Jl"-t'i^^;:>SiS-C^^.^S:■ 
 
i 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 '^ 
 
 V 
 
 J 
 
 r 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 •H 
 
 i» 
 
 
 
 4-> , 
 
 -^ 
 
 i 
 
 w 
 
 CO 1 
 
 -^ 
 
 
 
 ^ ►^ 
 
 (^ 
 i'^ 
 
 > u 
 
 a c : 
 
 .5 
 
 ^ 
 
 G 
 
 u a 
 
 <D B 
 
 o: ^ 
 
 1 ^ •■ 
 
 a: 
 
 ■P cc 
 
 
 
 00 CO 
 
 C 4- 
 
 •H c/: 
 
 ^ o 
 
 r 
 
 • OJ 
 
 d 
 
 
 > c 
 
 1<H H 
 
 > 
 
 c 
 
 00 CO • 
 
 
 
 T3 
 
 1 % 5 
 
 lo 
 
 m 00 
 
 C/) !—( 
 
 O^' 
 
 00 
 
 »■ rH 
 
 0) O 
 
 r— 1 
 
 a a; 
 
 ^j^ 
 
 
 fn D I 
 
 •H x: 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 T-H CO >— 1 
 
 U 4J 
 
 
 
 •<r CD v£> 
 
 c 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 s-i r^ 
 
 •H 4-1 
 
 v' 
 
 
 CO CO T-^ 
 
 i^ c , 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 CQO. 
 
 Dh 
 
 ^^. 
 
 
 
 
 
 ; 1 
 
 '"i^ 
 
 
 
 # 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -n 
 
^ 4* *#■ *l^ •#• 4* •#• "^ '-^ *^ **l^ *v* 'v* V* 4- '^' •*!:* 4" "1^ •^<- "^ 
 
 •^ Clark's list or new pubi.icatiovs, Edinburgh. *v* 
 
 •!• "^ 
 
 ^ BIBIiICAIi CRITICISM AND BXFOSITION. •j|!> 
 
 4. -^ 
 
 ^ Interpretation of New Testament, *^ 
 
 •^ Vol. I. & IV. — Ernesti's Principles of Biblical Inter- -^ 
 
 i pretation, translated from the original by the Rev. Char- *A, 
 
 T^ les H. Terrot, A. M., late Fellow of Trinity College, . 
 
 *V* Cambridtre. 2 vols. r2s. bound in cloth. *^ 
 
 •A, " If the reader should be desirous of seeinsr the style of the ♦^ 
 
 ^ N'ew Testament fuUy and satisfactorily handled, I refer him ^^ 
 
 ♦ig» to Ernesti. — Archbishop Mjgce. *'?• 
 
 *!• Philological Tracts '^ 
 
 •^ Vols. II. & IX Philological Tracts, illustrative of the "^ 
 
 ^ Old and New Testaments ; containing, 1. Dr. Pfann- •&* 
 
 J. kouche on the Language of Palestine in the age of Christ jt 
 
 'v* and the Apostles; 2. Prof. Planck on the Greek Diction * 
 
 •J^ of the New Testament ; 3. Dr. Tholuck on the Impor- *?"• 
 
 »,^, tance of the Study of the Old Testament ; 4. Dr. Beck- *^» 
 
 i^ haiis on the Interpnetation of the Tropical Language of ^ 
 
 *V* the New Testament ; 5. Prof.-Storr's Dissertation on ^ 
 
 •^ the meaning of the '' Kingdom of Heaven" — 0. On the "S^ 
 
 ^, Parablesdf Christ— 7.<>n the word nAHPHMA; }i. Prof. ^ 
 
 J. Hengstei>lierg on the Interj)retation of Isaiah, chap. lii. a 
 
 *^ 12, liii., 2 vols. 12s. bd. in cL.th. ^ 
 
 *^ " There is in the tracts which compose these volumes, a A" 
 
 ,A, mass of sacred erudition, a deptli of judgment, a coniprchen- t^ 
 
 ^^ give and reach of understandiiiir, which." we regret to be ob- T 
 
 ■<&» hired to say, are contributed by a society of men,. lUnongst y^ 
 
 T whom, in vaiji, wc look for an Englishman — Monthln Ilcikic. jr 
 
 ^ Greek S3riionynis of New Testament- •5|» 
 
 ^ Vols. in. tScXVIII Tittmann's S)Tionymsof the New .A, 
 
 ^ Testament, translated from the original by the Rev. ^t 
 
 *V* Edward Craig, M. A. of St. Edmund's Hall, Oxford. '^ 
 
 *&» 2 vols. 12s. hound in cloth. *^ 
 
 ^^ " A trxdy valuable work, and well worthy of a place in the ^A 
 
 *V* " Cai.inet," andin the library of every Biblical Student ; we beg ^^ 
 
 »^ very strongly to recoamieuil it." — Chriftiait Instructor. *&» 
 
 «^ Epistle to the Romans- •^ 
 
 ^ Vols. V. & XII Tholuck's Exposition of St. Paul's ^ 
 
 ♦ ^ Epistle to the Komans, with extracts from the exet;eti- ^ 
 
 *T^ cal works of tiie Fatliers and Reformers, translated from ^ 
 
 *f5* the original by the Rev. Robert i\ienzies. 2 vols. l2s. '*j5* 
 
 ^ " Of the kind it is the best Commentary that we know."— •^ 
 
 ^ Cftr.'s(''oii hislnn-lctr ,, 
 
 ♦jj5» «• Confes.sedly the ablpst exposition of the Scriptures in any l.in- "^ 
 
 j^^ guage." — Evinyelicai Magcune. ,A, 
 
 V ► 
 
 4- -^ 4* "I* "l^' "^ "^^ "^^ 4* "4^ "I* *^^ ^ "^ ^ *^ "^ 'v* 4'' 4"^ 
 
■^ Clark's list or new publication's, edinhurgh. *?* 
 
 ^ ^ 
 
 ^ BIBIiICAIi CRITICISM AND EXPOSITION. *^ 
 
 ^ '•^ 
 
 •|j. Interpretation of JSIevi Testament. •ij» 
 
 •^ Vol. I. & IV Ernesti'a Principles of Biblical Inter- -^ 
 
 ^ pretation, translated from the original by the Rev. Char- ^ 
 
 ^ les H. Terrot, A. M., late Fellow of Trinity College, T^ 
 
 *V* Cannbridirp. 2 vols. 12s. liound in cloth. *v* 
 
 •^ " If the reader should be desirous of seeiiifr the style of the *&• 
 
 T New Testament fully and satisfactorUy handled, I refer him T 
 
 ♦^ to Erncsti.—Arckbishoij Maijcc. Hj^ 
 
 ^ Philological Tracts "^ 
 
 *^ Vols. II. & IX — Philological Tracts, illustrative of the *$• 
 
 ^ Old and New Testaments ; containing, 1. Dr. FfHnn- ^ 
 
 -^ kouche on the Language of Palestine in the age of Christ ^ 
 
 *^ and the Apostles; 2. Prof. Planck on the Greek Diction J* 
 
 •^ of tlie New Testament ; 3. Dr. Tholuck on the Impor- *■?"• 
 
 »^, tance of the Study of the Old Testament; 4. Dr. Beck- »;S> 
 
 » haus on th.e Interpretation of the Tropical Language of X 
 
 *v* the New Testament ; 5. Prof.-Storr's Dissertation on *V* 
 
 *^ the meaning of the " Kingdom of Heaven" — (i. On the "^ 
 
 ^« Parablesof Christ— 7.<>n the word nAHPXlMA; «. Pruf. ^ 
 
 *^ Hengstenberg on the Interpretation of Isaiah, chap. lii. a 
 
 1* 12, liii., 2 vols. 12s. bd. in cl.ith. ^ 
 
 •5^ " There is in the tracts which compose these volumes, a v* 
 
 A^ mass of sacred erudition, a depth of jufiffment, a comprelien. .A, 
 
 ^^ sive and reach of uudeistandini.', which, Nve regret to be ob- T 
 
 <5&» hged to say, are contributed by a society of men, junongst ♦)§• 
 
 1" whom, in vain, we look for an Englisliman— .WoJi^A/^ Ilcvieih. jr 
 
 ,^ Greek Synonyms of New Testament- ^ 
 
 ^ Vols. in. &XVIII Tittmaiin's S}monynisof the New ^ 
 
 ^ Testament, translated from the original bv the Rev. ^^ 
 
 *^* Edward Craig, M. A. of St. Edmund's Hall, Oxford. *V* 
 
 ♦^ 2 vols. 12s. bound in cloth. *i^ 
 
 jt " A truly valuable wo;k, and well worthy of a place in the ^A 
 
 *v* " Cabinet," and in the library of every Biblical Student; we beg t^* 
 
 ^A, very strongly to rccoiiuueud it." — Clirietian Instructor. •&• 
 
 «i^ Epistle to the Romans- •^ 
 
 ^ Vol.s. V. & XII — Tholuck's Exposition of St. Paul's ^ 
 
 ♦^ Epistle to the Romans, with extracts from the exet;eti. ^a 
 
 ^^ cal works of tiie Fathers and Reformers, translated from J 
 
 ♦^ the original by the Kev. Robert .Menzies. 2 vols. I2s. 'y* 
 
 t&t " Of the kind it is the bi-st C'onimcntary that we know."— ♦^ 
 
 \ Cnrl.-sti'a'i liistructor . 
 
 ♦jjf* •■ Coiiffssedly the ablrst exposition of the SeripiuiLS in any Ian- *^ 
 
 ^A g^iage."— ■ii^o'ni'ei'ita? Maffuz'ne. ,^ 
 
 4- -^^ 4* "^^ "^"^^ 4* *-?"$* -1"^'^ "^ "^ "^ ^^ '^ "^ 'v* '^ "^ "^ 
 
^•1. •i|« -^ 4" 4* 4* '#•4' 4* •#* •#• 4"^ *l^ '^ "^ 4* *l^ 4* •$. 
 
 ^ Clark's list of new publications, Edinburgh. 3 *^» 
 
 , ^^ 
 
 I Epistles of St- John- «a, 
 
 ^^ Vol. XV. — Lucke's (Dr.) Commentary on the Epistles . 
 
 *V' of St. John, translated from the original by Thorleif "^ 
 
 »&, Gudmundson Repp, with additional Notes. 6s.bd. in cl. •^ 
 
 T "A commentary of the right kind, we earnestly recommend it to ^A 
 
 ^}» all that are concerned or interested in the right interpretation of ^r* 
 
 ^^ the New Testament Scriptures."— oSy 
 
 X Book of Job- w&» 
 
 *?!• Vols. XVI. & XIX Umbieit's (Prof.) New Version *^ 
 
 »&» of the Book of Job, with Expository Notes, and an In- *9* 
 
 troduction on the spirit, composition, and Author of the •&» 
 
 book ; translated from the original by the Rev. John jl 
 
 Hamilton Gray, M.A. of Magd. College, Oxford, Vicar j' 
 
 of Bolsover. 2 vols. 12s. bd. in cloth. *5?* 
 
 " We reckon the work an admirable key to the peculiarities of «j5;» 
 
 the Book of Job in its poetical structure and phraseology."— Scce«- jf 
 
 iion Magazine. •jji* 
 
 Epistle to the Corinthians- ^ 
 
 Vols. XXI. & XXIII — Billroth's Commentary on the ^ 
 
 Epistles of St. Paul to the Corinthians, translated from ♦ 
 
 the German, with additional notes, by the Rev. W. L. > 
 
 Alexander, A. M. 2 vols. 12s. bd. in cloth. •^ 
 
 " The author is a worthy associate of Tholuck, Steiger, and .jJj, 
 
 others wlio liave laboured to stem the current of infidel theo- Jl 
 
 logy, and forming a new school of biblical exegesis on the •^ 
 
 continent." — Cungrcgalional Mi^'J. jj, 
 
 Cornelius the Centurion, and St- John ^ 
 
 the Evangelist i 
 
 Vol. XXII Krummacher's Lives and Characters of "^ 
 
 Cornelius the Centurion, and St. John the Evangelist, *9' 
 
 with Notes, &c., by the Rev. J. W. Ferguson, A. M., ^ 
 
 Minister of St. Peter's Episcopal Chapel, Edinburgh. I 
 
 6s. bound in cloth. ^^ 
 
 " A fine specimen of Scriptural Exposition of a very interesting *9* 
 
 portion of revealed truth ; it is, indeed, a heart stirrmg composi- ^ 
 
 X.\on."—Evann(Hcal Mac/azine. , 
 
 " Eminently adapted to the cultivation of the heart,— we com- ^ 
 
 mend this excellent work to the attention of all who would worship Jf 
 
 God in spirit and in Uulh "— Chrlst'an Advocate. '^ 
 
 *,• These Lives may be had separately. ^ 
 
 Witsius on Prayer. ^ 
 
 Vol. XXIV Witsius' Sacred Dissertations on the t^ 
 
 Lord's Prayer, translated from the original, with Notes, a^ 
 
 by the Rev. William Priiigle, Auchterarder, 7s. bd. in cl. ^ 
 
 " The subject is treated with a degree of learning, piety, preci- *V* 
 
 sion and accuracy quite unrivalled, it will soi.n. we irust, bcin the ^ 
 
 hands of everv minister of thegospel, and student of divinity Ihere "* 
 
 are some very'judicious notes by the translator.' —Chrtstian Journal. ^ 
 
•^ 
 
 ^ 
 ^ 
 
 *¥* 2 clabk'b list or kzw publicatioks.edinbuuou. "^ 
 
 •*• ^ 
 
 •$• History of Theological Liiteratnre. -^ 
 
 •^ a. I'rof. Staeudliii's History of Theological Knowledge »&, 
 
 4A, and Literature, (!d. . 
 
 ^' " Full of comprehensive views, joined with minute and accurate **^ 
 
 t&t information." — Gta^jow Courier. V^ 
 
 ^ Use of Liberal Studies. 
 
 ^ 10. The Hon. (!. (i. V'erplanck's Discourse on the Right 
 
 T* Moral Influence and Use of Liberal Studies, Cd. 
 
 ^^ " Oneofthemostcloquentapperlseverwrittenin behalf of learn- *?* 
 
 *&t ing and science."— .<4(/«)die/» Oi/jtz-i'ir. j* 
 
 Hji» Duties of a Physician- ^ 
 
 »^ 11. Dr. Ware on the Character and Duties of a Physi- ^ 
 
 ^jj. cian, Cd. '\ 
 
 ^^ " ."^cnfible, judicious, and sound, it well deserves the attention *9* 
 
 •J%» of young medical praclilioncrs."— S'co»i>A Guardian. A 
 
 •^ Science and Literature- ni* 
 
 .J?}. 12. The Hon. J. Story's P'irst Discourse on the Pro- ^ 
 
 JL press of Science and Literature, Gd. ^ 
 
 "v* " The views of the author are enforced in a nervous and rhetori- ^!» 
 
 A, ral style, well adapted to captivate the class of per^ns to whom j, 
 
 Y they are addressed." — Kilvtarnock Journa'. 'v* 
 
 Life of Niebuhr- •** 
 
 "v* 1.3. Life of Niebuhr, by his -Son, Is. Jimrj. Series. No.\. "^^ 
 
 •!»• " Valuable »s « memoir of an intelligent, industrious, and faith- »A, 
 
 ^^ ful ta->tern traveller."— y4tcrdf«» Obterier. 
 
 ^ Life of Kant- *T 
 
 Jf^ 14. Life of Kant, by Prof. StapftT, Is. Z>'io9. .S'«rjV«,A''). 2. * 
 
 *5p* " A more comprehensive view may be obtained from this shilliue *}• 
 
 ^j^ number than from many larger volumes." — Wtstem Times. T 
 
 ^ Life of M. de Stael ^ 
 
 ^ 15. Life of Madame de Stael, by Mrs. Child, Is. Cd. t 
 
 J^ Biographical Series, JVo. 3. ^"^ 
 
 •Jj5» •• Replete with important matterrelativeto the literature of her «^ 
 
 jj, a^e."—jiatfl Journal. jf 
 
 ^ Science and Literature t 
 
 » 16. The Hon. J. Story's Second, Third, and Fourth *v* 
 
 "v* Discourses on Science, Literature, Government, Is. ^ 
 
 *A. " Clear and comprehensive in statement, varied and interesting j^ 
 
 ^ in illu>trations, and nervous and animated in style." — (Jrteno.k V* 
 
 t«e> Adi'trtiur. ,A^ 
 
 •4^ Biblical Interpretation- ^ 
 
 ,j&, 17. Prof. Sawyer's Popular 'J'reatise on the Elementiof jl 
 
 . Bil)lical Interj)retati<)n, l.s. *^ 
 
 *^ " We never faw the subject made more pl^in, nor brought with- •jJ}* 
 
 A^ in BO smaU a compass." — Vhri Han Advocate. j. 
 
*''* CLABk's list of hew publications, EDINBURGH. 3 ^ 
 
 *^ •¥' 
 
 *^ Slavery In the Middle Ages- J 
 
 •4^* 18. Mr. Edwards' Inquiry into tlie State of Slavery in *?* 
 
 •jL the Early and Jliddle Ages of the Christian Era, 9d. -^ 
 
 T "Displays extensive erudition, and laborious research.'— jt^ 
 
 «¥• Scottish Guardian. ^ 
 
 *|* Geology and Revelation. J 
 
 ■^ 19. Hitchcock on the Connection between Geology and *v* 
 
 *^ the iMot-aic Account of the Creation, Is. Cd. Scien- •JJi* 
 
 ^ tijic Series, No. 1. •^ 
 
 i " To all who take an interest in an inquiry inferior to few in no- ji. 
 
 ^J* velty or attraction, we recommend Prof. Hicchcock's tract, it is ^^ 
 
 ji written in a calm and philosophical spirit, and the reader will n eet ,A^ 
 
 *V* with a variety of aceute and ingenious remarks."— Saturday Posi. ^J^ 
 
 '^■» 20. Prof. Moses Stuart's Philoloftical View of the iMo- *¥• 
 
 «j^ dern Doctrines of Geology, Is. Scienlifio Series, «j|^ 
 
 A N^o. 2. ^ 
 
 *V* " The production of men of talent, who are in full posses- V^ 
 
 «A» si'in of every fact and statement bearing upon the subject."— t^ 
 
 T^ Elffin Courant. jl 
 
 ^ Life of Lady Russell- ^ 
 
 T 21. Life of 1-ady Russell, by Mrs. Child, Is. 6d. Bio- ^ 
 
 V* graphical Series, No. 4. "J^ 
 
 W " A more interesting piece of biography is rarely to be met "v* 
 
 J^ with." — Paisley Advertiser. tAi» 
 
 ^ Modem Slavery • *#• 
 
 A, 22, Dr. Channing's Dissertation on Slavery, Is. 6d. *^ 
 
 X^ " The calm and temperate, yet firm views of the writer, will j^ 
 
 •^ ensure to his work a dei,-ree of attention that would not have *^ 
 
 ^ been Kiven to it if written with passionate violence."— PowJey ^ 
 
 . Advertiser. j, 
 
 •«• . *?* 
 
 1 On Preaching. ^ 
 
 J" 23. Prcif.Ware on Extempoianeous Preaching,ls. 5'cifn- , 
 
 *¥* tific Series, Xo. 3. "v* 
 
 ^&, " .A. "uKjst ac.-eptiible book to young men whose views are to- ^ 
 
 , wards the ministry." — Paisley Advertiser. t^ 
 
 X Character of Fenelon- ^ 
 
 T, 24. Dr. Channin!? on the Character and Writings of . 
 
 *^ Archbishop Fenelon, Cd. '^ 
 
 *^ « Abounds with soul stirring remarks.— J5a<A Journal. *?* 
 
 jJSi, "Fenelon, in his writings, exhibits more of the qualities which ^ 
 
 ^^ predispose to reliiiious feelings than any other equally conspicuous v 
 
 «!&. person, a mird so pure as steadily to contemplate supreme excel- «^ 
 
 T lence, a gentle and modest spirit not elated by the privilege, but 
 
 *»• teeinf its own want of worth as it came nearer to such brightness, .JJj» 
 
 X and disposal to treat with compassionate forbearance those errors in j. 
 ■^ others of which it felt a hurabUng cousciousness."— Sir Jas. Mac- •^ 
 
 A^ kintosh. ^^ 
 
 -i^ -^ 4. .^ ^ "li- 4* -^ -l!* 'I- •!♦ 4* -f •#* -^ •#• 4* •#• 4* -1^ "^ 
 
THE 
 
 BIBLICAL CABINET; 
 
 OR 
 
 HERMENEUTICAL, EXEGETICAL, 
 
 AND 
 
 PHILOLOGICAL LIBRARY, 
 
 VOL. VIIL 
 
 PAREAU'S PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 EDINBURGH: 
 THOMAS CLARK, 38. GEORGE STREET; 
 
 J. G. & F. RIVINGTON, LONDON ; 
 AXD W. CURRY, JTJN. & CO. DL'lil.IN. 
 
 MDCCCXXXV. 
 
J. THOMSOiV, I'ttlNTEU, MII.NE SUUAItK 
 
PRINCIPLES 
 
 INTERPRETATION 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT; 
 
 TRANSLATED FROM THE 
 
 INSTITUTIO INTERPRETIS VETERIS TESTAMENTI 
 
 / 
 OF y 
 
 JOHN HENRY PAREAU, 
 
 PKOFESSOR OF ORIENTAL LANGUAGES IN THE UNlVEIiSlTT 
 OF UTRECHT. 
 
 BY 
 
 PATRICK FORBES, D. D. 
 
 ONE OF THE MINISTERS OF OLD MACHAR, AND PROFESSOIl 
 OF HUMANITY, &C. KING'S COLLEGE, ABEKDEEX. 
 
 VOL. I. 
 EDINBURGH: 
 
 THOMAS CLARK, 38. GEORGE STREET. 
 AIDCCCXXXV. 
 
^ 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Translator's Preface 
 Author's Preface 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 § 1. Explanation of the Object of this Undertaking . 1 
 
 § 2. A short History of the Interpretation of the Old 
 
 Testament ....... 2 
 
 §3. The difficulty of Interpreting the Old Testament 18 
 
 § 4. The principal reasons which, in our times particu- 
 larly, recommend the Interpretation of the Old 
 Testament ....... 26 
 
 § 5. The Extent and Plan of the proposed Work . 21 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 rage 
 
 PART FIRST. 
 
 OF THOSE ACQUIREMENTS AND QUALIFICATIONS 
 WHICH WILL RENDER ONE A GOOD INTERPRE- 
 TER OF THE OLD TESTAMENT IN THE I'UESENT 
 AGE. 
 
 SECTION FIRST. 
 
 OF THOSE STUDIES INSEPARABLY CONNECTf.D WITH 
 THE RIGHT INTEllPRETATIOV OF T H E (' I, n TESTA- 
 WENT. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 
 Of the Languajje in which the Books of tlie Ohl 'I'esta- 
 iiieiit were written ...... "io 
 
 CHAI'TER SECOND. 
 Of the Cognate Dialects of the Hebrew Lani^ua};e . 41 
 
 CHAPTER THIRD. 
 
 Of the History of the Hebrew Text, and the sorirces of 
 its Criticism in general ..... .il 
 
 CHAPTER FOURTH. 
 Of the ancient Interpreters ..... 73 
 
 CHAPTER FIFTH. 
 
 Of the Authenticity, Integrity, and Historical Faith of 
 the Books of the Old Testament ... 101 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 rage 
 CHAPTER SIXTH, 
 
 Of the det^ree of attention due to the extraordinary in- 
 terposition of God in regard tit that Religion, which is 
 contained in the Books of the Old Testannent . 'If) 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 
 OF THE PRINCIPAL ENDOWMENTS OF MIND, AND 
 VIRTUES OF THE SOITL, TO BE DESIRED AND 
 CULTIVATED IN AN ACCOMPLISHED INTERPRETEH 
 OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 Of the endowments of Mind , . . . 1 43 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 Of the Principal Virtues of the 3Iind, which an Inter- 
 preter of the Old Testament ought to possess, par- 
 ticularly in this age . . , . , . 155 
 
 SECTION THIRD. 
 
 OF THOSE SUUSIDIARY STDUIES WHICH ARE AN OR- 
 NAMENT AND AID TO AN ACCOMPLISHED tNTEll- 
 PRETER OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 Of the Study of Ancient Literature and Philosophy \'J<) 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 rage 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 Of some other Branches of Knowledi^e, the Study of 
 which is useful for the Interpretation of the Old Tes- 
 tament 180 
 
 PART SECOND. 
 
 OF THE INTERPRETATION OF THE OLD TESTA- 
 MENT IN GENERAL. 
 
 SECTION FIRST. 
 
 Of the true manner of Interpreting the Old Testament 191 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 
 Of the Understanding and Explanation of M'ords 216 
 
 SECTION THIRD. 
 
 Of the Understanding and Explanation of Things . 269 
 
TRANSLATOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 The following Introduction to the right mode of 
 understanding and expounding the Books of the 
 Old Testament, seems to the Translator well 
 adapted for the use of those entering on the study 
 of that sacred volume, from its containing a suc- 
 cinct account of the principles of the knowledge 
 and acquirements which are requisite and indis- 
 pensable to the successful pursuit of that study, 
 and from being written in a plain style, without 
 a superfluity of technical terms, or any parade of 
 learning. It may also serve as a text-book, to 
 which the student can refer his future accessions 
 of knowledge, as its arrangement is clear and 
 comprehensive; and, the advantage of having 
 such a text-book or syllabus, will be readily ac- 
 knowledged by those, who are aware of the ex- 
 tent and difficulty of the subject here treated. 
 The Translator is of opinion too, that, on the 
 
X translator's preface. 
 
 whole, the work will, by all candid judges, be 
 acknowledged to be the production of a man of 
 good principles and good sense, as well as of 
 sound and competent learning. And, it was the 
 conviction on the Translator's mind, that such a 
 work was wanting to the theological literature of 
 this countrj'-, and that the present one was well 
 calculated to supply this desideratum, and would 
 be very useful to the young Theologian, which 
 induced him to undertake the irksome task of 
 translation. He entertained hopes also, that 
 such a work might have the eifect of exciting an 
 earnest attention to the study of the original of 
 the Old Testament; without a deep acquain- 
 tance with which no one can ever be a sound 
 Theologian, or become even tolerably acquaint- 
 ed with the language and sense of the New Tes- 
 tament, that sacred depositary of all the really 
 valuable hopes of man. And were it in any de- 
 gree to contribute to this much to be desired re- 
 sult, it would give him unspeakable pleasure to 
 think that, in the humblest way, he had been as- 
 sisting in the promotion of it. 
 
 No one will suppose that the Translator holds 
 himself responsible for the opinions which the 
 author of the work entertains and promulgates. 
 This caution, however, is much less necessary 
 with regard to these volumes, than to many of 
 the Continental productions. For the author is 
 a decided and uncompromising enemy to the 
 
translator's preface. xi 
 
 Rationalist system, of which, in another produc- 
 tion,* he has ^iven a confutation, and an account 
 of its origin and progress. It was, however, the 
 intention of the Translator, at one time, to have 
 appended notes, corrective of some views and 
 statements, which to him appeared erroneous, 
 and also containing extracts from, and references 
 to other books, in which the various subjects 
 were more fully illustrated. From this, how- 
 ever, he was deterred by various considerations. 
 The chief of them was, the extent to which such 
 notes would have probably gone, and the con- 
 sequent weariness and annoyance which every 
 one must have experienced in reading a book 
 loaded with notes and references, and what 
 would frequently, perhaps, have appeared hyper- 
 criticisms, particularly to beginners in the study. 
 The conflicting views, too, of the Author and 
 Translator, would often have had the effect, per- 
 haps, of confusing instead of enlightening the 
 young student, for whom this work is princi- 
 pally intended. Such an addition would like- 
 wise have increased very considerably the price 
 of this translation, which can, in its present state, 
 be sold for little more than half the price which 
 the original costs; and, consequently, would 
 have prevented it from being so generally diffused 
 
 ' " Disputatio de Mystica Sacri Codieis interpretations." 
 Traj. ad Rhen. 1824. 
 
xii translator's preface. 
 
 and studied, as the merits of the work itself seem 
 to the Translator to deserve. 
 
 The rule by wliich the Translator has been 
 guided, in making this translation, is, that he 
 should not only give the sense of the Author, 
 without either addition or diminution, but, as 
 far as the idiom of the two languages would per- 
 mit, the dress or form in which the Author has 
 thought proper to put it. Merely giving the 
 sense of the Author in the Translator's own lan- 
 guage would have been a much easier task, and 
 is a method frequently adopted on similar occa- 
 sions, although in fairness it cannot be deno- 
 minated translation. For a clear view of what 
 was in an author's mind, and the exact shade of 
 meaning which he intended to convey, depends 
 much on the form of his expressions and lan- 
 guage, and, therefore, every real translation 
 must exhibit this form as correctly as possible. 
 Modes of thinking also appear not a little from 
 modes of expression ; and every one, who deems 
 it worth while to read a work, will be desirous 
 of having a full acquaintance with the mind of 
 the author, and his exact views, rather than his 
 general sense, conveyed through the very dif- 
 ferent channel of the language of one who per- 
 forms the humble office of his interpreter. This 
 mode of translation, however, while attended 
 with the great advantage of giving a more cor- 
 rect representation of the author's mind, and of 
 
translator's preface. 
 
 his manner of viewing subjects, is attended with 
 some disadvantages. For it is almost impossible, 
 when translating in this manner, from a lan- 
 guage so differing in form and idiom from ours 
 as the Latin does, to free the sentences at all 
 times from awkwardness, or to make the style 
 quite easy and flowing. The present translator 
 does not by any means pretend to have accom- 
 plished this : neither indeed, in order to attain 
 this object, has he designedly violated the rule of 
 translating which he proposed to himself. This 
 is the only excuse which he pretends to offer for 
 any clumsy or awkward passages or expressions 
 which may present themselves in the book. He 
 has, however, endeavoured to render the whole 
 perspicuous and intelligible as far as he was 
 able, with the exception of a few passages which 
 were vague and indefinite in the original, and 
 which he has left as he found them. In most 
 cases, when not sure whether he was translating 
 correctly, he has quoted the original expressions. 
 
PREFACE OF THE AUTHOR. 
 
 When teaching the Oriental languages in the 
 University of Harderwick, I formed the opinion 
 that I would consult the advantage of the young 
 men who were studying theology there, if I 
 should briefly explain to them what things seem- 
 ed to me principally to be attended to and ac- 
 complished by the interpreter of the Old Testa- 
 ment, particularly in reference to the present 
 age. After I was transferred to the University 
 of Utrecht, I occasionally gave lectures on this 
 subject, before attending lectures on sacred 
 hermeneutics was imposed as a duty on the 
 students of theology. But though always decid- 
 edly of opinion that I ought to complete the whole 
 elementary instruction in the science in one 
 academical course, the disagreeable occurrence 
 frequently happened to me, that 1 was not able 
 to treat certain parts so fuUy as I wished, nor to 
 give that time to the highly useful exercise of 
 examination which I desired. I had therefore 
 
XVI AUTHORS PREFACE. 
 
 long ago determined to publish a work on the 
 principles of the interpretation of the Old Tes- 
 tament, such as I could follow in my academical 
 lectures, and which would answer my object suf- 
 ficiently of serving the purposes of the students, 
 and at the same time might be of some advan- 
 tage to others. 
 
