May God spread out Japhet,
And may He dwell in the tents of Shem,
And let Canaan be their servant.''
In the first distich we have anoth er example of an un
finished line, the second progressive to it. In the sec
ond distich we have a simple progression in the thought.
In the final tristich the progression runs on through the
three lines. It is also worthy of note that the last line
is in the three examples of the nature of a refrain.
There are two interesting specimens of the tristich in

HEBREW POETEY. 269
the blessing of the sons of Joseph by Jacob (Gen. xlviii.
IS-20):
" The God before whom my fathers walked, Abraham and Isaac ;
The God who acted as my shepherd from the first even to this day ;
The Malakh who redeemed me from every evil — bless the lads.
And let my name be named in them ;
And the name of my' fathers, Abraham and Isaac,
And let them increase to a great multitude in the midst of the land."
The first tristich is in its three lines synonymous so far
as the first half of the lines, but in the second half there
is a steady march to the climax. The second tristich is
synonymous in its first and second lines, where the lead
ing idea of the narae is varied frora Jacob hiraself to
Abraham and Isaac ; but the third line is an advance in
thought. The priest's blessing (Num. vi. 23) is also an exaraple
of a synonymous tristich :
"Jehovah bless thee and keep thee ;
Jehovah let His face shine upon thee and be gracious to thee ;
Jehovah lift up His face upon thee and give thee peace.''
The tetrastich is formed from the distich, and consists
generally of pairs balanced over against one another,
but soraetiraes of three lines against one ; rarely there
is a steady march of thought to the end.
The oracle respecting Jacob and Esau (Gen. xxv. 23)
's an example of balanced pairs :
" Two nations are in thy womb.
And two peoples will separate themselves frora thy bowels ;
And people will prevail over people,
And the elder will serve the younger.''
The pairs are synonyraous within theraselves, but pro
gressive with reference to one another.

270 BIBLICAL STUDY.
The blessing of Ephraim by Jacob (Gen. xlviii. 19) is
an example of antithetical pairs :
" He also will become a people.
And he also will grow great ;
But yet his younger brother will become greater than he.
And his seed will become abundance of nations."
The song of the well (Nura. xxi. 17-18) is an interest
ing and beautiful example of a more involved kind of
parallelism, where the second and third lines constitute a
synonymous pair ; while at the same tirae, as a pair they
are progressive to the first line, and are followed by a
fourth line progressive to themselves :
^ " Spring up well ! Sing to it !
'Well that princes have dug ;
The nobles of the people have bored,
With sceptre, with their staves."
The dirge of David over Abner (2 Sam. iii. 33-37)
presents a sirailar specimen, where, however, the first
and fourth lines are synonymous with one another, as
well as the second and third lines :
" Was Abner to die as a fool dieth !
Thy hands were not bound.
And thy feet were not put in fetters ;
As one falling before the children of wickedness, thou did'st fall."
A fine example of a tetrastich, progressive throughout,
is found in the extract from an ancient ode (i Chron.
xii, 8), describing the Gadites who joined David's band :
" Heroes of valor, men, a host.
For battle, wielders of shield and spear ;
And their faces were faces of a lion,
And like roes upon the mountains for swiftness.''
The pentastich is usually a combination of the distich

HEBEEW POETEY.

271

and tristich. A beautiful specimen. is given in Josh. x.
12, 13, probably a strophe of an ode of victory over the
Canaanites at Bethhoron, which has been lost :
" Sun stand still in Gibeon,
And moon in the valley of Ajalon ;
And the sun stood still.
And the moon stood.
Until the people avenged themselves on their enemies.''
The first and second lines are essentially synonymous,
and so the third and fourth ; but the second pair is pro
gressive to the first, and the fifth line is progressive to
the second pair.
The oracle with which Amasai joined David's band
(i Chron. xii. 18) is an exaraple of the sameJcind, save
that the fifth line is progressive to the previous four
lines : " Thine are we, David,
And with thee, son of Jesse.
Peace, peace to thee,
And peace to thy helpers ;
For thy God doth help thee."
The hexastich is a combination of two tristichs, or a
tetrastich and distich, and is often used in poenrs. The
blessing of Jacob by Isaac (Gen. xxvii. 27 seq^ gives us
an example of a tetrastich and hexastich :
" See the smell of my son !
It is like the smell of a field which Jehovah hath blessed.
And may God give thee of the dew of heaven.
And the fulness of earth, and abundance of corn and new wine."
" May peoples bless thee,
And nations do thee homage ;
Be thou lord of thy brethren,
And may the sons of thy mother do thee homage.
Blessed be those who bless thee,
And cursed be those who curse thee."

272 BIBLICAL STUDY.
The tetrastich has its first line unfinished ; its second
progressive thereto ; the third and fourth lines are also
progressive. The hexastich is composed of three coup
lets, the first and second having their lines synonymous,
the third couplet antithetical, but the pairs are progres
sive with reference to one another.
Isaac's blessing of Esau (Gen. xxvii. 39, 40) is also a
hexastich :
" Lo far from the fatness of the earth will thy dwelling-place be.
And far from the dew of heaven above,
And by thy sword wilt thou live ;
And thy brother wilt thou serve.
And it will come to pass when thou wilt rove about,
Thou wilt break off his yoke from upon thy neck."
Longer groupings of lines are found in poems of vari
ous kinds : the description of the horse in Job xxxix.
19-25 has fourteen lines, the conclusion of the blessing
of Moses (Deut. xxxiii.) has seventeen lines.
IV. THE STROPHE.
The strophe is to the poera what the lines or verses
are in relation to one another in the system of parallel
ism. They are coraposed of a greater or lesser nuraber of
lines, sometiraes equal, and sometiraes unequal. Where
there is a uniforra flow of the eraotion the strophes will
be coraposed of the same number of lines, and will be as
regular in relation to one another as the lines of which
they are corapo.sed ; but where the eraotion is agitated
by passion, or broken by figures of speech, or abrupt in
transitions, they will be irregular and uneven. The
strophes are subject to the same principles of parallelisra
as the lines theraselves, and are thus either synonymous
to one another, antithetical, or progressive, in those sev-

HEBREW POETRY. 273
eral varieties of parallelism already mentioned. A fa
vorite arrangement is the balancing of one strophe with
another on the principle of the distich, then again of
two with one as a tristich. Thus the song (Deut. xxxii.)
has three parts of four strophes in each part, arranged
in double pairs of strophe and antistrophe, according to
the scheme of 3x2x2. The song of Deborah (Judges
V.) is coraposed of three parts, with three strophes in
each part according to the scherae of 3 x 3. These divis
ions are deterrained by the principles of parallelism, not
being indicated by any signs or raarks in the Hebrew
text. One of the earliest exaraples of strophes is in the
ode (Nura. xxi. 27-30), composed of three strophes grad
ually diminishing in accordance with its dirge-like char
acter, a favorite conceit of Hebrew poets; thus of 6.5.4
lines. The ode is abrupt in style, rapid in transitions,
full of rare forras and expressions, with frequent allitera
tions, and of real beauty :
." Come to Hesbon !
Built, yea established be the city of Sihon ;
For fire went forth from Hesbon,
Flame from the city of Sihon.
It consumed Ar of Moab,
The lords of the high places of Arnon.
" 'Woe to thee, Moab !
Thou art lost, people of Chemosh !
He hath given over his sons unto flight,
And his daughters unto captivity,
Unto the king of the Amorites, Sihon !
" Then we shot at them. — He was lost. —
Hesbon unto Dibon. —
And we wasted them even to Nophah,
¦With fire unto Medebah."
12*

274 BIBLICAL STUDY.
The oracle of Balaam (Num. xxiv. 3-9) is composed
of five strophes, according to the scheme ; 5.6.4.5.4 lines •
" Oracle of Balaam, son of Beor ;
Oracle of the man whose eye was shut ;
Oracle of one hearing the words of God,
¦Who was gazing at the vision of the Almighty,
Fallen down and with eyes uncovered.
" How excellent thy tents, Jacob I
Thy dwellings, Israel !
Like streams spread out.
Like gardens by a river,
Like aloes which Jehovah planted,
Like cedars by the water.
" ¦Water flows from his buckets.
And his seed are on many waters.
That his king may be higher than Agag,
And his kingdom exalt itself.
" God bringeth him forth from Egypt,
Like the swiftness of the yore-ox hath he ;
He devoureth nations, his adversaries,
And their bones he cruncheth,
And their arrows crusheth.
"He doth bow down, doth couch as a lion.
And as a lioness ; who would stir him up ?
Blessed be those who bless thee.
But cursed be those who curse thee.''
The last song of David (2 Sam. xxiii. 1-7) is coraposed
of five strophes of five lines each (the first strophe being
restored to its original forra by elimination of title and
editorial comments) :
" Oracle of the man raised up on high.
The spirit of Jehovah speaks in me ;
And His word is upon my tongue.
The God of Israel doth say to me,
The Rock of Israel doth speak.

HEBEEW POETEY. 275
" A ruler over men — righteous ;
A ruler in the fear of God.
Yea, he is like the morning light when the sun rises,
A morning without clouds.
From shining, from rain, tender grass sprouts from the earth.
" Is not thus my house with God ?
For an everlasting covenant hath He made with me.
Arranged in all things, and secured.
Yea, all my salvation and every delight
¦Will He not cause it to sprout ?
" But the worthless, like thorns all of them are thrust away.
For they cannot be taken with the hand.
The man touching them
Must be armed with iron, and the spear's staff.
And with fire they will be utterly consumed."
Further illustrations of the strophe will be given in
connection with the external marks of division now to
be considered. The simplest and most natural of these
is the Refrain. A good example of the Refrain is given
in Pss. xlii. and xliii., which are really one :
" As a" hart which crieth out after the water brooks.
So my soul crieth out for Thee, O God !
My soul doth thirst for God, for the God of life :
How long ere I shall come to appear before the face of God ?
My tears have been to me food day and night ;
¦While they say unto me all day, ' Where is thy God ? '
These things would I remember, and would pour out my soul with
in me :
How I used to pass along in the throng, used to lead them up to
the house of God.
¦With the sound of rejoicing and praise, a multitude keeping fes
tival,
¦Why art thou bowed down, my soul ? and why art thou moan
ing within me ?
¦Wait on God : for yet shall I praise Him,
The deliverance of my face, and my God.

276 BIBLICAL STUDY.
" 'Wherefore would I remember Thee from the land of Jordan, and
the Hermons, from the mount Mizar.
Deep unto deep is calling to the sound of Thy cataracts ;
All Thy breakers and Thy billows do pass over me :
By day Jehovah will appoint His mercy.
And by night His song will be with me, prayer to the God of my
life,
I must say to the God of my rock, ¦Why dost Thou forget me ?
¦Why go I mourning because of the oppression of an enemy }
As a breaking in my bones my adversaries do reproach me ;
¦While they say unto me all day, ' Where is thy God .'* '
Why art thou bowed down, my soul ? and why art thou moan
ing within me ?
¦Wait on God : for yet shall I praise Him,
The deliverance of my face, and ray God.
" Judge me, O God, and plead my cause against an unmerciful na
tion ;
Against a man of deceit and wickedness, deUver me,
O Thou God, my fortress, why dost Thou cast me off?
¦Why must I go about mourning because of the oppression of an
enemy ?
Send Thy light and Thy truth : let them lead me ;
Let thera bring me unto Thy holy mount, even to Thy dwellings.
That I may come to the altar of God,
To the God of the joy of my rejoicing,
That I may praise Thee with harp, O God, my God.
Why art thou bowed down, my soul ? and why art thou moan
ing within me ?
Wait on God : for yet shall I praise Him,
The deliverance of my face, and my God."
The strophes have each nine lines, the refrain three
lines. We are well aware that other arrangements of the
lines are usual, and that objection may be taken to our
elimination of ver. 7 a ; but it seems clearly established
that a copyist's raistake has caused the refrain of the
first strophe to be deprived of its closing word, which
begins this verse ; and the other three words are easiest

HEBREW POETRY. 277
to explain as copyist's raistakes, also repeated frora the
refrain. Psalm viii. is a beautiful exaraple of a hymn with a
refrain, having the peculiarity that the refrain begins the
first strophe and closes the second :
" Jehovah, our Lord,
How excellent is Thy name in all the earth !
' Thou whose glory doth extend over the heavens,
Out of the mouth of little children and sucklings
Thou dost establish strength because of Thine adversaries.
To silence enemy and avenger.
¦When I see Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers,
Moon and stars which Thou hast prepared ;
What is frail man, that Thou shouldst be mindful of him ?
Or the son of man, that Thou visitest him ?
When Thou didst make him a little lower than the angels,
With glory and honor crowning hira.
Thou mad'st hira to have dominion over the works of Thy hands ;
All things Thou didst put under his feet :
Sheep and oxen, all of them ;
And also beasts of the field ;
Birds of heaven, and fishes of the sea ;
Those that pass through the paths of the seas.
Jehovah, our Lord,
How excellent is Thy name in all the earth ! "
But the refrain does not always divide the poem into
equal strophes. Thus the dirge (2 Sam. i. 19-27) is
composed of three parts, which melt away according to
the scheme of i8, 5, i. The refrain itself does not al
ways correspond throughout. Thus in Ps. Ixxx. it in
creases itself for emphasis in the heaping up of the
divine naraes in the successive strophes ; and where the
two middle strophes constitute a double strophe, giving
the allegory of the vine with a double refrain at the
close, massing together a series of imperatives. Ps. xlv.

278 BIBLICAL STUDY.
gives us a varying refrain and three gradually-increasing
parts. The refrain is also used for the division of larger
pieces of poetry, as in the Song of Songs, where it di
vides the poera into five acts ; and in the prophet Isaiah,
xl.-lxvi., which it divides into three great divisions.*
Another means of marking the strophes is the alpha
bet, whereby the line or strophe begins with successive
letters of the Hebrew alphabet. This seems to have
been designed as an aid to the raeraory, and to mark the
advance step by step. They constitute, as it were, lad
ders up which the poet climbs in his prayers, exhortations,
and praises, and down which he climbs in his lamenta
tions. Soraetiraes the alphabet in its order marks the
initial letters of the lines, as in Pss. xii. and cxi. ; some
times of couplets, as in Pss. xxv., xxxiv., cxlv. ; and again
in strophes of four lines, as in Pss. ix., x., and xxxvii. ; and
in the long Ps. cxix. in greater strophes, in which every
couplet begins with the same letter, eight times repeated
in each strophe. The alphabetic structure reaches its
culmination in the book of Lamentations, which is com
posed of five songs, four being alphabetical. In the first
and second the strophes are of three couplets, in the
third song also of three couplets ; but each of these be
gins with the letter proper to the strophe, so that it is
repeated three times in each strophe. The fourth song
is composed of alphabetical strophes of two couplets.
The Selah in the Psalter is thought by sorae, notably
a recent scholar, Julius Ley, to always raark the divis
ions of the strophe when it occurs ; but in our judgraent
it is rather a rausical sign, and has no relation to the
poetic structure whatever.
* The author has recently discovered that Gen. i. is a poem of the Creation in
six strophes with a refrain. The lines are ordinarily five-toned. Strophes i. and
ii. have seven lines each ; iii.-v. ten lines each ; vi. is a double strophe of twenty
lines with a double refrain. See the Old Testament Student, Chicago, April,
1884.

HEBREW POETRY.

279

V. THE MEASUREMENT BY WORDS OR ACCENTS.
The accent seems to measure the Hebrew verses, so
that in the raain the lines will have the same number of
beats ; but the delight of Hebrew poetry in its freedom
prevents the carrying of the principle out into the forms
of metrical laws. The three-toned lines, which may, in
a restricted sense, be naraed triraeters, are favorites in
early poetry ; then come four-toned lines and five-toned.
Six-toned lines occur, but they are not so frequent.
There can be no doubt that the Maqqeph, as placed at
present, has reference to cantillation in the synagogue,
and not the original metrical raoveraent. Yet there is
no reason to doubt that in the raain it corresponds with
the old metrical arrangement. It must, however, be
rejected in some cases, and in others inserted, where
it is not found in the present text. The power of
the language to reduce the number of accented words,
by joining two or more together, must have been of
great service to the Hebrew poet. As a specimen, we
give from the first oracle of Balaam (Num. xxiii. 7, seq^
the first strophe in Hebrew transliterated :
Min — 'ara'm | yanhe'ni | B^li'q.
Me'lekh | Moa'b | mShar^rg — qSdem.
L'khah | 'irih — ^li | ya'«q6bh
Ul'khih I z6'°mah j yishra'el
M4h — 'eqqob | 16' — qabb6h | '81
Um^h — 'ez'om | 16' — zi'ara | Jahveh.
To show this as far as possible to the English reader
we translate :
" From Aram | Balaq | brings me.
The king | of Moab | from the mountains of the East.
O come I curse for me | Jacob
And oh come | execrate | Israel.

280 BIBLICAL STUDY.
How can I denounce | what God | doth not denounce ?
And how can I execrate | what Jehovah | doth not execrate ?
" For from the top | of rocks | I see him.
And from hills | I spy him.
Lo a people | alone | will he dwell.
And among nations | he will not | be reckoned.
Who hath counted | the dust | of Jacob ?
And as to number | the fourth | of Israel ?
Let me rayself die | the death | of the upright,
And let my last end | be | like his."
The closing distich is of the nature of a refrain. There
is but one exception to three-toned lines ; the second
line of the second strophe having but two tones.
The second prophecy of Balaara is the sarae in struct
ure (Nura. xxiii. 18-24) : two strophes of six lines each,
three-toned, with a refrain in four three-toned lines.
The several prophecies of Jacob (Gen. xlix.) are three-
toned, also the songs of Moses (Deut. xxxii. and xxxiii.).
The ode (Exod. xv.) is four-toned. The refrain we give
in Hebrew : Shirii I 1' Jahveh | khi — gha'oh | gha'ah
Siis I w' rokh=bh6 | rimah | bayyam.
We translate the first strophe :
" My strength | and song is Jah | and He has become | my salvation.
The same is my God | that I may glorify Him | my Father's God |
that I may exalt Him.
Jehovah is | a warrior, | Jehovah is |.His name.
Chariots of Pharaoh | and his host | He hath thrown | into the sea.
And the choicest | of his charioteers | are drowned | in the sea of
reeds.
The depths | cover them over, | they descend | into the deep places
I like a stone."
The last line is lengthened to five tones for the cliraax.
Psalm iv. is an evening prayer of David, composed of

HEBREW POETRY. 281
five strophes in the scheme of 3.4.3.4.3, and generally
four-toned lines :
" When I call | answer me | God | of my righteousness.
In trouble | Thou didst enlarge | for me.
Be gracious to me | and hear | my prayer.
" Ye sons of man | how long | shall my glory | become shame ?
Will ye love | vanity | will ye seek | a lie ?
But know I that Jehovah | hath wonderfully selected | a pious man
for Himself.
Jehovah | heareth | when I call | unto Him.
" Be ye angry | but do not | sin.
Speak I in your heart | upon your bed | and be still,
Sacrifice | sacrifices of righteousness | and trust | unto Jehovah.
" Many | are saying | who can show us | good ?
Let wave upon them | the light | of thy face | Jehovah.
Thou hast given | joy | in ray heart,
More than at the time when | their corn | and their new wine |
increased.
" In peace | together | I will lie down | to sleep,
For Thou | Jehovah | alone.
In confidence | causeth me to dwell."
The first psalm is an example of two strophes, the one
of eight four-toned lines, the other of six three-toned
lines :
" O the blessedness | of the man | 
Who does not | walk | in the counsel | of the wicked,
And in the way | of sinners | doth not | stand.
And in the seat | of scorners | doth not | sit ;
But on the contrary | in the doctrine | of Jehovah | is his delight.
And in His doctrine | he meditateth | day | and night :
And so he is | like a tree | planted | by brooks of water.
Which yieldeth | its fruit | in its season.
And its leaf | withereth not | and all which he doeth | he causeth
to prosper.

282 BIBLICAL STUDY.
" Not so I the wicked I 

But on the contrary, like the chaff | which the wind | driveth away,
Wherefore the wicked | shall not stand | in the judgment.
Nor sinners | in the congregation j of the righteous,
For Jehovah knoweth | the way | of the righteous ;
But the way | of the wicked | goeth to ruin."
The nineteenth psalm is an interesting example of
varied measurement. It is composed of two parts : the
first of two strophes of six and eight four-toned lines,
the last of eight and six five-toned lines. It is only nec
essary to call attention to these five-toned lines as really
composed of 3 + 2, with a caesura-like pause. Thus, the
first strophe of the second part :
" The doctrine | of Jehovah | is perfect, || restoring | the soul ;
The testimony | of Jehovah | is reliable, || making wise | the simple;
The statutes | of Jehovah | are upright, || rejoicing | the heart ;
The comraand | of Jehovah ] is pure, || enlightening | the eyes ;
The fear | of Jehovah | is clear, || standing | for ever ;
The judgments | of Jehovah | are truth, | they are righteous | alto
gether :
Those desirable | more than gold || or than fine | gold ;
Sweeter | than honey || and the drippings | of the comb."
The twenty-third psalm shows a beautiful progress
in the gradual lengthening of the lines in the three
strophes :
" Jehovah is | my shepherd | I cannot want.
In pastures | of green grass | He causeth me to lie down ;
Unto waters | of refreshment | He leadeth me ;
Myself I He restoreth | 
' He guideth me | in paths | of righteousness | for His name's sake ;
Also I when I walk | in the valley | of dense darkness,
I fear not | evil, | for Thou art | with me,
Thy rod [ and Thy staff | they | comfort rae.

HEBREW POETRY. 283
'' He prepareth | before me | a table | in the presence | of my adver
saries ;
Has he anointed | with oil | my head, | my cup | is abundance ;
Surely goodness | and raercy | pursue me | all the days | of my life.
And I shall return | to dwell in the house | of Jehovah | for
length I of days."
Isaiah xxvi. i -6 gives an example of six-toned lines :
" A city of strength | have we, || salvation | is put | for walls | ahd
rampart.
Open I the gates || that a righteous nation | keeping | faithfulness
I may enter.
One in purpose firra | Thou keepest | in peace ; | in peace, || for in
Thee | he trusteth.
Trust in Jehovah | for ever, 1 yea, in Jah | Jehovah | a rock ever
lasting.
'Tis He doth bringdown | dwellers | on high || a city ] inaccessible ;
He bringeth it low, | he bringeth it low | unto earth, || razeth it |
to the dust ;
The foot I trampleth it, || feet | of the afflicted, | steps | of the
weak."
Examples might be multiplied indefinitely, but we
have given enough to illustrate the principle.
VI. POETIC LANGUAGE.
As in all other languages, so in the Hebrew the poetic
style is elevated, artistic, and cultivated, and hence above
the every-day talk of the houses and streets. For this
purpose it selects not the language of the schools, which
becomes technical, pedantic, and artificial, but the older
language, which, with its simplicity and strong vital
energy, is in accord with the poetic spirit.
Thus in the forras of the language there is {a) an
occasional use of the fuller sounding forras, as athah for
ah, of the fem. noun ; {b) the older endings of preposi
tions in b^lt for bal, minni for min, 'ali for 'el, 'ali for 'al.

284 BIBLICAL Sl'UDY.
'ddhi for 'ad; {c) the older case endings of nouns as
chay'tho for chayyath, and b^ni for ben; {d) the older
suffix forms in md and imd for dm ; {e) the fuller forms
of the inseparable prepositions l^md for 1% b^md for b^ ;
(/) the nun paragogic or archaic ending of 3 pf. of
verbs, lin for ii.
The style is more primitive, using raany archaic ex
pressions that have been lost to the classic language.
There are in the older books so-called Araraaisms. There
are, however, carefully to be distinguished, an earlier
and a later Araraaism. The raonuments of Assyria and
Babylon show us that the earlier Hebrew language was
historically in contact with the languages of Syria and
the Euphrates. The Assyrian and Babylonian shed great
light on these poetic archaisms. A later connection of
Hebrew with Aramaic is indicated in the later historical
writings of the Bible, which is of an altogether different
type. The poetic language is also remarkably rich in
synonyms, exceedingly flexible and rausical in structure,
and thus the older forras are retained in these synonyms
for variety of representation, when they have long
passed from use in the prose literature.
VII. THE KINDS OF HEBREW POETRY.
Hebrew poetry may be divided into three general
classes. Lyric, Gnomic, and Composite. (i) Lyric
poetry is the earliest development of literature. We
find it scattered through the various historical and pro
phetical books, and also in the great collection of Hebrew
lyric poetry, the Psalter. The three pieces ascribed to
Moses, Ex. XV., Psalm xc, and Deut. xxxii., subdivide
lyric poetry into the hyran, the prayer, and the song.
The hyran is found in rich variety — the evening hymn,
the morning hyran, the hymn in a storm, hyrans of vie-

HEBREW POETRY. 285
tory or odes, as that of the victory over the Egyptians,
Ex. XV. ; over the Moabites, Nura. xxi. ; the ode of the
battle of Beth Horon, Josh. x. ; the song of Deborah,
Judges V. ; the thanksgiving as in the song of Hannah,
and many pieces of Isaiah ; the grand oratorio, Ps.
xcii.-c, and the raost of the fourth and fifth books of
the Psalter, containing the greater and lesser hallels, the
hallelujah psalms and doxologies. The prayers are
in rich variety — evening and morning prayers, a litany
before a battle, prayers for special and national deliver
ance ; psalms of lamentation, penitence, religious raedi
tation, of faith, and assurance — in all the rich variety of
devotion. These are raost numerous in the psalms
ascribed to David, and may be regarded as especially
the Davidic type, although the xc. psalm ascribed to
Moses and Hab. iii. are among the most wonderful
speciraens, as the one traverses the past and corapares
the frailness of man with the everlasting God, and the
other marches into the future and bows with trembling
in the presence of the most sublime Theophany. A
special form of this class is the dirge, as the laments of
David over Jonathan and Abner, and in the exceed
ingly elaborate and artistic book of Lamentations, and
not infrequently in the prophets. The songs are abun
dant, and in every variety : the sword song of Laraech,
the birth song of Sarah, the blessings of the patriarchs
Noah, Abrahara, Isaac, the priest Aaron, and the swan
song of David. In the Psalter we have songs of exhor
tation, warning, encourageraent, historical recollections,
prophetic anticipations, and the love song. The psalms
of Asaph are chiefly of this class.
(2) Gnomic poetry has but few specimens in the his
torical books. We have a riddle of the ancient hero
Samson :

286 BIBLICAL STUDY.
" From the eater | came forth | food.
And from the strong | came forth | sweetness ";
followed by a satire :
" If you I had not ploughed | with .my heifer,
You would not | have found out | my riddle."
Judges xiv. 14-18.
Another witty saying of this hero is preserved :
" With the jaw-bone | of an ass || a heap | two heaps ;
With the jaw-bone | of an ass || have I smitten | a thousand men.
Judges xv. 16.
The Hebrews were fond of this species of poetry, but
we could hardly expect to find much of it in the Bible.*
Its religious and ethical forras are preserved in a rich
collection in the Proverbs, consisting of fables, parables,
proverbs, riddles, raoral and political raaxiras, satires,
philosophical and speculative sentences. There are up
wards of five hundred distinct couplets, synonyraous,
antithetical, parabolical, comparative, erableraatical, be
sides fifty larger pieces of three, four, five, six, seven, and
eight lines, with a few poems, such as the temperance
poem (xxiii. 29-35), the pastoral (xxvii. 22-27), the
pieces ascribed to the poets Aluqah, Agur, and Lemuel,
the alphabetical praise of the talented wife (xxxi. 10-31),
and the great admonition of Wisdom in fifteen advanc
ing discourses (i.-ix.).
A few specimens of this kind of poetry will suffice to
illustrate it.
There are several riddles ascribed to Aluqah in Prov.
XXX.: (i) The riddle of the insatiable things, xxx. 15-
16: " Two daughters | (cry) : give ! | give !
Three | are they | which cannot be satisfied ;
Four I say not | enough."
-* See Wunsche, Die Rathselweislieit bei d. Hebraern, Leipzig, r883.

HEBREW POETRY. 287
The answer :
' Sheol, I and a barren | womb ;
Land | cannot be satisfied | with water ;
And fire | says not | enough."
(2) The riddle of the little wise people, xxx. 24-28 :
" Four I are I little ones of earth ;
But they | are wise | exceedingly."
The answer :
" The ants | are a people | not strong,
But they prepare | in summer | their food ;
Conies | are a people | not mighty,
But they make | in the rock | their home ;
A king I the locusts | have not.
But they raarch forth | in bands | — all of them ;
The spider | with the hands | thou mayest catch,
But she I dwells in the palaces | of kings."
A beautiful temperance piece is found in xxiii. 29-35,
composed of ten lines of five tones each :
" Who hath woe ? | who hath wretchedness ? || who hath | stripes ?
I who hath murmuring }
Who hath wounds | without cause ? | who hath ( dark flashing |
eyes ?
Those tarrying long | at the wine || : those going | to seek | spiced
wine.
Look I not I on wine || when it | sparkleth red ;
When it giveth | in the cup | its glance || ; floweth ( smoothly :
Its end is | that as a serpent | it biteth, || and like an adder | it
stingeth.
Thine eyes | will see | strange things, || and thine heart utter |
perverse things ;
So that thou wilt become | like one lying down | in the heart of
the sea || ; and like one lying down | on the top of a mast.
They have smitten me | (thou wilt say), but I am not | hurt || :
they have wounded rae, | I feel it not :
How long I ere I shall arise | that I may seek it | yet | again ? "

288 BIBLICAL STUDY.
.Another choice piece is the representation of the slug
gard, xxiv. 30-34, eleven lines of three tones each :
" By the field | of a slothful man | I passed,
And by the vineyard | of a man | without understanding
And lo, its wall | was grown up | with thorns.
Its face I covered over | with nettles.
And its wall | of stones | was broken down ;
So that I gazed | to give it | attention ;
I saw I — I received | instruction.
A little sleep, | a little | of slumber
A little folding | of the hands | to lie down ;
And thy poverty | comes | walking on.
And thy want | as a man | armed with a shield."
(3) Composite poetry starts in part from a lyric base
as in prophecy, beginning with the blessings of Jacob
and Moses, and the poems of Balaam, and in lesser and
greater pieces in the prophetical writings, the Song of
Songs, and Lamentations ; in part from a gnomic base
as in the book of Job, and Ecclesiastes.
We shall present a few speciraens.
The first Act of the Song of Songs will give an illus
tration of the use of the dramatic element :
Scene I.
Solo. Let him kiss me with some kisses of his mouth.
For thy caresses are better than wine ;
For scent thine ointments are excellent ;
O thou sweet ointment, poured forth as to thy name !
Therefore the virgins love thee.
Solo. Oh ! Draw rae !
Chorus. After thee we will run !
Solo. O that the king had brought me to his apartment !
Chorus. We will rejoice and we will be glad with thee,
We will celebrate thy caresses more than wine.
Rightly they love thee. Scene II.
Shulamite. Dark am I —
Chnmv — but lovelv —

HEBREW POETRY. 289
Shulamite. — daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar.
Chorus. — as the curtains of Solomon.
Sh. Gaze not upon me because I am swarthy.
Because the sun scanned me :
My mother's sons were angry with me.
They set me as keeper of the vineyards ;
My vineyard, which is my own, have I not kept.
O tell me, thou whom ray soul loveth :
Where feedest thou thy flock ?
Where dost thou let thera couch at noon ?
Why should I be, as one straying
After the flocks of thy companions .'
Ch. If thou knowest not of thyself, thou fairest among women.
Go forth for thyself at the heels of the flock.
And feed thy kids at the tabernacles of the shepherds.
Scene III.
Solomon. To my mare in the choice chariot of Pharaoh I liken thee
my friend.
Lovely are thy cheeks in rows (of coin), thy neck in thy neck- .
lace !
Rows of gold we will raake thee, with chains of silver.
Sh. While the king was in his divan ray nard gave its scent.
A bundle of rayrrh, is ray beloved to me, that lodgeth between
my breasts ;
A cluster of henna, is my beloved to me, in the vineyards of
En Geddi.
Sol. Lo thou art lovely, my friend,
Lo thine eyes are doves.
Sh. Lo thou art lovely, my beloved.
Yea sweet, yea our arbour is green.
Sol. The timbers of our houses are cedar,
Our wainscoting cypress.
Sh. I am the flower of Sharon,
The anemone of the valleys.
Sol. As the aneraone araong the thorns.
So is my friend among the daughters.
Sh. As the apricot among the trees of the wood.
So is my beloved among the sons.
In its shadow I delighted to sit,
13

290 BIBLICAL STUDY.
And its fruit was sweet to my taste.
O that he had brought me to the vineyard,
His banner over me being love —
Sustain me with raisin-cakes, support me with apricots;
For I am love sick 
His left hand would be under my head,
His right hand would embrace me.
I adjure you, daughters of Jerusalem, by the gazelles.
Or by the hinds of the field that ye arouse not,
And that ye stir not up love till it please.
The finest piece of ethics in the Old Testament is
found in Job xxxi. :
" (l) A covenant have I concluded with my eyes ;
How then should I consider a maiden ?
Else what portion of Eloah frora above.
Or inheritance of Shadday from on high ?
Is there not destruction for the evil doer ;
And calamity for the worker of iniquity ?
Is He not seeing my ways ;
And all my steps counting ?
" (2) If I have walked with falsehood,
And my foot has made haste unto deceit ;
Let Him weigh me in righteous balances.
That Eloah may know my integrity !
If my step used to incline frora the way,
And after my eyes my heart did walk.
And to my palms a spot did cleave.
Let me sow and let another eat.
And as for my crops, let them be rooted out.
" (3) If my heart hath been seduced unto a woman,
And at the door of ray neighbour I have lurked.
Let my wife grind the mill for another.
And over her let others bend ;
For that were infamy ;
And that were an iniquity for the judges ;
For it is a fire that devoureth unto Abaddon,
And in all my increase it rooteth up.

HEBREW POETEY. 291
" (4) If I used to refuse the right of my slave.
Or ray maid servant, when they plead with me ;
What could I do when God should rise up.
And when He would investigate, what could I respond to
Him?
Did not, in the worab, my maker make him.
And one being form us in the belly.'
' (5) If I used to keep back the weak from his desire.
And caused the eye of the widow to fail.
And ate my portion alone.
And the orphan did not eat of it : 
Nay — ^frora my youth did he grow up unto me as a father ;
And from the womb of my mother I was accustomed to guide
her.
' (6) If I could see a man ready to perish without clothing
And the poor having no covering 
Surely his loins blessed me.
And frora the fleece of my sheep he warmed himself.
If I lifted up ray hand over the orphan.
When I saw my help in the gate 
My shoulder — let it fall from its blade.
And my arra — ^let it be broken from its bone !
For there was fear unto me of calamity from God,
And because of His majesty I could not.
(7) If I have made gold my confidence,
And unto fine gold said, thou art my trust ;
If I used to rejoice that my wealth was great.
And thart ray hand had found vast resources ;
If I used to see the light that it was shining brightly.
And the moon moving in splendour.
So that my heart was enticed in secret,
And my hand kissed my mouth : —
This also were an iniquity for judges,
For I had denied El on high.
" (8) It I was accustomed to rejoice in the calamity of the one hat
ing me.
Or was excited with joy when evil overtook hira ; 

292 BLBLICAL STUDY.
Nay ! I did not give my palate to sinning.
In asking with a curse his life.
Verily the raen of my tent say :
Who can shew us one not filled with his meat ?
Without the stranger used not to lodge.
My doors to the caravan I used to open.
" (9) If against me my land crieth.
And together its furrows weep ;
If its strength I have eaten without silver,
And the life of its lord I have caused to expire ;
Instead of wheat let thorns come forth.
And evil weeds instead of barley.
" (10) If I have covered as man my transgression,
Hiding in my bosom my iniquity ;
Because I feared the great multitude.
And the contempt of the clans made me afraid ;
And so was silent, would not go out to the gate : —
O that I had one to hear me —
Behold my mark ! — Let Shadday answer me !
O that I had the bill (of accusation) my adversary has written !
Surely I would lift it up on my shoulder,
I would bind it as a crown of glory upon me.
The number of ray steps would I declare to him,
As a prince I would approach him."
We shall finally present a specimen of Prophetic Poe
try, and indeed the raost sublime piece in the Old Tes
tament, as well as one of the most artistic (Is. lii. 13-
liii.), consisting of five gradually increasing strophes :
" (i) Behold my servant shall prosper.
He shall be lifted up and be exalted and be very high.
According as many were astonished at thee —
So disfigured more than a man was his appearance.
And his form than the sons of men ; —
So shall he startle many nations ;
Because of him kings will stop their mouths ;
For what had not been told them they shall see,
And what they had not heard they shall attentively consider.

HEBEEW POETEY. 293
" (2) Who believed our message,
And the arm of Jehovah, unto whom was it revealed ?
When he grew up as a suckling plant before us,
And as a root out of a dry ground ;
He had no form and no majesty that we should see him.
And no appearance that we should take pleasure in him ;
Despised and forsaken of men !
A man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief!
And as one before whora there is a hiding of the face !
Despised, and we regarded him not !
" (3) Verily our griefs he bore
And our sorrows — he carried them.
But we regarded him as stricken.
Smitten of God, and humbled.
But he was one pierced because of our transgressions.
Crushed because of our iniquities ;
The chastisement for our peace was upon him ;
And by his stripes there is healing for us.
We all like sheep strayed away ;
Each one tumed to his own way.
While Jehovah caused to light on him the iniquity of us all.
' (4) He was harassed while he was humbling himself.
And he opens not his mouth ;
Like a sheep that is being led to the slaughter
And as an ewe that before her shearers is dumb ; —
And he opens not his mouth.
From oppression and from judgement he was taken away.
And among his cotemporaries who was considering.
That he was cut off from the land of the living.
Because of the transgression of my people, one smitten for
them ?
With the wicked his grave was assigned.
But he was with the rich in his martyr death ;
Because that he had done no violence.
And there was no deceit in his mouth.
" (5) But Jehovah was pleased to crush him with grief !
Whgn he himself offers a trespass offering,.

294 BIBLICAL STUDY.
He shall see a seed, he shall prolong days ;
And the pleasure of Jehovah will prosper in his hands ;
On account of his own travail he shall see ;
He shall be satisfied with his knowledge ;
My righteous servant shall justify many.
And their iniquities he shall carry.
Therefore will I give him a portion consisting of the many ;
And with the strong shall he divide spoil.
Because that he exposed himself to death,
And he was numbered with transgressors,
And he did bear the sin of many ;
And for transgressors was suffering infliction."
In such pieces as these we find the cliraax of He
brew poetic art, where the draraatic and heroic ele
ments combine to produce in a larger whole ethical
and religious results with wonderful power. While
these do not present us epic or dramatic or pastoral
poeras in the classic sense, they yet use the epic, dra
raatic, and pastoral eleraents in perfect freedom, com
bining thera in a simple and comprehensive manner
for the highest and grandest purposes of the prophet
and sage inspired of God, giving us productions of po
etic art that are unique in the world's literature. The
dramatic, epic, and pastoral elements are means used
freely and fully, but not ends. These forms of beauty
and grace are simply forras which do not retard the im
agination in admiration of themselves, but direct it to
the grandest themes and images of piety and devotion.
The wise raen of Israel present us in the ideals of the
Shularaite, Job, and Koheleth, types of noble character,
raoral heroisra, and purity, that transcend the heroic
types of the Iliad or ^neid, wrestling as they do with
foes to their souls far raore terrible than the spears and
javelins and warring gods of Greek or Trojan, advanc
ing step by step, through scene after scene and act after

HEBREW POETEY. 295
act to holy victory in the fear of God ; victories that
will serve for the support and comfort of the human
race in all time, which has ever to meet the same incon
sistencies of evil, the same assaults on virtue, the sarae
struggle with doubt and error, therein so vividly and
faithfully portrayed to us. The prophets of Israel play
upon the great heart of the Hebrew people as upon a
thousand-stringed lyre, striking the tones with divinely-
guided touch, so that frora the dirge of rapidly succeed
ing disaster and ruin, they rise through penitence and
petition to faith, assurance, exultation, and hallelujah,
laying hold of the deep thoughts and everlasting faith
fulness of God, binding the past and present as by a
chain of light to the impending Messianic future ; seeing
and rejoicing in the glory of God, which, though now
for a season shrouded behind the clouds of disaster, is
soon to burst forth in a unique day.*

* Zech. xiv. 6 seg.

CHAPTER X.
THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.
The word of God came to raan at first orally, in con
nection with theophanies. These theophanies are divine
manifestations in forms of time and space. From them,
as centres, went forth the supernatural influences in word
of revelation and deed of miracle. These theophanies
attained their culmination in Jesus Christ, the incarnate
God, the risen, ascended, and glorified Saviour ; and
the divine word reached its completion in His Gos
pel. The word of God, issuing frora these theophanic
centres, was appropriated raore and more by holy men,
upon whom the divine Spirit carae, taking possession
of thera, influencing and directing them in the exercise
of prophetic ministry. An important part of this min
istry was the oral delivery of the divine word to the
people of God in ascending stages of revelation. This
word was gradually committed to writing, and assumed
the literary forms that are presented to us in the canon
of Scripture.
" It pleased the Lord, at sundry times and in divers manners, to
reveal Himself, and to declare that His will unto His Church, and
afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and
for the more sure establishment and corafort of the Church against
the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world ;
to commit the same wholly unto writing ; which maketh the Holy
(3961

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTUEE. 297
Scripture to be most necessary; these former ways of God's reveal
ing His will unto His people being now ceased." (Westminster
Confession, I. i).
The word of God, as written, is to be appropriated
by man through reading it, meditating upon it, and
putting it in practice.
Reading is an appropriation through the eye and ear
and sense perception, of letters, words, and sentences as
signs of thought. Meditation is the use of the faculties
of the mind in the apprehension of the substance of
thought and emotion contained in these signs, the asso
ciation of it with other things, and the application of it
to other conditions and circumstances. This appropria
tion must be in accordance with the laws of the appre
hending human soul, with the principles of the compo
sition of written documents, and also with the nature
of the things contained in and expressed by the sensible
signs. Biblical interpretation is a section of general in
terpretation, and it differs from other special branches
in accordance with the internal character of the contents
of the Bible. Interpretation is usually regarded as a sec
tion of applied logic.'* Schleiermacher defines it as the
art of correctly understanding an author. ¦}¦ Klausen,:j:
as " the scientific establishment and development of the
fundamental principles and rules for the understanding
of a given discourse." We are constrained to think that
this is too narrow a definition. We agree with most in
terpreters in the opinion that it erabraces not only the
art of understanding an author, but also the art of ex-

* See Carpzov, Primae Lineae Herm., Helmstadii, 1790, p. 5 ; Sir Wm. Ham
ilton, Logic, p. 474 ; lOausen, Hermeneutik des Neuen Testaments, Leipzig,
1841, p. 7-
t Hermeneutik und Kritik, Berlin, 1838, p. 3.
X In /. c, p. I.

298 BIBLICAL STUDY.
position or explanation of an author to others.'* We are
also compelled to go still further and include as a part
of interpretation, the practical application of the sub
stance of the writing to other appropriate conditions
and circurastances. The older interpreters, especially
araong the Puritans, regarded this latter as the chief
feature. The interpreter needs according to the older
writers, oratio, meditatio, et tentatio. This tentatio, trial,
experience, is the raost iraportant of all. This was urged
by Jesus : " If any raan willeth to do His will he shall
know of the teaching, whether it be of God, or whether
I speak frora rayself" (John vii. 17). Bernard says:
" He rightly reads Scripture who turns words into
deeds." Francis Roberts says : " The raightiest raan
in practice, will in the end prove the raightiest man in
Scripture. Theory is the guide of practice, practice the
life of theory ; where Scripture contemplation and ex
perience meet together in the same persons, true Script
ure understanding must needs be heightened and
doubled. t
Biblical interpretation is the central department of
biblical study whence all other departments derive their
material. In this field the strifes and struggles of cent
uries have taken place. There is no department of
study where there has been so many differences, and
where there still reraains so rauch confusion. The Bi
ble has huraan features and divine features. To under
stand thera in their harraonious combination is the se
cret of interpretation. This secret is the philosopher's
-* Emesti, Institutio Interp. N. T., 1761, § 10 ; Principles of Interpretation,
ed, Moses Stuart, Andover, 4th edition, 1842, p. 14, seq. ; Moms, Hermeneutica
N. T., ed. Eichstadt, Lips., 1797, I,, p. 3, seq. ; Immer, Hermeneutics, Ando
ver edition, 1877, p. 10.
t Clavis Bibliorum, 4th edit., London, 1675, p. 11 ; see also Rambach, Insti-
tutiones Hermeneuticae, Jena, 1723, Sth edit., 1764, p. 2, seq.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTUEE. 299
stone after which multitudes of interpreters have been
seeking through the Christian centuries. As Lange ap
propriately says : *
" As Chri.st has overcome the world by his cross, as the blood of
the martyrs has become the seed of the Church, so also the miscon
ceptions and abuse of the Bible have been obliged to more and more
redound to its glorification. The battle of Biblical criticism in the
first four centuries brought about the collection and establishment
of a purified canon ; the arbitrariness of copyists occasioned the col
lection of codices and the criticism of the text ; the exegesis of the
allegorical method, called into life the vindication of the historical
sense of Scripture ; the fourfold enchaining of the Bible by exegeti
cal tradition, hierarchical guardianship, ecclesiastical decisions, the
Latin language, raised the Bible in the Protestant world almost
above the dignity of a historical revelation of God ; the humanistic
exposition, as well as the naturalistic explanation of miracles, called
into life along with the New Testament Grammar, also the under
standing of the New Testament idiom, over against its customary
depreciation in comparison with the classic models ; and finally the
pantheistic criticism occasioned the revival and rich unfolding of
evangelical history."
We shall first consider the history of Biblical interpre
tation, then on the basis of its history state its princi
ples and methods. I. RABBINICAL INTERPRETATION.
The Jewish Rabbinical schools from the most ancient
times recognized alongside of the written Word of God,
another oral or traditional word of much greater extent
and authority delivered to the ancient teachers and
handed down from generation to generation in the eso
teric teaching of the faithful scribes, as the official inter
pretation of the written word. This was not only the
view of the Pharisees, who subsequently committed this

• Grundriss der biblischen Hermeneutik, Heidelberg, 1878, p. xxi.

300 BIBLICAL STUDY.
tradition to writing in the Mishnas and Talmuds,'* but
also of the Zelots and Essenes (see p. iBi). It was
claimed that this oral divine word had been faithfully
handed down from Ezra, who received it by divine in
spiration as esoteric wisdom for the initiated disciples.
Others clairaed a still higher antiquity for it, going back
to Joshua and the elders, and even in part to the twelve
patriarchs, Enoch and Adam : hence the large number
of pseudepigraphs in which this wisdom is contained, ^
well as in the Talmuds.
This traditional interpretation was of two kinds, Hala
cha and Haggada. The Halacha was legal, containing
an immense number of casuistic distinctions, making
fences about the law in wider and wider sweep till the
law itself became for the people of God as inaccessible
as the temple of Ezekiel, into which none but the priests
of the line of Zadok raight enter. The Haggada was
illustrative and practical, embracing a wealth of legend
apd allegory that so colored and enlarged Biblical his
tory that it becarae as obscure as the New Testaraent
history upon the palimpsests under the legends of the
raonks that were written over it.
Frora the older Halacha and Haggada methods of in
terpretation, were subsequently separated the Peshat and
the Sodh. The Peshat is the determination of the
literal sense, and is really a branch of the Halacha.
The Sodh is the determination of the mystical or alle
gorical sense and is a species of the Haggada.'^
The rules of Rabbinical interpretation gradually in
creased in extent. Seven rules of the Halacha are as-

* Weber, System d. Altsynagogalen Palestinischen Theologie, 1880, Leip-
Eig, p. 92, seq.
f Wo.!jue in /. c, pp. 134, 164, seq.

THE INTEEPEETATION OF SCEIPTURE. 30I
cribed to Hillel in the Siphra.* These are enlarged in
the Beraitha of R. Israael to thirteen. f
These rules are : (i) That which is true of the easier
or less is true of the greater or more difficult, and the
reverse ; (2) Two similar passages supplement one an
other ; (3) That which is clearly established in one part
of Scripture is to be presumed in interpreting others ;
(4)-(ii) Eight rules with reference to the relation of the
genus to the species, by inclusion, exclusion, contrast, and
their relation to a third term, in the forms of Rabbinical
logic; (12) The word is deterrained by the context, and
the sentence bythe scope of the passage; (13) When
two verses contradict, we must wait for a third to explain
them. Some of these rules are excellent, and so far as
the practical logic of the tiraes went, cannot be disputed.
The fault of Rabbinical exegesis was less in the rules than
in their application, although latent fallacies are not
difficult to discover in thera, and they do not sufficiently
guard against slips of arguraent.
The Haggada raethod was elaborated by R. Eliezar
into thirty-two rules.:]:
The principles of the two methods are admirably
sumraed up by Wogue :
" These forty-five rules may all be reduced to two fundamental
considerations, (i) Nothing is fortuitous, arbitrary, or indifferent in
the Word of God. Pleonasm, ellipsis, grammatical anomaly, trans
position of words or facts, everything is calculated, everything has
its end and would teach us something. The casual, the approxi-

* These are given by Schiirer, N. T. Zeitgeschichte, 1874, p. 447, and Hausrath,
Zeit Jesu, Heidelberg, p. 96.
t Chiarini in /. c, I., p. 66, seq. ; Weber in /. c, p. 106, seq. The best state
raent of them, with ample illustrations, is given by Waehner, Antiquitates
Ebraeoru?n, Gottingae, 1743, p. 422, seq.
X Selections of these are given by Chiarini in /. c, I., p. 81. A full statement,
with ample illustration, is given by Waehner in /. ir., I,, p., 396, seq.

302 BIBLICAL STUDY.
mate, the insignificant and inconsequential flower of rhetoric, all
that belongs to the setting in human language, are strange to the
severe precision of Biblical language. (2) As the image of its au
thor, who is one by Himself and manifold in His manifestations, the
Bible often conceals in a single word a crowd of thoughts ; many a
phrase, which appears to express a simple and single idea, is sus
ceptible of diverse senses and nuraberless interpretations indepen
dent of the fundamental difference between literal exegesis and free
exegesis, in short, as the Talraud says after the Bible itself, the
divine word is like fire which divides itself into a thousand sparks,
or a rock which breaks into numberless fragments under the ham
mer that attacks it. These two points of view, I repeat, are the
soul of the Midrash in general ; the latter above all serves as the
common basis of the Halacha and Haggada, and it explains, better
than any other theory, the long domination of the midrash exegesis
in the synagogue." *
This adrairable statement shows the radical errors of
the Rabbinical idea of the Scriptures : (i) everything
must be interpreted in accordance with that severe pre
cision, which alone is worthy of God ; (2) the Scriptures
are altogether divine and have the sarae attributes of
unity and infinity that God Hiraself has. The huraan
features of the Bible are entirely ignored.
The Sodh was used in the most ancient times by the
Essenes and Zelots and found expression in the numer
ous apocalypses and pseudepigraphs of the four centu
ries in the midst of which the Messiah appeared. It at
tained its culmination in the Cabalistic system of the
thirteenth century. ¦)¦ These raystics regarded every let
ter of the Bible as so highly iraportant that it contained
a secret sense for the initiated. The book of Sohar:]:
describes the systera in the following parable :
" Like a beautiful woman, concealed in the interior of her palace,

* Wogue in /. <:., p. 169. t Ginsburg, Kabbalah, London, 1865.
X II. 99-

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTUEE. 303
who when her friend and beloved passes by, opens for a moraent a
secret window and is seen by him alone, and then withdraws herself
immediately and disappears for a long time, so the doctrine only
shows herself to the chosen, (i. e., to him who is devoted to her body
and soul) ; and even to him not always in the same manner. At
first she simply beckons at the passer-by with her hand, and it gen
erally depends upon his understanding this gentle hint. This is the
interpretation known by the name T?3"l- Afterwards she approaches
hira a little closer, lisps hira a few words, but her forra is still cov
ered with a thick veil which his looks cannot penetrate. This is the
so-called TUT^I. She theh converses with him with her face cov
ered by a thin veil; this is the enigmatical language of ullin.
After having thus become accustomed to her society, she at last
shows herself face to face and entrusts him with the innermost se
crets of her heart. This is the secret of the law T|0,"*
There are three principles of Cabalistic interpretation :
(i) Notariqon — to reconstruct a word by using the ini
tials of many, or a sentence by using all the letters of a
single word for initial letters of other words ; (2) Ghema-
tria — the use of the numerical values of the letters of a
word for purposes of comparison with other words which
yield the same or similar combinations of numbers ; (3)
Temura — the permutation of letters by the three Cabal
istic alphabets, called ' Atbach, 'Albam, and Athbash.^
The Peshat, or literal interpretation, is used in the Tar
gum of Onkelos, and the Greek version of Aquila, with
reference to the law — but found little expression araong
the ancient Jews. The Qarites were the first to empha
size it in the eighth century. Before this time there is
no trace of Hebrew grararaar, or Hebrew dictionary.
The Qarites threw off the yoke of Rabbinical Halacha,
and devoted theraselves to the literal sense and became

* We give the translation of Ginsburg in /. c. , p. 130 ; comp. Siegfried, Philo
von Alexandria ais Ausleger des Alt. Test., 1875, Jena, p. 291.
\ See Ginsburg, The Kabbalah, London, 1865, p. 131, seq. ; Wogue'*in /. c,
p. 274, seq. ; Chiaiini in /. c, p. 95, seq. ; Siegfried in /. c, p. 290, seq.

304 BIBLICAL STUDY.
extreme literalists. Influenced by thera Saadia intro
duced the literal method into the Rabbinical schools,
and used it as the raost potent weapon to overcome the
Qarites. He became the father of Jewish exegesis in
the middle ages, and was followed by a large number of
distinguished scholars who have left monuraents of
Jewish learning.* Wogue attributes this rise of the lit
eral raethod to the influence of Arabic learning at Bag
dad, Bassora, and Cairo. But the Arabs and the Per
sians received their irapulses frora the Nestorian schools
of Edessa and Nisibis, which raediated the transition of
Greek learning to the Orient, which also frora the tiraes
of Theodore of Mopsuestia, and Lucius of Saraosata,
had been chiefly characterized by their historic raethod
of exegesis (see p. 325).
Thus in Judaisra there grew up three great parties
which struggled with one another during the middle
ages. The sacred Scriptures of the Old Testament were
buried under a mass of tradition that was heaped upon
them raore and raore for centuries until it becarae
necessary for the interpreter, who would understand the
holy word itself, to force his way through this raass, as
at the present day one who would find the ancient Jeru
salera raust dig through eighteen centuries of d6bris
under which it has been buried in the strifes of nations.
There is doubtless truth at the bottora of all these
systeras. There is a certain propriety in distinguishing
the fourfold sense. The literal sense will not apply ex
cept to the plainest raatter-of-fact passages ; the Haggada
raethod is necessary in the rhetorical parts of Script
ure. The Halacha raethod is necessary for the deter
mination of the principles embedded in the Scriptures.

* Wogue in /. c, p. 208, seq.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 305
The Sodh method is necessary in the interpretation of
prophetic symbolism, and the esoteric instruction of the
Bible. If each of these four methods had been restricted
to its own appropriate sphere in the Bible, they would
have co-operated with great advantage — but where these
methods are applied at the same time to the same pas
sages with the view that the Scripture has a manifold
sense ; where again these methods are applied arbitrarily
to all passages ; where they are used to remove difficul
ties, and to maintain traditional opinions ; or where any
one method is made to usurp the functions of all ; — there
can only result — as there did result in fact — the utmost
arbitrariness and confusion. The Bible was no longer
interpreted — it was used as the slave of traditional sys
tems and sectarian prejudices.
II. HELLENISTIC INTERPRETATION.
The Hellenistic Jews were largely under the influence
of the Platonic philosophy which they sought to recon
cile with the Old Testament Scriptures. The chief of
,the Hellenistic Jews is Philo of Alexandria. Philo was
not a Hebrew scholar, but was acquainted with the
Aramaic of Palestine, and probably also with the ancient
Hebrew.* He does not use the Hebrew text, but bases
himself entirely on the LXX, and uses tradition in its two
forms of Halacha and Haggada, but especially the latter,
which he elaborates in the direction of the Sodh or al
legorical raethod. He distinguishes between the literal
sense and the allegorical as between the body and the
soul,-)- the sense like a fluid pervades the letter. The al
legory is a wise architect which builds on the ground of
the Scriptures an architectural structure.:!:

* Siegfried in /. c, p. 141, seq. \ De migr. Abraham xvi. XOe Somn. ii. 2.

306 BIBLICAL STUDY.
The allegorical method of Philo is so well stated by
Siegfried, that we shall build upon hira in detail, while
we pursue our own raethod in a raore general arrange
raent. There are three rules to determine when the
literal sense is excluded; (i) when anything is said un
worthy of God ; (2) when it presents an insoluble diffi
culty ; (3) when the expression is allegorical. The last
rule alone is sound, the others are a priori, and result
in the imposition on the Scriptures of the preconcep
tions and prejudices of the interpreter. The rules of
Philo's allegorical raethod given by Siegfried are twenty-
three in nuraber.* We shall arrange them under four
heads in a soraewhat different order.
I. Grammatical allegory. An allegory is indicated
in the use of certain particles ; in the modifications of
words by prefixes or affixes ; in stress upon number of
noun and tense of verb ; in gender of words ; in the use
or absence of the article. Here grammatical exegesis is
insufficient ; there are mysterious hidden meanings to
be found in these gramraatical peculiarities.
II. Rhetorical allegory is found: in the repetition of
words ; in redundancy of style ; in reiteration of state
ment ; in changes of expression ; in synonyras ; in play
upon words ; in striking expressions ; in position of
words ; in unusual connections of verses ; in the oraission
of what would be expected ; in the unexpected use of
terms. Here rhetorical exegesis is insufficient ; there
must be a hidden sense in any departure from the plain
prosaic form.
III. Allegory by means of new combinations is gained :
by changing the punctuation ; by giving a word all its
possible meanings ; by internal modifications of the

* In /. c, p. 165, seq.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 307
word ; by new corribinations of words. This method
was more fully wrought out by the Cabalists (see p. 303),
and is the most abnormal of all the forras of allegory.
IV. Symbolism is of three kinds : of nurabers, of things,
and of names. This method is the most appropriate
of the forms of allegory; its propriety is recognized by
modern exegesis when used within due bounds.
To Philo and his school the inner sense attained by
allegory was the real sense designed by God. The
method of Philo was doubtless used to a great extent
among the Essenes and the Zelots. There are traces of
it in the pseudepigraphs and apocryphal books that were
composed in the tirae of Philo. Josephus was also in
fluenced by Philo, and was inclined to the use of alle
gory, as we see from his treatment of the tabernacle.*
There is truth at the bottom of the allegorical raethod,
namely, that human language is inadequate to convey
the thoughts of God to man. At the best it can only be a
sign and external representation. We must go back of
the sign to the thing signified. The mistake of the alle
gorical method is in extending it beyond its legitiraate
bounds, and making every word and syllable and letter
of Scripture an allegory of some kind, and in using it to
escape difficulties of philosophy and theology, and in
I order to maintain peculiar religious views.
III. THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE IN THE NEW
TESTAMENT.
The writings of New Testament Scripture use and in
terpret Old Testament Scripture. It is important for us
to determine the nature and principles of this interpre-

» Antiq. iii. 7, 7 ; Siegfried in /. c, p. 278, seq.

