spoken of in the Psalm; but the Ascension is supplemented by the Mission of the Comforter to dwell in men, and thus by two steps the direct conclusion of the original is reached.

NOTE ON CHAPTER VII.

A. Dr Lightfoot remarks, on Tò "Ayap, Gal. iv. 25, that 'it need not necessarily mean, the word Hagar; compare for instance Eph. iv. 9, Tò dè avéẞn Tí éσTw; where Tò is the statement, for the preceding word was not avéßn, but avaẞás.' But this is inconclusive, for neither was the preceding statement avéßn. It might have been written that τὸ ἀναβάς implies καταβάς, but for greater simplicity αναβάς is resolved into avéẞn κaí, and the κaí being dropped, there followS TO dè ávéßη, K.T.λ. This resolution is a returning to the form of the ori

לקחת שבית,עלית,ginal, where only past tenses

are used.

It may be remarked that, just as avéẞn, with the Apostle, implies KaTÉẞn, so take (LXX.) may have implied give, as many have supposed. Dr Wordsworth understands to mean, 'in His character as man,' and adds:-'The reception of those gifts in Him and by Him, in His humanity, as our second Adam, virtually implied the donation of those gifts to us, who are mystically united as one body in Him.'

CHAPTER VIII.

A body hast Thou prepared Me.

Ps. xl. 6 ; Heb. x. 5.

THIS word body occurs in the LXX. rendering of Ps. xl. 6; but neither in the present Hebrew text, nor in the versions of Aquila, Symmachus, or Theodotion, where τia replaces σώμα. The Authorized Version, following the Masoretic text, reads: 'mine ears hast Thou opened.' (1) Some would account for the occurrence of coma as a transcriber's mistake for wra, the c being repeated from the preceding HOEAнCAC. (2) To others, 'ears' and 'body' are alike suggestive of obedience and service. (3) A third explanation supposes a reference to the boring of a servant's ear in token of perpetual enslavement; but the form of the clause (not merely the use of the dual, ears) is opposed to this explanation. In the passages referred to, it is provided, that 'if he [the servant] say unto thee, I will not go away from thee: because he loveth thee and thine house, because he is well with thee; Then thou shalt take an aul, and thrust it through his ear unto the door, and he shall be thy servant for ever. And also unto thy maid-servant thou shalt do likewise' (Deut. xv. 16, 17; Ex. xxi. 6). But in the Psalm, it is written, not precisely as in the Authorized Version, mine ears hast thou opened,' but 'ears hast thou opened [digged] for me.' (4) Others again suppose the change from ears to body to have

been made intentionally, in order to express more fully the prophetic meaning of the passage. The foregoing suppositions seem at first sight mutually exclusive; but, to pass by the third, it may be said that a modification of the last is not irreconcileable with the first and second. The reading oμa may have owed its origin to an error of transcription, but, when found in the text, may have been adopted deliberately, as associating itself with the thought of obedience, and the working of the Father's will. Dean Alford concludes his note with a remark which recognizes the twofold nature of the difficulty presented. First of all, it has to be inquired how the reading arose; and, secondly, why it has been retained. As Christian believers, our course is plain. How the word oua came into the LXX. we cannot say but being there, it is now sanctioned for us by the citation here: not as the (or even a) proper rendering of the Hebrew, but as a prophetic utterance, equivalent to, and representing, that other.'

I. The fortieth Psalm is not ascribed in the New Testament to any specific author; the formula of citation being the indefinite λéyel. 'Wherefore, when he cometh into the world, he saith. In the Hebrew it is styled a David-psalm; but this title being in itself not altogether free from ambiguity, it was perhaps not intended originally to designate David as the author; and moreover, even if the inscription amounted to a clear affirmation of Davidic authorship, it might still be rejected, if at variance with internal evidence, as being (like the subscriptions of the apostolic Epistles) of no canonical authority. No satisfactory explanation having been suggested on the theory of Davidic authorship, it is here assumed, provisionally, that the reference is to a time of captivity.

The central revelation of the Psalm follows as a sequel to the discovery that there was no inherent efficacy in the sacrifices of the Law; and this teaching was pre-eminently the teaching of exile and captivity. Faith in the God of Israel then survived, when it had become impossible to join,

as of old, in the temple service; and from this it followed necessarily that JEHOVAH could be served without sacrifice or hand-built shrine. But so long as the legal system remained accessible', the worshipper was less likely to attain to a full appreciation of its barely typical significance. This truth would be best taught by an intermission of the temple service; for when the worshipper, far away, it may be, in Babylon, was under a physical incapacity of offering sacrifice, his heart was thereby prepared for other consolations; his ear opened to the new, or as yet unheeded, teaching, that the sacrifice of praise would find acceptance. 'What period in the history of the Jews was more propitious [than that of the captivity] for the circulation of these truths? So long as all the ordinances of the Law were celebrated with their former regularity, the worshipper might seldom realize the possibility of fundamental changes in the system under which he lived. But when the sanctuary itself was levelled with the ground, when the sacrifices were no longer offered... how much was there in an emergency like this to lift their thoughts above the legal institutions, and constrain them to reflect on better things to come".'

II. The Psalm thus commences: 'I waited patiently for the LORD; and He inclined unto me, and heard my cry. He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings. And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God.' Further on, the subject of the 'new song' is specified. From the mire of despondency the Psalmist has been raised to a sure ground of hope, unmoved by external shocks. He has learned the spirituality of true religion. The temple may be in ruins, but God's truth still reigns. Old things have passed away, and a strange song is put into his mouth-the song of praise. The discovery of the spirituality of true worship is overwhelming. Words

1 In 1 Sam. xv. 22, obedience is preferred to sacrifice. But circumstances, which set the two in opposition, gave

rise to this teaching also. See note A. Hardwick, Christ and Other Masters, Part I. p. 149.

cannot express the grandeur of the conception. 'Many, O LORD my God, are Thy wonderful works which thou hast done, and thy thoughts which are to us-ward: they cannot be reckoned up in order unto thee: if I would declare and speak of them, they are more than can be numbered. Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not desire... burnt-offering and sin-offering hast Thou not required.'

Between these last clauses come the disputed words: 'ears hast Thou digged for me;' i.e. Thou hast revealed to me the truth that the blood of bulls and goats avails not; that 'sacrifice and offering Thou didst not desire.' Thou hast taught me that for which I had no ears before. The expression, ears hast Thou digged, is indeed unique, but may be regarded as an intensification of either of two expressions, which might be used in the sense assigned. One of these is exemplified by 1 Sam. xx. 2: 'Behold, my father will do nothing either great or small, but that he will shew it me' [lit. uncover my ear]; the other by Is. 1. 5: The LORD God hath opened mine ear, and I was not rebellious, neither turned away back;' where the first hemistich affirms that instructions were given1; and the second that they were obeyed. In Is. xlviii. 8 the same mode of expression is adopted, but there seems rather to imply obedience. There is no reason for excluding either of these two usages, each of which seems appropriate in its context; it may be concluded therefore that there is the same ambiguity in this digging of cars as in the common word to hear; which implies in some contexts obedience, but in others, no more than the bare aptitude for hearing.

In Ps. xl., the meaning adopted by many commentators is that the truth just stated had been communicated to Messiah by the Almighty";' while others interpret the clause of Ex. xxviii. 9, 36.

1

אזן • certiorem me אדני פתח לי

2 French and Skinner. Transl. of Psalms. So Mudge: Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not choose; (Thou insinuatedst into my ears) burnt-offering and sin-offering Thou didst not ask.'