 Applying myself to this work then, with these 
 two objects in view, I laid down this plan to 
 myself, that, in an undertaking of the most ex- 
 tensive nature, I should enter into some subjects 
 more fully, and touch on others more slightly, 
 and in many make such selections as their na- 
 ture seemed to require or allow, adding at the 
 same time, in the third part of the work, what I 
 thought principally deserving of the attention of 
 an interpreter regarding each of the Books of 
 the Old Testament, arranged in their proper 
 classes. — I have judged it proper not to make 
 any distinct reference to w'riters of modern times, 
 except where it could scarcely be avoided. I 
 know, indeed, that it is the custom of the present 
 day with many to refer to a great many other 
 writers. But, after due consideration, so far was 
 I from thinking that I ought to imitate this cus- 
 tom, that even in my private lectures I deem it 
 sufficient to refer to those writers whom it is in- 
 dispensably necessary to mention. Having there- 
 fore, in the end of § 2. of the introduction, men- 
 
author's preface. xvii 
 
 tioned the principal authors connected with my 
 undertaking, I did not choose to load my book 
 farther with a troublesome collection, easily in- 
 deed made, of more references. Lastly, I have 
 thought it worth while to add indexes; in which 
 my only object was, to render the consultation 
 of the book more easy. 
 
 Utrecht, 
 
 February 22, 1822. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 §1- 
 
 Explanation of the Object of this Undertaking. 
 
 1. Since, in every science, whether treated of briefly 
 or more copiously, it ought, above all things, to be 
 attended to, that the mode in which it is taught be 
 accommodated to the state and circumstances of the 
 times ; I have, therefore, considered this necessary 
 to be kept in mind, when attempting to deUver the 
 principles on which the Old Testament is to be in- 
 terpreted. 
 
 2. I consider him to be a proper interpreter of the 
 books of the Old Testament, who, after full instruc- 
 tion and preparation, endeavours, to the utmost of 
 his power, to understand their true meaning himself, 
 and to explain them to others in a manner adapted 
 to the times in which he lives. 
 
 3. Since these books are, of all others, the most 
 ancient, no one can be a good interpreter of them, 
 unless he be acquainted with the art of criticising them ; 
 
 B 
 
5i INTRODUCTION. 
 
 and, therefore, I have not left this branch of the sub- 
 ject untreated of. 
 
 4. In hiterpreting the sacred books, certain rules 
 must be observed. The science explaining these is 
 called Sacred Hermeneutics ; which, when ranked as 
 a part of theology, is called Exegetical Theology. 
 From this is distinguished what is called Exegesis, 
 or the act itself of interpreting the sacred volume. 
 
 5. These rules of interpretation ought to flow 
 clearly from the very nature of the subject, and 
 should not be liable to vary or change with the 
 change of times and circumstances. Should, however, 
 the principles of sacred criticism not be prudently 
 adapted to the genius of different ages, they would, 
 in a great degree, be useless, and not attended with 
 the desired advantages. 
 
 6. Although the interpretation of the books of the 
 Old and New Testament have much in common, it 
 would, however, be inconvenient to conjoin the rules 
 for interpreting them, on account of the very con- 
 siderable diversity which exists both in the interpre- 
 tation and criticism peculiar to each. 
 
 §2. 
 
 A Short History of the Interpretation of the Old 
 Testament. 
 
 1. The interpretation of the books of the Old 
 Testament in its highest antiquity^ has not been the 
 
 * The wonis in the original are, " Liliroruni V. T. in 
 suvima sua aiiti'^iiitate iuterpretatio iioii eadem oinni tempore 
 
INTRODUCTION. 3 
 
 same in every age : and its history, both among the 
 Jews and Christians, is worthy of attention. 
 
 2. From the beginning of the primitive form of 
 the Hebrew state down to its destruction, these books 
 required little interpretation. The language in which 
 they were written was, during all this space of time, 
 vernacular to the Israelites, and underwent only very 
 slight changes. If, then, any explanation was required, 
 it was only in reference to the duties prescribed by the 
 Mosaic law. 
 
 3. The first interpreters of the sacred books may 
 therefore be said to have been the Levites and the 
 Prophets. For they, by the very Mosaic constitu- 
 tion, were the authorised directors and administra- 
 tors of the external worship of God, and the inter- 
 preters and teachers of the Divine laws, both sacred 
 and civil, to the people, Deut. xxxiii. 10. They 
 promoted the internal worship, and the sincere vene- 
 ration of the one God, and prompt obedience to his 
 laws ; and they inculcated the love of true piety and 
 virtue agreeably to the object of the Mosaic constitu- 
 tion on their countrymen. From the time of Samuel 
 downwards, therefore, they had schools in which the 
 youth were formed to those noble sentiments, and in 
 which, with the same view, the Divine writings were 
 read and explained. 
 
 4. Although, previous to their exile to Babylon, 
 the Israelites had among them persons who, from the 
 nature of their office, applied themselves to the un- 
 derstanding of the Mosaic books, and to explaining 
 them in the manner suited to the wants of the time, 
 yet, by the greater part of the communit}', the study 
 
4 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of these and the other sacred books, was in general 
 little relished. For the Israelites universally shewed 
 a great propensity to the worship of idols and false 
 gods at all times ; until, by the condign punishment 
 of their perverseness, in the destruction of their state 
 and subsequent exile, they were brought to a better 
 mind. 
 
 5. When the Jews, after their return home, began 
 to devote themselves with much greater care than 
 ever they had done before to their religion, and, in 
 consequence, to the study of those books in which it 
 was contained ; the more distant they were from that 
 age in which particularly the more ancient of these 
 books were composed, and the more the language of 
 their fathers had become depraved among them, so 
 much the more every day did the necessity of having 
 them explained to them become greater. But, grow- 
 ing more and more adverse to all foreign religions, 
 they, by degrees, fell into the basest superstition, and 
 thus became attached to those modes of interpre- 
 tation, which are particularly pleasing to men who 
 are superstitious, devoted to trifles, and narrow- 
 minded. 
 
 6. Before the time of our Saviour there had, in 
 consequence, long prevailed a trifling and subtile 
 mode of explaining the Old Testament, which, ser- 
 vilely adhering to the words, altogether departed 
 from the true meaning of the text, — a mode which 
 was followed by most of the doctors of the Phari- 
 saical sect, particularly in interpreting the laws of 
 Moses contrary to their spirit, and the Divine in- 
 tention in enacting them. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 7. But, at the same time, there were not a few who 
 followed a quite opposite plan, and paid no attention 
 to the proper and common meaning of the words, 
 but superinduced on the Scriptures a remote and 
 figurative or allegorical signification, with the view of 
 extracting from them the tenets of a foreign phi- 
 losophy. The most indefatigable, in this absurd 
 manner of interpretation, was Philo-Judgeus, who was 
 so carried away by his attachment to the Platonic 
 philosophy, as to exhibit it veiled and wrapped up 
 in the doctrines, precepts, and even in the historical 
 details of his religion. 
 
 8. From the time of Alexander the Great, there 
 evidently prevailed among the Jews who lived in 
 Egypt> a most silly mode of interpretation, deriving 
 its origin from the allegorical method of the secrc*t 
 philosophy of the Egyptians, which, in the course of 
 time, propagated itself more extensively. Out of the 
 words and letters themselves, and their order and 
 transposition, they extracted a hidden sense, and doc- 
 trines full of mystery : and this manner of interpre- 
 tation, which was thought to recommend the tradi- 
 tions received from their ancestors by the additional 
 authority of sanctity and of divine origin, came at 
 last to be termed Cabalistical from the word "^^p, 
 which signifies " to receive." ' 
 
 9. When, however, from the tenth century after 
 Christ, the study of Hebrew grammar came to be cul- 
 tivated among the Jews, there were some who attempt- 
 ed to explain either the whole of the Old Testament, or 
 some of its parts, in the grammatical manner, of whom 
 
6 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 the principal were Aben Esra, Salomo Jarclii, Moses 
 Maimonides, David Kirachi, and Isaac Abarbanel. 
 
 10. On the criticism also of their sacred writ- 
 ings, some Jews bestowed no little labour. The 
 study of some sort of criticism seems even to have 
 existed among them pi'evious to the third century of 
 our era. It was confined, however, almost wholly to 
 things of very trifling importance, agreeably to the 
 turn of mind of their nation, and was employed about 
 mere minutiae, such as the accurate computation of 
 the number of words in each of the books of the 
 sacred volume ; nay, it was even partly conjoined 
 with their cabalistic pursuits, as certain astonishing 
 mysteries were endeavoured to be discovered in the 
 uncommon mode of writing some letters, or in an 
 unusual manner of punctuation. 
 
 11. Some interpretations, or versions as we call 
 them, were made by the Jews ; of which some were 
 into Greek, for the use of those of their countrymen 
 who could read Greek more easily than Hebrew, or who 
 were quite ignorant of the Hebrew language ; others 
 were into Chaldee, intended for the use of those who 
 had been accustomed to the Chaldee language, and 
 with whom the language of their ancestors had gone 
 into disuse. Of these versions some are quite full of 
 allegorical and cabalistical fables. 
 
 12. Jesus Christ, the founder of our religion, quite 
 disapproved of the perverted mode of interpretation 
 adopted by the Jews of his time, as appears from 
 Matt. XV. 1 — 14: but, however, both he and his 
 Apostles, in quoting the sacred Scriptures, and mak- 
 
INTRODUCTION. 7 
 
 ing use of ihem for their own purposes, sometimes 
 accommodated themselves to the received manner of 
 the time ; and Paul, in particular, with a prudence 
 deserving much praise, occasionally adopted the al- 
 legorical mode. 
 
 13. By far the greater part of the succeeding 
 Christian teachers, up to the age of Constantine the 
 Great, were quite devoted to this allegorical mode of 
 interpretation, and employed it almost solely in their 
 disputations. The most celebrated during this period 
 of time were Ephraim Syrus among the Orientals, 
 Clemens Alexandrinus, and Origen among the Greeks, 
 and Jerome among the Latins. The Greek doc- 
 tors were indeed more particularly delighted with 
 the allegorical method ; to which both Clemens, al- 
 though the most learned of the Fathers as they are 
 called, and even Origen himself, how much soever in 
 other respects he contributed to assist in the right in- 
 terpretation of the Scriptures by those stupendous 
 critical labours which he underwent, were vehementl}'' 
 attached. This last (Origen), found a most celebrated 
 imitator of his critical labours in Jerome, who de- 
 voted his great learning and industry to the criti- 
 cism and interpretation, and a Latin version of the 
 Old Testament. — Before the end, however, of this 
 period, some versions of the Old Testament were 
 first executed by the Christians, such as the Syriac 
 and the Latin Italic, which preceded that of Jerome. 
 
 14. About the end of the fourth and the bejrinninjr 
 of the fifth century flourished Augustine, celebrated 
 among the Latins more on account of his genius than 
 learning, who has bestowed some pains in inter- 
 
« INTRODUCTION. 
 
 preting the Old Testament, and also first treated of 
 the mode in which the eacred books were to be ex- 
 plained, in his writings on Christian doctrine : for 
 we can scarcely reckon as belonging to this sub- 
 ject, what Jerome says in his Epistle to Sammachius 
 respecting the best manner of interpreting, in which 
 he only details the method which he himself followed ; 
 neither can we consider as belonging to it the Greek 
 Epistles of Isiodorus the Pellusiote, the noblest of 
 Chrysostom's disciples, who lived in the fifth century, 
 which, although they may be said to be written on the 
 interpretation of the sacred volume, yet only treat of 
 those passages which are to be found in the Scrip- 
 tures applicable to teaching us to guide our lives 
 aright. But, connected with this subject, certainly is 
 the introduction to the Divine Scriptures {ilaayuyri 
 sig rag ^s/ag y^a<pag) of Adrian, who lived in the same 
 century. 
 
 15. After the fifth century, the state of the inter- 
 pretation of the sacred text became more and more 
 wretched, and this continued to go on till the fifteenth 
 century, so that at first very few, and finally none, 
 existed who contributed any thing to the right inter- 
 pretation of the whole Scripture, but particularly to 
 that of the Old Testament. For, by degrees, the de- 
 sire of true learning, and the cultivation of polite lite- 
 rature, had become quite extinct, so that learned men 
 were very rare who could read, or in any way un- 
 derstand the Hebrew books. And to this we must 
 add, from the fifth century downwards, the conten- 
 tions, disputes, hatred, and wars subsisting among the 
 different religious sects. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ] 6. In the twelfth century, the scholastic theology, 
 which originated in the perverse use of the Aristo- 
 telian philosophy, arose, or certainly from that period 
 very greatly prevailed, and for a considerable time 
 afterwards was firmly established ; and the conse- 
 sequence was, that those who delighted in it, argued 
 with minute, and often absurd subtility on religion, 
 while they never once thought of interpreting the 
 Scriptures. Those again who were opposed to them, 
 and were distinguished by the title of Biblical Doc- 
 tors, by their mystical and allegorical interpretations, 
 rather darkened than illustrated the sacred books; 
 and these, by degrees, became much diminished in 
 number. 
 
 17. The universities which, in the same twelfth 
 century, were founded in Europe, and in which the 
 learned languages, and also the Oriental dialects, 
 were taught, at first produced no change in the in- 
 terpretation of the Scriptures. The expeditions into 
 Asia, called the crusades, begun in the former cen- 
 tury and continued long afterwards, had taken off 
 the minds of most men from any sort of study of the 
 sacred volume ; but, being the cause why a vast num- 
 ber of Greeks left their native country, and migrated 
 into Italy and other European countries, these ex- 
 cited a love of literature in various parts of Europe ; 
 and the pursuit of learning by degrees reviving 
 through means of the instituted universities, aided 
 and began to prepare the way for a better interpre- 
 tation of the sacred code. 
 
 18. In the second centurj', therefore, before the 
 Reformation, Nicolaus Lyranus became celebrated as 
 
10 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 an interpreter of Scripture. To him Luther is very 
 much indebted. But the art of printing, which was 
 invented in the fifteenth century, was the most power- 
 ful means of disseminating quickly and extensively 
 those sounder views which were afterwards entertained 
 regarding Scripture criticism. 
 
 19. But as the reviving love of learning, and the 
 daily increasing study of doctrines, hastened and 
 most happily assisted the reformation of religion, so, 
 among those who followed this purer form of religion, 
 there was thus generated a greater liberty and a much 
 more correct method of interpretation. 
 
 20. In the sixteenth century then, when a clear 
 light shone upon religion, which had been so much 
 obscured, the two men who were the principal leaders 
 of the reformation, Luther and Calvin, expended 
 much labour in translating and explaining even the 
 books of the Old Testament, if we think of their time 
 and the aids which they possessed. Erasmus too, who 
 did not dare to embrace their party, although he 
 mightily contributed to the reformation of religion, has 
 merited immortal praise by what he has done in aid of 
 the better interpretation of the books of the New 
 Testament. He, however, did not expend any labour 
 in elucidating the books of the Old Testament. 
 
 21. As the reformers of religion were accustomed 
 to defend their cause by arguments taken from the 
 Scriptures, they therefore bestowed much pains on the 
 right interpretation of the sacred volume, and imposed 
 even upon their adversaries a necessity of some appli- 
 cation to the same study. But, from the continual 
 disputations on both sides, originated by degrees a 
 
INTRODUCTION. 11 
 
 polemical mode of interpreting and explaining the 
 sacred books which for some time prevailed, by which 
 every one endeavoured to prove the opinions of his 
 own party from the Scriptures, and not unfrequently 
 to ascribe to the sacred writers opinions with which 
 they were quite unacquainted, and opposed to their 
 l)lain meaning. 
 
 22. The sixteenth century was rendered illustrious 
 by a conjoined edition of some ancient versions of the 
 whole sacred code, and consequently of the Old 
 Testament, which had been made at various times 
 both by Jews and Christians. In this the Papists 
 merited great praise ; for, through their care, the 
 Complutensian and Antwerp Polyglot Bibles, very 
 excellent editions, were brought out ; and one of them, 
 Flaminius Nobihs, was the first, who in this century 
 endeavoured to collect and edite the fragments of the 
 ancient Greek interpreters. The Polyglot Bibles 
 which in this century were edited by the Protestants, 
 did not attain to the same degree of celebrity ; but 
 John Drusius, who was much esteemed among the 
 Reformed for his great learning, enlarged greatly the 
 remains of those ancient interpreters. 
 
 23. In the same age Sixtus Senensis, by the publi- 
 cation of his Bibliotheca Sancta, in which he, among 
 other tilings, explained the art of expounding Scrip- 
 ture, seems to have gained no small praise to the 
 Popish body. But far superior to him was Mathias Fla- 
 cius Illyricus among the Lutherans, who, in his Claris 
 Scriptures Sacrce, first shewed the true method of in- 
 terpreting Scripture, as far as it could be investigated 
 and exhibited to others at that time. 
 
12 INTRODUCTIO^f. 
 
 24. The study of the Old Testament was much in- 
 creased during the seventeenth century. For, besides 
 some ancient versions, or parts of them, which were 
 edited separately, a more enlarged edition of the Poly- 
 glot Bible was published at Paris, and afterwards a 
 still more perfect one at London. Some, besides, and 
 among them even the Papists themselves, laboured to 
 illustrate either all the books of the Old Testament, 
 or particular books or passages. Others were solici- 
 tous to explain the history and other events of the Old 
 Testament. Others attained high praise by their cul- 
 tivation of the Oriental languages, such, for instance, 
 as our countrymen Erpenius and Golius, while John 
 Cocceius exhibited singular skill in the Hebrew lan- 
 guage and idiom. Others began to apply to the cri- 
 ticism of the Old Testament with a noble boldness, 
 such as Ludovicus Capellus of the reformed body, and 
 Richard Simon among the Papists — both of whom ap- 
 peared to the men of their own time too free in their 
 views. And, not to mention more who published books 
 connected with Sacred Herraeneutics, Solomon Glas- 
 sius in this century particularly distinguished him- 
 self, whose book on Sacred Philology^ has long been 
 
 • This work, under the title of Sal. Glassii PhUologia Sacra 
 his temporibus accammodala, has been republished by D. Jo. 
 Aug. Dathe, and Geo. Laur. Bauer. That part of it compris- 
 ing the Grammatica et Rhetorica Sacra by Dathe, is almost in- 
 dispensable to the understanding of the syntax and figurative 
 language of the Old Testament. It differs in many respects 
 from the original work of Glassius, and is much more correct. 
 The part by Bauer, containing the Critica et Ilermeneul'tca 
 Sacra, is an entirely new work, with a trifling exception. It 
 
INTRODUCTION. 13 
 
 esteemed a standard work, and even in our age is 
 very valuable. The glory, however, of this age, was 
 our countryman Grotius, who yet holds, and long will 
 possess, the chief place among the interpreters of the 
 New Testament, and no common praise is due to 
 him for his annotations on the Old Testament, which, 
 however, would have been much higher had he be- 
 stowed the same labour on the Old, as he did on the 
 New Testament. 
 
 25. From the seventeenth century down to our age, 
 the interpretation of the Old Testament has very 
 greatly advanced, particularly among those who had 
 happily delivered themselves from the long worn 
 shackles of the ancient superstition. The true way of 
 studying the Hebrew language, by making use of the 
 light to be derived from the cognate Oriental lan- 
 guages, was first discovered by Albert Schultens, who 
 himself gained immortal glory by his interpretations of 
 the Old Testament. And there were not a few who 
 employed themselves with honour iu the explication 
 of the words, and of the whole Hebrew phraseology, 
 and particularly of the Poetic diction. The number 
 of those is also very great who have thrown much more 
 light than was before possible on the subject matter 
 itself, both by the use of adventitious assistance, and 
 by undertaking journeys into the East. 
 
 26. In a later age, much labour has been bestowed 
 
 contains a great deal of valuable information, particularly in 
 the first section or Critica Sacra ; but the second section has 
 intermixed with it much exceptionable matter. The original 
 work is still, however, well worthy of a careful perusal Tr. 
 
14 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 on the criticism of the Old Testament. In France, 
 Houbigant, by a collation of manuscripts and ancient 
 versions, and not unfrequently by calling in the aid 
 of conjecture, endeavoured to correct many passages. 
 After him Benjamin Kennicott, in England, caused 
 all the Hebrew copies which were any where to be 
 found to be compared, and the different various read- 
 ings to be extracted from them, and to be published : 
 and, not long after, John Bernard de Rossi, in Italy, 
 endeavoured to enlarge and complete this laborious 
 undertaking, and to render it more adapted to gene- 
 ral use, by a very frequent collation of the ancient 
 versions. This part of critical study was also much 
 aided by the labour which was bestowed, particularly 
 in bringing the most ancient Greek version into a 
 better state, and in collecting with more care the 
 fragments of the other Greek versions : the conse- 
 (juence of which Mas, that this sort of criticism gained 
 very many patrons. Of a very recent age, however, 
 is that higher criticism, as it is called, which treats of 
 some more important parts in the same manner as 
 common criticism does of words and phrases, and in- 
 quires with the greatest freedom into the manner in 
 which the ancient sacred books were composed, and 
 by what means they were moulded into that form in 
 which they have come do\vn to us. 
 
 27. In the astonishing number of interpreters of the 
 Old Testament, produced in later tunes, it vas not 
 possible that there should not have been a great di- 
 versity of method adopted bj' very many of them, 
 according to the diversity of their times and genius. 
 Among the Papists, although freedom of iuterprcta- 
 
INTRODUCTION. 15 
 
 tion was restrained by the stricter limits in which they 
 were confined by their religion, in consequence of which 
 they were prevented from proceeding freely in this 
 work, yet there were to be found, even among them, 
 some who distinguished themselves in this department; 
 such as Augustin Calmet about the beginning of the 
 eighteenth century, much celebrated both for his Com- 
 mentary on the sacred code, and also for his Diction- 
 ary of the Bible, and another in the middle of the 
 same century, less commonly known, but remarkable 
 for his varied erudition, Alexius Symmachus Mazo- 
 chius, who, in his Spicilegium Biblicum, (Biblical 
 Gleanings) which was confined to the Old Testament, 
 seems fully to merit the praise of a learned and inge- 
 nious interpreter. Among those, again, from whose 
 minds the reformation of religion had shaken off the 
 yoke of servitude, this happy change only in the slow- 
 progress of time, exerted all that power which it might, 
 and certainly ought to have had. 
 
 28. Even in the beginning, therefore, of the eight- 
 eenth century, and for sometime afterwards, there were 
 very many who delighted in allegorical and mystical 
 interpretations of Scripture ; and not a few who were 
 rather controversial Theologians than Interpreters. 
 But a sounder mode of interpretation began to prevail 
 more and more every day, and it, alone, by degrees 
 became approved by the lovers of genuine hberty ; a 
 mode which, employing the necessary aids, endeavour- 
 ed to discover the meaning of the writers, not only 
 from the idioms of the language w hich they used, but 
 likewise illustrated and confirmed the meaning thus 
 discovered, from the genius of the age iu which they 
 
IG INTRODUCTION. 
 
 lived, and from their manners, circumstances, and 
 design in writing; and, consequently, never sought to 
 discover in them any thing but what could be shewn 
 with probability to have been in their minds. 
 
 29. But that noble liberty of interpretation, a be- 
 nefit which we acknowledge to have Ijeen conferred 
 upon us by the reformation pf religion, came at last 
 to be shamefully abused by some, and degenerated, 
 through the proneness of mankind to rush into ex- 
 tremes, into the most unrestrained licentiousness. 
 According to the most recent canons of this class 
 of interpreters, we ought to admit nothing in the sa- 
 cred volume to be true, unless what is agreeable to 
 the common order of things : aud, conformably to 
 these canons, whatever is related in Scripture as dif- 
 ferent from that order, must all be explained by the 
 interpreter in a manner consistent with it: so that 
 what would deservedly be accounted unallowable with 
 regard to the profane writers of antiquity, is not only 
 allowed with regard to the most ancient sacred books, 
 but is even reckoned laudable. And there are not 
 certainly wanting persons in our times, who twist* to 
 a moral purpose whatever may tend to give offence in 
 these books, being no way solicitous regarding the 
 most natural or plain sense of the words. 
 
 30. In fine, during that space of time of which we 
 have just been speaking, many books were published, 
 
 * In tlie original, " qni, quidqiiid offensioni diicatiir in iis- 
 dem Hbris, ad moralem nsiim contorqueant." I tliink I un- 
 derstand the author's allusion, but I deem it not worth while 
 to write a long note explaining my conjectures.— T'r. 
 
INTRODUCTIOK. 17 
 
 which treated of the method of interpreting both the 
 Old Testament and the whole sacred volume. Some 
 of these, however, confined themselves solely to the 
 critical part ; while others, under the name of intro- 
 ductions, embraced all those things which might be 
 reckoned to pertain to the understanding of the con- 
 tents, the authors, the composition, and the ancient 
 versions of the whole of the Old Testament, and of 
 each of its parts. Of the first sort, the more excel- 
 lent are, John Alphonsus Turretin's Tract, in two 
 parts., on the Interpretation of Scripture, and two 
 more recent books written in the German language, 
 the one of which, explaining Biblical Hermeiieutics 
 generally, has G. F. Seller for its author, and the other, 
 an Attempt at the Interpretation of the Old Testament, 
 is from the pen of G. W. Meyer. Of a sort between 
 the two, Ave may mention the older Sacred Criticism 
 of the Old Testament oH. G. Carpzovius, andthe more 
 recent book, under the same title, of Bauer. Of the 
 last sort, it will be suflficient to mention Carpzovius' 
 Introduction to the Canonical hooks of the Old Testa- 
 ment, and J. G. Eichhorn's Introduction to the boohs 
 of the Old Testament, together with that of John Jahn, 
 published lately in the German language ; and lastly, 
 L. Bertholds Historico-critical Introduction to all the 
 Canonical and Apocryphcd books of the Old and New 
 Testament, which, not long ago, appeared in the same 
 language. Respecting these, and other writings on 
 these subjects, it is proper to be guided by the golden 
 maxim of the Apostle, 1 Thessal. v, 21, " Prove all 
 things ; hold fast that which is good." 
 
18 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 §3. 
 Tlie difficulty of Interpreting the Old Testament, 
 
 1. However much labour may have been bestowed 
 in these later times in endeavouring to arrive at a bet- 
 ter understanding of the books of the Old Testament, 
 still tlie interpretation of them contmues to be very 
 difficult. And, indeed, the multitude of the various 
 explications of one and the same passage sufficiently 
 demonstrates the difficulty. It must be allowed, how- 
 ever, that the different opinions of interpreters should 
 often be attributed to their own preconceived notions, 
 rather than to the writings of the Old Testament. 
 But there is a definite and common cause of all these 
 diversities, which we must seek for in the very difficult 
 imderstanding of the Old Testament. 
 
 2. For the language in which the books of the Old 
 Testament were written, although it has received much 
 light in these later times, presents even yet, no little 
 obscurity, which the most skilful interpreters cannot 
 dispel. In general, too, it is very difierent from our 
 language, and survives in the^books of the Old Testa- 
 ment only. Their whole composition, but particular- 
 ly the more sublime and poetic portion, has in it 
 something quite foreign to our mode of expressing 
 olirselves. There are, too, some words which occur 
 either very rarely, or only once, and consequently 
 are of dubious or uncertain signification. We find also, 
 abstruse, elliptical, and sometimes ambiguous phrases. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 19 
 
 In a word, the very high antiquity of these books, 
 written in a language long since extinct, is a cause , 
 why we often find great difficulties in understanding 
 their diction. 
 
 3. This great antiquity of these books, is also the 
 reason why we frequently find much difficulty in as- 
 certaining the meaning of their authors, even when w^e 
 think that we understand the words. The most re- 
 cent of them, are of the remote age in which Herodo- 
 tus, the father of history among the Greeks, lived ; and 
 the most ancient, are far anterior to the age of Homer 
 himself. These books, too, were written in countries 
 where both the modes of thinking, and the manners 
 and customs, are very diflferent from ours. Therefore 
 is it very difficult for tlie most skilful interpreter com- 
 pletely to penetrate into the full meaning of the 
 authors. 
 
 4. What increases this difficulty of interpretation 
 very much, is the immense multitude and variety of 
 things which are treated of in these writings, and the 
 almost infinite diversity of subjects w hich are handled 
 by the individual writers. Those, too, which are writ- 
 ten in a more sublime strain, for the most part oppose 
 greater difficulties to the interpreter. 
 
 3. Finally, there are no books in which the employ- 
 ment of criticism is more frequently called for, than 
 in those of the Old Testament, because there are none, 
 taken in whole, more ancient ; and however numerous 
 the assistances for exercising the critical art may be, 
 the proper and prudent use of them requires very 
 great and very difficult labour. 
 
20 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 §4. 
 
 The principal Reasons tohich, iii our times, particu- 
 larly recommend the Interpretation of the Old Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 1. Notwithstanding the great difficulty of the books 
 of the Old Testament which we have briefly touched 
 upon, there are some, and these too no trifling reasons, 
 which recommend the study of these books. Their 
 very antiquity, which renders them often very difllicult 
 to be understood; has in it something alluring, and 
 which excites veneration. 
 
 2. The people among whom these books were writ- 
 ten, are indeed justly esteemed less distinguished than 
 the Greeks or Romans. But their changes of fortune 
 and history are very remarkable, and some periods 
 of their story were very splendid. 
 
 3. The knowledge of the things handed down to 
 us in these writings is, for the most part, highly use- 
 ful ; and there are no books of remote antiquity from 
 which more information can be derived for elucidat- 
 ing the ancient condition of mankind, nations, arts, 
 and sciences ; none in which the genius of human 
 nature, such as it exhibils itself in the virtues and vices 
 of individuals, is more placed as it were before our 
 eyes: none, in fine, in which we can find equally 
 elevated conceptions of the supreme God. 
 
 4. In these books are many things which will give 
 pleasure to the cultivators of polite literature. There 
 
INTRODUCTION. 21 
 
 is not indeed in them that perfection of art and polish 
 which we justly adnaire in the best writers of Greece 
 and Rome. But they have their own beauties, and 
 these too of the highest class. There is a certain ad- 
 mirable simplicity in the historical writings, and in 
 the poetical compositions so great sublimity, and as 
 it were majesty, such as you will search for in vain 
 elsewhere ; and which will be more fully felt, the 
 more any one has advanced in understanding them. 
 
 5. In the Scriptures of the Old, and in those of the 
 New Testament, we adore the same God who has 
 blessed mankind by his revelations. Between these 
 writings there is the strictest bond of connection ; and 
 the understanding of the Old Testament is so useful 
 to the interpretation of the New, that the more labour 
 any one has bestowed on the former, the more will 
 he be prepared for applying himself with success to 
 the latter. 
 
 6. Finally, it is the happiness of our times that there 
 are many more aids within our reach for the interpre- 
 tation of the Old Testament than were possessed in 
 former ages ; and if any one will employ these aright, 
 and in a manner suitable to the spirit of our age, he 
 may hope for a success in this stud}^ however diffi- 
 cult, which will much more than compensate the great- 
 ness of the labour bestovved. 
 
 §5. 
 
 TTie extent and Plan of the proposed Work. 
 
 1. Whilst, on the one hand, there are so many 
 causes of difficulty wliich attend the interpretation of 
 
-- INTRODUCTION. 
 
 tlie Old Testament, and on the other, so many motives 
 to incite us to make the attempt with all our energies, 
 I indeed confess that I have perceived the force of 
 each of these motives the more, the longer I have 
 been employed in this study. But 1 must not dis- 
 semble that the motives inciting to it are much more 
 powerful upon my mind, than those which seem to 
 deter me from it. 
 