308 BIBLICAL STUDY.
tation, and its relation to the Rabbinical and Hellenistic
methods. In the Old Testaraent prior to the exile, the prophets
use earlier writings by way of citation rather than inter
pretation. This use is in the nature of free reproduction
and application rather than an exposition of their sense.
During the periods of oral revelation and prophecy,
the interpretation of ancient Scripture was of little ira
portance. It was only when prophecy ceased, and oral
revelations were discontinued, that it was necessary to
ascertain the divine will by the interpretation of ancient
written documents.
After the exile, Ezra introduced the more systematic
study of the Scripture, and established the midrash_
raethod, in seeking for the meaning of ancient Scriptures,
and their application to the present. The people were
assembled, and Ezra and the Levites " read in the book
in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and
they understood in the reading " (Neh. viii. 8). The
aim of Ezra and his associates was to make the law of
God so plain that the people generally could under
stand it.
The New Testaraent writers constantly use the Old
Testaraent. Do they employ the methods in use by
the Palestinian and Hellenistic Jews of their tirae ?
Different answers have been given to this question frora
partisan points of view. It is important to ascertain the
real facts of the case. The most important use of the
Scripture is ever the last and the highest in the process
of interpretation, namely, practical interpretation, or ap
plication ; for the divine revelation has in view, above
all, huraan conduct. This is raost frequently employed
in the New Testament by Jesus and His apostles. The
most famjliar example is in the temptation of Jesus

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 309
when He overcomes Satan by the application of the
words of the law : " Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of
God"; "Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God";
" Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Hira only
shalt thou serve " (Matt. iv. 4-10). These will suffice,
also, as speciraens of the literal interpretation as used
by Jesus.
In conflict with the Pharisees He soraetiraes employs
the Halacha method as most appropriate to controversy
with them, defeating thera with their own weapons.
Thus in John x. 34-36, He eraploys Ps. lxxxii. 6, argu
ing from the greater to the less.
" Is it not written in your law I said, ye are gods ? If He called
them gods, unto whom the word of God came (and the Scripture
cannot be broken), say ye of him, whom the Father sanctified and
sent into the world. Thou blasphemest ; because I said, I am the
Son of God ? "
In Matt. xxii. 43-45, He uses the Halacha method of
arguing from the inner contrast of general and particu
lar in Ps. ex. I.
" How then doth David in the Spirit call him Lord, saying : The
Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I put thine
enemies underneath thy feet ? If David then calleth him Lord, how
is he his son ? "
Again in Matt. xii. 3 seq., in the interpretation of the
Sabbath-law He quotes from i Sara. xxi. 1-7 ; Nura.
xxviii. 9-10; Hos. vi. 6; on the principle that Scripture
passages raay be used to supplement one another.
" Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungered,
and they that were with him ; how he entered into the house of
God, and did eat the shew-bread which it was not lawful for him
:o eat, neither for them that were with him, but only for the priests ?
Or have ye not read in the law how that on the Sabbath day the

310 BIBLICAL STUDY.
priests in the temple profane the sabbath and are guiltless ? But I
say unto you, that one greater than the temple is here. But if ye
had known what this meaneth, I desire mercy and not sacrifice, ye
would not have condemned the guiltless."
In these and sirailar instances Jesus interprets Script
ure, as a Jewish rabbin, after t^e- Halacha raethod, with
which the Pharisees were farailiar, and to which they
were accustoraed in discussion and arguraent.
Jesus also eraploys the Haggada raethod. This in
deed is His own favorite method of teaching, inasmuch
as His discourses were in the raain addressed to the peo
ple. His raethod of illustration and enforceraent of
truth is perfect in its kind as only a divine raaster could
fashion it. If we take the series of parables in Luke xv.
as an exaraple, what could be raore siraple, appropriate,
beautiful, and impressive ? They have been the gospel
of rederaption to raillions of our race. We shall
present sorae exaraples of this method of interpretation.
He replies to the bald literalism of the ruler of the syna
gogue, Luke xiii. 14 seq. :
" There are six days in which men ought to work : on them come
and be healed, and not on the Sabbath "; " Ye hypocrites, doth not
each of you on the Sabbath loose his ox or his ass frora the stall,
and lead him away to the watering ? And ought not this woman,
being a daughter of Abraham, whom Satan had bound, lo, eighteen
years, to have been loosed from this bond on the day of the Sab
bath ? "
In the interpretation of prophecy and history Jesus
comes into connection with the allegorical raethod of in
terpretation, and it has been claimed that He applies it
with the freedom of a Hellenist. In His first discourse
in the synagogue of Nazareth (Luke iv. 16-22) He inter
prets the prophecy (Is. Ixi.) as applying to Hiraself.
This prophecy is in its nature figurative, as it presents

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. Q^
the servant of Jehovah in his faithful preaching to the
people. Jesus correctly sees the inner sense of the pas
sage and finds His own likeness depicted there. In Matt.
xxi. 42, Jesus interprets the corner-stone of Ps. cxviii.
22-23 ^s referring to Himself and His kingdom. This
is not a prophecy in the original passage, but a syraboli
cal representation of the re-establishraent of the king
dom of God. The work of Jesus was pre-eminently such
a work. Hence the inner sense affqjjfls the connection
that makes the use of the symbol appropriate. A touch
ing example of the historical allegory is the caution of
Jesus (Luke xvii. 32): " Remeraber Lot's wife" (Gen.
xix. 26) in connection with his prediction of the judg
ment upon Jerusalem and the nations.
We shall now examine some of the most striking pas
sages, in which certain distinguishing features of our
Saviour's interpretation appear. The Sadducees carae
to Him (Matt. xxii. 23-32) with a difficult question un
der the law (Deut. xxv. 5) :
" If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his
wife and raise up seed unto his brother." The case is, " Now there
were with us seven brethren : and the first raarried and deceased,
and having no seed, left his wife unto his brother ; in like manner the
second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And after them all
the woman died. In the resurrection therefore whose wife shall she
be of the seven ? for they all had her."
Jesus does not determine this case by an appeal to the
Scripture, but on His own authority, delivers a doctrine
which settles it : " In the resurrection they neither marry,
nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels in
heaven." He takes occasion, however, to overcorae the
Sadducean denial of a resurrection by an appeal to Ex. iii.
6 : " Have ye not read that which was spoken unto you
by God, saying, ' I am the God of Abraham, and the God

312 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of Isaac, and the God of Jacob ' ? God is not the God
of the dead, but of the living." It is clear that our Sav
iour takes the passage out of its context and gives it a
meaning which no one would ever have thought of on
any principles of exegesis. Where then is the justifica
tion, and what is the raethod? We observe that He de
rives from the statement of the covenant relation be
tween God and the patriarchs, the principle that God
being a living God, the relation is a vital relation, and
those who are in this relation are living ones as possess
ors of the life they have received from God. This per
petuity of life after death tends to the resurrection.
Jesus here interprets as the interpreter of the mind of
God, with the fulness of the Spirit (John i. i8). It is a
transfiguration of the Halacha method. No principle of
exegesis can be derived from His exaraple in this case
that it will be safe for huraan exegesis to follow.
In the serraon on the mount (Matt. v. 21, seq.), in His
use of the laws of the tables. He contrasts His own in
terpretation of thera with the traditional. The latter
looked at the external letter and warped this into ac
cordance with traditional theory and practice. He en
ters into the internal spirit. He goes in His interpreta
tion beyond any human propriety, and interprets them
from the point of view of the divine lawgiver Himself.
No human interpreter would be justified in following
the Master thither. It is His sovereign prerogative so
to interpret.
Jesus recognizes the principle of accoraraodation in
the use of the Old Testament (Matt. xix. 3, seq.). The law
of divorce was granted by Moses, owing to the hardness
of the hearts of the people of his time. That law was,
however, inconsistent with the original divine ideal at
the creation. And here again Jesus interprets from the

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 3^3
mind of God in the Halacha method, the words of Gen.
ii. 24: " For this cause shall a man leave his father and
mother, and shall cleave to his wife ; and the twain shall
become one flesh." This He interprets by laying hold
of the great thought : " one flesh." " So that they are no
more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath
joined together, let not man put asunder." No one
would ever have thought of this interpretation but Jesus,
who interpreted the mind of God, the creator of raan and
the author of marriage.
In Luke xxiv. 44 seq., Jesus said :
" These are my words which I spake unto you, while I was yet
with you, how that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are writ
ten in the law of Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms concem
ing me. Then opened he their mind, that they raight understand
the Scriptures ; and he said unto them. Thus it is written, that the
Christ should suffer, and rise again from the dead the third day, and
that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name
unto all nations, beginning from Jerusalem."
Here our Saviour grasps the entire Old Testament
revelation in its unity, and represents Himself and His
kingdom as its central therae. The same is the case in
the institution of the Lord's supper where He represents
the feast as the new covenant feast over against the old
covenant sacrifice.
Jesus Christ in His method of interpretation thus laid
down the distinctive principles of scriptural interpreta
tion which enabled His apostles to understand the Old
Testament, and delivered them from the perils of the
allegorical and legal methods of His times. He uses
the four kinds of biblical interpretation, in accordance
with the usage of the various classes of men in His times;
in those ways that were familiar to the rabbinical school,
the synagogue instruction, the popular audience, and the
esoteric training of the disciple. He uses all that was
14

314 BIBLICAL STUDY.
appropriate in these methods ; but never employs any of
the casuistry or hair-splitting Halacha of the scribes ; or
any of the idle tales and absurd legends of the Hagga
da ; or any of the strange combinations and fanciful re
constructions of the Sodh of the Alexandrians. His use
of Scripture is simple, beautiful, profound, and sublime.
One sees through the Divine Master that the written
Word is the mirror of the raind of God ; and the eter
nal Word interprets the forraer from the latter. The
rabbins interpreted the Scriptures to accord with the
traditions of the elders : Jesus interpreted them to ac
cord with the mind of God their author. Hence the
characteristic authority with which He spake; the free
dom with which He added to the ancient Scriptures, and
substituted a higher revelation for the lower wherever it
was found necessary. As Dorner appropriately says :
" This is the wondrous charra of His words, their unfathomable,
mysterious depth, despite all their simplicity, that they are ever ut
tered, so to speak, from the heart of the question ; for the harmony
which binds together and comprehends in one view the opposite ends
of things, is lovingly and consciously present to Hira, since everything
is related to His kingdom. Other words of men, this or that man
might have spoken ; nay, most that is spoken or done by us is merely
a continuation of others through us ; we are simply therein points of
transmission for tradition. But the words which He drew from
within — these precious gems, which attest the presence of the Son
of Man, who is the Son of God — have an originality of an unique
order ; they are His, because taken from that which is present in
Him. In this sense. His prophetic activity is simply manifestation.
Certainly, where in the accoramodation of love He condescends to
men in figurative speech, or in simple talk, intelligible even to chil
dren, or avails Himself of ordinary, especially O. T. ideas. He there
suppresses the rays of His originality. But when He does this, it
is in order to fill the O. T. husk or the types and forms taken from
nature with the highest, the true contents." *
* System of Christian Doctrine, Vol. III., p. 389.

THE INTERPRETATION OP SCEIPTUEE. 315
Jesus does not lay down any principles of interpreta=,
tion. But we venture from the synthesis of His exegesis
to state the three following principles: (i) He recog
nized that the words of Scripture are living words of
God to raan, bearing upon huraan conduct. They are
to be interpreted by entering into living communion
with the living God and frora internal personal relations
to their author ; and not by roundabout raethods of tra
ditional definitions and illustrative legends. (2) The di
vine revelation was made on the principle of accorarao
dation to the weakness, ignorance, and sinfulness of man,
requiring no more than he was able to bear. The tem
porary provisions are to be eliminated from the eternal
principles and the divine ideals. (3) The Scriptures are
an organic whole, the Gospel of the Messiah is the ful
filment of the Old Testament, the Messiah and His king
dom the key to the whole. These were fruitful princi
ples and ought to have guided the Church in all time
and preserved it from manifold errors.
The apostles and their disciples in the New Testa
ment use the methods of the Lord Jesus rather than
those of the raen of their tirae. The New Testament
writers differ among themselves in the tendencies of their
thought. Peter, James, and Jude, Matthew and Mark
incline to use the Haggada method ; Stephen, Paul,
and Luke to the more learned Halacha method ; John
and the epistle to the Hebrews to the Sodh or allegorical
method ; but in them all, the methods of the Lord Jesus
prevail over the other methods and ennoble them.
(i) The Haggada is used by Peter when he cites Ps.
Ixix. 25 ; cix. 8 ; in Acts i. 20, with reference to the case
of Judas. The propriety is in the parallelism of the
cases of the doora of the traitor and persecutor. Matt.,
in his gospel, ii. 13-18, makes a similar use of Hos. xi. i,

316 BIBLICAL STUDY.
and Jer. xxxi. 15, and applies thera to the situation of
Jesus. There is here a parallelism of circumstances, in
which the ancient prophecies illustrate the descent of
Jesus into Egypt and the laraentation at Bethlehera, by
the descent of Israel into Egypt and the wars that deso
lated Judea. There is no prediction in these prophecies, or
interpretation of them by the evangelist as prediction ;
but the association of the passages with Jesus has its pro
priety in that He is conceived to be the Messiah, in
whom the fortunes of Israel are involved. " Here is
incorrectness of form with truth of thought." *
The epistle of James (ii. 21, seq^ uses by preference
what has been called the moral Haggada. To maintain
his proposition that faith without works is dead, he
cites the exaraples of Abrahara and Rahab (Gen. xxii. ;
Josh. ii. 8, seq}^. So he refers to the patience of Job
(v. 11) and the fervent prayers of Elijah (v. 17). Paul
also uses the Haggada in his citation of Ps. xix. 4, to il
lustrate the going forth of the gospel to the ends of the
earth (Rora. x. 18), and of Deut. xxx. 11 seq., to illus
trate the truth that the word of the gospel was nigh in
the preaching of the apostles, in the faith of the heart, and
in the confession of the raouth (Rom. x. 6-10). The epis
tle to the Hebrews uses it especially in calling the roll
of the heroes of faith in chap. xi. There are also a few
exaraples in the New Testaraent of the use of legends
and fables (2 Pet. ii. 4 seq. ; Jude 9 seq. ; 2 Tim. iii. 8),
for purposes of illustration, which do not comrait the au
thors to their historical truthfulness, (see p. 232, seq?).
(2) The Halacha method is used by Paul arguing from
the less to the greater (i Cor. ix. 9 seq. ; Deut. xxv. 4) ;
from analogy (2 Cor. iii. 7; Ex. xxiv. 17); from general

* Tholuck, Alt. Test, in N. T., 6te Aufl., Gotha, 1868, p. 44.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTUEE. 317
to particular (Rora. iv. 3 seq., frora Gen. xv. 6 ; Ps. xxxii.
I ; I Cor. xiv. 21 seq., frora Is. xxviii. n-12); frora the
corabination of passages to prove the corruption of sin
(Rom. iii. 9-18; from Pss. xiv. 1-3; v. 9; cxl. 3 ; x. 7
Is. lix. 7 ; Ps. xxxvi. 2).
The Halacha method is also used by James to prove
his point that whoso transgresseth one of the laws is
guilty of all (ii. 7-13) by citing the general law (Ley. xix.
18), and the special commands (Ex. xx. 13, 14), and the
principle of mercy and justice (Prov. iii. 34).
(3) The Allegorical method is used by Paul in Gal. iv.
24, where Hagar and Sara are taken to represent the
Pharisee and the Christian ; in i Cor. x. 4, where he uses
the water frora the rock as an allegory of Christ. Here
the apostle sees a principle clothed in the history. He
uses it to illustrate and enforce an analogous case where
the principle applies. As Tholuck says, " The apostle
is like one who has seen a finished picture and then aft
erwards sees in the sketch of it raore than we do who
have only the sketch." * Is it not rather that with the
sun-light of an inspired prophetic insight he sees into the
essential features of the ancient histories, whereas to us
they are in the obscurities of raere candle-light ? He
tells us raore about thera than we can see even with his
guidance. It is in the epistle to the Hebrews that the
allegorical raethod has its greatest display in the New
Testaraent. Paul uses it occasionally, the author of the
epistle to the Hebrews constantly. As Tholuck says,
" The literary character of Paul is Talraudic and dialec
tic, the epistle to the Hebrews is Hellenistic and rhetor
ical." f Thus in Heb. iv. the Sabbath of the Old Tes
taraent is used to allegorize the Sabbath rest at the end

« In /. (.., p. 37. t In /. c, p. 52.

318 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of the world. In Heb. vii. the person and office of
Melcbizedek are used to allegorize the Messianic high-
priest, and there is an allegory in the etyraology of the
naraes Salem and Melcbizedek. Here, according to
Riehm,* the author "leaves out of consideration the his
torical meaning of Old Testament passages, and only
sees the higher prophetic raeaning which belongs to
them on account of their ideal contents."
The apostle John uses the allegorical method of sym-
bolisra in the number of the beast, 666 (Rev. xiii. i8);
the sun-clad woman (xii. i seq}j ; the river Euphrates
(xvi. 12) ; the city of Babylon (xvii. 5 ; xviii. 2) ; the place
Harmageddon (xvi. 16) ; the prophetic numbers of Daniel
(xii. 6 ; xiii. 5), and the recombination (in xxi.-xxii.) of
the ancient prophecies of Ezek. xxxviii.-xxxix. ; Dan.
vii. 9 .y^^. ; xii.; Isa. xxv. 8; Ixv. 17 seq., and the de
scriptions of Paradise (Gen. ii. 2> seq}).
There are many who in our tiraes seek to explain away
the allegorical interpretation as used in the New Testa
ment as unbecoming to Jesus and His apostles. These
forget that it was just this allegorical method with all
its abuses that has been chiefly employed in the syna
gogue and in the church for ages by the ablest and most
pious of her interpreters. We cannot do better than
quote the judicious reproof of such by Bishop Light
foot : t
" We need not fear to allow that St. Paul's mode of teaching here
is colored by his early education in the rabbinical schools. It were
as unreasonable to stake the Apostle's inspiration on the turn of a
metaphor or the character of an illustration or the form of an argu
ment, as on purity of diction. No one now thinks of maintaining
that the language of the inspired writers reaches the classical stand-

* Lehrb. HebrSerbriefes, Neue Ausg., 1867, p. 204.
t St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians. Andover, 1870, p. 370.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCEIPTUEE. 319
ard of correctness and elegance, though at one time it was held al
most a heresy to deny this. ' A treasure contained in earthen ves
sels,' 'strength made perfect in weakness,' 'rudeness in speech, yet
not in knowledge,' such is the far nobler conception of inspired
teaching, which we may gather from the apostle's own language.
And this language we should do well to bear in mind. But, on the
other hand, it were sheer dogmatism to set up the intellectual stand
ard of our own age or country as an infallible rule. The power of
allegory has been differently felt in different ages, as it is differently
felt at any one time by diverse nations. Analogy, allegory, meta
phor — by what boundaries are these separated, the one from the
other ? What is true or false, correct or incorrect, as an analogy, or
an allegory ? What argumentative force must be assigned to either ?
We should at least be prepared with an answer to these questions,
before we venture to sit in judgment on any individual case."
(4) The apostles were taught by Jesus to consider the
old covenant as a whole ; to see it as a shadow, type,
and preparatory dispensation with reference to the new
covenant ; to regard the substance, and disregard the
form. Hence under the further guidance of the Holy
Spirit they eliminated the temporal, local, and circura
stantial forms of the old covenant, and gained the uni
versal, eternal, and essential substance ; and this they
applied to the circumstances of the new covenant, of
which they were called to be the expounders. They in
terpreted in accordance with the mind of the Holy Spirit,
as Jesus had interpreted in accordance with the mind of
His heavenly Father.
Thus Peter on the day of Pentecost (Acts ii. 16 seq)
grasps the situation and sees in the outpouring of the
Holy Spirit the inauguration of the new dispensation
described by the prophet Joel (iii.). In his epistle (i Pet.
ii. 9 seq.) he applies the Sinaitic covenant of Ex. xix. to
the new covenant relations of Jesus. This was from the
sense of the unity of both covenants in Christ, and the
fulfilment of the earlier in the latter. So the apostle

320 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Paul goes back of the law of Sinai to the Abrahamic
covenant and finds that all believers are the true children
of Abraham (Rom. iv.). In Col. ii. 17 he represents the
ancient institutions as " a shadow of the things to come :
but the body is Christ's." And so the author of the
epistle to the Hebrews finds the entire system of Levitical
priesthood, purification and offerings fulfilled in Christ
and His ministry, so that the forra is thrown off now
that the " very iraage " of these things has been raade
manifest (Heb. x. i seq.). The author of the Apoca
lypse gathers up the substance of unfulfilled prophecy
and attaches it to the second advent of Jesus Christ.
This organic living method of interpretation of Jesus
and His apostles is the true Christian raethod. The
errors in the history of exegesis have sprung up to the
right and the left of it.
IV. INTERPRETATION OF THE FATHERS AND SCHOOL
MEN.
In the ancient church the raethods of exegesis * of the
Palestinian and Hellenistic Jews, as well as those of
Jesus and His apostles, were reproduced. The strife of
the various eleraents that entered into the apostolic
church is clearly to be seen in the New Testaraent itself
(Acts XV. ; I Cor. iii. ; Gal. ii. ; i Tira. i. ; Jaraes ii. ;
Rev. ii.).
The Palestinian methods were represented in the
Ebionites and the Jewish-Christian tendency that passed
over into the church. Thus Papias, in his naive way.

* For the History of Exegesis in the Christian Church s^e RosenmuUer, His
toria interpretationis librorum sacrorum in Ecclesia Christiana, 5 Tom.,
Hildburghusae, 1795-1814, but especiaUy Klausen, Hermeneutik des Neuen Tes
taments, Leipzig, 1841, and Samuel Davidson, Sacred Hermeneutics, Edin.,
1843.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 321
appeals to the elders, Aristion, the Presbyter John, and
others, rather than to the New Testament, to establish
his premillenarianism.* The Clementine pseudepigraph
represents the apostle Peter in conflict with Simon Ma
gus, as the embodiraent of church authority over against
Gnosticism. Peter, speaking of the prophetic writings,
is made to say :
" Which things were indeed plainly spoken, but are not plainly
written ; so much so that when they are read they cannot be under
stood without an expounder, on account of the sin which has grown
up with men." t
Tertullian also says :
" Our appeal, therefore, must not be made to the Scriptures ; nor
must controversy be admitted on points in which victory will either
be impossible, or uncertain, or not certain enough  The nat
ural order of things would require that this point should be first pro
posed, which is now the only one which we raust discuss : ' With
whom lies that very faith to which the Scriptures belong? From
what, and through whom, and when, and to whom, has been handed
down that rule, by which raen become Christians ? ' For wherever
it shall be manifest that the true Christian rule and faith shall be,
there will likewise be the true Scriptures and expositions thereof, and
all the Christian traditions." f
Irenaeus § and Cyprian || lay stress upon the literal
method of exegesis and the authority of tradition, and
exercised an unfortunate influence upon the early Latin
church. The Hellenistic methods found the greatest represen
tation in the early church. The New Testaraent writers
eraployed the Greek language and the LXX version. It
is probable that the great m.ajority of the earliest Chris
tians were Hellenists. Naturally the influence of Philo

* Eusebius, Eccl. Hist., HI., 39. t Recognitions, I., c. 21.
X Adv. Haer., c. xix. § Adv. Haer., I., c. 9, 4 ; c. 10, i. | Epist. 74.
14*

322 BIBLICAL STUDY.
and the allegorical raethod becarae very great. Wc see
that influence already in the epistle to the Hebrews and
the writings of John the apostle. We find it in the
epistles of Clement of Rome and Barnabas, of the apos
tolic fathers ; in Justin and the apologists generally.*
Cleraent of Alexandria gave it more definite shape
when he distinguished between the body and soul of
Scripture and called attention to its fourfold use. He
corapares it to engrafting: (i) The way in which we in
struct plain people belonging to the Gentiles, who re
ceive the word superficially ; (2) the instruction of those
who have studied philosophy, cutting through the Greek
dograas and opening up the Hebrew Scriptures ; (3) over
coming the rustics and heretics by the force of the truth ;
(4) the gnostic teaching which is capable of looking into
the things themselves.^ He makes the wise remark :
" The truth is not to be found by changing the meanings, but in
the consideration of what perfectly belongs to and becoraes the sov
ereign God, and in establishing each one ofthe points demonstrated
in the Scriptures frora similar Scriptures." I
Klausen well says :
" By the assertion and vindication of this principle of interpreta
tion the Alexandrian teachers have been the preservers of the pure
Christian doctrine, when the cr^fiss literal interpretation in raany
parts of the Latin church, especially the African provinces, worked
to justify from the sacred Scriptures the grossest ideas of the being
of God, the nature ofthe soul, and the future life."§
Origen carried out the principles of interpretation
still further and became the father of the allegorical
method in the church. He distinguishes a threefold
sense : body, soul, and spirit. || He uses thirteen of

¦* Klausen in /. c, p. 97, seq. i Stromata, VI. 15.
J Stromata, VII., 16. § In /. t., p. ro3. | Hom. V. in Lev.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 323
Philo's rules.* He lays stress on the allegory and often
uses it to get rid of anthropomorphisras ; and turns a
good deal of ancient Jewish history into allegory — but
he does not neglect the literal sense. He uses the three
senses, but ranges them in the order of ascent from low
est to highest, and finds in the spiritual sense the one
chiefly desirable.
Eucherius of Lyons in the first half of the fifth cent
ury f divides the mystical sense into two kinds, the alle
gorical, what is to be believed in now ; the anagogical,
what is predicted.:]: In Hilary and Ambrose the alle
gorical method became dorainant in the Latin church.
Ambrose says :
" As the Church has two eyes with which it contemplates Christ ;
naraely, a moral and a mystic, of which the former is sharper, the
latter milder, so the entire divine Scripture is either natural, or moral
or mystic." §
Tychonius belonged to this school, and laid down seven
rules of interpretation : (i) Of the Lord and His body ;
(2) the twofold division of the Lord's body ; (3) prora
ises and law; (4) relation of species and genus; (5)
the tiraes ; (6) recapitulation ; (7) the devil and his body.
These rules have more to do with the doctrinal substance
of the Scriptures, the relation of the church to Christ,
the law to the gospel, and* the like. They have been of
service in the history of the church and are mentioned
with approval by Augustine, although he shows their
insufficiency. || Augustine gave the allegorical method

* Siegfried in /. c, p. 353, seq.
-f Liber formularum spiritualis intelligentide. Migne edition, T. 50, p. 727.
See Reuss, Gesch. d. Heil. Serif t. N. 7"., 4te Ausg., Braunschweig, 1864, p. 543.
X Kihn, Theodor von Mopsuestia und Junilius Africanus ais Exegeten.
Freib., i88o, p. 30.
§ Exposit. in Ps. cxviii., Serm. ii. n. 7, ibid. 36, Praef.
I De doctrina. III. 30.

324 BIBLICAL STUDY.
a better shaping in the Latin church. He distinguishes
four kinds of exegesis : (i) historical, (2) etiological, (3)
analogical, (4) allegorical,* and lays down the principle
that whatever cannot be referred to good conduct or
truth of faith must be regarded as figurative.f Klausen
gives a careful sumraary of the exegetical principles of
Augustine. These are reproduced by Davidson, frora
whora we quote :j: in a more condensed forra :
" (i) The object of all interpretation is to express as accurately as
possible the thoughts and meaning of an author  (2) In the
case of the Holy Scriptures, this is not attained by strictly insisting on
each single expression by itself. .... (3) On the contrary. We should
endeavor to clear up the obscurity of such passages, and to remove
their ambiguity — first, by close attention to the connexion before and
after ; next, by comparison with kindred places where the sense is
more clearly and definitely given ; and lastly, by a reference to the
essential contents of Christian doctrine. (4) The interpreter of Holy
Scripture must bring with him a Christian reverence for the divine
word, and an humble disposition which subordinates preconceived
opinions to whatever it perceives to be contained in the Word of
God  (s) Where the interpretation is insecure, notwithstand
ing the preceding measures, it must be assumed, that the matter lies
beyond the circle of the essential truths belonging to the Christian
faith. (6) It is irrational and dangerous for any one, whilst trusting
in faith, and in the promises respecting the operations of the Holy
Spirit on the mind, to despise the guidance and aid of science in the
interpretation of Scripture." •
The spirit that should actuate the interpreter is beau
tifully stated by Augustine :
" The man who fears God seeks diligently in Holy Scripture for a
knowledge of His will. And when he has become meek through
piety, so as to have no love of strife, when furnished also with a
knowledge of language so as not to be stopped by unknown' words
and forms of speech, and with the knowledge of certain necessary ob-

* De util. cred., c. 5. t De doctrina, HI. 15.
} Klausen in /. i.., p. 162, seq. ; Davidson in /. c, p. 133, seq.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTUEE. 325
jects, so as not to be igfnorant ofthe force and nature of those which
are used figuratively ; and assisted, besides, by accuracy in the texts,
which has been secured by skill and care in the matter of correction ;
— ^when thus prepared, let him proceed to the examination and solu
tion ofthe ambiguities of Scripture." *
We think that Klausen on the whole is justified, so far
as the Latin church is concerned, in his statement that :
" None of the rest of the fathers, earlier or later, came near Augus
tine in the conception and statement of the essential character and
conditions of the interpretation of Scripture. The truths which the
Reformation in the sixteenth century again invoked into fruitful life,
namely, of the relation of the sacred Scriptures to Christian doctrine,
and of the scientific interpretation ofthe Scriptures, and which have
become subsequently the foundations for the erection of evangelical
dograatics, may all be shown in the writings of Augustine, ex
pressed in his clear, strong language." t
This should, however, be qualified with the remark
that Augustine's practice did not altogether accord with
his precepts. He was dominated by the rule of faith:]:
and the authority of the church, as Irenaeus and Tertul
lian had been ; and he did not apprehend the essential
Reformation principle of scriptural interpretation, narae
ly, the analogy of faith in the Scriptures theraselves.
Augustine, in his practice, used too rauch of the allegor.y ;
and the Latin fathers followed his exaraple rather than
his precepts, and raore and more gave themselves up to
this method. Gregory the Great went to the greatest
lengths in allegory.
Toward the close of the third century Lucius of Sara
osata established at Antioch a new exegetical school,
which soon rose to a great power and influence, and pro-

* De doctrina. III. i. + In /. c, p. 165.
X Diestel, Gesch. d. Alt. Test, in d. Christ. Kirche, Jena, 1869, p. 85 ; A. Dor-
ler, .Augustinus sein theologisches System,'Ber:\in, 1873, p. 240, «y.

326 BIBLICAL STUDY.
duced the greatest exegetes of the ancient church. Its
fundaraental principles are well stated by Kihn.* (i)
Every passage has its literal raeaning and only one raean
ing. We raust, however, distinguish between plain and
figurative language, and interpret each passage in ac
cordance with its nature. (2) Alongside of the literal
sense is the typical sense, which arises out of the rela
tion of the old covenant to the new. It is based upon
the literal sense which it presupposes. These are sound
principles and are in accord with the usage of the New
Testaraent. " The Antiochans mediated between the two contrasted positions :
a coarse, childish, literal sense, and an arbitrary allegorical interpre
tation ; between the extremes ofthe Judaizers and Anthropomorphites
on the one hand, and the Hellenistic Gnostics and Origenists on the
other ; and they paved the way for a sound biblical exegesis which
remained influential for all coraing time, if indeed not always preva
lent." t
The Antiochan school, like all others, produced schol
ars of different tendencies. Some of them, like Theo
dore of Mopsuestia, Diodorus of Tarsus, and Nestorius
pressed historical and gramraatical exegesis too far, to
the neglect of the higher typical and raystical ; but in
Chrysostora, Theodoret, and Ephraim the Syrian, the
principles of the school find expression in the noblest
products of Christian exegesis, which served as the reser
voir of supply for the feeble traditionalists of the middle
ages ; and are valued more and raore in our own tiraes.:]:
With the decline of the school of Antioch, its princi
ples were raaintained at Edessa and Nisibis, and thence
gave an irapulse to the Arabs and the Jewish exegesis
of the raiddle ages, and thus in a roundabout way again

* In /. c, p. 29. + Kihn in /. c, p. 29. X Diestel in /. c, pp. 135, 138.

THE INTEEPEETATION OF SCEIPTURE. 32Y
influenced the church of the West at the Reformation.
But an earlier influence may be traced in the reproduc
tion of the work of Paul of Nisibis by Junilius Africanus
in his Institutes.* The rules of Junilius are brief but
excellent :
" (Disciple). What are those things which we ought to guard in the
understanding ofthe sacred Scriptures ? (Master). That those things
which are said may agree with Him who says them ; that they should
not be discrepant with the reasons for which they were said ; that
they should accord with their times, places, order, and intention.
(Disciple). How may we learn the intention of the divine doctrine ?
(Master). As the Lord Himself says, that we should love God with
all our hearts and with all our souls and our neighbors as ourselves.
But corruption of doctrine is, on the contrary, not to love God or the
neighbor." t
The school of Nisibis influenced the Occident also
through Cassiodorus, who wished to establish a corre
sponding theological school at Rome, but failed on ac
count of the warlike tiraes.:]: If this had been accora
pHshed, the history of the middle age might have been
very different. He introduced the methods ofthe school
of Nisibis in his Institutions. This was an impor
tant text-book in the middle age and exerted a health
ful influence. He urges to use the fathers as a Jacob's
ladder by which to rise to the Scriptures themselves.
He insists upon the comparison of Scripture with Script
ures, and points out that frequent and intense medita
tion is the way to a true understanding of thera.§
Jerorae seeras to have occupied an interraediate and
not altogether consistent position. He strives for his
torical and grammatical exposition, yet it is easy to see
* Instituta Regularia Divinae Legis. + Kihn in /. c, p. 526^
X Kihn in /. c, p. 210.
§ Kihnm /. c, pp. 211-212; Praef. de Instil, div. litt., Migne, T. 70, p.
iios, seq.

328 BIBLICAL STUDY.
that at the bottom he is more inclined to the allegorical
method. He lays down no principles of exegesis, but
scattered through his writings one finds numerous wise
remarks :
" The sacred Scripture cannot contradict itself" * " Whoever in
terprets the gospel in a different spirit from that in which it was
written, confuses the faithful and distorts the gospel of Christ." t
" The gospel consists not in the words of Scripture but in the sense,
not in the surface but in the marrow, not in the leaves of the words
but in the roots of the thought." I
Thus there grew up in the ancient church three great
exegetical tendencies : the literal and traditional, the al
legorical and mystical, the historical and ethical, and
these three struggled with one another and became more
and raore interwoven, in the best of the fathers, but took'
on all sorts of abnorraal forras of exegesis in others.
In the middle age the vital Christian spirit was more
and more suppressed, and ecclesiastical authority as
sumed the place of learning. The traditional principle
of exegesis became raore and raore dorainant and along
side of this the allegorical raethod was found to be the
raost convenient for reconciling Scripture with tradition.
The literal and the historical sense was alraost entirely
ignored. The fourfold sense becarae fixed, as expressed
in the saying : the literal sense teaches what has been
done, the allegorical what to believe, the moral what to
do, the anagogical whither we are tending.§
In the middle age exegesis consisted chiefly in the re
production of the expositions of the fathers, in collec
tions and compilations, called epitomes, glosses, postilles,
chains. In the Oriental church the chief of these com

* Epist. ad Marcellam. t Epist. ad Gal. i. 6. X Epist. ad Gal. i. ii.
§ Litera gesta docet, quid credas allegoria, moralis quid agas, quo tendas
Anagogia.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCEIPTUEE.

829

pilers were : Oecumenius (f 999), Theophylact (f 1007),
and Euthyraius Zigabenus (f 1 1 1 8). These contain chiefly
the exegesis of Chrysostom, Theodoret, and the Anti
ochan school. In the Occidental church, there is more
independence and greater use of the allegory. The chief
Latin expositors of the raiddle age are, Beda (f 735), Al-
cuin (t 804), Walafrid Strabo (f 849), Rhabanus Maurus
(f 856), Peter Lombard (f 1164), Thomas Aquinas
(•t-1274),* Hugo de St. Caro (f 1260). The only exegete
of the middle age who shows any acquaintance with the
Hebrew text of the Old Testament is the converted
Jew, Nicolaus de Lyra {j; 1340). He seeras to have appre
hended better than any previous writer the proper exe
getical method, but could only partly put it in practice.
He was doubtless influenced greatly by the gramraatical
exegesis of the Jews of the raiddle age, frora Saadia's
school, and especially by Raschi.f He wrote postilles
on the entire Bible. He raentions the four senses of
Scripture and then says :
" All of them presuppose the literal sense as the foundation. As
a building, declining from the foundation, is likely to fall, so the mys
tic exposition, which deviates from the literal sense, must be reck
oned unbecoming and unsuitable."
And yet he adds :
" I protest, I intend to say nothing either in the way of assertion
or determination, except in relation to such things as have been
clearly settled by Holy Scripture on the authority ofthe church. All
besides must be taken as spoken scholastically and by way of exer-

* His Catena Aurea on the Gospels have been translated by Pusey, Keble,
and Newman, 6 vols., Oxford, 1870 ; and raay be consulted as the most accessible
specimen of the interpretation of the middle age.
t See Siegfried, Raschi's Einfluss anf Nicolaus von Lira und Luther in der
Anslegung der Genesis, in Merx, Archiv, I. , p. 428, seq. ; II., p. 39, seq.

330 BIBLICAL STUDY.
cise ; for which reason, I submit all I have said, and aim to say, to
the correction of our holy mother the church," *
In such bondage to the infallable church, it is astonish
ing that he accomplished so much. He exerted a health
ful, reviving influence in biblical study and in a measure
prepared for the Reformation. There is truth in the
saying, " If Lyra had not piped, Luther would not have
danced." f Luther thought highly of Lyra, and yet
Luther really started from a principle entirely different
from the literal sense. For this he was rather prepared
by Wicklif and Huss. Wicklif was a contemporary of
Lyra, and opposed the abuse of the allegorical method
frora the spiritual side, and in contrast with Lyra recog
nized the authority of the Scriptures as above the au
thority of the church. He makes the all-iraportant state
raent which was not allowed to die, but becarae the Puri
tan watchword in subsequent times : "The Holy Spirit
teaches us the sense of Scripture as Christ opened the
Scriptures to His apostles." X Huss and Jerome of
Prague followed Wicklif in this respect. §
With reference to the interpretation of the middle age
as a whole, the reraarks of Immer are appropriate : ||
" It lacks the most essential qualification to scriptural interpreta
tion, linguistic knowledge, and historical perception  This de
fect inheres in the mediseval period in general. Hence there could
be no advance in interpretation. But what it could do it did : it col
lected and preserved ; and what was thus preserved waited for new
fructifying elements, which were to be introduced in the second half
of the fifteenth century.''
'^- Posiillae perpctuae, seu brevia comm-entaria in Univer sa Biblia, prol. ii.,
Davidson in /. c, p. 175. seq.
- \.Si Lyra non lyrasset, Lutherus non saltasset.
f Lesfcls'"! Johann von WicHf, Leipzig, 1873, I., p, 483, seq. ; Lorimer's edi
tion, London, 1878, II., p. 29, seq.
§ Gillett, ZyS«^af Times of John Huss, Boston, 1864, 2d ed., I., p. 29s, seq.
1 In /. c, p. 37. X

THE INTEEPEETATION OF SCEIPTUEE.

331

The mediaeval exegesife reached its culmination at the
Council of Trent, where Roraan Catholic interpretation
was chained forever in the fourfold fetters : that it raust
be conforraed to the rule of faith, the practice of the
church, the consent of the fathers, and the decisions of
the councils. But the seeds of a new exegesis had been
planted by Lyra and Wicklif which burst forth into
fruitful life in the Protestant Reformation.
V. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE REFORMERS AND
THEIR SUCCESSORS.
The Reformation was accorapanied by a great revival
of Biblical Study in all directions, but especially in the
interpretation of the Scriptures. The Huraanists were
influenced, by their studies of the Greek and Hebrew
languages and literatures, to apply this new learning to
the study of the Bible. Erasmus is the acknowledged
chief of interpreters of this class. He insisted that the
interpretation of the Scriptures should be in accordance
with the original Greek and Hebrew texts, and urged
the giving of the grammatical and literal sense over
against the allegorical sense, which had been the ally of
tradition.* The Huraanists, however, did not go to the
root of the evil ; they were too deferential to the author
ity of the Church, and sought to correct the errors in
exegesis by purely scholarly methods. The Reforraers,
however, revived the principle of Wicklif and Huss,
strengthened it, an* made it invincible. They urged
the one literal sense against the fourfold sense, but they
still more insisted that Scripture should be its own in
terpreter, and that it was not to be interpreted by tra
dition or external ecclesiastical authority. Thus, Luther
says: * Klausen ial.c, p. 227.

332 BIBLICAL STUDY.
" Every word should be allowed to '^tand in its natural meaning,
and that should not be abandoned unless faith forces us to it."* ....
" It is the attribute of Holy Scripture that it interprets itself by
passages and places which belong together, and can only be under
stood by the rule of faith." t
Tyndale says :
" Thou shalt understand, therefore, that the Scripture hath but
one sense, which is the literal sense. And that literal sense is the
root and ground of all, and the anchor that never faileth, whereunto
if thou cleave, thou canst never err or go out of the way. And
if thou leave the literal sense, thou canst not but go out of the way.
Neverthelater, the Scripture useth proverbs, sirailitudes, riddles, or
allegories, as all other speeches do ; but that which the proverb,
similitude, riddle, or allegory signifieth, is ever the literal sense,
which thou must seek out diligently : as in the English we borrow
words and sentences of one thing, and apply thera unto another,
and give them new significations." . , . , " Beyond all this, when
we have found out the literal sense of the Scripture by the process
of the text, or by a like text of another place, then go we ; and as
the Scripture borroweth similitudes of worldly things, even so we
again borrow sirailitudes or allegories of the Scripture, and apply
them to our purposes ; which allegories are no sense of the Script
ure, but free things besides the Scripture, and altogether in the liberty
of the Spirit." " Finally, all God's words are spiritual, if thou have
eyes of God, to see the right meaning of the text, and whereunto
the Scripture pertaineth, and the final end and cause thereof." |
The view of the Reformed churches is expressed in
the 2d Helvetic Confession (ii. l) :
"We acknowledge that interpretation of Scripture for authentical
and proper, which being taken from the Scriptures theraselves (that
is, from the phrase of that tongue in which they were written, they
being also wayed according to the circumstances and expounded
according to the proportion of places, either like or unlike, or of

* Walch, xix., p. 1601. t Walch, iii., p. 2042.
X The Obedience of a Christian Man, 1528 ; Parker edition, Doctrinal Treat
ises, p. 307, seq.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 333
more and plainer), accordeth with the rule of faith and charity, and
maketh notably for God's glory and man's salvation." *
The Reforraers produced raasterpieces of exegesis by
these principles, and set the Bible in a new light before the
world. Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin especially were great
exegetes;t Bullinger(ti575), Oecolarapadius (ti53i), Me
lancthon, Musculus (ti563), were worthy to stand by their
side. Their imraediate successors had soraewhat of their
spirit, although the sectarian element already influences
them in the maintenance of the peculiarities of the dif
ferent churches. The Hermeneutical principles of the
Lutherans are well stated by Matth. Flacius ; j^ those of
the Reforraed by And. Rivetus.§ The weakness of the
Reforraation principle was in the lack of clear definition
of what was meant by the analogy or rule of faith. It
is clear that the Reformers set the rule of faith in the
Scriptures themselves, — in the substance of doctrine ap
prehended by faith. But when it came to define what
that substance was, there was difficulty. Hence, so
soon as the faith of the church was expressed in sym
bols, these were at first unconsciously, and at last avow
edly, identified with this Scripture rule of faith. The
Lutheran scholastic Gerhard says :
" From these plain passages of Scripture the rule of faith is col
lected, which is the sum of the celestial doctrine collected from the
most evident passages of Scripture. Its parts are two — the former
conceming faith, whose chief precepts are expressed in the apostles'
creed ; the latter concerning love, the sum of which the decalogue
explains." ||

* We give the English version of Harmony ofthe Confessions, London, 1643,
on account of its historical relations.
t IClausen in /. c, p. 223 ; also, p. 112.
X Clavis Scripturae Sacrae, Antwerp, 1567 ; Basilea:, 1609. Best edition, ed.
Musaeus, 1675.
§ Isagoge, 1627. I Gerhard, Loci, Tubingae, 1767, Tom. I., p. 53,

334 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Hollazius * defines the analogy of faith : " t^e funda
mental articles of faith, or the principal chapters of the
Christian faith collected from the clearest testimonies of
the Scriptures." Carpzov f makes it: "the systera of
Scripture doctrine in its order and connection."
If this system of doctrine had been that found in the
Scriptures themselves, in accordance with the raodern
discipline of Biblical Theology,^ there would have been
sorae propriety in the definition ; but inasmuch as the
scholastic theologians proposed to express that system
of doctrine in their theological comraonplaces, in other
methods and forras than those presented in the Script
ures, practically the rule or analogy of faith became
these theological systems, and so an external rule was
substituted for the internal rule of the Scriptures them
selves ; the Reformation principle was more and more
abandoned ; and the Jewish Halacha, and the mediseval
scholastic re-entered, and took possession of Protestant
exegesis. §
The Reformed church was slower in attaining this
result than the Lutheran church, owing to the exegetical
spirit that had come down frora Oecolarapadius, Calvin,
and Zwingli ; but already Beza leads off in the wrong
direction ; and notwithstanding the great stress laid upon
literal and grararaatical exegesis by Cappellus and the
school of Saumur in France ; by Drusius, De Dieu, and
Dan. Heinsius in Holland ; the drift was in the scholastic
direction ; and when the Swiss churches arrayed thera
selves against the French exegetes ; and the churches of
Holland were divided by the Arrainian controversy, and
the historical and literal exegesis carae to characterize

'* Exam. Theologici Acroamatici, 1741, Holmiae, p. 1777.
t PrimiB Lineae Herm. Helmstad., 1790, p. 28. J See Chap. XI.
§ Volck, in Zockler, Handb. Theo. Wiss., p. 657 ; Klausen in /. c, p. 254.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 335
more and more the latter; the scholastic divines more
and more eraployed the dogmatic method, and urged to
interpret in accordance with the external rule of faith.

VI. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PURITANS, AND
THE ARMINIANS.
British Puritanism reraained true to the Reforraation
principle of interpretation till the close of the seventeenth
century. The views of Tyndale and the Puritans went
deeper into the essence of the raatter than those of the
continental reformers. This was doubtless owing to the
fact of their conflict against ecclesiastical authority and
the prelatical party, and their protests against the obtru
sion of Popish ceremonies on the Christians of England.
They urged raore and raore the principle of the Script
ures alone as the rule of the church, and raade tkiefus
divinum the supreme appeal. Thus Thomas Cartwright :
" Scripture alone being able and sufficient to make us wise to
salvation, we need no unwritten verities, no traditions of men, no
canons of councels, or sentences of fathers, much less decrees of
popes, to supply any supposed defect of the written word, or to give
us a more perfect direction in the way of life, then is already set
down expressly in the canonicall Scriptures  They are of di
vine authority. They are the rule, the line, the squyre and light,
whereby to examine and trie all judgements and sayings of raen,
and of angels, whether they be such as God approveth, yea or no ;
and they are not to be judged or sentenced by any." *
Especially noteworthy is the statement that no ex
ternal rule is to be used to supply any supposed de
fects of the written word, and that plain direction is
given by what is set down expressly in the Scripture.

• Treatise of Christian Religion, 1616, p. 78.

336 BIBLICAL STUDY.
John Ball * gives an admirable statement of the Puritan
position :
" The expounding of the Scriptures is commanded by God, and
practiced by the godly, profitable both for the unfolding of obscure
places, and applying of plaine texts. It stands in two things, (i) In
giving the right sense. (2) In a fit application of the same. Of one
place of Scripture, there is but one proper and naturail sense, though
sometimes things are so expressed, as that the things themselves
doe signifie other things, according to the Lord's ordinance : Gal.
iv. 22, 23, 24 ; Ex. xii. 46, with John xix. 36 ; Ps. ii. i, with Acts iv.
34, 25, 26. We are not tyed to the expositions of the Fathers or
councels for the finding out the sense of the Scripture, the Holy
Ghost speaking in the Scripture, is the only faithful interpreter of
the Scripture. The meanes to find out the true meaning of the
Scripture, are conference of one place of Scripture with another,
diligent consideration of the scope and circumstances of the place,
as the occasions, and coherence of that which went before, with that
which foUoweth after ; the matter whereof it doth intreat, and cir
cumstances of persons, times and places, and consideration, whether
the words are spoken figuratively or simply ; for in figurative speeches,
not the outward shew of words, but the sense is to be taken, and
knowledge of the arts and tongues wherein the Scriptures were
originally written. But alwayes it is to bee observed, that obscure
places are not to bee expounded contrary to the rule of faith set
downe in plainer places of the Scripture."
The analogy or rule of faith is expressly defined by
him as " set downe in plainer places of the Scripture,"
and it is maintained that " the Holy Ghost speaking in
the Scripture is the only faithful interpreter of Script
ure." This iraproveraent of the Protestant principle by
lifting it to the person of the Holy Spirit speaking in
the word to the believer, prevents any substitution of
an external symbol or system of theology for the rule of

* Short Treatise containing all the principall Grounds of Christian Religion.
Tenth Impression. London, 1635. p, 39.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 337
faith of the Scriptures theraselves. Archbishop Usher
takes the sarae position as Ball : *
" The Spirit of God alone is the certain interpreter of His word
written by His Spirit. For no man knoweth the things pertaining
to God, but the Spirit of God (I. Cor. ii. 11)  The interpreta
tion therefore must be of the same Spirit by which the Scripture was
written ; of which Spirit we have no certainty upon any man's
credit, but onely so far forth as his saying may be confirmed by the
Holy Scriptures  How then is the Scripture to be interpreted
by Scripture f According to the analogy of faith (Rom. xii. 6), and
the scope and circumstance of the present place, and conference of
other plain and evident places, by which all such as are obscure and
hard to be understood ought to be interpreted, for there is no matter
necessary to etemal life, which is not plainly, and sufficiently set
forth in many places of Scripture."
These extracts frora the Puritan fathers, who chiefly
influenced the Westminster divines, will enable us to
understand the principles of interpretation laid down in
the Westminster Confession (I. 9-10), which are in ad
vance of all the symbols of the Reformation in this par
ticular :
" The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture
itself; and therefore, when there is a question about the true and
full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must
be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly "
(§9)- " The supreme judge, by which all controversies of religion are to
be determined and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writ
ers, doctrines of raen, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in
whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit,
speaking in the Scripture " (§ 10).
These principles of interpretation give the death-blow
to the manifold sense, and also to any external analogy
of faith for the interpretation of Scripture. It has been

" Body of Divmitie, London, 1645. Fourth Edit., London, 1653, pp. 24, 25.
15

838 BIBLICAL STUDY.
raade contra-confessional in those churches which adopt
the Westrainster syrabols to believe and teach any but
the one true and full sense of any Scripture, or to appeal
to " doctrines of raen," or any external rule or analogy
of faith, or to raake any other but the Holy Spirit Him
self the supreme interpreter of Scripture to the believer
and the church. It was not without good and sufficient
reasons that the Westminster divines substituted the
" Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture" for the analogy
of faith which had been so much abused, and which was
to be still more abused by the descendants of the Puri
tans, after they had forgotten their Puritan fathers, and
resorted to the Swiss and Dutch scholastics for theolog
ical instruction.
Edward Leigh (a lawyer and meraber of the Long
Parliaraent, and said to have been a lay raeraber of the
Westrainster Asserably,) clearly states the Puritan posi
tion * in his chapter on the Interpretation of Scripture :
" The Holy Ghost is the judge, and the Scripture is the sentence
or definitive decree. We acknowledge no publick judge except the
Scripture, and the Holy Ghost teaching us in the Scripture, He that
made the law should interpret the same." . . . . " The Papist says,
that the Scripture ought to be expounded by the rule of faith, and
therefore not by Scripture only. But the rule of faith and Scripture
is all one. As the Scriptures are not of man, but of the Spirit, so
their interpretation is not by raan, but of the Spirit likewise." t
We shall call attention to sorae other features of the
interpretation of the seventeenth century in England,
because it has been neglected by British and American

* Systeme, or Body of Divinity. London, 1654, pp. 107, 119.
+ Thomas Watson, in his Body of Practical Divinity, in exposition of the
Westminster Shorter Catechism, London, 1692, p. 16, takes the same position :
" The Scripture is to be its own interpreter, or rather the Spirit speaking in it ;
nothing can cut the diamond but the diamond ; nothing can interpret Scripture
but Scripture ; the sun best discovers itself by its own beams."

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCEIPTUEE. 339
scholars, and consequently also by Gerraan critics and
historians, upon whora raany of our raodern Anglo-Saxon
interpreters depend, conservative and progressive alike.
Henry Ainsworth says :
" I have chiefly laboured in these annotations upon Moses, to ex
plain his words and speech by conference with himself, and other
prophets and apostles, all which are comraenters upon his lawes,
and do open unto us the mysteries which were covered under his
veile ; for by a true and sound literall explication, the spiritual mean
ing may be the better discerned. And the exquisite scanning of
words and phrases, which to some may seerae needlesse, will be
found (as painful to the writer) profitable to the reader." *
Francis Taylor, a Westminster divine, a great Hebrew
scholar and Talmudist, author of raany coramentaries
and other practical and theological works, says :t
" The method used by me is new, and never formerly exactly fol
lowed in every verse, by any writer, Protestant or Papist, that ever I
read, (i) Ye have the grammatical sense in the various significa
tions of every Hebrew word used throughout the Old Testament,
which gives light to many other texts ; (2) Ye have the rhetorical
sense, in the tropes and figures ; (3) The logicall, in the several
arguments ; (4) The theological in divine observations."
This is an exact and admirable method which would
have delighted Ernesti in the next century, if he had
known of it, with the exception of the last point in
which the Puritan practical interpretation coraes in play.
Edward Leigh X also lays down excellent principles :
"The word is interpreted ^aright, by declaring (i) the order, (2)
the summe or scope, (3) the sense of the words, which is done by
framing a rhetorical and logical analysis of the text. In giving the
sense, three rules are of principal use and necessity to be observed.

* Pentateuch, Preface, 1626.
t Epist. dedicatory to the Exposition ofthe Proverbs. London, 1655.
t In /. c, p. 119.

