1. If we analyze the words of an author, and take them out of their proper series, they may be so distorted as to mean anything but what he intended to express. Since, therefore, words have several meanings, and, consequently, are to be taken in various acceptations, a careful consideration of the preceding and subsequent parts will enable us to determine that signification, whether literal or figurative, which is best adapted to the passage in question.

A few instances will illustrate this subject, and show not only the advantage, but also the necessity, of attending to the context.

(1.) It has been questioned whether those words of the prophet Micaiah (1 Kings xxii. 15.), Go and prosper; for the Lord shall deliver it (Ramoth) into the hand of the king, are to be understood affirmatively according to their apparent meaning, or are to be taken in an ironical and contrary sense. That they are to be understood in the latter sense, the consideration of the context will plainly show, both from the prophet's intention, and from the prophetic denunciation afterwards made by him. Hence it may be inferred that some sort of ironical gesture accompanied Micaiah's prediction; which circumstance ought to be borne in mind by the interpreter of Scripture.'

(2.) Further, there is a difference of opinion whether the address of Job's wife (Job ii. 9.) is to be understood in a good sense, as Bless (or ascribe glory to) God, and die, or in a different signification, Curse God, and die, as it is rendered in our authorized version. Circumstances show that the last is the proper meaning; because as yet Job had not sinned with his lips, and, consequently, his wife had no ground for charging him with indulging a vain opinion of his integrity.

[There are various ways in which light is thrown upon the meaning of a word by referring to the context. Thus the subject and predicate illustrate each other. An apposite example is found in John i. 10., where éyéveтo is joined with Kooμos. The latter must be ἐγένετο κόσμος. taken in the sense of the material world; and the verb must be interpreted as being literally made.

Again, the signification of words is often determined by the adjuncts. In Psal. xxvi. 6., we have, "I will wash my hands in innocency." It was not, therefore, a literal but a figurative washing that was intended. The following examples are selected from those given by Dr. Davidson: "In 1 Pet. ii. 2., Tò XoyɩKÒV yáλa, the milk of the word. Heb. xiii. 15., Ovoíav aivéoews, sacrifice of praise, showing what kind of a sacrifice is meant. Col. iii. 1., If ye then be risen with Christ: τῷ Χριστῷ, joined with the verb συνηéponte, points out the nature of the resurrection. It is a resurrection of the soul, a spiritual rising. Matt. v. 3., oi πTwXOÌ TÔ πVEÚμATI: TÔ TνEÚμаTι specifies wherein the poverty consists: it is in spirit." 2]

2. The epithets introduced by the sacred writers are also to be carefully weighed and considered; as all of them have either a declarative or explanatory force, or serve to distinguish one thing from another, or unite these two characters together.

The epithets of Scripture then are,

-

(1.) Exegetical, or explanatory, that is, such as declare the nature and properties of a thing.

Thus, in Tit. ii. 11., the grace of God is termed saving, not indeed as if there were any other divine grace bestowed on man, that was not saving; but because the grace of God revealed in the gospel is the primary and true source of eternal life. Similar epithets occur in 2 Tim. i. 9., in which our calling is styled holy; in 1 Pet. iv. 3., where idolatry is

See a further illustration of this passage in vol. i. p. 274, 275.

2 Sacr. Herm. chap. viii. p. 239.; where many more examples may be found.

termed abominable; and in 1 Pet ii. 9., where the gospel is called the marvellous light of God, because it displays so many amazing scenes of divine wonders.

(2.) Diacritical, or distinctive, that is, such as distinguish one thing from another.

For instance, in 1 Pet. v. 4., the crown of future glory is termed a never-fading crown, auapávтivos, to distinguish it from that corruptible crown which, in the Grecian games, was awarded to the successful candidate. In like manner, genuine faith, in 1 Tim. i. 5., is called undissembled, àvνæóкpitos: God, in the same chapter (v. 17.), is designated the King incorruptible, Baσiλeùs ǎplapтos; and in Rom. xii. 1., the self-dedication of Christians to God is termed a reasonable service, λarpeía λoyikh, in contradistinction to the Jewish worship, which chiefly consisted in the sacrifice of irrational creatures.

(3.) Both explanatory and distinctive.

In Rom. ix. 5., Christ is called God blessed for ever; by which epithet both his divine nature is declared, and he is eminently distinguished from the Gentile deities. Similar examples occur in John xvii. 11. (compared with Luke xi. 11-13.), where God is termed Holy Father; in 1 John v. 20. where Christ is styled the true God, as also the great God in Tit. ii. 13.; and Heb. ix. 14, where the Holy Spirit is denominated the eternal Spirit.