 '1. And I wish I could excite and strengthen in the 
 minds of those, who are principally interested, the 
 same feeling, which is more alive to the usefulness of 
 this study than to its difficulties and impediments \ 
 With this view, I have been altogether actuated in 
 preparing these Princij)les of the Interpretation of tlie 
 Old Testament for assisting in the study of this book, 
 which deserves so highly to be recommended in these 
 times. 
 
 ;3. In oi'der to comprise in our brief syllabus, all that 
 belongs to the subject proposed, we shall, first, treat of 
 those acquirements and qualifications which will ren- 
 der one a good interpreter of the Old Testament in 
 the present age ; in the second place, we shall discuss 
 those points which have a reference to the interpreta- 
 tion of the Old Testament in general ; and, lastly, we 
 shall consider those things which it is necessary prin- 
 cipally to attend to in interpreting each of the books 
 of the Old Testament, according to the diversity of 
 subject and style, which is generally called the special 
 interpretation^ of the Old Testament. 
 
 ^ The words in the original are " quce specialis appellari 
 solet, \ ■ T. interpretatio." I am not aware that any such 
 
INTRODUCTION. 'ti3 
 
 4. In laying down these Principles of the Interpre- 
 tation of the Hebrew Scriptures, I have followed the 
 mode of comprehending in distinct paragraphs the 
 separate points treated of, summed up as it were in 
 short propositions, and of afterwards illustrating these 
 by such observations as seemed necessary. 
 
 phraseology as general and special interpietation has been 
 adopted in our language. The meaning is, ho\rever, easily 
 understood Tr. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 PART FIRST. 
 
 OF THOSE ACQUIREMENTSANDQUALIFICATiONSVVHlCH 
 WILL RENDER ONE A GOOD INTERPRETER OF THE 
 OLD TESTAMENT IN THE PRESENT AGE. 
 
 SECTION FIRST. 
 
 OF THOSK STUDIES INSEPARABLY CONNECTED WITH THE 
 RIGHT INTERPRETATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 
 ON THE LANGUAGE IN WHICH THE BOOKS OF THE OLD 
 TESTAMENT WERE WRITTEN. 
 
 §1- 
 
 Since the object I have proposed to myself, is 
 not merely to lay down the rules to be observed 
 in the interpretation of the books of the Old 
 Testament, but, in general, to teach all that is 
 necessary to form a good interpreter of them, 
 such as may be expected in the present age ; for 
 this purpose it seems necessary, in the outset, to 
 
26 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 take a view, first of those things which must be 
 known and attended to, by a well qualified in- 
 terpreter ; next, of the virtues and endowments of 
 mind most particularly to be desired in him ; and, 
 finally, of some branches of learning highly use- 
 ful to him : consequently, I must, in preference 
 to every thing else, begin with treating of the 
 language in which the books of the Old Testa- 
 ment have been written. 
 
 Observation 1. It is very evident, that a knowledge 
 of a great variety of things is required of him who de- 
 sires to become a useful and valuable interpreter of the 
 books of the Old Testament, in the present day. To 
 this, in a certain degree also, are conducive both high 
 intellectual powers, and Hkewise certain good dis- 
 positions of the heart. There are, besides, branches 
 of learning which, although, perhaps, they may seem 
 less necessary, are however productive of great ad- 
 vantages. We shall, therefore, be obliged to discuss 
 these three points, before we proceed to the particular 
 manner of interpreting the Old Testament. 
 
 Obs. 2. To the studies, therefore, connected by an 
 indissoluble bond, with the interpretations of the Old 
 Testament, I not only refer, according to my plan, 
 whatever pertains to the language in which tliese an- 
 cient sacred books are written, but likewise what is 
 useful for exercising the critical art regarding them ; 
 nay, even I am desirous that a becoming regard should 
 be paid to the authenticity, integrity, and historical 
 
P.I. S.I. C.I. §2. 27 
 
 faith to be given to these books ; and to the remark- 
 ing of the divine interpositions as to religion, which 
 are contained in them. Since we must begin with the 
 language in which the books of the Old Testament 
 have been written, let us now see what is particularly 
 to be remarked with regard to it, which will be use- 
 ful to our purpose. 
 
 §2. 
 
 By far the greatest part of what is compre- 
 hended in the books of the Old Testament, is 
 written in that language which we call Hebrew. 
 
 Obs. 1. The Hebrew language got its name from 
 the Hebrews, the forefathers of the Israelitish nation, 
 among whom it was in use. It might also have 
 been called the Jewish language, as being that em- 
 ployed by the subjects of the Jewish kingdom ; 2 
 Kings xviii. 26 ; 2 Chron. xxxii. 18 ; Isaiah xxxvi. 
 11; and also the Canaanitish, Isaiah xix. 18; not 
 only because it was used in the country of Canaan by 
 the Israelites, but likewise because the language of 
 the Canaanites was, in its origin and genius, the same 
 with that of the Hebrews. The superstition of the 
 Jews, after their return from the Babylonish captivity, 
 conferred upon it the title of the holy language. 
 
 Obs. 2. The Hebrew language is very ancient, and 
 its original, in the opinion of all the most learned, 
 must be referred to an age long prior to the origin 
 of the Israelitish race. Nay, it even seems to have 
 been coeval with the human race, and to have been 
 
28 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 that language which, surviving the deluge with Noah, 
 was the only dialect in the new world, and common 
 to the succeeding generations ; Genes, xi. 1. It after- 
 wards contracted a degree of diversity among the 
 different nations which bordered upon each other, 
 such as we observe in the dialects of one and the same 
 language : but, among the Hebrews, it seems pro- 
 bable that, approaching nearest to its primitive nature 
 and genius, it of all the others retained the clearest 
 marks of that simplicity which is peculiar to children, 
 and points in no obscure manner to the infancy of the 
 human race. 
 
 Obs. 3. A difference of opinion exists regarding the 
 antiquity of the Hebrew letters which we now use. 
 It is impossible to decide positively in this matter ; 
 but it seems most probable that these letters, from 
 their very nature and form, are the most ancient. 
 For, as in the East, the art of writing was in use from 
 the very earliest times, so one and the same mode of 
 writing this very ancient language always prevailed : 
 which, in the course of time, acquired some diversity 
 in its form, among the different nations to which it 
 was common, but among the Hebrews deviated less 
 from its original form than among the other nations. 
 The letters, then, which the Hebrews originally used, 
 were more rudely shaped, and continued with very 
 little change down to the Babylonish captivity ; but 
 after the Jews were restored to their country, although 
 in their general conformation they still remained the 
 same as before, yet they underwent some change, by 
 which they attained greater elegance. In which form 
 they now present a character of distinguished beauty : 
 
p. I. s. I. c. I. § 2. 29 
 
 and it is not without reason that v.e believe Ezra to 
 have been the inventor of their present form, used in 
 the copies of the sacred books. At least no one will, 
 I think, persuade me that the letters used, in that most 
 impure of all dialects, the Samaritan, are more ancient 
 in their nature than the Hebrew. 
 
 Obs. 4. What antiquity is to be assigned to the 
 ^nal letters we have no means of determining. It 
 is no improbable opinion that they were already in 
 use when the Alexandrian version was made ; and 
 were originally used to express numbers greater than 
 those which were marked by the common letters of 
 the Alphabet ; but afterwards were deemed proper to 
 be placed at the end of words. 
 
 Obs. 5. There is no sufficient reason for doubt- 
 ing that the ancient Hebrews had certain marks for 
 vowels, which, when it seemed necessary, might be 
 attached to the letters ; but which, like those used 
 by the Arabians even at the present day, and by the 
 ancient Syrians, were very few, probably only three, 
 and those of the most simple form. Nor is it any ob- 
 jection to this opinion, that the Mosaic Pentateuch is 
 used without points in the Jewish Sjmagogues, which 
 custom peculiar reasons* introduced after the labours 
 
 a The author ought to have stated these peculiar reasoits, or 
 at least referred to some book where they would have been 
 found enumerated. It is believed that only one reascm has 
 been attempted to be brought, by the defenders of the high an- 
 tiquity of the Hebrew points, to account for this universal 
 custom of having the principal copy of the Pentateuch in 
 every Jewish synagogue without points; which has been con- 
 sidered by most learned men as a virtual acknowledgrnent, by 
 the Jews themselves, of the recent origin of the vowel points 
 
30 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 of the Talmudists in editing these books were fi- 
 nished. But it is by no means probable that vowel 
 marks of any sort were of the same high antiquity 
 with the letters. Perhaps certain small points were 
 begun to be added to some words, by which the di- 
 versity of pronunciation and signification were indi- 
 cated, and these, in process of time, gave rise to the 
 vowel points ; of which very ancient custom, traces 
 seem to remain in the writing of the Syriac language. 
 Certainly, however, we owe the Hebrew vowels 
 which are now employed in pronouncing the words, 
 to the Masorites, or certain learned Jews in later ages, 
 who applied themselves with the most minute eager- 
 ness to the grammar and criticism of the sacred books. 
 By them the vowel points were invented and adapted 
 for conveying the ancient pronunciation of the words, 
 which, in this most sacred language, they endeavoured 
 to preserve, and, as far as possible, religiously to trans- 
 mit to posterity. The letters >ix, called matres 
 lectionis, or the principal helps for reading without 
 points, only began in later times to supply the place 
 of vowels. 
 
 Obs. 6. By the same Masorites, the Sc/tevata, 
 
 This reason the reader will find stated and well refuted by- 
 Bauer in his edition of Sal. Glass. Phil. Sacr. sect. i. p. 141. 
 IVluntinghe, a countryman of the author, in an excellent little 
 work, entitled Brevis expositio Critices Vet. Feed, publislied so 
 late as 1827, thus expresses himself on this subject, — " lu 
 synagogis porro Judwi Codice utuntur Pentateuchi non pitnc- 
 tato, ut sic adumbrent ipsum Mosis avToy^a(pov in area reposi- 
 tum," p. 35 ; which fact he considers to be one strong proof, 
 among many others, of the recent addition of the vowei points 
 to tlie Hebrew language. — Tr. 
 
p. I. s. I. c. I. §2. 31 
 
 as they are called, were invented; these they em- 
 ployed, partly to mark the letters to which pointsi 
 were not attached, and partly to suggest some fugi- 
 tive and scarcely audible sounds, occasionally used 
 in pronunciation, but not at all connected with the 
 vowels. And, for the same reason, the Patach 
 furtive was invented by them, to indicate a very 
 slender vowel sound, used in pronunciation before 
 certain letters. 
 
 Obs. 7. Nor do the diacritic points attached to 
 some letters, seem to have been originally employ- 
 ed, although they are certainly, for the most part, 
 adapted to the ancient mode of pronunciation ; as, for 
 instance, the point of the letter ^ or ^, Dagesch or 
 Mappik. The Arabians and Syrians have point? of the 
 same kind ; but these are also not of great antiquity. 
 
 Obs. 8. The marks of the accents too, are of 
 modern origin. The other Hebrew dialects, or the 
 cognate languages, have them not. They have in 
 them, however, something adapted to the ancient state 
 of the language, in so far as they mark where the em- 
 phasis was placed, and indicate the manner in which 
 the separate members of the sentences were divided : 
 and some marks of punctuation seem to have been in 
 use, and occasionally attached, some time before the 
 coming of Christ. The origin of the forms of the ac- 
 cents themselves is, not altogether without probabiH- 
 ty, sought for in the musical notes wont to be attach- 
 ed to the sacred hymns ; which were afterwards add- 
 ed even to the prose writings, for the sake of indicat- 
 ing a certain modulation ; and, indeed, it appears that 
 the Jews rather sung than read their sacred writings. 
 
32 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Ohs. 9. The unchanging nature of the Hebrew 
 language, as observable in almost all the writings of 
 the Old Testament, deserves to be remarked. For, 
 in the great diversity of ages and authors, and of style, 
 both prose and poetical, the language retains the high- 
 est similarity. In the writings composed before the 
 Babylonish captivity, very little change is observable 
 which it had undergone. But, after the Hebrews had 
 been expelled from their country, and were scattered 
 among other nations, they were unable to regain the 
 original purity and strength of their language, even 
 in the best times after their restoration to their 
 country. And, at last, in consequence of the various 
 vicissitudes to which they were subjected, and parti- 
 cularly the final destruction of their state by the Ro- 
 mans, the Hebrew language went altogether out of 
 common use, so that even the more learned and skil- 
 ful Jews were quite unable, in their writings, to ex- 
 hibit its native image when now dead. 
 
 §3. 
 
 Only a few parts of the Old Testament are 
 composed in that dialect generally denominated 
 the Chaldaic, and which is allied to the Hebrew. 
 There are, however, to be found some foreign 
 words. 
 
 Ohs. 1. We find written in Chaldaic from the mid- 
 dle of the 4th verse of the second chapter of Daniel, 
 to the end of the seventh chapter, and from the 
 
p. I. s. I. c. I. § 3. 33 
 
 fourth chaper, 7th verse of Ezra, to chap. vi. 18, 
 and Ukewise chap. vii. 12 — 16. The Chaldaic verse 
 which we have in the prophetic writings of Jeremiah, 
 chap. X. 11, is justly suspected of not being genuine, 
 as it interrupts and confuses the connection of the sen- 
 timents. 
 
 Obs. 2. The Chaldaic language derives its nam-e 
 from the nation of the Chaldees. The genius of 
 the vernacular language of that people was quite 
 different from that of the language called Chaldaic, as 
 may be collected from the Chaldaic proper names. 
 We must seek for the native country of the Chaldees 
 in the northern parts of Asia, far distant from the 
 countrj' of the Israehtes, Jerem. v. 13, vi. 22. Pour- 
 ing out from their native seats in immense multitudes 
 in search of new habitations, and directing their course 
 southwards, they attacked the Babylonians : and, hav- 
 ing subverted their empire, they in time adopted the 
 language of the conquered peojile, which, in conse- 
 quence, came to be denominated the Chaldaic. 
 
 Obs. 3. This Babylonian or Chaldaic language 
 might also be called Aramaean ; Dan. ii. 4. The 
 name Arama^a, in its widest signification, was given 
 to the whole tract of country which lies between the 
 Orontes and the Euphrates, and between this last 
 river and the Tigris ; nay, in some parts it extended 
 farther. In the eastern part of this tract, principal!}^ 
 between the Euphrates and the Tigris, lay Babylonia 
 or Eastern Araraaea ; and in the western part, between 
 the Orontes and the Euphrates, Syria or Western 
 Aramsea was situated. 
 
 Obs. 4. The language in use in all this extent of 
 
 D 
 
34 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 country was the Aramfean,^ which was nearly allied to 
 the Hebrew. The parts of Daniel and Ezra which 
 we find in this dialect are written with the Hebrew 
 letters and points ; for these writings were destined for 
 the use of the Jews, and from them they have come 
 down to us written in that manner, to which they were 
 principally accustomed. The Chaldaic language, 
 indeed, although made use of by the Jews, was not 
 however, as that of the Hebrew, venerable in re- 
 spect of sanctity, and, therefore, was not supposed 
 to require the same high degree of religious regard. 
 The most of those things which we may have to say, 
 however, regarding the study of the Hebrew language, 
 will equally apply to the Chaldaic, from the intimate 
 connection between the two dialects. 
 
 Obs. 5. In reading the books of the Old Testament, 
 some foreign words from time to time occur. In Gen. 
 xxxi. 47, we find two Aramaean words, but these are 
 from a cognate dialect. There are many Egyptian 
 words, particularly in the books of Moses and the 
 poem of Job. In the later books, some Persic words 
 occur : none of which, consequently, can be expound- 
 ed from the Hebrew tongue. Some have been of 
 
 a For some good remarks on this dialect, the reader may 
 consult Pfannkuche's Dissertation " On the Langiiaye of Pa- 
 lestine in the Age of Christ," translated in the second vol. 
 of the Biblical Cabinet. 
 
 As to the hypothesis maintained by the author in this dis- 
 sertation, it will he well that ihe student, before forming an 
 opinion, should peruse the tenth section of the first chapter of 
 the second part of Ilug^s Introduction to the New Testament ; 
 p. 32 of the second volume of the Eng. Translation Tr. 
 
P.I. S.I. c. I. § 4. 35 
 
 opinion that in the books of Daniel and Ecclesiastes 
 there were certain words of Greek extraction : but 
 whether this be correct or not, is not our business 
 here to inquire. 
 
 §4. 
 
 The knowledge of the Hebrew language must 
 be altogether derived from its own sources — 
 namely, from the Old Testament. 
 
 Obs. 1. The Hebrew writings which we find in the 
 volume of the Old Testament, are the only ones which 
 remain in that language. Certain Talraudical writ- 
 ings are indeed extant, which may seem to be He- 
 brew, and are usually so called : but their diction is 
 less pure, and is greatly contaminated. Still more im- 
 pure are the later Rabbinical writings. The language 
 at present used by most of the Jews, is only a peculiar 
 barbarous dialect, made up of a mixture of the Rabbin- 
 ical dialect and German. 
 
 Obs. 2. Thus then, in the same manner as the 
 knowledge of the Greek and Latin languatjes must 
 be sought for in those writers who formerly spoke 
 those languages in their purity, so, undoubtedly, the 
 proper manner of attaining the knowledge of the 
 Hebrew tongue is, by application to the books of 
 the Old Testament alone, its only pure source. And 
 there have been persons who, by assiduous and dili- 
 gent reading of these books, when scarcely any other 
 aid was to be had, acquired eminent skill in this lan- 
 guage ; such, for instance, as S. Glassius, and J. Coc- 
 
36 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 ceius, both of whom we have mentioned in our intro- 
 duction, § 2. Obs. 4. 
 
 §5. 
 
 But, however, since we have not very ample 
 remains of the Hebrew language in the Old 
 Testament, these are not sufficient to give us 
 such a knowledge of it, as will be altogether sa- 
 tisfactory. We must, therefore, seek for such 
 additional assistance as we can find ; and, for this 
 purpose, none is more valuable than what the cog- 
 nate oriental dialects supply. 
 
 Obs 1. There are writings in the Old Testament 
 of such various kinds, and treating of such different 
 subjects, that they contain a very great number of 
 diverse words and forms of speech : but, still no 
 one can believe that they contain the whole extent 
 of the ancient language. Besides, we find not a few 
 derivatives, whose primitives are lost ; other words oc- 
 cur rarely, or only once ; others are of obscure and 
 uncertain signification ; consequently, even the best 
 Hebrew scholars, who were without the excellent aids 
 enjoyed in later times, met with many words, in the 
 explanation of which they were at a loss, and not a 
 few, in explaining which, it has now been demonstrated 
 that they erred. 
 
 Obs. 2. There have not, however, been wanting 
 some, who themselves thought, and endeavoured to 
 persuade others, that the Hebrew language, such as 
 
p. I. s. I. c. I. § 3. 37 
 
 it exists in the Old Testament, was quite sufficient for 
 explaining itself; and who, in consequence, endeavour- 
 ed to acquire the knowledge of it solely from itself, 
 and to arrive at the signification of the words from the 
 figure, situation, and similitude of the letters ; or, by a 
 comparison of passages, to lay down some general and 
 abstract signification of words, through their own per- 
 spicacity ; or who proposed some ingenious fiction of 
 their imagination for this purpose : among whom, the 
 most celebrated for their opinions and attempts at 
 conjectures, were Forster, Avenarius, Bohlius, Gus- 
 setius, Neumannus, and Loescherus. 
 
 Obs. 3. Some assistance may be derived from the 
 traditions of the Jews : but this is confined chiefly to 
 words and expressions in general use, and their com- 
 mon signification, but are of little value with regard 
 to such as are more rare, or occur but once only. 
 For although the Jews had a great religious care of 
 the sacred books and their diction, it was not, how- 
 ever, possible, that in the heavy calamities of their 
 nation, and through a long series of ages, they should, 
 by a faithful and unerring tradition, have retained the 
 true significations of all words in all cases ; or that 
 they should not have committed frequent mistakes. 
 And there have been Rabbins who ingenuously con- 
 fessed, that there are many words so very obscure 
 as to render it necessary to search for their explana- 
 tion from other sources. 
 
 Obs. 4. Neither are the ancient versions of the 
 Old Testament without their use in this respect. 
 The authors of those which were made immediately 
 from the sacred volume, had more knowledge of tlie 
 Hebrew language the nearer they were to the times 
 
38 PRINCTPLES OF INTRRPRETATroX. 
 
 ill wliich the language was yet in some degree flourish- 
 ing. They do not, however, deserve to be esteemed 
 in all respects faithful guides to the knowledge of it. 
 For it by no means survived in its ancient vigour, in 
 the age even of the most ancient of these interpreters ; 
 and they, consequentlj^ in translating the more ob- 
 scure and rare words and forms of expression, have 
 given not a few indications of their ignorance and un- 
 skilfulness. 
 
 Obs. 3. Our safest and most useful resort, therefore, 
 is to the allied and cognate oriental languages. For, 
 since the very ancient language which the Hebrews 
 used, was in so far common to them with the other 
 nations, as that in each of them was found something^ 
 peculiar, generally known by the term dialect, no- 
 thing certainly is more consonant to reason, than 
 to apply for aid to those dialects, in order to be en- 
 abled to restore some life to the dead language. In 
 the signification, indeed, of the same words common to 
 the different oriental dialects, we frequently observe 
 the greatest difference : but this takes place in the 
 secondary senses, and not in that original and very 
 simple idea, from which those in course of time pro- 
 ceeded : and often, too, the greatest similitude of the 
 signification now in use of the same words exists in 
 all the dialects. A great change also, of the vowels, 
 nay even of the cognate consonants, takes place in the 
 words which are common to the different dialects ; and, 
 in the construction and whole, form of the language, 
 there is something peculiar to each of these dialects. 
 Still, however, the easily discernible lineaments of a 
 sisterly connection remain, which shew them to have 
 been all descended from one common parent. 
 
p. I. s. I. c. r. § 5. 39 
 
 Ohs. G. These languages are distinguished by the 
 appellation Oriental, because they were formerly used, 
 and partly continue to be so at this day, by those 
 nations which we are accustomed to consider as 
 inhabiting the Eastern part of our world. In Ger- 
 many, of late, it has become customary rather to de- 
 nominate them Shemitish, as considering the former 
 denomination too vague ; and because it seems more 
 proper to designate languages from the nations b}' 
 which they are spoken, than from any particular 
 country. But, since the Canaanitish nations, which 
 were not the descendants of Shem, but of Ham, spoke 
 a dialect of these languages ; and since Elam, the son 
 of Shem, was the principal progenitor of the Persians, 
 (Gen. X. 22.) whose language was not related to the 
 Hebrew, this new appellation does not seem to de- 
 serve to be preferred to the former ; and we deem it 
 better to retain the ancient one, provided it is always 
 borne in mind, that those only are called Eastern lan- 
 guages, which are intimately related to each other 
 by affinity of dialect. 
 
 Obs. 7. The following are esteemed the principal 
 of these Oriental dialects — the Arabic, Aramaean, Sa- 
 maritan, and Ethiopic ; to which some add the Tal- 
 mudic and Rabbinical ; regarding these, it will be 
 proper to treat in a separate chapter. Not connect- 
 ed with them, are some other languages, besides the 
 Persic and Turkish, used still in Eastern countries, al- 
 though they emploj^ the Arabic characters. But 
 these have indeed a very different nature and origin. 
 
40 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 §6. 
 
 The greatest attention to Grammar is highly 
 valuable in acquiring a right knowledge of the 
 Hebrew language, and in arriving at a correct 
 interpretation of the Old Testament: and the 
 use of the best Lexicons is also no mean assist- 
 ance in gaining these objects. 
 
 Obs. 1. There have occasionaJIy been persons, by 
 no means contemptible for their attainments in the 
 philology and criticism of the Old Testament, who, 
 from not being sufficiently acquainted with the na- 
 ture of the grammar of the Hebrew language, have 
 put absurd interpretations on some passages, or sus- 
 pected errors to exist where there were none. But 
 no one can be a good interpreter of books composed 
 in any language, who is not a good grammarian. 
 The grammatical study of the Hebrew language, 
 however, has in itself many things which will give 
 delight to an ingenuous mind. For the more one ad- 
 vances in this study, the greater pleasure will he de- 
 rive from that language, which unites the greatest 
 simplicity of the language of children, with both an 
 energy and conciseness truly admirable. 
 
 Obs. 2. The first Christians who learned and 
 taught others Hebrew grammar, followed the Jews as 
 their sole guides. But, from the time of A. Schult- 
 ens, the immortal restorer of Hebrew literature, the 
 true method of studying the Hebrew language, which 
 
p. 1. s. I. c. II. § 1. 41 
 
 is by a comparison with the other Oriental dialects, 
 began to be pursued. 
 
 Obs. 3. Dictionaries are at all times most useful 
 aids for acquiring a knowledge of the Hebrew lan- 
 guage, and for interpreting the Old Testament, as 
 they give at one view the different forms of the same 
 word, and its different derivatives. And the greater 
 and more correct use which is made of the cognate 
 dialects in these works, the more will they be valuable 
 for imparting a sound knowledge of the Hebrew lan- 
 guage. 
 
 CHAPTER n. 
 
 OF THE COGNATE DIALECTS OF THE HEBREW 
 LANGUAGE. 
 
 Since, in supplying the defects of the Hebrew 
 language, those languages which, as dialects, 
 are most nearly allied to it, are the most effect- 
 ual means ; in this respect, undoubtedly, the 
 first place is due to the Arabic dialect. 
 
 Obs. 1. In its external form, the Arabic language 
 seems to differ exceedingly from the Hebrew. Their 
 additional letters, however, are not new, but are some 
 of the old ones marked merely by a point, to indicate 
 a difference of pronunciation, and of signification 
 
42 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 thence for the most part derived. They have like- 
 wise another order of the alphabet. The more an- 
 cient, however, was plainly similar to the Hebrew, 
 and has always remained so when the letters are used 
 to mark numbers. Besides, however different or 
 more free the manner of writing which has prevailed 
 among the Arabians, there still remains in some of 
 their letters some degree of affinity with the Hebrew. 
 The vowel points used by the Arabians are fewer and 
 more simple ; but in this respect they are nearer to 
 the ancient mode employed formerly by the Hebrews. 
 
 Obs. 2. When, however, we attend to the internal 
 structure of the Arabic language, we perceive the 
 greatest similitude in it to the Hebrew. This is seen 
 in the words and their use ; in their phrases, and in 
 the whole manner of expressing themselves. It is 
 discernible also in the peculiar structure, and in the 
 grammatical form of the language. Neither does the 
 declension of the nouns in Arabic, which is unknown 
 to the Hebrews, form any exception ; for it is a late 
 invention, and is probably in some degree an imita- 
 tion of the Greeks, and has introduced no change into 
 the language itself, or the structure of the nouns. It 
 is rejected too by the common people ; and the Ara- 
 bians, who are most tenacious of their paternal cus- 
 toms, condemn it as a late invention of the gramma- 
 rians of a particular country called C>^y*a^ Hadra- 
 tnaut, a very ancient name, taken from one of the 
 sons of Joktan, called niii'i^rr, Gen. x. 26. 
 
 Obs. 3. By how much the Arabic language is 
 more ancient, and has been preserved in a state of 
 purit}' to the present time, by so much the more is it 
 
p. I. s. I. c. I. § 1. 43 
 
 adapted to supplj^ the defects of the Hebrew. The 
 Arabians deduce the origin, both of their language 
 and nation, partly from Joktan, whose posterity re- 
 tired into Arabia, Gen. x. 25, 26, and who was of the 
 race of Shem, as well as Abraham, the founder of the 
 Israelitish nation, partly from Ishmael, the son of 
 Abraham by Hagar, by whose posterity it appears 
 that a portion of Arabia was peopled. Gen. xvi. 
 12. But as the Arabian race was connected by the 
 bonds of affinity with the Hebrew, so the languages 
 of both had the same primitive language as their 
 source, and were in nowise afterwards distinguished 
 but by difference of dialect. Of this high antiquity, 
 therefore, the Arabic language remains to this present 
 day, and is in manj' parts of the world highly flourish- 
 ing, and, as far as regards its internal nature, at all 
 times, and everywhere, unchanged. In the peninsula 
 of Arabia itself, in consequence of the separation from 
 other countries, and the genius of the people little 
 given to change, it has remained quite the same as it 
 was in the remotest ages. And the changes which it 
 has undergone are neither very great, nor have they 
 affected the peculiar internal structure of the lan- 
 guage. ^ Nay, even after it had extended itself far 
 
 ' The translator is not chargeable with the confused state- 
 ment in this paragraph. The author is manifestly labouring 
 to exalt the value of a knowledge of the Arabic language to 
 the interpretation of the Old Testament, and, from his eager- 
 ness to establish his point, has gone so far as to assert that the 
 Arabic language has remained in the peninsula of Arabia 
 quite unchanged from the time of its first inhabitants; that 
 is, from the time of Joktan's sons to the present day. His 
 mind seems to have had some misgivings as to the correctnesi 
 
44 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 and wide beyond the bounds of Arabia, it was not 
 very much changed ; although it was in the inmost 
 recesses of Arabia where it was most pure, and re- 
 mained most unchanged. And in this language very 
 many books, in every department of human learning, 
 have been published, and a great number of writings, 
 both in prose and verse, of which only a part have 
 been printed. The Arabians themselves have always 
 cultivated it with the greatest care ; and there have 
 not been wanting among them persons who have be- 
 stowed great labour in the formation of dictionaries. 
 Its admirable application to explaining the Hebrew 
 language was first clearly pointed out by Albert 
 Schultens. 
 
 of this sweeping assertion, and he qualifies it in a vague man- 
 ner in this last sentence. 
 
 No one will be disposed to deny the value of a knowledge of 
 the cognate eastern dialects, and particularly of the Arabic, to 
 aid the scholiast and lexicographer in the investigation of the 
 signification of those words which but rarely occur in the He- 
 brew Scriptures. Perhaps, however, almost all that can be 
 done in this way, has been already accomplished by the great 
 scholars who have applied themselves to this subject since 
 Schultens led the way to the elucidation of the Hebrew lan- 
 guage, in its more unusual words, phrases, and constructions, 
 from these cognate eastern dialects. The principal results of 
 their investigations will be found in Winer's and Gesenius' 
 Lexicons, and Rosenmuller's Scholia. It seems therefore 
 doubtful whether the great expense of time and labour neces . 
 sary to acquire these languages, and particularly the Arabic, 
 will be repaid to the Theologian by the advantages gained : 
 especially when it is recollected, what ought always to be borne 
 in mind, that a language imperfectly learned, or not fully 
 mastered, will, in critical investigations, be more likely to 
 mislead than to assist. — Tr, 
 
p. I. s. I. c. I. § 2. 45 
 
 § 2. 
 
 The Arameean dialect is of no little value 
 in explaining the Hebrew language, although 
 not equal in this respect to the Arabic. 
 