340 BIBLICAL STUDY.
(i) The literal and largest sense of any words in Scripture must not
be embraced further when our cleaving thereto would breed sorae
disagreement and contrariety between the present Scripture, and
some other text or place, else shall we change the Scripture into a
nose of wax. (2) In case of such appearing disagreement, the Holy
Ghost leads us by the hand to seek out some distinction, restriction,
limitation or signe for the reconcilement thereof, and one of these
will always fit the purpose ; for God's word must always bring per
fect truth, it cannot fight against itself. (3) Such figurative sense,
limitation, restriction or distinction must be sought out, as the word
of God affordeth either in the present place or some other ; and
chiefly those that seem to differ with the present text, being duly
compared together."
We do not know where a raore careful stateraent, of
this delicate problera of harraonizing Scripture with
Scripture, can be found.*
The Puritan interpreters laid stress upon the practical
interpretation, or application of Scripture. The best
stateraent is found in the Key of the Bible, by Francis
Roberts, 4th edition, London, 1675, p. 5, seq.:
" That the Holy Scriptures may be more profitably and clearly un
derstood, certain rules or directions are to be observed and followed :
"I. Some more special and peculiar, more particularly concerning
scholars. As (i) The competent understanding of the original lan-

* This same Edward Leigh was one of the best Biblical scholars of the seven
teenth century. He published Annotations upon all the New Testament, phil-
logicall and Theologicail wherein the emphasis and elegance of the Greeke is ob
served, some imperfections in our translation are discovered, divers Jewish rites
and customes tending to illustrate the text are mentioned, many antilogies and
seeming contradictions reconciled, severail darke and obscure places opened,
sundry passages vindicated from the false glosses of Papists and Heretics. Lon
don, 1650, folio. The title is descriptive of a sound method. He also published
Ci'itica Sacra on the Hebrew of the Old Testament. 410, London, 1639. Crit
ica Sacra on the Greek of the New Testament. 410, London, 1646. These
were combined in a folio, 1662. They were translated into Latin by Henry Mid-
doch and published at Amsterdam, 1679, and then at Leipzig, 1696, with Pref
ace by John Meyer, a Hebrew Professor there, and in this way exerted a great
influence on the continent until the close of the century.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCEIPTURE. 341
guages  (2) The prudent use of Logick  (3) The sub
servient help of other arts, as Rhetoric, Natural Philosophy, etc.
.... (4) The benefit of humane histories to illustrate and clear the
theme. (5) The conferring of ancient translations with the origi
nals  (6) The prudent use of the most orthodox, learned, and
judicious Commentators. (7) Constant caution that all tongues,
arts, histories, translations, and comments be duly ranked in their
proper places in subserviency under, not in regency or predomi
nancy over the Holy Scriptures which are to controle thera all."
" II. Sorae more general and common directions, which may be
of use to all sorts of Christians learned and unlearned  (i)
Beg wisdom of the onely wise God, who gives liberally and upbraids
not  (2) Labour sincerely after a truly gracious spirit, then
thou shalt be peculiarly able to penetrate into the internal marrow
and mysteries of the holy Scriptures  (3) Peruse the Scripture
with an hurable self-denying heart  (4) Familiarize the Script
ure to thyself by constant and methodical exercise therein. ...» (5)
Understand Scripture according to the theological analogy, or cer
tain rule of faith and love  (6) Be well acquainted with the
order, titles, times, penraan, occasion, scope, and principal parts of
the books, both of the Old and New Testament. (7) Heedfully and
judiciously observe the accurate concord and harraony of the Holy
Scriptures. (8) Learn the excellent art of explaining and under
standing the Scriptures, by the Scriptures. (9) Endeavor sincerely
to practice Scripture, and you shall solidly understand Scripture."
We have given these rules at length, both on account
of their intrinsic excellence and also to call attention to
a work of great value which has been lost sight of for a
long tirae in the history of interpretation.
This same Francis Roberts, — who was a Presbyterian
minister of London during the Commonwealth period, and
at the restoration remained with the Established church,
, — is the author of a massive work in two folio voluraes,
which construct a system of theology on the doctrine of
the covenants.*

* The Mysterie and Marrow of the Bible: viz., God's Covenants with man,
.TB the first Adam, before the Fall ; and in the last Adam, Jesus Christ, after

342 BIBLICAL STUDY.
In his epistolary introduction he says : " I began my
weekly lectures, to treat of God's Covenants, on Sept.
2, 165 1, and have persisted therein till the very publica
tion of this book, in May, 1657."
In the sarae introduction he describes his treatise as
" A Work of vast extent, coraprising in it : all the raethods of divine
dispensations to the Church in all ages ; all the conditions of the
Church under those dispensations ; all the greatest and precious
promises, of the life that now is, and of that which is to come ; all
sorts of blessings promised by God to man ; all sorts of duties re-
promised by man to God ; all the gradual discoveries of Jesus Christ,
the only Mediator and Saviour of sinners ; the whole mystery of all
true religion from the beginning to the end of the world ; and which
as a continued thred of gold runs through the whole series of all the
Holy Scriptures, .... because I have set my heart exceedingly to
the Covenants of my God, which (in my judgment) are an universal
basis or foundation of all true religion and happiness, I have shunned
no diligence, industry, or endeavor that to me seemed requisite for
the profitable unveihng of them."
Francis Roberts in this work carries out a plan de
vised and partially executed by John Ball.* According
to Thomas Blake, f "his purpose was to speak on this
subject of the covenant, all that he had to say in all the
whole body of divinity. That which he hath left behind
gives us a taste of it." In this Ball anticipated Cocce
ius and the Dutch Federal theology, as indeed his system
of the covenants is of a purer type, having all the ad
vantages of the historical method of the Dutch Federal
school without its far-fetched typologies. Indeed the

the Fall; from the Beginning to the End of the World ; Unfolded and Illus
trated in positive Aphorisms and their Explanations. 2 vols. , London, 1657.
•» Treatise of the Covenant of Grace, London, 1645, 410, pubhshed after his
death by his friend Simeon Ashe, and with commendatory notices by five other
Westminster divines.
-f Treatise of the Covenant of God entered with mankinde in tlie several
kindes and degrees of it. Preface, London, 1653.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 343
theology of the covenants had been erabedded in Puri
tan theology since Thomas Cartwright.* The covenant
principle is also in Usher's Body of Divinity, and the
Westminster symbols. In truth, the historical principle
that characterizes the covenant theology is better wrought
out by John Ball and Francis Roberts than by Cocceius.
It will be found that the doctrine of the covenants passed
over from England with the Puritan spirit into Holland,
into the Federal school, and thence into Spener and the
German Pietists. The essential mystic spirit is comraon
to these three great raoveraents which were the historic
successors of one another in the order, England, Hol
land, Germany, although each assuraed a forra adapted
to its peculiar circurastances and conditions. f
The Federal school in Holland was characterized by a
tendency to allegorize, which was foreign to the best
Puritan type, although Thoraas Brightraan, in his Cora-
raentaries on Revelation, Song of Songs, and Daniel,
reintroduced the allegorical method into the Protestant
church and carried it to great lengths. He had not a
few followers in Great Britain, and on the continent
where his works were republished.
This element is united with the principle of the cove
nant in the Federal theology, and proved its greatest
weakness. The Federal theology, however, exerted a
wholesome influence in preserving the mystic spirit of
interpretation over against the purely external historical
method of the Arminians ; and in maintaining the his
toric raethod of divine revelation over against the exter-

* In his Treatise of Christian Religion, 1616, he treats first of the doctrine of
God and then of man ; next of the Word of God, and this he divides into two
parts : the doctrine of the Covenant of Works, called the law, the Covenant of
Grace, the gospel ; and treats of Christology and Soteriology under the latter.
t Cocceius was a pupil of Ames, the British Puritan. See Mitchell, Westmin
ster Assembly, London, 1883, p. 344, seq.

344 BIBLICAL STUDY.
nal and raechanical systematizing of the Dutch scholas
tics. Spener and the Gerraan Pieti-sts also represented
the raystic spirit of interpretation and adopted many of
the chief features of Puritanism. They laid stress upon
personal relations to God and experimental piety in or
der to the interpretation of Scripture. This was accora
panied araong the best- of thera with true scholarship.
The Pietistic interpretation may be found stated by
Franke,* but especially by Rarabach,f whose work was
fruitful for raany generations and still retains its value.
The best exegete in this direction is the celebrated Ben
gel, whose interpretation is a raodel of piety and accu
racy.:]: His principle of interpretation is briefly stated:
" It is the especial office of every interpretation to ex
hibit adequately the force and significance of the words
which the text contains, so as to express everything
which the author intended, and to introduce nothing
which he did not intend " (xiv. Preface).
The principles of interpretation of the Puritans worked
raightily during the seventeenth century in Great Britain,
and produced exegetical works that ought to be the
pride of the Anglo-Saxon churches in all tirae. Thomas
Cartwright, Henry Ainsworth, John Reynolds, John
Fox, Nicholas Byfield, Paul Bayne, Hugh Broughton,
J. Davenant, Francis Taylor, William Gouge, John
Lightfoot, Edward Leigh, Wm. Attersol, Thos. Gataker,
Joseph Caryl, Samuel Clark, John Trapp, William Green
hill, Francis Roberts, and numerous others have opened
up the raeaning of the Word of God for all generations.
Araong the last of the Puritan works on the raore learned

* Manducatio ad lectionem, S.S. 1693; Praelectiones Hermeneut., 1717.
^ Institutiones Hermeneuticae, 1723, Sth edit., Jenae, 1764, ed. Buddeus.
I Gnomon, N. T., Tiibingen, 1742, English edition by T. Carlton Lewis and
klarvin R. Vincent, Philadelphia, 1860-62.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 345
side was the Synopsis Criticoruni of Matthew Poole ; but
the more practical side of interpretation continued to
advance until it attained its highest mark in Matthew
Henry.* Other practical comraentaries have been of
great service to the churches, such as those of Ph. Dod
dridge f and Thoraas Scott,:]: but the Puritan interpreta
tion soon lost its strength by the neglect of theological
education. Excluded frora the universities by their re
ligious principles, the non-conforraists were unable to
organize educational institutions of their own that were
at all adequate, and hence the rainistry fell back upon
dograatizing or spiritualizing, equally perilous, without
an exact knowledge of the Biblical text.§
In the meanwhile, the Humanistic spirit had main
tained itself in the Prelatical party in the church of Eng
land and found expression among the Arminians of
Holland. The chief interpreter of the seventeenth cent
ury, who revived the spirit of Erasmus, was Hugo Gro
tius. He laid stress upon historical interpretation.] He
was followed by the Arminians generally, especially
Clericus. Irt Great Britain Henry Hammond had the
same spirit and methods.^ Edward Pocock** also seeks
as the raain thing " to settle the genuine and literal raean-

* Expositions ofthe Old and New Testaments, London, 1704-6.
t Family Expositor. 6 vols. 4to, London, 1760-62.
X Family Bible, with notes. 4 vols. 410, 1796.
§ It is the merit of C. H. Spurgeon that he has recently called attention to the
neglected Puritan commentators and expressed his great obligations to them.
See his Commenting and Commentaries, N. Y., 1876, and also Treasury of
David, London, 6 vols., 1870, seq., which contains copious extracts from the Puri
tan commentaries.
\ Annotationes in lib. evang., Amst., 1641 ; Amiot. in Vet. Test., Paris, 1664.
If Paraphrase and Annotations upon all the books of the New Testament,
1653, 8vo, 3d edition, folio, London, 1671. In a Postscript concerning new
light or divine illumination, over against the Quakers, he insisted upon the
plain, literal, and historical sense.
** Com. on Micah, 1677, Hosea, 1685, Joel, 1691.
15*

346 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ing of the text." Dan. Whitby* also represents this
tendency ; and still later Bishop Lowth (see p. 203) and
John Taylor of Norwich.f The latter says:
" To understand the sense of the Spirit in the New, 'tis essentially
necessary that we understand its sense in the Old Testament. But
the sense of the Spirit cannot be understood unless we understand
the language in which that sense is conveyed. For which purpose
the Hebrew Concordance is the best Expositor. For there you have
in one view presented all the places of the sacred code where any
words are used ; and by carefully collating those places, may judge
what sense it will, or will not bear, which being once settled there
lies no appeal to any other writing in the world : because there are
no other books in all the world in the pure original Hebrew, but the
books of the Old Testament. A judgment therefore duly founded
upon them must be absolutely decisive." |
Taylor acknowledges his great indebtedness to the
philosopher Locke,§ and shows the influence of that
philosophy in his exegesis. Toward the close of the
century Biblical interpretation raore and more declined
in Great Britain, and we must go to the continent and
especially to Gerraany for the exegesis as well as the
higher and lower criticism of raodern tiraes.]]
VII. BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION OF MODERN TIMES.
We have seen in our studies of Biblical literature that
there was a great revival of Biblical studies, especially in
Gerraany toward the close of the eighteenth century,
which extended to all departraents. For Biblical inter
pretation Ernesti was the chief of the new era.
Ernesti was essentially a philologist rather than a

* Paraphrase and Commentary on the New Testament. 2 vols., 1703-g, folio.
-f Hebrew Concordance, 2 vols, foho, London, 1734.
X Preface of Hebrew Concordance. See also his Paraphrase with notes on
the Epistle to the Romans, London, 1745, pp. 114, 127, 146.
§ In /. c, p. 149. I See pp. 149, 206, seq.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 347
theologian, and he applied to the Bible the princi
ples which he had employed in the interpretation of the
ancient classics. He began at the foundation of inter
pretation, grammatical exegesis, and placed it in such a
position before the world that it has ever since main
tained its fundamental iraportance. He published his
principles of interpretation in 1761.* Ernesti was fol
lowed by Zacharia,f Morus,:]: C. D. Beck,§ and others.
Moses Stuart translated Ernesti with the notes .of Morus
abridged.]] About the same time as Ernesti, Seraler urged the
importance of historical interpretation.^" Seraler was an
open-rainded, devout scholar, and appropriated freely
the raaterial wherever he could find it, and reproduced it
in forms fashioned by his own genius. He was greatly
influenced by foreign interpreters and was the channel
through whora the historical interpretation, still linger
ing in Reforraed lands, made its way into Lutheran Ger
many. Among those who influenced Seraler may be
mentioned: J. A. Turretine, who had introduced the
Swiss revolt against scholasticism,** John Taylor of Nor-

* Institutio Interpretis N. T. 1761, 3te Auf., 1774; 5te Aufl. ed. Ammon,
1809. It was translated into English and edited by Bishop Terrot in i8og from
Ammon's .edition, for the Biblical Cabinet, I. and IV., Edinburg.
t Einleit. in d. Auslegekunst , 1778.
X Acroases. acad. super Herm., N. T. 1797 and 1802, ed. by Eichstadt.
§ Monogram, herm-eneutices librorum N. Foed., Lips., 1803.
I Elementary Principles of Interpretation, translated from the Latin of J. A.
Emesti, accompanied by notes, with an appendix containing extracts from Mo
rus, Beck, Keil, and Henderson. 4th edit. , Andover, 1842. The earlier edition
was republished in England with additional observations by Dr. Henderson,
London, 1827, which were used in Stuart's fourth edition.
Tf Vorbereit. zur theol. Herm., 1760-69; Apparatus ad liberalem, N. T. In
terp., 1767.
** De S. S. interp. tractatus bipartitus, 1728. This was an unauthorized and
defective edition and it was repudiated by the author. A better edition was ed
ited by Teller in 1776.

348 BIBLICAL STUDY.
wich and Daniel Whitby,* and L. Meyer, the Spinozist.f
Seraler was followed by J. G. Gabler, G. L. Baur, K. C.
Bretschneider, and others.
These eleraents of interpretation were combined in the
gramraatico-historical method of C. A. G. Keil.:]: The
grammatico-historical raethod was introduced into the
United States of Araerica chiefly by Moses Stuart and
his school.
The defects of the grammatico-historical method were
discovered and attacks were made upon it frora both
sides. Kant and his school urged rational and raoral ex
egesis, to which the historical must yield as of vastly
less importance. There was truth in this rising to the
moral se»se, but as it was stated and used by the Kant-
ians it resulted in binding the Bible in the fetters of a
philosophical systera that was far more oppressive than
the theological systera had been. Staudlein,§ Stern, ||
Stark,T[ and Kaiser,** and above all Gerraar,f f rendered
great service by urging that the interpreter should enter
into sympathy with the spirit of the Biblical authors.
On the other side the little band of Pietists of the
older Tubingen school urged the inadequacy of the
grararaatico-historical raethod and insisted upon faith
and piety in the interpreter.:]::]: The chief of these were
Storr,§§ Flatt and Steudel of Tubingen, Knapp of Halle,
and Seller of Eriangen. |]]|

* See p. 346, also Tholuck, Vermischte Schriften, Hamburg, 1839, pp. 30, 40.
t Author of an anonymous treatise : Philosophias Script, interpres., 1666.
X Lchr. d. Herm., 1810. g De interp. N. T., 1807.
I Ueber den Begriff und obersten Grundsatz d. hist, interp. d. N. T., 1815.
H Beitr. z. Herm., 1817. ** System Herm., 1817.
-ft Beitrag zur allgemein. Hermeneutik, Altona, 1828.
Jt Reuss, Gesch. d. H. S. N. T., 4te Aufl., 1864, p. 582, seq.
§§ De sensu historico, 1778.
Ill Bib. Herm., 1880, edited in HoUand by Heringa; and translated from the
Holland edition and edited with additions by Wm. Wright, London, 1835.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 349
This conflict of principles worked more and more con
fusion. If the older exegesis was at fault in neglecting
the human eleraent* and the variety of features of the
Bible on the huraan side ; the newer interpreters of the
graramatico-historical school were still raore at fault in
neglecting the divine eleraent and the unity of the Bible.
A healthful raethod of interpretation had been intro
duced from England in the translation of the works of
Bishop Lowth, which urged literary interpretation.
Herder, Eichhorn, and others exerted their influence in
the same direction. Schleiermacher deserves the credit
for combining all that had thus far been gained into a
higher unity, by his organic method of interpretation.*
Schleiermacher lays down his principles in a series of
theses :
" In the application (of Hermeneutics) to the New Testament the
philological view, which isolates every writing of every author, stands
over against the dogmatic view, which regards the N. T. as the work
of one author. Both approach one another when one considers that,
in the view of the religious contents, the identity of the school comes
in, and in the view of the details, the identity of language. . . . The
philological view lags behind its own principle when it rejects the
general dependence for the sake of the individual culture. The dog-
mafic view transcends its needs when it rejects individual culture for
the sake of dependence, and so destroys itself. The only question
that remains, is, which of the two is to be placed above the other ;
and this must be decided by the philological view itself in favor of
its own dependence. When the philological view ignores this it an
nihilates Christianity. When the dogmatic view extends the canon
of the analogy of faith beyond these limits it annihilates Scripture." t
Liicke, of Schleiermacher's school, well states the prin
ciple when he says that we must

* His Hermeneutik und Kritik is a posthumous work by his pupil, F. Lucke,
published Berlin, 1838, but the influence of his method was felt at an earlier date,
and expressed by his disciples.
t In /. c, pp. 79-81.

350 BIBLICAL STUDY.
"so construct the general principles of Hermeneutics as th.-it the
proper theological element may be united with them in a really or
ganic manner, and likewise so fashion and carry on the theo
logical element that the general principles of interpretation may
maintain their full value." ""
He also insisted upon love for the Word of God, as
the indispensable requisite for the interpreter.f
The vast importance of this organic method is seen
in the exegetical works of De Wette, Neander, Klausen,
Bleek, Lutz, Meyer, and indeed the chief interpreters of
modern Gerraany.
The greatest defect of interpretation at this time was in
the lack of apprehension of the true relation of the New
Testament to the Old Testament. The Old Testament
was neglected by Schleiermacher and raany of his school.
It was necessary for the discipline of Biblical theology to
be developed ere this defect could be overcome. The
unfolding of the discipline of Biblical theology in the
school of Neander has established, the organic unity of
the New Testament in the combination of a number of
historical types ; the organic unity of the Old Testa
ment has also been especially urged by Oehler in the spirit
of Neander, together with sorae of the features of the
older Tubingen school. The organic unity of the whole
Bible has been especially insisted upon by Hofraann of
Eriangen, DeHtzsch, and others of their school. This is
a furtiier unfolding of the organic principle of Schleier
macher, and the revival in another form of the Puritan
principle wrapt up in the covenant theology, and which
has worked through the schools of Cocceius and the
Pietists, to attach itself to the scientific principles of

* Studien und Krit., 1830, p. 421 ; see also his Grundriss d. N. T. Herm.,
1817. t See Klausen in /. r, p. 311 ; Immer in /. c, p. 66 ; Reuss in /. t., p. 605.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 35^
exegesis that have thus far been developed. The school
of Hofraann claira this principle which they call the
heilsgeschichtliche,* as the highest attainraent of Her
meneutics. This insisting above all upon interpreting
Scripture as one divine book giving the history of re
demption, is the restatement of the Puritan principle of
the gradual revelation of the covenants of grace. The
variety of the Bible is better understood in relation to its
unity ; and the genesis of its revelation of redemption
is made more prominent.
Francis Roberts already states it admirably:
" Still remember how Jesus Christ is revealed in Scripture, grad
ually in promises and covenants, till the noon-day of the gospel
shined most clearly  For (i) God is a God of order ; and He
makes known His gracious contrivances orderly. (2) Christ, and
salvation by Him are treasures too high and precious to be disclosed
all at once to the church. (3) The state of the church is various ;
she hath her infancy, her youth, and all the degrees of her minority,
as also her riper age ; and therefore God revealed Christ, not ac
cording to his own ability of revealing, but according to the churches
capacity of receiving. (4) This gradual revealing of Christ suits
well with our condition in this world, which is not perfect, but grow
ing into perfection, fully attainable in heaven only. Now this grad
ual unveiling of the covenant and promises in Christ, is to be much
considered throughout the whole Scripture ; that we may see the
wisdom of God's dispensations, the imperfections of the churches
condition here, especially in her minority ; and the usefulness of
comparing the more dark and imperfect with the more clear and
complete manifestation of the mysteries of God's grace in Christ "
(in /. c, p. 10).
VIII. METHOD OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION.
The Bible is coraposed of a body of literature. As
such it is a part of the literature of the world, having
features in coraraon with all other literatures, and also

* See Volck, in Zockler, Handb., p. 661, seq. ; Hofmann, Bib. Herm., Nord.,
1880.

352 BIBLICAL STUDY.
features peculiar to itself. From these circurastances
arise the fundaraental principles of interpretation. Bib
lical interpretation is a section of general interpretation.
Here all students of the Bible are on common ground.
Rationalistic, evangelical, scholastical, and mystical, they
should all alike begin here. This is the broad base on
which the pyraraid of exegesis is to rise to its apex. It
is the raerit of Schleiermacher that he clearly and defi
nitely established this fundamental relation. From gen
eral interpretation arises :
(i) Grammatical interpretation. The Bible is written
in human languages. These languages contain the Bible
which is to be studied. There is no other way than to
master them, and thoroughly understand their grammar.*
" Only the philologist can be an interpreter. It is true that the
office of interpretation requires more than mere philology, or an ac
quaintance with language ; but all those other qualifications that may
belong to it are useless without this acquaintance, whilst on the con
trary, in very many cases nothing more than this is necessary for
correct interpretation." t
Others than philologists may become interpreters of
Scripture by depending upon the labors of philologists
in the translations and expositions that they produce-
but without these the originals of Scripture would be as
inaccessible as the Hamathite inscriptions which still
defy the efforts of scholars to decipher them.
The great defect of ancient and mediseval interpreta
tion was in the neglect of the grammar of the Bible, and
in the dependence upon the LXX and Vulgate versions.
Hence a multitude of errors that have come into the
traditional exegesis through the fathers and schoolmen,

» See Chap, III.
+ Planck, Introduction to Sacred Philology and Interpretation, trans, and
edited by S. H. Tumer, Edin., 1834, pp. 140-141.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 353
which have become rooted in the history of doctrine
and the customs of the church as evil weeds so that it has
taken generations of gramraatical study to eradicate thera.
It is the merit of Ernesti in modern tiraes that he so
insisted upon graramatical exegesis that he induced
exegetes of all classes to begin their work here at the
foundation. Grammatical exegesis is, however, depend
ent upon the progress of linguistic studies. There has
been great progress in the knowledge of the New Testa
ment Greek : in the study of the dialects, in the com
parison of the Greek with its cognates of the Indo-Ger
manic family of languages, in the science of etymology
of words, and still more in the history of the use of
words in Greek literature. In the study of the Hebrew
language, there has been still greater progress. When
one traces the history of its study in modern tiraes, and
rises from Levita and Reuchlin, through Buxtorf and
Castel, Schultens and John Taylor, to Gesenius and
Ewald, one feels that he is climbing to greater and
greater heights. The older interpreters who knew
nothing of comparative Shemitic philology, who did not
understand the position of the Hebrew language in the
developraent of the Sheraitic family, who were ignorant
of its rich and varied syntax, who relied on traditional
meanings of words, and had not learned their etymolo
gies and their historic growth — lived almost in another
world. The modern Hebrew scholars are working in
far more extended relations, and upon vastly deeper
principles, and we should not be surprised at new and
almost revolutionary results.
(2) The second stage of our pyramid of exegesis is
logical and rhetorical interpretation. Here also there are
general featur.es in coraraon with other literatures, and
also features peculiar to Biblical literature.

354 BIBLICAL STLT)Y.
(a) The laws of thought are derived from the human
mind itself. These enable us to determine the value of
all thought, to discriminate the true, close, exact reason
ing from the inexact and fallacious. It is assuraed by
sorae that the Bible is divine in such a sense that it cor
responds with these laws of thought exactly and is fault
less in its logic. If this were so, it is astonishing that
we find so little that is technical, or in the form of logical
propositions, in the Bible. Here was the fault of the
Jewish Halacha, and the mediseval dialectic, and the
modern scholastic use of proof texts. The Bible has
been interpreted by the formulas of Aristotle in the
middle age, and then by the logical methods of the dif
ferent philosophies in the raodern age. These scholas
tic and philosophical logicians overlook the fact that
pure logic is one thing, applied logic another, and the
history of its application a third. There are differ
ences in logic as in other things. Huraan logic is far
frora infallible. • Our modern logic has not reraained in
the state of innocence, nor has it reached the state
of perfection. Certainly there are few if any dogmatic
divines and philosophers who do not violate its principles
and neglect its methods as stated in our logical raanuals.
Every race has indeed its own raethods of reasoning.
The Gerraan and the French rainds raove in somewhat
different grooves. Still more is this the case when we
consider the Hebrew and the Greek and the Anglo-Saxon.
The Biblical writers wrote for the men of their own time
and used the forms of thought of the men of their time.
It is not sufficient, therefore, to apply logical analysis to
the text of the Scripture, as is so often done.* The
proper use of logical interpretation is to seek for the

* Lange, Hermeneutik, p. 43.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 355
method of reasoning of the Biblical author; his plan,
his scope, his course of argument, and the relation of his
methods to those of his coteraporaries.
"The Scripture doth not explaine the will of God by universal
and scientific rules, but by narrations, examples, precepts, ex
hortations, admonitions, and promises ; because that manner
doth make most for the common use of all kinde of men, and
also most to affect the will, and stirre up godly motions, which
is the chief .scope of divinity." *
" Language is not the invention of metaphysicians, or convo
cations of the wise and learned. It is the common blessing of
mankind, framed for their mutual advantage in their intercourse
with each other. Its laws therefore are popular, not philosophi
cal, being founded on the general laws of thought which govern
the whole mass in the community. . . . Scarcely will we hear in a
long and serious conversation between the best speakers, a sen
tence which does not need some modification or limitation in
order that we may not attribute to it more or less than was in
tended. Nor is the operation at all difficult. 'We make the cor
rection instantly, with so little cost of thought that we would be
tempted to call it instinct did we not know that many of our per
ceptions which seem intuitive are the results of habit and educa
tion. It would be an exceedingly strange thing, if the Bible, the
most popular of all books, composed by men, for the most part
taken from the multitude, addressed 'to all, and on subjects in
teresting to all, were found written in language to be interpreted
on different principles. But, in point of fact, it is not. Its style
is eminently, and to a remarkable degree, that which we would
expect to find in a volume designed by its gracious Author to be
the people's book — abounding in all those kinds of inaccuracy
which are sprinkled through ordinary discourse ; hyperboles, an
alogies, and loose catachrestical expressions, whose meaning no
one mistakes, though their deviation from plumb, occasionally
makes the small critic sad." t
Again, it is an abuse of logical interpretation to regard

-* Ames, Marrow of Sacred Divinity, London, 1643.
\ McClelland, Manual of Sacred Interpretation, pp. 61-63, N. Y. 1842.

350 BIBLICAL STUDY.
the Biblical writers as all alike logical. Those who take
the logical methods of the apostle Paul as the key to the
New Testaraent, and interpret, by the apostle to the Gen
tiles, the practical Peter and Jaraes and the raystic John
and above all our blessed Lord Jesus hiraself, the Son of
raan, erabracing in himself all the types of humanity for
the rederaption of all — do violence to these other writers,
rend the searaless robe of the gospel, and do not aid the
proper understanding of Paul himself. Those who
should find the key of the Old Testament in the wis
dora literature, would coramit a most unpardonable
blunder. How rauch greater is the sin of those who
first insist upon interpreting the epistles of Paul in ac
cordance with the principles of analysis of raodern logic,
and then of interpreting all the rest of the New Testa
ment by this interpretation of Paul, and then the whole
body of the Hebrew Old Testaraent by this interpreta
tion of the New Testaraent. In view of such a raethod,
one raight inquire, why take all this trouble to impose
raeanings upon such a vast body of ancient literature?
It would be far easier and raore honest to construct the
dograatic systera by logical principles, and leave the Bible
to itself. We are not surprised that when and where
such raethods have prevailed. Biblical studies have been
neglected and despised.
{b) Rhetorical interpretation is closely connected with
logical. There are common features of rhetoric that be
long to all discourse, and there are special features which
are peculiar to the Biblical literature. The Bible has
been tested and interpreted too often, after Greek, Ger
man, French, and English models (see Chap. viii.). We
have to discriminate in the Bible the more logical parts
from the raore rhetorical parts. The fault of the Halacha
and scholastic methods was in their overlooking the rhe-

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 357
torical features of the Bible. The fault of the Haggada
and allegorical methods was in overlooking the logical.
In rhetorical exegesis it is essential to discriminate poetry
frora prose, the different kinds of poetry and prose from
each other, the style of each author, as well as the liter
ary peculiarities of the people, and race which produced
the Bible. Here is a neglected field of study which prom
ises great rewards to those who will pursue it,* and it
will prove of especial richness to the homilist and cate-
chist. (3) Thus far all parties work in common. As we rise
to the higher stage of historical interpretation there arise
differences between the rationalistic and other interpre
ters, owing to certain presuppositions with which they
approach the Bible. There are different conceptions of
history. The evangelical interpreters recognize the super
natural element as the determining factor ; the rational
istic interpreters endeavor to explain everything by
purely natural laws. Among believers in the supernatural
there is also a difference, in that some are ever resorting
to the supernatural to explain the history, while other
more judicious interpreters explain by the natural element
until they are corapelled by overpowering evidence to re
sort to the supernatural. Seraler has the credit in modern
times of laying great stress on the historic interpretation.
I n historical exegesis we have to recognize that the Biblical
writers were raen of their tiraes and yet raen above their
tiraes. They were influenced by inspiration to introduce
new divine revelations, and to revive old truths and set
them in new lights ; they were reformers, and so came
into conflict with the conservatives of their tirae. Many
errors spring up here. The Pharisees interpreted the

** See page 228 seq.

358 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Old Testament by tradition. The scholastics pursue
the same course with reference to the New Testament.
The rationalists interpret Scripture altogether by history
and natural forces. Here the scholastic and rationalistic
interpreters of our times lock horns. They are both
alike in error. Tradition is the bastard of history and
should be resorted to only when we have no history,
and then with caution and suspicion as to its origin.
History is to help, not rule^for in the history of re
demption the supernatural force shapes and controls
history. The true method is to rise from the natural to
the supernatural. History has been impregnated with
the supernatural. We must not expect to find the su
pernatural everywhere on the surface. The supernat
ural coraes into play only when the natural is incapable
of accomplishing the divine purpose ; so it is to be
sought when it alone is capable of affording explanation
of the phenomena. Then the supernatural displays it
self with convincing, assuring force.
Lutz has some admirable reraarks here : *
" The historico-grararaatical method of interpretation has brought
out truths which cannot be valued too highly. No book needs more
than the Holy Scriptures to be understood inaccordance with the tiraes
in which they were first read  But it is just as true that such
an exposition in its one-sidedness limiting itself to grammar and
history, entirely loses sight of the peculiar features of the Bible, and
would bring about a complete separation between church and exe
gesis. Thereby the church would be deprived of its light, and exe
gesis would dig its own grave."
(4) In rising to comparative interpretation we have to dis
tinguish still further the attitude of interpreters toward
the Bible. Supernaturalists come to the Bible as a sacred
canon, an organic whole. Rationalists corae to the Bible

* Bib. Herm., Pforzheim, 1861. 2te Ausg., p. 16

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTUEE. 359
as a collection of raerely huraan writings. It is the raerit
of the Puritans, of the Federalists of Holland, and in re
cent times of the schools of Schleiermacher and Hofmann,
that they urged the organic unity of Scripture. It is
presumed that writers are consistent, and that writers
of the sarae school are in substantial accord. This is
a general presuraption derived frora the study of all
literature. But we raust go further and as supernatu
ralists insist that as all the writers of the Bible are of
the school of the Holy Spirit and conspired to give us
the coraplete organism of the canon, there is a unity and
concord that extends throughout the Bible. There is
error here on the right and the left. The rationalists
regard the Bible as a bundle of miscellaneous and hete
rogeneous writings. The scholastics regard them as a
horaogeneous mass. As Lange says :
" We should read the Bible as a human book, but not as a heathen
book ; as a divino-human book according to the fact that there is a
distinction between elect men of God who walk on the heights of
humanity and the populace in the low plains of humanity ; as the
documents of revelation, which participate throughout in the revela
tion, the unicum araong all religious writings." *
The rationalists sink the unity in the variety ; the
scholastics destroy the variety for the sake of the unity.
The true evangelical position is, that the Bible is a vast
organism in which the unity springs from an amazing
variety. The unity is not that of a mass of rocks or a
pool of water. It is the unity that one finds in the best
works of God. It is the unity of the ocean where every
wave has its individuality of life and movement. It is
the unity of the continent, . in which mountains and
rivers, valleys and uplands, flowers and trees, birds and
insects, animal and human life combine to distinguish it

* Grindris., d. bib. Hermeneutik, Heidelberg, 187S, p. 68.

360 BIBLICAL STUDY.
as a magnificent whole frora other continents. It is the
unity of the heaven, where star differs frora star in form,
color, order, raoveraent, size, and importance, but all de
clare the glory of God.
(5) As we rise to the fifth stage of exegesis, the use of
the literature of interpretation, we part company with the
Roman Catholic and all churchly interpreters. The
Bible is the Canon of the Christian Church. What re
lation does it sustain to the Church ? We are separated
from the originals by ages. Multitudes of students have
studied the Bible, and their labor has not been in vain.
As the prince of modern preachers says :
" In order to be able to expound the Scriptures, and as an aid to
your pulpit studies, you will need to be familiar with the commenta
tors : a glorious army, let me tell you, whose acquaintance will be
your delight and profit. Of course, you are not such wiseacres as to
think or say that you can expound Scripture without assistance from
the works of divines and learned men, who have labored before you
in the field of exposition  It seems odd, that certain men who
talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to themselves, should
think so little of what he has revealed to others." *
But the question presses itself upon the exegete, how
far he is to go in allowing himself to be influenced by the
history of exegesis. The Roman Catholic Church makes
the church itself, the fathers, and councils, the expositors
of Scripture, to which all exposition is to be conforraed.
We have learned frora the history of exegesis how false
this position is.f We have found the best interpreters
using false methods, and establishing false principles. The
literature of exegesis is an invaluable help, but this help
is as much negative as positive. It exhibits a vast raul
titude of errors that have been exposed, and so prevents
us from stumbling into thera. It shows us a great num-

* Spurgeon, Commenting and Comvientaries', p. ii. t See page 328 seq.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 361
ber of positions so plainly established and fortified, that
it were folly to question them. But at the same time, it
presents a number of positions so weakly supported,
that they excite suspicion of their validity ; and others,
where contests have not resulted in settleraent. The
literature of exegesis enables us to understand the real
state of the questions that have to be determined by the
interpreter of the Scriptures. It prevents us from wast
ing our energies in doing what others have done before
us, or in working in barren or unprofitable fields ; and it
directs us to the fruitful soil of the Bible, the mines to
be worked, and the problems to be solved. It were
suicidal for interpretation to limit itself to the exegesis
of the fathers, the schoolmen, or even the reformers
and theologians of the Protestant churches. It would
result in forsaking the interpretation of the Script
ures, and devoting ourselves to the interpretation of the
interpreters. Francis Roberts happily says :
" There must be constant caution that all tongues, arts, histories,
translations, and comments be duly ranked in their proper place, in
a subserviency under, not a regency or predominancy over the Holy
Scriptures, which are to controule thera all. For when Hagar shall
once usuqi over her mistress, it's high time to cast her out of doors
till she submit herself." *
(6) In rising a stage higher in our pyramid to doctrinal
interpretation, we must part company with the Protestant
scholastics, for which we have been prepared, as were
Abraham and Lot by previous minor contentions. The
Bible is a divine revelation. It presents us with " what
man is to believe concerning God, and what duty God
requires of man." f The Bible is the rule of faith. It

* In /. c, p. 5. • -f West. Shorter Cat., 223.
16

362 BIBLICAL STUDY.
is to be interpreted in accordance with the analogy of
faith. This analogy is the substance of Scripture doc
trine found in the plainest passages of Scripture. This
was the view of the reforraers. But the scholastics sub
stituted for this internal rule of faith an external rule of
faith — first in the apostles' creed, then in the syrabols of
the churches, and finally in the Reformed or Lutheran
or Anglican systeras of doctrine. And thus the Script
ures becarae the slaves of dograatic a priori systems. The
evangelical interpreter returns to the position of the re
formers. He has learned in the history of doctrine that
the early church depended too much upon the apostle
John, the mediseval church upon Peter and James, the
modern church on the apostle Paul. He finds a system
of theology in the Bible itself which he has learned as a
Biblical Theology to be carefully distinguished from
Dogmatic Theology. He has found that Peter and John
and Jaraes and Paul were all disciples of Jesus Christ,
and have in Hira their centre and life. The evangelical
interpreter has learned that the Old Testament is an or
ganic whole, in which priests and prophets, sages and
poets find their centre and life in the theophanies of Je
hovah. He has learned that Jehovah and Jesus are one,
and that in the Messiah of prophecy and history the
Scriptures of the Old and New Testaraents become an
organic whole. With this bringing forth of the internal
substance of the Scriptures in its unity and variety theo
logical exposition finds its satisfaction and delight, and
the analogy of faith is harmonized with the principles
of interpretation which have indeed prepared the way
for its advance and achieveraents.* Francis Roberts
saw this and stated it in the 17th century.f

» See Chap. XI. •• f In /. c, p. lo.

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCEIPTURE. 363
" Now that we may more successfiiUy and clearly understand
Scripture by Scripture, these ensueing particulars are to be observed ;
(i) That Jesus Christ our mediator and the salvation of sinners by
Him is the very substance, marroav, soul and scope of the whole
Scriptures. What are the whole Scriptures„but as it were the spir
itual swadhng cloathes of the Holy child Jesus, (i) Christ is the
truth and substance of all the types and shadows. (2) Christ is the
matter and substance of the Covenant of Grace under all administra
tions thereof ; under the Old Testament Christ is veyled, under the
New Covenant revealed. (3) Christ is the centre and meeting-
place of all the promises, for in him all the promises of God are yea,
and they are Amen. (4) Christ is the thing signified, sealed, and
. exhibited in all the sacraments of Old and New Testaments,
whether ordinary or extraordinary. (5) Scripture genealogies are to
lead us on to the true Une of Christ. (6) Scripture chronologies are
to discover to us the tiraes and seasons of Christ. (7) Scripture laws
are our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ ; the moral by correcting,
the ceremonial by directing. And (8) Scripture gospel is Christ's
light, whereby we know him ; Christ's voice, whereby we hear and
follow him ; Christ's cords of love, whereby we are drawn into sweet
union and communion with him ; yea it is the power of God unto
salvation unto all them that believe in Christ Jesus. Keep therefore
still Jesus Christ in your eye, in the perusal of the Scripture, as the
end, scope, and substance thereof. For as the sun gives light to all
the heavenly bodies, so Jesus Christ the sun of righteousness gives
ligkt to all the Holy Scriptures.''
(7) In rising now to the highest stage of interpreta
tion — practical interpretation — we part corapany with
the raystics as well as the scholastics, and return to the
position of the Puritans and Westminster divines. The
Bible is a book of life — a people's book — a book of con
duct. It came from the living God. It tends to the
living God. Here is the apex of the pyramid of inter
pretation. He who has not reached this stage has
stopped on the way and will not understand the
Bible. The Bible brings the interpreter to God. We
can understand the Bible only by mastering it. We

364 BIBLICAL STUDY.
need the raaster key. No one but the Master himself
can give it to us. It is necessary to know God and His
Christ in order to know the Bible. The Scriptures can
not be understood frora the outside by grararaar, logic,
rhetoric, and history alone. The Bible cannot be under
stood when involved in the labyrinth of its doctrines.
The Bible is to be understood frora its centre — its heart
¦ — its Christ. Jesus Christ does not reveal Himself ordi
narily aside frora the Bible, by new revelations outside
of it casting new light upon it from the exterior, as the
mystics suppose. But the Messiah is the light centre
of the Scriptures themselves. He is enthroned in them
as His Holy of Plolies, as was Jehovah in the ancient
temple. Through the avenues of the Scriptures we go
to find Christ — in their centre we find our Saviour. It
is this personal relation of the author of the entire
Scripture to the interpreter that enables him truly to
understand the divine things of the Scripture. Jesus
Christ knew the Old Testament and interpreted it as
one who knew the mind of God.* He neefled no helps
to climb the pyraraid of interpretation. He was born
and ever lived at the surarait. The apostles interpreted
the Scriptures from the mind of Christ, read by the
Spirit He had given them.-j- We have no such supernat
ural help. We cannot use their a priori methods, but
we raay climb toward them. We have all the enthusi
asra of the quest — all the joy of discovery.
It is not necessary for us to coraplete our studies of
the lower stages of exegesis ere we clirab higher. The
exegete is not building the pyraraid. He is climbing it.
Every passage tends toward the sumrait. Sorae inter
preters reraain forever in the lowest stages. Others
¦* See p. 312. t See p. 319. ¦*

THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE. 365
spring hastily to the higher stages and fall back crippled
and are flung down to the lowest. The patient, faithful,
honest exegete climbs steadily to the surarait.
Our Puritan fathers understood this principle. The
doctrin^that the Holy, Spirit is the suprerae interpreter
of Scripture is the highest attainraent of interpretation.
The greatest leaders of the church in all ages have acted
on this principle, however defective their apprehension
of it may have been, and however little they raay have
consciously used it in Scripture interpretation. It was
this consciousness of knowing the mind of the Spirit and
having the truth of God that made them invincible. It
was Athanasius against the world. With the divine
truth of the blessed Trinity he was raightier than the
world. It was Luther against pope and eraperor. He
could do no other. The Word of God in his hands and
in his heart assured him of justification by faith ; and
poor, weak man though he was, he was mightier than
Church and State combined.
It was this principle "that the supreme judge, by
which all controversies of religion are to be determined,
and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers,
doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined,
and in -whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other
but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture,"* that
made the Puritan faith and life invincible.
O that their descendants had raaintained it ! If they
had laid less stress upon the minor matters : the order
of the decrees, the extent of the atonement, the nature
of imputation, the mode of inspiration, and the divine
right of presbytery, — and had adhered to this essential
principle of their fathers, the history of Puritanism would

* Westminster Confession, I. to.

366 BIBLICAL STUDY.
have been higher, grander, and more successful. We
would not now be threatened with the ruin that has
overtaken all its unfaithful predecessors in their turn.
Let their children return to it ; let them cling to it as
the most precious achievement pf British Christianity ;
let them raise it on their banners, and advance with it
into the conflicts of the day ; let them plant it on every
hill and in every valley throughout the world ; let them
not only give the Bible into the hands of men and trans
late it into their tongues, but let them put it into their
hearts, and transjate it into their lives. Then will
Biblical interpretation reach its culmination in practical
interpretation, in the experience and life of raankind.

CHAPTER XL
BIBLICAL THEOLOGY.
Biblical Theology, as a theological discipline, had
its origin in the effort to throw off from the Bible the
accumulated traditions of scholasticisra, guard it from
the perversions of mysticism, and defend it from the at
tacks of rationalism. Its growth has been through a
struggle with these abnormal tendencies, until it has es
tablished a well-defined system, presenting the unity of
the Scriptures as a divine organism, and justly estimating
the various human types of religion, doctrine, and morals.
I. the FOUR types OF THEOLOGY.
The Bible is the divine revelation as it has become
fixed and permanent in written documents of various
persons in different periods of history, collected in one
body called the canon, or sacred Scriptures. All Chris
tian theology raust be founded on the Bible, and yet the
theologians of the various Christian churches, and the
several periods of Christian history have differed great
ly in their use of the Bible. Each age has its own prov
idential problems to solve in the progress of 'our race,
and seeks in the divine word for their solution, looking
frora the point of view of its own iramediate and pecul
iar necessities. Each temperament and characteristic
tendency of human nature approaches the Bible from its
(367)

368 BIBLICAJi STUDY.
own peculiarities and necessities. The subjective and
the objective, the forra and the substance of knowledge,
the real and the ideal, are ever readjusting theraselves
to the advancing generations. If the Bible were a codex
of laws, or a system of doctrines, there would still be
room for difference of attitude and interpretation ; but
inasmuch as the Bible is rather a collection of various
kinds of literature : poetry and prose, history and story,
oration and epistle, sentence of wisdom and dramatic
incident ; and, as a whole, concrete rather than abstract,
the room for difference of attitude and interpretation is
vastly enhanced. Principles are not always distinctly
given, but must ordinarily be derived from a concrete
body of truth and facts, and concrete relations ; and
everything depends upon _ the point of view, method,
process, and the spirit with which the study is conducted.
Thus the mystic spirit arising from an emotional nat
ure and unfolding into a raore or less refined sesthetic
sense, seeks union and coraraunion with God, direct, irn-
mediate, and vital, through the religious feeling. It
either strives to break through the forms of religion to
the spiritual substance, or else by the imagination sees
allegories in the forms, or modes of divine manifestation
in sensuous outlines and colors of beauty and grandeur,
to be interpreted by the religious aesthetic taste. The
religious element is disproportionately unfolded, to the
neglect of the doctrinal and ethical. This mystic spirit
exists in all ages and in most religions, but it was es
pecially prominent in the Ante-Nicene church, and in
Greek anti Oriental Christianity, and was distinguished
by its intense devotion and its too exclusive absorption
in the contemplation of God and of Jesus Christ as God
and Saviour. Its exegesis is characterized by the alle
gorical method.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 369
The scholastic spirit seeks union and communion with
God by means of well-ordered forms. It searches the
Word of God for a well-defined system of law and doc
trine by which to rule the Church and control the world.
It arises from an intellectual nature, and grows into a
more or less acute logical sense, and a taste for systems of
' order. This spirit exists in all ages and in most religions,
but was especially dominant in the middle age of the
church and in Latin Christianity. It is distinguished by
an intense legality and by too exclusive attention to the
works of the law, and the consideration of the sover
eignty of God, the sinfulness of man, and the satisfac
tion to be rendered to God for sin. In Biblical studies
it is distinguished by the legal, analytic method of in
terpretation, carried on at times with such hair-splitting
distinctions, and subtilty of reasoning, that the Script
ures become as it were a magician's book, which through
the device of the manifold sense are as effectual to the
purpose of the dogmatician for proof texts as are the
sacraments to the priests in their magical operation.
The doctrinal element prevails over the religious and
ethical. The speculative spirit seeks union and communion with
God through the human reason and conscience, and, like
the mystic spirit, disregards the form, but from another
point of view. It is developed into a more or less pure
ethical sense. It works with honest doubt and inquisi
tive search after truth, for the solution of the great prob
lem of the world and raan. It is distinguished by an
intense rationality and morality. It yearns for a con
science at peace with God and working in faith toward
God and love toward man. This has been the prevailing
spirit in the Germanic world since the Reformation, and
is still the characteristic spirit of our age. The Church,
16*

370 BIBLICAL STUDY.
its institutions and doctrines, the sacred Scriptures them
selves, are subjected to earnest criticism in the honest
search for moral and redemptive truth, and the eternal
ideas of right, which are good forever, and are approved
by the reason and conscience. The ethical eleinent pre
vails over the religious and the doctrinal.
Now, the evangelical spirit combines what is true and'
of advantage in all these tendencies of human nature.
Born of the Holy Spirit, it is ever appropriating all the
faculties and powers of man, and eliminating therefrom
defective and abnormal tendencies and habits. It is
reverent, believing, loving approach to God through the
raeans of grace. It is above all vital unioli and com
munion with the Triune God in the forms of divine ap
pointraent, and the love and service of God and the
brethren with all the faculties. It uses the forra in order
to the substance. It is inquiring, obedient, devout, and
reforraatory. It combines the subject and the object of
knowledge, and aims to realize the ideal. It unites the
devotional with the legal and moral habits and attitudes.
It strives to unite in the church the various types of
human experience in order to complete raanhood, and
the corapletion of the kingdom of God in the golden age
of the Messiah.
This evangelical spirit is the spirit of our Saviour, who
speaks to us through four evangelists in the various
types, in order to give us a complete and harraonious
representation of Himself. This is the spirit which com
bines the variety of the Old and New Testament -writers
into the unity of the Holy Ghost. This is the spirit
which animated the Christian church in its great ad
vancing epochs, when a variety of leaders, guided by the
Holy Spirit, combined the types into comprehensive
movements. This was the underlying and moving prin-

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 3Y|
ciple of the Reformation and of Puritanism where vital
religion combined with great intellectual activity and
moral earnestness, to produce the churches of Protestant
Christianity. The great initial movements by which the Christian
church advanced in the combination of the variety of
forces into harmonious operation, in every case gave way
to reaction and decline, in whicK the various forces sep
arated themselves, and some particular one prevailed.
So it was in the seventeenth century after the Reforraa
tion. The successors of the reformers, declining from
the vital religion and moral vigor of Luther, Calvin, and
Knox, broke up into various antagonistic parties in the
different national churches, in hostility with one another,
more and more raarring the harraony of divine truth and
the principles of the Reformation. The reaction first
began with those who had inherited the scholastic spirit
from the middle age, and substituted a Protestant scho
lasticisra for the raediseval scholasticism in the Lutheran
and Reformed churches of the continent, and a Protest
ant ecclesiasticism for a papal in the churches of Great
Britain. The Scriptures once more became the slaves
of dograatic systeras and ecclesiastical raachinery, and
were reduced to the raenial service of furnishing proof
texts to the foregone conclusions of poleraic divines and
ecclesiastics. The French Huguenots and British Puritans, in their
struggles against persecution, maintained a vital religion,
and reacted to the unfolding of the mystic type of the
ology and devoted their attention to works of piety, to
union and communion with God, and the practical ap
plication of the Scriptures to Christian life, holding fast
to the covenant of grace as the principle of their entire
theology, while they distinguished between a theoretical

372 BIBLICAL STUDY.
and a practical divinity, presenting the forraer in the
coraraon Reforraed sense, but advancing the latter to a
very high degree of developraent, the best expression of
which is found in the Westminster symbols.* Puritan
ism had, however, within itself antagonistic elements,
which separated themselves after the composition of the
Westrainster standards, into various types, and the Puri
tan spirit largely advanced into the Puritanical, on the
one side reacting to scholasticism in the school of the In
dependent divine, John Owen, and on the other into
mysticism, in the many separating churches of Great
Britain, and in such merabers of the Westrainster As
serably as Thoraas Goodwin and Peter Sterry. Puritan-
isra passed over to the continent through Wra. Ames
and others, and in the school of Cocceius raaintained a
more biblical cast of doctrine in the system of the cove
nants, and afterward gave birth to Pietisra in Reformed
and Lutheran Germany, producing the biblical school of
Bengel and the Moravians ; subsequently bursting forth
in England in the form of Methodism, which is a genu-

¦* John Dury, one of the Westminster divines, a Scotchman, the great peace
maker of his age, in his work. An Earnest Plea for Gospel Communion, sheds
much light upon this subject. He defines Practical Divinity to be "a system or
coUection of divine truth relating to the Practice of Piety." The great majority
of the writings of the Puritan divines and Westminster men are upon this theme.
It embraces chaps, xix.-xxxi. of the Westminster Confession of Faith, the larger
part of the Catechisms, and indeed the more characteristic, the abler, and the
better parts. Wm. Gouge (also member of Westminster Assembly) in 1633
headed a petition of the London ministers to Archbishop Ussher to frame a sys
tem of Practical Divinity, as a bond of union among Protestants, distinguishing
between essentials and circumstantials. John Dury, in 1654, presents such an
outUne himself, working it out on the principle of the Covenant of Grace. He
says : " Nor is it possible (as I conceive) ever to unite the Professors of Christi
anity to each other, to heal their breaches and divisions in Doctrine and Practice,
and to make them live together, as brethren in one spirit ought to do, without the
same sense of the Covenant by which they may be made to perceive the terms
upon which God doth unite aU those that are his children unto himself " (p. 19,
An Earnest Plea for Gospel Communion, London, 1654).

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 373
ine child of Puritanism in the stress that it lays upon
piety and a Christian life, although it shares with all
these movements that have grown out of Puritanism,
the common fault of undue eraphasis upon the religious
eleraent, and a more or less sharply defined raysticisra,
to the neglect of the doctrinal and the ethical.
The school of Sauraur in France, the school of Calix-
tus in Gerraany, and the Carabridge Platonists in Eng
land (who were Puritan in origin and training), revived
the ethical type and strove to give the huraan reason its
proper place and functions in raatters of religion, and
prepared the way for a broad, coraprehensive church.
They were accorapanied, however, by a raore active
movement, which by an undue emphasis of the rational
and the ethical, followed Hobbes, John Goodwin, and
Biddle into a raoveraent which in England assumed the
form of Deism, and in France of Atheism, in Holland of
Pantheism, and in Germany of Rationalism. And thus
the three great types became antagonized both within
the national churches, in struggling parties, and without
the national churches, in separating churches and hostile
forms of religion and irreligion, of philosophy and of
Science. Thus the evangelical spirit of the Reformation
was crushed between the contending parties, and its
voice drowned for a while by the clamor of partisanship.
The struggle has continued into the present century, but
has been raodified since Schleierraacher in the growth of
the evangelical spirit to becorae the potent reconciling
force of the 19th century.*
* The various types are not always found in their strength and purity as di
vergent forces, but frequently in a more or less mixed condition. Thus the
Cambridge Platonists, while predominantly rational and ethical, were also char
acterized by the mystic spirit, especially in the case of Henry Moore. The Puri
tans, William Perkins and WilUam Ames, combined the scholastic and mystic
types. The scholastic and the rational combined in Calixtus and Arminius.
This might be illustrated by numerous examples.

374 BIBLICAL STUDY.
II. RISE OF BIBLICAL THEOLOGY.
It was in the midst of this conflict of theological types
that Biblical Theology had its origin and historical de
velopment, and has now its position and importance. It
was first during the conflict between Rationalism and
Supernaturalisra in Gerraany that the need of a Biblical
Theology began to be felt. Scripture was the common
battle-field of Protestants, and each party strove to pre
sent the Scriptures from its own peculiar point of view ;
and it became important to distinguish the teachings of
the Scriptures theraselves frora the teachings of the
schools and the theologians of the contending parties.
This was attempted almost simultaneously from both
sides of the conflict. G. T. Zacharia, a pupil of Baum-
garten at Halle, and a decided supernaturalist,* would
compare the Biblical ideas with the church doctrine in
order to correct and purify the latter. He would base
Dogmatics on the Scriptures, which alone can prove
and correct the system. The author speaks of the ad
vancing economy of redemption, but has no conception
of an organic development. f Soon after, Araraon (C. F.)
issued his work on Biblical Theology.:]: Araraon was a
rationalist. Miracles and prophecy are rejected as un
tenable. They will not bear critical and historical inves
tigation. He would gather material from the Bible for
a dogmatic system without regard to the system that
might be built upon it.§ Thus frora both sides the
scholastic system was undermined by the scriptural in
vestigation.

* Bibl. Theol. Oder Untersuchung des biblischen Grundes der vornehmsten
theologischen Lehren, 1772.
-f See Tholuck's view of him in Herzog, Real Ency., x Auf., xviii., p. 351.
X Entwurf einer reinen Bibl, Theologie, 1792, and Biblische Theologie, 1801.
§ Tholuck regards his Biblical Theology as a fundamental one for the histori-
co-critical Rationalism. (See Herzog, i AuS.rxix., p. 54, seq.)

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 3^5
In the meanwhile Michaelis, Griesbach, and Eichhorn
had given a new impetus to Biblical studies. Gabler
(J. F.), the pupil and friend of Eichhorn and Gries
bach, who influenced hira and largely determined his
theological position, first laid the foundations of Bib
lical Theology as a distinct theological discipline.* He
presented the historical principle as the distinguishing
feature of Biblical Theology over against a systera of
Dogmatics.f Gabler himself did not work out his prin
ciples into a system, but left this as an inheritance to his
successors. Lorenzo Baur:]: defines Biblical Theology as a develop
ment, pure and unmixed with foreign elements, of the
religious theories of the Jews, of Jesus, and the apostles,
according to the different historical periods, the varied
acquireraents and views of the sacred writers, as derived
from their writings. He sought to determine the uni
versal principles which would apply to all times and in
dividuals. He would frora the shell of Biblical ideas get
the kernel of the universal religion. § De Wette || sought
to separate the essential from the non-essential by re-

* In an academic discourse : de justo discrimine theologies biblica et dog
matics regundisque recte utriusque finibus, 1787.
¦f Gabler was a man of the type of Eichhorn and Herder, on the borders of
the 18th and 19th centuries, from whom the fructifying influences upon the
Evangelical Theology of the 19th century went forth. He labored for raany
years as Professor at Jena, and worked for the advemcement of Biblical and His
torical Learning with an intense moral earnestness.
X Bibl. Theo. d. N. T, 1800-1802.
§ P. C. Kaiser's Biblische Theologie Oder Judaismus und Christianismus
nach grammatisch-historischen Inter pretationsmethode und nach einer frei-
muthigen Stellung in die kritisch vergleichende Universalgeschichte der Relig
ion und die universale Religion (Bd. I., 1813 ; II. a, 1814; II. b. 1821) is of
the same point of -riew.
{ Bibl. Dogmatik des Alt. und Neuen Testaments oder kritische Darstellung
der Religionslehre des Hebraismus, des Judenthums, des Urchristenthums,
1813, 3te Aufl., 1831.