1. ANALOGY of languages is an important aid in enabling us to judge of the signification of words.

Analogy means similitude. For instance, from the meaning attached to the forms of words, their position, connection, &c., in one, or rather in many cases, we agree to establish a similarity of meaning, where the phenomena are the same, in another. This analogy is the foundation of all the rules of grammar, and of all that is established and intelligible in language. The analogy of languages is of different kinds, viz. 1. the analogy of any particular language (that is, of the same language with that which is to be interpreted), the principles of which are developed by grammarians. This kind of analogy has been termed grammatical analogy. 2. The analogy of kindred languages.1

2. USE OF GRAMMATICAL ANALOGY.

Grammatical analogy is not only useful in finding the usus loquendi, but is also applicable to some doubtful cases; for instance, when the kind of meaning, generally considered, is evident (by comparing other similar words, and methods of speaking concerning such things, appropriate to the language), we may judge of the especial force or power of the word, by the aid of grammatical analogy.

(1.) In Col. ii. 23., occurs the word ¿0ɛλ00pŋokɛía, in our version rendered will-worship. As there is no example of this word, its meaning must be sought from analogy by ascertaining the import of words compounded with OX. Of this description of words there are many examples. Thus, 0λompóεvoç is one who takes upon him voluntarily to afford hospitality to strangers, in the name of a city: 0λódovλoc is one who offers himself to voluntary servitude; ¿0ɛλoupyós, one who labours of his own free will. From this analogy, we may collect that 0X00pηokɛía, in Col. ii. 23., means an affected or superstitious zeal for religion; which signification is confirmed by the argument of the apostle's discourse.

'Stuart, Elements, part v. chap. iii. pp. 81, 82. (edit. 1827); Ernesti, Institutio Interpretis Nov. Test. p. 65.

(2.) In 1 Pet. v. 5., where many critics have attached an emphatic sense to eykoμbwoαolai, we must compare the other Greek phrases which relate to clothing or investing; and thus we shall see that the prepositions ñɛpí, àμôi, and are used in composition without any accession of meaning to the verb thereby ; for instance, ἱμάτιον περιβάλλειν, ἀμφιβάλλειν, οἱ ἐμβάλλειν, simply means to put on a garment. Consequently, żyкoμ¤woαobaι means no more than Erdvoaodai, with which it is commuted by Clemens Romanus.1 The meaning, therefore, of the apostle Peter's expression be clothed with humility, is to exhibit a modest behaviour.

3. ANALOGY of Kindred Languages.

Another analogy is that of kindred languages, either as descended from one common stock, as the Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, and Arabic; or derived the one from the other, as Latin and Greek.

Besides the critical use to which the cognate or kindred languages may be applied, they afford very considerable assistance in interpreting the sacred writings. They confirm by their own authority a Hebrew form of speech, already known to us from some other source: they supply the deficiencies of the Hebrew language, and make us fully acquainted with the force and meaning of obscure words and phrases, of which we must otherwise remain ignorant, by restoring the lost roots of words, as well as the primary and secondary meanings of such roots; by illustrating words, the meaning of which has hitherto been uncertain; and by unfolding the meanings of other words that are of less frequent occurrence, or are only once found in the Scriptures. Further, the cognate languages are the most successful, if not the only means of leading us to understand the meaning of phrases, or idiomatical combinations of words found in the Bible, the meaning of which cannot be determined by it, but which, being agreeable to the genius of the cognate languages, are preserved in books written in them. Schultens, in his Origines Hebrææ3, has illustrated a great number of passages from the Arabic; from whose work Bauer and Dr. Gerard have given many examples which do not admit of abridgment. Schleusner has also availed himself of the cognate dialects to illustrate many important passages of the New Testament. Of the various modern commentators on the Bible, no one perhaps has more successfully applied the kindred languages to its interpretation than Dr. Adam Clarke.

4. In consulting the cognate languages, however, much care and attention are requisite, lest we should be led away by any verbal or literal resemblance that may strike the mind, and above all by mere etymologies, which, though in some instances they may be advantageously referred to, are often uncertain guides. The resemblance or analogy must be a real one. We must, therefore, compare not only similar words and phrases, but also similar modes of speech, which, though perhaps differing as to the etymology of the words, are yet Epist. i. 30. p. 108. (edit. 1838); Morus, Acroases, tom. i. pp. 171, 172.; Stuart, Elements, p. 82. (edit. 1827).

See a notice of the Cognate Languages in pp. 16-18. of the present volume. Albert Schultens, Origines Hebrææ, sive Hebrææ Linguæ antiquissima Natura et Indoles, ex Arabiæ penetralibus revocata. Lugduni Batavorum, 1761, 4to.

Bauer, Hermeneutica Sacra, pp. 96-144.

Gerard, Institutes of Biblical Criticism, pp. 58-70.

evidently employed to designate the same idea. The following examples will serve for illustration:

Here the meaning is obscure; but a reference to Arabic writers will explain the phrase. Thus in the

.8 .Isai. xxii וַיְגַל אֶת מָסַךְ יְהוּדָה]

وكشفوا غطاء المسترات history of Timur we find

وقبل ان ينكشف الغطا

they stripped off the veils of the damsels." And in Abul-Pharajius, Hist. Dynast., Well Listy, "before the veil be stripped off3;" the intention evidently being to express the deep ignominy and wretchedness that would be suffered. The phrase, as used by Isaiah, therefore, describes the extreme misery endured by Judah.