 Obs. 1. That the Aramaean dialect, called the 
 Syrian in 2 Kings xviii. 26. Isaiah xxxvi. 11, and of 
 which we have already spoken in chap. i. § 3, is very 
 ancient, and allied to the Hebrew, may be principally 
 collected from Genes, xxxi. 47, where we find a name 
 taken from it in which something of the peculiarity 
 of this dialect is found. And as the same thing is 
 perceptible also in the Chaldaic parts of Daniel and 
 Ezra, in the Syriac version of the Bible, and other 
 Aramaean writings, it is evident that this dialect, as 
 far as its peculiar nature is concerned, was always very 
 much the same ; yet from the various vicissitudes to 
 which the Aramaean race has been exposed, princi- 
 pally brought upon them by foreigners, it has been 
 much more changed in progress of time than the 
 Arabic. 
 
 Obs. 2. In the very great similitude between the 
 Syriac and Chaldaic, which is the reason why they 
 are called by the common name of Aramaean, we still 
 find a very great diflference between them in the let- 
 ters and points, and particularly in the vowel points. 
 The number of the letters, and their order, is how- 
 ever the same in both dialects. That the writinsr of 
 the Chaldaic differs not from the Hebrew is owing to 
 
46 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 the Jews, who employed the Chahlee language : but 
 there is scarcely a ground of doubt that anciently the 
 Hebrew writing was very similar to the Syriac. With 
 respect to the letters, the Syriac is written in two ways : 
 the more ancient, which is generally called Estrange- 
 lo, from the Greek word Gr^oyy'Jko^, because it is of a 
 rounder form, approaches more near to the Hebrew : 
 The more recent again, which arose out of the other, has 
 also retained clear indications of its ancient form. Its 
 vowel marks are also of two kinds : the one sort old" 
 er, consisting of mere points, and these few and very 
 simple, approaching therefore very closely to the 
 Arabic and the ancient Hebrew system ; the other 
 more recent, and derived from the Greek vowels 
 which Theophilus of Edessa first employed in the 
 eighth century, that he might more accurately ex- 
 press the pronunciation of proper names when tran- 
 slating Homer into Syriac verse. 
 
 Ohs. 3. Nearly the same similitude exists between 
 the Araraeean dialect and the Hebrew as between the 
 Arabic and the Hebrew. The whole difference arises 
 from a different use of the same words, and a more 
 rare or more frequent employment of certain peculiar 
 idioms, or in some trifling diflference in grammatical 
 composition or inflexion, or syntactical structure. In 
 this dialect, however, there is generally a greater sim- 
 plicity, rudeness, and clownishness, while the Hebrew 
 is more elegant, and the Arabic more rich and luxu- . 
 riant. 
 
 Ohs. 4. The Aramtean dialect is now almost ex- 
 tinct, or at least exists only in a very weak and lan- 
 guid state. The Chaldaic langu.ige, such as it exist- 
 
p. I. s. I. c. II. § 3. 47 
 
 ed among the Jews for some time, as seen in some 
 portions of Daniel and Ezra and the Chaldee para- 
 phrases, finally underwent the same fate as the He- 
 brew. 
 
 The remains of the ancient Syriac language which 
 still exist are very trifling, and much inferior in pro- 
 portion to its original extent. 
 
 Ohs. 5. The Hebrew may, however, derive no 
 contemptible aid from the Aramaean dialect. It ought, 
 however, chiefly to be employed, where it will be 
 found very valuable, in illustrating the language of 
 some of the later writers, such as Jeremiah, Ezekiel, 
 Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, Zachariah, Mala- 
 chi, and Ecclesiastes. There are many writings re- 
 maining, written partly in the Chaldaic language, or 
 eastern Aramaean, partly in the Syriac or western 
 Aramcean. Among these are some parts of the books 
 of Daniel and Ezra, and the paraphrases of the Old 
 Testament ; and besides these, there are versions of the 
 Old and New Testament, and many writings chiefly on 
 theological subjects, which have only in part yet been 
 published. It does not appear that poetry was ever 
 cultivated with any success by the Aramaeans, for 
 which their language seems much less adapted than 
 the Hebrew or Arabic. There exist some unedited 
 Syriac Lexicons, which, however, we can scarcely 
 suppose to approach to the excellence of the superior 
 Arabic Dictionaries. 
 
 §3. 
 
 The Ethiopic and Samaritan dialects are 
 much less useful than the Arabic and Aramaean ; 
 
48 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 the Talmudic and Rabbinical are tlie least use- 
 ful of all : and there is too little remaining worth 
 notice of the Phenician and cognate Palmyrene 
 language to be of any service. 
 
 Ohs. 1. It may appear surprising that any offset 
 from the primitive language should have been remov- 
 ed to such a distance as to be cultivated by the Ethio- 
 pians. But the Ethiopic dialect was not immediately 
 propagated from it, but descended through the Ara- 
 bic dialect ; it being certain that even previous to the 
 age of Moses there were Arabians who, passing the 
 interposed gulf of the sea, migrated into the opposite 
 region of Africa which lies above Egypt. This dia- 
 lect then, in its internal structure, clearly shews that 
 it is descended from the Arabic ; while, in its exter- 
 nal form, it recedes very far, both from the Arabic 
 and from the other oriental dialects : and in its pro- 
 nunciation it has contracted some roughness from the 
 inflamed temperature of the African atmosphere. Its 
 letters are twenty-six in number, and, differing from 
 what is usual in the neighbouring languages, they are 
 written from the left hand to the right. The vowel 
 marks are joined to these letters in such a manner as 
 to produce on them some change. All the change, 
 however, seems to be derived partly from the usage 
 of the Greeks, partly from tlie custom of the country, 
 and partly from the genius of the inventor. It is now 
 a dead language ; the Amharic having succeeded into 
 its place, which is derived from the ancient Ethiopic, 
 and from a mivfure of various African languages. 
 
p. I. s, I. c. II. § 3. 49 
 
 The use of the ancient language in its native country 
 is wholly restricted to religion, and it only survives in 
 some ecclesiastical writings, and in the translations of 
 the sacred writings: of these, too, only a part has 
 been printed, so that its utihty is very much circum- 
 scribed. 
 
 Obs. 2. Still more circumscribed is the utility of 
 tlie Samaritan dialect. It was peculiar to those per- 
 sons of the vulgar class whom the Assyrian king left 
 in the country after the destruction of the Israelitic 
 kingdom of the ten tribes, and those new colonists 
 from the Babylonish countries who were intermingled 
 with them, 2 Kings xvii. 24 ; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 9, 21 ; 
 Isaiah xvii. 6, to which inhabitants of the country the 
 name of Samaritans was applied, from Samaria, the 
 chief city of the ancient kingdom. It is therefore a 
 sort of degenerate shoot from the ancient Hebrew and 
 Aramaean dialects, besides what other impurity it may 
 have derived from the mixed rabble of various nations 
 by whom it was spoken. It has now almost gone out 
 of use; and the few remaining Samaritans of the 
 present day use vernacularly the Arabic language. 
 Scarcely are any relics of it preserved save in the Sa- 
 maritan version of the Pentateuch. Its letters them- 
 selves, derived seemingly from the Hebrew and 
 Arameean in their ruder state, have likewise suffered 
 some degree of deterioration from the admixture of 
 people already alluded to. No vowel marks added 
 to tlie letters appear ; from which, however, it by no 
 means follows that such were never used by the Sa- 
 nuiritans. 
 
 Ohs. 3. What is called the Talmudic language, is 
 
 £ 
 
50 PRINCIPLES OF INTEUPIIETATION. 
 
 divided iiito the more ancient, in which the Mischna, 
 or text of the Talmud, is written ; and the more re- 
 cent, in which the Gemara, or the supplement and 
 commentary of that work, is composed. The older 
 the specimens of this dialect are, the greater si- 
 militude they have to the Hebrew, and approach 
 nearly as much to it as the Latinity of the middle 
 ages to the purer language of the Augustan age. 
 The Rabbinical language again, as it is called, ma- 
 nifests in most of its words its Hebrew origin, and 
 bears the same relation to the ancient Hebrew lan- 
 guage, as the modern Italian to the ancient Roman : 
 so that if any aid is to be derived from either of these 
 dialects, particularly, however, from the Talmudic, 
 towards a better understanding of the Hebrew, it is at 
 best but trifling, and scarcely worthy of being men- 
 tioned. 
 
 Obs. 4. Had any written remains of the ancient 
 Plienician language, which was not unlike the old 
 Hebrew, come down to us, no small advantage would 
 have redounded from these. We have only, how- 
 ever, a very few fragments of this utterly lost lan- 
 guage scattered here and there, and much corrupted, 
 such particularly as that passage of Plautus in his 
 Poenul. Act. 5, sc. 1. In the Palmy rene language, 
 whicli is allied to the Oriental dialects, there are some 
 inscriptions remaining, in an unusual (^peregrino) cha- 
 racter of writing, and very obscure and difficult of 
 interpretation. 
 
111. §1. 51 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 OF THE HISTORY OF THE HEBREW TEXT, AND THE 
 SOURCES OF ITS CRITICISM IN GENERAL. 
 
 §1- 
 
 It is necessary to the person who vvoukl apply 
 criticism aright, where it is required in inter- 
 preting the Old Testament, that he be not alto- 
 gether unacquainted with the history of the 
 Hebrew text. 
 
 Obs. 1. He who is very little acquainted with 
 the history of the Hebrew text, can form no just 
 judgment regarduig the changes which may have 
 been made on any passage either by various read- 
 ings or by other means, or regarding the value of 
 the various readings themselves ; nor consequently 
 exercise rightly or properly that criticism which is 
 so often required of the interpreter of the Old Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 Obs. 2. This history' of the Hebrew text, of which 
 Ave can only treat very slightly in these principles of 
 interpretation, we shall distribute into different pe- 
 riods of time, that we may see by a just and natural 
 order, what ought to be its form ; and these periods 
 shall be, 1st, from the beginning down to the Baby- 
 
52 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 lonish captivity ; 2iid, from thence to the time of our 
 Saviom- ; 3d, from that age to the Masoretic revisal 
 of the text, as it is termed ; and the last, from that 
 period to the present time. 
 
 §2. 
 
 The history of the text of the ancient sacred 
 books before the Babylonish captivity, is, for 
 the most part, obscure and uncertain, which, in- 
 deed, in a case of such remote antiquity, need 
 excite no surprise. 
 
 Obs. 1. The first sacred writings being attri- 
 buted to Moses as their author, we must begin the 
 history of the Hebrew text from his age. In the 
 book of Genesis, indeed, things prior to his time are 
 related : these, however, are reckoned, with a high 
 degree of probabihty, to have come down to us as 
 written by Moses ; he having collected those ancient 
 historical documents most nearly connected with his 
 purpose, reduced them into order, and prefixed them 
 to those things which, for the sake of religion, he 
 delivered in writing to his countrymen. 
 
 Obs. 2. Although in the present day there are 
 not a few who do not acknowledge Moses to be the 
 author of the Pentateuch, as we now have it, we can- 
 not, however agree with such, their reasons not ap- 
 pearing to us satisfactory ; and they themselves are 
 obliged to confess that Moses at least gave in writing 
 
p. I. s. 1. c. III. § 2. 53 
 
 some things to the Israelites relating to religion. 
 We shall only refer to Exod. xxiv. 3, 4, 7 ; Deut. 
 xxxi. 9 — 13. 
 
 Obs. 3. No one can with propriety doubt, that 
 to the Mosaic writings some others were added be- 
 fore the Babylonish captivity. Such are some his- 
 torical writings, many poems of David and other 
 poets, and lastly, some writings of Solomon and the 
 prophets : each of which, it is certain were accounted 
 sacred by the Jews after the Babylonish captivity. 
 We cannot, however, suppose that there is any one 
 who calls to mind the rudeness of the nation, and 
 the remoteness of the time, who will bring himself to 
 believe, that no disarrangement or confusion took 
 place in the collecting of all these writings, and es- 
 pecially of those which consisted of parts not strictly 
 connected, such particularly as the book of Psalms. 
 
 Obs. 4. It is asked, in what manner were the 
 sacred books collected and preserved before the Ba- 
 bylonish captivity ? That this is even now doubtful, 
 and can never be precisely ascertained, is what we do 
 not deny ; nor need we greatly wonder at this. For 
 the subject is of the most remote antiquity ; and we 
 ought not to expect, from the ancient Hebrew na- 
 tion, such particular accounts of things pertaining 
 even to religion itself, as to leave nothing to be de- 
 sired by posterity. Since therefore we must de- 
 termine this question chiefly from the nature of the 
 thing, and from the greater or less degree of pro- 
 bability, there seem to be three suppositions out of 
 which we may choose ; either that the sacred books 
 were deposited in some public library ; or were col- 
 
54 pr.iNciPrr.s of interpretation. 
 
 If ctt'd and preserved solely by the care of the priests 
 and Levites ; or were dispersed through private lib- 
 raries, and not collected into one volume till after the 
 captivity. The last of these suppositions seems to be 
 the least probable ; although we can scarcely doubt, 
 that certain historical relations, and some poems taken 
 from the houses of private persons, were received, 
 into the sacred code. Among the ancient Hebrew 
 common people, there was little or no use of books, 
 and private libraries were unknown among them ; the 
 most of them, even prior to the captivity, Avere by 
 no means cuiious inquirers into things connected with 
 religion, and most of the kings themselves, who, 
 from the Mosaic precept, Deut. xvii. 18 — 20, were 
 bound to have alwa}s with them a copy of the law 
 for their own use, seem to have almost quite neglected 
 this injunction, caring less for religion than they 
 ought to have done. Nor can it, with any degree of 
 probability, be shewn that there Avere private per- 
 sons who carried Avith them into captivity, some, one 
 part of the sacred writings, and others, other parts, 
 Avhich were afterAvards collected into one volume. 
 It may be assumed, Avith greater appearance of truth, 
 that the sacred books Avere preserved by the priests 
 and Levites, to whom, by Divine authority, the care 
 of them and of sacred things in general, and the in- 
 struction of the people had been committed. Com- 
 pare Deut. xvii. 18 ; xxxiii. 10. Neither does it seem 
 unlikely, that some of these should possess a copy of 
 certain books, particularly of those of Moses copied for 
 the use of themselves and others. But tliere is no suf- 
 ficient reason for believing that the sacred books were 
 
p. I. s. r. c. HI. § 2. 55 
 
 preserved by them alone : and it seems more proba- 
 ble that some safe and proper public situation was as- 
 signed for the most important of these books, in which 
 they might always remain. We may therefore safely 
 determine that there was some sacred place, set apart 
 for a library in some part of the sanctuary, which was 
 committed to the care of the priests and Levites in 
 which Moses first deposited his writings, and to 
 which the other sacred books were afterwards added. 
 If this be assumed, certain passages of Scripture will 
 be better understood, such as the following, Deut. 
 xvii. 18 ; xxxi. 9, 26 ; Jos. xxiv. 26 ; 1 Sam. x. 25. 
 And thus from this sacred library the book of the 
 law was to be taken every seventh year and read to 
 the people publicly assembled. Deut. xxxi. 10 — 13. 
 Obs. 5. The copy of the Mosaic law, which is said 
 to have been found in the temple of Solomon in tlje 
 reign of Josiah, 2 Kings xxii. 8 ; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 14, 
 seems to have been the book written by the hand of 
 Moses himself, which, to prevent its being lost, had 
 been long before hid in some secret place of the 
 temple. From this we may conclude, that even in 
 the most corrupt times there were persons who be- 
 stowed that care in preserving the sacred books which 
 was due to them. The more complete annals of the 
 Jewish and Israelitic kings, often quoted in the books 
 of Kings, seem not to have been preserved in the 
 sacred library but in the royal palace ; and it is pro- 
 bable that they were quite destroyed along with the 
 monarchy. In what manner the books of the Old 
 Testament were preserved safe from the destruction 
 of the whole ancient state, we have no written ac- 
 
56 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 count. Tradition bears that Jeremiah, before the 
 burning of the temple, had removed the sacred books 
 into some safe place ; which indeed is highly proba- 
 ble. For Jeremiah certainly foresaw the destruction 
 of the state, the captivity of the people and their re- 
 turn ; and whatever related to religion was the ob- 
 ject both of his care and atfeetion. Nay, it seems 
 by no means improbable, from Dan. ix. 2, that he 
 liad committed to Daniel the ancient sacred records, 
 along with his own prophecies. The Jewish fable is 
 undoubtedly most absurd, to which a reference ap- 
 pears in a book of no authorit}^ the second of Esdras, 
 chap. xiv. 21, &c., namely, that all the copies of the 
 most ancient sacred books were burnt along with the 
 temple of Solomon, or perished during the captivity, 
 and were completely restored by Ezra, through the 
 aid of the Holy Spirit, dictating to him the whole 
 accurately. 
 
 Ohs. 7. The sacred authors either committed their 
 own compositions to writing, or dictated them to 
 others. The first mention of an amanuensis occurs in 
 Psalm xlv. 2, which poem seems to have David for 
 its author ; and it appears that Jeremiah employed 
 Baruch for the same purpose. Jerem. xxxvi. 4, 32 ; 
 xlv. 1. From the time of Moses, they were accus- 
 tomed to employ sheets for writing upon, made of 
 some durable material, which they stitched together 
 when the writings were of any length. These were 
 properly called rolls, mbiTO. Psalm xl. 8. They 
 used the same letters in writing as at present, though 
 somewhat ruder in their form ; and if any points 
 were added, they were many fewer than those now 
 
p. I. s. I. c. III. § 3. 57 
 
 in use. See chap. i. § "2, Obs. 3 — 8. But as the 
 sacred writings served only for public use, and no 
 great attention was paid commonly to them, there 
 was little necessity for multiplying copies. 
 
 Obs. 8. It is disputed, whether the Hebrews an- 
 ciently left any space between their words in writing 
 or not ; as to this point, the arguments brought for- 
 ward on both sides have considerable weight : for 
 our part, we are of opinion that a certain space was 
 interposed, very small, however, for the most part, 
 and sometimes altogether neglected. Previous to the 
 Babylonish captivity no trace appears of those sections 
 into which purposely, and for religious use, the sacred 
 books have been divided. 
 
 §3. 
 
 Regarding the text of the books of the Old 
 Testament, from the Babylonish captivity to the 
 Christian era, we know a little more ; but still 
 the accounts we have are only in part certain 
 and probable. 
 
 Obs. 1. As most of the Jews, deeply affected by 
 the destruction of their state, applied themselves with 
 their whole souls to their religion, to which before 
 they paid slight attention ; from this change of mind 
 we are naturally led to conclude that they devoted 
 much more care to their sacred books than ever they 
 had done before. It is not, however, to be supposed 
 
58 PRINCIPLES OF INTETIPRETATION. 
 
 that private individuals, in the time of the captivity, 
 preserved safe from destruction the more ancient of 
 tlie sacred writings, and those which were .successive- 
 ly added to them. F(jr the circumstances of the 
 times did not permit private persons to collect books 
 or to possess libraries : and, besides, it was a matter 
 of too much importance to allow of its being left to 
 the care and inclination of the people at large. But 
 the prophets Ezekicl and Daniel being among them, 
 either took upon themselves the charge of this busi- 
 ness, or committed it to some of the principal per- 
 sons of the order of the priests : and God, who, as a))- 
 pears from the book of Daniel, frequently interfered 
 for the sake of religion in an extraor dinar}' manner, 
 seems to have arranged it that there should be men so 
 distinguished by their religion, as that this care of 
 the sacred books might be safely committed to them, 
 Obs. 2. After their restoration to their country, 
 according to a celebrated tradition of the Jews, there 
 was assembled at Jerusalem a senate, generally called 
 by the name of the Great Synagogue, instituted by 
 Ezra, and composed of one hundred and twenty mem- 
 bers, to whom was committed the care both of civil 
 and sacred matters, but peculiarly of the sacred books, 
 and whose president Ezra was, although afterwards 
 Nehemiah took a great share in its proceedings. The 
 manner in which the Jews have dressed up this tradi- 
 tion is no dotibt fabulous ; but it may be allowed, 
 with much appearance of probability, that there is 
 some truth at bottom in it. We can scarce^ly, indeed, 
 doubt that Ezra, whose ardour in restoring the Jewish 
 state is so well known, bestowed peculiar care in col- 
 
p. I. s. I. c. III. § 3. 59 
 
 lectiDg the sacred books, and arranging them for the 
 use of the people. He seems to have employed him- 
 self first on the Mosaic books, which were principally 
 necessary to their religion, and which had the first 
 ])]ace in the new library ; to these, through the as- 
 sistance of Nehemiah, he added the other books in 
 succession, 2 Maccab. ii. 13 ; so that all the sacred 
 books, and such as in process of time were added to 
 them, were, from the very first, deposited in the new 
 temple. Nor is it at all improbable that Ezra assumed 
 to himself colleagues from among those of higiiest rank 
 and most experience among the people to assist him 
 in his very difficult task of restoring the whole af- 
 fairs of the state : such a council, assembled afterwards 
 as occasion required, may perhaps be referred to in 
 1 Maccab. vii. 12, under the title of the Synagogue 
 of the Scribes, S'^vaLywyr^c, y^aiiij^anuv. Nor, finally, 
 is it, as we think, unlikely that, by the authority and 
 example of Ezra, the sacred books now began to be 
 written in a more elegant character, as we have 
 already hinted above, chap. i. § 2, obs. 3. This 
 proved the cause of the ancient copies by degrees 
 being disused and finally perishing. 
 
 Cbs. 3. In this edition of the sacred books we have 
 no reason to doubt that every care was employed which 
 the dignity of the subject required, and human prudence 
 and diligence was equal to ; and that the copies of the 
 writings, particularly of those of Moses, which might be 
 in the possession of the priests, were consulted. And 
 we shall form no rash opinion, if we suppose that it 
 was not merely by chance, nor without design, that 
 the different writinf;;s were arranged in a certain or- 
 
60 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 der ; although it was not attempted to change, into 
 any more satisfactory and consistent order, that con- 
 fused arrangement observable in some books, particu- 
 larly in the Psalms, vvliich took place partly before 
 the destruction of their state, and partly during that 
 calamity and their subsequent captivity ; to remedy 
 which, indeed, at that period, the utmost industry was 
 altogether unequal. 
 
 Obs. 4. As soon as there Avas a fit place in the 
 new temple, the sacred library spoken of in 2 Maccab. 
 ii. 13, seems to have been placed there; and into it 
 were brought both those writings which survived the 
 destruction of the original state, and likewise those 
 which had been composed by inspired men in the 
 time of the captivity, and during a short period after 
 the return into their own land. Besides, there were 
 likewise other writings of a religious nature added, 
 composed some of them a shorter and others a longer 
 time after the return from captivity ; and there are 
 even some hymns in the book of Psalms whose au- 
 thors lived as late as the time of the Maccabees. 
 
 Obs. 5. After the return of the Jewish captives, 
 synagogues being established in foreign countries as 
 well as in their native land, in which the Scrip- 
 tures were read and explained, occasioned copies 
 of them to be more and more multiplied ; and at 
 the same time the attachment of the greater part 
 of them to their religion being increased, had such 
 an effect, that neitlier the vicissitudes and misfor- 
 tunes to which, in the course of time, they were sub- 
 jected, nor even the direful persecutions of Antio- 
 chus Epiphanes, could effect the destruction of their 
 
p. I. s. I. c. III. § 3, 61 
 
 sacred books ; but greater and greater care was every 
 day bestowed in making those copies of them which 
 might be required. 
 
 Obs. 6. It is probable that the copy of the Scrip- 
 tures which was kept in the temple after it was re- 
 built, perished at the time when Antiochus Epiphanes 
 spoiled the temple. For at that period all public worship 
 of God ceased, and whatever copies of the divine laws 
 were discovered were torn and burnt, 1 Maccab. i. 
 56, 57. But not long after, the sacred volume seems 
 to have been restored, and written out with the ut- 
 most care from the other copies which remained, at 
 the time when the temple was purified, and every 
 thing relating to the divine worship restored anew. 
 This new edition, containing some additional poeti- 
 cal compositions, it is probable remained in the tem- 
 ple until, on the destruction of that edifice by the 
 Romans, it was carried to Rome, and there borne in 
 triumph along with the other sacred spoils by Titus ; 
 Joseph. Jeivish War, book vii. 5. 5. At last, however, 
 it was given to Flavins Josephus at his own request, 
 as he himself testifies in his account of his own life, 
 v^ 75 : as to what became of it afterwards no probable 
 conjecture can be formed. 
 
 Obs. 7. A general division of the sacred volume, 
 when read publicly, was made, into the Law, the Pro- 
 phets, and the remaining books ; which division per- 
 haps existed before the institution of synagogues. 
 Under the title of the Law were comprehended the 
 books of Moses. Not only were the prophetical 
 writings of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the lesser 
 prophets, as we call them, styled the Prophets, but 
 
62 PRINCIPLES OF INTEKl'RETATION. 
 
 likewise the books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and 
 Kings, which the Jews considered to be wf^tten by 
 prophets ; and these, from their priority in point of 
 time, were generally called the former prophets. 
 Lastly, they designated the remaining books by the 
 general nanieof D'<:iinD, or Writings, meaning sacred 
 writings : and as the Psalms were placed at the head 
 of these, they bore this latter title in the time of our 
 Saviour, Luke xxiv. 44. The Jews place the book 
 of Daniel in this last division, and not among the pro- 
 phetical writings, because he had not exercised the 
 office of a prophet in his native country, but among 
 foreigners, and had led a more splendid life than was 
 usual with the prophets, in the court ofthe Babylon- 
 ish king. Of this last class, the five. books of Canti- 
 cles, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther, 
 afterwards read on certain festival days, and which 
 were often comprehended in a separate book, went 
 under the name of nib273, or Rolls ( Volumes) : this 
 distinction, however, took place in later times. 
 
 Obs. 8. In progress of time, a division of the 
 Mosaic books took place into Paraschce or sections, 
 which were read each Sabbath day, by which means 
 the whole books were read over in regular order 
 every year. The Jews afterwards divided what they 
 called the Prophets likewise into sections, for the pur- 
 pose of their sacred readings, and these they called 
 Haphtaroe. 
 
 Obs. 9. Lastly, Although the Alexandrian Greek 
 version made and used for the promotion of religion, 
 was in time more and more received into many syna- 
 g')gues, it is not to be imagined that it altogether, and 
 
p. I. s. I. c. III. § 4. 63 
 
 everywhere, abolished the use of the Hebrew text, 
 'inhere is, indeed, scarcely any just reason for doubting 
 that the text written in Hebrew was sacredly pre- 
 served in those very places where the Greek version 
 was used ; and that it was read first, along with that 
 translation. But the disuse of the Hebrew language, 
 which was the original cause of framing the Greek 
 version, increasing every day, could not but produce 
 some errors in copying the Hebrew text, when this 
 was required to be done. 
 
 §4. 
 
 From the Christian era, and even previous to 
 the Masoretie edition of the Old Testament, the 
 hi>.tory of, these books becomes better known, 
 from the peculiar attention paid to them both by 
 the Jews and the more learned among the 
 Christians. 
 
 Ohs. 1. From the second century of the Christian 
 era, when the Jews were obliged to dispute with the 
 Christians, they saw the necessity of a more accurate 
 study of the sacred books in their original language. 
 That they might the better defend their own cause, 
 they determined to employ, not the Greek version, 
 but the Hebrew text, as those who disputed with 
 them argued from the Greek. They applied them- 
 selves, therefore, to the constant reading of the He- 
 
fi4 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 brew, and gave themselves wholly up to this study. 
 Nay, in order to derive more correctly their argu- 
 ments from it, they studied it critically, as far as that 
 age, and their own genius, which was neither well 
 cultivated, nor of a liberal nature, would allow ; they 
 collated the different manuscripts of the sacred text, 
 and endeavoured to correct it where any mistake 
 seemed to have been committed, 
 
 Obs. 2. At this period the history of the Hebrew 
 text was particularly illustrated by the labours of two 
 h^arned men, who were Fathers, as they are called, of 
 the Christian chuich ; the one of whom, Origen, was 
 a Greek, and the other, Jerome, was a Latin. 
 
 Origen, who flourished about the middle of the 
 third century, executed a work of immense labour, 
 vhich he entitled Hexapla, {hexapla biblia) : which, 
 however, as it is more connected with the criticism 
 of the Greek version than of the Hebrew text, will 
 be treated of more fully afterwards. But it deserves 
 to be noticed here, that the Hebrew text was given 
 by Origen in his Hexapla, not only in Hebrew but 
 also in Greek characters : and it appears from the 
 fragments of the work which have been discovered, 
 that the text afterwards established by the Masoritcs, 
 had, even at that time, been, for the most part, receiv- 
 ed as the best. 
 
 Jerome, about the end of the fourth and beginning 
 of the fifth century, by giving the most sedulous at- 
 tention to the study of the Hebrew scri()tnres, no less 
 distinguished himself by his critical labours on the 
 Old Testament. Before restoring and correcting the 
 I^tin version called the Italic, he deemed it necessary 
 
p. I. s. I. c. in. § 5. 65 
 
 accurately to collate the Hebrew copies, and to satis- 
 fy himself of the true reading of the text; and he 
 afterwards executed from the Hebrew text itself a 
 new Latin translation. As more will be said on this 
 subject afterwards, it is sufficient to remark here, that 
 the Hebrew copy which Jerome used, contained all 
 the books of the Old Testament nearly in the same 
 order as they are found in the ordinary editions ; that 
 there was in it a division of the chapters and verses 
 not quite the same as that used by the present Jews ; 
 and that the Hebrew text of that age differed little 
 from the present Masoretic editions. 
 
 §5. 
 
 The history of the Hebrew text is particular- 
 ly deserving- of attention from the age of the 
 Masorites down to our times. 
 
 Ohs. 1. Under the term Masora the Jews com- 
 prehend generally the traditions received from their 
 ancestors, but particularly the collection of critical 
 observations which Ezra himself, the president of the 
 great Synagogue, and his colleagues in that council, 
 began ; and which the doctors who succeeded them 
 enriched from time to time by new additions having 
 always in view to determine the correctness of the 
 various readings, by this rule of faithful and ascer- 
 tained tradition, and to correct whatever errors might 
 have crept into the teSt. 
 
 F 
 
6G PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Obs. 2. Although the truth of this Jewish account 
 of the Masora may be with propriety rejected ; one 
 thing may yet be accounted probable, that even from 
 the second century after Christ, some observations 
 were begun to be made, having respect to the text of the 
 Old Testament, which, in process of time, were more 
 and more augmented, till they increased to a volume, 
 known by the name of the Masora : and that these 
 were collected in the beginning of the fourth century, 
 by the Jews of the College of Tiberias, a very cele- 
 brated city of ancient Galilee, and frequented above 
 all others by the Jews after Jerusalem was overthrown. 
 This collection was continued downwards, and recei- 
 ved signal additions till about the middle of the ele- 
 venth century, when it was almost completed by the 
 labour of two men most celebrated in the history of 
 the Hebrew text ; the one of whom, JBen Ashcr, head 
 of the College of Tiberias, and the other, Ben Naph- 
 Ma/2, chief of the College of Babylon, laboured, through 
 the aid of the Masora, to render the sacred volume as 
 correct as possible. 
 
 Obs. 3. The labour of the Masorites was directed 
 to determining the whole arrangement of the text, and 
 the marking of the points, such as we have them in 
 the Hebrew Bibles of the present day, as well as to 
 correcting the text, to \\hich, as to a perfect model, 
 all future copies might be conformed. To this it is 
 owing that the ancient manuscrij)ts by degrees perish- 
 ed, as being considered of no value ; so that if not all, 
 by far the greater part at least, of the most ancient 
 codices are not of nn older date than eight luuidred 
 years. To this labour of the Masorites are also due 
 
p. I. s. I.e. III. § 5. 67 
 
 some annotations, partly critical, inserted in the mar- 
 gin, while others of them have a reference rather to 
 Rabbinical trifles. The number of the verses too, and 
 of the smaller sections of whatever sort, occurring in 
 each book, was reckoned up by them ; but in this 
 computation we find some diversity in various places, 
 as these divisions were not all of the same magnitude 
 in all the manuscripts. 
 