376 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ligious philosophical reflection. He would exclude the
local, the temporal, and the individual in order to attain
the universal religion. He made the advance of treat
ing Biblical Theology in periods, and of distinguishing
the characteristic features of Hebraism and Judaism, of
Christ and His apostles ; but in his treatment the dog
matic element has too great prorainence given to it, so
that he justly gives this work the title. Biblical Dog
matics.* W. Vatkef in 1835 issued an able and instruct
ive work, discussing fully the essential character of the
Biblical religion in relation to the idea of religion. He
divides his theme into two parts, presenting the religion
of the Old and the New Testaments. The first part is
subdivided into two stages : the Bloora and the Decay,
historically traced. The author also divides into a gen
eral and a special part ; the forraer alone has been pub
lished, and is entirely speculative in character. It does
not consider the individualities of the authors, and shows
no advance beyond L. Baur and DeWette.:]: Daniel von
Coin § carries out the historical method more thoroughly
than any of his predecessors, and presents a much more
coraplete systera, but he does not escape the speculative

* L. F. O. Baumgarten Crusius' Grundziige der Biblischen Theologie, 1828,
is of sUght importance, reacting from the advances made by L. Baur and De
Wette. \ Religion des Alien Testaments nach den kanonisckpn BUchern entwickelt,
as the first part of a Biblical Theology.
X It has recently come into prominence, owing to the author's -views of O. T.
Literature, which are in agreement with those of Reuss and Kuenen, at the ba
sis of the Critical Theories of Wellhausen.
J. C. F. Steudel's Vorlesungen Uber die Theologie des Alien Testaments
nach dessen Tode herausgegeben von G. F. Oehler, 1840, is stiU on the older
ground, taking Biblical Theology to be "the systematic survey of the religious
ideas which are found in the writings of the Old Testament," including the
Apocryphal, without distinction of periods or authors or writings, all arranged
under the topics : Man, God, and the relation between God and Man.
%Bibl. Theo., 1836.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 377-
traramels of his predecessors. He presepts the follow
ing principles of Biblical Theology :
" (i) To carefully distinguish the times and authors, and the medi
ate as well as the immediate presentation of doctrine; (2) To
strongly maintain the religious ideas of the authors themselves ; (3)
To present and explain the symbolical mythical forras and their re
lation to the pure ideas and convictions of the authors ; (4) To ex
plain the relation of the authors and their methods to the external
conditions of the people, the time and the place under which they
were trained ; (5) To search for the origin of the ideas in their prim
itive forms."*
De Wette and Von Coin recognize a difference of the
authors, but not from any inner peculiarity of the au
thors themselves, but from the external conditions of
time, place, and circumstances. The authors are placed
side by side without any real conception of their differ
ences or of their unity. The historical principle is ap
plied and worked out, but in an external fashion, and
the relation to the universal religion and other religions
is considered rather than the interrelation of the vari
ous doctrines and types of the Scriptures themselves.
III. DEVELOPMENT OF BIBLICAL THEOLOGY.
This was the condition of affairs when Strauss issued
his Life of Jesus, and sought, by arraying one New Tes
tament writer against another, as F. Baur justly charges
against him, to prove the incompetence of all the wit
nesses and reduce the life of Jesus to a myth.f F. Baur
himself sought by the historico-critical process to show
the natural development of Christianity out of the vari
ous forces brought into conflict with each other in the

* Bib. Theologie, I., p. 30.
t F. Baur, Krit. Untersuch. in d. kann. Evang., p. 71 ; F. Baur, Kirchen-
geschichte des ig Jahrhunderts, p. 397. Strauss replies in his Leben Jesuf. d.
deutsche Volk., p. 64. •

378 BIBLICAL STUDY.
first and second Christian centuries, reducing the life
and teachings of Jesus to a minimum. Neander grap
pled with the mythical hypothesis of Strauss, and the
development hypothesis of F. Baur, and sought to con-*
struct a life of Jesus and a history of the apostolic
church, resting upon a sound historical criticism of the
New Testament writings.* He introduced a new prin
ciple into Biblical Theology, and made it a section in his
History of the Apostles. He sought to distinguish the
individualities of the various sacred writers in their con
ception of Christianity and to unite them in a higher
unity. " The doctrine of Christ was not to be given to man as a stiff and
dead letter, in a fixed and inflexible form, but, as the word of the
Spirit and of life, was to be proclaimed in and by its life in living va
riation and variety. Men enlightened bythe Divine Spirit caught up
these doctrines and appropriated thera in a living manner according
to their respective differences in education and life. These differ
ences were to manifest the living unity, the richness and depth of
the Christian spirit according to the various modes of human con
ception, unconsciously complementing and explaining each other.
For Christianity is meant for al! men, and can adapt itself to the
most varied human characters, transform them and unite them in a
higher unity. For the various peculiarities and fundamental tenden
cies in human nature are designed to work in and with one another
at all times for the realization of the idea of humanity, the presenta
tion of the kingdora of God in huraanity." \
Neander thus gave to Biblical Theology a new and
important feature that was indispensable for the further
development of the discipline. Neander's presentation

* Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der christlichen Kirche durch die
Apostel, 1832, 5th Aufl., 1S62 ; translated into English in Biblical Cabinet, Edin
burgh, 1842; Bohn's Library, London, 1856; translated by J. E. Ryland, re
vised and corrected according to the fourth Germjm edition by E. G. Robinson,
N. Y., 1865.
t Gesch. d. Pf. und Lett., Gotha, 5te Aufl., p. 301.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 379
has still many defects. It is kept in a too subordinate
position to his history. But he takes the stand so nec
essary for the growth of Biblical Theology that the the
ology of the various authors is to be deterrained from
their own characters and the essential and fundamental
conceptions of their own writings. Neander presents as
the central idea of Paul, the law and righteousness, which
give the connection as well as contrast between his original
and final conception. The fundamental idea of James
is, that Christianity is the perfect law. John's conception
is, that divine life is in coramunion with the Redeemer,
death in estrangement from Him.
Schraid, a colleague of F. Baur at Tubingen, first gave
Biblical Theology its proper place in Theological Ency
clopaedia.* He defined Biblical Theology as belonging
essentially to the departraent of Exegetical Theology.
" We understand by Biblical Theology of the New Tes
taraent the historico-genetic presentation of Christianity
as this is given in the canonical writings of the New Tes
tament ; a discipline which is essentially distinguished
frora Systematic Theology by its historical character,
while by its limitation to the biblical writings of the New
Testament, it is separated from Historical Theology, and
is characterized as a part of Exegetical Theology. Of
this last it constitutes the summit by which Exegetical
Theology is connected with the roots of Systematic as
well as Historical Theology, and even touches Practi
cal Theology." Schraid regards Christianity as the
fulfilraent of the Old Covenant, which consists in Law
and Proraise.f He seeks to present Christianity in its

* In his invaluable essay, Ueber das Interesse und den Stand d. Bibl. Theo.
des Neu. Test, in unsererZeit. Tiibinger Zeitschrift f. Theo., 4 Heft., 1838,
pp. 126, 129.
t Bib. Theo., p. 367.

380 BIBLICAL STUDY.
unity with the Old Testaraent as well as in its contrast
thereto. He thus gains four possibilities of doctrine,
which are realized in the four principal apostles. Jaraes
presents Christianity as the fulfilled Law ; Peter as the
fulfilled Proraise ; Paul as contrasted with the Law ; and
John as contrasted with both Law and Proraise. For
raany years he lectured on the Theology of the New
Testament. These lectures were published after his
death by his pupils.*
Oehler (G. F.), also of the university of Tubingen,
takes the sarae position with reference to the Old Tes-
taraent.f He defines the Theology of the Old Testa
raent as " the historico-genetic presentation of the re
vealed religion contained in the canonical writings of
the Old Testaraent." His Lectures were first issued in
1873-4,:]: by his son. Oehler distinguishes in the Old
Testament three parts : Mosaism, Prophetism, and the
Chokma — the first fundaraental ; the Prophetism repre
senting the objective side, and the Chokma the subject
ive : these two unfolding in parallelisra with one another.
Thus he raarks an advance in the Old Testament in the
discrimination of types, corresponding with the distin
guishing of types in the New Testament by Neander
and Schmid.§ Schraid and Oehler combine in giving us
organic systems of Biblical Theology as the highest point
of Exegetical Theology, and with a distinction of types
corabining in a higher unity, and with Neander introduce
a new epoch in Biblical Theology. ||
* Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments, 1853, 4th ed., 1869. Translated
into EngUsh, but without the invaluable definitions at the beginning of the sec
tions. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1870.
\ Prolegomena zur Theologie des Alien Testaments, 1845.
X Theologie des Alien Test., 2 Bde., II. Aufl., 1883.
§ His work has been translated into English in Clark's Lib., Edin., 2 vols.,
1874 ; also revised and edited by Prof. G. E. Day. New York, 1883.
l The posthumous Lectures of Prof. Havernick, of Konigsburg, on Bibl. Theo.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 381
On- the other hand, F. Baur atterapts to account for
the peculiarities of the New Testament writings, as well
as the origin of the Christian church, by his theory of
the two opposing forces, the Judaistic and the Pauline,
gradually uniting in the later writings of the New Tes
tament in the second century into a more conservative
and mediating theology, reaching its culmination in the
Johannean writings, which are at an elevation above the
^peculiarities of the earlier stages of development. Bib
lical Theology is to Baur a purely historical discipline.
In it the scriptural doctrine loosens itself from the fet
ters of the dependent relation in which it has been to
the dogmatic systeras of the cnurch, and will raore and
raore eraancipate itself therefrora. New Testaraent The
ology is that part of Historical Theology which has to
present the doctrine of Jesus as well as the doctrinal
systems resting upon it, in the order and connection of
their historical development, according to the peculiar
characteristics by which they are distinguished from one
another, so far as this can be ascertained in the New
^ Testament writings. Baur strongly objects to the idea
of Neander and his school, that there is a unity in the
variety of New Testament doctrines, which is the very
opposite of his own view of a developraent out of con
trasted and irreconcilable forces. Baur justly adraits
that the doctrines of Jesus raust be at the foundation.
The doctrine of Jesus raust be drawn chiefly frora the

d. Alt. Test., were published by Hahn in 1848, and a revised edition by Her
mann Schultz in 1863, but are of no special value. Prof. H. Messner, of BerUn,
in 1856, published Die Lehre der Apostel in the spirit of Neander. He begins
with the system of James, Jude, and Peter ; makes the discourse of Stephen a
transition to the PauUne system, and gives the theology of Paul with that of the
Epistle to the Hebrews appended, and concludes -with the theology of John and
the Apocalypse. He finaUy gives a searching coraparison of the various forms of
apostoUc doctrine, seeking a unity in the variety.

382 BIBLICAL STUDY.
discourses in Matthew, yet these not in their present
forra, as given in our Greek Gospel, but in their original
forra, to be deterrained by sound criticisra. The essen,
tial principle of Christianity and of the doctrine of Jesus
is the ethical principle ; the law is not only enlarged by
the Gospel, but the Gospel is contrasted with it. They
are related as the outer to the inner, the act to the in
tention, the letter to the spirit. " Christianity presented
in its original form in the doctrine of Jesus is a religion
breathing the purest moral spirit." " This moral ele
ment, as it is made known in the simple sentences of
the sermon on the mount, is the purest and clearest con
tent of the doctrine of Jesus, the real kernel of Chris
tianity, to which all the rest, however significant, stands
in a more or less secondary and accidental relation. It
is that on which the rest raust be built, for however little
it has the forra and color of that Christianity which has
becorae historical, yet it is in itself the entire Chris
tianity." *
Neander and Baur, the great historical rivals of our
century, thus attain the same end in John's contempla
tion which reconciles and harmonizes all the previous
points of view.' According to Neander and his school,
the variety therein attains a higher unity ; according to
Baur and his school, the contradictory positions are rec
onciled in an ideal spirit which is indifferent to all mere
externals. The Lectures of Baur were published after
his death in i864.t
Prof. Reuss, of Strasburg, in 1852 issued his History
of Christian Theology in the Apostolic Age.:]: In the
Preface to the last edition he states :

* Neu. Test. Theologie, p. 64, seq.
t Vorlesungen Uber Neutestamentliche Theologie.
X Histoire de la Theologie Chretienne au Siicle Apostolique, 2 tomes.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 383
" The unity which has been sought at the end of the work, I have
dwelt upon where the history itself points to it — namely, at the be-
ginnii>g. It is in the primitive Gospel, in the teaching of the Lord
Himself, that we find the focus of those rays which the prism of
analysis places before us, separately in their different shades of color.
As it has not been my design to produce a critical or theoretical,
but a historical work, I have necessarily followed the natural evolu
tion of the ideas, nor did it come within my province to violate this
order to subserve any practical purpose, however lawful."
It is the distinguishing merit of Reuss that he sets
the Biblical Theology of the New Testament in the
midst of the religious movements of the times. He
begins with a discussion of Judaism, e. g., the theology
of the Jews subsequent to the Exile and in its various
sects, then considers John the Baptist, and the Forerun
ners. In the second part he treats of the Gospels ; in
the third part the Jewish Christian Theology, and in the
fourth the Pauline, and in the fifth the theology of John.
But the historical raethod absorbs and overwhelms the
inductive, and he justly names his work a History of
Christian Theology in Apostolic Tiraes. Standing with
the school of Baur in contending for the position of the
discipline in Historical Theology, he differs from it in
his giving up the reconciliation of contrasts in John's
Theology. In the sarae year, 1852, Lutterbeck,* a Ro
man Catholic writer, goes even more thoroughly than
Reuss into the doctrinal systems in the midst of which
Christianity arose : (i) The Heathen systeras ; (2) The
Jewish ; (3) The mixed systems and heresies of the
apostolic period. " He then passes over to the Christian
system, distinguishing the various types as did Neander,

translation of the 3d edition into EngUsh has been pubUshed by Hodder &
Stoughton, London, in 2 vols., 1872.
* Neutestamentlichen Lehrbegriffen, Ein Han.Jbuch fUr alteste Dogmenge-
schichte und systematische Exegese des Neuen Testamentes, 2 Bande.

384 BIBLICAL STUDY.
and shows their genesis and internal harmony in an able
and thorough manner, distinguishing three stages of
apostolic doctrine : (i) From the death of Christ to the
Apostolic Council, the original type ; (2) The time of
contrasted views, 50-70 ; (3) The period of raediation,
or the later life of the apostle John, 70-100 A.D.
G. L. Hahn * reacts to the historical ground without
distinction of types. B. Weiss f has also been influ
enced by the conflict between the schools of Neander
and Baur to take an interraediate position. He ex
cludes the life of Jesus and the great events of Apostolic
history, and also restricts Biblical Theology to the vari
ety of the types of doctrine and abandons the effort for
a higher unity. Within the liraits chosen by the author
his work is elaborate and thorough, and a raost valuable
addition to the literature, but does not show any prog
ress in his conception of the discipline.
Hermann Schultz, in 1869,:]: laid stress 'upon the his
torico-critical method of the school of Baur, yet includes
religion as well as dogmatics and ethics in his scheme,
excluding the apocryphal books and limiting himself to
the canonical writings. His work is elaborate and thor
ough in its working out of details, but does not show
any real progress.§
In his Biblical Theology, Van Oosterzee,| in 1870, does
not enter much into details or present a thoroughgoing
-* Theologie des Alien Testaments, vol. i., 1854. *
t Lehrb. d. Bibl. Tlteo. d. N. T., 1868, 3te Aufl., 1880. Translated into English
in Clark's Library, vol. i., 1S83.
X Alttestamentliche Theologie, 2te Aufl., 1878.
§ In his last edition Schultz has gone over to the school of WeUhausen, and
reconstructed his BibUcal Theology so as to distinguish a Prophetic and Levitical
period, and abandons the historical development, and thus Uke Ewald decUnes
from the advanced position of F. Baur and Neander.
II BiM. Theo. of the New Test. Translated from the Dutch by M. J. Evans.
N. Y., 1876.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 385
coraparison, yet he seeks the higher unity as well as the
individual types. He regards Biblical Theology as a part
of Historical Theology, but his treatment of it is after
the style of Neander. He does not estimate the life of
Jesus and the religious life of the apostolic church. He
neglects the religious and ethical elements, and as a whole
must be regarded as falling behind the later treatises on
the subject. Bernard * issued a brief work in the spirit
of Neander, but without any advance in the working out
of the theme.
Ewald (H.) in 1 871-6 issued his massive and profound
work.-f- The first volume treats of the doctrine of the
word of God, the second of the doctrine of God, the
third of the world and man, the fourth of the life of
men and the kingdom of God. These divisions of the
subject-matter are simple and comprehensive, and the
treatment, especially in the first volume, admirable and
profound, and yet the historical side of the discipline
falls too much into the background ; so that we must
regard the work on the whole as a decline from the
higher position of the schools of Neander and Baur.
Indeed Old Testaraent Theology was not yet ripe for
the treatraent that was necessary to bring it up to the
standard of the New Testaraent Theology. The older
views of the Biblical writings of the Old Testament,
both of the Critical and Traditional sides, were too
mechanical and uncertain. There was needed a great
overturning of the soil of the Old Testament by a rad
ical critical study of its religion and history such as
Strauss had made in the New Testament. Such a treat-

* Progress of Doctrine in the New Testament, Bampton Lectures, 1864, 2d
edit., 1867.
t Lehre der Bibel von Gott oder Theologie des Alien und Neuen Bundes, 4
Bde. 17

386 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ment was prepared by Vatke, Reuss, and Graf,* but first
carried out by Kuenen,t and then by Julius Wellhausen. $
These distinguished three great codes and sections in the
Pentateuch, and found two antagonistic eleraents in the
Old Testaraent Scriptures, and ventured upon a radical
reconstruction of Old Testaraent Religion and History
and established a large and enthusiastic school.
Kuenen, in his history of. Israel, finds in the period
from Hezekiah to the exile two antagonistic parties in
perpetual conflict. The one is the raore popular and
conservative party advocating the ancient religion of
the land, the local sanctuaries and iraage worship, to
gether with various deities. This party was formed by
the raajority of the prophets and the older Levitical
priests. The other party was the progressive and the
reforraing party aiming at a central and exclusive sanct
uary and the worship of Jehovah alone in a more spirit
ual raanner. This was the priestly party at Jerusalem
forraed by the prophets Isaiah, Micah, and Jereraiah.
These parties struggled with varying fortunes until the
exile. The reforming party issued as their programme
the Deuteronomic code. Independent of thera, yet at
tiraes raerging with the party of progress, was the
Chokma tendency.§ The struggle was thus " between
Jahvisra and Jewish nationality." || During the exile,
influenced by Ezekiel's progrararae of reconstruction.

* Hitzig, in his posthumous Vorlesungen Uber Bibl. Theo. und Mess. Weissa
gungen, 1880, treats first of the principle of the religion of the Old Testament,
e.g., the idea of God as a holy spirit. This developed itself in two directions:
Universalism and Particularism. The book is defective in method, arbitrary
in judgment, and shows no real progress beyond this distinction of types.
-1 Religion of Israel, 1869-70 (in the Dutch language, translated 1873-5 '°to
English) and by his Prophets and Prophecy in Israel, 1877.
X Gesch. Israel, Bd. i., 1878, 2 Ausg., 1883.,,
^ Religion of Israel, ii., chap. 6. | In /. ,.., I., p. 70.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 387
the priestly legislation of the middle books of the Pen
tateuch was composed, and Ezra introduced it to the
new commonwealth at Jerusalem.
" Ezra and Nehemiah assailed as much the independence of the
religious life of the Israelites, which found utterance in prophecy,
as the more tolerant judgment upon the heathen to which many in
clined ; their reformation was in other words anti-prophetic and
anti-universahstic. History teaches us that the Reformation of
Ezra and Nehemiah nearly coincides in date with the disappearance
of Prophecy in Israel." (II. , p. 240, seq.).*
The three great codes were afterward combined in
the Pentateuch. Thus this scheme of reconstruction of
Old Testament legislation and religion adopted by such
a large number of critics reserables in a most remarkable
degree the reconstruction of the New Testament his
tory and doctrine proposed by Baur ; naraely, two an
tagonistic and irreconcilable forces resulting in a final
system above them both.
With reference to the three codes and sections of the
Pentateuch, evangelical men should not fail to recognize
them. They correspond in a remarkable manner with
the various presentations of the Gospel of Jesus. And
so the great types such as we find in the Prophetic,
Priestly, and Chokma writings are clearly defined, cor
responding closely with the Petrine, Pauline, and the
Johannean types of the New Testament. The corre
spondence goes even farther, in that, as the Jewish Chris
tian type is divided in twain by the gospels of Mark and
Matthew, and by the apostles Peter and James, so the
prophetic type breaks up into the Psalmists and the
* See the articles : The Theory of Prof essor Kuenen, by the Rev. T. W. Cham
bers, D.D., in the Presbyterian Review, 1880, p. 304, seq, ; The Critical Theo
ries of Julius Wellhausen, by Prof. Henry P. Smith, in the same Review, 1882,
p, 357, seq. ; and Critical Study^f the History of the Higher Criticism, in th^
same Review, 1883, p. 69, seq.

388 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Prophets. The three great types must be recognized
in the Old Testament from the Thora onward, extend
ing through the histories, prophets, and poetical books
and other writings, as in the New Testament the types
are recognized from the gospels through the book of
Acts to the Epistles and Apocalypse. The school of
Kuenen and Wellhausen regard them as antagonistic as
are the parties in Church and State in our own day, the
history and religion having a purely natural develop
ment. Evangelical exegetes will, in the main, deal with
the Old Testament as they have done with the New
Testament under the lead of Neander, Schraid, and
Oehler, and recognize the variation of type in order to
a raore complete and harraonious representation as they
combine under the supernatural influence of a divine
progressive revelation.
Recent works on New Testament theology have de
voted themselves raore to a study of the particular types
with reference to their psychological development out
of the condition of mind and historical position and
training of the various New Testament writers. Immer*
restates the positions of the school of Baur, but with
the inlportant advance that he traces the various stages
of the development of the Pauline theology itself with
considerable industry and skill, so Pfleiderer, -j- Sabatier,$
•* Theo. d. N. T., 1877.
t It was natural that the theology of Paul should receive at first the closest
Examination. Usteri, Entwickelung des Paulinischen Lehrbegriffes, 1829, 6te
Aufl., 1851, is a classic work; followed by Dahne, Entwickelung des Paulin
ischen Lehrbegriffs, 1835 ; Baur, Paulus der Apostel Jesu Christi, 1845, 2te
Aufl., 1866 ; Opitz (H.), System, des Paulus, 1874.
X L'Apotre Paul esquisse d'une Histoire de sa Pensie, 1870. Deuxieme edi
tion revue et augmentee, 1881, Paris. He finds the origin of Paul's theology
in the combination of the three facts — his Pharisaism which he left, the Chris
tian church which he entered, and the conversion by which he passed from the
one to the other. He then traces the genesis af the Pauline theology in three
periods.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 389
•
and especially Holsten,* who strives to derive the pecu
liarity of the doctrine of Paul out of his consciousness
rather than frora the vision and Chri.stophany on the way
to Daraascus.f Thoma:]: strives to explain the theology
of John as a development out of the struggling doctrinal
conceptions of Judaism and Alexandrianism. § These,
then, are the two points. on which Biblical Theology raay
be expected to raake a new advance: (i) in the relation'
of the variety of types to one another and to their
unity ; (2) in the origin and developraent of the particu
lar types.
We have thus far distinguished two stages in the de
velopraent of the discipline of Biblical Theology. Gab
ler first stated its historical principle and distinguished
it from Systematic Theology. Neander then distin
guished its variety of types, and Schmid stated its exe
getical principle and distinguished it frora Historical
Theology as a part of Exegetical Theology. We are
about to enter upon a third stage in which Biblical The
ology, as the point of contact of Exegetical Theology
with the three other great sections of Theological Ency
clopaedia, will show the true relation of its various types
to one organic system of divine truth, will trace them

* Zum Evangelium des Paulus u. d. Petrus, 1868 ; Evangelium des Paulus,
1880. + Prof. A. B. Bruce, of Glasgow, in his article on PauPs Conversion and the
Pauline Gospel, in the Pres. Review, 1880, p. 652, seq., ably discusses these
theories, and shows the connection of PauUne theology -with the supernatural
event of the Christophany and the apostle's consequent conversion.
X Die Genesis des Johannes Evangelium, 1882.
§ Other special writers upon particular types are : Riehm's Lehrbegriff des
Hebraerbriefs, 1867 ; K. R. Kostlin, Lehrbegriff des Evang. und der Briefe
Johannes, 1845 ; B. Weiss, Peirinische Lehrbegriff, 1855 ; Jolianneische
Lehrbegriff, 1862 ; Zschokke, Theologie der Propheten des Alien Testaments,
1877 ; W. Schraidt, Lehrgehalt des Jacobus Briefes, 1869 ; H. Gebhardt, Lehr
begriff der Apokalypse, 1873.

390 BIBLICAL STUDY.
each and all to their supernatural origin and direction as
distinguished from the ordinary types of human think
ing ; and thus will act as a con.serving and a reconciling
force in the theology of the last quarter of our century.
Step by step Biblical Theology has advanced in the
progress of exegetical studies. It is and must be an ag
gressive discipline. It has a fourfold work : of removing
the rubbish that Scholasticism has piled upon the Word
of God ; of battling with Rationalism for its principles,
methods, and products; of resisting the seductions of
Mysticism ; and of building up an impregnable system
of sacred truth. As the Jews returning from their exile
built the walls of Jerusalem, working with one hand, and
with the other grasping a weapon, so must Biblical schol
ars build up the system of Biblical Theology, until they
have erected a structure of Biblical truth containing
the unity in the variety of Divine Revelation, a struct
ure compacted through the fitting together of all the gems
of sacred truth according to the adaptation of a divine
prearrangement. IV. THE POSITION AND IMPORTANCE OF BIBLICAL
THEOLOGY.
Having considered the origin and history of Biblical
Theology, we are now prepared to show its position and
importance, and define it as to its idea, method, and sys
tem, (i) The idea of Biblical Theology. — Biblical The
ology is that theological discipline which presents the
theology of the Bible in its historical formation within
the canonical writings. The discipline liraits itself
strictly to the theology of the Bible, ai)d thus excludes
from its range the theology of the Apocryphal and Pseu
depigraphical writings of the Jewish and Christian sects,
the ideas of the various external religious parties, and

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 39I
the religions of the world brought in contact with the
people of God at different periods in their histon.-. It
is true .that these must come into consideration for com
parative purposes in order to show their influence posi
tively and negatively upon the development of Biblical
doctrine; for the Biblical religion is a religion in the
inidst of a great varietj'- of religions of the world, and
its distinctive features can be sho-wn only after the eUm
ination of the features that are common with other- re
ligions. We must show from the historical circumstances,
the psychological preparations, and all the conditioning
influences, how far the origin and development of the
particular type and the particular stage of religious de
velopment of Israel and the Church were influenced by
these external forces. We must find the supernatural
influence that originated and maintained the Biblical
types and the Biblical religion as distinct and separate
from all other religions. And then these other religious
forces will not be employed as co-ordinate factors with
the Biblical material, as is done by Reuss, Schwegler,
and Kuenen, who make Biblical Theology simply a his
tory of religion, or of doctrine in the times of the Bible
and in the Jewish nation. Rather these theological con
ceptions of other religions will be seen to be subordinate
factors as influencing Biblical Theology from witliout,
and not from within, as presenting the external occa
sions and conditions of its growth, and not its normal
and regulative principles. The Biblical limit will be
maintained ; for the Biblical material stands apart by
itself, in that the theology therein contained is the
theology of a divine Revelation, and thus distinguished
from all other theologies, both as to its origin and its
development; for they give us either the products of
natural religion in various normal and abnormal sys-

392 BIBLICAL STUDY.
terns, originating and developing under the influence of
unguided or partially guided huraan religious strivings,
or else are apostasies or deflections from the religion oi
revelation in its various stages of development.
The discipline we have defined as presenting the The
ology of the Bible. It is true that the term Biblical The
ology is ambiguous as being too broad, having been eni-
ployed as a general term including Biblical Introduction,
Hermeneutics, and so on. And yet we raust have a broad
terra, for we cannot lirait our discipline to Dogmatics, for
Biblical Dograatics, as rightly conceived, is a part of Sys
teraatic Theology, hewi.^ a priori z.nd. deductive in raethod.
Biblical Dogmatics deduces the dograas from the Bibli
cal raaterial and arranges thera in an a priori dogmatic
system, presenting not so rauch the doctrines of the
Bible in their simplicity and in their concrete forra as
they are given in the Scriptures themselves, but such
doctrines as may be fairly derived from the Biblical ma
terial by the logical process, or can be gained by setting the
Bible in the midst of philosophy and church tradition. We
cannot deny to this departraent the propriety of using
the narae Biblical Dograatics or even Biblical Theology.
For where a Dograatic systera derives its chief or only
raaterial from the Scriptures there is force in its claim
to be Biblical Theology. We do not, therefore, use the
terra Biblical Theology as applied to our discipline with
the iraplication that a dograatic systera derived frora the
Bible is wci;2-Biblical or not sufficiently Biblical, but as a
term which has come to be applied to the discipline
which we are now distinguishing from Biblical Dograat
ics. Biblical Theology, in the sense of our discipline,
and as distinguished from Biblical Dograatics, cannot
take a step beyond the Bible itself, or, indeed, beyond
the particular writing or author under consideration at

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 393
the time. Biblical Theology has to do only with the
sacred author's conceptions, and has nothing whatever
to do with the legitimate logical consequences. It is
not to be assumed that either the author or his genera
tion argued out the consequences of their statements,
still less discerned them by intuition ; although, on the
other hand, we must always recognize that the religion
and, indeed, the entire theologj"- of a period or an au
thor may be far wider and more comprehensive than the
record or records that have been left of it ; and that, in
all cases. Biblical Theology will give us the minimum
rather than the m.aximum. of the theology of a period or
author. But, on the other hand, we must also estiraate
the fact that this minimum is the inspired authority to
which alone we can appeal. The only consequences
with which Biblical Theology has to do are those his
torical ones that later Biblical writers gained in their ad
vanced knowledge of divine revelation, those conclusions
that are true historically — whatever our subjective con
clusions may be as to the legitimate logical results of
their stateraents. And even here the interpretation and
use of later writers are not to be assigned to the authors
theraselves or the theology of their tiraes. We would
therefore urge that the terra Biblical Dograatics should
be applied to that part of Dogmatics which rests upon
the Bible and derives its material from the Bible by the
legitimate use of its principles. Dogmatics as a theo
logical discipline, in our judgment, is far wider than the
Biblical material that is employed by the dogmatician.
The Biblical material should be the normal and regula
tive material, but the dograatician will raake use of the
deductions from the Bible and other authorities that the
church has made in the history of doctrine and incor
porated in her creeds, or preserved in the doctrinal treat-
17*

394 BIBLICAL STUDY.
ises of the theologians. He will also make use of right
reason, and of philosophy, and science, and the religious
consciousness as manifest in the history of the church
and in the Christian life of the day. It is all-important
that the various sources should be carefully discriminated,
and the Biblical material set apart by itself in Biblical
Dogmatics, lest in the commingling of material that
should be regarded as Biblical which is W(7«-Biblical, or
extra Biblical, or contra Biblical, as has so often hap
pened in the working of ecclesiastical tradition. And,
even then, when Biblical Dogmatics has been distin
guished in Systematic Theology, it should be held apart
from Biblical Theology, for Biblical Dograatics is the
point of contact of Systematic Theology with Exegeti
cal Theology, and Biblical Theology is the point of con
tact of Exegetical Thpology with Systematic Theology,
each belonging to its own distinctive branch of theolo
gy, with its characteristic methods and principles. That
system of theology which would anxiously confine it
self to supposed Biblical material, to the neglect of the
material presented by philosophy, science, literature,
art, comparative religion, the history of doctrine, the
symbols, the liturgies, and the life of the church, and
the pious religious consciousness of the individual or of
Christian society, must be extremely defective, unscien
tific, and cannot make up for its defects by an appeal to
the Scriptures and a claim to be Biblical. None of the
great systematic theologians, from the most ancient
times have ever proposed any such course. It has been
the resort of the feebler Pietists in Germany, and of the
narrower Evangelicalism of Great Britain and America,
doomed to defeat and destruction, for working in such
contracted lines.
We do not, therefore, present Biblical Theology as a

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 395
substitute for Systematic Theology. Systematic Theol
ogy is raore comprehensive than Biblical Theology can
ever be. But we urge the importance of Biblical Theol
ogy in order to the important distinction that should be
made, in the first place, between the Biblical sources and
all other sources of Theology, and then, in the second
place, to distinguish between the Biblical Theology as
presented in the Scriptures themselves, and Biblical
Dogmatics which makes legitiraate deductions and appli
cations of the Biblical raaterial.
But Biblical Theology is wider than the doctrines of
the Bible. It includes Ethics also. Here the school of
Baur and even Weiss and Van Oosterzee would stop.
But Schmid, Schultz, and Oehler are correct in taking
Biblical Theology to include religion as well as doc
trines and morals, that is, those historic persons, facts,
and relations which embody religious, dograatical, and
ethical ideas. This discrimination is important in Systera
atic Theology, but it is indispensable in Biblical Theol
ogy where everything is still in the concrete. Thus a
fundaraental question in the theology of the New Testa
ment, is what to do with the life of Jesus. The life of
Jesus is, as Schmid .shows, the fruitful source of His
doctrine, and a theology which does not estiraate it,
lacks foundation and vital power. The life of Jesus raay
indeed be regarded frora two distinct points of view, as
a biographical, or a doctrinal and religious subject. The
birth of Jesus raay be regarded as a pure hi.storical fact
or as an incarnation. His suffering and death raay be
historical subjects, or as expressing atonement. His life
may afford biographical matter or be considered as re
ligious, doctrinal, and ethical, in that His life was a new
religious force, a redemptive influence and an ethical
example. Biblical Theology will have to consider, there-

396 BIBLICAL STUDY.
fore, what the life of Jesus presents for its various de
partraents. And so the great fact of Pentecost, the
Christophanies to Peter, Paul, and John, and the apos
tolic council at Jerusalera must all be brought into
consideration. And in the Old Testaraent we raust
consider the various covenants and the religious insti
tutions and laws that were grouped about thera. With
out religion, with its persons, events, and institutions.
Biblical Theology would lose its foundations, and without
ethical results it would fail of its rich fruitage.
We state, furthermore, that the discipline presents
the theology of the Bible in its historical formation.
This does not imply that it limits itself to the consider
ation of the various particular conceptions of the various
authors, writings, and periods, as Weiss and even Oehler
raaintain, but with Schraid, Messner, Van Oosterzee
after Neander it seeks the unity in the variety ; ascertains
the roots of the divergencies, traces thera each in their
separate historical development, shows them co-operat
ing in the forraation of one organic systera. For Bibhcal
Theology would not present a mere conglomerate of
heterogeneous raaterial in a bundle of miscellaneous
Hebrew literature, but would ascertain whether there is
not some principle of organization ; and it finds that
principle in a supernatural divine revelation and com
munication of redemption in the successive covenants
of grace, extending through many centuries, operating
through many rainds, and in a great variety of literary
styles, employing all the faculties of man and all the
types of human nature, in order to the accomplishment
of one massive, all-embracing and everlasting Divine
Word adapted to every age, every nation, every type of
character, every temperament of raankind ; the whole
world.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 397
(2) The Place of Biblical Theology.— Bih\ica.l Theology^
belongs to the departraent of Exegetical Theology as a'
higher exegesis completing the exegetical process, and!
presenting the essential material and principles of tha
other departments of theology.
The boundaries between Exegetical and Historical
Theology are not so sharply defined as those between
either of them and Systematic Theology. All Histori
cal Theology has to deal with sources, and in this respect
must consider them in their variety and unity as well as
developraent ; and hence raany theologians combine
Exegetical Theology and Historical Theology under
one head — Historical Theology. It is important, how
ever, to draw the distinction, for this reason. The
sources of Biblical Theology are in different relation
from the sources of a history of doctrine, inasrauch as
they constitute a body of divine revelation, and in this
respect to be kept distinct frora all other sources, even
cotemporary and of the sarae nation. They have an
absolute authority which no other sources can have. The
stress is to be laid less upon their historical develop
ment than upon them as an organic body of revelation,
and this stress upon their importance as sources not
only for historical development, but also for dogmatic
reconstruction and practical application, requires that
the special study of thera should be exalted to a separate
discipline and a distinct branch of theology.
Now in the departraent of Exegetical Theology, Bib
lical Theology occupies the highest place, the latest
and crowning achievement. It is a higher exegesis
completing the Exegetical Process. All other branches
of Exegetical Theology are presupposed by it. The
Biblical Literature must first be studied as sacred liter
ature. All questions of date of writing, integrity, con-

398 BIBLICAL STUDY.
struction, style, and authorship must be determined by
the principles of the Higher Criticism. Biblical Canonics
deterraines the extent and authority of the various
writings that are to be regarded as coraposing the
sacred canon, and discrirainates thera frora all other
writings by the criticism of the believing spirit enlight
ened and guided by the Holy Spirit in the Church.
Biblical Textual Criticism ascertains the true text of the
writings in the study of MSS. and versions and citations,
and seeks to present it in its pure priraitive forras.
Biblical Herraeneutics lays down the rules of Biblical
Interpretation, and Biblical Exegesis applies these
rules to the various particular passages of the sacred
Scriptures. Now Biblical Theology accepts all these
rules and results thus deterrained and applied. It is
not its office to go into the detailed exaraination of the
verse and the section, but it raust accept the results of a
thorough exegesis and criticisra in order to advance
thereon and thereby to its own proper work of higher
exegesis ; naraely, rising frora the coraparison of verse
with verse, and paragraph with paragraph, where siraple
exegesis is employed, to the still raore difficult and in
structive coraparison of writing with writing, author with
author, period -with period, until by generalization and
synthesis the theology of the Bible is attained as an
organic whole.
Biblical Theology is thus the culraination of Exeget
ical Theology, and raust be in an iraportant relation to
all other branches of theology. For Historical Theol
ogy it presents the great principles of the various periods
of history, the fundamental and controlling tendencies
which, springing from human nature and operating in
all the religions of the world, find their proper expres
sion and satisfaction in the normal development of

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 399
Divine Revelation, but which, breaking loose from these
salutary bonds, become perverted and distorted into
abnormal forras, producing false and heretical principles
and radical errors. And so in the Biblical unity of these
tendencies Biblical Theology presents the ideal unity
for the church and the Christian in all times of the
world's history. For Systeraatic Theology, Biblical
Theology affords the holy material to be used in Bibli
cal Apologetics, Dogmatics, and Ethics, the funda
mental and controlling material out of which that
systematic structure raust be built which will express
the intellectual and raoral needs of the particular age,
fortify the church for offence and defence in the strug
gles with the anti-Christian world, and give unity to its
life, its efforts, and its dograas in all ages. For Practical
Theology it presents the various types of religious ex
perience and of doctrinal and ethical ideas which raust
be skilfully applied to the corresponding differences of
type which exist in all tiraes, in all churches, in all
lands, and indeed in all religions and races of mankind.
Biblical Theology is indeed the Irenic force which will
do much to harmonize the antagonistic forces and vari
ous departments of theology, and bring about that toler
ation within the church which is the greatest requisite of
our times.
(3) Method of Biblical Theology. — The method em
ployed by Biblical Theology is a blending of the genetic
and the inductive methods. The method of Biblical
Theology arises out of the nature of the discipline and
its place in Theological Encyclopaedia. As it must
show the Theology of the Bible in its historic formation,
ascertain its genesis, the laws of its development from
germinal principles, the order of its progress in every
individual writer, and from writer to writer and age to

iOO BIBLICAL STUDY.
age in the successive periods and in the whole Bible, it
mu.st employ the genetic method. It is this genesis
which is becoming raore and more important in our dis
cipline, and is indeed the chief point of discussion in our
day. Can all be explained by a natural genesis, or must
the supernatural be called in ? The various Rationalistic
efforts to explain the genesis of the Biblical types of
doctrine in their variety and their corabination in a unity
in the Scriptures are extreraely unsatisfactory and un
scientific. With all the reserablances to other religions,
the Biblical Religion is so different that its differences
must be explained, and these can only be explained by
the clairas of the sacred writers themselves, that God
Himself in various forms of Theophany and Chris
tophany revealed Himself to initiate and to guide the
religion of the Bible in its various movements and
stages. Mosaism centres about the great Theophany of
Sinai, as Christianity centres about the Resurrection of
Jesus Christ, and the life, death, ascension, and second
advent therein involved. It is now the problem of
Biblical Theology as it has traced the Theology of the
Jewish Christian type to the Theophany of Pentecost,
and of the Pauline to the Christophany on the way to
Damascus, so to trace the Johannean type and the vari
ous Old Testaraent types to corresponding supernatural
initiation. The Johannean type may be traced to the
Christophanies of Patmos.* The Old Testament is full
of Theophanies which originate particular Covenants
and initiate all the great movements in the history of
Israel.

* We regard the Apocalypse as the earliest of the Johannean -writings. The
Christophanies therein described had been granted to the apostle prior to the
composition of the Gospel, so that the Gospel was written under their influence
StiU more even than under the recollection of the association with Jesus during
His earthly ministry.

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 401
As it has to exhibit the unity in the variety of the
various conceptions and statements of the writings and
authors of every different type, style, and character, and
by comparison generalize to its results. Biblical Theol
ogy must employ the inductive method and the synthet
ic process. This inductive method is the true method
of Exegetical Theology. The details of Exegesis have
been greatly enriched by this method during the present
century, especially by the labors of German divines, and
in most recent times by numerous laborers in Great
Britain and America. But the majority of the laborers
in Biblical Theology have devoted their strength to
the working out of the historical principle of our disci
pline. Yet within the various types and special doc
trines a large amount of higher exegesis has been ac
complished by Weiss, Riehm, Schultz, Diestel, Weiffen-
bach, and others. But the highest exegesis in the com
parison of types and their arrangement in an organic
system with a unity and determining principle out of
which all originate and to which they return their fruit
age, remains comparatively undeveloped. Indeed the
study of the particular types, especially in the Old Tes
tament, must be conducted still further and to more
substantial results ere the highest exegesis can fulfil its
task. The genetic and the inductive methods must indeed
combine in order to the best results. They must co-op
erate in every writing, in the treatment of every author,
of every period and of the whole. They must blend in
harmony throughout. On their proper combination the
excellence of a system of Biblical Theology depends.
An undue emphasis of either will make the system de
fective and inharmonious.
(4) The system, and divisions of Biblical Theology.—

i02 BIBLICAL STUDY.
These are determined partly by the material itself, but
chiefly by the methods of dealing with it. We must make
the divisions so simple that they may be adapted to the
raost eleraentary conceptions, and yet comprehensive
enough to embrace the most fully developed conceptions,
and also so as to be capable of a simple and natural
subdivision in the advancing periods. In order to this
we must find the dorainant principle of the entire revela
tion and make our historical and our inductive divisions
in accordance with it. The Divine revelation itself
might seem to be this determining factor, so that we
should divide historically by the historical developraent
of that revelation, and synthetically by its raost charac
teristic features. But this divine revelation was raade
to intelligent raan and involved thereby an active appro
priation of it on his part, both as to its forra and sub
stance, so that frora this point of view we raight divide
historically in accordance with the great epochs of the
appropriation of divine revelation, and synthetically by
the characteristic features of that appropriation. Frora
either of these points of view, however, there might be
— there naturally would be, an undue emphasis of the
one over against the other at the expense of a complete
and harmonious representation. We need some princi
ple that will enable us to combine the subject and the
object — God and man — in the unity of its conception.
Such a principle is happily afforded us in the Revelation
itself, so distinctly brought out that it has been histori
cally recognized in the names given to the two great sec
tions of the Scriptures, the Old and the New Testa
ments or Covenants. The Covenant is the fundamental
principle of the divine revelation, to which the divine
revelation comraits its treasures and frora which raan con
tinually draws upon them. The Covenant has a great

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 403
variety of forms in the sacred Scriptures, but the most
essential and comprehensive form is that assumed in the
Mosaic Covenant at Sinai which becomes the Old Cove
nant, pre-eminently, and over against that is placed the
New Covenant of the Messiah Jesus Christ, so that the
great historical division becomes the Theology of the Old
Covenant and the Theology of the New Covenant.
The Covenant must also determine the synthetic divis
ions. The Covenant is a union and communion ef
fected between God and Man. It involves a personal
relationship which it originates and maintains by certain
events and institutions. This is Religion. The Cove
nant and its relations, man apprehends as an intelligent
being with meditation, reflection, and reasoning. All
this he comprehends in doctrines, which he apprehends
and believes and maintains as his faith. These doctrines
will embrace the three general topics of God, of Man,
and of Redemption, The Covenant still further has to
do with man as a moral being, imposing moral obliga
tions upon him with reference to God and man and the
creatures of God. All these are comprehended under
the general term Ethics. These distinctions apply
equally well to all the periods of divine revelation ;
they are simple, they are comprehensive, they are all-
pervading. Indeed they interpenetrate one another, so
that many prefer to combine the three under the one
term Theology, and then treat of God and Man and the
union of God and Man in redemption, in each division
by itself with reference to religious, ethical, and doc
trinal questions ; but it is easier and raore thorough-go
ing to keep them apart, even at the expense of looking
at the same thing at times successively from three dif
ferent points of view.
From these more general divisions we may advance to

404 BIBLICAL STUDY.
such subdivisions, as may be justified in the successive
periods of Biblical Theology, both on the historic and
synthetic sides, and, indeed, without anticipation.
The relation between the historical and the synthetic
divisions raay be variously viewed. Thus Ewald, in his
Biblical Theology, raakes the historical divisions so en
tirely subordinate as to treat of each topic of theology
by itself in its history. The difficulty of this raethod is,
that it does not sufficiently show the relative develop
raent of doctrines, and their constant action and reaction
upon one another in the successive periods. It raay
be of advantage for thoroughness in any one departraent
to take that topic by itself and work it out in its histori
cal development ; but in a comprehensive course of Bib
lical Theology the interests of the whole cannot be sac
rificed for the particular sections. They must be ad
justed to one another in their historical development in
the particular periods. Hence it will be necessary to
determine in each perio4 : (i) the development of each
particular doctrine by itself, as it starts from the gen
eral principle, and then (2) to sum up the general results
before passing over into another period.
It will also be found that Theology does not unfold
in one single line, but in several, frora several different
points of view, and in accordance with several different
types. It will therefore be necessary on the one side
ever to keep these types distinct, and yet to show their
unity as one organism. Thus in the Pentateuch the
great types of the Jahvist, the two Elohists, and the Deu-
teronoraist, will be distinctly traced until they corabine
in the one organisra of our Pentateuch, presenting the
fundamental Thorah of Israel. In the historical books
the Prophetic and Levitical historians will be distin
guished and compared for a higher unity. The three

BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 405
great types — the psalmists, wise men, and prophets —
will be discriminated, the variations within the types
carefully studied and compared, and then the types
themselves brought into harmony, and at last tho whole
Old Testament presented a.s an organic whole. The New
Testament will then be considered in the forerunners
of Christ ; then the four types in which the evangelists
present the Tiicology of Jesus, each by itself, in com
parison with tho others, and as a whole. The Apostolic
Theology will be traced from its origin at Pentecost in
its subsequent division into the three great types, the
Jewish Christian of Peter, James and Jude ; the Gentile
Christian of Paul, Luke, and the epistle to the Hebrews;
and, finally, the Johannean of the gospels, epistle, and
apocalypse of John ; and the whole considered in the
unity of the New Testament ; and then, as the last
thing, the whole Bible will bo considered, showing not
only the unity of the theology of Christ and His apos
tles, but also of the unity of tho theology of Moses and
David and all the prophets, with the theology of Jesus
and His apostles, as each distinct theology takes its
place in the advancing system of divine revelation, all
conspiring to the completion of a perfect, harmonious,
symmetrical organism, the infallible expression of God's
will, character, and being to His favored children. At
. the same time, tho religion of each period and of the
whole Bible will be set in the midst of the other relig
ions of the world, so that it will appear as the divine
grace ever working in humanity, and its sacred records
as the true lamp of the world, holding forth the light of
life to all the nations of the world.

CHAPTER XII.
THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEANS OF GRACE.
The essential principle of the Calvinistic system of the
ology is redemption by the divine grace alone. The
Reformed churches have ever been distinguished for
their intense interest in the covenant of grace. Some
times the divine grace has been hardened by an undue
stress upon the sovereignty of it, so that sovereignty has
taken the place of the divine grace as the central princi
ple of theology in some of the scholastic systems ; and
sometiraes the divine grace has been softened by an un
due eraphasis upon the Fatherhood of God. But even
in these more extrerae tendencies of Calvinisra the es
sential principle of the divine grace alone has not been
abandoned, however little any of the systems have com
prehended the richness and the fulness of the " grace of
God that bringeth salvation " (Titus ii. 1 1).
Rederaption by the divine grace alone is the banner
principle of the Reformed churches, designed to exclude
the uncertainty and arbitrariness attached to all human
instruraentalities and external agencies. As the banner
principle of the Lutheran Reformation was justification
by faith alone excluding any raerit or agency of human
works, so the Calvinistic principle excluded any inherent
efficacy, in human nature or in external remedies, for
overcoming' the guilt of sin and working redemption.
(406)

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEANS OF GRACE. 407
In these two principles lie the chief merits and the chief
defects of the two great churches of the Reformation.
Intermediate between these principles of faith alone and
grace alone, lies a third principle, which is the divine
word alone. This principle we conceive to have been
emphasized in the Reformation of Great Britain and es
pecially in the Puritan churches. The Word of God has
been called the forraal principle of Protestantisra over
against faith alone, the raaterial principle, and it has
been said that the Reformed churches have laid more stress
upon the formal principle, while the Lutheran churches
have laid more stress upon the material principle. This
does not, in our judgment, correspond with the facts of
the case. Rather is it true that in the three great
churches of the Reformation, the three principles,
faith, grace, and the divine word, were emphasized over
against the errors of Rome ; but these churches differed
in the relative iraportance they ascribed to one of
these three principles of the Reformation in its rela
tion to the other two. The Word of God is the in
termediate principle where faith and grace meet. The
Word of God gives faitli its appropriate object. The
Word of God is the appointed instrument or means of
grace. I. THE GOSPEL IN THE SCRIPTURES.
The Word of God as a means of grace, as a principle
of the Reformation, has, however, its technical meaning.
It is not the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments
in their entirety, but rather the Gospel contained in the
Scriptures :
" The Holy Gospel which God Hiraself first revealed in Paradise,
afterwards proclaimed by the Holy Patriarchs and Prophets, and

408 BIBLICAL STUDY.
foreshadowed by the sacrifices and other ceremonies of the law and
finally fulfilled by His well-beloved Son." *
The merit of the Lutheran Reformation was that it so
distinctly set forth the means by which man appropri
ates the grace of the Gospel — by faith alone. Faith is
the sole appropriating instrument and it becomes a test
of the Word of God itself, for faith having appropriated
the gospel of the grace of God is enabled to determine
therefrom what is the Word of God and what is not the
Word of God.
As Luther said :
" All right holy books agree in this that they altogether preach
and urge Christ. This also is the true touchstone to test all books,
when one sees whether they so urge Christ or not, since every script
ure shews Christ (Rom. iii. 21), and St. Paul will know nothing but
Christ (i Cor. ii. 2) ; what does not teach Christ that is not yet apos
tolical, even if St. Paul or St. Peter taught it ; on the other hand,
what preaches Christ would be apostolical, even if Judas, Annas, Pi
late, and Herod did it."t
The merit of the Calvinistic Reformation is that it so
distinctly set forth the means by which God accom
plishes human redemption— b)^ the divine grace of the
Gospel. The divine grace is the sole efficacious instru
ment of redemption, and this grace becomes itself a test
of the true Word of God. The divine grace in the
Scriptures gives its witness for the Scriptures, discrimi
nating the true canon from all other books.
" We know these books to be canonical, and the sure rule of our
faith not so much by tbe common accord and consent of the church,
as by the testimony and inward illumination of the Holy Spirit, which
enables us to distinguish thera frora other ecclesiastical books, upon
which, however useful, we cannot found any article of faith." t
* Heidelb. Cat. , Quest. 19.
t Vorred. zu Epist. Jacobus ; Walch, xiv., p. 149.
X French Confession, Art. iv.

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEANS OF GRACE. 409
It was the merit of the British Reformation from the
beginning that it laid such stress on the divine Word
alone, and it was especially in tho British churches that
this principle received its fullest statement and develop
ment. Thus it was a cardinal principle of the Church
of England that :
" The Holy Scriptui-e conteyneth all things necessary to salvation ;
so th.nt whalsoovei- is not ro.id therein, nor may he proved thereby,
is nol to lio required of any man that it should be believed as an ar
ticle of faith or be thought requisite as necessary to salvation.""*
And the Westminster Assembly, in carrying on the
work of Reformation, state that :
"The authority of tho Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be be
lieved and obeyetl, dependeth not upon the testimony of any ni.in or
church, but wholly upon God (who is truth itself), the .\uthor there
of ; mid therefore it is to be received, because it is the word of God."t
Tims the three principles of the Reformation were
empha.si/.ed variously in the throe great branches of the
Reformation. The most serious defect was in the fail
ure of the respective churches properly to combine these
principle.-^, and especially in the neglect to define with
sufficient care the relation of the divine grace and hu-
man f.iith 'to the Word of God. Hence the common
error into which tlie churches of the Reformation soon
fell, notwithstanding their symbols of faith, namely, the
undue empha.sis of the external Word of God over
against the internal Word of God. But as we have said,
¦• The Protestant principle struggles against this con
founding of tho means of grace with the di\-iiio grace it-
.sclf, this identification of the instrument and the divine
agent, in order therefore to their proper discrimination.
This is the problem left unsolved by the Reformation ;
» .Y.V.VJ.V Articles, Art. VI. t H'cst. Conf, I., 4.
IS

410 BIBLICAL STUDY.
in which the separate churches of Protestantism have been
working, and which demands a solution from the church
of the nineteenth century. Here the most radical ques
tion is that of the divine Word and its relation to the
work of the Holy Spirit. This solved, all the other
questions will be solved. Herein the churches of the
Reforraation raay be harraonized. The Reformed
churches have a peculiar call to grapple bravely with the
problem." * The solution of this problera has been
prepared by the exaltation of the Person of Jesus Christ
more and more during the last century, as the central
principle of theology. He is the Word of God in the
Word of God, the eternal Logos. He is the veritable
grace of the Gospel in whose person grace concentrates
itself for the rederaption of mankind. " For God so
loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but
have everlasting life " (John iii. i6).
II. THE GRACE OF GOD IN THE SCRIPTURES.
The grace of God is the free unmerited favor of God
in rederaption. That grace is bestowed upon raen in
Jesus Christ, the Saviour. That grace is presented to
us by the Holy Spirit and applied by Him to our per
sons and lives. This application is made in the use of
certain external raedia which are called the raeans of
grace. " The Holy Ghost works faith in our hearts by
the preaching of the Holy Gospel, and confirms it by the
use of the Holy Sacraments." f Thus the chief of these
raeans of grace, according to our Reforraed churches, is
the Word of God or the holy Gospel as contained in
the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.
* Presbyterian Review, II., p. 573. See p. 159.
t Heidelb. Cat., Quest. 65.

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEANS OF GRACE. 41I
(i) In what sense are the Scriptures raeans of grace?
The Scriptures are means of grace in that they con
tain the Gospel of Christ which is the power of God
unto salvation. The Word of God is called the Sword
of the Spirit. For it " is living, and active, and sharper
than any two-edged sword, and piercing even to the di
viding of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and
quick to discern the thoughts and intents of the heart "
(Heb. iv. 12). It is the lamp of God. "Thy word is a
lamp unto ray feet and a light unto my path " (Ps. cxix.
105). It is the seed of regeneration. For Christians
have " been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but
of incorruptible, through the Word of God, which liveth
and abideth " (i Pet. i. 23). It is a power of God
(Svva/xis), " For I am not asharaed of the gospel ; for
it is the power of God unto salvation " (Rora. i. 16), says
Paul to the Roraans ; and he reminds his disciple, Tira-
othy, that " frora a babe thou hast known the sacred
writings, which are able (ra Swa/xsva) to raake thee wise
unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus "
(2 Tim. iii. 15). These attributes of the Word of God
cannot be brought under the category of Inspiration.
The Inspiration of the Word of God is a highly impor
tant doctrine, but it must not be so greatly emphasized
as to lead us to neglect other and still raore iraportant
aspects of the Bible. Inspiration has to do with the
truthfulness, reliability, accuracy, and authority of the
Word of God ; the assurance that we have that the in
struction contained therein coraes frora God. But these
attributes of the divine Word that we have just men
tioned in Biblical terms are deeper and more important
than Inspiration. They lie at the root of Inspiration,
as among its strongest evidences. They stand out as
the most prominent features of the Gospel, independent

412 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of the doctrine of Inspiration. They are features shared
by the Bible with the Church and the sacraraents which
are not inspired and are not infallible. They are those
attributes that raake the Bible what it is in the life of the
people and the faith of the church without raising the
question of Inspiration. They ascribe to the Word of
God a divine power {Svvapii?) such as is contained in a
seed of life, the raoveraent of the light, the activity of a
sword, a power that works rederaption, the supreme
means of grace. As Robert Boyle well says ; *
" Certainly then, if we consider God as the Creator of our souls,
and so likeliest to know the frame and springs and nature ofhis own
workmanship, we shall make but little difficulty to beheve that in the
books written for and addressed to men, he hath employed very pow
erful and appropriated means to work upon thera. And in effect,
there is a strange movingness, and, if the epithet be not too bold, a
kind of heavenly magic to be found in some passages of Scripture,
which is to be found nowhere else."
(2) What, then, is this power of grace contained in the
Scriptures? The power of grace contained in the Script
ures is the rederaption raade known to us, freely offered
to us and effectually applied to us in Jesus Christ, the
Saviour. It is the Holy Gospel in the Scriptures, the
Word of God written, presenting as in a mirror of wonder
ful corabinations from so many different points of view,
the glorious person, character, life, and achievements of
the Word of God incarnate, the eterfial Logos. Thus the
Scriptures give us not merely the history of Israel, but
the history of redemption from its earliest prot-evan-
geliura to its fruition in Jesus Christ, the Messiah of
history and prophecy. They give us not ordinary biog
raphy, but the experience of redeeraed men, telling us of

¦^- Some Considerations touching the Style of the H. Scriptures, London,
i66i, p. 241.