77, Prov. xi. 21. The Syriac phrase 1

(Castell. Lex.) signifies" one after the other;" and therefore the meaning of the passage may be taken to be that the wicked shall be punished from generation to generation. Reiske hence illustrates Job xx. 10., supposing that by "7; children are there intended'; an interpretation which best preserves the parallelism of the two members of the verse. Many similar examples may be seen in Davidson, Sacr. Herm. chap. xiv.]

5. FOUNDATION OF ANALOGY IN ALL LANGUAGES.

"No one can doubt that men are affected in nearly the same way, by objects of sense. Hence, those who speak of the same objects, perceived and contemplated in the same manner, although they may use language that differs in respect to etymology, yet must be supposed to have meant the same thing; and, on this account, the one may be explained by the other.

"Men are physically and mentally affected in the same manner by very many objects; and, of course, it may be presumed that they entertain and mean to express the same ideas concerning these objects, however various their language may be. Besides, modes of expression are often communicated from one people to another.

"In general, this principle is of great extent, and of much use to the interpreter, in judging of the meaning of tropical language, and in avoiding fictitious emphasis. Accordingly, we find it resorted to, now and then, by good interpreters, with great profit. But it needs much and accurate knowledge of many tongues to use it discreetly; whence it is not to be wondered at, that its use is not very common among interpreters."5

The following general cautions, on the subject of comparing words and languages with each other, may be of some utility: they are abridged from Dr. H. C. A. Eichstädt's notes to Morus's Acroases Academicæ.

1. The meaning in each or any language is not to be resolved into the authority of lexicons, but that of good writers.

Schultens, De Defect. Hod. Ling. Hebr. ad calc. Orig Hebr. pp. 427, 428. 2 Ahmed. Arabsiad. Vit. Timuri (S. H. Manger), tom. ii. cap. viii. p. 127.

8 Dyn. x. p. 529.

4 Conject. in Job. et Proverb, Sal. Lips. 1779, p. 74.

Stuart, Elements, part v. chap. iii. pp. 84, 85.

2. Words, phrases, tropes, &c. of any ancient language are to be judged of by the rules of judging among those who spoke that language, and not by those which prevail in modern times, and which have originated from different habits and tastes.

3. Guard against drawing conclusions as to the meaning of words, in the same or different languages, from fanciful etymology, similarity or metathesis of letters, &c.

4. When the sense of words can be ascertained in any particular language, by the ordinary means, other languages, even kindred ones, should not be resorted to, except for the purpose of increased illustration or confirmation.

5. Take good care that real similitude exists, whenever comparison is made.1

CHAP. II.

INVESTIGATION OF THE SENSE OF SCRIPTURE.

[ATTENTION having been paid to the mode of ascertaining the signification of words and phrases, we may proceed to examine the meaning of propositions and sentences, in other words, to the investigation of the sense of the sacred writers.

This investigation must be conducted on principles similar to those adopted in ascertaining the meaning of terms. The passage itself must be examined, and additional light must be sought from the context, from parallels, and other less immediate sources.2

It is obvious that the first step is to settle the right construction of a sentence. A sentence is not merely a number of words in juxta-position: it has parts and members more or less closely united, the dependence of which on each other, and relation of each to the whole, must be carefully inquired into. Hence we must attend to the punctuation: we must see whether there are ellipses to be supplied, whether or no the sentence is interrogative, and must make a careful adjustment of the various parts. One or two illustrative examples shall be given to show the importance of determining the construction of sentences.

John vii. 21, 22. Here it has been proposed to punctuate Oavμážete dia τοῦτο. "I have done one work; and ye all marvel on account of it." But it is doubtful whether such a sense would not require avró; and, besides, the meaning of the passage is much better brought out, as Dean Alford has shown3, by preserving the ordinary punctuation of placing the stop after θαυμάζετε.

Morus, Acroases, tom. i. pp. 182-184.; Ernesti Institutio Interpretis Nov. Test. pp. 65-70., and his Opera Philologica, pp. 171., &c., and 277. The subject of the analogy of languages is also discussed at considerable length by G. G. Zemisch in his Disputatio Philologica de Analogia Linguarum Interpretationis Subsidio (Lipsiæ, 1758, 4to.), reprinted in Pott's and Ruperti's Sylloge Commentationum Theologicarum, vol. vii. pp. 185-221.

2 There are some valuable remarks on the interpretation of Scripture passages in Fairbairn, Herm. Man. part i. sect. iv. pp. 63, &c.

The Greek Testament, not. in loc.