 Obs. 4. After the Masoretic revisal was finally and 
 unchangeably settled, and before the invention of the 
 art of printing, the present received distinction of 
 chapters took place. It is with suflicient probability 
 ascribed to Cardinal Hugo de St. Caro,^ who lived in 
 the thirteenth centnry : and it seems to have been an 
 invention of the Scholastics, who, that they might the 
 more easily quote the places of sacred Scripture which 
 they employed in '^heir disputes, divided by the instru- 
 mentality of Hugo, the Latin vulgate, into chapters. 
 This division being very useful, was by degrees recei- 
 ved even by the Jews themselves. But in what way 
 the present division into verses found its way into the 
 Hebrew Bibles, it is impossible to say with any cer- 
 tainty. The general arrangement of all the sacred 
 books, agreeably to the ancient division into the Law, 
 the Prophets, and tiie other writers, pointed out above 
 in § 3. Obs. 7, has been invariably observed among 
 the Jews ; although a particular division of some 
 books, by which two are made out of one, has begun 
 to prevail among them in later times. 
 
 a Hugo de St. Caro, or St. Cher, was the first who composed 
 a C)ncordance, which ct>uld not have been made without some 
 sacii contrivance Tr. 
 
68 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Obs. 5. When the art of printing was invented in 
 the 15th century, the Jews began to give printed 
 editions of the whole, and of parts of their sacred vo- 
 lume, conformable to their manuscript text. In the 
 years 1525 and 152G, the Rabbinical Bible, under the 
 care of i?. Jacob. Ben Chajim, and at the instance of 
 that most excellent printer, D. Bombtrg, appeared at 
 Venice ; and such was the care employed by the edi- 
 tor in conforming the Hebrew text to the Masoretic 
 precepts, that this edition obtained the highest cha- 
 racter for correctness among the Jews ; and almost all 
 the Christians too, who afterwards published new edi- 
 tions, considered it to be their dutj^ to follow it close- 
 ly as their most faithful guide ; so that it is by no 
 means wonderful that the later editions should so 
 nearly agree with each other. 
 
 Obs. 6. In consequence of this close agreement of 
 the editions, it happened that for a long time most 
 men were of opinion that any appHcation of criticism 
 to the correction of the text was useless, neither did 
 any one think of comparing the different manuscripts. 
 By degrees, however, this collation Avas begun ; and, 
 in the year 1720, J. H. Michaelis published at Halle 
 the Hebrew Bible, with select various readings. These, 
 however, had respect chiefly to certain vowel or other 
 ])oints ; while the greater variations which were dis- 
 covered were accounted errors of the transcribei's. 
 Charles Frid. Houhignnt was the first who added; for 
 the purposes of criticism, the various readings ex- 
 tracted from the manuscripts in the King of France's 
 library, and ])ublislied them along with his Bible in 
 1753. But Kennicot is deservedly reckoned the re- 
 
p. I. s. I. c. III. § 6. 69 
 
 storer of the application of genuine criticism to the 
 Old Testament. For, excited by the example of his 
 countryman Mill, who had edited the New Testament 
 with various readings, and strongly urged by the ad- 
 vice of others, particularly of the highly celebratecl 
 LowtJi, he undertook, and, aided by the help of many, 
 completed in twenty years a noble work, in which he 
 proposed to compare all the manuscripts, and some 
 ancient editions, which were to be found in his own 
 country of England, and elsewhere : and these various 
 readings, as far as concerned the letters only, he noted 
 and added to his Bible, published in 1776 and 1780. 
 Emulous of this praiseworthy design, De Rossi, a most 
 laborious Italian, instituted a more extensive collation 
 of manuscripts, and published in 1784 — 1788, the 
 various readings he had collected ; marking also the 
 variations observed in the vowels, (viz. the vowel 
 points,) which he considered most worthy of notice ; 
 to which he occasionally added his own critical opi- 
 nion, taking to his aid the authority of the ancient 
 versions. To this work he finally added a supplement 
 in 1798. 
 
 §6. 
 
 Besides the lilstory of the Hebrew text, it is 
 required of the accomplished interpreter of the 
 Old Testament, to have a knowledge of those 
 aids which he may employ in the exercise of 
 criticism. 
 
70 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Ohs. 1 . The first aid to enable us to apply criticism 
 to the Old Testament, consists in the various readings, 
 which are to be found in the more ancient editions, 
 and in the manuscripts. For, since all the more recent 
 editions are conformed to that of Bomberg, as being 
 the most perfect, it is evident thai some various read- 
 ings may be found not unworthy of critical attention 
 in the more ancient editions. And in the manuscript 
 codices, although more recent than the Masoretic re- 
 visal of the text, experience has shewn that there are 
 certain various readings of the best authority to be 
 found, more ancient than the Masoretic edition. Al- 
 though, however, it must be confessed, that the colla- 
 tion of the editions and manuscripts of the Old Tes- 
 tament, has not fulfilled in all respects the expectation 
 of the learned ; yet every competent judge will readily 
 acknowledge that it is a source of criticism by no 
 means to be despised. 
 
 Obs. 2. In as far as the Masora relates to the criti- 
 cism of the Old Testament, in so far is it of some 
 assistance in this respect ; for it contains diverse ob- 
 servations begun a long time ago to be collected, 
 principally from the more ancient manuscripts ; and 
 consequently has true various readings, which are 
 more ancient than all the manuscripts yet discovered 
 or collated. 
 
 Obs. 3. The Pentateuch, written in Samaritan cha- 
 racters, but in the Hebrew language, is of the highest 
 value in the criticism of the Mosaic books. The first 
 copy of this book was brought into Europe by the 
 celebrated traveller Pietro della Valle, who, in the 
 
p. I. s. I. c. III. § 6. 71 
 
 year 1616, had purchased it from the Samaritans at 
 Damascus. Other copies, however, were afterwards 
 brought into Europe. We have no certain account 
 of the origin of this Pentateuch, of which we find 
 frequent mention made by some doctors of the an- 
 cient Christian church, as well as by Fl. Josephus. 
 Some Samaritans saj', that it is as old as the thirteenth 
 j'ear after the occupation of Palestine by the Israelites: 
 but this tradition is in no degree probable. Some are 
 of opinion that we must seek for the origin of the 
 Samaritan Pentateuch in the time when the kingdom 
 of Israel was separated from tliat of Judah : if it be 
 indeed possible, that in the midst of their perverse 
 idolatrous worship the Mosaic constitution could be 
 preserved, and that priests and Levites were found 
 among them. But, after that kingdom was destroyed, 
 as nothing but the dregs of the people were left, it is by 
 no means likely that, among such men, a copy of the 
 Mosaic law would be preserved and transmitted to the 
 Samaritans, who were made up of the mixed multitude 
 of their descendants and of foreign colonists. Neither 
 is their opinion satisfactory, who hold that after the 
 termination of the Jewish captivity the Samaritans 
 obtained their Pentateuch. For no one can persuade 
 us that from the Jews, whom from the moment of 
 their return to their country they began to hate in 
 the most violent manner, they received their sacred 
 books at any time of that later period of their history. 
 No more probable time then can be assigned in history 
 for the origin of this Pentateuch, than that in which 
 an Israelitish priest was sent b}' the King of the Ass}'- 
 
72 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 rians to instruct the Israelites in the manner in which 
 the God of the Israelitish country ought to be wor- 
 shipped. 2 Kings xvii. 25 — 28. For tliis purpose, 
 if the object of the king was to be accompUshed, a 
 copy of the Divine laws was necessary. It is not sur- 
 prising therefore that the Samaritans had only the 
 Pentateuch : for the double book of Joshua which 
 they possess, is written in the Arabic language, and 
 contains some annals, beginning from Joshua and 
 continued downwards b}^ various writers. 
 
 The age of the manuscripts of the Samaritan Pen- 
 tateuch which have been brought into Europe, al- 
 though not as yet absolutely fixed, seems, however, 
 to be of great antiquity; and nothing is found in them 
 conformed to the Masoretic edition of the Jewish 
 Pentateuch. For they have neither voAvel points, 
 nor diacritic marks to the consonants, nor accents ; 
 but they have certain marks peculiar to themselves, 
 as, when they separate single words by a point or 
 line ; or when any diversity of pronunciation, and of 
 signification arising therefrom, is indicated, as it fre- 
 quently is, by some mark. The Samaritan Penta- 
 teuch is besides divided into sections, which are dif- 
 ferent from the Jewish. That it is highly useful to 
 the criticism of the Mosaic books must be apparent 
 to every one. It is indeed less accurately transcribed 
 than the Masoretic edition of the Jews, but is far 
 more ancient. It has also many errors, arising from 
 the confusion and transposition of letters, from the 
 omission and addition of whole words, and from mar- 
 ginal glosses ; nay even some parts seem to have 
 
P.I. S.I, c. III. § 6. 73 
 
 been changed intentionally. But it contains, never- 
 theless, not a few genuine various readings, which 
 deserve to be preferred to the Masoretic readings. 
 
 Obs. 4. Among the critical helps, of which ^ve are 
 treating, the ancient versions are universally allowed 
 to hold a primary place, as part of them are of great 
 antiquity and made from ancient manuscripts ; so 
 that, in very many places, the true reading may be 
 more felicitously restored from them than from the 
 Hebrew manuscripts yet extant, or from the Masora 
 of the Jews. Of these translations, however, we shall 
 treat in a separate chapter. 
 
 Obs. 5. Parallel passages are also a source of this 
 sacred criticism. For there are not a few passa- 
 ges of the Old Testament, some of them longer and 
 some shorter, which occur twice ; such as genealogi- 
 cal tables, certain historical narrations, laws, moral 
 maxims, some poems, and certain annunciations of 
 the prophets. There are also passages either re- 
 peated by the authors themselves with some varia- 
 tion, or adapted afterwards by others, with some 
 changes, to their own use or that of their cotempo- 
 raries. We are not, however, to attribute to these 
 causes all the diversities we find in such parallel pas- 
 sages ; for not a few of them must be attributed to 
 error, which may be detected and corrected by com- 
 paring them. 
 
 Obs. 6. Neither ought we, in the list of aids to the 
 criticism of the Old Testament, to pass over without 
 notice the writers of the New Testament, who have 
 quoted many passages, either wholly or in part, from 
 the ancient sacred records. They are in fact of the 
 
74 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION'. 
 
 highest antiquity and authority, and in some passages 
 may be employed either in estaWishing or changing 
 the received reading. It is not, liowever, to be de- 
 nied, that they have often only expressed the sense, 
 not adhering closely to the words, and have even 
 not uufrequently used the Alexandrine version. 
 
 Obs. 7. Among these critical aids, the Talmud and 
 the other Jewish writings are commonly reckoned. 
 The authors of the Talmud lived previous to the fix- 
 ing of the text of the sacred books by the Masorites, 
 and quoted numberless places of the Old Testament. 
 There have consequently been persons who recom- 
 mended the collecting from thence various readings, 
 and some have collected them. But it may be justly 
 affirmed that little advantage has accrued from this ; 
 and still less, and almost none, can be derived from 
 the consultation of the Rabbinical writers, who are 
 more recent than even the Talmud. What critical 
 aid may be derived from FL Josephus and Philo 
 Judceus, who lived about the times of Christ and his 
 Apostles, in amending the text of the Old Testament, 
 has principally a reference to the Alexandrine Greek 
 version which it appears that they used. But as in 
 some places Josephus seems to have consulted the 
 Hebrew text, he may in such cases supply some vari- 
 ous readings. 
 
 Obs. 8. But as there are many cases in which au- 
 thoritative aids fail us, we must then have recourse to 
 critical conjectures. In writing out copies of every 
 kind of books errors are inevitable : and the older the 
 books, and the more frequently they have been copied, 
 every one must allow that there must be the more 
 
p. I. s. I. c. III. § 6. 75 
 
 errors found in them. But the most of the books of the 
 Old Testament are by far the most ancient existing, 
 and have been frequently copied, at least since the 
 Babylonish captivity and the return of the Jews to 
 their countr}-. The translations of them were made 
 long after the time of writing even the most recent of 
 these books ; and the manuscript copies of them which 
 remain are of a much later date than the translations. 
 And since the transcribers, without perpetual miracles 
 quite unworthy of God, could not have been pre- 
 served, in spite of every diligence on their own part, 
 from falling occasionally into error: it from hence 
 appears, that there are mistakes in these books re- 
 quiring to be rectified by conjectural emendation. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 OF THE ANCIENT INTERPRETERS. 
 
 Since from the ancient interpreters we derive 
 some aid to the understanding of the Old Testa- 
 ment, but chiefly to the criticism of that sacred 
 volume, it is necessary that we set before the 
 reader, what is most worthy of being known re- 
 garding- them. 
 
 Obs. 1. As, occasionally, certain passages occurring 
 in the more ancient writings of the Old Testament, 
 
76 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 are explained in those of a later date of the same 
 volume ; the authors of these last may, in some re- 
 spect, be accounted the interpreters of the former. 
 In Nehem. ix. 21, the expressions in Deuter. viii. 4; 
 xxix. 4, 5, are so quoted, that it is easy to see in what 
 sense they ought to be understood. The uncertain 
 author of the Ixxxix Psalm, vers. 20 — 38, exjilains in 
 a poetical manner, the divine promise made to David, 
 2 Sam. vii. 14 — 16. David in Ps. Ixxii. 17, has in his 
 eye the divine oracle given to Abraham, Gen. xii. 3, 
 and xxii. 18, and in no small degree defines its mean- 
 ing. And, to say no more on this head, there are not 
 wanting more recent prophecies, by which some of 
 the more ancient are extended and illustrated. 
 
 Obs. 2. Among the ancient interpreters of the Old 
 Testament, .may be reckoned, in many passages, the 
 writers of the New. For, not only are many places 
 quoted by them, but also explained. And as they 
 were of the nation of the Jews, well acquainted 
 with Jewish affairs, and armed with divine authority, 
 we cannot think lightly of their capability of inter- 
 preting the Old Testament. What their value in a 
 ci'itical point of view is, we have seen in the former 
 chapter, § 6. Obs. 6. 
 
 Obs. 3. In the number of the interpreters of the 
 Old Testament, may be reckoned Philo Judcsus, 
 Flav. Josephus, and the Talnmdic writers ; the use of 
 whom in criticism, we have alread}'^ noticed in chap, 
 iii. § 6. Obs. 7. The interpretations of Philo are 
 generally of the allegorical sort ; Josephus is a more 
 valuable expositor, and very frequently is useful for 
 enabling us to understand more clearly the historical 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 2. 77 
 
 events. The Talmudic writers are much less valuable 
 to the interpreter of the Old than of the New Testa- 
 ment, as they frequently intrude the manners, institu- 
 tions, and even the fables of later times into the Old 
 Testament. 
 
 Obs. 4, But in common language we mean by the 
 ancient interpreters, those who turned the books of 
 the Old Testament into other languages. These then 
 of whom we now mean to speak exclusively, we 
 have already stated, (chap. i. § 5. Obs. 4.) to be of 
 some use in the interpretation of the Old Testament. 
 Their principal utility, however, is in criticism ; and 
 we have seen in the former chapter, § 6. Obs. 4, that 
 they hold the first place among the critical aids. 
 
 Of all the versions of the Old Testament, the 
 Alexandrine Greek is the most ancient; and to 
 this others also in the Greek language were af- 
 terwards added. 
 
 Obs. 1. The history by Aristeas of the origin of 
 this most ancient Greek version, subjoined to some 
 copies of the works of Josephus, and also edited se- 
 parately, is deserving of notice ; of which account we 
 t^ubjoin a summary — Ptolemy Philadelphus, king of 
 Egypt, wishing to enrich his library at Alexandria 
 with books collected from all quarters, Demetrius 
 Phalereus, his Librarian, advised him to cause the 
 
78 PRINCIPLES OF INTEKPnETATION. 
 
 book which contained the laws of the Jews, and 
 which he understood to be highly worthy of perusal, 
 to be translated into the Greek language. Accord- 
 ingly the king sent Aristeas his minister, and also 
 Andrew, a distinguished person, with splendid presents 
 to Eleazar, the priest of the Jews, from whom he re- 
 quested a copy of the law, and well qualified transla- 
 tors. Their request was readily complied with, and 
 seventy-two men, being six from each of the tribes, 
 all well skilled in Hebrew and Greek, and venerable, 
 both from their character and age, together with a 
 copy of the Mosaic books, written in golden letters, 
 were sent with them. When these translators arriv- 
 ed at Alexandria, they were most honourably receiv- 
 ed by the king. Being then taken to the neighbour- 
 ing island of Pharos, and lodged in a splendid man- 
 sion ; in the space of seventy-two days, they, Ir/ mu- 
 tually assisting each otlier, accomplished the transla- 
 tion, which, as the work proceeded, they dictated to 
 Demetrius. When he had read over the whole trans- 
 lation to an assembly of Jews, composed of priests 
 and other learned men, who gave it the highest 
 praises, he then placed it in the royal libraiy. 
 
 Obs. 2. .Josephus in his Antiquities, xii. 2, agrees 
 with this relation of Aristeas, from which in some 
 points Philo Judaeus dissents. In the second book 
 of his " Life of Moses," about the middle, he narrates 
 tliat, at i\\n request of Ptolemy Philadelphus, some 
 learned Jews were sent from Palestine to Alexandria 
 by the High Priest, to translate the Mosaic books 
 into Greek, and that they were taken to the isle of 
 Pharos, where, apart from each otlier, they translated 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 2. 79 
 
 these books, but exactly in the same manner, and as 
 it were by divine inspiration. Justin Martyr goes 
 farther, and in his Exhort, to the Greeks, sect. 13, 
 pretends, that each of the seventy translators, shut up 
 in as many separate cells, and prevented from mutual 
 intercourse, executed their version in such a manner 
 as not only in every instance to express the same 
 sense, but even used the same words, and did not dif- 
 fer even in one syllable : and of all this he professes 
 himself fully persuaded, from his having seen the re- 
 mains of their cells. Epiphanius, however, in his 
 book On Weights and Measures, sect. 3 and G, men- 
 tions only thirty-six cells, having in each two transla- 
 tors, who, shut up from dawn to the evening, trans- 
 lated in order, each of the books of the Old Testa- 
 ment, so as that there was not the slightest difference 
 to be found in the thirty- six versions, and therefore 
 in this astonishing harmony, we must acknowledge 
 a singular miracle of divine providence. 
 
 Obs. 3. The Samaritans contend with the Jews 
 for this honour of turning the Pentateuch into the 
 Greek language. They assert that the king Ptolemy 
 Philadelphus, excited by the opportunity, afforded by 
 the controversy existing between the Jews and Sama- 
 ritans regarding the sacred books, to desire a transla- 
 tion by each party separately of their copy of the law 
 into Greek, gave the preference to that which was 
 executed from the Samaritan text. This tradition of 
 theirs is extant in a chronicle of the Samaritans, writ- 
 ten in Arabic, by Abu' L Phatach.* 
 
 a Neues Repertor. von Pauliis, fur Inbl. und morgenl. 
 Litterat. T. i. p. 124—126. 
 
80 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Obs. 4. As then, the history of the Alexan- 
 drian version into the Greek is involved in fables 
 and obscured by tradition, let us try whether we can 
 determine any thing probable regarding its origin. . 
 
 1. All antiquity is agreed that the Hebrew Penta- 
 teuch was translated at Alexandria into the Greek 
 language. The origin of this version, however, seems 
 to be due to the Jews. For there were many of that 
 nation in Egypt, where they also had synagogues, \n 
 which the Mosaic books were read : and as the He- 
 brew language there went more and more into disuse, 
 while the Greek succeeded to its place, it is probable 
 that some of the leading and more learned Jews in 
 Egypt, were the original authors of making a Greek 
 version of those books for common and public use. 
 
 2. As it appears partly from iElian ( Var. Hist. 
 iii. 17), and partly from Plutarch ('"' 0pp. T. ii. p. 
 189, D.), that Demetrius Phalereus was appointed !)y 
 Ptolemy Soter in Egypt to preside over the drawing 
 up a code of laws, and had advised him to get and 
 collect books which treated of political subjects, in 
 which doctrines are laid down which to kings even 
 their own friends dare not mention : and as Diogenes 
 Laertius {Lib. v. Sect. 78), relates that Demetrius 
 resided for a long time with Ptolemy Soter, but was 
 banished by his son and successor Philadelphus : it is 
 probable, that Soter having heard through Demetrius 
 the rumour of the Jews being emplojed on making a 
 version of their laws, had asked for a copy of it as 
 
 » Such is the ahsurd mode of quoting in several places in 
 the original — no mention being made of the edition refer- 
 red to — Tr. 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 2. 81 
 
 soon as it should be ready, and had thus hastened the 
 work ; but that only Philadelphus had at last obtain- 
 ed a copy, and placed it in the Alexandrine library, 
 it not having been finished till he came to the throne. 
 
 3. There seems to have been only one translator of 
 the Pentateuch. But it is not improbable that his 
 version was approved by an assembly of the principal 
 and learned men convened for examining it, before it 
 was appointed for religious use, or a copy of it given 
 to Ptolemy Philadelphus. 
 
 4. No credit seems due to the tradition of the Sa- 
 maritans. For it is not possible to conceive that the 
 Jews, actuated by the inveterate hatred which they 
 had towards the Samaritans, would have received a 
 version made by them so honourably, as to have used 
 it in their synagogues. There have indeed been some 
 philologers, who, induced by the near agreement be- 
 tween the Greek version and the Samaritan Penta- 
 teuch, have believed that tradition. But this agree- 
 ment ought rather perhaps to be explained in this 
 way ; that the Hebrew text, which the Alexandrian 
 Jews used, was, from whatever cause, more conform- 
 able to the Samaritan text, than all the Hebrew ma- 
 nuscripts with which we are yet acquainted. 
 
 Obs. 5. Tychsen^ is peculiar in his opinion, in ima- 
 gining that the Alexandrine translators, as they are 
 called, did not translate the Hebrew writings into 
 Greek, but only transcribed them into Greek letters, 
 and that from this copy some Jews, either of Alexan- 
 
 « In his " Tentamen de variis Codd. V. Test, generibui." 
 Rostoch. A. 1772, p. 54, &c. 
 
 G 
 
82 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 (Iria, or of some other country, afterwards executed 
 the Greek version. There are no reasons of weight 
 which give any countenance to this opinion. 
 
 Ohs. 6. Neitlier does that seem admissible which is 
 related by Aristobulus, an Alexandrian Jew and Peri- 
 patetic philosopher, who is supposed to have flourished 
 about 1 75 years before Christ. He says, that before 
 the Alexandrian version was made, another Greek 
 version existed, from which the Greek philosophers, 
 but especially Plato, extracted many things for their 
 own use. We have his words in Clemens Alexandri- 
 nus (^Strom. L. i. p. 342), and in Ensebius {Prcepar. 
 Evang. p. 663, 664). But no considerate person will 
 allow himself to be persuaded by the very slight 
 authority of Aristobulus, to believe that there was 
 any Greek version anterior to the very celebrated 
 Alexandrine. 
 
 Ohs. 7. There is no doubt, but that at first the 
 Pentateuch only was translated into Greek ; as the 
 Mosaic books were principally used by the common 
 ])eople. But in process of time the other books were 
 also translated by various persons, as seems manifest 
 from the difference of style ; and from no obscure in- 
 dications, is it likewise deduced that the whole was 
 translated in Egypt. The translation of all the books 
 of the Old Testament, seems to have been finally 
 completed in the second century before Christ. 
 
 Ohs. 8, One thing is common to all the Alexan- 
 drine translators, that they employ a style which is 
 not puie Greek, but such as we might expect from 
 Jews, and approaching nearly to the Hebrew manner 
 of speaking. Most of them adhere closely to the very 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 2. 83 
 
 words of the original. Some few of them have attain- 
 ed to no mean degree of excellence ; among whom 
 the translator of the Pentateuch deserves the first 
 place. The Alexandrine version of Daniel being 
 thought to differ too much from the Hebrew text, and 
 being generally little esteemed, that of Theodotion, 
 of which we shall speak afterwards, was early substi- 
 tuted in its room by the Christian church ; and, in 
 consequence, has been adopted in all the editions. 
 The more ancient version, however, was at last rescued 
 from oblivion in the last century, and has been more 
 than once published by itself. 
 
 Obs. 9. The Alexandrine version having been in 
 common use among the Jews, not only in Egypt, but 
 afterwards in Palestine, and in those other countries 
 where the Greek language principally prevailed, and 
 consequently often transcribed ; and having been re- 
 ceived by many Chinstians of the first ages ; numerous 
 errors crept into it. By the Christian copiers, in par- 
 ticular, it was for the most part transcribed very ne- 
 gligently, and in many places, through their rash cri- 
 tical attempts, was perverted and corrupted. 
 
 Obs. 10. To remedy this evil, Origen proposed to 
 compare the Alexandrine version with the Hebrew 
 text, and ^vith the other Greek versions, to which he 
 could have access, and by the aid and pro])er employ- 
 ment of these versions to form a new edition. For 
 this i)urpose, he travelled over the whole East, and 
 applied himself to this most laborious occupation fur 
 twenty-eight j'ears, being surnamed Adamantius by 
 the ancients, from his uncommon hardness or sti'eiigtii 
 in t'liduriuff such toil. He seems to have first inib- 
 
84 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 lished liis Tetrajjla, in which work he transcribed in 
 four columns the Alexandrine version, and that of the 
 three later translators, Aquila, Symmachus, and Theo- 
 dotion. But afterwards in a more enlarged edition 
 he added the Hebrew text, written both in Hebrew 
 and Greek letters ; and as this noble work consisted 
 of six columns, he gave it the name of Hexapla. In 
 it too he laboured to correct the Alexandrine version 
 by the Hebrew text, adding diverse marks to shew 
 where the one seemed to differ from the other, and at 
 the same time comparing with these some other Greek 
 versions. 
 
 This work, which was completed about the middle 
 of the third century, and consisted of nearly fifty vo- 
 lumes, does not seem, on account of its great magni- 
 tude, to have been ever wholly copied by any one. 
 Some time after the death of its author it was carrifid 
 to Cesarea, where it was preserved in the library of 
 Pamphilus, and perished, as it is thought, along with 
 that library when the city was taken and plundered 
 by the Saracens, in the 653d year of the Christian 
 era. 
 
 Posterity, however, was not altogether deprived of 
 the benefit of that incomparable work. For, in the 
 beginning of the fourth century, Eusebius and Pam- 
 philus, edited by itself, the text of the Alexandrine ver- 
 sion, as it has been settled by Origen in his Hexapla, 
 and added in some places certain variations of the 
 other versions, and likewise the scholia of Origen. 
 This epitome, as it were, of that immense work, hav- 
 ing been often afterwards transcribed, sustained very 
 great injury through the negligence of the copiers, 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 2. 85 
 
 and the audacity and rashness of some of them adding 
 some things, and suppressing others. In later times, 
 there have been men also, who have laboured to re- 
 store, in some degree, the Hexapla itself, or at least 
 to collect its fragments wherever they could be found. 
 The first who employed themselves in this task, were 
 Flaminius Nobilis, in the sixteenth century, or, as 
 some think, Peter Morinus, under this assumed 
 name, and John Drusius ; by the aid of whose la- 
 bours, and from other sources, Bernard de Montfau- 
 con edited his Hexapla, in the year 1714. 
 
 Obs. 11. Besides Origen, there were others of the 
 ancients who employed themselves in amending, in 
 some degree, the text of the Alexandrine version ; in 
 which attempt, Lucian of Antioch, and Hesychius in 
 Egypt, distinguished themselves. And it is from 
 dieir editions, and that of Eusebius and Pamphilus, 
 taken from the Hexapla, that all the manuscripts of 
 this formerly much used version, which have come 
 down to our times, and from the chief of which the 
 various printed editions have been formed, were ori- 
 ginally derived. In the present century, or in the 
 end of the last, Robert Holmes in England, caused 
 all the copies of that version which were in Europe 
 to be collated ; and from these, and likevvise from the 
 writings of the flxthers, he collected the various read- 
 ings, which he intended to print along with the text 
 of the Greek version. This work, published in part 
 by the author himself, has been begun to be continued 
 since his death.* 
 
 * It is now completed — Tr, 
 
Sa PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Obs. 12. After this most ancient, and most gene- 
 rally received Alexandrine version, there were other 
 Greek versions of the Hebrew sacred volume made, 
 regarding which we shall briefly notice what seems 
 principally deserving attention. 
 
 1. At what time the translation by Aquila appear- 
 ed, is uncertain, but it is most probable that it was 
 published before the year of our Lord 130. That 
 opinion which seems nearest to truth, makes him a 
 Jew of Pontus, and his object in making a new trans- 
 lation to have been, that he might enable the Jews who 
 Msed the Greek language to dispute with more advan- 
 tage against the Christians, than they could do from the 
 Alexandrine version. With the greatest and almost 
 anxious care, therefore, he endeavoured to express 
 the force and particular meaning of the words ; and 
 afterwards in a new edition, he conformed his version 
 even more to the Hebrew idiom, so as by having no 
 regard to the genius of the Greek language, to show 
 himself singularly tenacious of his purpose. On this 
 account, such fragments of his version as have been 
 discovered, are highly useful to the critical emenda- 
 tion of the Hebrew text. 
 
 2. Theodotion seems to have been of Ephesus, and 
 an Ebionite, or Christian addicted to the Jewish rites, 
 and to have made his version about the middle of the 
 second century ; and being partly attached to the 
 views of the Jews, and partly to those of the Chris- 
 tians, he wished to adapt his version to the use of 
 both in their mutual disputes, by conforming the 
 Alexandrine translation as much as he could to an 
 ^igreement with the Hebrew text. He therefore fol- 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 2. 87 
 
 lowed it as far as the nature of his undertaking would 
 allow, taking away what was redundant, adding what 
 was wanting, and endeav^ouring to express more cor- 
 rectly what he considered to be improperly rendered. 
 Hence it was, that Origen not only corrected the 
 Alexandrine version from his ; but likewise, that the 
 translation of Daniel which he gave, was universally 
 received in the Greek church, as being more confor- 
 mable to the Hebrew text, than the Alexandrine. 
 
 3. Symmachus, likewise an Ebionite, is said to have 
 been of the Samaritan nation, but to have become a 
 Jewish proselyte. He certainly seems to have made 
 his version not long after Theodotion, with the view 
 of furnishing a translation of the sacred volume, more 
 correct and more agreeable to the idiom of the Greek 
 language, than any which had yet been published. 
 With this view also, he endeavoured by subsequent 
 corrections, to render his version more deserving of 
 the praise of purity and elegance. 
 
 4. Origen discovered three other versions of some 
 of the books of the Old Testament, of uncertain dates 
 and authors, which he employed in his critical labours, 
 as he saw occasion. Fragments, too, of some other 
 versions, remain, written on the margin of manu- 
 scripts. 
 