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEANS OF GRACE. 4I3
their faith, repentance, spiritual conflicts, and the victo
ries of grace. They give us the grandest poetry of the
world and the raost sublime moral precepts, but this
poetry is composed of the songs of the redeemed ; and
these precepts are the lessons of those who are wise in
the fear of God. They give us oratory, but the orations
are prophetic, irapassioned utterances of warning and
corafort in view of the conflicts of the kingdom of grace
and its ultimate triumph, and the preaching of the gos
pel of a risen and glorified Saviour. They give us essays
and epistles, but these are not to enlighten us in the arts
and sciences, the speculations of philosophy, and the
raaxiras of coraraerce, that we raay be students in any
of the departraents of human learning ; but they set forth
Jesus Christ the Saviour in whom are hid all the treas
ures of wisdom and knowledge (Col. ii. 3). Redemption
is written all over the Scriptures of the Old and New
Testaments. The grace of God that bringeth salvation
is the one all-pervading influence. This is the holy sub
stance of the Bible to which all else is the human form
in which it is enveloped. Hence the two great divisions
of the Bible are called Testaments or Covenants, for
they are covenants of grace, the great storehouses in
which God has treasured up for all time and for all the
world the riches of His grace of redemption.
This grace of Redemption contained in Jesus Christ
and conveyed by the Scriptures, is redemption from
sin to holiness, from death in guilt to life in blessed
ness, it is a grace of regeneration and a grace of sanc
tification. {a) It is a grace of regeneration. Christians are be
gotten again, not of corruptible seed but of incorrupti
ble, by the Word of God which liveth and abideth for
ever (i Peter i. 23). Jesus represents His word as a

414 BIBLICAL STUDY.
.seed of grain which He Himself plants in the human
heart. It springs up in the good soil, first the blade,
then the ear, then the full grain in the ear, and grows
to maturity amidst all kinds of difficulties and dangers
(Mark iv.). It is a germ of life that iraparts itself to
man's heart and finds therein the prepared ground of its
growth. The words of Jesus are spirit and life (John vi.
63) ; they bear in them the regenerating force of the
divine Spirit to quicken the human spirit. The Gospel
is no dead letter, it is a living organism, for Christ
Jesus is in it, in it all, and in every part of it,
and the energy of the divine Spirit pervades it,
so that its words are endowed with the omnipotence of
divine love and the irresistibleness of divine grace.
Those brief, terse, mysterious, yet simple texts, spread
all over the Bible, the inexhaustible supply for the min
isters of the Word, those little Bibles, that contain the
quintessence of the whole — like the raountain lakes, clear
yet reaching to vast depths, like the blue of the sky,
charraing yet leading to infinite heights — they lay hold
of the sinner with the irresistible conviction of his sin ;
they persuade the penitent of the divine forgiveness ;
they constrain faith by the energy of redeeraing love ;
they assure the repenting of the adoption of the heaven
ly Father. There are no other words like the words of
God contained in the sacred Scriptures, in which the
grace of God appropriates, raoulds, and energizes the
forras of human speech with creative, generative power.
{b) The grace of redemption contained in the Script
ures is also sanctifying grace. Our Saviour prays the
Father for His disciples : " Sanctify thera through thy
truth ; thy word is truth " (John xvii. 17). He tells His
disciples, " Already ye are clean because of the word
which I have spoken unto you " (John xv. 3). The word

TUE SCRIPTURES AS A MEANS OF GRACE. 4I6
of the Gospel is thus .1 cleansing, sanctifying word: for
it is not bare truth appealing to the intellect with logi
cal power, it is not truth clothed with beauty and charm
ing tlie .'esthetic nature of man ; but it is truth which is
essentially ethical, having moral power, and above all en
ergized bythe religious forces, which lay hold of the re
ligious instincts of m.in, and it leads him to (iod. This
could not be accomplished by the law of conlmand-
iiients contained in ordinances, but only by the Gospel
of the grace of God, the soul-transforming words of our
holy rc;ligioii. l'"or the Gospel sets forth Jehovah, the
Holy l\e(lei:mcr, the Fatherand the Preserver. The
Gos|)el sets forth Jesus Chri.st as the crucified, risen, and
glorifieil .S.iviour; presents us liis blood and righteous
ness, throws over our nakedness the robe of His justifi
cation, .md commands us by the vision of Plis graces
ami perfections. The Wonl of God is a purifying and
sanctifying word, because it contains the words of holy
men, of a sinless and entirely sanctified Saviour, of a per
fect CkuI, the 1 loly One of Israel.
Pluman sjieech is the most wonderful endowment of
man. It is the tower of strength in little children, who
as babes and sucklings are enabled to praise their God
(Ps. viii. 2). It is the means of cominunication bolween
intelligent beings. It is the means of comnumicalion
between God and man. Human speech finds its noblest
cmiiloymenl by man in prayer, praise, adoration, and
preaching of the Gosiiel of the grace of God. Human
speech finds its highest employment by God in being
made the instrument of His divine power. It enwraps
and conveys to sinful man the divine grace of regenera
tion and sanctification, it presents the divine I'rinity to
man in all their retlemplive offices, and it is the channel

416 BIBLICAL STUDY.
of communication, of attachment, of comraunion, of or
ganic union, and everlasting blessedness.
" For the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salvation to all men,
instructing us, to the intent that, denying ungodliness and worldly
lusts, we should live soberly and righteously and godly in this present
world ; looking for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of
the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ : who gave hiraself for us,
that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a
people for his own possession, zealous of good works." (Titus ii. 1 1-
14). III. THE EFFICACY OF THE SCRIPTURES.
The Scriptures are raeans of grace because they have
in thera the grace of God in Jesus Christ, the grace of
regeneration and sanctification. In what, then, lies the
efficacy of this grace? How are we regenerated and
sanctified by the word of redemption in Christ ?
" The Spirit of God maketh the reading, but especially the preach
ing of the 'Word, an effectual means of enlightening, convincing and
humbling sinners, of driving them out of themselves, and drawing
them unto Christ ; of conforming them to his image, and subduing
them to his will ; of strengthening thera against temptations and
corruptions ; of building them up in grace, and establishing their
hearts in holiness and comfort through faith unto salvation."*
These are faithful and noble words. They ought to
become more real to the experience of the men of this
generation, where the peril, on the one hand, is in laying
too much stress on doctrines of faith, and, on the other,
in overrating maxims of morals. Religion, the experi
ence of the divine grace and growth therein, is the chief
thing in the use of the Bible and in Christian life. The
Holy Scriptures are means of grace, but means that have
to be applied by a divine force to make them efficacious.
There must be an immediate contact and energetic work-

* West. Larger Cat., Q. 155.

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEANS OF GRACE. 417
ing upon the readers and hearers and students of the
Word by a divine power. The Word of God does not
work ex opere operato, that is, by its raere use. It is
not the mere reading, the mere study of the Bible, that
is efficacious. It is not the Bible in the house or in the
hands. It is not the Bible read by the eyes and heard
by the ears. It is not the Bible comraitted to memory
and recited word for word. It is not the Bible ex
pounded by the teacher and apprehended by the mind
of the scholar. All these are but external forms of the
Word which enwrap the spiritual substance, the" grace
of redemption. The casket contains the precious jewels.
It must be opened that their lustre and beauty raay
charm us. The shell contains the nut. It must be
cracked or we cannot eat it. The pitcher contains the
water ; but it must be poured out and drunk to satisfy
thirst. The Word of God is effectual only when it has
become dynamic, and wrought vital and organic changes,
entering into the depths of the heart, assimilating itself
to the spiritual necessities of our nature, transforming
life and character. This is the purpose of the grace
which the Bible contains. This is the power of grace
that the Bible exhibits, in holding forth to us Jesus
Christ the Saviour. This can be accorapHshed in us
only by the activity of the Holy Spirit working in and
through the Scriptures in their use.
IV. THE APPROPRIATION OF THE GRACE OF THE SCRIPT
URES.
How then are we to obtain the grace of God con
tained in the Scriptures and effectually applied unto us
by the Holy Spirit as regenerating and sanctifying
grace ? The universal Protestant answer to this ques
tion would be, the grace of the Scriptures is received by
18*

418 BIBLICAL STUDY.
faith. Faith is the hand of the soul which grasps and
takes to itself the grace of God. But the nature of this
appropriation by faith needs unfolding. The Westrain
ster Shorter Catechism* gives the best answer to the
question :
" That the Word may become effectual to salvation, we must at
tend thereunto with diligence, preparation and prayer ; receive it
with faith and love, lay it up in our hearts, and practice it in our
lives." (i) The first thing we have to do in our study of the
Word of God is to give it our attention. Indeed atten
tion is the first requisite of all study and of all work.
Diligence and preparation are necessary for all under
takings. No one can fulfil his calling in life without
these qualifications. But there is an attention to be
given to the Word of God which is peculiar, and vastly
higher than the attention given to ordinary avocations
of life. It is an attention that is distinguished by
prayer, for the study of the Bible is a study of redemp
tion, a search for the power of God in Jesus Christ, a
quest for the grace of salvation. Such study must be
pointed with prayer, for prayer is the soul's quest after
God. Prayer di rects the student of the Bible to God in
the Bible. It withdraws the attention frora all other
things that raight absorb and attract it, and concentrates
it on God. Prayer is the arrow-head that bears the ar
row of attention to its raark — God. If the grace of God
in the sacred Scriptures, the prevenient grace, — always
preceding and anticipating the quest of man, ready to
be found, waiting to impart itself to us, — be directed by
the Holy Spirit ; then the attention of the Bible student,
directed by prayer, coraes, in iraraediate contact with this
* Ques. 90.

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEAJfS OF GRACE. 419
Spirit of grace and receives the power of salvation in
personal union with Him. Hence it is that prayer is
associated with the Word of God and the Sacraraents as
a raeans of grace. It is not a raeans of grace in the
same way as the Word of God, but it is a means of
grace of no less iraportance ; for if the Word of God is
the instrument, the means by which the grace of God is
given to us by the Holy Spirit, prayer is the instrument
or means of grace whereby we are able to receive and
use the grace of God. It is of prirae iraportance, there
fore, that the student of the Bible should be bathed
in prayer, and that the spirit of prayer should be the
animating influence in all our investigations of the
Scriptures. Prayerful attention seeks and finds God,
appropriates His grace and the redemptive influence of
His Word.
Robert Boyle * well says :
"And surely this consideration of the Bible's being one of the
conduit pipes, through which God hath appointed to con,veigh his
Tiuth, as well as graces to his children, should methinks both largely
animate us to the searching of the Scriptures, and equally refresh us
in it. For as no Instrument is weak in an omnipotent hand : so
ought no means to be looked upon as more promising than that
which is like to be prospered by Grace, as 'tis devised by Omniscience.
¦We may confidently expect God's blessing upon his own institutions,
since we know, that whatsoever we ask according to the will^of God,
he will give it us, and we can scarce ask anything more agreeable to
the will of God, than the competent understanding of that book
wherein his will is contained."
In order to emphasize this all-important point and
give it its proper position in Biblical study, it will be
necessary for us to make some discriminations.

* Some Considerations touching the Style of the H. Scriptures. London,
1661, p. 50.

420 BIBLICAL STUDY.
{a) The first work in the scientific and systemat:
study of the Scriptures is called textual criticisra, or th
Lower Criticism. It is first of all necessary to know th
text in which the Scriptures are contained. Hence th
candidates for the ministry devote a large portion (
their time to a study of the sacred languages, the varioi
versions and MSS. of the Word of God. All transl;
tions must be derived frora a faithful study of the orij
inals. It is indispensable that a living church shoul
have a ministry who are brought into iraraediate contac
with the divine originals. The Bible in unknown tongue
is a Paradise fenced and barred (see Chaps. III. and VI.
The acquisition of the original text reraoves the barriei
the translation into the tongue of the people opens th
gates, that all who will may enter in. Hence our Pro
estant churches have made it an article of faith that th
Bible must be given to the people in their own tongui
and continually interpreted to the people by minister
who know theraselves the originals, and are able to n
move misapprehensions that will always arise, to som
extent, in connection with all translations and reprodui
tions. But this first step of the mastery of the divin
original text may be accomplished and yet the grace c
God that is in the Scriptures remain entirely unknowr
It is as if a man should enter the king's garden and df
vote his entire attention to the study of the gates an
walls. {b) The second step in Biblical study is literary crit
cism or Higher Criticisra (see Chaps. VIL, VIIL, an
IX.). The sacred Scriptures are coraposed of a grcE
variety of writings of different authors in different pi
riods of history, writing in raany different styles, such i
poetry and prose, history and story, epistle and prophec]
Some of this literature is exceedingly choice from-

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEANS OF GRACE. 421
purely literary point of view. An anthology of the
choicest pieces of Biblical literature would certainly be a
very profitable study for raany of God's people. Their
eyes would be opened to the wondrous forras of beauty
in which God has chosen to reveal His grace of rederap
tion. But to study the Bible as sacred literature is not
to study it as a raeans of grace. Exclusive devotion to
that theme is as if one should enter the king's garden,
and instead of going at once to his gracious presence,
in accordance with his invitation, we should devote our
selves to the beautiful trees and flowers and ornamental
shrubs and landscape.
{c) The third work of Biblical study is Biblical exegesis
(see Chap. X.). In this department the student in every
way endeavors to get at the true raeaning of the Script
ures. The particular passage and the entire writing
under consideration must be studied with the most
minute accuracy, and, at the same tirae, the raost cora
prehensive suraraation of evidence. But even this may
be carried on in a most thorough and successful raanner
in all its stages, except the last and highest (see p. 363),
without finding God in Jesus Christ. Sorae of the
best exegetes have not been true Christians. The peril
in exegesis is, the becoming absorbed in details, and in
giving ourselves to the quest after truth and scholarly
accuracy. It is as if one entered the king's garden and
devoted himself at once to a scientific exaraination and
classification of its contents, the survey and raapping
out of its sections.
{d) The fourth work of Biblical study is the study of the
theology of the Bible (see Chap. XI.) — its religion, its doc
trines, and its raorals. This is the highest attainraent of
Biblical scholarship, but it is not the study of the Bible
as a means of grace. It is as if we entered the king's

422 BIBLICAL STUDY.
palace and devoted our attention to the principles and
maxiras of his adraniistration, the rules of his household,
while the king himself was graciously waiting to receive
us into his own presence and give us the kiss of fatherly
salutation. All of these various subjects of Biblical study are
vastly iraportant. The Church has not yet awakened to
the vast possibilities and the wonderful fruitage to be
derived frora Biblical study. No one could exalt these
departraents, each and all of thera, raore highly than we
are disposed to do, but notwithstanding, it raust be said
that if all these studies could be accoraplished in a most
scholarly manner, the chief thing, the one suprerae thing,
raight still remain unaccomplished — namely, the study
of the Bible as a raeans of grace. This is the highest
achieveraent of Biblical study. P"or prayer will seek first
the presence and the person of God. It will not be de
tained by anything in the Bible. It will press on through
the text, the literature, the exegesis, and the theology,
giving thera but slight attention, a raere passing glance,
firraly advancing into the presence-charaber of God. It
will run in the footsteps of the divine Spirit until the raan
is ushered into the presence of the Heavenly Father and
bows in adoration and love to the dear Saviour and has
the adoption and recognition of sonship. Then first will
he be assured that the Bible is indeed the Word of God,
the inspired canon, when he has found God in the Bible
(see Chap. V.) ; then first will he understand the Script
ures at their centre, in their very heart, when he has recog
nized his Saviour in them (see Chap. X., p. 364) ; then in
the light of the Redeemer's countenance, the student may
go forth to the enjoyment of all the beauties and glories
and wondrous manifestations of truth and love in the
Scriptures, and find them radiant with the love of Christ,

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEAN'S OF GRACE. 423
and pervaded throughout -\vith the effectual grace of
God. As an ancient Puritan divine has said :
" Thus in the Scriptures ye find life, because the Word is so effect
ual to doe you good, to convert your soul, to pull down Satan's
throne, and to build up the soul in grace. It is a hammer to break
the hard heart, a fire to purge the drossie heart, a light to shine into
the darke heart, an oyle to revive the broken heart, armour of proof
to stabhsh the weake and tempted heart. If these precious things be
matters of Christian, religion ; then surely tbe written word is the
foundation of it. Etemal life is in the Scriptures, because they testify
of Christ, they set forth Christ who is the way the truth and the life ;
in them ye find life, because in them ye find Christ. So far as by
Scripture we get acquaintance with Christ ; so far we are acquainted
with salvation and no farther. For if you knew all Histories and all
the prophecies, if ye had the whole Bible by heart, if by it you could
judge of all disputes, yet until you find Christ there, you cannot find
life ; the Scriptures are to us salvificall because they bring us unto
Christ." *
(2) Faith in the form of prayerful attention and inves
tigation is followed by appropriating faith. The atten
tion becomes more and more absorbed in its object.
Prayer having attained its quest is satisfied and grateful.
The grace of God, so evidently set forth in the Script
ures in Jesus Christ the Saviour, is appropriated in this
personal contact. The affections are generated and im
part to faith new vigor. The Holy Spirit grasps the
hand of prayer and pours into it the treasures of grace,
and they are clasped as infinitely precious to believing
and loving hearts. As a distinguished modern divine
says :
" Holy Scripture gives faith its object. It puts Christianity in its
purity and attractiveness before our eyes as an object which is itself
a chaUenge and inducement to enter into union with it by faith."
. . . . " The Holy Spirit perpetually glorifies Christ as He is set

* Lyford, Plain Man's Senses exercised, 1655, pp. 59, 60.

424 BIBLICAL STUDY.
forth in Scripture, makes Him emerge, so to speak, from the letter
and stand out in living form before us. He thus brings us through
the medium of Holy Scripture into communion with the hving
Christ." *
Thus faith and love are the two eyes of the soul that
see the living Christ present in His Word. They are
the spiritual appetites by which we partake of the bread
of heaven and living water. Such a receiving is an ever-
increasing enjoyraent of the infinite riches of divine
grace, the inexhaustible treasures of rederaptive love.
The supply of grace in the Scriptures is inexhaustible.
The possibilities of the growth of the affections of faith
and love are only liraited by the possibilities of grace
itself. This systera of grace is corapared by the prophet
Zechariah to a vast self-feeding lamp-stand with its seven
branches and lighted lamps, supplied by the ever-living,
growing, and oil-producing olive-trees that stand by its
sides and overshadow it (Zech. iv.). The oil of grace is
ever fresh and new — the light is ever bright and brilliant.
Faith's eye sees and understands it more and more.
But just here it is necessary to guard against a too
coraraon error. It is true that the grace of God per
vades the Scriptures and Christ is the raaster of the
Scriptures, but it is not equally easy for faith to see and
appreciate the grace of God in every passage. The
Bible contains supplies of grace for all the world, and
for all time, for the weak and baby Christians, for the
strong and manly Christians, for the iraraature Christian
centuries, and for the church in its highest developraent
as the Bride of the Larab. Training in the school of
grace is indispensable for the appropriation of the grace
of the Scriptures. There are but few who are able to
appropriate more than the grace that lies on the surface
* Dorner System of Christian Doctrine, IV., pp. 260, 261.

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEANS OF GRACE. 425
of the plainest passages of Scripture. The Church is
constantly learning new lessons of grace frora the Script
ures. We have a right to expect still greater light to
break forth frora the Scriptures when the Church has
been prepared to receive it. The Church did not attain
its maturity at the Nicene Council. 'Augustine was not
the highest achievement of Christian faith and experi
ence. The Protestant Reformation did not introduce
the golden age. A church that is not" growing in grace
is a lukewarra, if not a dead church. A theology that is
not progressive is bedridden, if not a dead theology.
The Church needs a greater Reforraation than it has
ever yet enjoyed — a more extensive pouring out of the
Holy Spirit, a deeper quickening, a more intense devo
tion in love and service to our Saviour and the interests
of His kingdom. We are convinced that the seeds of
such a Reformation are embedded in the Bible, only
waiting a new spring-tirae of the world to shoot forth.
The grace of God will reveal itself to another Luther
and another Calvin at no very distant day, in vastly
greater richness and fulness, for the sanctification of the
Church and the preparation of the Bride for her Bride
groom. In the meantirae it behooves us all to turn
away from the abnormal, iraraature, and defective expe
riences and systeras of very poor Christians so often held
up to us as models for our attainment, and to set our
faces as a flint against every wresting of Scripture in the
interest of any dogma, new or old, and concentrate our
faith and love upon the image of the grace- of God in
Jesus Christ, the crucified, risen and glorified Redeemer.
He is the one object that concentrates the grace of God
— the fountain source of supply for all believers. Into
His image as the divine likeness we are to be trans
formed, and we ought to think of no other.

426 BIBLICAL STUDY.
The Scriptures are indeed means, not ends. They are
to bring us to God, to assimilate us to Christ, to unite
us in organic union with Him. If this has not been ac
coraplished, there has been very great failure, however
much we raay have accomplished in Biblical scholarship,
or Dogmatic Theology, in the History and Polity of the
Church, in devotional reading and preaching, in the ap
plication of particular passages to our souls. But those
who have become personally attached to Jesus Christ
have found the Master of the Scriptures. He is the key
to its treasures, the clue to its labyrinths. Under His
instruction and guidance believers search the Scriptures
with ever-increasing pleasure and profit. They ever find
treasures new and old. They understand the secret of
grace. They know how to extract it from the varied forms
in which it is enveloped. They explore the deepest
mines and bring forth lustrous gems of truth. They
clirab the highest peaks and rapturously gaze on the
vast territories of their Lord. With the Psalmist they
exclaim (Ps. cxix. 97, 103, 127, 160) :
" O how I love thy instruction !
It is my meditation all the day.
" How sweet are thy words unto my taste !
Sweeter than honey to my mouth.
" I love thy commandments above gold.
Yea above fine gold.
" The sum of thy words is truth,
And everlasting all thy righteous judgments."
(3) But the grace of God in the Scriptures can be fully
appropriated only by practicing faith. Our Saviour
taught His disciples : " If any man willeth to do his will
he shall know of the teaching, whether it be of God or

THE SCRIPTURES AS A MEAXS OF GRACE. 407
whetlier I speak from myself" (John vii. 17). Experi
ment is ever the victor of doubt. Faith is tested by
practice. Abraliam's faith w.as proved by his willingiiess
to sacrifice his well-beloved son. Mere faith is seeming
faitli, a shadow, a dead \-anity. A real, genuine, li\ing
faith apprehends and uses divine grace. The grace of
God is effectual. It is djTiamic in its application of re
demption. It is no less dynamic after it has been ap
propriated by man. The light of the world lights up
Qmstian lamps. The water of life becomes in the be
liever a fountain, from whicli shall flow rivers of li\-ing
water (John \-ii. 3S). The grace of God is made effect
ual by •• lax^ng it up in our he.arts and practicing it in
our lives." The grace of God becomes a grace of exoe-
rience. Unless the divine grace continue to flow forth
from a man in his life and conduct, the source of
suppl}- is stopped. As a resenoir which has no outlet
wnll have no incoming waters. A lamp that does not
bum will not be able to receive fresh supplies of oil.
From this two things follow :
{a) If a Christian man would use the Scriptures as a
means of grace he must continually put them in prac
tice in his heart and life. If tlie cliurch would appre
hend more and more the riclies of the grace of Jesus
Christ contained in the Scriptures it must become a
more practical, earnest. Christ-like cliurch. The source
of supply from the Scripture reservoir is feeble because
the outflowing of grace from Christian men and women
is feeble.
{d) Christians become secondary sources of suppl\-.
The Word of God, tlie Gospel of Jesus Christ, when ap>-
propriated by the Christian, assimilated ro his needs,
transformed into his life, does not cease to be the Gos
pel of tlie grace of God. The external form h.is been

428 BIBLICAL STUDY.
changed, but the internal substance of grace is the same.
The Word of God does not cease to be the Word of
God when wrapped in other than Scripture language.
Hence it is that the Christian becoraes a living epistle of
God [2 Cor. iii. 3), and the Church, as a body of such epis
tles, a raeans of grace, conveying the divine grace in an
other forra to the world. It is ever the grace of God that
is the effectual divine force and not the form in which
for the time it may be enveloped. Happy the church
when its ministers have become more really such living
epistles, written with the Spirit of the living God ! Blessed
will that tirae be, when the entire membership of the
church shall becorae such epistles, when Christ, who so
loved the Church and gave Hirriself for it, shall have
sanctified it, having cleansed it by the -washing of water
with the Word (Eph. v. 25)! Then will the ancient
prophecy be realized (Heb. viii. lo-ii):
" I will put my laws in their mind.
And on their heart also will I write them :
And I will become their God,
And they shall become ray people :
And they shall not teach every one his fellow-citizen.
And every one his brother, saying. Know the Lord :
For all shall know me.
From the least to the greatest of them."

A CATALOGUE

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY.
,1,*^ This catalogue has been prepared for those who desire to
pursue Biblical study in three grades : (i). The books marked
with a star and placed first in each division, are recommended
to the general public. (2). The books marked with a cross,
following those marked with a star, are recommended for
theological students and ministers. (3). The remainder of
the books mentioned Rave been selected for a reference library
in a theological seminary, as an introduction to a more schol
arly study of the Scriptures. The arrangement is first topi
cal, and second in accordance with relative importance to the
several classes of students. Honorary and official titles of
authors or editors have been omitted.
I. — Biblical Study in General.
*ScHAFF, Philip. A Dictionary of the Bible, including Biog
raphy, Natural History, Geography, Topography, Archae
ology, and Literature. Philadelphia : American Sunday-
school Union. 3d edition. 1883.
*HiTCHCOCK, Roswell D. A New and Complete Analysis of
the Holy Bible. The Old and New Testaments arranged
by Subjects on the basis of M. Talbot, with Indexes and
Tables by N. West. With Cruden's Concordance, revised
by J. Eadie. New York : A. J. Johnson & Co. 1870.
fSMiTH, William. Dictionary of the Bible, comprising its
Antiquities, Biography, Geography, and Natural History.
3 vols. London : John Murray, 1860-63. Revised and
edited by H. B. Hackett, with the co-operation of Ezra Ab
bot. 4 vols. New York: Hurd & Houghton. 1868-70.
f ZOECKLER, Otto. Handbuch d. Theologischen Wissenschaften
in Encyklopadischer Darstellung mit besonderer Riicksicht
auf der einzelnen Disciplinen in verbindung mit Cremer,

430 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Grau, Harnack, Kflbel, Luthardt, von Scheele, F.W. Schultz,
L. Schultz, Strack, Volck, von Zezschwitz, Plath und
Schafer. Nordlingen: C. H. Beck. 1882-3. [5 half vols.
have appeared. A translation is in press. T. & T. Clark,
Edinburgh].
tLADD, George T. The Doctrine of ffofy Scripture. A crit
ical, historical, and dogmatic inquiry into the origin and
nature of the Old and New Testaments. 2 vols. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1883.
Wogue, L. Histoire de la Bible et de F Exiglse Biblique
jusqu' a nos jours. Paris i I'lmprimerie Nationale. 1881.
Hagenbach, K. C. Encyklopadie und Methodologie der
Theologischen Wissenschaften. lote Aufl. von E. Kautzsch.
1880. Leipzig: C. Hirzel. 1874.
Diestel, Ludwig. Geschichte des AUen Testamentes in der
Christlichen Kirche. Jena : H. Dufift. 1869.
Roberts, Francis. Clavis Bibliorum. The Key to the Bible,
unlocking the richest Treasures of the Holy Scriptures.
4th edition, folio. London : P. Parker. 1675.
KiTTO, John. A Cyclopcedia of BibUcal Literature, originally
edited by John Kitto. 3d edition, greatly enlarged and
improved. Edited by W. L. Alexander. 3 vols. Lon
don : A. & C. Black. Philadelphia : J. B. Lippincott &
Co. 1865.
Riehm, Edward. Handworterbuch des Biblisches Altertutm
fur gebildete Bibelleser. Bielefeld und Leipzig : Belhagen
& Klasing. 1875-83 (still unfinished).
II. — The Languages of the Bible and
Cognates.
(i) The Hebrew Language.
f Davidson, A. B. An Introductory Hebrew Grammar, with
Progressive Exercises in Reading and Writing. 5th
edition. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1883.
fGESENius, Wilhelm. Hebrew Grammar. Translated by
Benj. Davis from Rodiger's edition. Thoroughly revised

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 43I
and enlarged on the basis of the latest edition of E.
Kautzsch, and from other recent authorities, by Edward
C' Mitchell. Andover : W. F. Draper. 1880.
f Driver, S. R. A Treatise of the Tenses in Hebrew, and
some other Syntactical Questions. Oxford : At the Clar
endon Press. 2d edition. 1881.
fRoBiNSON, Edward. A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the
Old Testament, including the Biblical Chaldee. From the
Latin of William Gesenius, with corrections and large ad
ditions, partly furnished by the author in manuscript,
and partly condensed from his larger Thesaurus. 3d edi
tion. Boston : Crocker & Brewster. 1849.
fPoTTER, Joseph Lewis. An English- Hebrew Lexicon, be
ing a complete Verbal Index to Gesenius' Hebrew Lexi
con, as translated by Edward Robinson. Boston: Crocker
& Brewster. 1872.
f Harper, W. R. Hebrew Vocabularies. Chicago : Max
Stern, Goldsmith & Co. 1882.
f Green, William Henry. A Grammar of the Hebrew
Language. 4th edition (in press). New York : John
Wiley & Sons. 1883.
Ewald, Heinrich. Syntax of the Hebrew Language. Trans
lated from the Sth German edition by James Kennedy.
Edinburgh. T. & T. Clark. 1879.
Nordheimer, Isaac. A Critical Grammar of the Hebrew
Language. 2 vols. 2d edition. New York : Wiley &
Putnam. 1842.
Ewald, Heinrich. Ausfiihrliches Lehrbuch der Hebraischen
Sprache des Alien Bundes. 8te Ausgabe. Gottingen.
J. C. Dieterich. 1870.
Bottcher, Friedrich. Ausfiihrliches Lehrbuch der Hebra
ischen Sprache, nach dem. Tode des Verfassers herausge
geben von Ferd. Miihlau. 2 Bde. Leipzig : J. A. Barth.
1866.
Olshausen, Justus. Lehrbuch der Hebraischen Sprache
Braunschweig : F. Vieweg und Sohn. 1861.

432 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Gesenius, Wilhelm. Ausfiihrliches grammatisch-kritisches
Lehrgebaude der Hebraischen Sprache mit vergleichung
der verwandten Dialekte. Leipzig : C. W. Vogel. 1817.
Strack, Hermann. Hebrdische Grammatik mit Uebungs-
stiicken, Litteratur und Vokabular. Karlsruhe und Leip
zig : H. Reuther. 1883.
BiCKEL, Gustavus. Outlines of Hebrew Grammar. Re
vised by the author and annotated by the translator, S. I.
Curtiss, Jr. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus. 1877.
Gesenius, Wilhelm. Thesaurus philologicus criticus linguae
Hebraeae et Chaldaeae Veteris Testamenti. Editio altera.
3 Tom. 1835-53. Lipsiae : F. C. G. Vogel. (The work
was completed by Aemilius Roediger.)
Gesenius, Wilhelm. Hebraisches und Chaldaisches Hand
worterbuch. pte Aufl. von F. Miihlau und W. Volck.
Leipzig : F. C. W. Vogel. 1882-83.
FuERST, Julius. Hebraisches und Chaldaisches Handworter
buch Uber das Alte Testament. Leipzig : B. Tauchnitz.
A Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament. 4th
edition. Translated from the German by Samuel David
son. London : Williams & Norgate. 1871.
Meier, Ernst. Hebraisches Wurzelworterbuch. Manheim :
F. Bassermann. 1845.
Girdlestone, R. B. Synonyms of the Old Testament : their
bearing on Christian Faith and Practice. London : Long
mans, Green & Co. 187 1.
(2) Aramaic.
f Riggs, Elias. A Manual of the Chaldee Language, con
taining a Chaldee grammar, chiefly from the German of
G. B. Winer ; a Chrestomathy consisting of selections
from the Targums, and including notes on the Biblical
Chaldee, etc. 4th edition. New York : A. D. F. Ran
dolph & Co. 1858.
f Cowper, B. Harris. The Principles of Syriac Grammar.
Translated and abridged from the work of Hoffmann.
London : Williams & Norgate. 1858.
tCASTELL, Edmund. Lexicon Syriacum ex eius Heptaglotto
seorsim typis describi curavit atque sua adnotata adjecit
J. D. Michaelis. Gottingae : J. C. Dieterich. 1788.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 433
fROEDiGER, Aemilius. Chrestomathia Syriaca quam glossa-
rio et tabulis grammaticis. Editio altera. Halis : Sump-
tibus Orphanotrophei. 1868.
Luzzatto, S. D. Grammar of the Biblical Chaldaic Lan
guage and the Talmud Babli Idioms. Translated from
the Italian, and largely renewed by J. S. Goldammer.
New York : John Wiley & Sons. 1876.
Strack, H. L., & Carl Siegfried. Lehrbuch der Neuhe-
brdischen Sprache und Litteratur. Karlsruhe: H. Reuther.
1884.
Levy, Jacob. Chaldaisches Worterbuch Uber die Targumim
und einen grossen Theii des rabbinischen Schriftthums.
2 Bde. 2te Ausgabe. Leipzig : Baumgartner. 1876.
Levy, Jacob. Neuhebrdisches und Chaldaisches Worterbuch
Uber die Talmudim und Midraschim nebst beitragen von
H. L. Fleischer. 4 Bde. Leipzig : F. A. Brockhaus.
1876-83. (The fourth vol. has not yet appeared.)
Phillips, George. A Syriac Grammar. 3d edition. Cam
bridge : Deighton, Bell & Co. 1866.
Noeldeke, Th. Kurzgefasste Syrische Grammatik. Leipzig:
T. O. Weigel. 1880.
Merx, Adalbert. Grammatica Syriaca quam post Hoff"-
manni. Halis : Lib. Orphanotrophei. 1867.
Smith, R. Payne. Thesaurus Syriacus collegerunt S. M.
Quatremere, G. H. Bernstein, .G. W. Lorsbach, A. J. Ar
nold, C. M. Agrell, F. Field, A. Roediger, auxit, digessit,
exposuit, edidit. Oxonii, e typographeo Clarendomano.
1868—83. (6 Fasciculi as far as page 2256 have been pub
lished completing the letter Mem.)
Noeldeke, Theo. Manddische Grammatik. Halle : Wais-
enhaus. 1875.
(3) Arabic and ^Ethiopic.
tWRiGHT, William. A Grammar of the Arabic Language.
Translated from the German of Caspari and edited with
numerous additions and corrections. 2d edition. 2 vols.
London : F. Norgate. 1874-5.
fPETERMANN, J. H. Brevis Linguae Arabicae grammatica,
litteratura, chrestomathia cum glossario. Editio secunda.
Berolini : G. Eichler. 1867.
19

434 BIBLICAL STUDY.
fpREYTAG, G. W. Lexicon Arabico-Latinum. 4 Tom. Halis
C. A. Schwetschke et Filium. 1830-37.
fDiLLMANN, August. Grammatik der Aethiopischen Sprache
Leipzig: T. O. Weigel. 1857.
f Dillmann, August. Chrestomathia Aethiopica. Lipsiae
T.O. Weigel. 1866.
fDiLLMANN, August. Lexicon Linguae Aethiopicae. Lip
siae : T. O. Weigel. 1865.
Arnold, F. A. Chrestomathia Arabica. Halis : C- E. M.
Pfeffer. 1853.
Catafago, Joseph. An English and Arabic Dictionary.
2d edition. London : Bernard Quaritch. 1873.
Wahrmund, Adolph. Handworterbuch der Arabischen und
Deutschen Sprache (Modern Arabic). 2 Bande. Giessen :
J. Ricker. 1870-77.
Penrice, John. A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran.
London : H. S. King & Co. 1873.
Lane, Edward William. An Arabic Lexicon, derived from
the best and most copious Eastern sources, comprising a
very large collection of words and significations omitted
in the Kamoos, with supplements to its abridged and de
fective explanations, ample grammatical and critical com
ments, and examples in prose and verse. Vols. I.-V.
Williams & Norgate. 1863-74. Continued under the
editorship of Stanley Lane Poole. Vol. V., 1877, Vol. VI.
1—2, 1 881-2. (Completed as far as 2640 pages of the
whole work.)
Dozy, R. Supplement aux Dictionaires Arabes. 2 Tomes.
Leyde: E. J. Brill. 1881.
Pretorius, Franz. Amharische Sprache. Halle : Waisen-
haus. 1879.
(4) Phoenician and Samaritan.
fScHROEDER, P. Die Phonizische Sprache. Entwurf einer
Grammatik nebst Sprach und Schriftproben. Halle : Wai-
senhaus. 1869.
f Levy, M. A. Phonizisches Worterbiich. Breslau : H
Skutsch. 1864.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL. STUDY. 435
fPETERMANN, J. H. Brevis Linguae Samaritanae. Bero
lini : G. Eichler. 1873.
(5) Assyrian and Babylonian.
f Delitzsch, Fried. Assyrische Lesestucke. 2teAufl. Leip
zig: J. C. Heinrichs. 1878.
f Sayce, A. H. An Assyrian Grammar for comparative pur
poses. London : Trubner & Co. 1872.
fSCHRADER, Eberhard. Assyrisches Syllabar fur den Ge-
brauch in seinen Vorlesungen zusammengestellt. Berlin :
Koniglichen Acad. d. Wissenschaften. 1880.
Schrader, Eberhard. Die Assyrisches-babylonische Keilin-
schriften. Kritische Untersuchungen der Grundlagen ihret
Entzifierung. Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus. 1872.
Norris, Edm. Assyrian Dictionary. 3 vols. London :
Williams & Norgate. 1868-72.
S-ayce, a. H. Lectures upon the Assyrian Language and Syl
labary. London : S. Bagster & Sons. 1877.
Sayce, A. H. Babylonian Literature. Lectures delivered at
the Royal Institution. London : Samuel Bagster & Sons:
1879.
Oppert, Jules. EUments de la Grammaire Assyriene. 2me
Edition. Paris : A. Franck. 1868.
(6) Greek.
fWiNER, G. B. Grammatik des N'eutest. Sprachidioms. 7 Aufl.
von G. Liinemann. Leipzig : F. C. W. Vogel. 1867.
A Treatise of the Grammar of New Testament Greek, re
garded as a sure basis for New Testament Exegesis.
Translated from the German, with large additions and
full indices. 2d edition by W. F. Moulton. Sth English
edition. T. & T. Clark. 1S77. A Grammar of the
Idiom of the New Testament. 7 th edition, enlarged and
improved by G. Liinemann. Revised and authorized
translation. By J. H. Thayer Andover: W. F. Draper.
1877.
f Robinson, Edward. A Greek and English Lexicon of the
New Testament. A new edition. New York : Harper &
Brothers. 1872.

436 BIBLICAL STUDY.
fCREMER, Hermann. Biblisch-theologisches Worterbuch der
Neutestamentlichen Gracitat. 3te sehr vermehrte und ver-
besserte Aufiage. Gotha: F. A. Perthes. 1881-83.
Biblico- Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek.
Translated from the German of the 2d edition with ad
ditional matter and corrections by the author. By Wil
liam Urwick. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1878.
f ScoTT, Robert. A Greek-English Lexicon. Compiled by
H. G. Liddell and Robert Scott. 7th edition, revised and
augmented throughout with the co-operation of Professor
Drisler. New York : Harper & Brothers. 1883.
Green, T. S. A Grammar of the New Testament Dialect.
' London : S. Bagster & Sons. 1S72.
BuTTMANN, Alexander. Grammatik des Neutestament.
Sprachgebrauchs. 2 Abtheil. Berlin: Diimmler. 1857-59.
A Grammar of the New Testament. Authorized translation
by J. H. Thayer, with numerous additions and corrections
by the author. Andover : W. F. Draper. 1873.
J ELF, W.E. Grammar of the Greek Language. 4th edition.
2 vols. Oxford : James Parker & Co. rS66.
WiLKE, C. G. Clavis N. T. philologica. 3 Edit, emendata et
aucta von W. Grimm. Leipzig: Lib. Arnoldiana. 1S79.
Curtius, George. GrundzUge der Griechischen Etymologic.
5 Aufl. Leipzig: B. G. Treubner. 1879. Principles of
Greek Etymology. Translated with the sanction of the
author by A. S. Wilkins and E. B. England. 2 vols.
London: John Murray. 1875-6.
Schmidt, J. H. Synonymik der Griechischen Sprache. 3
Bande. Leipzig : B. G. Treubner. 1876-79.
Trench, R. C. Synonyms of the New Testament. The two
parts in one. 9th edition, revised. London : Macmillan
& Co. 1880.
Webster, William. The Syntax aud Synonyms of the Greek
Testament. London : Rivingtons. 1864.
Sophocles, E. A. A Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzan
tine Periods. Boston : Little, Brown & Co. 1870.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 437

III. — The Canon of Scripture.
*Charteris, a. H. The New Testament Scriptures : their
claims, history, and authority. Being the Croall Lectures
for 1882. London : James Nisbet & Co. New York :
Robert Carter & Brothers. 1882.
fSTUART, MosES. Critical History and defence of the Old
Testament Canon. Andover: W. F. Draper. 1865. Ed
ited, with occasional notes and references, by Peter Lori
mer. London: William Tegg & Co. 1849.
fWESTCOTT, B. F. A General Survey of the History of the
Canon of the New Testament. 5 th edition. London :
Macmillan & Co. iSSi.
Charteris, A. H. A Collection of Early Testimonies to the
Canonical Books of the New Testament. Based on Kirch-
hofer's Quellensammlung. Edinburgh : William Black
wood & Sons. 1880.
Reuss, Edward. Histoire du Canon des Saintes-Ecritures
dans r Eglise ChrMenne. 2 edition. Strasbourg : Treut-
tel et Wurtz. 1863.
CosiN, John. Scholastical History of the Canon of the Holy
Scriptures. London: R.Norton. 1657. In Vol. III. of
Works. Oxford : J. H. Parker. 1849.
FuERST, Julius. Der Kanon des Alt. Test, nach den Ueber-
lieferungen in Talmud und Midrasch. Leipzig : Dorf-
fling & Franke. 1868.
Davidson, Samuel. The Canon of the Bible : its formation,
history, and fluctuations. 3d edition. London : C. Ke
gan Paul. 1880.
Credner, C. a. Gesch. d. neutest. Kanon herausgegeben von
G. Volkmar. Berlin : G. Reimer. 1S60.
Zahn, Theodor. Forchungen zur Gesch. des neutest. Kanons
u. der altkirchl. Literatur. I Theii : Tatian' s DIatessaron.
II Thiel : der Evangeliencommentar des Theophilus von
Antiochen. Eriangen : A. Deichert. 1881-3.

438 biblical study.
IV.— The Text of Scripture.
(i) The Originals and Versions.
(a) Of the whole Bible.
'^ The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments.
Translated out of the original tongues, and with the former
translations diligently compared and revised. New York :
American Bible Society.
'''The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments.
Translated out of the original tongues, and with the form
er translations diligently compared and revised, by his
majesty's special command. The S. S. Teacher's edition.
Oxford : Printed at the University Press.
*Cambridge .Paragraph Bible of the Authorized English Ver
sion, with the text revised, the marginal references remod
elled, and a critical introduction prepared by F. H. Scriv
ener. Cambridge : Deighton, Bell & Co. 1873.
fSTiER, R., and K. G. W. Theile. Polyglotten- Bibel zum
prciktischen Handgebrauch. Die Heilige Schrift AUen
und Neuen Testaments in tlbersichtlicher Nebeneinander-
stellung des Urtextes, der Septuaginta, Vulgata, und Lu-
theriibersetzung, so wie der wichtigsten Varianten der
vornehmsten deutschen Uebersetzungen. 5 Bande. Bie
lefeld : Velhagen & Klasing. 1864.
Walton, Brian. S- S. Biblia-Polyglotta. Complectentia
Textus Originales Hebraicum cum Pentateucho Samari-
tano Chaldaicum Graecum Versionumque Antiqarum Sa
maritanae Graeco-Sept., Chaldaicae, Syriacae, Lat. Vulg.
Arabicae, Aethiopicae, Persicae, quicquid comparari pote-
rat. 6 vol. folio. London : Thos. Roycroft. 1657.
Bibliorum Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus ed. Constantinus
Tischendorf. 4 vol. Petropoli. 1862.
Bibliorum sacrorum graecus codex Vaticanus collatis studiis
Caroli Vercellone et Josephi Cozza, editus. Folio. 6
Tom. Roma. 1869-1881.
Dillmann, A. Biblia Veteris Testamenti Aethiop. Tom i.
Octateuchtis. 1853-55. II. Libri Regum, Paralipome-
non Esdrae, Esther. Leipzig : F. A. Brockhaus. 1861-72

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 439
Codex Alexandrinus, fac-simile, printed in photo- lithography. 4
Parts folio. An absolute fac-simile produced by order of
the Trustees of the British Museum. London. 1S79— 81.
(The New Testament and Part I. of the Old Testament
have appeared.)
(b) Of the Old Testament.
\Biblia Hebraica ad optimas editiones imprimis Ev. van der
Hooght. cur. etc. C. G. Guil. Theile. Ed. Steor. V. Lip
siae : B. Tauchnitz. 1873.
\Liber Genesis Textum Massoreticum accuratissime expressit,
e fontibus masorae varie illustravit, notis criticis confir-
mavit S. Baer. Praefatus est. Fr. Delitzsch. Lipsiae :
B. Tauchnitz, 1869 ; L. Jesajae, 1S72 ; L. Jobi, 1875 ;
L. duodecim Prophet. 1878 ; L. Psalmorum, 1880 ; L. Pro-
verbiorum, 1880 ; Libri Danielis Ezrae et Nehemiae, 1882.
^Testamentum Vetus, graece fuxta LXX interpretes Text. Vatic.
rom. emend, ed. argum. et locos n. test, parall. notavit,
omnem lect. variet. cod. vetus. Alex., Ephr. Syri., Fr.
August, subjunxit, proleg. uberrimis instr. Const, de
Tischendorf. Ed. VI. Prolegomena rec. Nestle. 2 tom.
Lipsiae: F. A. Brockhaus. 1880.
Prophetarum posteriorum codex Babylonicus Petropolitanus,
ed. Herm. Strack. Editio Biblio. imperialis. Petropoli.
1876.
Biblia Hebrae, cum utraque Masora et Targum item cum com-
mentariii rabbinorum studio. Joan. Buxtorfii 5 Tom. folio.
Basileae : L. Kbnig. 1618-20.
Etheridge, J. W. The Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan
ben Uzziel on the Pentateuch j with the fragments of Je
rusalem Targum. From the Chaldee. 2 vols. London:
Longmans, Green & Co. 1862-1865.
Petermann, J. H. Pentateuchus Samarifanus Ad fidem libro
rum mss. apud Nablusianos repertorum I. Genesis. Ber
lin : Moeser. 1872.
Petermann, J. H. Versuch einer hebr. Formenlehre nach der
Aussprache der heut. Samaritaner. Leipzig : F. A. Brock
haus. 1868. (Contains v'ariations of Samaritan MSS. from
the Massoretic.)

440 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Ceriani, A. M. Codex Syro-hexaplaris Ambrosianus photo-
lithographice editus curante. Mailand : Biblio. Ambrosi-
anae. 1874.
Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt ; sive veterum interpre-
tum Graecorum in totum V. T. fragmenta, adhibita etiam
versione syro-hexaplari concinnavit emendavit et multis
partibus auxit. 2 vols. Oxford: Fred. Field. 1867-75.
(c) Of the New Testament.
''^ The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ
translated out of the Greek : being the version set forth
A.D. 161 1, compared with the most ancient authorities and
revised a.d. 1881. Printed for the Universities of Oxford
and Cambridge. Oxford: At the University Press.- 1881.
* The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ
translated out of the Greek : being the version set forth
A.D. 161 1, compared with the most ancient authorities and
revised a.d. 18S1, with the readings and renderings pre
ferred by the American Committee of Revision, incorpo
rated into the text. By Roswell D. Hitchcock. New
York: Fords, Howard & Hurbert. 1S81.
f The New Testament in the Original Greek. The Text re
vised by B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, with Introduc
tion and Appendix by the editors. 2 voLs. Cambridge :
Macmillan & Co. 1881. New York : Harper & Brothers.
1 88 1-2.
fGARDiNER, F. A Harmony of the Four Gospels in Greek,
according to the text of Tischendorf, with a collation of
the Textus Receptus, and of the Texts of Griesbach,
Lachmann, and Tregelles. Andover : W. F. Draper.
Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark. 1871.
Novum Testamentum Graece. Ad antiquissimos testes denuo
recensuit apparatum criticum omni studio perfectum ap-
posuit commendationem isagogicam praetexuit C. Tischen
dorf. Editio octava critica major. 2 Bde. Lipsiae : Gie-
secke & Devrient. 1869-72.
Tregelles, Samuel P. The Greek New Testament. Edited
from ancient authorities. London : Bagster & Sons.
1857-72.

BooKH OF nmnrnKkcK for biblical study. 44-1
RusiiBROOKic, W. (',. .Sy/////itic////. An ext)osii ion of the com
mon in.-itliT of thi; .Synoptic Gospels, with Append iocs.
London : Macmillan & Co. 1880.
Novum 'TcsliiiiictttiioL Graece ct /.aline. C;ir. I.achmanniis re-
ccnsiiil, Phil Ihittuiiinnus grni^c.-K- leclioncs auctorilates
apposilil. 2 'I'cjin. I'erolini : (.',. \ic\mcr. 1832—50.
Novum 'Tcslainciiliiiii (Iraccuni. Textus Steplianici 1550.
Acccdin-it viiriac leclioncs edilionuin liczae, Elzcviri, Lach-
manni, 'I'ischcndoi-fii ct Tregellcssii. Curante V. II.
Scrivener. Cunbridgc : Deighton, Hell & Co. 1.S72.
KoiiiNsoN, ]')i)WANi). A l/tiniu/iiy of the h'oiir (ios/u-ls in
<¦/'/-/¦/¦'/•, .'iccording lo the lext of Hahn. Revised etlition.
Doston : OocJccr & l5rc;vvHlcr. 1.S72.
'I'iKCiii'-.NDOKi'-, ('oNST. .Synopsis cvongcHca. IV. evang. or-
dine chronolog. coneiiinavit, brcvi comment, illustr. 410
Aufl. Leipzig: Mendelssohn. 1878.
TiiK IOngi.isii llnxAi'i.A. Six Iransl.-itions of the New Tes-
t,-inu,'nt ; Wirlif, i.j8o; Tyndale, 1554; (j'.-innier, 1539;
Genevan, t557 ; An^;lo-Rhemish, 1582 ; Authorized, 1611 ;
arr.-uigi-(! in |).-ir.'illel colninns, beneath tlu; original Creek
text, by Scholtz. With a llislory of ICnglish tr.-mslations
and Iraiiblator.s. London : Samuel Bagster & Son.s.
(2) Concordances.
*Y()UN(;, KoMi'-.KT. A nalyticdl Concordance tl) the Bible, on an
entirely new plan, conl.-iining every word in alphabetical
order, arrani'ed under its Hebrew or Creek original, with
the lileral meaning of e;icli and its pronunciation. 3d re
vised ediiion. ICdinhurgh : G. A.Young & Co. New
York : 1. K. h'lmk & Co. 1880.
*Cui;i>|';n, Ai.hxaniiuk. A Complete Coneoriianee to the lloh
Scriptures. New York : Dodd i'^ Mead. 1870.
fTlloMS, J. A. A ciiniplefe Co!ieii)-d<inee to the realised \'ersion.
of Ihe New 'Testament. I''.ndiraeing the m.-ir^inal re.-ulinns
ofthe iMinlish Revisers as well as those of the Ainerican
Committee. Published under tlu: aulhorizntion of the
Oxford and Cambridge Universities. New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons. 1883.
19*

t42 biblical study.
fHuDSON, C. F. A Critical Greek atid English Concordatue
of the New Testament. Revised and completed by Ezra
Abbot 4th edit. Boston : H. L. Hastings. 1877.
tWiGRAM, G. V. Englishman s Hebrew and Chaldee Concord
ance of the Old Testament. 4th ed. 2 vols. London : S.
Bagster & Sons.
Fuerst, Julius. Librorum Sacrorum Veteris Testamenti
Concordantiae Hebraicae atque Chaldaicae. Lipsiae : B.
Tauchnitz. 1840.
NOLDIUS, Christianus. Concordantiae particularumEbraeo-
Chaldaicarum. J. G. Tympius recensuit. Jena : J. F.
Bielck. 1734.
Trommius, Abraham. Concordantiae Graecae Ver.no vulgo dic-
tae LXX interpretum. 2 Tomi. Amstelodami : Sumpti
bus Societatis. 1718.
Bruder, A. V. H. Concordantiae omnium vocum Novi Testa
mentum Graecae. 5 edit. Lipsiae: Ernest Bredt 1880.
(3) Textual Criticism of the Old Testament.
fSTRACK, Herm. L. Prolegomena Critica in Vetus Testamen
tum Hebraicum. Leipzig : J. C. Heinrichs. 1873.
Davidson, Sam. Treatise on Biblical Criticism. 2 vols.
Boston: Gould & Lincoln. 1853.
Ginsburg, C. The Massorah. Compiled from manuscripts
alphabetically and lexically arranged. Vols. I. and II.
Aleph— Tav. London. 1880-83.
Levita, Elias. The Massoreth Ha-Massoreth, being an ex
position of the Massoretic notes on the Hebrew Bible, or
the ancient critical apparatus of the Old Testament in
Hebrew, with an English translation and critical and ex
planatory notes. By C. D. Ginsburg. London : Long
mans, Green, Reader & Dyer. 1867.
Buxtorf, John. Tiberius sive commentarius Masorethicus
Basle : Lud. Konig. 1620.
Cappellus, Ludovic. Critica Sacra s. de variis quae in
sacris. V. T. libris occurrunt lectionibus libri VI. Lute-
tiae Parisiorum : Sebast. Cramoisy. 1650.

BOOKS OF EEFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 443
Kennicott, Benj. Vetus Test. Heb. cum variis lectionibus.
2 Tom. folio. Oxonii, e typo Clarend. 17 76-1 780.
DeRossi, j. B. Variae lectioius Vet. Test. 4 Tom. Parma.
1 7 84-1 7 88 ; also. Scholia critica in V. T. libros seu sup-
plementa ad varias sacri textus lectiones. Palma : Ex
regio typographeo. 1798.
Frensdorf, S. Die Massora Magna ; Erster Theii, Masso
retisches Worterbuch. Hanover und Leipzig : Cohen &
Risch. 1876.
Wickes, William. Treatise on the Accentuation of the three
so-called poetic books of the Old Testament. Oxford :
Clarendon Press. 1881.
Frankel, Z. Vorstudien zu der Septuaginta. Leipzig: F. C W.
Vogel. 1 84 1.
Ronsch, H. Itala und Vulgata, Das Sprachidiom der ur-
christl. Itala und Kathol. Vulgata unter Beriicksichtigung
der Rora. Volkssprache erlautert. Marburg : N. G. El-
wert. 1869.
Ziegler, L. Die Lateinischen BibelUbersetzung vor Hierony-
thas und die Itala des Augustinus. Ein Beitrag zur Gesch.
d. Heil. Schrift. Munchen : Th. Riedel. 1879.
Walton, Brian. In Biblia Polyglotta Prolegomena specialia
recognovit Dathianisque et variorum notis suas immis-
cuit F. Wrangham. 2 Tom. Cantabrigiae : T. Smith.
1828.
(4) Textual Criticism of the New Testament.
*Mombert, j. I. A Handbook of the English Versions of the
Bible, New York : A. D. F. Randolph & Co. 1883.
f Scrivener, F. H. Introduction to the Criticism of the New
Testament. 3d edit. Cambridge : Deighton, Bell & Co.
1883.
f Schaff, P. Companion to the Greek Testament and the En
glish Version. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1883.
Kaulen, Fr. Handbuch zur Vulgata. Eine systematische
Darstellung ihres lateinischen Sprachcharakters. Mainz :
Kirchheim. 1870.

444 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Eadie, John. The English Bible. An external and critical
History of the various English Translations of Scripture.
2 vols. Macmillan & Co. 1876.
Tholuck, A. Das Alte Testament im Neuen Testament. 6
Aufl. Gotha • F. Perthes. 1S68.
fToY, Crawford H. Quotations in the New Testament. New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1884.
Turpie, D. M. The Old Testament in the New. A Contri
bution to Biblical Criticism and Interpretation. London :
Williams & Norgate. 1868.
V. — The Higher Criticism.
(i) The Old Testament.
*Cross, j. a. Introductory Hints to English Readers of the
Old Testament. London : Longmans, Green & Co. 1882.
¦"Smith, W. Robertson. The Old Testament in the Jewish
Church. London : Longmans, Green & Co. 1881. New
York : D. Appleton & Co. 1881.
f Bleek, Fred. Einleitung in das N. T. 4te Aufl. Bearbeitet
von J. Wellhausen. Berlin : G. Reimer. 1878. Trans
lated from the 2d German edition by G. H. Venables. 2
vols. London. 1875.
Davidson, Samuel. An Introduction to the Old Testament,
critical, historical, and theological. 3 vols. London :
Williams & Norgate. 1862-3.
Keil, K. F. Lehrbuch der historisch-kritisch. Einleitung in d,
kanonischen und apokryphischen Schriften d. A, T, Frank-
furt-a-Maine : Heyder & Zimmer. 3te Aufl. 1873.
Trans, by C. M. Douglas. 2 vols. Edinburgh : T. & T.
Clark. 1869.
DeWette, W. M. L. Lehrbuch der historisch-kritischen Ein
leitung in die kanonischen und apokryphischen Biicher des
Allen Testaments. Neu bearbeitet von Eberhard Schrader.
8te Ausgabe. Berlin : G. Reimer. 1869. Translated
from the German edition and enlarged by Theodore Par
ker. 2 vols. Boston : Little & Brown. 1843.
Kleinert, Paul. Abriss der. Einleitung zum A. T. in Tabellen-
form. Berlin : G. W. F. Miiller. 1878.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 445
Simon, Richard. Histoire Critique du Vieux Testament,
Rotterdam: R. Leers. 1685.
Eichhorn, J. G. Einleitung in das Alte Testament. \te
Aufl. 5 Bde. Gottingen : Lauffer. 1823-4.
Noldeke, Theo. Die Alttestamentliche Literatur in einer
Reihe von Aufsatzen. Leipzig: Quardt & Handel. 1868.
Reuss, Edward. Die Geschichte der heiligen Schriften Al
ien Testaments. Braunschweig : C A. Schwetschke &
Sohn. 1881.
Haevernick, H. a. C. Handbuch der historisch-kritischen
Einleitung in das Alte Testament. 3 Bande. Eriangen :
Carl Heyden. 1836-49. 2te Aufl. von C F. Keil.
Frankfurt und Eriangen. I. i, 1854 ,• II. 2, 1856.
(2) Higher Criticism of parts of* the Old Testa
ment.
*Murray, Thomas C. Lectures gn the Origin and Growth
of the Psalms. New York : Charles Scribner's Sons.
1880.
*Smith, W. R. The Prophets of Israel. London : Long
mans, Green & Co. New York : D. Appleton & Co.
1882.
*Green, William Henry. Moses and the Prophets. New
York : Robert Carter & Brothers. 1883.
*Taylor, Isaac The Spirit of Hebrew Poetry. London :
Bell & Daldy. 186 1. New York: Rudd & Carleton.
1862. With a biographical introduction by Wm. Adams.
LowTH, Wm. De Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum, .... cum notis
et epimetris, J. D. Michaelis, . . . . ed. E. F C. Rosen-
mtlller, Oxonii, 1821. Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of
the Hebrews. Translated from the original Latin by G.
Gregory. A new edition, with notes by C. E. Stowe.
Boston : Crocker & Brewster. 1829.
Herder, J. G. Vom Geist der Hebr. Poesie. Dessau. 1782—
83. The Spirit of Hebrew Poetry. Translated from the
German by James "Marsh. 2 vols. Burlington, Vt. : E.
D. Smith. 1833.
Bickell, G. Carmina Veteris Testamenti Metrice. Oeni
ponte : Academica Wagneriana. 1882.

