agencies of perishable nature; Thou art the unchanging LORD, and Maker of all. The words, Thy throne is for ever,' sustain the argument, independently of the omitted parenthesis, and would seem, moreover, to appropriate the chief emphasis of the clause itself, when taken singly, and viewed without reference to the context. Lastly it may be asked, are not ver. 13, 14, a brief résumé of the argument, thus expounded? To the Son-Sit thou on my right hand; to the angels-Go forth and minister.

It is doubtless intended in Heb. i. 8, to address Christ as God, but it may be questioned, as above, whether the words ó eós, are the characteristic of the citation. If not, they may still, according to the common usage, have been retained, as appropriate in themselves, and in harmony with the special purpose of the citation, yet without furnishing a key to the interpretation of the whole Psalm. All that could be implied by the form of address ó cós, is implied unequivocally by ver. 10, Thou Lord, in the beginning, &c.'

The word Lord does not indeed occur in the particular verse here cited, but, except as regards perspicuity, it is immaterial whether the word be expressed or understood, the significant fact being, that the hundred and second Psalm is addressed throughout to JEHOVAH, as the Redeemer of Israel, and is, in Heb. i. 10, transferred to Christ.

NOTES ON CHAPTER VI.

A. When our Lord shadows forth His resurrection by a reference to the history of Jonah, is He attaching a new meaning to the familiar narrative; or is He applying it in a way that would be recognized by His hearers, as in harmony with its original significance? The latter view derives strong confirmation from the words of the Prophet's prayer. He substitutes, belly of hell, for bowels of the fish; and describes his deliverance in words borrowed from the Psalms, as a return from death to life. 'Out of the belly of hell cried I, and

thou heardest my voice...I went down, to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me for ever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O Lord my God' (Jon. ii. 2, 6).

,were rendered: Thy God, O God משחך אלהים אלהיך B. If

hath anointed Thee;' the abruptness of the preceding D, taken vocatively as an address to the king, would be diminished. Pearson, Creed, Art. II., quotes from Jerome in loc.: 'Duas personas, ejus qui unctus est Dei et qui unxit, intellige.' 'Quod sequitur, Unxit te, Deus, Deus tuus, primum nomen Dei vocativo casu intelligendum est, sequens nominativo; quod satis miror cur Aquila non, ut coeperat in primo versiculo, vocativo casu interpretatus sit, sed nominativo, bis nominans Deum, qui supradictum unxerit Deum.'-See Field's Origenis Hexaplorum quæ supersunt.-But against this vocative rendering it may be urged, that the repetition, God, even Thy God, has its counterpart in other places where a like collocation occurs; e. g. 'Then will I go unto the altar of God, unto God my exceeding joy: yea upon the harp will I praise thee, O God, my God,' (Ps. xliii. 4); 'I am God, even thy God,' (1. 7); God, even our own God, shall bless us,' (lxvii. 6). See li. 14; lxiii. 1; lxviii. 8; lxxii. 18.

C. Saadiah's rendering of Ps. xlv. 6 [p. 163, note] might be explained as follows. In ver. 8 the true construction is perhaps a zeugma, thus: 'myrrh, &c.—all thy garments: [myrrh, &c.] have gladdened thee;' where some verb governing 'garments,' and having 'myrrh, &c. for its nominative, is to be anticipated from. So in ver. 7, 8 there may be a zeugma: 'God-thy throne...God, thy God, hath anointed thee;' where a verb (e. g. hath established) applicable to 'throne,' is to be anticipated from . But this would be further complicated by the explanatory parenthesis: Thou hast loved righteousness, &c. &c.' For the verb-rendering of ND, all that is to be said is, that it agrees with the context of the Psalm, and that ND, elsewhere a noun, is of the same form as the 3rd pers. past piel. This is far from convincing to the writer, and seems only sufficiently plausible to be recorded; regard being had to the acknowledged difficulty of the passage. The possessive rendering is ill-supported. The vocative rendering, adopted in Heb. i. 8, is, grammatically, as Dr Pusey contends, no doubt the simplest.

P.S. Scaynus Salodiensis writes: etiam sic Filius super Angelos insinuatur, ut ille cujus Thronus sit Deus.'