 5. There is a later version, by an unknown Greek 
 author, which, from the impurity of the style, though 
 not altogether barbarous, and from its close confor- 
 mity to the Masoretic edition, may, with much pro- 
 bability, be supposed to have been made between the 
 eighth and ninth centuries. It follows, with singular 
 and scrupulous solicitude, the Hebrew text ; and its 
 
88 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 manuscript, which contains the Pentateuch, Pro- 
 verbs, Ruth, Canticles, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations, 
 and Daniel, copied very inaccurately from a more 
 ancient manuscript, was discovered in the Library of 
 St. Mark at Venice. The whole Pentateuch was 
 published in this version about the end of last century 
 by Amnion ; and select parts of the Pentateuch, and 
 of the other books, were edited a little before by 
 Villoison. 
 
 §3. 
 
 To a much later age than the Alexandrine 
 version, belong the Chaldaic translations or 
 paraphrases, of most of the books of the Old 
 Testament, made by the Jews. There has been 
 also lately discovered, a Hebrew translation of 
 the Chaldaic portions of Daniel and Ezra. 
 
 Obs. L The name Targum £r:i:nn, derived from 
 the Aramaean word Caain, to interpret, signifies inter- 
 pretation, explanation; but is chiefly employed by 
 the Jews, and after their example, by the Christians, 
 to denote the Chaldee translations of the Old Testa- 
 ment. These are commonly called Paraphrases, as 
 they, for the most part, follow the paraphrastical mode 
 of translating. All the versions of this kind which 
 have been found, are only of sortie part of the Old 
 Testament, and there is none of them which embraces 
 the whole volume. Neither is there any Chaldee 
 
p. I. s. 1. c. IV. § 3. 89 
 
 translation known of the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, 
 and Daniel. 
 
 Obs. 2. The most ancient version of the Pentateuch, 
 which is ascribed to Onkelos, as its author, is the best 
 of them all. Respecting the time in which he lived, 
 there are different opinions ; that, however, which 
 makes him to have flourished in Babylon, a little be- 
 fore the birth of Christ, is the most to be approved. 
 The very genius of the translation proves it to be of 
 this ancient date ; for it is very near to the Hebrew 
 text, is througiiout very simple, and differs little in 
 purity of language, from those parts of the books of 
 Daniel and Ezra, which are written in Chaldee. 
 Jonathan, who translated all the books called the Pro- 
 phets by the Jews, is said to have been contemporary 
 with Onkelos. It is certain that he resided in Pales- 
 tine ; but, it seems probable, that he was not anterior 
 to the second or third century of the Christian era. 
 His style is less pure, and more paraphrastical, and 
 he introduces now and then Rabbinical fables. There 
 is, besides, a version of the Pentateuch, improperly 
 ascribed by the later Jews to this Jonathan ; for its 
 style is still more impure, it contains a great number 
 of foreign words and Rabbinical fictions, and among 
 other more recent circumstances, it makes mention 
 of the Mischna, Exod. xxiv. 9 ; and of Lombardy and 
 Constantinople, Numb. xxiv. 24. It is therefore with 
 probabilitj^ supposed to have been executed in the 
 seventh or eighth century of our era. 
 
 From this version of the Pentateuch, the para- 
 phrase, commonly called the Jerusalem Targum, has 
 certain passages which are seemingly excerpts : for 
 
90 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 this Targum is a compilation fi-om the fictitious Jo- 
 natlian, and likewise from the translations of other 
 authors, made witliout any judgment, and in a late 
 age ; and it is not complete, but blanks occur in many 
 places. There seems also to have been a Jerusalem 
 Targum of the prophets, a fragment of which has 
 been discovered on the margin of a manuscript at 
 Zachar. xii. 10.^ Finally, an uncertain tradition in- 
 forms us that a paraphrase of the rest of the writings 
 of the Old Testament, or the Hagiographa, was made 
 by one Joseph surnamed the Blind, and who lived in 
 Babylon about the year of our Lord 322. But what- 
 ever Chaldaic interpretations of these books have 
 been discovered are of a later age, and not the work 
 of one author. That which embraces the Psalms, is 
 derived from various sources. Not uncommonly two 
 paraphrases of the book of Job are conjoined. The 
 interpreter of the Proverbs seems to have followed 
 the text of the Syriac version. The most probable 
 opinion, with regard to the books of Chronicles, is, 
 that they were not translated into the Chaldaic lan- 
 guage before the eleventh century : for the transla- 
 tion of these books is full of errors and fables, and its 
 author seems to have frequently made use of the Je- 
 rusalem Targum in his undertaking. Of the five 
 books which are conjunctly denominated by the Jews 
 Megilloth, as we have seen. Chap. iii. § 3, Obs. 7, some 
 of the paraphrases are more absurd than the others. 
 The most absurd of them all is that on the Song of 
 
 a Vid Repei tor. fiir bibl. und raorgenl. Litterat. T. xv. p. 
 174. 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 3. 91 
 
 Solomon, which is wholly wrested to the praise of 
 the Jewish people. Three Chaldaic paraphrases of 
 the hook of Esther have been discovered, one of 
 which being less diffuse, and in all respects more ac- 
 curate, is justly esteemed more ancient than the other 
 two, which are ridiculously diffuse. 
 
 Obs. 'i. The particular cause of making the Chal- 
 daic translations was the same as that which produced 
 the Alexandrine Greek version, namely, the daily in- 
 creasing disuse of the language of their ancestors ; a 
 fact which will scarcely be doubted or controverted 
 by any one conversant with the subject. It is also 
 extremely probable, from the circumstances of the 
 case, that the first Chaldaic versions were made in 
 Babylon. For it appears that very many Jews re- 
 mained there after the restoration of their country : 
 there too was spoken that Aramaean dialect, which got 
 its name from the Chaldeans after their conquest of 
 that territory, and to which the Babylonian Jews 
 had learned to become more and more accustomed, 
 which occasioned the loss of their own language. 
 Consequently some time before the age of our Savi- 
 our, it seems to have been a received custom among 
 them, when the books of Moses, which they princi- 
 pally used, were read in their synagogues, to explain 
 in the Chaldaic tongue whatever was difficult to be 
 understood ; until at last a general desire was mani- 
 fested for a complete translation, which Onkelos was 
 the first to execute. And as this version w'as in the 
 highest esteem for its faithfulness and accuracy, it by 
 degrees became the more acceptable to the Jews re- 
 siding in Palestine, in proportion as in process of 
 
92 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 time their value for the Alexandrine version de- 
 creased : from this too it happened, that from time 
 to time persons became desirous of employing them- 
 selves in translating the Mosaic and the other books 
 of Scripture into Chaldaic : which versions, however, 
 from the daily increasing propensity of the Jewish 
 turn of mind to the most silly trifling, became the 
 more inept, the more recent they were. 
 
 Obs. 4. The hermeneutic use of even the most an- 
 cient of these Chaldaic versions is very little ; and 
 they are of no value in criticism, unless supported by 
 other authorities. They seem anciently to have been 
 written without points, or at least generally to have 
 wanted them; and as in adding them afterwards, ne- 
 gligence and an arbitrary metliod of proceeding was 
 adopted, only the most trifling confidence can be 
 placed in these points. In very many places these 
 versions have been conformed by the Jews to the 
 Masoretic text, with which, in general, therefore they 
 agree. 
 
 Obs. 5. In this place it will be proper to say some- 
 thing of the Hebrew version of those parts of Daniel 
 and Ezra, which occur in these authors, written by 
 them in Chaldee. Kennicot found it added to a ma- 
 nuscript, and inserted it in his edition of the Old 
 Testament. No one of any penetration will be of 
 opinion, that it is the real Hebrew text of Daniel and 
 Ezra, whose place a Chaldaic translation had long 
 occupied. For it manifestly betrays a translator 
 who endeavoured to transfer with minute diligence, 
 and even almost to obtrude the peculiarities of the 
 Chaldaic into the Hebrew language. And besides, its 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 4. 93 
 
 style is that of a very recent age, whose author seems 
 to have lived not long before the date of the manu- 
 script, which is referred tothe^year of our Lord 1327. 
 The use of this Hebrew translation to the better un- 
 derstanding of the Chaldaic text is scarcely any, and 
 for the purposes of criticism very little. 
 
 §4. 
 
 Some Syriac versions of the Old Testament 
 proceeded from the Christians, the oldest and 
 the best of which was made from the Hebrew 
 text. 
 
 Obs. 1. Various Syriac translations of the Old 
 Testament were made into their vernacular language 
 by different Syrian Christians of different sects : but 
 only one of these is known, taken immediately from 
 the Hebrew text. It is generally called Peschito 
 J^,jt»a Simple, i. e. pure, faithful: for by this Syriac 
 noun is the Greek word a-vKoug, simple, upright, free 
 from fault or stain, translated in the New Testa- 
 ment ; so that it was a version whose excellence and 
 faithfulness was highly esteemed, and possessed of 
 the greatest authority. This appellation may, how- 
 ever, be understood of a translation extensively re- 
 ceived, as this was, being used in common by all 
 Syrians of whatever sect in religion they were ; for 
 the verb .^^a signifies, he expanded, extended. 
 
 Obs. 2. Although we cannot go along with some 
 Syrians, who boast too highly of the antiquity of 
 
94 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 this version, in holding that it existed long before the 
 Christian era ; yet we can scarcely doubt that it is of 
 great antiquity, and was made not long after the 
 translation of the Syriac New Testament. For it was 
 not only in existence a considerable time before 
 Ephraim Syrus who commented upon it in the fourth 
 century, but even in the time of Melito, about the 
 year 170, as Mill ^ has rightly judged from his scho- 
 lium on Genes, xxii. 13, where Melito has quoted 
 this version. 
 
 Obs. 3. That this translation, which was made 
 from the Hebrew, as its whole contexture shews, and 
 as is expressly declared by Abulpliaragius, Histor. 
 Dynast, p. 100, was the work of various translators, 
 is evident from the diversity of its style. But as it 
 cannot with any probability be ascribed to Jewish, 
 but is rather due to Christian authors, we are of opi- 
 nion that it was executed by Jews, natives of Syria, 
 who had embraced the Christian religion. 
 
 Obs. 4. This version is possessed of great excellen- 
 cies, which render it very valuable both to the inter- 
 preter and critic of the Old Testament. Its authors 
 were, for the times, highly skilled in the Hebrew lan- 
 guage, and pursuing a middle course between a too 
 free and too servile a manner of translating, endea- 
 voured as far as possible to give correctly the mean- 
 ing of the words. And although, through the injuries 
 of time, and the carelessness of transcribers, it has 
 often been corrupted, na}', even from time to time 
 interpolated from other versions, it has nevertheless 
 
 a Prolegomen. ad N. T. § 1239. 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 5. 95 
 
 come doM n to us in a much purer state, on the m hole, 
 than the Alexandrian Greek version. 
 
 Obs. 5. As the Greek version itself was in the high- 
 est estimation among the Syrians, it was more than 
 once translated into the Sj'riac language. The best 
 of these versions is that from the Hexaplar, according 
 to the edition of Eusebius and Pamphilus, already 
 spoken of, § 2. Obs. 10., which was made about the 
 beginning of the seventh century. Besides excerpts, 
 some books of the Old Testament have been edited 
 in Syriac and Latin, from the Milan manuscript of 
 this version, which contains several of the books of the 
 ancient sacred code. In 1787, Math. Norberg pub- 
 lished Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and Cajetan Bugatus 
 edited Daniel in 1788, and the Psalms in 1820. From 
 another manuscript, which comprehended most of the 
 other books, but which now seems to be lost, Andreas 
 Masius long before, in the year 1574, had published 
 Joshua in Latin only. Whatever, however, proceeds 
 from the Hexaplar version, every one must see has 
 more a reference to the criticism of the Alexandrine 
 version than to that of the Hebrew text. 
 
 §5. 
 
 Many Latin versions were also made by the 
 Christians ; of these the ancient or Italic ver- 
 sion, and the more recent made by Jerome, from 
 wliicii last the Vul<^ate was formed, deserve to 
 be mentioned : the former of these versions was 
 
96 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 translated from the Alexandrine Greek, and the 
 latter from the Hebrew. 
 
 Obs. 1. Augustine, de doctrin. Christ, lib. ii. c. 2, 
 testifies, that in the early times of Christianity, there 
 were very many Latin versions of the sacred Scrip- 
 tures, and says, Ibid, c. 15, that among these the 
 Italic was distinguished for its close adherence to the 
 words of Scripture, and for perspicuousness of lan- 
 guage. By this title was designated the ancient 
 Latin version, which was more used than the others. 
 By Jerome it is called the Common and the Vulgate, by 
 which he means — employed generall}' by the common 
 people. It was conformed to the text of the Alexan- 
 drine version, such as it was before the time of Ori- 
 gen ; and tlie few fragments which could be collected 
 of it were published by Peter Sabbatier, in the last 
 centur}'. 
 
 Obs. 2. Of this version, translated from a faulty 
 Greek text, and which had undergone at various times 
 many changes, Jerome determined to undertake a 
 corrected edition, agreeable to the Greek hexaplar 
 text. But he only published the Psalms, Proverbs, 
 Canticles, Job, and the two Books of Chronicles, from 
 having lost the other books, as he himself tells Augus- 
 tine in the end of his 134th epistle,* through the fi'aud 
 of some one. Of this edition there have as yet been 
 discovered only tlie Psalms and the Book of Job. 
 
 Obs. 3. Before Jerome had brought to a conclusion 
 lie correction of the ancient Latin version, he under- 
 
 » In V'aleiius' Edition. It is the y^tli '» the Benedictine 
 edition. 
 
p. r. s. I. c. IV. § 5. 97 
 
 took a new translation from the Hebrew text ; for 
 which purpose he consulted the best copies which 
 could be got, and the most learned Jews of his lime, 
 and also very often called to his assistance the Alex- 
 drine, and other Greek versions. This work he exe- 
 cuted in such a manner that his translation is equally 
 useful with the ancient Syriac version, both in the in- 
 terpretation and criticism of the books of the Old 
 Testament. 
 
 Obs. 4. This new version of Jerome, from its great 
 excellence, in process of time attained such celebrity 
 as at last every where to abolish almost the use of the 
 more ancient Italic in the Chi'istian church, and be- 
 came itself the Vulgate^ or the commonly used ver- 
 sion. From its general use, however, it underwent 
 many changes ; partly through the negligence of 
 transcribers, and partly from the absurdity of correc- 
 tors. The council of Trent, therefore, which, in the 
 sixteenth century, declared it authentic, — that is, a 
 faithful translation, and of the highest authority, — 
 commanded that it should be edited in the most ac- 
 curate manner possible. About the end of the same 
 centur}', the Roman Pontiff, Sixtus V., caused this 
 new edition to be put forth ; and his successor, Cle- 
 ment VIII., gave also another new one. But neither 
 the care of these Popes, nor of others, has restored 
 this Latin version to its original state, such as it pro- 
 ceeded from its author. Not even Vallarsius, the 
 latest editor of the works of Jerome, has been able to 
 accomplish this, although he made diligent use of the 
 best aids, which he had got together. The veision of 
 the Psalms, from the Hebrew text edited by Jerome, 
 
 H 
 
98 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 is not that which is found in the editions of the Vul- 
 gate, but that which he had made or corrected fi'om 
 the Greek hexaplar text. 
 
 §6. 
 
 There are also very many other ancient ver- 
 sions of the Old Testament; the principal of 
 which we deem it sufficient briefly to pass in re- 
 view. 
 
 Ohs. 1. After the Arabians, under the successors of 
 Mahomet, had extended their empire far and wide, 
 and had accustomed the vanquished nations to their 
 language, both Jews and Christians, subjected to their 
 power, found, in process of time, the necessity of an 
 Arabic version of the sacred code. Consequently 
 not a few Arabic translations from the Hebrew text, 
 or from other versions, were made. Of the first kind 
 is the Arabic version of the Pentateuch, which is 
 printed in the Polyglot bibles. Its author, R. Saadias, 
 surnamed Gaon, ]"in:i, or Excellent, lived in the tenth 
 century. He was a native of Egypt, and head of the 
 Jewish Academy at Babylon for two years. He is 
 thought to have translated the Avhole Old Testament 
 into the Arabic language. Undoubtedly the Arabic 
 version of Isaiah proceeded from him ; which was 
 separately edited, not long ago, by H. E. G. Paulus. 
 This translator adopts a freer and almost paraphras- 
 tical manner, and his version has undergone some 
 changes and interpolations, and, consequently, cannot 
 
p. I. s. I. c. IV. § 6. 99 
 
 rank among those of the highest utility. From this 
 version of the Pentateuch differs greatly the one 
 edited by Erpenius, a. d. 1622, which adheres close- 
 ly to the Masoretic text, and whose author was an 
 African Jew of a later age. It is consequently of 
 very little use. The Arabic version of Joshua, which 
 is in the Polyglots, and which is from the Hebrew 
 text, is of an unknown author and date. 
 
 The other Arabic versions which have been pub- 
 Hshed are not from the Hebrew text. The version 
 of Job and Chronicles, found in the Polyglots, is from 
 the old Syriac translation, and that of the other book 
 in these publications is made from the Alexandrine 
 Greek. The other Arabic versions being less con- 
 nected with the scope of our work, we shall pass over 
 without notice. 
 
 Obs. 2. An Ethiopic version was made from the 
 Alexandrine Greek text for the use of the Christians 
 in Ethiopia, not earlier, however, than the fourth 
 century, when the Christian religion was finally esta- 
 blished in that country. Of it only a few portions 
 have been separately edited ; and in the Polyglots 
 we have only the Psalms and Canticles. From 
 the Egyptian Christians, or Copts, have also pro- 
 ceeded Coptic versions, whose date is uncertain, and 
 which have been onlj^ published partially, and in a 
 detached manner. 
 
 Ohs, 3. To say nothing of the Persic version of 
 the Pentateuch, made by a Jew for the use of his 
 countrymen who were subject to the Persians, which 
 is added to the Polyglots, and not destitute of merit, 
 we nmst take notice of the Samaritan and Arabic 
 
100 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 versions of the Samaritan Pentateuch. The former, by 
 far the more ancient of the two, was made at the time 
 when the language, formerly vernacular among the Is- 
 raelites, (i. e. the ten tribes,) had altogether degenerat- 
 ed into a most impure dialect, [t almost always ad- 
 heres to the Hebraico-Samaritan text, is deservedly ac- 
 counted highly useful in a critical point of view, and 
 is printed in the Polyglots. Afterwards, when the Sa- 
 maritans became subject to the Arabians, and were 
 growing more and more accustomed to their lan- 
 guage, they at first were obliged to make use of the 
 version of Saadias, of which we have taken notice in 
 Obs. 1. But as this was the work of one of the hated 
 nation of the Jews, and made from the .Jewish Penta- 
 teuch, they were desirous of having an Arabic ver- 
 sion of their own Pentateuch made h\ one of their 
 own countrymen. This, therefore, Abou Said exe- 
 cuted ; who lived after the middle of the tenth cen- 
 tury, but previous to the beginning of the thirteenth ; 
 for it has not been possible hitherto to ascertain more 
 accurately his time. The version itself has not yet 
 been printed ; but, as far as its nature has been in- 
 vestigated, it is no less valuable for the criticism of the 
 Hebraico-Samaritan text from wl.ich it was made, 
 than the older Samaritan version of that text. 
 
p. I. s. I. c. V. § 1. 101 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 ON THE AUTHENTICITY, INTEGRITY, AND HISTORI- 
 CAL FAITH OF THE BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTA- 
 MENT. 
 
 §1. 
 
 A GOOD interpreter of the Old Testament must, 
 in our times particularly, pay due regard to es- 
 timating the authenticity, integrity, and histori- 
 cal credit so long attributed to these books; and, 
 consequently, must settle what opinion he ought 
 to form regarding each of these particulars. 
 
 Ohs. 1. If any one wishes to be a sound interpre- 
 ter of any one of the books of the Old Testament, it 
 is certainly not immaterial to him, whether the book 
 be spurious, or corrupted by the perversity of men, 
 or unworth}^ of credit in the historical events which 
 it relates, or otherwise. The more important, too, the 
 subject of a book, so much the more curious and soli- 
 citous will he be regarding its authenticity as it is 
 called, its integrity, and its historical faith, if this last 
 also should become the subject of his discussion. 
 
 Obs. 2. As it is by no means inconsistent with the 
 education of one who is desirous of employing him- 
 self in the interpretation of the books of the New 
 
102 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Testament that those particulars, which we have men- 
 tioned, should be investigated, I am of opinion, that 
 they should not altogether be passed over in the edu- 
 cation of an interpreter of the much more ancient 
 books of the Old Testament ; because there have been 
 many in our times who have formed very rash opi- 
 nions regarding their origin, composition, and the cre- 
 dit which they deserve in historical matters. 
 
 §2. 
 
 When influenced by sufficiently powerful 
 reasons, we pronounce tlie books of the Old Tes- 
 tament authentic; we mean, that they are not 
 spurious, nor forged by one or more authors, — 
 nor are they fictions of later ages, which have 
 been fraudulently obtruded upon us. 
 
 Obs. 1. It is not foreign to the state of things in 
 our time to observe, that nothing in all cases is easier, 
 when speculating regarding books of very high anti- 
 quity, tlian to frame multiplied opinions regarding 
 their origin and composition which will appear inge- 
 nious, but which, by their boldness, may bring into 
 the utmost danger tlie authority and value of the 
 writings. And, therefore, should strong circumstan- 
 tial arguments not be found, by which such hypotheses 
 may be refuted, this should not appear surprising to 
 any one who has reflected, that, in the nature of 
 things, a wide field is open for conjecture in such a 
 
p. I. s. I. c. V. § 2. 103 
 
 subject, and that absolute demonstration can scarcely 
 be attained. Thus, then, it is not possible that we 
 should so determine the authors, and date of each of 
 the writings which are contained in the Old Testa- 
 ment, and the manner in which they were framed, as 
 that nothing farther should remain to be desired. Our 
 age hath taught us to what a degree of audacity the 
 lust of framing hypotheses may proceed, where histo- 
 rical documents of the most unexceptionable nature 
 cannot be brought in opposition. 
 
 Obs. 2. Although, however, the authenticity of the 
 books of the Old Testament caimot be so absolutely 
 demonstrated as to meet, in every respect, the objec- 
 tions and doubts of those who give full rein to their 
 imaginations ; there are not wanting weighty argu- 
 ments, which may satisfy those who require nothing 
 more than what the nature of the subject can afford ; 
 which, therefore, we shall now produce, though only 
 in a summary manner. 
 
 Obs. 3. The external arguments producible, or 
 what we call testimonies, are not indeed trifling, but 
 such as may satisfy a candid friend to truth and reli- 
 gion, in a subject of such remote antiquity. We have 
 then, as witnesses, not only Jesus and his Apostles, 
 Flavins Josephus, Philo Juda;us, and the Alexandrine 
 translators of the Old Testament, who are more an- 
 cient than all these, but likewise the whole Jewish na- 
 tion, which has always held these books to be genuine. 
 But how could it have happened, that this whole na- 
 tion should have suffered these books, which were so 
 closely connected both with their civil constitution 
 and their religion, to have been obtruded upon them 
 
104 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 by their priests ? And let it not be said that perhaps 
 the fraud was of a nature agreeable to the Jews in 
 general, as affording them a ground of boasting in 
 the possession of certain sacred books. For, so far 
 were these books from being a cause of boasting to 
 them, that, on the contrary, they were an everlasting 
 monument, as it were, of the perversity of their dispo- 
 sitions, which certainly they would not have allowed 
 to have been erected to their disgrace, if there had 
 been even the slightest cause of doubting their truth. 
 This testimony, too, of the whole nation has the great- 
 er force, particularly when we call to mind, that books 
 in general were very rare in the most ancient times, 
 and, moreover, that in the more recent books of the 
 Old Testament, certain more ancient and authorita- 
 tive books were acknowledged and received, and often 
 appealed to, and, finally, that no period in any degree 
 suited for the purpose can be fixed upon, either be- 
 fore the Babylonish captivity, or afterwards, in which 
 the Hebrevv nation would have commenced receiving 
 supposititious books witli a blind and eager credulity, 
 as genuine and sacred, and recommending them to 
 a credulous posterity. 
 
 Obs. 4. To the external arguments we add the 
 internal, as they are generally called, which are de- 
 rived from the very nature of the books, ])roving in 
 no obscure manner their authenticity. For such is 
 their nature and genius, that nothing can be said re- 
 garding any other books of very remote antiquity 
 which is more satisfactory. 
 
 And, in the first })lace, we deem it worthy of atten- 
 tion, that in different books a great diversity of style 
 
p. I. s. I. c. V. § 2. 105 
 
 is perceivable. This, too, not only takes place where 
 different subjects are treated of, but is such generally 
 as characterises different authors and ages. Even in 
 the very great similitude of historical narration among 
 the Hebrews of every age, there is a marked distinc- 
 tion, such, for instance, as the books ascribed to Moses, 
 and the books of Chronicles, which every one who is 
 even moderately skilled in the language can easily 
 observe. No less is the diversity in the poetical 
 writings, though resembling each other in maintaining 
 the same peculiarity of their poetical style : and this 
 diversity in no small degree distinguishes even the 
 poetical passages of each of the Prophets. At the 
 same time, in such a diversity of writers and ages, 
 there reigns throughout an astonishing agreement in 
 sentiment and facts, without at the same time the 
 least appearance of this being artfully aimed at ; such 
 indeed as displays the works not of spurious but ge- 
 nuine authors. 
 
 In the second place, as in writings bearing the 
 names of their authors, some things generally ap- 
 pear which are congruous with the disposition and 
 genius of the writers, so do we find the style,, of the 
 various books breathing wholly the age to which 
 they are assigned. By far the greater part of the 
 hymns of David, for example, manifestly agree with 
 his genius, history, and actions ; and nothing can be 
 imagined more truly Mosaic, than the xc psalm, to 
 which his name is prefixed. Those writings too, 
 which are generally reckoned the most ancient, have 
 a more pure style than those which are said to have 
 been composed when the state was verging to disso- 
 
106 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 lutioii, or after the restoration of the Jews to their 
 own land. 
 
 Lastly, through all the books, along with the great- 
 est conformity to the genius and manners of the 
 times, there appears also the utmost agreement in 
 sentiments and views, and that too without the least 
 appearance of design. Nothing occurs in them which 
 is inconsistent with the remote ages to which they 
 relate. Nay, such is their agreement with these, that 
 if we peruse the different books in an attentive and 
 unprejudiced manner, we shall find ourselves trans- 
 ferred as it were into those times of which they treat. 
 Even foreign affairs, the origin and very ancient fates 
 of nations, the institution of rites, customs, arts and 
 sciences : all these, oftentimes only mentioned in a 
 single expression, and in passing, most harmoniously 
 accord with the genius of the times and events, and 
 likewise with what may be gathered by due care and 
 diligence from the best and most approved profane 
 authors. 
 
 Obs. 5. Some things however are objected to, 
 which seem to mark them as the productions of a 
 later age : such as the names of cities and countries 
 which were only subsequently imposed. But these 
 were either changed in the text itself, in after times, 
 for the sake of perspicuity, or were at first noted in 
 the margin by those who transcribed the books, and 
 afterwards were taken into the text as more conve- 
 nient. Some other things which are thought to shew 
 that they are of later date, consist partly of histori- 
 cal and geographical observations added afterwards ; 
 partly of supplementary adjections by a subsequent 
 
P.I. S.I. c. V. § 2. 107 
 
 writer ; partly of interpolations, such as occur in very 
 ancient writings of every kind ; and partly of pas- 
 sages, which by more accurate investigation are easily 
 reconcileable with that antiquity to which these books 
 are referred. 
 
 Obs. 6. We shall take this opportunity of briefly 
 touching on an objection made by some of the philo- 
 logers of our age, through which they endeavour 
 to refer the composition of the writings of the Old 
 Testament, to which we are accustomed to assign the 
 most remote antiquity, to a much later period. They 
 make an appeal to the great sameness of the Hebrew 
 language, observable in the writings of the Old Tes- 
 tament. For this language, say they, only arrived at 
 that degree of cultivation, which is exhibited in those 
 which are accounted the most ancient writings, in the 
 days of David ; neither is it possible to conceive, 
 when we reflect on the great mutability of languages, 
 how the Hebrew language was scarcely at all chang- 
 ed during nearly a thousand years, Mhich are reckon- 
 ed to have elapsed between the time of Moses and 
 the Babylonish captivity, whilst the Latin and Ger- 
 man languages, in a shorter space of time, have un- 
 dergone the greatest changes. But we may be al- 
 lowed to express our surprise, that, with such an ac- 
 quaintance with Eastern languages as the last century 
 has introduced among us, so absurd a comparison 
 could hp.ve been instituted between them, and the 
 Latin and German languages. For it is well known, 
 that there is nothing more fixed, nothing more al- 
 ways alike, than what has once gained a footing 
 among the Orientals, provided changes are not 
 
108 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 brought about by external causes ; and we have seen 
 above, Chap. ii. § 1. Obs. 3, that the Arabic dialect, 
 which is closely allied to the Hebrew-, and of no less 
 antiquity, has, through a much greater length of 
 time, suffered very little change ; and that, as far as 
 its genius and form is concerned, has remained the 
 same from the earliest records even to our days. 
 But, besides, there were peculiar causes which 
 operated among the Hebrews, in retaining their lan- 
 guage in its primitive genius and form, from the time 
 of Moses to the Babylonish captivity. The Mosaic 
 constitution itself kept the Israelites secluded, as it 
 were, from other nations: and the continual and in- 
 dispensable use of Mosaic books in their public sacred 
 duties, and even in their civil affairs, recommended, 
 as it were, and enforced upon them the retaining per- 
 petually their language unaltered, whilst no external 
 cause operated to produce a change. Nor, during 
 the first ages of their state, did they suffer any thing 
 from other nations of such a nature as to inflict any 
 injury on their language. Farther, it is a rash as- 
 sumption, arising solely from prejudice, that the He- 
 brew language, such as it apjiears in the best writers, 
 attained that degree of perfection only in the age of 
 David. It, indeed, underwent some changes, but 
 these were very trifling ; and it was only as the 
 Jewish kingdom was approaching to its destruction, 
 that the fatal influence of external causes was princi- 
 pally felt. Besides, it is worthy of notice, that even 
 the language of the Greeks, through a very long 
 space of time, was subjected to no great change. 
 
p. 1. s. I. c. V. § 3. , 109 
 
 §3. 
 
 We hold, likewise, the integrity of the books 
 of the Old Testament, so far as to believe that 
 they have never been intentionally corrupted 
 nor changed in any respect, from bad motives. 
 