446 BIBLICAL STUDY.
KuENEN, A. De Profeten en de pi-ofetie in der Israel, Leiden,
1875. The Prophets and Prophecy in Israel. ; Translated
from the Dutch by the Rev. Adam Milroy. London :
Longmans, Green & Co. 1877. ••'
Wellhausen, J. Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels. 2te
Ausgabe der Gesch. Israels. Band I. Berlin : G. Reimer.
1883.
BiNNiE, William. The Psalms : tjieir History, Teachings,
and Use. London: T.Nelson.' 1870.
Bruston, Charles. Histoire critique de la littdrature froph-
dtique des Hdbreiix depuis les origines jusqua la mort d'
Isaie. Paris : G. Fischbacher. 1881.
Pusey, E. B. Daniel the Prophet, Nine Lectures, delivered
in the Divinity sfchool of the University of Oxford. 3d
edition. Oxford :¦ J. Parker & Co. 1869.
(3) The Higher Criticism of the Ne-w Testament.
f Bleek, Fred. Einleitung*> in d. N. T. nach dessen Vorle
sungen herausgegeben von J. Bleek. 3te Aufl. von Man
gold. Berlin: G. Reimer. 1875. An Introduction to the
New Testament. Translated, by W. Urwick. 2 vols. Edin
burgh : T. & T. Clark. 1869-70.
Davidson, Samuel. An Introduction to the study of the New
Testament, critical, exegetical, and theological. 3 vols.
London : S. Bagster & Sons. 1848-51.
Reuss, Edward. Die Geschichte der h. Schriften N. T, 5
Aufl. Braunschweig: Schwetschke & Sohn. 1874.
DeWette, W. M. L. Lehrbuch d, hist.-krit, Einleit. in die ka
non. Bucher des N. T. 6te Aufl. von Messner & Liine
mann. Berlin : G. Reimer. i860.
Michaelis, J. D. Einleitung in d. gottl. Schriften des N.
Bundes. 4te Aufl. Gottingen: Vandenhok. 1788. In
troduction to the Neiv Testament. Translated into En
glish with additions by Herbert Marsh. 6 vols. 4 edi-
¦ tion. London : F. C. & J. Rivington. 1823.
Hertwig, O. R. Tabellen zur Einl. ins N. T, 4 Aufl. vor
H. Weingarten. Berlin: G. W. F. Miiher. 1872.

BOOKS OF EEFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 447
(4) The Higher Criticism of parts of the New
Testament.
¦"Westcott, B. F. Introduction to the Study of the Four Gos
pels, with historical and explanatory notes. 6th edition.
London : Macmillan & Co. 1881.
f Sanday, W. The Gospels in the Second Century. London :
Macmillan & Co. 1876.
f Abbot, Ezra. The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel, Ex
ternal evidences. Boston : G. H. Ellis. 1880.
Mill, W. H. Observations on the attempted application of
Pantheistic Principles to the theory and historical criticism
of the Gospel, 2d edition, edited by B. Webb. Cam
bridge : Deighton, Bell & Co. 1861.
Tischendorf, Const. Wann wurden unsere Evangelien ver-
fasst, 4te Aufl., J. C. Heinrichs, 1880. Origin of the
Four Gospels. Translated into English. Boston : Am.
Tract Society. 1868.
Lardner, Nathaniel. The Credibility of the Gospel His
tory, 5 vols. London : W. Ball. 1838.
Ebrard, J. H. A. Wissenschaftliche Kritik der evangelischen
Geschichte. 3te Aufl. Frankfurt-a-M. : Heyder & Zim
mer. 1868.
Weiss, Bernard. Das Matthaus Evangelium und seine Lu-
cas-parallelen erklarL Halle : Waisenhaus. 1876.
Weiss, Bernard. Das Marcus Evangelium und seine syn-
optischen Parallelen erklart. Berlin : W. Hertz. 1872.
VI. — The Interpretation of Scripture.
(i) Hermeneutics.
*Spurgeon, C. H. Commenting and Commentaries. Two
Lectures addressed to the students of the Pastor's College,
.... together with a catalogue of Biblical Commen
taries and Expositions. London : Passmore & Alabaster.
New York : Sheldon & Co. 1876.
tiMMER, A. Hermeneutik des N- T. Wittenberg : H. Koel-
ling. 1873. Hermeneutics of the New Testament. Trans
lated from the German by A. H. Neuman. Andover : W.
F. Draper. 1877.

448 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Schleiermacher, Fred. Hermeneutik und Kritik mit be-
sorderer Beziehung auf das Neue Test. Aus Schleier
macher's handschrift. Nachlasse und nachgeschriebenen
Vorlesungen herausgegeben von F. Liicke. Berlin : G.
Reimer. 1838.
Davidson, Samuel. Sacred Hermeneutics. Developed and
applied, including a history of Biblical Interpretation
from the earliest of the Fathers to the Reformation.
Edinburgh : Thomas Clark. 1843.
Klausen, H. N. Hermeneutik des Neuen Testaments aus.
dem Danischen iibersetzt von C. D. Schmidt-Phiseldek.
Leipzig : K. F. Kohler. 1841.
Rambach, J. J. Institutiones Hermeneuticae Sacrae. Editio
octava, cum praef. J. F. Buddei. Jenae : J. W. Hartun-
gil. 1764.
Lange, J. D. Grundriss d. biblischen Hermeneutik. Heidel
berg : C Winter. 1878.
McClelland, Alex. A brief treatise on the Canon and In
terpretation of the Holy Scriptures. New York : Robert
Carter & Bros. i860.
Ernesti, J. A. Institutio Interpretis N. T. 5 edit. ed.
C. F. Ammon. 1809. Lipsiae : Weidmann. Elementary
Principles of Interpretation. Translated from the Latin,
and accompanied by notes, with an appendix, containing
extracts from Morus, Beck, Keil, and Henderson. By
Moses Stuart. 4th edition. Andover : Allen, Morrill &
Wardwell.. 1842.
Ginsburg, C. D. The Kabbalah . its doctrines, develop
ment, and Literature. London : Longmans, Reader &
Dyer. 1865.
Kihn, Heinrich. Theodor von Mopsuestia und Junilius Af
ricanus ais Exegeten, Freiburg im Breisgau : Herder.
1880.
Siegfried, Carl. Philo von Alexandria ais Ausleger des Al
len Testaments. Jena : H. Dufft. 1875.
Dopke, J. C. C- Hermeneutik der neutestamentlichen Schrift
steller. Leipzig : F. C W. Vogel. 1829.

BOOKS OF EEFEEENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 449
tTERRY, Milton S. Biblical Hermeneutics, A Treatise on
the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments. New
York : Phillips & Hunt. 1883.
(2) Commentaries. (A) On the whole Bible.
*Henry, Matthew. An exposition of the Old and New Tes
taments ; wherein each chapter is summed up in its con
tents ; the sacred Text inserted at large, in distinct Para
graphs, etc. Edited by the Rev. Edward Bickersteth.
6 vols. London : H. G. Bohn. 1846. 9 vols. New
York : R. Carter & Bros. 1876.
f Lange, J. P. Critical, doctrinal, and homiletical Commentary
on the Holy Scriptures, -with special reference to ministers
and students, in connection with a number of eminent
European divines. Translated, enlarged, and edited by
Philip Schaff, in connection with American scholars of va
rious evangelical denominations. 25 vols. New York :
Chas. Scribner's Sons. 1867—82. Genesis, with a General
Introduction to the Old Testament. By J. P. Lange. Trans
lated from the German, with additions, by Tayler Lewis and
A. Gosman. — Exodus, by C. M. Mead ; Leviticus, by F.
Gardiner, with General Introduction, by H. Osgood. — Num
bers. By J. P. Lange. Translated and enlarged by Samuel
T. Lowrie and A. Gosman ; Deuteronomy, by F. W. J. Shroe-
der, translated and enlarged by A. Gosman. — Joshua, by F.
R. Fay, translated, with additions, by George R. Bliss ;
Judges and Ruth, by Paulus Cassel, translated, -with addi
tions, by P. H. Steenstra. — \Samuel, by C. F. D. Erdmann,
translated, enlarged, and edited by C H. Toy and J. A. Broa-
dus. — \Kings. By K. C. W. F. Bahr. Book I., translated and
enlarged by Edwin Harwood. Book II., translated and en
larged by W. G. Sumner. — Chronicles I. and II, by Otto
Zockler, translated, enlarged, and edited by James G. Mur
phy ; fEzra, by Fr. W. Schultz, translated, enlarged, and
edited by Chas. A. Briggs ; Nehemiah, by Howard Crosby ;
Esther, by Fr. W. Schultz, translated, enlarged, and edited
by James Strong. — \Job. A Rhythmical Version, with an
Introduction and Annotation by Tayler Lewis. A Com
mentary by Otto Zockler, translated from the Gerraan, with
additions, by L. J. Evans. Together with an Introductorj

450 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Essay on Hebrew Poetry by Philip Schaff. — The Psalms.
By Carl Bernhard Moll. Translated, with additions, by C.
A. Briggs, John Forsyth, J. B. Hammond, and J. F. Mc
Curdy. With a new Metrical Version of the Psalms, and
Philological notes, by T. J. Conant. — \Proverbs, by Otto
Zockler, translated by C. A. Aiken ; Ecclesiastes, by O.
Zockler, translated by Wm. Wells, with additions, and a new
Metrical Version by Tayler Lewis ; The Song of Solomon,
by O. Zockler, translated, with additions, by VV. H. Green. — ¦
Isaiah. By C. W. E. Naegelsbach. Translated, with ad
ditions, by Samuel T. Lowrie and Dunlop Moore. — Jeremiah,
by C. W. E. Naegelsbach, translated and enlarged by S. R.
Asbury ; Lamentations, by C. W. E. Naegelsbach, translated
and enlarged by W. H. Hornblower. — Ezekiel. By F. W. J.
Schroeder. Translated, edited, and enlarged by Patrick
Fairbairn and William Findlay, aided by Thomas Crerar and
Sinclair Manson ; Daniel, translated, edited, and enlarged
by James Strong. — The Minor Prophets, Hosea, Joel, and
Amos, by Otto Schmoller, translated, with additions, by Jas.
E. McCurdy, John Forsyth, and Talbot W. Chambers, re
spectively ; Obadiah, Jonah, and Micha, by Paul Kleinert,
translated, with additions, by George R. Bliss ; Nahum, Ha
bakkuk, and Zephaniah, by Paul Kleinert, translated, with
additions, by Chas. Elliott ; Haggai, by James E. McCurdy ;
Zechariah, by T. W. Chambers ; Malachi, by Joseph Pack
ard. Index to the 14 vols, on the Old Testament, by B. Pick.
. — \The Apocrypha of the Old Testament. With historical
introductions, a revised translation, and notes critical and
explanatory. By E. C. Bissell. — Matthew. With a General
Introduction to the New Testament. By J. P. Lange.
Translated, with additions, by Philip Schaff. — Mark. By J.
P. Lange. Revised from the Edinburgh translation, with ad
ditions, by W. G. T. Shedd ; Luke, by J. J. Van Oosterzee,
translated, with additions, by Philip Schaff and Charles C.
Starbuck. — John. By John P. Lange. Translated by E. D.
Yeomans and Evelina Moore. With additions by E. R.
Craven and Philip Schaff. — Acts. By G. V. Lechler and
Chas. Gerok. Translated, with additions, by C. F. Schaef-
fer. — \Romans. By J. P. Lange and F. R. Fay. Trans
lated by J. F. Hurst. Revised and enlarged by P. Schaff
and M. B. Riddle. — Corinthians . By Christian F. Kling.
Translated, with additions, by D. W. Poor. — Galatians, by
Otto Schmoller, translated by C. C. Starbuck, with additions
by M. B. Riddle ; Philippians, by Karl Braune, translated

BOOKS OF EEFEEENCE FOE BIBLICAL STUDY. 45J
and enlarged by H. B. Hackett ; Ephesians and Colossians,
by Karl Braune, translated and enlarged by M. B. Riddle. —
Thessalonians, by Auberlen and Riggenbach, translated with
additions, by John Lillie ; Timothy, by J. J. Van Oosterzee,
translated, with additions, by E. A. \Vashburn and E. Har
wood ; Titus, by J. J. Van Oosterzee, translated, with addi
tions, by Geo. E. Day ; Philemon, by J. J. Van Oosterzee,
translated, with additions, by H. B. Hackett ; Hebrews, by
Carl B. Moll, translated, with additions, by A. C. Kendrick.
— -James, by J. P. Lange, J. J. Van Oosterzee ; Peter, by P.
F. C. Froumiiller ; John, by Karl Braune ; Jude, by P. F. C.
Fronniiiller, all translated, with additions, by Isidor Mombert.
— \The Revelation of John. By J. P. Lange. Translated by
Evelina Moore. Enlarged and edited by E. R. Craven.
Together with double alphabetical Index to the ten volumes
on the New Testament, by John H. Woods.
The Holy Bible according to the authorized Version (a.d. 161 i),
with an explanatory and critical Commentary and a revision
of the translation, by bishops and other clergy of the Angli
can Church. Edited by F. C. Cook. 10 vols. London : John
Murray. 1871-81. 77«^ ^ij/y ^i^/^, according to the Author
ized Version. With explanatory and critical note.^, and a re
vision of the translation by bishops and clergymen of the
Church of England. — New York : Chas. Scribner's Sons.
1871-81. Genesis, by E. H. Browne; Exodus, Chapters
I.-XIX. by F. C. Cook, and XX. to the end, by Samuel
Clark ; Leviticus, by Samuel Clark ; Numbers and Deuter
onomy, by T. E. Espin. — Joshua, by T. E. Espin ; Judges,
Ruth, and Samuel, by Arthur Hervey ; \First Kings, by
George Rawlinson. — f Second Kings, Chronicles, Ezra,
Nehemiah, and Esther, by George Rawlinson. — Job, by
F. C. Cook ; Psalms, by G. H. S. Johnson and C. J. Elliott ;
Proverbs, by E. H. Plumptre ; Ecclesiastes, by W. T.
Bullock ; Song of Solomon, by T. L. Kingsbury. — Isaiah,
by W. Kay ; Jeremiah and Lamentations, R. Payne
Smith. — Ezekiel, by G. Curry; Daniel, by H. J. Rose and
J. M. Fuller; The Minor Prophets, by E. Huxtable, F.
Meyrick, R. Gandell, Sam'l Clark, F. C. Cook, and W.
Drake. — St. Matthew, by H. Longueville Mansel ; St. Mark,
by F. C. Cook ; St. Luke, by VV. Basil Jones and F. C.
Cook, with a General Introduction by Wra. Thompson. — St
John, Introduction, Commentary, and Critical Notes, by B.
F. Westcott ; The Acts of the Apostles, Introduction by F.

452 BIBLICAL STCDY.
C Cook, Commentary and Critical Notes by William Jacob-
son. — Romans, by E. H. Gifford ; Corinthians, by Evans and
Joseph Waite ; Galatians, by J. S. Howson ; Ephesians, by
F. Meyrich ; Philippians, by J. Gwynn ; Colossians, Thessa
lonians, and Philemon, by Wra. Alexander ; Timothy and
Titus, by H. Waee and John Jackson. — Hebrews, by
W. Kay ; St. James, by Robert Scott ; St. John, by Wm.
Alexander ; St. Peter and St. Jude, by J. B. Lightfoot and
J. R. Lumby ; Revelation, by Win. Lee.
The Pulpit Commentary. Edited by H. D. M. Spence and
Joseph S. Exell. London : C. Kegan Paul & Co. 1880-
83. New York : A. D. F. Randolph & Co. Genesis, by T.
Whitelaw, with Homilies by J. F. Montgomery, R. A. Red-
ford, F. Hastings, W. Roberts. An Introduction to the
Study of the Old Testament by F. W. Farrar, and Intro
ductions to the Pentateuch by H. Cotterill and T. White-
law. 7th edition. — Exodus, by G. Rawhnson, with Homilies
by J. Orr, C. A. Goo(3hart, D. Young, J. Urquhart, and H.
T. Robjohns. 4th edition. 2 vols. — Leviticus, by Fred.
Meyrick, with Introductions by R. Collins, A. Cave, and
Honiihes by R. A. Redford, J. A. Macdonald, W. Clark
son, S. R. Aldridge, and McCheyne Edgar. 3d edition. —
Numbers, by R. Winterbotham, with Homilies by E. S.
Prout, W. Binnie, D. Young, J. Waite, and an Introduction
by Thonias Whitelaw. 4th edition. — Deuteronomy, by W.
L. Alexander, with Homilies by Dickerson Davies, C.
Clemance, J. Orr, and R. M. Edgar. 2d edition. — -Joshua,
by J. J. Lias, with Homilies by R. Glover, E. De Pressense,
S. R. Aldridge, W. F. Adeney, J. Waite, and Introductions
to the Historical Books by A. Plummer and J. J. Lias.
4th edition. — Judges by A. C. Hervey, with Homilies by A.
F. Muir and W. F. Adeney ; Ruth, by J. Morison, with
Homilies by W. M. Statham and J. R. "Thomson. 4th edi
tion. — /. Samuel, by R. Payne Smith, with Homilies by
Donald Eraser, C. Chapman, and B. Dale, sth editioni —
/. Kings, by Joseph Hammond, with Homilies by E. de
Pressensd, J. Waite, A. Rowland, J. A. Macdonald, and J.
Urquhart. 3d edition. — Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, by G.
Rawhnson, with Homihes by J. R. Thomson, R. A. Red-
ford, W. S. Lewis, J. A. Macdonald, A. Mackennal, W.
Clarkson, F. Hasdngs, W. Dinwiddie, D. Rowlands, G.
Wood, P. C. Barker, and J. S. Exell. 5th edition  St.
Mark, by E. Bickersteth, with Homilies by J. R. Thom-

BOOKS OF EEFEEENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 453
son, E. Johnson, J. J. Given, A. Rowland, A. F. Muir, R.
Green. 2d edition. 2 vols.
Wordsworth, Christopher. The Holy Bible, in the Author
ized Version. With Notes and Introduction. New Edition.
7 vols. London: Rivingtons. 1872.
Critici Sacri sive doctissimorum virorum in S. S. Biblia Anno
tationes et Tractatus. Edited by J. Pearson, A. Scattergood,
F\ Gouldman, and R. Pearson. 9 vol., folio. London : C.
Bee. 1660. 13 vol., folio. Amsterdam. 1669.
Poole, Matth. Synopsis Criticorum. 4 vols, in 5, folio.
London: J. Flescher & T. Roycroft. 1669. Utrecht, 1684.
Reuss, Edward. La. Bible Traduction nouvelle avec intro
ductions et commentaires. 15 Part. Paris : Sadoz et Fisch
bacher. 1874-1881. (B) The Old Testament.
(a) The Old Testament as a whole.
\Kurzgef assies exegetisches Handbuch zum Alt. Test. Leipzig ;
S. Hirzel. 1838-83. In 17 Banden. \Genesis, 4. Aufl.,
von A. Dillmann, 1883 ; \Exodus df Levit., 2. Aufl., von
A. Dillmann, 1880 ; Num., Deut., Jos., von A. Knobel,
1861 ; Richter, Ruth, von E. Bertheau, 1845 ; Samuel,
von O. Thenius, 2. Aufl., 1864; Konige, von O. Thenius,
2. Aufl., 1873 ; \Jesafa, 4. Aufl., von L. Diestel, 1872 ;
Jerem., von F. Hitzig, 2. Aufl., 1866 ; \Ezechiel, 2. Aufl.,
von R. Smend, 1880 ; \Klein. Propheten, 4. Aufl., von H.
Steiner, 1881 ; Psalmen, von J. Olshausen, 1853 ; \Hiob.,
3. Aufl., von A. Dillmann, 1869 ! Spruche, von E. Bertheau,
u. Koheleth, von F. Hitzig, 1847 ; Hohelied, von F. Hitzig,
u. Klaglieder, von O. Thenius, 1855 ; Daniel, von F. Hitzig,
1850 ; Esra, Neh., Esther, von E. Bertheau, 1862 ; Chron-
ik., von E. Bertheau, 1862.
tKEiL, C F., und Franz Delitzsch. Biblische Commentar
iiber das A. T. 14 Bande. Leipzig : Dorffling & Franke.
1861-83. Translated as Biblical Commentary on the Old
Testament. 25 vols. Edinburgh : T. &' T. Clark. 1864-
78. (The Commentaries on Psalms, 3d German edition,
1873-4 ; Job, 2d edition, 1876 ; Proverbs, 1873 ; Song of
Songs dr" Koheleth, 1875 ; Isaiah, 3d edition, 1879, all by
F. Delitzsch, are excellent. The Commentaries by KeiJ

454 BIBLICAL STUDY.
upon the Minor Prophets, 2d edition, 1873 ; Daniel, 1876 ;
and Ezekiel, 2d edition, 1883, are valuable; the others are
of less importance.)
f Boettcher, F. Neue exegetish-kritsche Aehrenlese zum Allen
Testament. 3 Abtheil. Leipzig: J. A. Barth. 1863-5.
Rosenmueller, C. F. K. Scholia in Vetus Testamentum.
23 vol. Leipzig : J. A. Barth. 1820-34.
Wuensche, A. Bibliotheca Rabbinica : Eine Sammlung Alte
Midraschira (23 Lief, published). Leipzig : Otto Schiiltze.
1880-83.
(b) Historical Books.
fCALviN, John. In librum Geneseos commentarius cur. E.
Hengstenberg. 2 Pts. Berlin : G. Bethge 1838. Com
mentaries on the First Book of Moses, called Genesis.
Translated from the original Latin and compared with
the French edition. By John King. 2 vols. Edin
burgh : T. & T. Clark. 1847-50.
f Delitzsch, Franz. Commentar Uber d. Genesis mit Beitragen
von Fleischer u. Wetzstein. 4te Aufl. Leipzig : Dorffling
und Franke. 1872.
fScHULTZ, F. W. Das Deuteronomium erklart. Berlin : G.
Schlawitz. 1859.
fKALisCH, M. M-. Historical and Critical Commentary on lite
Old Testament. With a new translation. Vol. I., Genesis,
1858. Vol. IL, Exodus, 1855. Vols. IIL and IV., Leviti
cus, 1867-72. London: Longman, Brown & Co. 1858.
Masius, Andreas. Josuae imperatoris historia illustrata atque
explicata. Antwerpiae : C. Plantin. 1574. Also in
Critici sacri.
Ainsworth, Henry. Annotations on the Five Books of
Moses, the Psalms, and the Song of Solomon. Folio.
London. 1639.
Kalisch, M. M. Bible Studies. Part I., The Prophecies of
Balaam. London: Longmans. 1877.
Murphy, James. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on
the Book of Genesis. With a new translation. Edin
burgh : T. & T. Clark. 1863. Andover : W. F. Draper.
1866. Commentary on Exodus. Edinburgh and Andover.
1866. Leviticus. Edinburgh and Andover. 1872.

BOOKS OF EEFEEENCE FOE BIBLICAL STUDY. 455
Tuch, Fried. Commentar Uber die Genesis. 2. Aufl. bes.
von Amold und Merx. Halle : Waisenhaus. 1871.
Bush, George. Notes, Critical and Practical, on the Book of
Numbers. Designed as a general help to Biblical reading
and instruction. New York : Ivison, Phinney & Co.
1863.
Bush, George. Notes, Critical and Practical, on the Book of
Joshua. 2d edition. New York : Ivison, Phinney & Co.
1862.
Wright, C. H. H. Book of Ruth in Hebrew. With gram
matical and critical commentary. London : Williams
& Norgate. 1864.
Davidson, A. B. Lectures, Expository and Practical, on the
Book of Esther. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1859.
Bachmann, J. Das Buch der Richter. Bd. I., Cap. I.-V.
Berlin : Wiegandt & Grieben. 1868-69.
(c) Psalter.
*Spurgeon, C. H. The Treasury of David. Containing an
original exposition of the Book of Psalms ; a collection of
Dlustrative extracts from the whole range of literature ; a
series of homiletical hints upon almost every verse ; and
a list of writers upon each psalm. 6 vols. London :
Passmore & Alabaster. 1870-78.
* Vincent, Marvin R. Gates into the Psalm-country. New
York : Charles Scribner's Sons. 1878.
fCALViN, John. In librum Psalmorum commentarius. 2
Part, ed. A. Tholuck. Berlin : G. Eichler. 1836. Com
mentaries on the Psalms of David. 3 vols. London :
Thomas Tegg. 1840.
f Ewald, Heinrich. Die Dichter des alien Bundes erklart. 2.
Ausg. ; 3 Bde. ; Gottingen : Vanderhock & Ruprecht ;
1866— 1867. Commentary on the Psalms, translated by E.
Johnson ; 2 vols. Commentary on the Book of Job, trans
lated by J. F. Smith ; London : Williams & Norgate ;
1880-82.
f Perowne, J. J. S. The Book of Psalms ; a new translation,
with introduction and notes, critical and explanatory. 5th
edition. London : G. Bell & Sons. 1883. Andover
W. F. Draper. 1876.

456 BIBLICAL STUDY.
f Hupfeld, H. Die Psalmen Ubersetzt und ausgelegt, mit Zu-
s'atzen und Berichtigungen von E. Riehm. 2te Aufl. 4
Bde. Gotha: F.A.Perthes. 1867-72.
Alexander, Joseph Addison. The Psalms, translated ana
explained. 6th ed. 3 vols. New York : Charles Scrib
ner. 1866.
Barnes, Albert. Notes, Critical, Explanatory and Practi
cal, on the Book of Psalms. 3 vols- New York : Harper
& Brothers. 1868-69.
Horne, George. A Commentary on the Book of Psalms
with an introductory essay by Edward Irving. Glas
gow : Thoraas Tegg. i860. New York: R. Carter &
Brothers. 1849.
Murphy, J. G- A, Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Book of Psalms, with a new translation. Edinburgh : T.
& T. Clark. 1875. Andover : W. F. Draper. 1875.
Neale, J. M., and R. F. Littledale. A Commentary on
the Psalms, from the primitive and mediseval writers; and
from the various office books and hymns of the Roman,
Mozarabic, Ambrosian, Galilean, Greek, Coptic, Armen
ian, and Syrian rites. 4 vols. London : J. Masters & Co.
1860-74.
Hengstenberg, E. W. Commentar uber d. Psalmen. zte
Aufl. 4 Bde. Ludwig Oehmigke. 1849-52.
Augustine, Aurelius. Expositions on the Book of Psalms.
Translated by J. Tweed. Vols. XXIV., XXV., XXX.,
XXXIL, XXXVII., XXXIX. of Library of the Fathers
of the Holy Catholic Church. Oxford : J. Parker & Co.
1848.
Graetz, H- Kritischer Commentar zu den Psalmen nebst
Text und Uebersetzung. 2 Bde. Breslau : S. Schott-
laender. 1882-3.
(d) The Wisdom Literature.
*Cox, Samuel. A Commentary on the Book of Job, with a
translation. London : Kegan Paul & Co.. 1880.
*Plumptre, E. H. Ecclesiastes ; or, the Preacher, with Notes
and Introduction- Cambridge: University Press. i88i.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 457
*Hamilton, James. The Royal Preacher, Lectures on Ec
clesiastes. London : James Nisbet. 1865. New York :
Robert Carter & Bros.
fSTUART, Moses. A Commentary on the Book of Prm'erbs.
New York : M. W. Dodd. 1852.
f Ginsburg, C. D. Tlte Song of Songs ; with a commentary,
historical and critical. London : Longman, Brown & Co.
1857-
fWRiGHT, C. H. H. The Book of Koheleth, considered in
relation to modern Criticism and to the doctrines of
modern Pessimism, with a critical and grammatical Com
mentary. London : Hodder & Stoughton. 1883.
Davidson, A. B. A Commentary on Job, grammatical and
exegetical, with a translation. Vol. I. London : Will
iams & Norgate. 1862.
Stuart, Moses. A Commentary on Ecclesiastes. New York :
G. P. Putnam. 187 1.
Withington, Leonard. Solomotis Song, Translated and
E.xplained. Boston : J. E. Tilton & Go. 1861.
Boettcher, F. Die dltesten Buhmndichtung ; der Debora-
Gesang und das hohe Lied, dramatisch dargestellt und
neu iibersetzt Leipzig: J. A. Barth. 1850.
Taylor, Francis. Observations upon I.-IX. Chapters of
Proverbs. 2 vols. London : George Eversden. 1645-
57-
Ginsburg, C. D. Coheleth or Eclcsiastes ; translated, with
a Comraentary. London: Longman, Brown & Co. 1857.
Durh.\m, James. Claris Cantici ; or, an Exposition of the
Song of Solomon. Edinburgh. 1668. Aberdeen. 1840.
Gregory the Great. Morals on the Book cf Job, trans
lated, with notes and indices, in vols. XVIII., XXL,
XXIIL, XXXI. of Tlie Librarv of the Fathers of the
Holy Catholic Church. Oxford : J. H. Parker. 1848.
Renan, Ernest. L'Eccl/sinste, traduit de I'Hfebreu avec
une 6tude sur I'age et le caract^re du livre. 2. ddition.
Paris : Caiman Levy. 1882.
20

458 BIBLICAL STUDY.
(e) The Prophets.
fEwALD, Heinrich. Die Propheten des Allen Bundes er
klart ; Neue Bearbeitung ; 3 Bde. ; Gottingen : Vander-
hoeck & Ruprecht ; 1867-68. Commentary on the Prophets
of the Old Testament ; translated by J. F. Smith ; 5 vols. ;
London : Williams & Norgate ; 1875-81.
f Cheyne, T. K. The Prophecies of Isaiah. A new transla
tion, with comraentary and appendixes. 2 vols. Lon
don : C Kegan Paul & Co. 1880-1881.
Umbreit, F. W. C. Praktischer Commentar uber die Pro
pheten des Alt. Bundes. 4 Bde. Hamburg : F. Perthes.
1841-46.
Gesenius, Wilhelm. Der Prophet Jesafa iibersetzt, und mit
vollst phil.-krit u. histor. Commentar begleitet 3 Bde.
Leipzig : F. C. W. VogeL 182 1.
The 53(f Chapter of Isaiah according to the Jewish interpreters.
Texts edited from printed books and MSS. by Ad. Neu-
bauer ; translation by S. R. Driver and Ad. Neubauer.
With an introduction to the translations by E. B. Pusey.
2 vols. Oxford: J. Parker & Co. 1876-77.
Alexander, J. A. The Prophecies of Isaiah. Translated
and explained. Revised edition. 2 vols. New York :
C. Scribner & Co. 1869. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.
1874
Lowth, Robert. Isaiah. A new translation, with a pre
liminary dissertation and notes, critical, philological, and
explanatory. 2d edition. London: J. Dodsley. 1779.
Henderson, E. The Book of the Prophet Jeremiah, and that
of the Lamentations. Translated from the original He
brew. With a Coramentary, critical, philological, and
exegetical. London: Hamilton. 1851. Andover: W.
F. Draper. 1868.
Scholz, Anton. Commentar zum Buche des Propheten Jere
mias. Wurzburg : L. Woerl. 1880.
Graf, K. H. Der Prophet Jeremia erklart. Leipzig : T.
O. WeigeL 1862. •
Haevernick, H. A. C. Commentar Uber den Propheten
Ezechiel. Eriangen : Carl Heyder. 1843.

BOOKS OF EEFERENCE FOE BIBLICAL STUDY. 459
Fairbairn, Patrick. Ezekiel and the Book of His Prophecy.
2d edition. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1855.
Hengstenberg, E. W. Die Weissagungen des Propheten Ezech
iel; 2Bde. ; Berlin: Gustav Schlawitz ; 1867-1868. The
Prophecies of Ezekiel elucidated ; translated by A. C. and
J. G. Murphy ; Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark ; 1869.
Greenhill, Wm. Exposition of Ezekiel. 5 vols. 1645-67.
Revised and corrected by James Sherman. Edinburgh :
James Nichol. 1863.
(f) Minor Prophets and Daniel.
f Pusey, E. B. The Minor Prophets ; with a Commentary
explanatory and practical, and introductions to the several
books. Oxford : J. Parker & Co. 1877.
fWRiGHT, C. H. H. Zechariah and His Prophecies considered
in relation to Modern Criticism ; with a critical and gram
matical Commentary and new Translation. London :
Hodder & Stoughton. 1879.
fWuENSCHE, A. Der Prophet Hosea iibersetzt und erklart
mit Benutzung der Targumim u. der jiid. Ausleger. Leip
zig: T. O. Weigel. 1868.
f Wuensche, A. Die Weissagungen des Propheten Joel Gber-
setzt und erklart Leipzig : R. Reisland. 1872.
f Kranichfeld, R. Das Buch Daniel erklart. Berlin :
Gustav Schlawitz. 1868.
Henderson, E. The Books of the Twelve Minor Prophets.
London: Hamilton & Co. 1845. Andover: W. F.
Draper, i860.
Burroughes, Jeremiah. An Exposition of the Prophecies of
Hosea. 4 vols. London: 1643-51. Edinburgh: J.
Nichol. 1863.
PococK, Edward. Commentary on Hosea ; Oxford, At the
Theatre. 1685. On Joel, Micah, and Malachi j OySorA.,
1691.
Rainolds, John. The Prophecies of Obadiah opened and ap-
plyed. 1613. Edinburgh: J. Nichol. 1864.

460 BIBLICAL STUDY.
King, John. Lectures upon Jonah. Oxford. 1600. Edin
burgh : J. Nichol. 1864.
Kalisch, M. M. Bible Studies. Part II., The Book of Jonah.
London : Longmans, Green & Co. 1878.
More, Henry. A Plaine and continued Exposition of the
several Prophecies of Daniel. London. 1681.
Stuart, Moses. A Commentary on the Book of Daniel.
Boston : Crocker & Brewster. 1850.
Haevernick, H. A. C. Commentar uber das Buch Daniel.
Hamburg: Fried. Perthes. 1839.
Commentaries on the New Testament.
(a) The New Testament as a whole.
¦"^ Popular Commentary on the New Testament. Prepared by
a number of American and British scholars of the leading
Evangelical Denominations, under the General Editorship
of Philip Schaff. 4 volumes. Each volume profusely illus-
trusted with cuts of Bible Lands and Bible Scenes, made from
recent Photographs, and prepared under the supervision of
Wm. M. Thomson, and with maps prepared under the super
vision of Arnold Guyot. — I. Matthew, Mark and Luke. With
an Introducdon. By Philip Schaff and Matthew B. Riddle. —
II. *y»/^«, by Wm. Milligan and Wm. F. Moulton; Acts of the
Apostles, by J. S. Howson and Donald Spence. — III. *Ro-
mans, by Philip Schaff and M. B. Riddle ; Corinthians, by Da
vid Brown ; '^Galatians, by Philip Schaff; Ephesians, by Matt.
B. Riddle ; Philippians, by J. Rawson Lumby ; Colossians,
by M. B. Riddle ; Thessalonians, by Marcus Dods ; Timothy,
by Edward Hayes Plumptre ; Titus, by J. Oswald Dykes ;
Philemon, by J. Rawson Lumb)'. — IV. Hebrews, by Joseph
Angus ; James, by Paton J. Gloag ; Peter, by G. D. F. Sal-
mond ; John, by Wm. B. Pope and Wm. F. Moulton ;
Jude, by Joseph Angus ; Revelation, by Wm. Milligan and
Wra. F. Moulton.
*BuTLER, J. G. The Bible-Reader's Commentary. The New
Testaraent in Two Volumes. The Text arranged in sec
tions ; with brief readings and complete annotations, selected
frora the "choice and best observations" of raore than 300
eminent Christian Thinkers of the Past and Present. New
York : D. Appleton & Co. 1878-9.

BOOKS OF EEFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 461
fBENGEL, J. A. Gnomon N, T,, 5 editio von J. Steudel ; Stutt-
gartiae : J. F. Steinkopf, i860. Gnomon of the New Testa
ment, edited by Charlton T. Lewis and Marvin R. Vincent ;
2 vols. Philadelphia : P^rkenpine & Higgins. i860.
fMEYER, H. A. W. Krit. ex. Comm. Uber d. N, T. Gotting
en : Vanderhoek & Ruprecht, 1832-83. 16 Abtheilungen.
Matth., 7 Aufl. von B. Weiss, 1876 ; Markus, Lukas, Johan
nes, 6 Aufl. von B. Weiss, 1878-80; Apostelgeschichte von
H. H. Wendt, 5 Aufl., 1881 ; Romerbrief, 6 Aufl. von B.
Weiss, 1881 ; /. Corinth. 6 Aufl. von C. F. G. Heinrici,
1881 ; //. Corinth., 6 Aufl. von Heinrici, 1883 ; Galater
von F. Sieffert, 6 Aufl., 1881 ; Epheserbrief von W. Schmidt,
5 Aufl., 1878; Phil, Col, Philem,, 4 Aufl. von H. A. W.
Meyer, 1874; Thess., 4 Aufl. von G. Liinemann, 1878;
Tim,, Titus, Petrus, Judd, Johannes, 4 Aufl. von J. E.
Huther, 1876-80 ; Jacobus, 4 Aufl. von W. Beyschlag, 1882 ;
Hebraerbrief, 4 Aufl. von Liinemann, 1878 ; Offenb. Johan.,
3 Aufl. von F. Diisterdiek, 1877. Critical atid Exegetical
Commentary on the New Testament, I'rotn the Gerraan,
with the sanction of the author. 10 vols. Edinburgh : T.
& T. Clark. 1876-79.
f Calvin, John. In Novum Testamentum Commentarii, curavit
A. Tholuck. 7 vol. Editio altera. Berolini : G. Thome.
1838.
Alford, Henry. New Testament for English Readers ; con
taining the authorized version, with a revised English Text ;
marginal references, and a critical and explanatory Com
mentary. New edition. 4 parts, in 2 vols. London : Riv
ingtons. 1868.
Chrysostom, John. Homilies on the New Testament. Vols.
IV., v., VI., VIL, XL, XII., XIV., XV., XXVII., XXVIII.,
XXXIII., XXXIV., XXXV., XXXVL ofthe Library ofthe
Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church. Oxford : J. H.
Parker. 1848.
De Wette, W. M. L. Kurtzgefasstes exeget, Handb. z. N. T.
3 Bde. II Abtheil. Nach seinem Tode, bearbeitet von
Messner, Briickner, Overbeck & MoUer. Leipzig : Weid
mann. 1836 seq.
Hofmann, von J. Ch. Die Heilige Schriften Neuen Testa
ments zusammenhdngend untersucht. 9 Teilen. Nord-
hngen : C. H. Beck. 1862-83.

462 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Ellicott, C. J. A New Testament Commentary, for English
Readers, by various writers. 3 vols. London : Cassell,
Petter, Galpin & Co. 1878 seg. New York : E. P. Dutton
&Co.
ft
Spiess, Ed. Logos Spermatikos. Parallelstellen zum Neuen
Testament aus den Schriften der alten Griechen. Leipzig :
Wilhelm Engelraann. 187T.
Schoettgen, Ch. Horae hebraicae et talmudicae in universum
Novutn Testamentum. Dresdae : C. Hekel. 1 733.
(b) The Gospels and Book of Acts.
*Bruce, a. B. The Parabolic Teaching of Christ. A sys
tematic and critical study of the Parables of our Lord.
London : Hodder & Stoughton. 1882. New York : A. C.
Armstrong & Co. 1883.
f Morison, James. Matthew's Memoirs of Jesus Christ. Lon
don : Hamilton, Adams & Co. 1870.
f Morison, James, A Practical Commentary on the Gospel ac
cording to Mark. 2d edition. London : Hamilton, Adaras
& Co. 1876. Boston : N. J. Bartlett. 1882.
f Godet, F. Commentaire sur I'dvangile de St. Luc. 2 Edition.
2 vol. Neuchatel : J. Sandoz. A Commentary on the
Gospel of St, Luke, translated by E. W. Shalders and M.
D. Cusin. 2 vols. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1875.
f Godet, F. Com, sur fivangile de St. Jean. 3" vol. 2 edition.
Paris: Lib. Frangois 6t etrangfere, 1876-77. Commentary
on the Gospel of St. John, with a critical introduction, trans
lated from the 2d French edition by M. D. Cusin and S.
Taylor; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1876-77.
fTRENCH, R. C. Notes on the Parables, nth edition, Lon
don, Macmillan & Co., 1870. 9th edition. New York D.
Appleton & Co., 1858. '
Tholuck, A. F. Die Bergpredigt, 5. Aufl., 1872 ; Gotha: F.
A. Perthes, 1872. Commentary on the Sermon on the
Mount, translated from the 4th revised and enlarged Ger
man edition by R. L. Brown ; Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark
i860; Philadelphia: Sraith, English & Co. '
Alexander, J. Addison. The Gospel according to Mark Ex
plained. New York : Chas. Scribner. 1858.

BOOKS OF EEFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 463
Luthardt, C. E. Das Johanneische Evangelium ; 2 Thle. ; 2
Aufl. ; Niirnberg : Geiger, 1875-6. St. Johri s Gospel, de
scribed and explained according to its peculiar character ;
3 vols. ; Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1876-8.
Aquinas, Thomas. Catena Aurea. Commentary on the four
Gospels, collected out of works of the Fathers. 4 vols.
Oxford : J. H. Parker. 1841-44.
Greswell, E. B. D. Exposition of the Parables and other
parts of the Gospels. 5 vols. Oxford : J. G. & F. Rivington.
1834.
Euthvmius, Zigabenus. Commentar in IV. evangelia. Gr.
et Lat ed. C. F. Matthaei. 3 tora. Lips. : Weidmann.
1792.
Achelis, E. Die Bergpredigt nach Matthaeus und Lucas.
Bielefeld: Velhagen & Klasing. 1875.
Goebel, S. Die Parablen Jesu. Gotha : F. A. Perthes.
1879-80. The Parables of Jesus. Edinburgh : T. & T.
Clark. 1883.
Luecke, G. C. F. Commentar Uber die Schriften des Evan-
gelisten Johannes. 3. Aufl. 4 Bde. Bonn : E. Weber.
1850-1856.
Wuensche, August. Neue Beitrage zur ErlaUterung der
Evangelien aus Talmud b' Midrash. Gottingen : Van-
derhoeck & Ruprecht. 1878.
f Gloag, P. J. A Ct itical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Acts of the Apostles. 2 vols. Edinburgh : T. & "T. Clark.
1870.
Hackett, H. B. A Commentary on the Original Text of the
Acts of the Apostles. New edition. Andover : W. F.
Draper. 1877.
Alexander, J. A. The Acts of the Apostles Expounded. 3d
edition. 2 vols. New York : C. Scribner & Co. 1867.
(c) Pauline Epistles.
f Godet, F. Commentaire sur rspttre aux Romains. 2 Tora.
Neuchatel : J. Sandoz. Commentary on St, Paul' s Epistle
to the Romans, Translated frora the French by A. Cusin.
2 vols. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1880-81.

464 BIBLICAL STUDY.
fHoDGE, Chas. Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans.
New edition. Revised and in a great raeasure rewritten.
Philadelphia: R. & H. Claxton. 1856.
Shedd, W. G. T. A Critical and Doctrinal Commentary on the
Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, New York : Charles
Scribner's Sons. 1879.
Stuart, Moses. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary^ on
the Epistle to the Romans, 3d edition. Edited and revised
by R. D. C. Robbins. New edition. Andover : W. F.
Draper. 1876.
Beet, Joseph A. A Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the
Romans. 2d edition. London : Hodder & Stoughton.
1881.
Philippi, F. A. Commentar U. d. brief Pauli an die Romer ;
3 Aufl.; Frankfurt a. M.: Heyder & Ziramer, 1866. Com
mentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans j translated
from the 3d edition by J. S. Banks ; 2 vols.; Edinburgh : T.
& T. Clark, 1878-9.
f Stanley, A. P^ The Epistles of St. Paul to the Corinthians,
with critical notes and dissertations, sth edition. London :
J. Murray. 1882.
f Beet, Joseph A. A Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the
Corinthians. London : Hodder & Stoughton. 1882.
Hodge, Charles. An Exposition of the First Epistle to the
Corinthians. New York : R. Carter & Brothers. 1857.
Hodge, Charles. An Exposition of the Second Epistle to the
Corinthians. New York : R. Carter & Brothers, i860.
Heinrici, C. F. G. Das erste Sendschreiben des Apostel Paulus
an die Korinthier. Berlin : W. Hertz. 1880.
fLiGHTFOOT, J. B. St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians. Sth
edition. London: Macmillan & Co. 1880. Andover: W.
F. Draper. 1870.
f Luther, Martin. A Commentary on St. PauPs Epistle to the
Galatians. Philadelphia : Smith, English & Co. i860.
Ellicott, C. J. Commentary, Critical and Grammatical, on
St. Pauls Epistle to the Galatians. London : Longmans
& Co. Andover: W. F. Draper. 1867.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 465
Eadie, John. Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle of
Paul to the Galatians. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1869.
f Eadie, John. Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle
of Paul to the Ephesians. 2d edidon. London : 1861.
New York : R. Carter & Brothers. 1861.
f Ellicott, C. J. A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on
St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians. With a revised trans
lation. 3d edition. London : Longmans & Co. 1864.
Andover : W. F. Draper. 1862.
Hodge, Charles. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephe
sians, New .York : R. Carter & Brothers. 1856.
f Lightfoot, J. B. St. Pauts Epistle to the Philippians, A
revised text, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. 3d
edition. London: Macmillan & Co. 1873.
fELLicoTT, C. J. A Commentary, Critical and Grammatical,
on St, Paul's Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and to
Philemon, 3d edition. London : Longmans & Co. An
dover : W.F. Draper. 1865.
+L1GHTF00T, J. B. St. PauPs Epistles to the Colossians and to
Philemon. A revised text, with Introduction, Notes, and
Dissertations. 2d edition. London : Macraillan & Co.
1875.
Bayne, Paul. An Entire Commentary upon the whole of the
Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians. London. R. Milbourne.
1643. Edinburgh: James Nichol. 1866.
Airay, Henry. Lectures upon the whole Epistle of St. Paul
to the Philippians. London, 16 18. Edinburgh : J. Nichol.
1864.
Byfield, N. An Exposition upon the Epistle to the Colossians.
FoHo. London: N.Butler. 161 7.
f Ellicott, C. J. A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on
St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians, with a revised
translation. London : Longmans & Co. Andover : W. F.
Draper. 1865.
Eadie, John. A Commentary on the Greek Text of the
Epistles of Paul to the Thessalonians. Edited by W.
Young. With a Preface by John Cairns. London : Mac
raillan & Co. 1877.
20*

466 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Lillie, John. Lectures on the Epistles of Paul to the Thessa
lonians. New York : R. Carter & Brothers, i860.
f Ellicott, C. J. A critical and grammatical Commentary on the
Pastoral Epistles, with a revised translation. London:
Longmans, Green & Co. Andover : W. F. Draper. 1865.
Fairbairn, Patrick. The Pastoral Epistles. Greek text,
and translation, with introductions, expository notes, and
dissertations. ILdinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1874.
Barlow, John. Exposition of II. Timothy, Chaps, i.-ii.
London : George Latham. 1632.
Hall, Thomas. Cotnmentary on II. Timothy, C. iii. and iv.
Folio. London : J. Starkey. 1658.
Taylor, Thomas. Commentarie upon Titus. Carabridge.
1 6 19. Folio, 1668.
(d) General Epistles.
f Delitzsch, Franz. Commentar zum Briefe an die Hebraer.
Leipzig: Dorffling & Franke. 1857. Commentary on the
epistle to the Hebrews. Trans, by T. L. Kingsbury. 2 vols.
Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1868-70.
Bleek, F. Der Brief an die Hebraer erlautert durch Einlei
tung, Uebersetzung und fortlaufenden Commentar. 2 Ab
theil. Berlin: F. Diimmler. 1828-40. Der Hebraerbrief
erklart, herausg. von K. A. Windrath. Elberfeld : Frider-
icks. 1868.
Stuart, Moses. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews.
New edition. Andover : W. F. Draper. 1876.
Gouge, William. Commentary on the wliole Epistle to the He
brews. 2 vols., folio, London, Joseph Kirton, 1655. 3
vols. Edinburgh : Jaraes Nichol. 1866-67.
Owen, John. Exposition of Hebrews. 4 vols., folio, Lon
don, 1668-74. Edited by W. A. Goold. 7 vols. Edin
burgh : T. & T. Clark.
Manton, Thomas. A Practical Exposition on the Epistle of
James. London. 1651. Revised and corrected by Jaraes
Sherman. London : S. Holdsworth. 1842.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 467
Bassett, F. T. The Catholic Epistle of St. James. Lon
don : Sarauel Bagster & Sons. 1876.
tLEiGHTON, Robert. Commentary upon 1st Peter. 2 vols.,
1613-1684. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of
Publication. 1864.
Lillie, John. .Lectures on the First and Second Epistles of
Peter. New York : Charles Scribner & Co. London :
Hodder & Stoughton. 1869.
tWESTCOTT, Brook F. The Epistles of St. John. The Greek
Text with notes and essays. London : Macmillan & Co.
1883.
tCANDLisH, Robert. First epistle of John expounded. 2 vols.
Edinburgh : A. & C. Black. 1870.
tEBRARD, J. H. A. Die Briefe Johannis. Konigsberg : A.
W. Unzer. 1859. Commentary on the epistles of St. John.
Translated by W. B. Pope. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark.
t86o.
Cotton, John. Commentary upon the first epistle of fohn.
Folio, 2d edition. London : Thomas Parkhurst 1658.
Jenkyn, William. An exposition upon the epistle of Jude. 2
vols., Samuel Gellibrand, 1652 ; revised and corrected by
James Sherman. London : Samuel Holdsworth. 1839.
(e) The Book of Revelation.
'Glasgow, James. The Apocalypse translated and expounded.
Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1862.
tSTUART, Moses. A Commentary on the Apocalypse. 2 vols.
Andover: Allen, Morrill & Wardwell. 1845.
+Elliott, C. B. Horae Apocalypticae. A Coramentary on the
Apocalypse, critical and historical, sth edition. 4 vols.
London : Seeley, Jackson & Halliday. 1862.
Vitringa, C. Anakrisis Apocalypsios Johannis apostoli.
Amsterdam: H. Strick. 171 9. Leucopetiae : J. F. Wehr-
mann. 1721.
Brightman, Thomas. The Revelation of the Revelation,
Amsterdam, 1615. Leyden, 1644.

468 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Durha.m, James. A Commentarie upon the look of tlu Rez'e-
latioiu Glasgow. 1658. New edition, Glasgow, 1788.
Eichhorn, J. G. Commentarius in apocalypsin Joannis. 2 vol.
Gottingen : J. C. Dieterich. 1791.
Kliefoth, Th. Die Offenbarung des Johannes. 3 .'^btheiL
Leipzig : DoriBing & Franke. 1874.
VII. Biblical History.
(i) Biblical Geography and Natural History.
*Tristram, H. B. The Topography of the Holy Land. A
succinct account of all the places, rivers, and mountains of
the land of Israel, mentioned in the Bible, so far as they have
been identified, together with their modern names and his
torical references. London : Society for Promoting Chris
tian Knowledge. 1876. New York : Pott, Young & Co.
1878.
*Tristram, H. B. Tlu Natural History of the Bible. Being
a review of the physical geography, geology, and meteorolo
gy of the Holy Land ; with a description of every aniraal
and plant mentioned in Holy Scripture. London : Society
for Promoting Christian Knowledge. 1867. New York :
Pott, Young & Co.
*Thomson, W. M The Land and the Book ; or. Biblical Il
lustrations drawn frora the raanners and customs, the scenes
and scenery of the Holy Land. 2 vols. New York : Har
per & Brothers. 1859. New edition, illustrated. 3 vols.
1880-83.
^Stanley, Arthur P. Sinai and Palestitu in connection with
their history. New edition. London : John Murray. New
York : A. C. Armstrong & Son. 1883.
tBAEDEKER, K. Paldstina und Syrien. Handbuch fur Rei-
sende. 2te Aufl. Leipzig : Karl Baedeker. 1880. Pal-
estine and Syria. Boston : J. R. Osgood & Co.
-IRoBiNsox, Edward. Biblical Researches in Palestine and in
the adfacent regions. A journal of travels in the year 1838.
2 vols. 2d edition. Boston: Crocker & Brewster, i860.
tRoBiNSON, Edward. Later Biblical Researches in Palestine
and in the adjacent regions. A journal of travels in the year
1852. 2d edition. Boston : Crocker & Brewster. 1857.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 469
f
fRoBiNSON, Edward. Physical Geography of the Holy Land.
Boston : Crocker & Brewster. 1865.
fMERRiLL, Selah. East of the Jordan. A record bf travel
and observation in the countries of Moab, Gilead, and Bashan
during the years 1875-77. New York: Chas. Scribner's
Sons. 1 88 J. New edition, 1883.
tToBLER, Titus. Descriptiones Terrae Sanctae ex saeculo
VIIL, IX., XIL, et XV. Leipzig : J. C. Heinrichs. 1874.
tToBLER, Titus. Bibliographia Geographica Palestinae.
Leipzig: Hirzel. 1867.
tDELiTZSCH, Fried. Wo lag das Paradies ? Leipzig : J. C.
Heinrichs. 1881.
tTRUMBULL, H. Clay. Kadesh-Barnea : Its importance and
probable site. New York : Charles Scribner's Sons. 1884,
Conder, C. R. Tent Work in Palestine. 2 vols. London :
R. Bentley & Son. New York : D. Appleton & Co. 1878.
iMap of Western Palestine. In 26 sheets. By C. R Conder
and H. H. Kitschener. London. 1880.
tMENKE, Theo. Bibelatlas in acht Bldttertu Gotha : J.
Perthes. 1868.
Lynch, W. F. Narrative of the United States Expedition to
the river Jordan and the Dead Sea. Philadelphia : Lee &
Blanchard. 1849.
iftsRS, G. Durch Gosen zum Sinai. Aus dem Wanderluch
und der Bibliothek. 2te Auf. Leipzig: W. Engelmann.
1881.
Wetzstein, J. G. Reisebericht Uber Hciuran und die Tracho-
nen, nebst einem Anhange iiber die Sabaischen Denkraaler
in Ostsyrien. Berlin : D. Reiraer. i860.
Palmer, E. H. The Desert of the Exodus. 2 vols. Cam
bridge : Deighton, Bell & Co. 1871. New York : Harper
& Brothers. 1872.
Wilson, John. The Lands of the Bible Visited and Described.
2 vols. Edinburgh : Longmans. 1847.

470 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Burton, Richard F., and Charles Drake. Unexplored
Syria. 2 vols. London: Tinsley Bros. 1872.
Tobler, T. Topographic von Jerusalem und seinen Umgebungen.
2 Bde. Berlin : G. Reimer. 1853-4.
Tobler, T. Nazareth in Paldstina. Berlin: G. Reiraer.
i868.
Tobler, T. Bethlehem in Paldstina. St. Gallen. Huber &
Corap. 1849.
Warren, Charles. Underground Jerusalem. An account of
some of the principal difficulties encountered in its explora
tion and the results obtained. London : Richard Bentley
& Son. 1876.
Wilson, Chas W., and Warren, Chas. The Recovery of Jer
usalem. A Narrative of Exploration and Discovery in the
city and Holy Land. Edited by W. Morrison. New York :
D. Appleton & Co. 1871.
Tristram, H. B. The Land of Lsrael. A journal of travels
in Palestine, undertaken with special reference to its physi
cal character. 2d ed. London : Soc. Prom. Christian
Knowledge. 1866.
Tristram, H. B. The Land of Moab. Travels and Discov
eries on the East side of the Dead Sea and the Jordan. Lon
don : J. Murray. New York : Harper & Brothers. 1873.
Ritter, Carl. The complete Geography of Palestine and the
Sinaitic Peninsula. Translated by W. L. Gage. 4 vols.
Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1866. New York : D. AppH-
ton & Co. 1870.
Williams, George. The Holy City. Historical, topographi
cal, and antiquarian notices of Jerusalem. 2d ed. 2 vols.
London : Parker & Son. 1849.
(2) Old Testament History.
(a) Archaeology ofthe Old Testament
*Conder, F. R. a Handbook to the Bible. Being a guide to
the study of the Holy Scriptures, derived from ancient mon
uments and modern exploration. London : Longmans, Green
& Co. New York : A. D. F. Randolph & Co.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 47-^
*Lane, E. W. An account of the manners and customs of the
modern Egyptians. 2 vols, sth edition. London : J.
Murray. 1871.
*Lane, E. W. The Thousand and One Nights, commonly
called, in England, The Arabian Nights' Entertainments.
A new translation frora the Arabic, with copious notes. A
new edition, edited by E. S. Poole. 3 vols. London :
Routledge, Warne & Roudedge. 1865.
tEwALD, Heinrich. Die Alterthumer des Volkes Israel. 3
Ausg. Gottingen : Dieterich, 1866. The Antiquities of
Israel. Translated frora the German by H. S. Solly. Lon
don : Longmans, Green & Co. 1876.
fKEiL, C. F. Handbuch der Biblischen Archdologie. 2te.
Aufl. Frankfurt-a-M. : Heyder & Zimmer. 1875.
Van Lennep, H. J. Bible Lands : their modern custoras and
manners illustrative of Scripture. New York : Harper &
Brothers. 1875.
Saalschutz, j. L. Archdologie der Hebraer, fur Freunde des
Alterthums und zum Gebrauche bei akademischen Vorle
sungen. 2 Theile. Konigsberg : Gebriider Borntrager.
1855-6.
Madden, F. W. Coins of the Jews. 2d edition. London :
B. Quaritch. Boston : J. R. Osgood & Co. 1881.
DeWette, W. M. L. Lehrbuch der hebrdisch-judischen Arch
dologie nebst einera Grundrisse der hebraisch-judisch-Ge-
schichte. 4 Auf. bearbeitet von F. J. Raebiger. Leipzig :
F. C W. Vogel. 1864.
Waehner, A. G. Antiquitates Ebraeorum de Lsraeliticae Gen-
tis. 2 voll. Gottingae : A. Vandenhoeck. 1742-3.
(b) The History of the Jews.
*Smith, William. The Old Testament History. London :
J.Murray. 1865. New York : Harper & Brothers. 1871.
*Milman, H. H. The History of the Jews, from the earliest
Period down to Modern Tiraes. 3 vols. London ; Ward,
Lock & Co. New York : A. C. Armstrong & Son. 1882.
*Stanley, a. p. Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church.
3 Parts. 7th edition. London : J. Murray. New York :
Scribner, Armstrong & Co. 1877.