THE difficulties of this citation are fully recognized by commentators, and by none more fully than by Bishop Ellicott; who, comparing Eph. iv. 8, with the LXX. rendering of the clauses corresponding to it in Ps. lxviii. remarks, that 'the difference in St Paul's citation is palpable, and, we are bound in candour to say, does not appear diminished by any of the proposed reconciliations.'

The citation is thus introduced:-'There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling... But unto every one of us is given grace, according to the measure of the gift of Christ. Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men'. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of

1 διὸ λέγει, ̓Αναβὰς εἰς ὕψος ήχμαλώτευσεν αἰχμαλωσίαν, καὶ ἔδωκεν δόματα

τοῖς ἀνθρώποις.

• Tò dè dvéßn. See note A, p. 175.

Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ' (Eph. iv. 4-12).

The Apostle here substitutes ἔδωκεν for the LXX. ἔλαβες, which corresponds more directly to the original expression. This variation it is usual to account for as explanatory, and intended to set forth explicitly the implied meaning of the Hebrew. In the Authorized Version, which presents the received arrangement of the clauses, the verse runs as follows: 'Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led captivity captive, thou hast received gifts for men; yea, for the rebellious also, that the LORD God might dwell among them;' and it is admitted that the receiving of gifts for men, and the giving of gifts to men, are so intimately connected, that the latter expression might naturally replace the former. The real difficulty arises in the reconciliation of either of the foregoing with the original Hebrew. It is usual to cite passages in which the word to take imports a taking with the intention of giving to another; thus, in Gen. xviii. 5: 'I will fetch a morsel of bread, and comfort ye your hearts;' and in Ex. xxvii. 20: 'And thou shalt command the children of Israel, that they bring thee' pure oil-olive beaten for the light, to cause the lamp to burn always.' But such illustrations are insufficient, not to say illusory; shewing only that the word may mean generally to take, fetch, obtain, &c. (for one's own use or for another's, as the context may require) but not establishing its practical equivalence to doûva in such a context as that of Ps. lxviii. where the preposition following is in, not, to or for. Moreover, when the usual explanation of these particular words is accepted, there remains a general inconsecutiveness, best evinced by the many attempts which have been made to force the clauses of the verse into harmonious sequence. It seems best therefore to reconsider the whole verse ab initio,

and in particular to subject the clause above considered to a fresh analysis.

The preposition in does not follow naturally upon the word, to take, in the sense required by the Authorized Version : 'Thou hast received gifts for men.' To receive among1 (i. e. from) would be a more natural rendering, and some accordingly have taken this to be the true construction; but an abruptness would still attach itself to the concluding words, and the whole verse would present itself as ill-balanced and unsymmetrical. If the extreme clauses of the verse be read in close connection, and the last mentioned explanation of the reception of gifts in men be adopted, the whole verse will run as follows: Thou hast gone up on high--Thou hast led captives captive; Thou hast received gifts from men; yea from the rebellious also-to dwell, O LORD God.' But the rendering is still abrupt and unsymmetrical; and since much of the difficulty felt in adopting it arises from its lack of symmetry, it may be asked whether a rearrangement of the clause, be not possible. Is it necessary to join the words, Thou hast received gifts, with the following expression, among men? would not the latter read better in connection with the word to dwell (which now stands elliptically), as serving in that connection to define the locality wherein the LORD God is about to dwell?

The expression 'to dwell among men,' is aptly illustrated by Ps. lxxviii. 60, where the same verb is used: 'So he forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh the tent which he had placed among men';' and again, no less explicitly, by Rev. xxi. 3: 'And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the

1 Thou art gone up into Thy sanctuary on high; Thou hast led Thy captivity captive; Thou hast received gifts among men, yea even the refractory, that the LORD God may be lodged.' Mudge.

2 Hunc versum, parum feliciter a

superioris ætatis interpretibus tractatum, ...primus recte explicavit Schnurrerus : Conscendisti altum, captivos ducens victos hostes, accipiens munera inter homines, rebelles etiam, ut habites hic JAH, Deus.' (Rosenm.)

אהל שכן באדם :