 Obs. 1. When we assert that the books of the Old 
 Testament are pure and incorrupted, we do not mean 
 to say, that no errors are to be found in them, but 
 such as may be rectified by the collation of their 
 manuscript copies. No person, but one quite igno- 
 rant of criticism, will be inclined to ascribe such a 
 degree of integrity, even to the books of the New 
 Testament. What we mean to say, is, only that the 
 books of the Old Testament have not been corrupted 
 by M'icked men, nor altered fraudulently. And we 
 shall have no difficulty in showing that no such al- 
 teration took place before the age of our Saviour, 
 and that it could not have happened afterwards, 
 
 Obs. 2. If any corruption of the sacred books of 
 the Jews took place before the Christian era, it must 
 be supposed, either to have happened before the 
 Babylonish captivity, or after it. Before that capti- 
 vity, so few, indeed, were the copies of the sacred 
 books, that an alteration of this nature seems not diffi- 
 cult to have been attempted or effectuated. But 
 during the whole of that interval of time, the Jews, 
 in general, cared, for the most part, so little for their 
 
110 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 sacred books, as to leave no room for the suspicion 
 that they corrupted them. For we know, that tliey 
 were much more prone to a veneration for idols and 
 false gods, than to a regard for that religion which 
 was delivered to them through divine revelation, by 
 Moses. Why then should we imagine that they 
 wished to change any thing in books, for which, in 
 general, they cared very little? And had they been 
 desirous of making any change in them, undoubtedly 
 they would have expunged very many passages, in 
 which they saw the perversity of their dispositions 
 and manners, objected to them. Not even upon the 
 priests themselves, to whom the care of these books 
 had been committed, nor upon their kings and men 
 of highest dignitj^, does any suspicion of such altera- 
 tion, either attempted or perpetrated, fall, as we find 
 in these books, not a few things, by no means 
 honourable to them ; and, in fine, whatever else we 
 see reprehended by the prophets, those very severe 
 censors of those princes and priests, we never read of 
 the slightest imputation to them of such a crime. By 
 the destruction of their state, and their subsequent 
 captivity, however, it cannot be denied that the Jews, 
 vehemently affected by this calamity, began to be 
 actuated by a very different spirit from what the}^ for- 
 merly were. But, however much this change of mind 
 rendered them afterwards addicted to their own true 
 religion, and incited them to a great care of their 
 sacred books, we find no ground for a suspicion that 
 they ever wished to change any thing in these books. 
 For they were not immediately in the hands of the 
 
p.r. S.I. c. V. § 3. Ill 
 
 common people ; and those Jews who presided over 
 the administration of sacred and civil affairs, held 
 tliese writings, in which they believed the statutes of 
 (iod to be contained, most sacred ; and they were, 
 besides, men equally eminent for their piety and in- 
 tegrity. When, too, in process of time, the copies 
 of the sacred books came to be multiplied, along with 
 the love of religion, the superstition of the Jews 
 greatly increased ; so that if any one had proposed, 
 even in the way of a pious fraud, to have changed 
 any thing in these books, he would have appeared, 
 both to himself and others, to have been laying sacri- 
 legious hands upon them. To this, we may also add 
 the evidence of the very ancient Greek version ; in 
 which, not a few discrepancies from the Hebrew text 
 are observable, but not of such a nature as would 
 shew that the text was ever corrupted purposely. In 
 fine, Christ himself, though he often reprehended the 
 crimes of the Jews, and objected to their traditions, 
 by which they had perverted the spirit of their reli- 
 gion, and the meaning of their sacred writings, never 
 accused them of the sacrilege of having, by their tra- 
 ditional fictions, corrupted or depraved the Hebrew 
 text. There is also a very remarkable passage in 
 Josephus against Apion, B. i. 8, where he asserts, 
 that such was the veneration among the Jews for the 
 sacred books, that in the very long series of ages, no 
 one, down to his time, had ever dared to add to or 
 take away any thing from them, or even to make in 
 them the least alteration. 
 
 Ofjs. S. It was impossible, after the birth of Christ, 
 for the Jews to corrupt the Hebrew text. For, since 
 
112 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 the Christian religion had its origin in Judea itself, 
 and very many Jews also, of every condition in life, 
 embraced it, some of these at least were in possession 
 of copies of their ancient sacred books, which they 
 justly continued to hold in veneration; consequently, 
 if any of the Jews who tenaciously adhered to their 
 paternal religion, had wished to corrupt these writ- 
 ings, they must have been unable to accomplish it, 
 without the knowledge, and against the will, of those 
 followers of Christ who were opposed fo them. 
 When, in the course of time, the number of those be- 
 came increased who made use of the writings of the 
 Old Testament, any attempt at their depravation 
 would have been less successful : and when at length 
 the Jevvs came to dispute against the Christians, they 
 did not even attempt to corrupt those passages by 
 which the Christians principally attacked them, nor 
 would such an attempt at fraud have easily succeeded 
 at any time. Nay, b}'^ the dispersion of the Jews far 
 and wide, and the diffusion of the Christian religion 
 through the various parts of the inhabited and civil- 
 ized world, copies of the books of the Old Testament 
 were so much increased and multiplied, that it would 
 be necessary to refer their depravation to causes 
 which could not have existed, and we should be 
 forced to suppose that Jews and Christians had, as it 
 wer(^ by covenant, mutually agreed to corrupt them. 
 Besides, there were inimerous received versions of the 
 Old Testament: which, unless perverted by the 
 same changes, would have opposed a very great ob- 
 stacle to these corruptions being everywhere admit- 
 ted. 
 
p. I. s. I. c. V. § 3. 113 
 
 Obs. 4. There have been some, however, who did 
 accuse the Jews of corrupting the sacred volume. 
 Among this number were some of the Doctors or 
 Fathers of the ancient Christian church ; as, for in- 
 stance, Justin Martyr in his Dial, with Trypho the 
 JeiD, sect. 71 — 73, Irenaeus Against heresies, B. iv. 
 chap. 25, TertuUian On the dress of Women, chap. 3, 
 Jerome, Epist. to the Galat. iii. 10. But the accusa- 
 tions partly regard the wrong interpretations put by 
 the Jews on the sacred text : partly also, they arose 
 from this, that these Fathers argued from the Greek 
 version, while the Jews, on the other hand, argued 
 from the Hebrew text, and the former, when their 
 version did not altogether coincide with the text of 
 the Jews, accused these last of corrupting it. There 
 have, however, been persons in later ages who have 
 attributed to the Jews the same crime ; to prove 
 which, they have appealed to the testimon}^ of the 
 Fathers, and have also produced some examples. 
 The former, however, is not of sufficient weight to 
 substantiate the accusation : and the latter are mere- 
 ly various readings, with the exception of Deut. xxvii. 
 4 — 8. There they consider that the Jews have 
 changed the name of mount Garizim, as it is rightly 
 written in the Samaritan Pentateuch, into Ebal, that 
 they might take from the Samaritans whatever might 
 conduce to increase their veneration for that moun- 
 tain, which they esteemed sacred : for, as they argue, 
 it was more Htting that an altar should be erected on 
 that mountain on whicli the blessings were to be pro- 
 nounced, than on the other, whence the curses were 
 to be j)oured forth. But the reading of the Hebrew 
 I 
 
114 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 text is justly esteemed the most correct ; it being 
 right that solemn execrations be confirmed by victims 
 offered on the altar. We are therefore of opinion, 
 that some Samaritan substituted by conjecture in his 
 Pentateuch the name of the other mountain, consider- 
 ing it to be more adapted to the context. And in- 
 deed, we have already observed (Chap. iii. § 6, Obs. 
 3, near the end,) that the Samaritan Pentateuch has 
 suffered not a few changes, which have been, some of 
 them at least, made intentionally and according to 
 some critical rule. 
 
 §4. 
 
 Finally, we are justified in maintaining that 
 the books of the Old Testament, in all historical 
 narratives, are entitled to the fullest credit. 
 
 Obs. 1. When we speak of the historical credit 
 due to the books of the Old Testament, we allude 
 not solely to those writings, which are in themselves 
 of tlie historical class, but likewise to those others 
 whose subject is not altogether historical, but which 
 contain some historical notices, or are closely con- 
 nected with historical events. To this class, how- 
 ever, vve do not refer these books, which although 
 partly in a historical form, yet have not a historical 
 subject ; whicli we think to be the case w ith regard 
 to the books of Job and Jojiah. In both of these 
 seems to be contained an extended moral parable ; 
 fur the framing of which some true history afforded 
 
p. I. s. 1. c. V. § 4. 115 
 
 the ground-work ; so that in neither is historical 
 truth the principal object, except in so far, as that 
 the dispositions and manners of men, and the nature 
 and circumstances of the times and events, be truly 
 represented. 
 
 Obs. 2. In vindicating, on the present occasion, the 
 historical credit of the books of the Old Testament, 
 only some of the more general arguments can be no- 
 ticed, such as we consider to be of the greatest force. 
 Whatever, then, we find historically related in the 
 Old Testament, has that admirable simplicity which 
 must readily satisfy a candid reader, that the writers 
 were actuated, not by the desire of pleasing, but by 
 the simple love of truth. That simplicity, too, which 
 is the seal of truth, not only appears in their relation 
 of ordinary events, but in those likewise which are 
 astonishing and miraculous. And even when, in the 
 account of these, the language sometimes assumes a 
 loftier and more elevated tone, it is manifestly of that 
 nature which we must ascribe to the unusual great- 
 ness of the event, and to the feelings excited by it, 
 and not to the desire of magnifying it. Again, the 
 writers of the Old Testament describe most correctly 
 the ancient manners of their own and other nations, 
 and, without any art, so depict the various characters 
 of the men they speak of, as to leave not the slightest 
 room to doubt that they are represented by them ex- 
 actly as they were. In fine, they never conceal, dis- 
 semble, or excuse, but candidly relate the vices, not 
 only of their nation, and of those illustrious men who 
 belonged to it, but even their own. In a word, the 
 more attentively and frequently any one who is free 
 
116 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 from prejudice, peruses the historical portions of the 
 Old Testament, the more will he perceive that there 
 are no writers in all antiquity more distinguished, 
 and more to be recommended for their historical 
 faith. 
 
 Obs. 3. There have been, however, some among 
 our later philologers, who have called in question the 
 historical faith of most of the writers of the Old Test- 
 ament, respecting which we are now treating. These 
 men, although they have not openly impugned those 
 innate marks of truth which we have pointed out, 
 have yet endeavoured to shew, that most of the his- 
 torical narrations contained in the Old Testament 
 were written long after they took place, and that they 
 were derived from ancient traditions, very frequently 
 manifestly perverted through length of time and tl^ 
 proneness of men to render illustrious some events 
 by giving them the appearance of miracles. Were 
 this allowed, the historical credit of the books of the 
 Old Testament would rest on a very slippery founda- 
 tion, nay, would be altogether deprived of its princi- 
 pal supports. 
 
 Ohs. 4. Those arguments which are brought for- 
 ward (§ 2.), particularly the internal arguments as 
 they are called, for proving generally the authentici- 
 ty of the books of the Old Testament, have also great 
 force in proving their historical fidelity : and the per- 
 son who wishes to judge and act candidly, and to de- 
 mand no more regarding books of the highest anti- 
 quity, than can be expected regarding compositions 
 of so remote an age, will readily perceive the rashness 
 of the assumption that the historical narrations of 
 
p. I. s. I. c. V. § 4. 117 
 
 the Old Testament have been derived only from un- 
 certain traditions. 
 
 Obs. 5. It is very far indeed from being true, that 
 all the historical books contained in the Old Testa- 
 ment may with probability be reckoned to have been 
 written long after the events. To take for example 
 the books which pass under the name of Moses, which 
 hold the first place among the historical writings of 
 the Old Testament — there are some philologers in 
 Germany who assert that these were not composed 
 before the times of David. But the reasons which 
 they give are for the most part far-fetched, and de- 
 rived also from this circumstance, that a proper ar- 
 rangement is not in all cases observed ; but this very 
 neglect of arrangement is rather an argument why 
 we should hold Moses to be the author of the Penta- 
 teuch ; who, vvithout any art, such as was inconsistent 
 with the habits of his age, consigned to writing the 
 various events as they took place, and delivered them 
 to his countrymen. But again, the book of Deutero- 
 nomy is most manifestly composed quite in the pe- 
 culiar manner of Moses ; and the things which are 
 contained in the three former books, are assumed as 
 known in the addresses contained in that book. In 
 fine, the mention of the books of the law is very fre- 
 quent, down from a very remote antiquity ; which 
 therefore, if we wish to be candid, we must believe to 
 be the compositions of Moses himself, to whom they 
 have always been ascribed. 
 
 Obs. 6. Neither ought we to reckon that even those 
 books, which we do not deny to have been put into 
 the form in which we now have them at an after 
 
118 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 period, such particularly as the books of Samuel and 
 Kings, were composed merely from traditions, and 
 therefore of dubious credit. For indeed the manner 
 of naiTation, although imperfect, and not agreeable to 
 the more recent rules of historical composition, is yet 
 altogether such as characterises an author, who had 
 access to the best sources of information, and who 
 employed undoubted historical documents. And it 
 clearly appears from 1 Chron. xxix. 29, that there 
 were fuller annals written by men of the highest au- 
 thority and credit ; and in the books of Kings, these 
 more extended annals, from which the author drew 
 his information, are more than once quoted in proof 
 of what he says. 
 
 Obs. 7. We may here take an opportunity of 
 subjoining some observations regarding the most 
 ancient of all historical books, the book of Genesis. 
 As this book contains accounts of things long ante- 
 rior to the age of Moses, reaching even to the very 
 infancy of the human race, it may seem to be of all 
 others the least worthy of credit. But it has been 
 observed by many, and put beyond a doubt, that that 
 book consists of various parts, written by different 
 authors, which Moses joined together and afterwards 
 prefixed to his own books. There is, besides, a re- 
 markable diversity of style in these different por- 
 tions ; and of that sort too, that the more remote 
 the times are to which the narrative refers, the 
 more is it brief and more replete with images and 
 figures, and consequently bears more striking in- 
 dications of a remote antiquity', easily to be per- 
 ceived by a learned and candid reader, and breathes 
 
p. I. s. I. c. VI. § 1. 119 
 
 more of the infancy of the human race ; all which 
 characteristical marks carry along with them such a 
 force of evidence as cannot be fairly resisted. Nor is 
 it superfluous to remark, that the art of writing is of 
 such antiquity in the East, that the farther you trace 
 it back, the farther its origin seems to recede. But 
 were it that the more ancient relations at least had 
 sometimes been only preserved by oral tradition ; 
 why should it not be that they should have been 
 equally well preserved by those who were interested 
 in them, as events particularly remarkable, and much 
 longer genealogies are retained faithfully by the ge- 
 nuine Arabs, and delivered down like a sacred deposit 
 to their posterity to be religiously preserved ? 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 ON THE DEGREE OF ATTENTION DUE TO THE EX- 
 TRAORDINARY INTERPOSITION OF GOD IN REGARD 
 TO THAT RELIGION, WHICH IS CONTAINED IN THE 
 BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 In interpreting the books of the Old Testa- 
 ment, it is not in our times a matter of indiffer- 
 I enee, what opinions may be formed regarding 
 the divine interpositions in the religion contain- 
 ed in those books ; it is therefore necessary for 
 
120 PRINCIPLES or INTERPRETATION. 
 
 an interpreter, that he pay attention to this 
 most important suhject. 
 
 Obs. 1. In former ages, whoever employed himself 
 in the interpretation of the sacred books, was accus- 
 tomed to treat them as attributable to a divine origin; 
 and such was the general consent among Christians 
 regarding the divine interposition of Almighty God 
 in the religion contained in these books, and in the 
 affairs connected with it, that, when discussing the 
 manner of interpreting them, there was no necessity 
 for saying a word on this subject. This was a point 
 confined to theologians solely, and was therefore dis- 
 cussed, as a topic peculiar and exclusively belonging 
 to them, in their schools. But for some time past, it 
 has become prevalent in not a few places in Germany, 
 even among those to whom the guardianship of re- 
 ligion is committed, not to acknowledge any such ex- 
 traordinary interposition, and to explain the sacred 
 books in conformity with this novel opinion. The 
 question, therefore, regarding the divine origin of 
 this ancient religion, and its sacred volume, is now 
 justly referred to the science of sacred hermeneutics. 
 
 Obs. 2. Indeed, in our age, the divine origin of 
 the Old Testament has come to be more and more 
 called into doubt, by very many of those who profess 
 themselves to be interpreters of the sacred books. 
 They have, in fact, endeavoured to explain every thing 
 which is met with in these books regarding divine ex- 
 traordinary visions and institutions, from the genius of 
 that remote age, and from the general manner of 
 thinking and acting among men of ancient times. 
 
p. I. s. I. c. VI. § 1. 121 
 
 They have farther attempted to shew in what man- 
 ner the human understanding, in somewise men among 
 the Hebrews, might have arrived at certain conclu- 
 sions which heretofore were usually ascribed to divine 
 inspiration and instruction. Thus, according to them, 
 the doctrine contained in the books of the Old Testa-- 
 ment was called divine, only because it was attributed 
 by its authors to God ; and they, in conformity with 
 the established custom of antiquity, called themselv^ 
 divinely inspired. Besides, it might also be accounted 
 a divine doctrine, in as far as those who broached it 
 acted under the direction of the ordinary providence 
 of God. Nay, since it is becoming to dignify with 
 the title of divine excellence whatever is excellent 
 and noble in man, why should not these ancient and 
 venerable Hebrews be ranked among the number of 
 divine men, since they seem, by their sublimer intelli- 
 gence, to have raised themselves above the standard 
 of the vulgar and of their age ? It is the preferable 
 mode, therefore, to attribute what are called miracles, 
 solely to the manner of narrating events, or to the 
 opinions entertained in those times. 
 
 Obs. 3. It would be tedious to review and discuss 
 accurately, and one by one, all the points connected 
 with this new mode of interpretation. We shall 
 therefore account it sufficient, to shew that it is indis- 
 pensable for an interpreter to believe, and to have 
 regard to, a divine extraordinary interposition in the 
 religion of the Old Testament, and in the affairs con- 
 nected with it. 
 
122 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPUETATION. 
 
 §2 
 
 The doctrine of religion delivered in the 
 books of the Old Testament, is so excellent that 
 it is improper to ascribe it solely -to the re- 
 searches of those men who delivered it. 
 
 Obs. 1. Even those who have been the most deter- 
 mined defenders of this new mode, and who have 
 kept any bounds in arguing for their opinions, have 
 found it necessary to acknowledge, that the doctrines 
 of that religion which is found in the Old Testament, 
 is most admirably adapted to the capacity of the age 
 and the genius of the nation to which it was deliver- 
 ed : although there are not wanting persons who en- 
 deavour so to diminish and impair this excellence, as 
 that little or nothing of it should remain. 
 
 Obs. 2. We readily confess, that there are things 
 observable in the notions which the books of the Old 
 Testament teach, regarding the Supreme Deity, that 
 are accommodated to the genius and circumstances 
 of the times, and of mankind ; and that, in many re- 
 spects, the religious doctrines of the New Testament 
 are superior. But this, indeed, is altogether agree- 
 able to the nature of things ; and, were it not so, the 
 doctrine of both the sacred volumes would exhibit 
 less illustrious marks of divine wisdom. We, how- 
 ever, rightly think that the notions concerning God, 
 his nature and attributes, and concerning religion in 
 
p. I. s. I. c. VI. § 2. 123 
 
 general, contained in the Old Testament, are so just, 
 exalted, and sublime, that nothing can be produced 
 from all the rest of antiquity, which deserves to be at 
 all compared with them. It is indeed astonishing, 
 that, whilst the other ancient and more noble nations 
 of antiquity, which existed in the times of Moses, 
 were devoted to Polytheism, sanctioned by their laws, 
 in the nation of the Israelites alone we should behold 
 the worship of one God, established and conjoined 
 with their very political constitution by an indisso- 
 luble bond. When, moreover, not even the more 
 excellent Greek philosophers were able to extricate 
 the most momentous doctrine of the one true God 
 from the fables of superstition, and to deliver it to 
 their disciples as certain, and to be adhered to with 
 the utmost stedfastness ; what is the reason, why, long 
 before their age, and the most splendid era of the 
 Greeks, among the Hebrews alone, by no means de- 
 serving to be compared with them in the cultivation 
 of the powers of the mind, that doctrine was publicly 
 taught as the principal point in the whole of religion, 
 and the chief foundation of their state itsolf; and 
 that there were not a few who spoke of God in such 
 a manner, as to fill the minds, even of us, so remote 
 from their times, and instructed in the superior doc- 
 trine of Christ, with the highest veneration of the su- 
 preme God ? 
 
 Obs. 3. The excellence of this doctrine, therefore, 
 is such as can in no way be accounted for with pro- 
 bability, from natural causes. For no man will ever 
 be able clearly to show how the wise men of the 
 Israelitish nation, were alone able of themselves to 
 
124 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 gain a superiority which nature had denied to the 
 wise of more cultivated nations. For the nation it- 
 self was devoted to agriculture, and in its early 
 ages, at least, was averse to the study of arts and 
 learning, by which other nations became celebrated, 
 and was not even attached to the worship of one God, 
 but vehemently addicted to that of many ; and yet 
 this nation, by its whole constitution, was trained by 
 public authority, to the purest of all the religions 
 which are known to have existed in antiquity. Nor 
 can these superior notions regarding God, be sup- 
 posed to be derived from the Egyptians. Stephen, 
 indeed, truly affirmed. Acts vii. 22, that Moses was 
 educated in all their wisdom. But their most cele- 
 brated wisdom had no reference to the purity of re- 
 ligion ; in which, so far were they from excelling, that, 
 on the contrary, the utmost polytheistic superstition 
 was already prevailing among them in the time of 
 Moses, confirmed too, and recommended by the laws 
 of the state ; nor shall we allow ourselves to be easily 
 persuaded, that at the same time the secret doctrine 
 of the Egyptian philosophers or sages, however dif- 
 ferent from the superstition of the vulgar, was distin- 
 guished by such a degree of purity, as that Moses 
 could derive from it any thing valuable for his pur- 
 pose. We do not, however assert, that in the age of 
 Moses, the doctrine of the unity of God was alto- 
 gether unknown. But, at the same time, we are 
 convinced, that only a very few traces of a pure reli- 
 gion, and these almost obliterated, can be shown to 
 have existed at that period. And, is it credible that 
 Moses, educated in the court of the Egyptian 
 
p. I. s. I. c. VI. § 2. 125 
 
 monarch, and accustomed from his tender years to 
 the contemplation of so depraved a religion, should 
 either have been instructed and instigated bj'^ some 
 other person, or have attempted of himself to deliver 
 to his countrymen an institution of rehgion, altogether 
 opposed to that of the Egyptians ? But it perhaps 
 will be said, that the highly simple patriarchal reli- 
 gion, had not 3'et become altogether extinct among 
 the Israelites during their stay in Egypt ; which 
 therefore, from whatever source it may have been de- 
 rived, Moses might convert to his own purposes. 
 This we readily grant. But, since the unhappy pro- 
 pensity of the Israelites to a depraved religion, exist- 
 ed in Egypt, we, on the other hand, ask how it came 
 to pass, that Moses should attempt to establish a new 
 commonwealth, founded wholly on the worship of one 
 God, which, even in a much less remote antiquit}^, no 
 one ever dreamed of, and should successfully accom- 
 plish this unheard of prodigy in politics among his 
 countrymen, unless he had had God for his instigator, 
 and leader, and constant teacher? For, although 
 among the ancient Egyptians, as well as among the 
 other nations of antiquity, religion was closely con- 
 nected vvith political affairs, yet, nothing in this re- 
 spect, similar to the Mosaic institution, in all its parts, 
 can be produced from the whole history of the most 
 ancient ages. 
 
 Obs. 4. Our opponents, in this case, do not deny 
 that Moses said, that he was impelled and instructed 
 by God ; but they say, that he asserted this to add 
 greater force to his laws and precepts ; and that in 
 this he acted in a similar manner with the other cele- 
 
126 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 brated legislators of antiquity, who, in order to give 
 the most sacred authority to their laws, were accus- 
 tomed to declare, that they had intercourse with some 
 deity. But we observe this difference, and that, t)Oo, 
 not a trifling one, — that Moses not only professed 
 himself a divine teacher and ambassador, but pro- 
 posed to evidence this by his miracles ; so that it is 
 impossible to clear him of the crime of notorious 
 fraud, unless he really was what he pretended to be, 
 especially when he relates, Exod. iv. 1 — 17, that he 
 accepted his divine commission reluctantly. And, in- 
 deed, the excellent disposition of the man completely 
 removes all suspicion of deceit ; and the miracles, by 
 which he endeavoured to procure credit to his decla- 
 rations, are of such a nature, that even now we must 
 acknowledge them to have had the most powerful 
 persuasive force. But we fhall afterwards speak of 
 miracles in another place. This one observation we 
 shall make, as particularly deserving attention ; — that 
 Mahomet, although he professed himself a divine am- 
 bassador, did not, however, dare to propose to him- 
 self to feign any miracle ; nay, he openly declared, 
 that the power of doing miracles, when they were de- 
 manded of him by many, had been denied to him. 
 
 Obs. 5. To Moses we add the Prophets, — the sub- 
 sequent teachers of this ancient religion, who gave 
 such proofs of their divine mission, as that we find 
 ourselves oliliged to yield that comjilete credit to 
 their having been commissioned by God, which some 
 are disposed to deny to them. These were not few 
 in number, and appeared among the Israelites during 
 a long course of ages. Neither were these men ha- 
 
p. I. s. 1. c. VI. § 2. 127 
 
 ruspices, nor augurs, nor astrologers , who, from the 
 flight of birds, the observation of the stars, or from 
 tlie intestines of sacrificed animals, or from such trifl- 
 ing circumstances, derived omens: respectiog all 
 which the saying holds ti'ue, which Cicero attributes 
 to Cato regarding the haruspices of his age, (De Nat. 
 Deor. i. 26. and De Divinat. ii. 24,) " It seems sur- 
 prising that an haruspex should not laugh, when he 
 meets another haruspex." They were not the authors 
 or interpreters of certain artfully ambiguous oracles, 
 nor patrons of the popular superstition, nor the ser- 
 vants of princes, such as, according to history, were 
 the persons among certain ancient nations who exer- 
 cised the art of soothsaying. Nay, they wei'e quite 
 free from all those kinds of fraud which a perversion 
 of religion has ever generated ; for whenever they ad- 
 dressed the people or the princes, they always show- 
 ed themselves the defenders of genuine piety and pure 
 virtue, and by the excellence of their own morals 
 added great weight to their salutary admonitions. 
 And they did not recommend and require a scrupu- 
 lous observance of external ceremonies alone ; but a 
 heart-felt reverence for God, purity of soul, and inte- 
 grity of conduct. They sought the favour of no one, 
 but were severe censors both of the superstition and 
 the vices of the people. They flattered not the mini- 
 sters of religion ; nay, whatever was in them, or in 
 any of the chief men, or even in the kings themselves, 
 reprehensible, they reproved with a highly comnjen- 
 dable boldness. When employed in the prediction 
 of future events, they seemed to have them present 
 to their minds; nor did they endeavour to divine 
 
128 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 them by any secret art, but poured them out from the 
 fullest conviction of their being afterwards assuredly 
 verified by the event. Frequently, even plainly and 
 unambiguously, did they so announce events that 
 were quickly to happen, as not to show the least fear 
 of their being convicted of error. In a word, were 
 we to frame to ourselves the idea of men, who; ho- 
 noured with a divine commission, would support that 
 dignity in a suitable manner, such do we behold in 
 the Hebrew prophets, expressed in the most lively 
 manner. Seeing, then, that they were not few in num- 
 ber, and that they were of a nation which, from its 
 proneness to the worship of false gods, was not disposed 
 to reverence them in the manner they deserved ; is it at 
 all likely that so many men, highly venerable in all re- 
 spects, should in this nation, through so many ages, 
 have wished, or dared, or been at all able, to assume 
 the dignity of prophets divinely commissioned, unless 
 they had really been what they professed themselves 
 to be? 
 
 §3. 
 
 We have reason to affirm, that real miracles, 
 and consequently manifestations of extraordinary 
 divine interpositions, were exhibited; by which 
 the divine origin of the religion delivered in the 
 books of the Old Testament was clearly con- 
 firmed. 
 
p. I. s. 1. c. VI. § 3. 129 
 
 Obs. 1. Without entering on the subject of miracles 
 in general, we shall only moke a few brief observa- 
 tions on those which Moses, the author of the ancient 
 religion, and the founder of the L-raelitic state, is 
 said to have performed. Agreeably to the opinion of 
 most of our opponents in this case, the things per- 
 formed are not altogether to be denied, but are to be 
 explained in conformity with the ordinary course of 
 nature. Thus Mcsies i;? to be supposed to have ex- 
 hibited before the Egyptian king, only a greater de- 
 gree of skill and art than the Egyptian Magi could 
 shew. In the dreadful plagues inflicted on the land 
 of Egypt, which, according to our adversaries, were 
 produced by natural causes, the only thing remarkable 
 was, that Moses, through his superior acquaintance 
 with natural science, was able to foresee the approach 
 and the going away of each of them. It was also 
 brought about by natural cauS^es that the Ked Sea 
 was dried up, with which, as they suppose, Moses 
 being acquainted, was able accurately to compute the 
 time at which the passage would be most easy to the 
 Israelites, but this being elapsed, the same passage, 
 when attempted by the uninformed Egyptians, proved 
 their destruction. In hne, to pass over other circum- 
 stances, the idea which ought to be entertained re- 
 garding the giving of the law at Sinai, is, that Moses 
 observing the top of Mount Sinai covered with 
 clouds, accompanied with thunder and lightning, 
 which scene placed the Deity, as it were, present be- 
 fore their eyes ; laying hold of this opportunity, and 
 desirous, above all things, of impressing on his 
 countrymen, the divine origin of his laws, pretended 
 
 K 
 
130 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 that God was speaking in the thunder, and he declar- 
 ed that the summary of his laws which he afterwards 
 delivered, comprehended in ten precepts, and engra- 
 ven by his orders, on two tables of stone, contained 
 those words which God wished to express by his 
 thunders. 
 
 Ohs. 2. But should this mode of explanation be 
 adopted, not with regard to any one fact presenting 
 the appearance of a miracle, but with regard to a very 
 great number, many things will then have to be as- 
 sumed, conjectured, and supposed, v/hich have very 
 little probability ; many which took place through a 
 very singular, and most rare casualty ; many, which 
 the more one lays together, and compares them with 
 each other, the less will he believe the concurrence 
 of the different things so highly fortunate for Moses' 
 purpose, credible. But, let us grant all this ; then 
 must we suppose Moses to have been so superior in 
 the knowledge of natural causes, and in his skill in 
 magical arts, to all the wise men of Egypt, that, re- 
 duced to despair, they were obliged openly to confess, 
 Exod. viii. 14, 15, that they were vanquished by a 
 Hebrew whom they insolently looked down upon, 
 and that he was aided by the hand of God. Then, 
 too, it follows, that before Pharaoh and his whole 
 court, before the Magi themselves, who had come by 
 his order, and before those too who had the highest 
 interest in convicting of fraud that principal patron 
 of a hated race, and in punishing him as the contriver 
 of an impious deceit ; before these very bitter and 
 acute adversaries, was Moses able so to support his 
 pretended divine commission, as at last to attain his 
 
V. I. s. 1. c. VI. § 3. 131 
 
 object, and to carry off safe and sound, an unvvarlike 
 multitude, from a king pursuing them with a very 
 powerful aiTiiy. Finally, it is necessary to hold that 
 Moses was able to persuade the Israelites, a very nu- 
 merous nation, the whole of whom almost were ting- 
 ed with the Egyptian superstition ; a race too, most 
 difficult to manage, and very sullen and obstinate, to 
 receive his laws as divine ; nay, was able to obtrude 
 upon them a system of laws, of a nature highly dis- 
 pleasing to them, whose yoke they were perpetually 
 endeavouring to shake off; and, consequently, that by 
 his own unassisted wisdom, he overcame the various 
 obstacles opposed to him by a people of this jcharac- 
 ter, so as to be reckoned a divine legislator by the 
 Hebrews of his own age, and by their posterity down 
 to the present moment. In a word, either following 
 the example of the open enemies of the sacred vo- 
 lume, we must reject the whole Mosaic history, such 
 as it is recorded, as false ; or, if taking many of the 
 philologers of our own times, as our directors and 
 guides, we receive that history as indeed true in it- 
 self, but think that those parts of it which contain any 
 thing miraculous, are to be explained in conformity 
 with the ordinary course of nature ; then must we 
 assume and assert many things which are so far from 
 being natural or customary, as that they are much 
 more difficult to be understood or believed, than even 
 the greatest miracles. 
 