472 BIBLICAL STUDY.
tEwALD, Heinrich. Geschichte des Volkes Israel ; 7 Bande,
3 Ausg. ; Gottingen : Dieterich, 1864-68. The History
of Israel, translated frora the German ; edited by R. Mar
tineau and J. E. Carpenter. London : Longman, Green &
Co. 1871.
tJosEPHUs, Flavius. Opera omnia Graecae et Latinae, curavit
F. Oberthiir, 3 tora., Lipsiae, 1782-85 ; Opera recog., G.
Dindorf, 2 voll., Paris, 1845-49 ; Editio Stereotypa, 6 voll..
Lips., Tauchnitz, 1850; trans. W. Whiston, 4 vols., London,
1737 (raany editions).
Hengstenberg, E. W. Geschichte d: Reiches Gottes utiter d. alten
Bunde ; 3 Theile ; Berlin: G. Schlawitz, 1869-71. History
of the Kingdom of God under the Old Testament, translated
from the Gerraan ; 2 vols. ; Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark,
1871-3-
Jost, J. M. Geschichte des Judenthums und seiner Secten. 3
Bde. Leipzig : Dorffling & Franke. 1857-9.
Graetz, H. Geschichte der Juden von den dltesten Zeiten bis
auf die Gegenwart. 1 1 Bde. 2 Aufl. Leipzig : Oskar
Leiner. 1864-1870.
(c) Cotemporary History of the Old Testament.
*Rawlinson, G. The Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient
Eastern World. 4 vols. London : J. Murray. 1862-67.
*Brugsch Bey, Henry. Geschichte Aegyptens unter den Pha-
raonen. Leipzig, J. C. Heinrichs. A History of Egypt under
the Pharaohs, derived entirely from the monuraents. Trans
lated and edited frora the German by Philip Smith. 2d
edition. 2 vols. London : J. Murray. 1881.
tLENORMANT, FRAN501S. Les Origines de V histoire j 2 Tom. ;
Paris : Maisoneuve & Cie, 1880-83. The Beginnings of
History according to the Bible and tne traditions of Oriental
peoples, from the creation of man to the deluge; trans.
frora the 2d French edition, with an introduction by Francis
Brown ; New .York : Charies Scribner's Sons, 1882 (2d
volume in press).
tEBERS, G. Aegypten und die Bucher Moses. Sachl. Com-
mentar zu den Aegypt Stellen in Genesis u. Exodus. Leip
zig : Engelraann. 1868.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 473
tScHRADER, E. Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament,
mit einem Beitrage von Paul. Haupt. 2 Aufl. Giessen : J.
Ricker. 1883.
ViGOUROUX, F. La Bible et les ddcouvertes modernes en Pales
tine, en Egypte et en Assyria. 3 edition. 4 Tora. Paris :
Berche et "rralin. 1882.
Hengstenberg, E. W. Die Bucher Moses und Aegypten;
Berlin : L. Oehmigke, 1841. Egypt and the Books of Moses,
translated by R. D. C. Robbins ; New York : Robert Carter
& Brothers, 1850.
Schrader, E. Die Keilischriften und Geschichtsforschung.
Ein Beitrag zur monumentalen Geographic, Geschichte und
Chronologic der Assyrer. Giessen : J. Ricker. 1878.
Duncker, Max. Geschichte des Alterthum-. 3 Aufl. 5 Bande.
Berhn. 1880-81. History of Antiquity, Frora the Ger
man. By E. Abbott 6 vols. London : Richard Bentley
& Son. 1877-82.
Rawlinson, Geo. History of Ancient Egypt. 2 vols. Lon
don : Longman, Green & Co. 1881.
Smith, George. The Chaldean Account of Genesis. New
edition. London : Sampson Low, Marston & Co. 1880.
New York : Scribner, Armstrong & Co. 1876.
Smith, George. Assyrian Discoveries ; an Account of Ex
plorations and Discoveries on the site of Nineveh during
1873 and 1874, with illustrations. New edition, edited by
A. 11. Sayce, 1880. London : Sampson Low & Co. New
York : Scribner, Armstrong & Co. 1875.
Budge, Earnest A. The History of Esarhaddon, translated
from the Cuneiform inscriptions upon Cylinders and Tablets
in the British Museura. Boston : J. R. Osgood & Co.
1881.
Wilkinson, J. G. Manners and Customs of the Ancient
Egyptians, New edition, revised and corrected by Samuel
Birch. 3 vols. London : J. Murray. 1878.
Smith, Geo. History of Assurbanipal. Translated from the
Cuneiform Inscriptions. London : Williams & Norgate.
1871.

474 biblical study.
Smith, Geo. The Assyrian Eponym Canon, containing trans
lations of the documents, and an account of the evidence,
on the comparative chronology of the Assyrian and Jewish
Kingdoms, from the death of Solomon to Nebuchadnezzar.
London: Samuel Bagster & Sons. 1875.
LoTZ, W. Die Inschriften Tiglathpilesers in transkribierten
Assyrischen Grundtext mit Uebersetzung und Koramentar.
Leipzig: J. C. Heinrichs. 1880.
Lenormant, F. Histoire ancienne de t Orient jusqu' aux
guerres m^diques. Neuvieme Edition. 3 Tom. Paris : A.
L^vy. 1881-83.
Sharpe, Samuel. The History of Egypt, from the earliest
times till the conquest of the Arabs, 2 vols. London :
George Bell & Son. 1876.
ZiNCKE, F. B. Egypt of the Pharaohs and the Khedive. 2d
edition. London : Smith, Elder & Co. 1873.
Kenrick, J. Phoenicia. London: B. Fellows. 1855.
Wilkins, A. Phoenicia and Israel. A Historical Essay.
London : Hodder & Stoughton. 1871.
NuTT, J. W. A Sketch of Samaritan History, Dogma and
Literature. London: Trubner & Co. 1874.
Records of the Past, being English translations of the Assyr
ian and Egyptian raonuments, published under the sanction
of the Society of Biblical Archseology. 1 1 vols. London :
S. Bagster & Sons. 1873-78.
Cooper, W. R. An Archaic Dictionary ; Biographical, His
torical, and Mythological, frora the Egyptian, Assyrian, and
Etruscan monuments and papyri. London : Samuel Bagster
& Sons. 1876.
(3). The History of the Jews and their Sur
roundings during the Greek and Roman
Periods.
(a) The Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament.
*The Apocrypha, Greek and English in parallel colurans.
London : S. Bagster & Co. 1871.

BOOKS OF EEFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 475
tBissELL, E. C. The Apocrypha of the Old Testament, with
historical introductions, a revised translation, and notes,
critical and explanatory. New York : Charles Scribner's
Sons. 1880.
Kurtzgefasstes Handbuch z. d. Apokryphen des Alten Testa
mentes, erklart von O. F. Fritzsche u. C. L. W. Grimm. 6
Bde. Leipzig: S. Hirzel. 1851-60.
Deane, W. J. The Book of Wisdom. The Greek text, the
Latin Vulgate, and the authorized English version, with an
introduction, critical apparatus, and a Commentary. Ox
ford : Clarendon Press. 1881.
Neubauer, A. The Book of Tobit. A Chaldee text, from a
unique MS. in the Bodleian Library, with other Rabbinical
texts, English translation and the Itala. Oxford : Clarendon
Press. 1878.
Keil, C. F. Commentar uber die Bucher der Makkabder.
Leipzig: Dorffling & Franke. 1875.
Kneucker, j. j. Das Buch Baruck. Geschichte und Kritik,
Uebersetzung und Erklarung, mit einem Anhang iiber den
pseudepigraphischen Baruch. Leipzig : F. A. Brockhaus.
1879.
Volkmar, G. Handbuch der Einleitung in die Apokryphen. 3
Bde. Leipzig: J. Fues. 1860-67.
(b) Pseudepigraphs.
*ScHODDE, G. H. The Book of Enoch, translated frora the
Ethiopic, with introduction and notes. Andover : W. F.
Draper. 1 882.
fFABRicius, J. A. Codex Pseudepigraphi Veteris Testamenti.
Editio altera. 2 voll. Hamburg : apud Viduam Felginer-
iam et Bohmium. 1722-23.
tDiLLMANN, A. Das Buch Henoch; ubersetzt und erklart
Leipzig : F. C. W. Vogel. 1853.
fHiLGENFELD, A. Messias Judaeorum; libris eorum paulo
ante et paulo post Christum natura conscriptis illustratus.
Lipsiae; R. Reisland. 1869.
fFRiEDLiEB, J. H. Oracula Sibyllina, ad fidera codd. MSS.
quotquot extant recensuit, praetextis prolegominis illustravit,
versione Germanica instruxit, annotationes criticas et rerum
indicein adjecit. Lipsae : T. O. Weigel. 1852.

476 BIBLICAL STUDY.
fLANGEN, J. De Apocalysi Baruch, coramentatio anno su-
pericis primum edita. Freiburg : Herder. 1867.
Dillmann, A. Liber Henoch Aethiopicae, ad quinque codi
cum fidem editus cum variis lectionibus. Lipsiae : F. C.
AV. Vogel. 1851.
Dillmann, A. Ascensio Isaiae Aethiopiae et. Latine. Lipsiae :
F. A. Brockhaus. 1877.
Roensch, H. Das Buch der Jubilceen oder die kleine Genesis.
Unter beifugung des revirdirten Textes der in der Ambro-
siana aufgefundenen lat Fragraente, sovie einer von A.
Dillmann aus 2 athiop. Handschrift gefertigten lat. Ueber-
tragung erlautert und untersucht Leipzig: J. Fues. 1874.
(c) History.
*Prideaux, Humphrey. The Old and New Testaments con
nected in the history of the Jews and neighboring nations,
frora the declension of the kingdom of Israel and Judah to
the time of Christ New edition, revised, with notes, anal
yses, and introductory reviews, by J. Talboys Wheeler. 3d
edition. 2 vols. London : Thomas Tegg. 1876.
*CuRTius, Ernst. Griechische Geschichte. 3 Aufl. 3 Bde.
Berhn : Weidmann. 1868. The History of Greece. 5
vols. Translated by A. W. Ward. New York : Scribner,
Armstrong & Co. 1874.
*Mommsen, Theo. Romische Geschichte. 5 Aufl. 3 Bde.
Berlin : Weidmann. 1868. The History of Rome. Trans
lated by W. P. Dickson. 2d edition. 4 vols. London : Rich
ard Bentley. New York : Charles Scribner. 1864-6.
tMoNTET, Edouard. Essai sur les origines des partis Sadu-
cien et Pharisien et leur Histoire jusqu' a la naissance de
Jdsus Christ. Paris.: Fischbach. 1883.
Lucius, P. E. Der Essenismus in seinem Verhaltniss zum
Judenthum. Strassburg : C. ¥. Schmidt. 1881.
Wellhausen, J. Die Pharisder und die Sadducder. Greifs
wald : Bamberg. 1874.
(4). New Testament History.
(a) Cotemporary History.
*JosEPHUs, Flavius. The Jewish War, with his autobiography.
A new translation, by R. Traill, edited, with notes, by Isaac
Taylor. London : Houlston & Wright. 1868.

BOOKS OF EEFEEENCE FOE BIBLICAL STUDY. 477
tSCHUERER, Emil. Lehrbuch der Neutestamentliche Zeitge
schichte. Leipzig : J. C. Heinrichs. 1874.
Hausrath, A. Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte. 2 Aufl. 4
The. Heidelberg: F. Bassermann, 1874-77. History of
the New Testament Times. Translated 'oy C. T. Poynting
and P. Queuzer. WiUiams & Norgate. 1878-83. (Two
vols, only have appeared.)
Bollinger, J. J. I. Heidenthum und Judenthum. Vorhalle
zur Geschichte des Christenthums. Regensburg : C. J.
Manz. 1857.
Friedlander, L. Darstellung aus der Sittengeschichte Roms.
in der Zeit von August bis zura Ausgang der Antonine. 5
Aufl. 3 Theile. Leipzig: S. Hirzel. 1881.
(b) Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphical books relat
ing to the origin of Christianity.
tTisCHENDORF, C. Evangelia apocrypha. Leipzig : Avenarius
& Mendelssohn. 1853.
tTisCHENDORF, C. Apocalypses apocryphae. Mosis, Esdrae,
Pauli, Johannis, itera Mariae dorraito. Leipzig : H. Men
delssohn. 1866.
+L1PSIUS, P. A. Die Apokryphen Apostelgeschichten und Apos-
tellegenden. Ein Beitrag zur altchristlichen Literaturgesch-
ichte. Braunschweig : C. A. Schwetschke & Sohn. 1883.
Tischendorf, C. Acta Apostolorum apocrypha. Leipzig :
Avenarius & Mendelssohn. 1851.
Baring-Gould, S. The lost and hostile Gospels. An Essay on
the Toledeth Jeschu and the Petrine. and Pauline Gospels
of the first three centuries, of which fragments remain. Lon
don : Williams & Norgate. 1874.
Wright, William. Apocryphal Literature of the New Testa
ment. London : Williams & Norgate. 1865.
Cooper, B. Harris. Apocryphal Gospels and Documents relat
ing to Christ. London : Williams & Norgate. 1867.
Bonnet, Max. Acta Thomae. Graece partim cum no vis cod-
icibus contulit primus edidit Latine recensuit praefaetus est.
Lipsiae : H. Mendelsohn. 1883.

478 BIBLICAL STUDY.
(c) Life of Jesus Christ.
*Farrar, F. W. The Life of Christ. 2 vols. London :
Petter, Galpin & Co. New York : E. P. Dutton & Co.
1874.
*Geikie, C. The Life and Words of Christ. New edition.
London : Strahan & Co. 1878. New York : D. Appleton
& Co. 1877.
tWEiss, Bernhard. Das Leben Jesu. 2 Bde. Berlin : Wil
helm Herz. 1882-83. The Life of Jesus. Translated
by J. W. Hope. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1883.
fULLMANN, C. Die SUndlosigkeit Jesu. 7 Aufl. Gotha : F.
A. Perthes. 1863. The Sinlessness of Jesus. Translated
from the 6th German edition by R. C. Brown. Edinburgh :
T. & T. Clark. New edition, translated by Sophia Taylor.
1870.
+Caspari, C. E. Chronolog-geograph. Einleitung in d. Leben
Jesu Christi. Hamburgh : Agentur des Rauen Hauses. 1869.
A Chronological and Geographical Introduction to the Life
of Christ. Translated by M. J. Evans. Edinburgh : T. &
T. Clark. 1876.
Keim, Th. Geschichte Jesu von Nazara in ihrer Verkettung
mit dem Gesaramtleben seines Volkes. 3 Bde. Ziirich :
Orell, Fiissle & Co. 1867-72. The History of Jesus of
Nazareth. Translated by Ransom & Gilbert. 5 vols.
Williams & Norgate. 1873-81.
Andrews, S. J. The Life of our Lord upon earth. Consid
ered in its historical, chronological, and geographical rela
tions. 4th edition. New York : Charles Scribner & Co.
1868.
Strauss, David. Das Leben Jesu kritisch bearbeitet. 3 Aufl.
2 Bde. Tiibingen : C. F. Osiander. 1838-39. Das leben
Jesu fUr das deutsche Volks. 3 Aufl. Leipzig : F. A.
Brockhaus. 1874. Life of Jesus. Authorized translation.
2d edition. 2 vols. London : Williams & Norgate. 1879.
Neander, A. Das Leben Jesu in seinen geschichtlichen Zusara-
menhange und seiner geschichtlichen Entwickelung darge
stellt. 7 Aufl. Gotha : F. A. Perthes. 1873. The Life
of Jesus. Translated from the 4th German edition by J.
McClintock and C. E. Blumenthal. 3d edition. New York :
Harper & Brothers. 1850.

BOOKS OF EEFEEENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 479
Hase, K. Geschichte Jesu. Leipzig : Breitkopf & Hartel.
1876.
Hervey, Arthur. Genealogies of our Saviour, from Matthew
and Luke. London : Bell & Daldy. 1853.
Trench, R. C. Notes on the Miracles of our Lord. loth edi
tion. London : Macraillan & Co. 1874. New York : D,
Appleton & Co. 1858.
Renan, Ernest. Vie de Jdsus. 1 7 ed. Paris : Calmann L^vy.
1882. Life of Jesus. 'Translated frora the original French, by
C. E. Wilbour. New York : G. W. Carieton & Co. 1862.
Stroud, William. A Treatise on the physical cause of the
death of Christ, and its relation to the principles and prac
tice of Christianity. 2d edition. London : Hamilton, Adams
& Co. New'York : D. Appleton & Co. 1871.
Jameson, Anna, and E. Eastlake. The History of our Lord
as exemplified in Works of Art, with that of His types ; St.
John the Baptist ; and other Persons of the Old and New
Testament. Coramenced by the late Mrs. Jameson, con
tinued and completed by Lady Flastlake. 2 vols. London :
Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts, & Green. 1864.
Ludolphus de Saxonia. Vita Jesu Christ e quat. evang. et
scriptoribus orthodox, concinnata. Strasburg. 1470. Ed.
Bolard et Carnandes. Bruxelles. 1870.
(d) The Apostolical Church.
*Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. A new
edition, thoroughly revised and enlarged. Vol. I. Apostoli
cal Christianity, p^.-'D. \-ioo. New York : Charles Scribner's
Sons. 1882.
?Conybeare, W. J., and J. S. Howson. The Life and epistles
of St. Paul. 2 vols. London : Longmans, Green & Co.
1875. New edition, 1877. 2 vols, in i. New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons.
*McDonald, j. M. Life and writings of St. John. Edited
with an introduction by J. S. Howson. New York : Scribner,
Armstrong & Co. 1877.
*HowsoN, J. S. Horae Petrinae ; or. Studies in the hfe of St.
Peter. London : Religious Tract Society. 1883.

480 BIBLICAI. STUDY.
*HowsoN, John S. The Companions of St- Paul. London :
A. Strahan. 187 1.
tLEWiN, Thomas. The life aud epistles of St. Paul. 3d edi
tion. 2 vols. London : Geo. Bell & Sons. 1875.
tNEANDER, A. Geschichte der Pflanzung und Leitung der
christlichen Kirche durch die Apostel. 5 Aufl. Gotha ; F.
A.Perthes. 1862. History of the Planting and Training
of the Christian Church. "Translated from the Gerraan by
J. E. Ryland. Revised and corrected according to the 4th
German edition by E. G. Robinson. New York : Sheldon
& Co. 1865.
Baumgarten, M. Die Apostelgeschichte oder der Entwicke-
lungsgang der Kirche von Jerusalem bis Rom. 2 Thle.
Halle : G. A. Schwetscke & Sohn. 1852.
Farrar, F. W. The life and work of St. Paul. 2 vols.
London: Cassell. 1879. New York : E. P. Dutton & Co.
Smith, James. The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul. 4th
edition, revised and corrected by W. E. Sraith. I.,ondon :
Longmans, Green & Co. 1880.
Renan, Ernest. Histoire des Origines du Christianisme. 7
vol. Paris : Calmann Levy. 1882-1883.
VIIL— Biblical Theology.
(i) Theology of the Bible.
(a) The Theology of the whole Bible.
f Ewald, Heinrich. Lehre der Bibel von Gott oder Theologie
des Alten und Neuen Bundes. 4 Bde. Leipzig : F. C. W.
VogeL 1871-76.
(b) Special Topics.
f Delitzsch, F'ranz. System d. Biblischen Psychologic. 2 Aufl.
Leipzig : Dorffling & Franke. 1863. System of Biblical
Psychology. Trans, by R. E. Wallis. 2 edit Edinburgh :
T. & T. Clark. 1867.
¦|-Cave, Alfred. The Scriptural Doctrine of Sacrifice. Edin
burgh: T. &T. Clark. 1877.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BffiLICAL STUDY. ajJ
I..AIPLAW, John. The Bihic doctrine of man. Edinburgh : T.
& T.Clark. 1S79.
Fairbairn. Patrick. The RevcA^n.-': of La-.L in Scriptur,;
Considered with respect both to its own nature and to its
relative place in successive dispensations. Edinburgh : T.
& T. Clark. 1S6S.
Fairbairn, Patrick. The Typology of Scripture. Slewed in
connection with the whole series of the dirine dispensations.
6th edition. 2 vols. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1876.
New York : X. Tibbals & Sons. 1880.
Beck, J. T. Umriss ..". bibl. Scdenlehre, 3 Aufl. Stuttgart :
J. F. Sreinkopf. 1871. OutUnes of Biblical Psychology.
Translated from the 3d German ediiion, 1S71. Edinburgh:
T. & T. Clark. 1S77.
(2^ Theology of the Old Testament.
(a) Theology of the old religions.
*Rawlin50N. George. The ReUgions of the Ancient World.
lx)ndon : Religious Tract Society. 1882. New York :
Charles Scribner's Sons. 1SS3.
tLEXORM-iXT. F. Z« Scier..-{s occuUes en Asic. La Magic chez-
hs Chaldeens et les origineaitx Accadiennes. Paris : ^laison-
neiive et Cie. 1S74. Chaldean Mjgic. Its origin and
development. Translated from the French, with consider
able additions, by the author, and notes by the editor.
London : S. Bagster & Sons. 1S77.
Schrader, E. Die HoUenfahrt der Istar. Ein altbabylonisches
Epos nebst Proben ass\ri3cher Lvrik. Giessen : J. Ricker.
1S74-
Krehl, L. Ueber die Religion der lorislamischen Araber.
Leipzig : Serig. 1S63.
Movers. J. C Die Phonisier. 3 Bde. Bonn : E. Weber.
1S41-50.
RwDissiN, W. W. Sfu.iicf. sur Semitischen Rci!g!onsgtSc':::/tfe.
1-2 Heft Leipzig : W. Grunow. 1876—79.
Spiess. Edmund. Enf-.cicklungsgcschichte der Vorsiellungen
ron Zustj'-.ie nach dem Tode auf Grund vergleichender Re-
ligionsforschung. Jena: H. Costenoble. 1S77.
21

482 BIBLICAL STUDY.
TiELE, C. P. Vergelijkende geschiedenis der Egyptische en
Mesopotamische godsdietisten. Amsterdam : P. N. Van
Kampen. 1869-72. History of the Egyptian Religion.
Vol. I. Translated by lames Ballingal. Boston : Houghton,
Mifflin & Co.
(b) The Old Testament as a whole.
*0ehler, G. F. Vorlesungen uber die Theologie d. Alt. Test.
2 Bde. 2 Aufl. 1883. Theology of the Old Testament. 2
vols. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark. 1874. Revised edition
by G. E. Day. New York : Funk & Wagnalls. 1883.
fScHULTZ, Hermann. Alttestamentliche Theologie. Die offen-
barnngsreligion auf ihrer vorchristlichen Entwickelungsstufe,
dargestellt. 2 Aufl. Frankfurt-a-M. : Heyder & Ziraraer.
1878.
Hofmann, J. C. R. Der Schriftbeweis. 2 Aufl. 3 Bde.
Nordlingen : C. H. Beck. 1857-60.
(c) The Religion of Israel.
tKoNiG, F. E. Der Offenbarungsbegriff des Alten Testamentes.
2 Bde. Leipzig : J. C. Heinrichs. 1882.
f Tholuck, A. Die Propheten und ihre Weissagungen- Gotha :
F. A. Perthes. Abd. 2. 1861.
tlCuPER. Das Prophetenthum des Alten Bundes. Leipzig :
Dorffling & Franke. 1870.
Kuenen, A. De Godsdienst van Israel tot den Ondergang
van den Joodschen Staat. Haarlem, 1869. The Religion of
Israel. Translated from the Dutch by A. H. May. 3 vols.
London : Williams & Norgate. 1874-5.
Kuenen, A. De Profeten en de Profetie on der Israel Leiden.
1875. The Prophets and Prophecy in Israel- Translated
from the Dutch by A. Milroy, with an introduction by J.
Muir. I.,ondon : Longmans, Green & Co. 1877.
Trip, J. Die Theophanien in den Geschichtsbuechern des Alten
Testaraents. Leiden : D. Noothoven van Goor. 1858.
(d) Religious Institutions.
"Atwater, Edward E. History and Significance of the Sa
cred Tabernacle of the Hebrews. New York : Dodd &
Mead. 1875.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 483
*Edersheim, a. The temple, its ministry and services as they
* were in the time of Christ. London: T.Nelson & Sons.
1874
fBAHR, K. C. W. F. Symbolik des Mosaischen Cultus. I. Bd.,
2te Aufl., 1874; II. Bd., 1839. Heidelberg: J. C. B. Mohr.
tSAALSCH&TZ, J. L. Das Mosaische Recht nebst den vervoll-
standigenden thalraudisch-rabbinischen Bestimmungen. 2
Aufl. 2 Theile. Berlin : C. Heyraann. 1853.
Warburton, William. The divine Legation of Moses demon
strated. 3 vols. London : Thoraas Tegg. 1846.
Wines, E. C. Commentaries on the Laws of the Ancient He
brews. New York : G. P. Putnam & Co. 1855.
Michaelis, J. D. Commentaries on the law of Moses. 4 vols.
London: Rivingtons. 1814.
Kurtz, J. H. Der Alttestamentliche Opfercultus. Ein nach
seiner gesetzlichen Begrundung und Anwendung. Mitau :
A Neumann. 1862. Sacrificial Worship of the Old Tes
tament. Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1863.
Bahr, K. C. W. F. Der Salomonische Tempel mit Beriick
sichtigung seines Vorhaltnisses zur heiligen Architectur.
Karlsruhe : C. T. Groos. 1848.

(e) Special Doctrines of the Old Testament.
¦{¦Orelli, von C. Die alttestamentliche Weissagung von der
Vollendung des Gottesreiches. Wien : G. P. Faesy. 1882.
fKinHM, E. Begriff. d. Suhne im Alten Testament. Gotha :
V. A. Perthes, 1877.
fRiEHM, Ed. Die Messianische Weissagung ihre Entstehung,
ihr zeitgeschichtlicher Charakter und ihr Verhaltnis zu der
neutestamenriichen Erfiillung. Gotha : F. A. Perthes, 1875.
Messianic Prophecy. Translated by J. Jefferson. Edinburgh :
T. & T. Clark. 1875.
f Bottcher, F. De inferis rebusque post mortem futuris ex.
Hebraeorum et Graecorum opinionibus libri duo. Dresden :
H. M. Go'ttschalck. 1846.

484 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Reinke, L. Die Messianischen Weissagungen bei den grossen^
und kleinen Propheten des A. T. 4 Bde. Giesen : E. Roth.
1859-62.
Kahle, Albert. Biblische Eschatologie. Abth. I. Escha-
tologie des Alten Test Gotha: G. Schloessraann. 1870.
Wuensche, Aug. Die Leiden des Messias in ihrer Ueberein-
stimmung rait der Lehre des Alten Testaraents und den Aus-
spriichen der Rabbinen in den Talrauden, Midraschim und
andern alten rabbinischen Schriften. Leipzig : R. Reisland.
1870.
Hengstenberg, E. W. Christologie des Alten Testaments. 2
Aufl. 3 Bde. Berlin : L. Oehmigke. 1854-56. Christology
of the Old Testament. Trans, by T. Meyer. 4 vols. Edin
burgh : T. & 'L Clark. 1859-65.
(3). Theology of the Jews during the Greek and
Roman Periods.
(a) The Theology ofthe surrounding Religions.
Nagelsbach, K. F. Homerische Theologie. 2 Aufl. von G.
Autenrieth. Niirnberg : C. Geiger. 1861.
Nagelsbach, K. F. Die nachhomerische Theologie des grie
chischen Volksglauben bis auf Alexander Niirnberg : C.
Geiger. 1857.
Tyler, W. S. The Theology of the Greek Poets. Andover :
W. F. Draper. 1870.
Lewis, Tayler. Plato against the Atheists ; or, the tenth book
of the dialogues on Laws, as accompanied with critical notes
and followed by extended dissertations on some of the main
points of the Platonic Philosophy and Theology, especially
as compared with the Holy Scripture. New York : Harper
& Brothers. 1845.
Pressense, E. de. The Religions before Christ, Being an
Introduction to the History of the first three centuries of the
Church. Translated by L. Corkran. Edinburgh : T. & T.
Clark. 1862.
Darbistan, the ; or School of Manners. Translated from the
original I'ersian. With notes and illustrations by David
Shea and Anihony Troyer. 3 vols. London : Allen & Co.
1843.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 485
(b) Theology of the Apocryphal books and Pseud
epigraphs.
''Drummond, James. The Jewish Messiah, A critical his
tory of the Messianic idea araong the Jews from the rise of
the Maccabee to the closing of the Talraud. London :
Longmans, Green & Co. 1877.
-I'BRETSCHNtiDER, K. G. Systematische Darstellung der Dog
matik und Moral der apocryphischen Schriften des Alten
Testaments, Leipzig : G. L. Crusius. 1805.
fViTRiNGA, C. De Synagoge vetere, Leucopetriae : J. F. Wehr-
mann. 1726. The Synagogue and the Church, Condensed
from the original Latin work of Vitringa by J. L. Bernard.
London : B. Fellows. 1842.
t
fLANGEN, J. Das Judenthum in Paldstina zur Zeit Christi.
Ein Beitrag zur Offenbarungs-und religions-geschichte ais
Einleitung in die Theologie des N. T. Freiburg im B. :
Herder. 1866.

(c) Later Jewish Theology.
tZuNZ, L. Die gottesdienstlichen Vortrage der Judeti, historisch
entwickelt, Berlin : A. Asher. 1832.
tWEBER, F. System der altsynagogalen palastinischen Theologie
aus 'Targum, Midrasch, und Talmud. Leipzig : Dorffling &
Franke. 1880.
Chiarini, L. Le Talmud de Babylone traduit en langue Fran
calse et coraplete par celui de Jerusalem et par d'autres
monumens de I'antiquite Judaique. 2 voll. Leipzig : J. A.
G. Weigel. 1831.
Surenhusius, G. Mishna sive totius Hebraeorum Juris,
Rituum, Antiquitatura, ac Legum orahuiii Systema. 6 Pars
Amstelaedarai. 1698-1702.
Schwab, M. Le Talmud • de Jerusalem traduit pour la pre
miere fois. 6 Tora. (thus far published). Paris : Maison
euve & Ce. 1871-83.

486

BIBLICAL STUDY.

(4^ New Testament Theology.
(a) As a whole.
^^Bernard, T. D. The Progress of Doctrine in the New Tes'
tament. Bampton Lecture, 3 edition. London : Macrail
lan & Co. 1873. 2d edition. Gould & Lincoln. 1868.
tWEiss, Bernhard. Lehrbuch der Biblischen Theologie des
Neuen Testaments ; 3 Aufl., Berhn, Wilhelm Hertz, 1880.
Biblical Theology of the New Testament, translated from
the third revised edition by D. Eaton ; 2 vols.; Edinburgh :
T. & T. Clark, 1882-83.
tScHMiD, C. F. Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments,
herausg. von Heller, 4 Aufl. ; Gotha, 1869. Biblical The
ology of the New Testament ; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.
1870.
BAUh. F. C. Vorlesungen uber Neutestamentliche Theologie,
hei.'usgegeben von F. F. Baur. Leipzig : L. W. Reisland.
1864
Reuss, Edua-rd. Histoire de la ThMogie Chrdtienne au Siicle
Apostoliqut '; 3 edit; Strasbourg, Treuttel & Wiirtz, 1864.
History of Christian Theology in the Apostolic Age, trans
lated frora the 3d edition by Annie Harwood ; 2 vols. ;
London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1872.
LuiTERBECK, A. B. Die Neutestamentliche Lehrbegriffen, ein
Handbuch fiir alteste Dogmengeschichte und systematische
Exegese des Neuen Testamentes. 2 Bande. Mainz : F.
Kupferberg. 1852.
Oosterzee Van, J. J. De Theologie des Niewen Verbonds.
2 vorm. Utrecht : Kermink & Zn. 1867. The Theology
of the New Testament. Translated from the Dutch by M.
J. Evans. New York : Dodd & Mead. 1871.

(b) Theology of Gospels.
*Bruce, a. B. The Training of the Twelve, or passages out
of the Gospels exhibiting the twelve disciples of Jesus under
discipline for the apostleship. 3d edition. Edinburgh : T.
& T.Clark. 1883.

BOOKS OF REFERENCE FOR BIBLICAL STUDY. 437
Hardwick, C. Christ and other Masters. An historical
inquiry into sorae of the chief parallelisms and contrasts
between Christianity and the religious systems of the An
cient World. New edition. Carabridge : Macraillan & Co.
1883.
Smeaton, George. The Doctrine of the Atonement as Taught
by Christ Himself , Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1868.
Weiffenbach, AV. Der Wiederkunftsgedankes Jesu, nach den
Synoptikern kritisch untersucht und dargestellt. Leipzig :
Breitkopf & Hartel. 1873.

(c) Theology of the Epistles.
tOpiTZ, Hermann. Das System des Paulus nach seinen Briefen.
Gotha : F. A. Perthes. 1874.
tRiEHM, Ed. K. a. Der Lehrbegriff des Hebrderbriefes dar
gestellt und mit verwandten Lehrbegriffen verglichen. Neue
Ausg. Basel: Balraer & Riehra. 1867.
tGEBHARDT, HERMANN. Der Lehrbegriff der Apokalypse.
Gotha, Besser, 1873. The Doctrine of the Apocalypse,
translated from the Gerraan by J. Jefferson ; Edinburgh, 'Y.
& T.Clark, 1878.
Irons, W. J. Christianity as Taught by St. Paul. 2d edition.
Oxford : Jaraes Parker & Co. 1876.
U.steri, ].,. Entwickelung des Paulinischen Lehrbegriffes in
seinem Verhiiltnisse zur biblischen Dogmatik des Neuen
Testamentes. 6 Ausg. Ziirich : Orell, Fiissle & Co.
1851.
Baur, F. C. Paulus, der Apostel Jesu Christi. Sein Leben
und Werken, seine Briefe und seine Lehre. Ein Beitrag zu
einer kritischen Geschichte des Urchristenthums. 2 Aufl.
nach dem Tode des Verfassers besorgt von E. Zeller. 2
Theile. Leipzig: L. W. Reisland. 1866-67.
Sabatier, S. L'Apotre Paul. Esquisse d'une histoire de sa
pensie. 2 edit. Paris : G. Fischbacher. 1881.
Holsten, C. Zum Evangeliutn des Paulus u. des Petrus.
Rostock : H. Schmidt. 1868.

488 BIBLICAL STUDY.
Holsten, C. Das Evangeliutn des Paulus. Tail I. Berlin.
1880.
Thoma, Alb. Die Genesis des Johannes-Evangelium. Ber
lin : G. Reiraer. 1882.
Haupt, Erich. Der Erste Brief des Johannes, Beitrag z.
bib. Theol.; Coberg : Post, 1869. The First Epistle of
John : A contribution to Biblical Theology, translated, with
an introduction by W. B. Pope ; Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark,
1879.
Smeaton, George. The Doctrine of the Atonement as taught
by the Apostles, Edinburgh : T. & T. Clark. 1870.
Schmidt, W. G. Der Lehrgehalt des Jakobusbriefes, Leipzig :
Heinrichs. 1869.
(d) Special Doctrines in the New Testament.
*Jacob, G. a. The Ecclesiastical Polity of the New Testa-
tament. London; Strahan & Co. 1871.
tERNESTi, H. F. T. L. Die Ethik des Apostel Paulus, 3 Aufl.
Braunschweig : E. Leibrock. 1880.
Gess, W. F. Christi Person und Werk, nach Christi Selbst-
zeugniss und den Zeugnissen der Apostel. 2 Abtheil.
Basel : C. Detioff". 1870-78.
The Parousia. A Critical inquiry into the New Testaraent
doctrine of our I>ord's second Coraing. London: Dally,
Isbiter Sz: Co. 1878.
Philippi, Ferd. Die Biblische und Kirchliche Lehre vom
Antichrist, Giitersloh : C.Bertelsmann. 1877.

L--INDEX OF TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE.

Genesis,

 3^8
 313
 349
 =64
 =68
 47
 48
 48
 267
 317
xix. 26  3^:^
.6,7  268

II. 8 seq., . .
ii. 34 
iv. 23 
iv. 23 se^. .
ix, 25-27 . . ,
xi. 31 ,.
Xll. 14....
xiv 
xiv. 19,20.,
3^. 6.

XXll 
xxiv. 60 
xxv, 23 
xxvii. 27 seq.
xxvii. 39, 40.

316
267269 271272

xliv. iS-34. -  254
xlviii. 15-20  269
xlviii. 19  .- 270
yliT  280
Exodus. iii. 6  311
iv. 23  250
xii. 46  336
XV  51, 249, 256, 259, 280, 284, 285
xix  319
xix. 5  250
XX. 13-14  317
xxiv. 17  316
LEvincus. xix. 18  317

Numbers.

¦VI. 23.
3c. 35- -

XXI. 14 
xxi. 17 —
xxi- 17-18
xxi. 27-30
xxiii. 7 seq

269267
285248 249
270
373 279

xxiii. 18-27  *8o
xxiv. 3-9  274
xxviiL 9-10  3*^

Deuteronomy.

VIU. 3 
xxv. 4 
xxv. 5 
xxix. 33f etc.

. 316
.. 311
.. 188

Dkote ronomy.
X3CX  193
xxx. II seq  316
xxxi. 21, 32, etc  188
xxxii. ... 51, 193, 256, 259, 273, 280, 2S4
xxxiii  ,  272, 280
Joshua. ii.& seq  316
X.  285
X. 12-13   271
X. 13  248
xxiv  234
Judges. ^  2491 259, 273, 28s
V. II  66,249
^  234
XI. 40  249
xiv  249
xiv. 12  249
xiv. 14-18   286
XV. 16  286
xxi. 9  249
I. S.\iIUEI,
^..:  234
xv\u. 7  265
xxi, 1-7  309
II. Samuel.
i. 18  248, 249
i. 19-27  53. 277
"»-33  249
1»- 33-37  270
xxu  23
xxiii. 1—7  274
I. Kings.
iv. 31  249
iv. 32, 33  248
X;  249
XI. 41  227
xiii. 2  118
xiv. 19, 39  227
xvi. 5   227
xviii  234
II. Kings.
i. iS  227
viii. 23  227
xvii  199
x\'iii. II  60
XX. 20  227

490

BIBLICAL STUDY.

I. Chronicles.
xii, 8  270
xii. 18  271
xvi  156
xxix. 29  227
II. Chronicles.
ix. 29  227
xii. 15  227
xiii. 22  227
xvi. ir  227
XXIV. 27  227
xxvi. 22, etc  227
xxxiii. 18, ig  227
xxxv. 27  227
Nehemiah. viii. 8  62, 308
xi, 23  227
Job. xxviii. 28  29
xxxi. 1-37  290
xxxix. 19-25  272
xlii. 7  196
Psalms. i  189, 281
ii  189
ii. 1  336
ii. I seq  187
iii. 1  188
iv  280
v.,g  317
VIII  277
viii. 2  415
ix  278
X  278
X...7  317
XII  278
xii. 8  118
xiv  23, 156
xiv. 1-3  317
XVI. 8-TI  187
xviii  23, 156, 256
xix  282
xix. 4  316
xxi. 1-2  260
xxiii  282
xxv  278
xxv. 14  29
xxxii. I  317
xxxii, I seg  187
xxxiv  278
xxxvi. 2  317
xxxvii  278
xlii  275
xlm  275
xlv  277
Hii  23, 156
Ixix. 22-23  '87
Ixix. 25  187, 315
lxxii. I  x88
Ixxx .   53> 277
lxxxii. 6  309
Ixxxviii  1 88
lxxxix  188
xc  51, 188, 284
xcii -c  283

Psalms. xcv. 7  188
xcv. 8  i8g
xcviii. 1  66
cix. 8  187, 315
ex. I  187
cxi  278
cxviii. 22-23  3^^
cxix  ...'  278
cxix. 97, 103, 127, 160  426
cxix. 105  411
cxxvi  188
cxxvii  188
cxxxvii  188
cxl. 3  317
cxlv  278
cxlviii. 7-8  260
Proverbs. i.-ix  286
iij:.34  3'7
viii. 17 seq  29
X.I  260
X. 1-5  265
xiii. 24  266
xvi. 9  266
xxiii. 15, 16  261
xxiii. 29-35  286, 287
xxiv. 30-34  288
xxv. 1  179,2x7
xxvii. 22-27  286
xxx. 15-16  286
xxx. 24-28  287
xxxi. 10-30  286
Song of Solomon.
i. 2-ii. 7  288^.
Isaiah \: 9  191
11  156
V. 12  249
vi. 9  J91
yi. 9 seg  191
ix. I seg  191
X. 22 seq  igi
xi. 10  igi
xxiii. 15 seq  249
XXV. 8  318
xxvi. 1-6  ,  283
xxviii. II-I2  317
xxix. 13  igi
xl. 3 . , ,  igi
xl.-fxvi  53
xlii. 1-4  igi
xliv. 28  18S
xlv. 1  188
lii. 13-liii  2g2
Iiii. I, 4, 7  191
!>x. 7  317
jx. 3-S  :¦¦-. 191
1x1  310
Ixi. 1-2  191
Ixv. I seg  igi
Ixv. 17 seg  318
Jeremiah. xxxi. 15  I9ii3ifi

INDEX OF TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE.

491

Ezekiel. xxxviii.-xxxix  318
Daniel. vii. 1  189
vii. 9 seq  318
xi. 31  189
xii  318
xii. II  189
Hosea. i. 10  190
ii. 23  xgo
vi. 6  309
M- 1  315
Joel, ii. 28-32  191
iii  319
Amos. vi. 5  249
Micah. iv  156
Zechariah. »Y  424
X], 7  140
xi. 12-13  191,216-7
xiv. 6 seq  295
Malachi. iii. *  191
Matthew. II- 13-18  315
II. 17  191
, iii. 3  191
iv, 4  12
i V. 4—10  309
iv. 14  igi
V. i8  13
V. 21 seq  312
viii. 17  191
xii. 3 seq  309
xil. 17  igi
xii. 39-41  190
xiii, 14  191
XV. 6  4
XV. 7  191
XV, 14  135
XIX. ¦iseq  312
xix. 7  193
xix. 8  185
xxi, 42  311
xxii. 15-46  62
xxii. 23-32  311
xxii. 43-45  187, 309
xxiv, 15  i8g
xxvii. 9  141, 169, 191, ai6
Mark. i. 2  , . . 191
»-44t «tc  193

Mark. iy;  414
vu. 6  igt
vii. 10  193
xii. 26  192
xii. 36, 37  187
xvi. 9-20  218, 220
Luke. i. 1-4  227
iii. 4  igi
|v. 16-22  310
iv. 17  igi
X- 7  193
XIII. 14 seq  310
xiv. 25  13X
XV  310
xvi. 29, 31  131
xvii. 32  311
XX. 42  169, 188
XX. 42-44  187
xxiv. 27  131, 192
xxiv, 44  131
xxiv. 44 seq  313
John. i. 1-14  71
». 14  72
i. 18  63, 312
i. 23  rgi
i:.45  193
UI. 16  410
V. 46, 47  193
vi. 63  414
vii. 17  298, 427
vii. 19  103
vii. 23  192
vii; 38  427
viii. i-ii  218
X. 34  131
X. 34-36  309
xii. 34  131
xii. 38  191
xii. 39-41  igi
xiii. 7  186
xiv. 26  69
XV. 3  414
XV. 25  131
xvi. 8  72
xvi. 13  q
XVl. 15  28
xvii. 17  414
xix, 36  ,  336
Acts. i, 16-20  187
1:20  315
ii. 16  igi
ii, i6 seq  319
ii. 25-29  187
ji; 34  187
111. 22  , , . . 193
iii. 23-24  193
iii. 24  190, 192
iv. 24, 25, 36  336
iv. 25  187, 188, 192
vii  141
vii. 37  193
viu, 28-30  191

402

BIBLICAL STUDY.

Acts. xiii. IS  131
xiii. 33  189
XV  320
XV, 21  192
xvii. 2  131
xvii. II  131
xviii. 24  131
xviii. 28  131
xx\i. ::2  131, 193
x.wiii. 23  131,192
xxviii. 25  191
Ro.MANS. i. 16  411
iii. I J'V  73
iii. 9-1S  317
iii, 21  40S
iv  320
iv. ^scg  317
iv. 6  187
ix. 25  igo
i.\-. 27, 29  igi
X- 5i 19  193
X. 6-10  316
X. 16  igi
x. 18  316
.\. 20  igi
XI. 9  187
>-''i. 6  337
XV. 12  191
I. Corinthians.
ii. 2  408
ii; "  337
III  320
ix. 9 seq  316
'X. 14  193
X: 4  317
XI. z^scq  193
xiv. 21  131
xiv. 21 seq  317
II. CoRINTHI.UiS.
iii. 3  428
iii. 7  316
iii. 15  192
iii. 18  13
Galatians. ii  320
iv. 22 seg  73, 140
iv. 22, 23, 24  336
iv.24  317
Ephesians. V. 25  428
Philippians. iii. ^  7
Colossians. ii- 3  413
u. 8  4
ii. 17  244, 320
I. Timothy.
i.  320

II. Timothy.
iii. 8  31*
iii. IS  131^ 4»i
Titus. ii, II  406
ii. 11-14  41*5
Hebrews. i-3  13
IV  317
iv. 7  188, 192
iv. 12  411
vii  318
vii. 14  193
viii. 5  193, 244
viii. lo-ii  428
ix. 19  193
X. 1  244
X. I seq  320
X. 28  193
XI  316
xi. 40  244
xii, 21  193
James. ii  320
ii. 7-13  3'7
ii. 21 seq  316
v. n  ,  316
V, 17  316
I. Peter.
i. 23  13.41I1 413
ii. 9 seq  319
II. Peter.
i. 21  27
ii. 4 seq  316
I. John.
V. 7.  218
Jude. 9 seq  316
14  190
Revelation. ii  320
xii. 1 seg  318
xii. 6  318
xiii. 5  318
Xlii. 18  318
xvi. 12  318
xvi. 16  318
xvii. 5  318
xviii. 2  318
xxi.-xxii  318
xxii. 18-19  6

I. Esdras.

IV. 33-41 .

238 58

II.— INDEX OF TOPICS.

AcCKNi-s  152,25^
 in llclucw verse and prose  jc^

-.pi

o\.

>.lc

93 S3
177
933 7»
54

¦ System of Polish uikI Ccniui
Aci'omnuuliitioii, I'liuciplo ot,... iSs, .iu
Acts  7.1, 830
Akkadirtn lang«!\RC  47
— — Uymiis   aPa
AUcj;oiu'al method  317
 lesus' use ot"  310
 "in tl\e l.iuin Chvirch  324 j^.
 Oviccii the Lithcr of  ,ijj
„ — ot ^hilo  >>o
 'ri'utli mid f.iiUiic of  307
AUcKory  los
Allcjiory not unbecoming to Jesus.
AlHieiiUion 
Alocsu 
Alphabet 
Aiitorttini 
Anouyine'i 
Antln'opolojiy 
AnlluvpoiiviMphism 
AhUoi-h, Sihool ot" 
Anlttcip polvi;lot  145
Apoo.il> psc  70, J09, 111, iP5i aao
Apociilypsc of Vtv.\  , , ij;, I'JO
.'Vpocftly\i->cs, Jewish ;ipocryphal, uv), J.J4
,'\po* rypha ,  6^, 70
Api'siUV civeil   9**
.Vpostoh^- ilimvli, Kloments of. . .. . ,^-xi
,\ppiopil.\tiou ot the t^'iiucc of the
Si-iipiuiv-.  '. , , 417
Appio\iii;uioo ofthe N\'on.l oft'ioil  jo;
.¦\v.ibic l.ui>;n.i};o  iS, 19, 4*^. 5^
Anuu.uc hmj;u,(>ic  50
— — " chur.icter and his
tory  S9.^*-
¦ - written character  153
.¦\i-,\miU-^uiN .  'J^^
Aivli.ii--n\^, Poetic  ui>4
Aivhicolojiv. Sacred ,.,. »  17
.•Vrmiiu.nusiii  ,»  . . 113
.\scoiision oi" Isaiiih  jj4
A^h^olVll^ 
.\>,sonance . . 
AsNunipiion of Mo$es ..
Assyria ami babylonia, nionumeiils of jS^
Av.yiian laiinu,»i;c ..... iS, 19, 46, 4S
llvnius  ,  ao-i
Authciuicilv  ^7.^0
ol" ihc l^cripturos  ^'¦'.{^•
-- tjuestions wliii-h .uisc,..  jjo
Authority of tho Bible. . . . no, iiQ^", »43

B56
. 8S4

Baal,

49

Ruby Ionia   47
lliibyloniiui hymn.s  262
langu;i>;c  46, t|B
- vowel system  15a
lli»t;t.lad  304
Hiiptisni  a^3
Uuslc, University of  144
Ha^sora ...  . . 304
/irr,i::'/ta  174,177
Bethhoron  271
Bible, . . 7S» 99) 945i -48. 363, 417
 luul criticism  73
Kovnis ami meaning  6
Cerm.in, of Uitther . ..,.,.  50
1 itcr.iiy study of  214
 nmierial for all ages  ^7
— Text of  i^g.//.
 Ti-.ulitionul views of  95
 I'sc of  4
\'ci-^ion of Kins J.imes  50
Uiblical IVrnks, View of Du I'in  aoi
¦ - Stvaiy, attiactive..  3
— - " extensive  i
'* in\poilaiit  t
" urofound  ,  a
'* Renewed attenlion to  aia
Pook of lubilees, , . ,  i=;t;
Hook of "the w.us of Jahveh  -^S
iKH^k ot Wishar  348
C\n\.i-isTic S\*stkm  ,  ,  50J
Ciio,  ;io4
(.\ili\ius, Scliool ot  373
CaKinivtic orttiodoxy  ,  iij
Cimbrid^e men  1^4
IM.iUMiists  j;3
;'anon of Scripture  ai, 105
.\ni;ustinKu\  106
llclleaisiic  106
Uieronvmian  io6
U.ilic   13a
Icuish  1 -o
losephus'  iSo
VmU.ui  \tA
 of the Reformers  u^o
~ Syriac  lu
criticism of  IJ5
detevminatJon of  ,  n
c.Ment of.  .. ITO
— of tlie New Testament  i-?j
'• " Old •*  U'7
i.\ T. not determined by N. T... i^
 not determined by consensus., . . ji
— Principles for determination of
^••V> 136
— — Results of criticism of  lu
i4'.)8)

494

BIBLICAL STUDY.

Canonics. Bil /ical  21, 78
 Sacred  17
Canonicity not a purely historical ques
tion  125
Carthage, Council of.  105
Chaldee, Biblical  18, 46, 60
Chemosh  49
Christ the centre of Scripture  364
 Person of....  71,410
Chronicles. .. 50, 128, 129, 187, 197, 198,
222, 227, 230
Citation  89
 Errors in  85
 of O. T., in N. T  131
Compilations  226
Conception, Differences of  88, 94
Constraint of symbol and Scripture  98
Construct relation  53
Council of Trent  331
Covenants  402
 Apostles* use and view of.  319
 Theology of  343
Credibility  87
 of the Scriptures  240
 distinguished from infallibility. . . 241
Creed, Docirine of the  243
Critical conflicts  102
 Evangelical, test  no
 theories, Recent  102
Criticism, in general  77^-
 Bible and  75.^-
 Biblical . .  78, 82, 94, 139
 " Historic right of.  loi
 " necessity of  76
 has been largely destructive  81
 Disiinction between Higher and
Lower  78
 Divisions of.  82
 Evangelical  104, 172
 Higher, .21, 24, 78, 86, 164 jff^., 204, 420
 *¦* attractive  246
 ** and the authority of Script
ure  243
 " and the credibility of
Scripture  244
 *' Illustrations of its princi
ples  gay.
 Importance of.  ga
 '* in America  .. 210 y".
 '* in Great Britain .... 206, 209 /I
 " intheXVI.-XVII. Cent.iesy:
 '* ^"^ XIX. Cent  207_/".
 '¦ not determined by tradition 196
 " Prejudice against  212,246
 ' ' Principles of  170
 *' Questions to be determined
by  87, 212
 " Rise of   196
 *' Three stadia of  207-8
 " Unfolding in Germany, etc 212
 Historical  82 j?;, 198
 Literary  82,85
 Lower, vid.  Textual.
 a priori objections  99
 Objections to application to the
Bible  95
 Principles and methods  82
 Textual or Lower.. 21, 22, 78, 246, 420
 " and Inspiration .... 156 _^.
 " of O. T. behind that of N.
T  150

Criticism, Textual, of XVL, XVIL,
XVIIL, XIX. Cent.. 140-8
 Textual, ^cope of  23
 The true  i^
Daniel.. 50, 60, 128, 129, 187, 197, 218, 224
Decalogue  243
Deism  206, 222
Deuteronomic code  3^6
Deuteronomy. ..... 51, 167, 194, 224, 234
Dialogues of the ancient worthies  233
Dir^e, The  285
Distich  264
Distinction between poetry and prose
slight  251
Documentary theory  200, 202 _^., 207
Documents, Genesis of tbe  208
Dogmatics, Biblical  392
Dogmatic method  194
Ebionites  320
Ecclesiastes.. 26, 50, 109, iii, 128, 129,
165, 167, 187, 224, 2S6
Ecclesiasticus  131
Edessa, School of.  304,326
 Syrian school at  152
Editing and interpolating of Scripture 219
Editorship  178
Efficacy of Scripture  416
Egypt  48
Eloquence, Biblical models of.  234
Epistles of the apostles as models  237
Epistles as prose literature  236
Errors in tbe original autographs  242
Errors in the present text  240
Essenes  129. 300, 302, 307
Esther. .109, 111, 128, 129, 187, 197, 218, 222. 238
Ethics  395, 403
Ethiopic language  18, 19, 46
Evangelical spirit  370
Evidence, External  90
 Internal  88 y".
Exegesis, Biblical  17, 421
 *' general principles  27
 Comparative  31
 Doctrinal  33
 Four kinds of Augustine  324
 Grammatical  29
 Historical  30
 History of  28
 Literaiy  32
 Logical and rhetorical  30
 The proper method of.  194
 S-'ynthetic method.  14
 of the middle age  328
 in the Oriental church  328'
 Practical  34
 Process of  i'l
 Proper spirit of  x€>
Exegete, The work of  28, 35
 How far influenced by history, . . 3fo
Exodus  48
Ezekiel  128, 129, 190
Ezra  . . 60, 129, 187, 197, 222, 230, 237
hzra, Restoration of O. T. by  181^,
Faith, Appropriating  423
 Practicing  426
Fiction in the Bible  238 y^
Fides divina  108, 123, 906

INDEX OF TOPICS.

495

Fides divina and kumana  n6
Figures of speech  253
Forgeiy, Theory of.  222
Foims, Poetic  283
Fragmentary Hypothesis, The  207
Gemara  174, 180
Genesis. R, C. support of documentary
theory  202
Geneva, Univeisity of.  144
German theology  135
Germany  346
God, Hebrew conception of  53
Gospel in the Scriptures  407
Gospels, The  230
Grace of God in the Scriptures  410
Greek language  60, 63 J^F.
 *' beautiful and finished. 6/S
 " characteristics of.  64
 ** complex and artistic. . 64
 ** form and style of
speech  65
-:  " strength and vigor. . ti/Sf.
 Biblical  69
 Hellenistic  18
 of the N ew Testament  353
 N. T. writers used  69
Haggada... 62, 73, 238, 300, 304, 310, 315
Hagiographa  ,_  187^.
Halacha  62, 73, 174, 300, 304, 316
 method of Jesus  309
Halacha and Haggada, Principles of.. 301
Hebrew Grammar  29
 " The first  107
 History  56
 Language  18, 46, 48, 49, 60, 71, 107
 religious  5c
 ** correspondence to
thought  52
 " lifeand fervor  56
 " majesty and sublimity,. 53
-;  ** simple and natural  51
 " characteristics  51
 " and the cognates  18^!
 " culture, Babylonian ori
gin  48
 Letters, forms used  153
 Literature diflFerent from Indo-
Germanic  215
 Poetic art. Climax of  294
 Poetry  52, 55, 56, 150, 248^.
 Text  151
 *' The present  153
Hebrews, The  250
 a literary and poetic people  248
 Epistle to  26, 70, 165, 166, 167,
222, 237, 316, 317
Hellenistic and Christian theories. 180 _^.
Hermeneutics. Biblical  27
Hermeneutical principles, Lutheran.. 333
Herodians  60
Hexastich ....  271
Himjaric language  46
History, Hebrew  56
 Two kinds, priestly, prophetic. .. 230
 Sources of   84
Holy Spirit, the interpreter of Script
ure  365
Hosea  igo, 235
Huguenots, French  371

Humanists  33^
Hymn, The  284
Inconsistencies, The supposed, of the
Bible  244
Independents  134
Inductive method in Biblical Study... 76
Inerrancy of Scripture  240^.
Inflection, Method of Hebrew  52, 57
Inspiration  220, 411
 Church doctrine  99, 243
 Dogmatic  97
 not confined to particular words. 158
 Plenary  241
 Scriptural doctrine  96
 Symbolical ''  96,242
 Textual Criticism and  156 jf.
 Traditional doctrine  100
 Various theories  96.^
 Verbal  76, 113, 144, 156 241
Integrity  87, 92
 of the Scriptures  216
Interpolations in the Pentateuch  218
 in the New Testament  218
 in the Septuagint  218
Interpretation of Scripture  296^
 Method of  351
 History of Biblical  299
 Literature of  360
 Requisites to proper  214/".
 True Christian method  320
 Jesus gave no rules of  313
 Comparative  358
 Doctrinal  361
of the Fathers and Schoolmen 320,^.

- General ,

 297
- Grammatical   352
- Hellenistic  305, 321
- Historical.

 357
 Logical and Rhetorical  353.^-
 Pietistic  34^
Practical  308, 362

- Puritan ,

 340
 Puritan and Arminian  335
 Rabbinical  299
 ofthe Reformers  ^y-ff-
 Roman Catholic  331, 360
 in the New Testament  Z°T ff-
 of the middle age  330
 of modem times  346
 of XVII. Cent, in England  338
 Palestinian methods  320
 Principles of Antiochian School . . 326
 " *¦' Cabalistic  303
 " " Puritan  344
 " " Schleiermacher  349
 " " Westminster Confes
sion  337
 Organic method  350
 methods of apostles  315
 Rules of Rabbinical  300
 Seven Rules of Tychonius  323
 Features of our Saviour's  311
 Defects of ancient and mediaeval. 352
 " ** grammatico-historical. 348
Introduction, Biblical  76
 Home's  209
 ^ First extant, by Junilius  183
Isaiah  190, 191, 218, 235, 278
Jahveh  ^ 71

496

BIBLICAL STUDY.

