expected, after the prayer for a perfect inward purity (ver. 7); but a prayer to be delivered from the violence (7) of others would be appropriate. With this agree the immediately following expressions, God of my salvation [Ps. cxliv. 10], and, Thy righteousness [xxii. 31]. Compare Ps. lix. 3. B. An attempt to make the clauses of ver. 8 more coherent, suggested this construction of as an accusative of motion towards; thus [i.] 'I have come to what is written,' or [ii.] I have entered into &c.' I find a like conjecture about the meaning of in Dr Geddes' translation of the Psalm, where the word is rendered: -Now I come at thy meaning. The second clause would be pro but the poetical inversion הכתוב עלי במגלת הספר,stically brings about the omission of the article before . This derived use of be illustrated by Eccl. iii. 22: him to see? Cp. words is not frequent in the Bible, but it may Who shall bring מי יביאנו לראת (Gen. vi. 13). May not the difficult NIN (Ps. lxxi. 16), mean that, I will enter upon (the contemplation or recital of) the mighty acts of the LORD God? With this meaning of N, which agrees well with the context, [and with the construction of Job iii. 6], the verse has been rendered by French and Skinner: The greatness of the Lord JEHOVAH shall be my theme; So Bp Horsley: 'I will enter upon [the subject of] the Lord Jehovah's great might.' There is another derived use of (with ) in 2 Sam. xxiii. 19, where it is said that Abishai 'did not attain unto [Angl. come up to] the three.' From the meaning: 'attain unto in prowess,' to the preceding: viz. attain unto in knowledge,' the transition is easy. The adjective is used, (1) of local proximity; (2) of mental proximity, within reach of the understanding; as when the law is described as 'not in heaven,' beyond man's reach, but nigh, yea even in his heart. It is quite as natural a priori for, as for , to have this double application. In later Hebrew, is very commonly used as in the following examples:- But the truth of the matter the human intellect cannot comprehend nor attain unto.' 'What then was that which Moses our Rabbi sought to attain unte. . he sought to know the truth of the existence, &c.' Bernard's Maimonides, p. 77. For the use of ', compare Rashi's paraphrase .6ס נחתי להגיד ולדבר עכמו מספר :(5 .Ps. xl) אגידה וג' of C. With a different division of words we might read, do eis, ἐρχόμενος [for εἰσερχόμενος] εἰς τὸν κόσμον, λέγει, κ.τ.λ., or with a slight change: διὸ ὁ εἷς, ἐρχόμενος κ.τ.λ. In favour of the alteration it may be urged that : [i] It gives a grammatical definiteness to the sentence. [ii] The use of eis, or ỏ eis [dià Toû ¿vós. Rom. v. 17, 19], has a special appropriateness in a passage which gives marked prominence to the contrast between the many and the ONE. [iii] The Messiah is elsewhere spoken of as o èpxóμevos [not εἰσερχόμενος] εἰς τὸν κόσμον. The phrase εἰσέρχεσθαι εἰς τὸν κόσμον is used of Sin (Rom. v. 12), and of the Kevodoέía avôрúñшv (Saр. xiv. 14); but seems not to be used of persons, either in the Canonical Books, or in the Apocrypha. It occurs in the textus receptus of 2 Joh. 7, but the true reading is probably έýλ0ov k.t.λ. See (for Eрxeσbaι eis Tòv Kóσμov) Joh. i. 9; vi. 14; ix. 39; xi. 27; xii. 46; xvi. 28; xviii. 37; 1 Tim. i. 15. For épxóμevos in connection with κw (ver. 7), see ver. 37. CHAPTER IX. The Allegory of Hagar. Gen. xvi., xxi.; Gal. iv. 21-31. IN seeking to fix the meaning of the word by which the Apostle introduces the 'Allegory' of Hagar, it is natural first of all to have recourse to the Hellenistic authors, with whom the terminology of allegorism was in common use; and of them, especially to one, 'who lived at a time which renders his works peculiarly valuable for the purpose of our enquiry.' Of the works of PHILO, so much has come down to us, that we are in a position not only to discover therefrom the nature of his allegorical deductions, but to estimate their attractiveness to the mind of the writer, and the extent to which they are to be regarded as components of his system. Had fragments of those works alone remained, it could not have been affirmed with full assurance that, whereas 'they [the Christian Fathers] occasionally allegorize, he never misses the opportunity:' that while they in a few instances supersede the historical meaning, he can scarcely be said to allow the historical meaning to stand at all:' and that 'they were almost as far as any modern historian from the dreamy inconsecutive apprehension of historical facts which we find in Philo, who is as entirely devoid of the historical sense as an Indian philosopher.' These however we may now admit to be fair statements; and, the prevalence of such extravagance in interpretation being established, it remains to investigate how far the author of the Epistle to the Galatians is to be regarded as adopting or sanctioning this method of the Hellenists: and, again, how far the usages of the Old Testament Scriptures may have suggested, what their interpreters-Rabbinic and Alexandrian had developed, and were further developing, to an extravagance of absurdity. I. St Paul's express words first demand attention. Much learning has from time to time been brought to bear upon them, but with less decisive results than might have been anticipated; and that chiefly, as it would seem, because of the undue prominence which has been given to one detail of the allegory.' The chief verbal discussion has centred. in St Paul's reason for identifying Hagar with Mount Sinai, or the former covenant; whereas this identification is but a detail, and the chief point which challenges enquiry is the mode and purport of his antecedent transition from history to allegory. Though the key-word of the passage is not Αγαρ, but ἀλληγορούμενα, the grammatical difficulties attendant upon the usual rendering of this latter have been very commonly depreciated or overlooked. The right understanding of the word is the first pre-requisite for the interpretation of the passage. With it the Apostle passes from history to allegory; and it is the mode and purport of this transition which it is the commentator's chief aim to elucidate. Have we therein an argument whereby the folly of the Judaizers is to be refuted; or an illustration whereby the writer's meaning is to be impressed upon the imagination of his hearers? To such enquiries diverse answers have been given. [i] Dr Lightfoot expresses the opinion that, 'whereas with Philo the allegory is the whole substance of his teaching, with St Paul it is but an accessory. He uses it rather as an illustration than an argument; as a means of representing in a lively manner the lessons before enforced on other grounds.' [ii] It is the view of Professor Jowett, that 'to an Alexandrian writer of the first century (may we not say therefore to St Paul himself?)' the distinction between an illustration and an argument could hardly have been made intelligible. That very modern distinction ... was precisely what his mind wanted to place it on a level with the modes of thought of our own age. We must therefore find some other way of characterizing the passage. It is neither an illustration nor an argument, but an interpretation of the Old Testament Scripture, after the manner of the age in which St Paul lived; that is, after the manner of the Jewish and Christian Alexandrian writers.' [iii] Others, as Dr Wordsworth, so far agree with the preceding statement as to regard the passage in the light of 'an interpretation;' not however a merely fanciful and subjective one. The words of the sacred narrative 'have a second spiritual sense; the holy Apostle does not take away the History, but he teaches us what is spiritually signified by it.' 'The Apostle here instructs us how to allegorize aright,namely to preserve the truth of the history, while we elicit from it its spiritual sense. Abraham, he says, had two sons, from two wives; here is the History. He then tells what was their spiritual meaning; there is the Allegory.' There is an ambiguity of application in Dr Lightfoot's statement [i] as it stands. The passage now under discussion consists of two main divisions: a. The historical citation. 'Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.' (Gal. iv. 21—23.) b. Its allegorical application. 'Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage', which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in 1 Cf. υἱοὶ τῆς διαθήκης (Acts iii. 25). |