James, Epistle  70, log, 237
Jamnia, Assembly at  105 130
Jeremiah  igo, igi, 217, 218
Jesuii Christ, Authority of  186
Jews  67
Job, Book of... 26, 128, 129, 168, ig8,
222, 249, 252, 257, ^58, 288
Joel, " "  --¦ 190
John, Epistles  73^ 237
 Gospel  70, 225
Jonah  190, 222, 238
Joshua  igo, 207, 222
Jude  log, 237
Judges  igO) 222
Judith  ;  62
Justification by faith  406
Kings, Books of  igo, 198, 222, 226
Koran  5°t ^5'^
Language  42
 Connection between thought and 42
 Poetic   283 y".
 of our Saviour  61
Languages of the Bible  18, 42 jf.
Lamentations ... 128, 222, 258, 278, 286
Laodicea, Council of  1C5
Legend  231
 preferable to term , myth  232
Legends and fables, N. T. use of  316
Leyden. University of  144
Literal interpretation of Jesus  309
 sense excluded. Rules of Philo . . . 305
Literature, Biblical  16
 " Field of  20
 " History of  76
 " Problems of  216
 Hebrew  56
 *' Divisions into poetry and
prose  229
Literary features  87
— — study nf the Bible is Higher Crit
icism  215, 246
 usage, The comraon  195
London Polyglot  143
Lord's Prayer  243
 Supper  , . 243
Luke, Gospel  70
Luther  50
Lutheranism  113
Maccabees, Book of   238
Maccabeus, Judas  .'  130
Malachi  223, 236
Man, Hebrew conception of  54
Mandaic language  46
Mark, Gospel  70, 227
Massoretic system. 24, 57, 105, 140, 142, 2571 259
 text..  148^., 150, 154
 tradition  19
Massorites  141, 145, 178
Matthew, Gospel  70, 227
Measures of time, etc  49
Mesopotamia  47
Messana   93
Methodism  372
Metres  256
Micah  ,  235

Midrash  * • ^S^
 method  308
Minor Prophets  216
Mishna  1301 142, i74i 3oo
Modern training and oriental thought. 239
Moloch  49
Moravians  3?2
Mosaic code  -  ;  ^90
Moses, represented as lawgiver, not as
author  ^93
Mystic  119^ i'3
 spirit  368
Mysticism  iso^*".
Myth, term associated with polytheism 233
Myths of Assyria and Babylonia  232
Nature, Hebrew conception of. . 54, ss.t
Nehemiah. 128, 187, 197, 222, 230, 236, 237
N ezikin  173
Nisibis, School of  304, 326
 Influence of  327
Opinion and conception, Differences
of  88, 94
Oration in the Bible. . ,  234
Palestinian vowel system  152
Parallelism  49, 52, 203, 259, 261, 264
 In troverted  261
 ordinarily progressive  266
 not prediction  315
Paris polyglot  143
Patmos  230
Paulj Epistles  70, 73, 237
Pauline Epistles, Authenticity  226
Pentastich   270
Pentateuch. 24, 25, 49, 50, izg, 165, 181,
192, 197, igg, 200, 207, 210,
222, 227, 230, 232, 386
 Invest illation by Eichhorn  204
 Theory of R. Simeon  198
 Three codes  387
Pentecost  73
Person of Jesus Christ  71, 410
Peshat, or literal interpretation.. 300, 303. 304
Peshitto  23
Peter, Epistles  70, 73, 109, 166, 237
Phalaris, Epistles of  93
Pharisees  61, 129, 130, 299, 310
Philo, Logos of  71
Philology, Sacred  17
Phcenician language  18, 19, 46, 48, 60
Pietism, German ....  372
Pietists, German  344
Plato, Nous of  71
Platonic Philosophy  305
Play of Words  256
Plural of intensity  52
Poetic forms  283
Poetiy, Arabic  255^"., 262
 of Assyria and Egypt  248
 of the Bible  229
 Composite  288
 Gnomic  28=;
 Hebrew  52, 55, 5G, 1 50, 248 ff.
 " Apprehension of  253
 " Breadth of  249
 '* Characteristics  250, 255
 " Composed of vejses  259

INDEX OF TOPICS.

497

Poetry, Hebrew, External form subor
dinated to internal
emotion  259
.  ** Forms of  255
 ** *' Lyric, Gnomic,
Composite  284
 " Measurement b y
words or accent z-jgff,
—— " Parallelism of mem
bers, 49, 52, M^, 259, 261, 264
 *' Realistic  253
 " Religious  250
 " Sententious  252
 " Subjective  - 252
 Lyric  284
 Prophetic  292
 Syriac  258, 262
Polyglots  143
Prayer  418, 422
Prayers of the Bible  285
Prelatists  117
Presbyterians  134
 Scotch  134
Principles for determination of read
ings  86
Private judgment. Right of  124
Proof texts, Indiscriminate use of  5
Prophetical books  234
Prophets  190/^
Prose of the Bible  \  230
 Characteristics of Scripture  239
 Historical  230
Protestant critical principle  M'^ff
 position. The true  iii
Protestantism, Formal principle of. 13,
108, 407
Proverbs. 26, 128, 129, i6g, 187, 197, 217,
252, 258, 265/:, 285
P.salms, or Psalter. 24, 25, 51, 166, 168,
1S7, 197, 217, 222, 252, 256, 257, 258
Psalter, Davidic authorship  187
 of Solomon  224
Pseudonyme, Use of  223
Pseudonymes  223
 among the Jews  224
 in Puritan uterature  224
Ptolemaeus Philadelphus  126
Puritanism  loi, 335
Puritans  117, 118, 134, 371
Puritan Theology  147
Qarites  303
Rabbinical ideas of Scripture, Errors
of  302
- Theories  i

Refrain, The  53, 275
Religion, Biblical, Development of the 208
Revision, Demand for  103
Rhyme  255
Riddles  286
Rome, Church of  109
Rule of Faith, Defined by John Ball.. 3^6
 ^^ " of the Puritans  3^5
 ** ** '' Reformers  333
Ruth  128, 187, 222
Sabbath  48
Sadducees  60, 129
Samaritan language.  18, 19, 46
Samaritans  129
Samuel  190, 194, 222, 230
Scenery of the text  31
Scholastic spirit  369
Scholasticism  99
Science, Opposition to  7
Scripture, Authority of  25
 Fourfold sense  322
 Literary forms of  228
 Text of  21, 112
Scriptures, The  .,  160
 fundamental position of  13
 as literary productions  214
 as means of grace  406
 as sources  21
 Human elements in the  133
Sedan, University of  144
Selah in the Psalter  278
Septuagint., .68, 70, 105, 125, 140, 153,
i55i 3051 321
 A Greek Targum  126
Shemitic languages  46
Shulamite, The  239
Sibyline oracles  109
Silence, Argument from  go^^, 94
Sirach, Wisdom of  7?
Sodh method  300, 302, 305
Sohar, Book of  302
Solomon, Wisdom of  71
Song, The  ^  285
Song of Songs. ...26, 109, rir, 128, 129,
187, 239, 258, 278, 286
Sources of Biblical history  231
Speculative spirit  369
Spiritual .';eiise  34
Strophe, The  272
 marked by the alphabet  278
Style, Differences of  88, 93
 Poetic  283
Subscription of Protestant symbols.. . 101
Suffixes, Hebrew  53
Symbol  99

Rationalism  ! . . . 222 Synonyms, Hebrew  55
~ ¦¦ . . — - - Syriac language  18, ig, 40
 vowel system  152
Talmud  105, 107, 130, 141, 142,
170, lilo, 300
Talmuds, Babylonian and Jerusalem.. 173
Tanaites.  177
Targums  23
Taurominium  93
Testa!ment, New  236, 243
 " Canon of  106
 '* Citations of the  155
— - " Literary development
of  73

Realism in the Hebrew language. ... 54
Redaction of the O. T. Scriptures  i7g
Redemption by grace alone  406
Reformation, The  17^)331
 Formal principle of the Protest
ant  13, 108, 407
 Ment of the British  409
 " " Calvinistic  408
 " " Lutheran  408
 Protestant, a critical revival  106
 Preparation for  330
Reformers,Principles for determination
of Canon used by  107

498

BIBLICAL STQDY.

Testament, New, Use of the Old  308
 ¦ " Variety in writings, 70
 n. Writers  68
 Old  243
 " Canon of  105
 *' Citation in  308
 " New Testament view of.. 184^.
 Relation of Old and New .... 3g, 350
Testaments ofthe Twelve Patriarchs. 224
Testimony, Positive  90
Tetrastich  269
Text, Differences of  155
 of the Bible  i39.^'
 ofthe Old Testament  i^rff.
 of Scripture  112
 Sources of error in  85
 Transmission of  22
Theology  420
 American  135
 British  135
¦  Biblical  17, 367
 *' Belongs to Exegetical
Theology  379
 " Culmination of Exegeti
cal Theology  397
 ** Development of  377
 *' Historical principle of. . . 375
 " Idfia of  390
•  " Method of  399
 " Methods and aims  37
 " Place of  397
 " Position and importance
of  .• ;  390
 *^ Presents the Biblical sys
tem of doctrine  3g
 " Problem of  400
 '^ Rise of  -74
 *' System and divisions of. 401
•  " Term is broad  392
 '* Traces historical forma
tion  396
 Exegetical, a science  15
 " Divisions and subdi
visions  16
 " Methods  13^.
 " " analytic  15
 " " historical.... 14
 " " synthetic... 14
 " Neglect of  12
 *' The primary disci
pline   10
Work of  xr

 Federal.
 Four types of. .

- Historical.

343367

Theology, Practical  10
 Systematic  10, 394
Theophanies  296
Thirty-nine articles  ^^1 /•
Tiberian vowel system  152
Titles of Biblical Books  221
Titus  130
Tobit  62, 238
Toseptha  174, 177
Tradition^'.  99, 220, 222
Traditional theories, Criticism or  170
 " Scholastic de
fence of.  200
Traditionalism  99
Translation  43
 Process of  157
 Sources of error in  85
Trent, Council of  109 y".
Trinity  71
Tristich  267
Tubingen school  208
Union Theological Seminary  20
Unity in the Scriptures  359
 of statement ofthe Scriptures, ... 244
Ur of the Chaldees  47
Verse  255
 Hebrew, its essential principle... 260
 " Measurement by the ac
cent  262
 '* Synonymous, antitheti
cal, synthetic  260
Versions  23, 153
Vowel points and accents. 24, 139, 144,
iS^i 156
Vulgate  23, 105, 112, 166

Westminster Assembly 
 Divines  117,
 Standards 
Wisdom, Book of 
 of Sirach 
 of Solomon 
Writings, Historic position of 
 Individual 
 Order of 

409134 2562
131 71

177

Zaude  93
Zechariah  216
 Integrity disputeti  217
Zelots  129, 300, 302, 307
Zoh ar, Book  '142
Zurich Consensus  135, 144
 University of  144

III.— INDEX OF BOOKS AND AUTHORS

Abbot, Ezra  225, 447
Aboth  127
Acha  127
Achelis, E  463
Adams, Th  4G7
 Wm  66, 445
Adeney, W. F  452
^neid  294
.^schines  64
.^schylus  64
Aglen, A. S  253
Aids to Faith  211
Ainsworth, Henry  339i 344i 454
Airay, Henry  465
Akiba, RaMii  iii, 130, 154, 174
Alcaeus  256
Alcala, Alphonso de  106
Alcuin  .•  329
Aldridge, S. R . .   452
Alexander, Addison  210
 J- A .  455, 458, 462, 463
 Wm  452
 W. L  452
Alford, Henry  t\6i
Alexandrinus, Codex  438
Amana, Sixt  146
Ambrose   221, 323
American Presby. Review  14, 29
Ames, Wm  343, 355, 372, 373
Amira  142
Ammon, C. F  374
Andrews, S. J  478
Angus, J seph  460
Antwerp olyglot  147
Apocrypha  474
Aquila  I54i 303
Aq^uinas, Thomas  329, 463
Anas Montanus  143
Aristeas  126
Aristion  321
Arminius, J  373
Arnold, F. A  434
Asarias. Rabbi  260
Ascensio Isaiae  476
Ashe, Simeon  342
Assembly's Annotations  168
Astruc, J  169, 202, 204
Athanasius  220, 356
Attersol, Wm  344
Atwater, E. E  482
Auberlen, C. A  451
Augustine, Aurelius. 182, 220, 323, 324,
32s, 425, 451
Baba Bathra (Talm. Babli) . . 105, 173
i7St 2i6, 217, 218, 221, 227

Babylonicus Petrop., Codex  439
Bachman, J  455
Bacon, Francis  221
Baedeker, Karl  468
Baehr, K. C, W. F  449, 483
Baer, S  149, 439
Ball, John  336, 342, 343
Barbier, A. A  223
Bar Cappara  174
Baring-Gould, S  477
Bar -Khokba  130
Barker, P. C  452
Barlow, John  466
Barnabas  322
Baruch Apocalypsis  476
-—.Buch  475
Basil  182
Bassett, F. T  467
Baudissen. W  481
Baumgarten, A. G  374, 481
Baumgarten-Crusius, L. F. 0  376
Baur, F. C. 377, 381, 382, 384, 387, 395, 486, 487
 Lorenzo  375, 376
Baxter, Richard  147, 155, 243
Bayne Paixl  344, 465
Beck, CD  347
 J.T.. ..,,  ttl
Beda Venerabilis  32g
Beecher, Willis J  83, 104
Beetj J. A  464
Belgian Confession  108, 167
Beliarmine,R  182
Bengel, J. A  ; . . . i4g, 344, 372, 461
Bentley, Richard  g3, 14S, 169
Berger, Samuel  107
Bernard, T. D  298, 385, 486
Bertheau, E  571203,450,453
Beyschlag, W  461
Beza, T  336
Bible, Bomberg's Rabbinical  139
 Holy  438
Bible for Learners  211
Biblia Hebraica  439
Bibliotheca Rabbinica  62
 Sacra  211, 218
Bickell, G  153, 258, 432, 445
Bickersteth, E  452
Biddle, J  373
Binnie, W  446, 452
Bissell, E.C  450, 47£
Blake, Thomas  342
Bleek, Fr. . . 69, 7^, 208, 350, 444, 446, 466
Boderianus, Fabricius  143
Boehl, Edw  155
Boettcher, Fr. .. 55, 57, 431, 454* 457, 4»3
(409)

500

BIBLICAL STUDY.

Bonnet, Max . .  477
Boyle, Robt  i6g, 412, 41Q
Braune, K  449, 450, 451
Brentius, J  146
Bretschneider, K. C  348, 485
Briggs, C. A  14, 29, 104, 153, 171,
208, 209, 228, 387
Brightman, Th  343,467
Brit, and For. Evang. Rev  25
British Quarterly  25 1
Brougliton, Hugh  i.|2, 344
Brown , D  460
 Francis  187, i8g
Browne, E. H  451
Bruce, A.B  236^ 246, 389, 462. 486
Bruder, A. v, H  [42
Brugsch Rey, H  472
Bruston, Charles  446
Budtje, F.. A  473
Bullinger, Henry  333
Bullock, W. T  451
Bunsen, C. C. J  210
Burroughs, Ter  459
Burton. Rich. F  470
Bush , G  455
Butler, J.G  460
Btittmann, A  436
Buxtorf, J. 113, 144, 156, 170, 184, 353, 439) 442
Byfield, Nicholas  344, 465
Cairns, John  163
Calamy, Edmund  in, 147, 323
Calixtus, George  nj, 373
Calmet, A  200
Calvin, John.. . 107, 112, 133, 140, 146,
165, 166, 217, 223, 333,
^ „. ,^ „ ,_ 334>37i, 454i 455, 461
Candush, Rob  467
Canus, Mclchoir  167
Capel, Richard  158
Cappellus, Lud.. 86, 142, 143, 144, 147,
164, 170, 184, 334i 342
•- — Lud. and Jac  146
Carlov, A.C  113
Carlstadt, And.  169
Carpzov, J. G  184,200,297,334
Cartwright, Thomas. 114, 167, 335, 343,344
Caryl, Joseph  344
Casaubon, 1  146,1(18
Caspari, C. E   478
Cassel, Paulus  449
Cassiodorus  337
Castell, Edm  M3, 3S3, 432
Catafago J  434
Cave, Alf . . . . . .^  453, 480
Cereani, A.M  440
Chambers, T. W.  387, 450
Chapman, C  452
Charteris, A.H  106, no, 132, 437
Cheyne, T. K  218,458
Chiarini, L. A  175, 301, 303, 485
Chija-Rabbi. ,  174
Chrysostom, J  1B2, 326, 329, 461
Cicero, M. T  224, 236
 Letters of  237
Clark, Samuel  344i 4Si
Clarkson, W. . .'.  4153
Clemance, C  453
Clement of Alexandria  182, 322
 of Rome  333

Clementine Pseudograph .

Clericus, J..
;obb,W.'H.,

 32T
184, 199, 345
 318
373

Davcn.int, J.
Davidson, A,

Cocceius, J  143, 3^2, 343, 35O1
Colenso, T.W  210,
Collins, K  45a
Compluiciisian Polyglot  io<i, 147
Conant, J. 'I'  4*10
Conder, (,'. R  469
F. K   .170
Contemporary Review  an
Convhc.ire, W.J  479
Cook. V. C  45t
Cooper, II. H  477
^\'- 1^  474
Co-^m. John  "7,437
Colterill. H  453
Cotton, John  467
Cowper, It. II  433
Cox, Samuel  456
Credner, C. A  437
CiLHicr, 11 ,  73, 436
Critici saLTI  453
Ci'o.sby, Howard  449
Cross, j. .'V  3i8, 444
(.'riideii, Alex  4^1), 4.):
Curry, 0  451
Curtius, E  64, 65, 66, 67, 476
 G  436
Curtiss, S. I,, Jr  18, ^o, 216, 217
Cyprian  321
nAHiiNc, A. F  388
Dale, B  452
B  430,455, 457
B  44a
 Samuel. 86, log, 150, aio, 320, 324,
330, 432, 437, 442, 444, 446, 4-l8
Davies D  4S3
Day, G. E  ,  380
Oeane, W. J  126, 475
De l^ieii, L  146, 334
Delitzsch, Franz... 149, 217, 318, 224,
350, 439, 454, 466, 480
— Fried  60, 435, 469
Dcmarcst, J. T  467
Demosthenes  64, 330
Do Rossi, J. B  149, 443
D esc. 1 1 tes, R  7
I )eutsch, i '.ni.iniicl  174
De Wette, W. M. L.207, 310, asg, 350,
, T ,375, .17'S 377, 444, 446, 461, 47>
I'leslel, Lud. 28, i('5, 325, 320, 401, 430, 453
Dillmann, Aug.. 152, 153, 155, 15C, 230,
,,. .,j. ,„ 434« 438, 453, 475i 476
J'lnwiddicW  45a
Diodorus of Tarsus  336
Doddridge, Philip  345
Dods, Marcus   460
Dodwell, Henry.  i'a4
Doc-pke, J. C. C  458
DiilllnKcl., J. J. 1  477
Donaldson, J. W  fig
Dorner, Isaac A. ..93, 70, 108, 114, 137,
»03> 3'4i 3=3, 4=4
=— A"K"St  3^5
Doxy, R  43.
Drake.W  45,
Driver,S.R  431,458
Droysen, J.G   64

INDEX OF BOOKS AND AUTHORS.

601

Drtimmond, James  485
Drusius, J  146,334
Ducas, Demetrius  106
Duesterdiek, F  461
Duncker, Max  473
Du Pin, L. E  87, 88, 92, 200, 217
Durham, James  457,468
Dury, John  ,  372
Dykes,J.0  460
Eacie, John  444, 465
Eastlake. E  479
Ebers, G  469, 472
Ebrard, J. H. A   447, 467
Eck, J  107
Edersheim, A  ,  483
Edgar, McCheyne  452
-:— R.M  452
Eichhorn, J. G..128, 129, 132, 169, 202,
¦r.- ,. „ , ,?°3, =°^» ^°7, 349* 375, 445, 468
Eichstadt, H. K, A  2g8
Eliezar, Rabbi  301
Ellicott, C. J  462,464,465,466
Elliott, C. B  467
 CJ  45i
Enocli, Book of  475, 476
Ephraim the Syrian  326
Erasmus  331, 345
 Greek Testament  147
Erdmann, C, F. D  449
Ernesti, J. A..  298, 339, 346, 353, 448
 H. F. T, L  489
Erpenius  143, 146
Espin, T. E...  451
Essays and Reviews  210, 2 1 1
Etheridge, J. W  62,439
Eucherius of Lyons  323
Eusebius  256,321
Euthymius. Zigabenus  329, 463
Evans, T. S  452
 M.J  384
Ewald, Heinr. . . 46, 57, 130, 208, 2og,
229, 23s, 250, 259, 353, 385,
X, ., , « 404, 43', 455, 458, 4711 472, 480
Exell, J. S  452
Expositor  109
Fabricius, J. A  182,475
Fairbairn, Patrick  459, 466, 481
Farrar- F. W  452, 478, 480
?f^'- -5^ t-  449, 4SO
Flacius, Matthew,  333
Flatt, CC  348
Fleury, Abb6 Claude  202
Fox, John  344
Francois, Abb^ Laurent  202
Franke, H  344
Frankel, Z  126, 443
Fraser, Donald  452
French Confession  408
Frensdorf, S  149,443
Freytag, G. H  434
Friedlander, L  477
Friedlieb, J. H  475
Fritzsche, O. F  475
Froninliller, P, F. C  451
Jucrst, Julius  14,77,432,437, 442
r iilke, Wm  142
Fuller, J. M  451

Gabler, J. G  348, 389
Galileo  7
Gallican Confession  108
Gandell, R  451
Gardiner, F  440, 449
Gataker, Thomas  344
Gebhardt, Herm  389, 488
Geddes, Alex  207
Geiger, Abr  433
Geike, C  478
Genesis, Textum Massoreticum  439
Gerhard, J  333
Germar, F. H  348
Gerokj Chas  450
Gesenius, W  47, 107, 152, 208,
^ „, „ 353, 430, 432, 458
Gess, W, F  488
Gieseler ,J. C L  83
Gifford, E. H  452
Gillett, E.H  330
Ginsberg, CD. .107, 141, 142, 150, 152,
302,303,442,448,457
Girdlestone, R. B  55, 432
Given, J. J  453
Gladstone, W. E  59
Glasgow, James  467
Gloag, P. J  460, 463
Glover, R  '  452
Godet, F  225, 462, 463
Goebel, S  463
Goodhart, C. A ,  452
Goodwin, John  373
 '1 homas  372
Gouge, Wm  188, 344, 372, 466
Gouldman, Henry.  147
Graetz, H  129, 150, 154, 174, 175,
218, 456, 472
Graf, K. H  386, 458
Green, R  4=3
 T. S  IP
- — W.H  211,431,445
Greenhill, Thoraas  344

-Wm.

463 257
375 55

Gregory the Great  325, 457
Gregory, C R  149
Gresswell, E. B, D  '
Greve, E.J 
Griesbach, J. J  149,
Grill,J  52,
Grimm, C L. W  436, 475
Grosart, A, B  221
Grotius, Hugo  146, 345
Guyot, Arnold  460
Gwynn, J  452
Hacket, H. B  463
Haevernick, H. A, C... . 380, 445, 4'-,8, 460
Hagenbach, K. C  17, 78, 430
Hahn, G. L  381, 384
Halkett, Samuel  223
Hall, Thomas  466
Hamilton, James  457
 Wm  82,83,92, 297
Hammond, Henry  i6g, igr, 345
 J  452
Hardwick, C  487
Harmony ofthe Confessions  333
Harper, W, R  20, 431
Hase, K  ,  479
castings, F  45a

502

BIBLICAL STUDY.

Haupt, Erich  488
Hausrath, A  62, 301, 477
Heideg3;er, J. H  113, 144, 156, 184, 200
Heidelberg Catechism  13,408, 410
Heinrici, C- F. G  461, 464
Heinsius, Daniel  334
Helvetic Confession (IL)  108, 332
 Confessions  13
Henderson, E  458, 459
Hengstenberg, E. W... 184,235,456,
459, 472, 473, 484
Henry, Matthew  345, 449
Herder, J. G  169, 203, 204, 228,
, . , 349, 375, 445
Hennga, J  348
Herie, Chas  118
Herodotus   233
Hertwig, O. R  446
Hervey, A  451, 479
 A.C  452
Hexapla, English  441
Hilary  323
Hilgenfeld, A  475
Hillel, Rabbi  62, 301
Hirzel, S  453
Hitchcock, R. D  429, 440
Hitzig,F  386, 4S3
Hobbes, Thos  i6g, 373
Hodge, A. A  161, 241
 Chas  464, 465
Hofmann, J. C .... 209, 350, 351, 461, 482
Hollazius, M, D  334
Holsten, C  389,487, 488
Home, G  456
 T. Hartwell  184.209
Hort, F. J. A  86,150,440
Howson, J. S  452, 460, 479, 480
Hudson, C. F  442
Huet, P. D  200
Hume. D  81
Hupfeld, H  I4( 77, 208, 456
Huss, John  330
Huther, J. E  461
Huxtable, E  451
Hyde, Thomas  143
Iliad  64, 294
Immer, A. .. 27, 70, 73, 29S, 330, 388, 447
Irenaeus  182, 321, 325
Irish Articles  167
Irons, W. J  487
Ismael, Rabbi  301
Jablonsky, P. E  175
Jackson, J .  452
Jacob ben Chajim  139
Jacob, G. A  488
Jacobson, W  452
Jadaim. Tract  130
Jameson, Anna  479
 Wm. ...   167
Jannai, Rabbi  . . 174
Jay, Michael de  143
Jebb, J.. .  261
Jehuda, Rabbi  174, 177
Jelf, W. E  67, 436
Jenkyn, Wm  467
Jerome... 109, 129, 140, 182, 320, 256, 32g
Jerome's Vulgate  147
Jerome of Prague.  330

Jerusalem, J. F, W  aoa
Joel, M  154
Johanan, Rabbi  176
Johnson, E  453
 G. H, S  451
Jonathan ben Uzziel  439
Jones, Wm  257
 W, B  451
Josephus, Flavius 126, 127, 128, 130,
180, 221, 256, 307, 472, 476
Jost, J, M  472
Journal Soc. Bib. Lit. and Exeg.. 91,
187, 211
Jubilaen, Buch der  476
Junilius Africanus  129, 183, 184, 327
Justin Martyr  322
Kahle, Alb  484
Kaiser. P C  348,375
Kalisch, M. M  454, 460
Kant, Immanuel  7, 348
Kaulen, Fr  443
Kay, W  451, 452
Keble, J  329
Keil, C. A. G  153, 184, 224, 348
— T^-J?"  444, 471, 476
Keim, Th  478
Kennicott, B  148, 149, 443
Kenrick, J  474
Kidder. R  169, 191
Kihn, Heinr.. .. 129, 323, 326, 327, 448
King, John  460
Kingsbury, T. L . -   451
Kitto, John  430
Klausen, H, N. .297, 320, 322, 324, 325,
, . „ , 331, 333i 334* 350, 448
Kleinert, Paul  444, 450
Kliefoth, Th  468
Kling, C. F  450
Knapp, G. C  348
Kneucker, J. J  475
Knight, Charles  221
Knobel, A  208, 453
Knox, J  371
Koeni^, F. E  482
Koestlin, K. R  389
Koppe, J. B  203, 207, 208, 218
Kranichfeld, R  459
Krehl, L  481
Krug, W.T  7
Kuenen, A  211, 376, 386, 391, 446, 482
Kueper  482
Kurtz,J.H..  483
Laidlaw, J  481
Lane, E. W  434, 471
Lang, J  223
Lange, J, P.,.. 217, 2gg, 354, 35g, 448,
449, 450, 451
Langen, J  476, 485
Lanier, S  229
Lardner, Nath  447
Lautwein  263
Lechler, G  134, 330, 450
Lee, Wm  4^2
Leigh, Edward  338, 339, 340, 344
Leighton, Robert  467
Lenormant, Fr  232,472,472, 481
Levita, Elias... 107, 127, i3g, 140. 141,
^43* 150, 353, 44i

INDEX OF BOOKS AND AUTHORS.

503

Levy, Jacob  174, 433
 M.A  434
Lewin, Thomas  480
Lewis, T. Carlton  344
 Tayler  449, 450, 484
Ley, Julius  262, 278
Lias, J.J  452
Library of the Fathers of the Holy
Roman Catholic Church  456, 461
Liddell, H. G  436
Lightfoot, John  142, 211, 318, 344
— T". J* ^  452,464, 465
Lillie, John  466, 467
Lipsius, P. A  477
Littledale, R. F  456
Livy, T  233
Locke, J  346
Lombard, Peter  329
London Ministers, 1647  120
Lotz, W  474
Lowth, Wm.... 148,151,154,169,203,
204, 228, 260, 261, 346, 349, 445, 458
Lucius  128
 P, E  476
 of Samosata  304, 325
Ludolphus de Saxonia  479
Luecke, F  ,  349
 G. C. F  463
Luenemann, G  435, 461
Lumby. J. R  93, 452, 460
Luthardt, C. E  225, 463
Luther, M  22, 71, 81, 107, 140, 141,
146, 165, 330, 331, 333, 365, 371, 408, 464
Lutterbeck, J. A. B  383, 486
Lutz, J. L. S  350, 358
Luzzato, S. D  175, 433
Lyford, Wm  120, 157, 423
Lynch, W. F  469
Lyra, Nicolas de  329
Macdonald, J. A  452
Mackennel, A  452
Madden, F. W  471
MakkabSer, BUcher der.  475
Mansel, H. L  451
Manton, Th  466
Map of Western Palestine  469
Maresius, S  184
Marsh, Geo. P  232
Marshall, Stephen  223
Martin Marprelate  223
Martinius, M  146
Masius, And  143, 169, 454
Massora Magna  149, 442
McClelland, A  355, 448
McCosh, J  82, 83
McCurdy, J. E  45b
McDonald, J. M  479
Mead, C M  44g
Mede, Joseph  146, 169, 191
Meier, Ernst  262, 432
Melancthon, P  333
Menke, Theo  469
Mercer, J  146
Merrill, S  469
Merx. A  126, 433
Messias Judaeorum  475
Messner, H  381, 396
Meyer, H. A. W  350, 461
 John  340

Meyer, L  348
Meyrickj F  451, 452
Michaelis, J- D  203, 375, 483
Middock, Henry  340
Mill, John  148
 W.H  447
Milligan, Wm  460
Milman, H. H..  471
Mitchell, A. F  101, 167
Mocha, Rabbi  152
Moll, C. B  ,  450, 451
Mombert, J. 1  443
Mommsea, Theo  476
Montet, Edouard  476
Montgomery, J. F  452
Moore, Henry  373
More, Henry  460
Morinus, T ...^  143, 144
Morison. J  452, 462
Morus, S. F. N  298, 347
Moulton, W, F  435, 460
Movers,J,C  481
Mozley, T  206
Miihlau, F  432
Miiller, Julius  108
Muir, A. F  453
Murphy, James  4^
Murray, T. C  218, 222, 445
Musculus, W  146, 333
Naegelsbach, C. W, E  236, 450
 K. F  484
Neale. J. M  221, 456
Neander, A  209, 350, 378, 380, 381,
382, 383, 384, 388, 38g, 396, 478, 480
Nehemiah, Rabbi  177
Nestle, E  439
Nestorius  326
Neubauer, Ad  . . 458, 475
Newcommen, M  223
Newman, J. H  329
Niemeyer, A. H  13
Noeldeke, Theo... 154, 155, 224, 227,
238, 433, 445
Noldius. C  442
Norris, E  435
Nutt, J. W  474
Oecolampadius, j  146, 166, 333, 334
Oecumenius  329
Oehler, G. F... 350, 376, 380, 388, 395, 396, 482
Olshausen, J  431, 453
Onkelos, Targum  303, 439
Opitz, Hermann  388, 488
Oppert, J  435
Orelh, C. von  483
Origen  log, i2g, 322
Origenis Hexapla  147, 440
Orr, J  452
Owen, John. . . 134, 145, 146, 147, 156,
170, 184, 372, 466
Packard, J  450
Palmer, E. H  469
 Herbert  221
Papias  320
Paris Polyglot  147
Parousia. The.  48^
Patton, Francis L. . 104, 119, 124, 125, 171, 241

604

BIBLICAL STUDY.

Paul of Nisibis  183, 327
Pearson, John  147, 4=13
-—Rich  147, 453
Pellican, K  146
Penrice, John  434
Perkins, Wm  373
Perowne, J. J. S  218, 222, 435
Petermann, J. H  433, 435, 439
Peyrerius, 1  184
Pfleiderer, 0  388
Phagius, P  146
Philippi, F. A  464, 488
Phillips, G  433
Philo of Alexandria  126, 127, 128,
130, 181, 221, 305, 321
Pick, B  450
Pin, L. E. Du  87, 88, 92, 200, 217
Pindar  256
Piscator, J  146
Planck, G, J  186, 352
Plato  64, 224
Plummer, A  452
Plumptre, E. H  451, 456, 460
Pococke, Edw  143, 345, 459
Poole, Matthew..., 147, 148, 157, 167,
345, 453
Pope, Wm. B  460
Potter, J. L  431
Prake, Charles  470
Presbyterian Review. , , , 14, 39, 83, 85,
88, 104, 119, 125, 153, r6i, 171, 20 <,
2og, 211, 228, 241, 32g, 387, 410
Pressel, F  175
Pressens^, E. de  452, 484
Pretorius, Fr  434
Prideaux, H  146, zoo, 476
Prout, E. S  452
Pusey, E. B  329, 446, 458, 459

Rainolds, John  ^44,
Rainy, Robert 
Rambach, J, J  298, 344,
Rapheleng, Franz 
Rashi, Rabbi  178,
Rawlinson, G  451,452,472,473,
Records of the Past 
Redford, R, A 
Reinke, L 
Renan, Ernst  226, 457, 479,
Reuchlin , J  107,
Reuss, Edw... 14, 68, 70, 77, 106, 108,
119, 229, 249, 323, 348, 376, 382,
386. 391, 437, 445, 446, 453,
Reynolds, John 
Rhambanus, Maurus 
Riddle, M. B 
Riehm, Edw . . . 224, 318, 38g, 401, 430, 483,
Riggenbach , C. J 
Riggs, Elias 
J^itter, Karl 
Rivetus, Andrew  143, 167,
Roberts, Francis. . . 2g8, 340, s4i, 342,
343, 344» 351, 361, 362,
 W 
Robinson, Edw. .2IO, 431, 435, 441,468,
 E, G 
Robjohps, H. T 
Roediger, Aemi! 
Roensch, H  443,

486344329
460

451
432 I
470 I
333430 '
452 1
46g 1
37^ !
452 I
433 ;
476

Rose, H, J  451
RosenmuUer, C. F. K  32O1 454
Rossi, Azzariah de  ^4?
Row, C. A  8
Rowland, A  452, 453
Rowlands, D  452
Rushbrooke, W. G  44^
Ryland, J.E  378
Saadia, Rabbi  3^4, 329
Saalschiitz, J. L  257, 47^, 483
Sabatier, A  388, 487
St. Caro, Hugo de  329
St. Petersburg, Codex  149, 152
Saimond, G. D. F  460
Sanda,',W  109, 447
Sappho  257
Sayce, A. H  45, 48, 59, 435
Scaliger, J. J  146
Scattergood, A  147,453
Schaff, P  13, 63, 66., 69, 71, 92, 93,
221, 226, 429, 443, 450, 460, 479
Schindler  146
Schleiermacher, F  297, 349, 350,
352, 373, 448
Schmid, C. F. . 379, 380, 388, 389, 395,396, 486
Schmidt, J. H  436
 W. G  389, 461, 488
Schmoller, Otto  450
Schnedermann, G  143
Schodde, G. H  475
Schoettgen, Ch  260, 462
Scholz, A  458
 J. M.A  149
Schrader, Eb. . . . 47, 49, 262, 435, 473, 481
Schroeder, F, W, J  449, 450
— -P  434
Schuerer, E  60, 175, 301, 477
Schultens, A  353
Schultz, F. W  449, /_r4
 Hermann  381,384,395,401, 482
Schutze, L  2i6
Schwab, M  485
Schwegler, A  391
Scotch Confession of 1560  114, 117
Scott, H. M  216
 Robert  436
 Thomas  345, 452
Scrivener, F. H  86, 148", 150, 438,441, 443
Seller, G. F  .. 3^3
Selden, J  146
Semler, J. S  136, 199, 347, 357
Shairpe, J. C  253
Shakespeare, W  221
Shammai, Rabbi  62
Sharpe, Samuel  4.74.
Shedd, W. G. T  464
Sibyllina, Oracula   475
Sieffert, F  . . 461
Siegfried, Karl  ig8, 303, 305, ^06,
c- -o- u 00 307,323,329, 448
Simon, Rich. . . 182, ig8, igg, 201, 204, 445
Simeon, Rabbi  177
Sinaiticus Petropolitanus, Codex. 149, 438
Sionita, Gabriel  142, 143
Smeaton, George  487, 488,' 489
Smectymnuus  223
Smend, R  ^t^^

INDEX OF BOOKS AND AUTHORS.

605

Smith, George  47, 473, 474
 James  480
.  H.B  162, 241
 H.P  88, 387
¦  R. P  433, 451, 452
 Wm  42g, 471
 W. Robertson.. log, 130, 154, 211,
224, 251. 444, 445
Socrates  64, 72
Sophocles  64
 E.A  436
Spanheim, F  200
Spence, D  460
 H. D. M  452
¦Spener, P. J  343, 344
Spiess, Edm  462, 481
Spinoza, B  ig7
Spurgeon, C. H  345, 360, 447, 455
Spurstow, Wm  223
StSudlein, C F  348
Stanley, A. P  464, 468, 471
Stark, CL. W  348
Statham, W. M  452
Stein,C.W  348
Stendel, J. C F  348, 376
Sterry, Peter  372
Stier, R  438
Storr, G. C  348
Strabo, Walafrid  . . .. 32g
Strack, Hermann L.. 77, 127, 128, 130,
149, 153, 178, 216, 224, 432, 43g, 442
Strauss, 1 Javid  81, 377, 385, 478
Stroud, Wm  479
Struthers, J  167
Stuart, Moses. . 210, 298, 347, 348, 437,
, ^ T. . 457, 460, 464, 466, 467
Supernatural Religion  211
Surenhusius, G  485
SyrO'-hexaplaris Ambrosianus  440
Tatian  437
Taylor, C  127
 Francis  168, 169, 339, 344, 457
 Isaac  86, 445
¦  John, of Norwich  346,347, 353
 Thomas  466
Terry. M. S  44g
Tertullian  182,321, 325
Testament, New  440
Testamentum (N). Graece  440, 441
 (V>  439
Thayer, J, H  435, 436
Theile,K.G.W  438
Thenius, O  453
Theodore of Mopsuestia  304, 326
Theodoret  182, 326, 329
. Theophilus of Antioch ..... .  437
Theophylact...  329
Thirty-nine Articles  114, 409
Tholuck, A.... 112, 141, 316, 317, 34S,
374, 444, 462, 4S2
Thoma, Alb  389, 488
Thompson, W   451
Thorns, J. A  441
Thomson, J. R   452
 Wm. M  460, 468
Thucydides  64, 233
Tiele, C. P  482
Tischendorf, Const  149, 189, 439.
440, 441, 447, 477

Tobit, Book of  475
Tobler, Titus  469, 470
Trans. Soc. Bibl. Archaeology .... 59
Trapp, John  344
Tregelles, S. P  150, 440
Trench, R. C  73, 436, 462, 479
Trip, J  482
Tristram, H.B  468, 470
Trommius, A  442
Tuch, Fried  455
Turner, S. H  186, £io, 352
Turpie, D, M  444
Turretine, J. A  147, 347
 Francis  113, 144, 156
Tychonius  323
Tyler, W. S  484
Tyndale, W  163, 332, 335
Ullmann, C ...  478
Umbreit, F. W. C  458
Urquhart, J  452
Usher, J  146, 167, 337, 343, 372
Usteri, L  388, 487
Van Dale, Anton  igg
Van Lennep, H. J  471
Van Oosterzee, J. J  384, 395, 396,
450, 451, 486
Vater, J. S  207
Vaticanus, Codex  438
Vatke, W  376, 386
Vifiouroux, F  473
Vincent, M. R...  344,455
Vitringa, C. .,  200, 202, 467, 485
Voetius, G  1  1 13, 156
Volck, W.  61, 334, 351, 432
Volkmar, G  ,  475
Von Coeln, Daniel  376, 377
Voltaire, F  81
Voragine, Jacobus de  232
Wace, H  452
Waehner, A. G  301, 471
Wahrmund, A  434
Waite, J  452
Walch, J, C  ,  165, 332
Wallis, John  159
Walton, Brian., 143, 144, 145, 164, 184,
438, 443
Warburton, Wm  483
Warfield, B. B  85,161,241
Warren, Charles  470
Watson, Thomas  338
Weber, F. .  300, 301, 485
Webster, Wm  436
Weiffenbach, W  401, 487
Weiss, Bernhard... 195,208,225,226,
227, 230, 384, 389, 395,
3g6, 401, 447, 461, 478, 486
Weizsaecker, C  62
Wellhausen, J  376,384,386,446,476
Wendt, H. H  461
Wenrich, J, G  257
Westcott, B. F.. 86, 150, 437, 440, 447, 451
 and Hort  86, 150, 440
Westminster, Confession of Faith... 6,
13, 25, loi, lis, i6<^, ^67,
241, 297, 337, 365, 409
 Larger Catechism  13, 25, 416
- — - Shorter **  13, 361, 418
 Symbols  343, 37a

606

BIBLICAL STUDY.

W^etstein, J. C   149
V,'^etzstein, J. G  469
Wh ately, R.  36
Whichcote, B  112
Whitby, Daniel  346, 348
Whitelaw, T  452
Wickes, W  152, 443
Wicklif, J  330
Wilke, C G  436
Wilkins, A  474
Wilkinson, J, G  473
Williams, George  470
Wilson, John  469
Wilson, Chas. W  470
Winer, G, B  69, 70, 435
Wines, E. C  483
Winterbotham, R  452
Wisdom, Book of,  475
Withington, L  457
Wit.=;ius, Hermann  185, 200
Wogue, L  Z42, 174, 178, 300, 301,
_ , „ 303, 304. 430
Wood,G  452
Woods, J. H  45X
Wordsworth, C  453

Wright, C H. H  455,457, 459
 Wm  178,217,224,255,256, 261, 348, 433. 477
Wuensche, Aug  62, 235, 238, 286,
454* 459, 463. 484
Xenophon  64,233
XimeneSjCaid  106
Young, D  452
 Thomas  223, 441
Zachaeia, G. T  347, 374
Zahn, Theo  77, 437
Zamora, Alphonso de  106
Zeitschrift d, D. M. G  52, 258
Zezschwitz, C, A. G. v.  66, 72
Ziegler, L  443
Zincke, F. B  474
Zoeckler, Otto  77, 216, 217, 429, 449, 450
Zschokke, H  389
Zunz, L  62, 130, 175, 485
Zurich Consensus  156
Zwingli, U  81, 140, 146, 166, 333, 334

additions to second edition.

Ladd, G. T  430
Noeldeke, Th  433
Siegfried, C  433
Strack, H  433

Toy, C. H 
Trumhull, H. C.
Westcott, B. F. .
Wigram, G. V...

444469467
442

The Theory of Preaching,
OR
LECTURES ON HOMILETICS.
By Professor AUSTIN PHELPS, D.D.

One volume. Svo^ ^ - - - _ $2.60
This work, now offered to the. i>uMic, is the growth of
more than thirty years' practical experience in teaching.
While primarily designed for professional readers, it will be
found to contain much that will be of interest to thoughtful
laymen. The writings of a master of style of broad and
catholic mind are always fascinating; in the present case the
wealth of appropriate and pointed illustration renders this
doubly the case. CKITIC.\I. NOTICES.
" In the range of Protestant homiletical litemture, we venture to afiBim that its equal
cannot be found for a conscientious, scholarly, and exhaustive treatment of the theory
and practice of preaching. * * * To the treatment of his subject Dr. Phelps brings
su?h qualifications as very few men now living possess. His is one of those dehcate and
sensitive natures which are instinctively critical, and yet full of what Matthew Arnold
happily calls sweet reasonableness. * * * To this characteristic graciousness of
nature Dr. Phelps adds a style which is preeminenUy adapted to his special work. It is
nervous, epigrammatic, and racy." — The £jcajniner and Chronicle,
*' It is a wise, spirited, practical and devout treatise upon a topic of the utmost con
sequence to pastors and people alike, and to the salvation of mankind. It is elaborate
but not redundant, rich in the fruits of experience, yet thoroughly timely and current,
and it easily takes the very first rank among volumes of its class. — The Congrega
tionalist. "The layman will find it delightful reading, and ministers of all denominations and
of all degrees of experience will rejoice in it as a veritable mine of wisdom." — New York
Christia7t Advocate.
"The volume is to be commended to young men as a superb example of the art in
which it aims to instruct them." — The Itidependent.
"The reading of it is a mental tonic. The preacher cannot but feel often his heart
burning withm him under its influence. We could wish it might be in the hands of every
theological student and of every pastor.'* — The Watch-man.
"Thirty-one years of experience as a professor of homiletics in a leading American
Theological Semin^ary by a man of genius, learning and power, are condensed into this
valuable volume."— CArzj/z'flw Intelligencer.
" Our professional readers will make a great mistake if they suppose this volume is
simply a heavy, monotonous discussion, chiefly adapted to the class-room. It is p
deligntfiil volume for general reading.'" — Boston Zion^s Herald.

*^* For sale by all booksellers^ or sent.^ post-paid., upon receipt oJ
frue, by
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers,
743 AND 745 Broadway, New York

THE WRITINGS OF GEORGE P. FISHER, D.D.
Professor of Ecclesiastical History in Yale College.
ESSAYS ON THE SDPERMTURAL OEI&IN OF CHRISTIANITY,
With special references to the theories of Renan, Strauss, and the
Tubingen School.
JTeif apnd enlarged editioti. One Vol, 8vo, $3,00,
" Able and scholarly essays on the Supernatural Origin*of Christianity, in which
Prof. Fisher discusses such subjects as the genuineness of the Gospel of John.
Baur's view of early Christian History and Literature, and the mythical theory oi
Strauss." — North American Revieiv.
THE BEGINNINGS OF CHRISTIANITY,
With a view of the state of the Roman World at the Birth of Christ.
One Vol, 8vo, . . $3,00,
"Prof. Fisher has displayed in this, as in his previous published writings, that
catholicity and that calm judicial quality of mind which are so indispensable to a
true historical critic, and so natural in one, who, like the author, is a loving disciple
of the revered Neander." — Boston Advertiser.
HISTORY OF THE REFORMATION.
One Vol. 8vo, , , $3,00.
FroinProf. Charles A, Aiken., D.D.., Princeton Theological Seminary,
Prof. Fisher's History of the Reformation presents the results of prolonged,
extended, and exact study with those exceUent qualities of style, wjiich are so char
acteristic of him — clearness, smoothness, judicial fairness, vividness, felicity in ar
ranging material, as well as in grouping and delineating characters. It must become
not only a library favorite, but a popular manual where such a work is required for
instruction and study. For such uses it seems to me admirably adapted.
DISCUSSIONS IN HISTORY AND THEOLOGY.
One Vol. 8vo, . , $3.00.
" Prof. Fisher has gathered here a number of essays on subjects connected with
those departments of study and research which have engaged his special attention,
and in which he has made himself an authority."
FAITH AND RATIONALISM.
One Vol. 13mo, . $1,25.
" This little volume may be regarded as virtually a primer of modern religious
thought, which contains within its condensed pages rich materials that are not easily
gathered from the great volumes of our theological authors. Alike in learning, style
and power of discrimination, it is honorable to the author and to his university,
which does not urge the claims of science by slighting the worth of faith or
philosophy," — N. Y. Times.
THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.
One Vol. JSrno. Fappr, SO cts. Cloth, 40 eta.
" This masterly essay of Professor Fisher is one of the best arguments for
Christianity that could be placed in the hands of those who have come und6r
influence of sceptical writers.

*<f* For Sale by all booksellers, or sent, post-paid, upon receipt of price, by
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers,
743 AND 745 Broadway, New Vork.

Men and Books;
OR, STUDIES IN HOMILETICS,
Lectures Introductory to the ''Theory Of Preaching."
By Professor AUSTIN PHELPS, D.D.

One Volume. Crown 8vo. - - $2.00

Professor Phelps' second volume of lectures is more popular and gen
eral in its application than " The Theory of Preaching," It is devoted to
a discussion of the sources of culture and power in the profession of the
pulpit, its power to absorb and appropriate to its own uses the world of
teal life in the present, and the world of the past, as it lives in books.
There is but little in the volume that is not just as valuable to all
students looking forward to a learned profession as to theological students,
and the charm of the style and the lofty tone of the book make it -difificuU
to lay it down when it is once taken up.

*' It is a book obviously free from all padding. It is a live book, animated as well
as sound and instructive, in which conventionalities are brushed aside, and the autho*"
goes straight to the marrow of the subject. No minister can read it without being waked
up to a higher conception of the possibilities of his calling." — Professor George P. Fisher.
*' It is one of the most helpful books in the interests of self-culiure that bas ever been
written. While specially intende 1 for young clergymen, it is almost equally well adapted
for students iu all the liberal professions." — Standard of the Cross.
*' We are sure that no minister or candidate for the ministry can read it without profit.
It is a tonic for one's mind to read a book so laden with thought and suggestion, and
written in a style so fresh, strong and bracing. "-^.Si3j/(3>2 Watchman.
*' Viewed in this light, for their orderly and wise and rich suggestiveness, thc^e lec
ture-; of Professor Phelps are of simply incomparable merit. Every page is crowded with
observations and suggestions of striking pertinence and force, and of that kind of wisdom
which touches the roots of a matter. Should one begin to make quotations illustrative of
this remark, there would be no end of them. While the hook is meant specially for the
preacher, so rich is it in sage remd.rk, in acute discernment, in penetrating observation of
now men are most apt to be influenced, and what are the most telling qualities in the va
rious forms of literary expression, it must become a favorite treatise with the best minds in
all the other professions. The author is, In a very high sense ofthe term, an artist, as for
a quarter of a century he has been one of the most skillful instructors of young men in
that which is the noblest of all the arts." — Chicago Adva?ice.

*#* For sale hy all booksellers., or sent., post-paid., upon receipt oj
frice,, by
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers,
743 AND 745 Broadway, New York.

THEBEGINNINGSOFHISTOR\
According to the Bible and the Traditions of the Oriental Peoples. From
the Creation of Man to the Deluge. By Francois Lenormant,
Professor of Archceology at the ^National Library of France, etc.
(Translated from the Second French Edition). "With an introduction
by Francis Brown, Associate Professor in BibUcal Philology,
Union Theological Seminary.

1 Vol.9 12niOn 600 pages, - - - $2.50.

" What should we see in the first chapters of Genesis ? " w^rites M. Lenor
mant in his preface— "A revealed narrative, or a human tradition, gathered
up for preservation by inspired w^riters as the oldest memory of their race ?
This is the problem which I have been led to examine by comparing the nar
rative of the Biblo with those which were current among the civilized peo
ples of most ancient origin by w^hich larael w^as surrounded, and from the
midst of which it came."
The book is not more erudite than it is absorbing in its interest. It has
bad an immense infiuence upon contemporary thought ; and has approached
its task with aa unusual mingling ofthe reverent and the scientific spirit.

" That the ' Oriental Peoples ' had legends on the Creation, the Fall of Man, the
Deluge, and other primitive events, there is no denying. Nor is there any need of
denying it, as this admirable volume shows. Mr. Lenormant is not only a believer
ji revelation, but a devout confessor of what came by Moses ; as well as of what came
by Christ. In this explanation of Chaldean, Babylonian, Assyrian and Phenician
tradition, he discloses a prodigality of thought and skill allied to great variety of pur
suit, and diligent manipulation of what he has secured. He •¦ spoils the Egyptians '
by boldly using for Christian purposes materials, which, if left unused, might be
turned against the credibility of the Mosaic records.
*' From the mass of tradition here examined it would seem that if these ancient
legends have a common basis of truth, the first part of Genesis .stands more generally
related to the religious history of mankind, than if it is taken primarily as one account.^
by one man, to one people. . . . While not claiming for the author the
setting forth of the absolute truth, nor the drawing from what he has set forth the
soundest conclusions, we can assure our readers of a diminishing fear of learned un
belief after the perusal of this work." — The Neio Englander.
" With reference to the book as a whole it may be said ; (i). That nowhere else can
one obtain the mass of information upon this subject in so convenient a form; (2J, That
the investigation is conducted in a truly scientific manner, and with an eminently
Christian spirit ; (3). That the results, though very different from those in .common
acceptance, contain much that is interesting and to say the least, plausible ; (4). That
the author while he seems in a number of cases to be injudicious in his state
ments and conclusions, has done work in investigation and in working out details that
will be of service to all, whether general readers or specialists. — The HebreTu
Studcfit. '¦"" The work is one that deserves to be studied by all students of ancient history, and
in particular by ministers of the'Gospel, whose office requires them to interpret the
Scriptures, and who ought not to be ignorant of the latest and most interesting con
tribution of science to the elucidation to the sacred volume." — Ne^v York Tribune,

^^ For Sale hy all booksellers, or sent, post-paid, upon receipt ofprice^
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers,
743 AND 745 Broadway, New Yorh;

Final Causes.
MEMBER OF THE FRENCH ACADEMY.
Translated Jrom ihe Second French Edition. With a Preface bj
Robert Flint, D.D., LL.D,

One Vol. 8vo., - - - Price, $2.50

" Here is a book to which we give the heartiest welcome and the study of
which — not reading merely — we commend to all who are seeking to solve the question
whether the universe is the product of mind or of chance. , . . Perhaps no living
author has been more thoroughly trained by previous studies for the work done here
than Mr. Janet; and no one is better fitted for it by original gifts." — Universalist
Quarterly. "I regard 'Janet's Final Causes' as incomparably the best thing in litera
ture on the subject of which it treats, and that it ought to be in the hands of every
man who has any interest in the present phases of the theistic problem. I am very ¦¦
glad that you have brought out an edition for the American public and at a price
that makes the work acceptable to ministers and students. I have commended it to
my classes in the seminary, and make constant use of it in my instructions." — Front
a letter of Professor Francis L. Patton.^ D. D.
*' I am delighted that you have published the translation of Janet's ' Final
Causes ' in an improved form and at a price which brings it within the reach of many
who desire to possess it. It is in my opinion the most suggestive treatise on this im
portant topic which is accessible in our language, and is admirably fitted to raeet
many of the misleading and superficial tendencies of the philosophy of a popular
but superficial school." — Extract front a letter of Noah Porter, D.D., LL.D.,
President of Yale CoUege.
" The raost powerful argument that has yet appeared against the unwar
ranted conclusions which Haeckel and others would draw from the Darwinian
Theory. That teleology and evolution are not mutually exclusive theories, M.
Janet has demonstrated with a vigor and keenness that admit of no reply." — The
Examiner. " No book of greater importance in the realm of theological philosophy has
appeared during the past twenty years than Paul Janet's ' Final Causes.' The
central idea of the work is one which the whole course of scientific discussion has
made the burning question of the day, viz: That final causes are not inconsistent
with physical causation." — Jtidependent.

*#* For sale by all booksellers, or sent., post-paid., upon receipt of price, by
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers,
743 and 745 Broadway, New York.

OUTLINES OF PRIMITIVE BELIEF
among tlie Indo-European Eaces.
By CHARLES FRANCIS KEARY, M.A.,
of the British Jifuseum.

One vol. crown 8vo., _ _ - - $2.50o
Mr. Keary's Book is not simply a series of essays in comparative myth
ology, it is a history of the legendafy beliefs Of the Indo-European races
drawn from their language and literature. Mr. Keary has no pet theory to
establish; he proceeds in the spirit ofthe inquirer after truth simply, and
his book is a rare example of patient research and unbiased opinion in a most
fascinating field of exploration.
" We have an important and singularly interesting contribution to our knowledge
of pre-historic creeds in the Outlines of pre-historic Belief among the Indo-European
Races., by Mr. C, F. Keary, of the British Museum. No contemporary essayist in
the field of comparative mythology — and we do not except Max Miiller — has known
how to embellish and illumine a work of scientific alms and solid worth with so much
imaginative power and literary charm. There are chapters in this volume that are as
persuasive as a paper of Matthew Arnold's, as delightful as a poem. The author is
not only a trained inquirer but he presents the fruits of his research with the skill and
felicity of an artist." — Neiv York ^un.
""Mr. Keary, having unusual advantages in the British Museum for studying
comparative philology, has gone through all the authorities concerning Hindoo,
Greek, early Norse, modern European, and other forms of faith in their early stages,
and there has never before been so thorough and so captivating an exposition of thera
as that given in this book." — Philadelphia Bulletin.
THE DAWN OF HISTORY.
AN INTRODUCTION TO PRE-HISTORIC STUDY.
Edited by C. F. KEARY, M.A.,
OF THE BRITISH MUSEUM.

One Volume, 12mo., - - _ $1.2S.
This work treats successively of the earliest traces of man in the re
mains discovered in caves or elsewhere in different parts of Europe ; of
language, its growth, and the story it tells ofthe pre-historic users of it; of
the races of mankind, early social life, the religions, mythologies, and folk
tales of mankind, and of the history of \vriting. A list of authorities is
appended, and an index has been prepared specially for this edition.

*'The book may be heartily recommended as probably the most satisfactory
summary of the subject that there is." — Nation,
" A fascinating manual, without a vestige of the dullness usuaUy charged against
scientific works. . . . In its way, the work is a model of what a popular scientific
work should be ; it is readable, it is easily understood, and its style is simple, yet dig
nified, avoiding equally the affection of the nursery arid of the laboratory." —
Boston Sat. E^ve. Gazette.
*#* For sale by all booksellers, or sent, post-paid, upon receipt of
price, hy
CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS, Publishers,
743 AND 745 Broadway, New York.

4130