132 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 §4. 
 
 We not only believe that a peculiar interpo- 
 sition of God must be acknowledged, in the 
 giving of the religion comprehended in the 
 books of the Old Testament, but likewise in 
 the committing of it to writing ; in other words, 
 that its writers were divinely inspired. 
 
 Obs. 1. This question regarding the inspiration of 
 the books of the Old Testament, may, indeed, be rec- 
 koned of less importance than that respecting tlieir 
 authenticity and historical credit, and the divine ori- 
 gin of the religion whicli they deliver, since, if one 
 is fully persuaded of these, he can safely extract from 
 them all that concerns religion. But this, however, 
 he will be enabled to do M'ith more certainty, if the 
 arguments be satisfactory by which it is shewn that 
 the writers were divinely assisted, and rendered free 
 from error. It seems proper, therefore, on the occa- 
 sion which now offers itself, to make a few remarks 
 on this subject. 
 
 Obs. 2. Let us then see, in the first place, what idea 
 we ought to form of inspiration, attending both to the 
 import of the word itself, and to what it signifies. The 
 word inspiration has its origin from the very cele- 
 brated passage in 2 Tim. iii. 16, where the apostle 
 calls the volume of the Old Testament Oio-rryvjCTov ; 
 
p. I. s. I. c. VI. § 4. 133 
 
 which, agreeably to the Hebrew idiom, must be ex- 
 plained that it was written cjinSx rrni, hy the 
 divine spirit ; and this signifies, in the widest sense 
 of the expression, by the divine power, hy the as- 
 sistance of God, which therefore was granted to the 
 writers as far as they needed it. As to the thing it- 
 self, then, we may designate by the name of inspira- 
 tion, (compare 2 Pet. i. 20.) that divine aid which 
 Moses and the Prophets experienced in the know- 
 ledge of things pertaining to religion ; in which sense 
 we more generally employ the word revelation, or di- 
 vine instruction. In this sense, no one can, with any 
 degree of probability, affirm that all things which are 
 contained in the Old Testament, are equally divinely 
 inspired. For exainple, can those things be supposed 
 to have been revealed by God to Moses, of which he 
 himself had been an eye-witness, or of which he had 
 otherwise the means of being correctly informed ? 
 Or did God inspire David in those psalms, in which 
 he uttered imprecations against his enemies? But those 
 tilings which Moses predicted to the Israelites that were 
 to happen in times long posterior, and the prp^necies 
 of David concerning the Messiah, who was to be born 
 many ages afterwards ; these we justlj' believe that 
 they derived from divine inspiration or instruction. 
 Here, therefore, we employ the word inspiration in a 
 more restricted sense, as regarding the writing of cer- 
 tain things, having a particular reference to religion ; 
 so that, in this respect, the sacred writers were em- 
 ployed, under the direction of a peculiar divine pro- 
 vidence governing them, and as fiir as was proper, 
 
134 PRINCIPLES OP INTERPRETATION, 
 
 assisting and guiding them. In committing to writ- 
 ing, then, the most important doctrines, the histories, 
 and other things particularly connected with religion, 
 the divine power so acted upon their minds, as to 
 preserve them free from error. But in other things 
 of less importance to religion, such as those psalms in 
 which David inveighs with acrimony against his ad- 
 versaries, the sacred writers acted under the same pe- 
 culiar direction of divine providence, which, not only 
 most wisely, and for the best purposes, permitted 
 such things to be written, but even intended that 
 they should be written, that they might be in confor- 
 mity with the nature of things, and with the true 
 feelings of the human soul, although they might not 
 always be such as ought to be approved. 
 
 Obs. 3. If we adopt this notion of inspiration, we 
 shall discover something in what is signified by this 
 word harmonizing with the whole divine government 
 of the Israelitic nation. Persuaded as we are, by 
 the most cogent reasons, that this nation wife under 
 that pecuhar government of God, which is called a 
 Theocracy ; and acknowledging, as we do, that this 
 government was instituted in all its bearings, for the 
 sake of religion, although not in every case acting in 
 the same way, but conformably to the differing nature 
 of men and circumstances ; why should we exclude 
 this divine superintendence from those books which 
 were written for the common use of that same nation 
 in religion ? This then ought ever to be kept in 
 view, that inspiration, rightly and fairl}'^ defined, 
 should be referred principally to the doctrines of re- 
 
p. I. s. I. c. VI. § 4. 135 
 
 ligion, and to the things most closely connected with 
 it; in both of which, as written under the direction 
 of God, it becomes us to have such faith in the sacred 
 authors, as that particular divine assistance, which they 
 enjoyed, demands. We are, however, by no means 
 able to explain fully the mode of this extraordinary 
 assistance, since we cannot even explain or understand 
 clearly, that ordinarj^ influence which God exerts up- 
 on the minds of men. 
 
 Ohs. 4. That a peculiar divine assistance was really' 
 afl^brded to the writers of the Old Testament, we are 
 assured from the circumstance, that Christ and his 
 Apostles were in the habit of appealing to the words 
 of the Old Testament, as divine oracles. If any one 
 shall be disposed to resist their authority, he must 
 then hold, either that Jesus and his Apostles were not 
 divinely commissioned, any more than many of these 
 later times esteem Moses and the Prophets not to 
 have been ; or, he must say, that they only accommo- 
 dated themselves to the ideas of their countrymen, 
 who estimated too highly the dignity of the sacred 
 volume ; or, lastly, he must lay it down, that their 
 sacred books were called divine by the Jews them- 
 selves, merely in respect to the excellence of their 
 contents. 
 
 And there are indeed persons who think that Jesus 
 and his Apostles are not to be accounted divine teach- 
 ers in any other sense, than when we call, what we 
 admire as noble and excellent in any other men, 
 divine : the rashness of which assumption this is not 
 the place for demonstrating. Believing then the 
 
136 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 divine authority of Christ and his Apostles, why 
 should we not grant that they only accommodated 
 themselves to the received opinions of the Jews, in 
 what they said of the inspiration of the sacred books ? 
 The answer is, because they always, and on every 
 opportunit}', spoke in such magnificent terms of the 
 books of the Old Testament ; that there is no reason- 
 able ground for doubting whether they declared their 
 real sentiments. Some who saw that this could scarce- 
 ly be denied, have asserted that not even the com- 
 mon people of the Jews, in the age of Christ and his 
 Apostles, attributed any thing divine, in the strict 
 sense of the word, to the sacred writings, but only 
 meant to express their excellence by the honourable 
 title of inspiration, as they were accustomed to as- 
 cribe every thing that was particularly excellent in its 
 kind to God. But, Jesus and his Apostles spoke of 
 these writings, and argued from them, in such a 
 manner, as clearly ascribed to them something divine. 
 Nay, indeed, he who shall dare to deny that the Jews 
 venerated their sacred code, not from any belief of its 
 divine origin, but merely on account of the excellence 
 of its contents, will be over and above refuted by 
 the history of that people, who for many ages before 
 estimated these books as dearer than their lives ; and 
 extolled their divine origin even to a superstitious 
 degree. Besides, Josephus, who lived, as every one 
 knows, about the time of the Apostles, spoke and 
 argued in such a manner regarding these books and 
 their divine origin, in the passage which we have 
 already quoted (Chap. v. § 3. Obs. 2, at the end,) 
 
p. 1. s. I. c. VI. § 5. 137 
 
 that it must clearly appear that this fiction of some 
 late writers has not the slightest plausibility. 
 
 §5. 
 
 Although we acknowledge and assert the di- 
 vine interposition, as to the doctrine of the reli- 
 gion which is contained in the Old Testament, 
 and in .the extraordinary things which were 
 done for confirming it, and also in the writing 
 of the books ; yet we by no means exclude the 
 employment of natural causes by the Al- 
 mighty. 
 
 Ohs. 1. As in our age, the extraordinary interven- 
 tion of God is violently impugned in all things con- 
 nected with the religion of the Old Testament, it is 
 much more incumbent than formerly, upon an expo- 
 sitor, sedulously to endeavour to form to himself just 
 notions upon this point. 
 
 Obs. 2. When then, we say, that as far as concerns 
 the doctrine of religion, its authors were divinely in- 
 structed, we do not suppose that they were like ma- 
 chines, who did nothing of themselves, and that God 
 did the whole through their means. For, as the or- 
 dinary providence of God acts upon men in a man- 
 ner which is consistent with their rational nature, so 
 
138 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 likewise, he instructed, enlightened, and directed 
 those whom he wished to be the ministers of his ex- 
 traordinary providence, in such a manner as was con- 
 sistent with the excellent faculties of man, and worthy 
 also of his own pre-eminent wisdom. Thus we have 
 every reason to believe, that Moses was a divine 
 teacher and ambassador, whom God himself instruct- 
 ed. But we have no reason to doubt, that to this 
 same Moses, the rare endowments of mind which he 
 possessed, and whatever valuable acquirements he 
 got among the Egyptians, were of the greatest use. 
 For, although no one can with any probability shew, 
 or accurately define, what in each instance should be 
 ascribed to God, and what to Moses, of the doctrines 
 and laws which we are accustomed to call by his 
 name ; it is, however, quite sufficient to an ingenuous 
 friend of truth, that he be convinced that Moses 
 would never have been the teacher and legislator 
 which we now see him to be, had not God been pre- 
 sent with him in an extraordinary manner. Nay, 
 even those parts which proceeded from the genius of 
 Moses, as they were only applied with the consent of 
 the Deity, to the constitution of the Israelitish reli- 
 gion and polity, have no less a divine authority, than 
 what he immediately received from God himself; so 
 that all the Mosaic doctrines, laws, and constitutions, 
 may and ought to be called by the general appella- 
 tion of divine. 
 
 Ohs. 3. In these actions and events also, which we 
 must designate by the name of miracles, it is not 
 without reason that we hold that God frequently em- 
 
p. I. s. 1. c. VI. § 5. 139 
 
 ployed natural causes for the accomplishment of his 
 purposes. Although this is not the place to enter 
 on the discussion of the true nature of miracles, it is 
 not foreign to our purpose to make this one remark, 
 as being in itself highly probable, and conformable to 
 the divine wisdom — that miracles, departing from the 
 ordinary course of nature, were not contrary to the 
 laws of nature, but took place agreeably to those very 
 laws, through the peculiar interposition of God ; that 
 the events indeed were extraordinary, but produc- 
 ed by the supreme author and governor of na- 
 ture, in conformity with the powers of nature. 
 And, indeed, in not a few miracles, something 
 is observable, from which it appears, that by them 
 no violence, so to speak, was done to nature, but the 
 powevs of nature itself were so directed by God, as 
 to place before the eyes of men an extraordinary 
 event.a — That the Israelites, when going out of Egypt, 
 
 a The author here seems to have fallen into the strange 
 confusion of ideas, so frequently observable in the language 
 even of those from whom more accuracy might have been ex- 
 pected, regarding the terms Nature, powers, and lawn of na- 
 ture. Nature can mean nothing else, in the language of a 
 sound Theist, than the works of God in the visible universe. 
 The powers of nature, when the word nature is confined to 
 the material works of God, are all passive, such as inertia, re- 
 sistance, &c. It will not, at least In this country, be held by 
 any true disciple of Newton, that active power can be inhe- 
 rent in mere matter, or, in other words, that such a thing as 
 a physical cause (taking the word cause to mean efficient 
 cause) can exist. Every efficient cause must therefore be of 
 a spiritual nature; and all changes or phenomena in the ma- 
 terial world must be produced by spiritual agency. The 
 
140 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 passed through the Red Sea on dry ground, whilst 
 the Egyptians, attempting, after them, the same pas- 
 sage, were overwhelmed and buried under the waves, 
 is narrated in such a manner, as that we must be per- 
 
 powers of nature then are, in fact, not powers inherent in. 
 matter, or in the material world, or in any of its parts, but 
 exhibitions of the divine and spiritual power of God continu- 
 ally in operation. The phrase laws of nature again, can, in 
 the mouth of a sound Theist, only mean iho%e fixed laws, by 
 which the Almighty is continually operating in preserving his 
 works in their beauty and order, in producing all the phe- 
 nomena in the material world which we behold, and in pre- 
 serving even the spiritual world, and in supplying to the 
 spirits, whom he has created, all their powers and faculties at 
 all times and at each individual moment. Sound Theism 
 therefore, and the doctrine of revelation, which teaches that 
 God woiketh all in all, quite coincide on this point. The laws 
 of nature then mean those rules by which the Almighty is pleas- 
 ed to act in producing the phenomena of the universe ; and 
 what we term a miracle is any phenomenon produced in con- 
 travention of those ordinary laws or rules by which the Al- 
 mighty acts, or not conformable to them. Now, it must be 
 quite evident from this definition of a miracle, that it can 
 <mly be produced by the power of God. For no power can 
 contravene or prevent his acting in the manner he has pre- 
 scribed to himself — neither can any power produce a pheno- 
 menon different from his constituted rules of producing the 
 phenomena of the universe, except such power as he imme- 
 diately exercises, or gives the power of exercising; because all 
 power exercised by any being is not oniv derived from him 
 originally, but is every moment supplied by him. M'hen, tlien, 
 any phenomenon wliich we call a miracle is produced at the 
 command of any ])ers()n, or when he predicts it ; it must be 
 evident that such phenomenon or miracle is the immediate 
 o})eration of God himself, and is a direct proof that tlie invi- 
 
p. I. s. I. c. VI. §3. 141 
 
 suaded, not only of the truth of the event, but also of 
 the extraordinary interposition of God in the case. 
 For the very historical relation itself, Exod. xiv. 
 manifestly leads us to acknowledge a divine interven- 
 
 sible God is in communication with such person. And say- 
 ing that God makes use of the powers of nature for his own 
 purposes, in bringing about events, whether naii-aculous or not, 
 is quite inaccurate; because there are no powers of nature dis- 
 tinct from hi.- own immediate power. But again, it is rea- 
 sonable to believe, that the all-wise and unchangeable God 
 never deviates from his ordinary rules of acting in producing 
 the phenomena of the universe, except when the ends which 
 he sees fit to accomplish cannot be produced in that manner. 
 A miraculous event, then, may be produced, partly by the 
 power of God operating in the usual manner, and partly in an 
 unusual manner. Thus the passage of the Red Sea, accom- 
 plished by the dividing of the waters, may have been brought 
 about, partly by the strong east wind cau&edhy God to blow du- 
 ring the whole of the night, an event quite consistent with his 
 usual manner of acting, and partly by his power being exerted 
 in an unusual manner, causing the waters to stand like a loall 
 on the right hand and left of the Israelites, while they passed be- 
 tween on dry ground, which no strength, nor indeed any con- 
 ceivable operation of wind, could do. But further, the imme- 
 diate intervention of God is manifested in what is called, in com- 
 mon language, the potvers of nature emploj'ed in this event ; for 
 Moses first informs the Israelites, that God had commanded 
 him to stretch out his rod that the sea might be divided for 
 their passage, and when he did in consequence stretch out 
 that rod, immediately God caused a strong east wind to blow 
 right across the sea in the line of their path. Now, the so 
 called powers of nature being exerted immediately in this de- 
 cided manner so favourable to his views, and in consequence 
 of his prediction and stretching out his rod over the sea, was 
 a clear indication of the intervention of God, and of Moses' 
 communication with him — Tr. 
 
142 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 tion of that nature which we designate by the name 
 of a miracle ; and the hymn publicly sung on that 
 occasion, Exod. xv,, in which, moreover, we have a 
 specimen of the genius of Moses, clearly confirms 
 this narration. And that God employed natural 
 causes in producing this extraordinary event, which 
 Moses certainly could never have foreseen, the same 
 historical relation, and the hymn of Moses itself, not 
 obscurely indicate : compare Exod. xiv. 21, 28, with 
 XV. 8, 10. In like manner, to give only one other 
 example, that there was a real interposition of the 
 Deity, in delivering the law on Mount Sinai, and not 
 a mere thunder-storm, of which casual event Moses 
 took advantage, and applied to his own purpose, may 
 be fully perceived from those purifications and prepa- 
 rations which Moses is narrated to have directed to 
 the people, three days before, Exod. xix. ; and we 
 cannot doubt that the thunder took place by the 
 powers of nature itself, under the divine direc- 
 tion. 
 
 Ohs. 4. Lastly, the peculiar assistance m hich was 
 afforded to the sacred writers, generally called by the 
 name of inspiration, did not take away, or suspend 
 the use of those natural faculties with which they were 
 endowed, but seems to have been conjoined, and as it 
 were, mixed up with their exercise. For, as in the 
 communication of doctrines to be derived from di- 
 vine instruction, and also in miracles themselves, God 
 must be supposed to interpose in a manner conform- 
 able to the constitution of man, and the nature of 
 things ; so, likewise, in the inspiration of particular 
 men, or in granting them extraordinary assistance to 
 
p. I. s. I. c. VI. § 5. 143 
 
 commit subjects to writing without error, it is right 
 to believe that God caused, that, while each writer 
 followed his own particular genius, in using those as- 
 sistances which were supplied to him, and in employ- 
 ing his own faculties, he should, at the same time, 
 write under the guidance of God, so as never to err 
 from the truth. 
 
PART FIRST. 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 
 OP THK PRINCIPAL ENDOWMENTS OF MIND, AND 
 VIRTUES OP THE SOUL TO BE DESIRED AND CULTI- 
 VATED IN AN ACCOMPLISHED INTERPRETER OF 
 THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 
 OF THE ENDOWJIENTS OF MIND. 
 
 No one has ever denied, that, to constitute a 
 good inter])reter of the Old Testament, certain 
 natural qualifications, and these of no mean kind, 
 are required. 
 
 Obs. I. In all arts and sciences, and indeed in all 
 the pursuits of man, it makes a might}' difforcnco if 
 one finds nature acting to him like an indulgent and 
 kind mother, or unkindly and parsimoniously, like a 
 step-mother. Labour, experience, and exercise, with- 
 out doubt do a great deal, and without them, natural 
 endowmicnts alone, however excellent, will accomplish 
 little ; yet, if one born with the more excellent capa- 
 
p. I. s. II. c. I. § 1. 145 
 
 cities of mind, shall employ them aright, he will, as 
 all allow, attain to much greater eminence in any 
 pursuit to which he may apply himsell", than he to 
 whom nature has been less generous. 
 
 Obs. 2. Since, then, there are many subjects, the 
 stud}' of which is intimately connected with the 
 right interpretation of the Old Testament, it is easy 
 to see, that if conducted in a proper manner, it must 
 require much labour. He, however, who applies 
 himself to the interpretation of tlie Old Testament, 
 and sedulously and diligently employs himself in 
 this object, may expect much greater success in his 
 labour, in proportion as he lias got from nature a su- 
 perior capacity. Such a felicity of nature as formed 
 Hugo Grotius, the first author of the true interpreta- 
 tion of the New Testament, and an incomparable and 
 ever during example of it, lik;e\\ ise formed Albert 
 Schultens, who first, after having overcome the va- 
 rious obstacles of a number of ages, detected and dis- 
 entangled tlie path, and clearly showed it to others, 
 by which alone life could be restored, if we may so 
 speak, to the dead language of the Old Testament, 
 and deserved high and immortal praise, not only 
 from the men of his ou n time, but also from pos- 
 tei-ity. 
 
 §2. 
 
 The gifts of nature which are here principrJly 
 required, :ire genius and judgment. 
 
146 PRINCIPLES OF IXTERPUETATION'. 
 
 Obs. 1. We have made no mention of memory, al- 
 tliough we neither wish to deny nor to doubt, that its 
 advantages in the interpretation of the Old Testa- 
 ment, are many. Even the very course of study 
 which we have delineated in the former section, suffi- 
 ciently indicates that we attribute much to that facul- 
 ty, which diligently apprehends, and faithfully retains 
 the objects presented to it. But in the interpretation 
 of these, as well as of every other species of writings, 
 the greatest part, if not the vhole of what me- 
 mory seems to perform, must be shared by it with 
 genius, which, when opportunity offers, immediately 
 brings forth the treasures which have been accumu- 
 lated in the mind, and applies them to the explanation 
 of the Old Testament, and likewise with judgment, 
 which makes a proper use, and a wise selection of 
 those things, which one intent upon understanding 
 the Old Testament, has always present in his mind. 
 
 Obs. 2. There is also another endowment of the 
 mind, in itself most valuable, which is also highly ad- 
 vantageous to an interpreter of the Old Testament. 
 We allude to the sense of beaut}', by means of which 
 the person himself readily perceives, and also explains 
 to others what is elegant, sublime, or excellent, in a 
 writer. But, since this sense is not of equal value 
 in regard to all the writings of the Old Testament, 
 and since it conduces more to the perception and ex- 
 planation of the beauty of things and sentiments that 
 are well understood, than to rightl}-^ understanding 
 and interpreting them, therefore we think it proper 
 to abstain, in this place, from a particular considera- 
 tion of this endowment. 
 
p. I. s. 11, c. I. § 3. 147 
 
 §3. 
 
 By genius, we here mean, that faculty of the 
 mind, which manifests itself in a ready repre- 
 sentation to itself of objects, in promptly com- 
 paring them, and in the invention of what is 
 new; which admirable faculty will be more use- 
 ful to the interpreter of the Old Testament, in 
 proportion to the degree in which it is possessed 
 by him. 
 
 Obs. 1. As the interpreter of whom we speak, is to 
 be employed upon the most ancient of all writings, 
 undoubtedly for the understanding and exposition of 
 these, labour, study, and learning, are required ; but 
 to be able to bring immediately before his mind 
 when necessary, whatever he has acquired by this 
 means, so as to transfer himself as much as may be, 
 to the age of the writer he is studying, to place him- 
 self, as it were, in his circumstances, and to endea- 
 vour to think and feel in the same manner with him ; 
 all this belongs to that most noble faculty of mind, 
 which appears in the ready representation of things 
 to the understanding, and which we designate by 
 the name of genius. 
 
 Obs. 2. To the same faculty of mind must be re- 
 ferred the prompt comparison of various things. It 
 is indeed necessary that one should have stored in 
 his memory those things, by instituting a comparison 
 
148 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 with which he may ilhistratp an author ; but to make 
 such a comparison, he will be much more capable 
 who excels in genius. This power of genius, for in- 
 stance, is seen in explaining the words and phrases 
 which occur rarely or only once, by instituting a pro- 
 per comparison of them v, ith each other, whether simi- 
 lar, or related ^ycrds or phrases, such as the Hebrew 
 language itself, or its allied dialects suppl)^ It is seen, 
 too, in the illustration of an argument or poem, by 
 the collation with historical fiicts, where that is 
 possible. And it is observable in such an exposition 
 of manners and observances, as the study of antiquity 
 suggests. 
 
 Obs. 3. In fine, the inventive faculty which pecu- 
 liarly belongs to superior genius is often highly useful 
 to the interpreter of the Old Testament. A person 
 endowed Avith such a genius, for example, one while 
 attaches to a word a meaning which nowhere else 
 occurs, but which every one immediately perceives 
 to be a most happy conjecture : at another, he so 
 well developes the sense of whole passages which 
 other interpreters have left doubtful, that he has no 
 doubt himself, and easily convinces others of his 
 having felicitously attained the true meaning of the 
 writer ; and again, when either a trifling or great 
 error is either suspected or proved by just arguments 
 to exist ill the text, and when no other means of emen- 
 dation is accessible, he so changes the reading through 
 conjecture solely, that every competent judge will 
 readily acknowledge, that, if the author did not write 
 in the manner conjectured, it is scarcely possible to 
 doubt or deny that the emendation is at least quite 
 
p. I. s. II. c. I. § 3. 149 
 
 congruous to the context, and to the genius and ob- 
 ject of the writer. 
 
 Obs. 4. Although the all-wise God, the author of 
 nature, has not given an equal portion of genius to 
 all, it does not, however, follow that those on whom 
 a less share of this gift has been bestowed, ought not 
 to apply themselves to the interpretation of the Old 
 Testament, if, from the nature of their office, or from 
 inclination, they are otherwise disposed to this kind 
 ot study. For, hy assiduous labour, there have been 
 men who attained the praise of correct and learned 
 expositors without much genius. The greater supe- 
 riority of genius, however, which any one possesses, 
 ought to render him the more cautious, lest either 
 by the abuse of the readiness of his genius, he incur 
 the just reproach of temerity, or, making light of the 
 stores of learning, he imagine that he can effect that 
 by genius alone, which he cannot arrive at without 
 great labour, and the employment of the aids of learn- 
 ing. And let every one who wishes to bestow his 
 labour on the interpretation of the Old Testament, 
 so employ that portion of genius which he has got 
 from nature, as that, while conscious to himself, he 
 may also shew to others, on every proper occasion, 
 that he has not received it in vain. 
 
 §4. 
 
 Another natural faculty of the mind, and no 
 less excellent in its nature, is called judgment; 
 
150 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 by means of which, whatever regards the inter- 
 pretation of the Old Testament, is wisely se- 
 lected and applied to the best use. 
 
 Obs. 1. Every one must readily perceive that 
 judgment is of great value in the interpretation of 
 every writing, particularly of the more ancient com- 
 positions. It indeed has a great share in deter- 
 mining what meaning of M'ords and phrases is most 
 agreeable to the context, as frequently their signifi- 
 cation is so various, that at first sight one cannot 
 know which ought to be preferred in any particular 
 passage. And it holds universally, that whatever 
 one's own genius has suggested in the explication of 
 words and phrases, or other interpreters who are con- 
 sulted, may have brought forward, judgment subjects 
 all this to its deliberation, and carefully separates 
 what is true from what is false, what is probable from 
 what is not. In the exposition of writings, too, it is 
 the business of judgment to discriminate between what 
 is conforiTiable to ancient and what to more recent 
 times : and the more any one excels in this faculty of 
 the mind, the greater order, perspicuity, and concise- 
 ness will he attempt in all that he produces for the 
 purpose of illustration ; and the more Avill he guard 
 himself both from such inept fictions of imagination, 
 as will be rejected by the wise, and likewise from a 
 vain ostentation of erudition, which frequently fatigues 
 and creates disgust, while the right and proper use of 
 learning allures, delights, keeps attentive, and pro- 
 duces conviction. 
 
p. I. s. II. c. I. § 4. 151 
 
 Obs. 2. The power of judgment is principally 
 seen in the right and proper application of the cri- 
 tical art, which is as it were its peculiar sphere. For, 
 by the appellation Critic, a word of Greek origin, is 
 signified, one who is skilful in judging. The criti- 
 cism then, of which we here treat, consists in the fa- 
 culty of judging whether the received reading is cor- 
 rect, and if suspected or corrupted, what should be 
 preferred to it : and it is also the business of the same 
 criticism to determine whether any book be genuine, 
 or any part of it properly ascribed to the author or 
 age to which it is assigned or otherwise. It is easy, 
 therefore, to be seen that no one is a good critic who 
 is not possessed of a correct judgment. 
 
 Obs. 3. From the observations we have made, it is 
 evident, that judgment is of admirable utility to the 
 interpreter of the Old Testament, and that, in some 
 respects, it is more valuable than genius, and of 
 greater authority. For it is much more guided by 
 wisdom and swayed by reason ; and it weighs so as 
 to approve or condemn what is suggested by genius, 
 whose too luxuriant energy it is able occasionally to 
 restrain and correct. This most excellent gift of 
 nature, although not equally extensive in all, seems, 
 however, to be distributed less unequally than genius, 
 which exists in a high degree only in a few ; while 
 to most men a certain natural skill in judging has 
 been conceded, in which many more would excel, 
 would they rightly cultivate and exercise it. For in- 
 dustry enlarges, age matures, and use and exercise 
 sharpen, polish, and bring to perfection this faculty 
 of nature ; and experience also shews, that by inde- 
 
152 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 fatigable and rightly conducted study, the power of 
 judgment is so increased that it seems to owe no less 
 to this than to nature. 
 
 §5. 
 
 The riy-ht use of both the natural faculties, 
 which we have separately considered, conduces 
 highly to that acuteness in understanding, and 
 to that perspicuousness in explaining, which are 
 universally allowed to constitute the excellence 
 of an interpreter. 
 
 Obs. 1. Since no one is able sufficiently to explain 
 that to others which he himself does not fully under- 
 stand, it is evident that there is required, and held to 
 be necessary in a good interpreter, an acuteness of 
 understanding — that is, that he be ready in perceiv- 
 ing, or at least in investigating, by the use of neces- 
 sary aids, the true meaning of the composition to 
 which he applies himself. But indeed this acuteness 
 of understanding is not manifested solely in the per- 
 ception of the meaning contained in the words, but 
 sometimes in the investigation merely of the proba- 
 ble meaning ; since it may often happen to every 
 good interpreter, particularly when employed on the 
 most ancient books, tiiat however rightly he may 
 employ the aids to correct interpretation, he may A'Ct 
 either be at a loss, or deceived in the understanding 
 of a passage. But, should either of tliese happen, who 
 
p. I. s. II. c. I. § 5. 153 
 
 will for that reason deny acuteness of understanding 
 to him, who demonstrates on other occasions his pos- 
 session of this power in his whole manner of interpret- 
 ing ? As to what respects perspicuousness in explain- 
 ing, it altogether consists in this, that a person shall 
 bring forward, in a proper manner, whatever, after 
 due inquiry, he thinks will principally conduce to the 
 understanding of any passage or of an entire book. 
 
 Obs. 2. This acuteness of understanding and per- 
 spicuousness in explaining, without which no one can 
 be reckoned a good interpreter, are principally de- 
 rived, partly from genius, and partly from judgment. 
 Acuteness of understanding is not indeed so much 
 manifested in what is plain and perspicuous, but 
 rather in what is more or less intricate or difficult to 
 be understood. Therefore, as in acuteness of under- 
 standing there are two requisites : the first, that one 
 see difficulties and perceive their nature, and the 
 second, that he labour as much as possible to master 
 them : in each of these requisites great power both of 
 genius and judgment exists. In the books of the Old 
 Testament many difficulties occur, and not a few 
 things likewise, which, from our being accustomed 
 from our early youth to the reading of these books, 
 we seem to ourselves to understand, wliile in reality 
 we do not understand them. Now, then, the more a 
 person is possessed of a happy genius, the more easily 
 will he, throwing aside as it were, and shaking off the 
 puerile notions which he had imbibed, read the Old 
 Testament in such a manner as if he had never read 
 it before, and the more easily will he observe and 
 perceive what is obscure and difficult in this or that 
 
154 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 passage, and consequently will the more readily seize 
 on what may be the means of overcoming these diffi- 
 culties. And the more any one is possessed of supe- 
 riority of judgment, the more will he guard against 
 creating to himself difficulties where none exist, and the 
 more justly will he estimate real difficulties: and, in 
 general, whatever means genius and learning, and ex- 
 perience and exercise affijrd for overcoming them, the 
 
 better and more correctly will he apply their aids 
 
 As to what respects perspicuousness in explaining, that 
 will appear partly from the translation given, and part- 
 ly from the exposition of the words and things. In 
 making a good translation, either of a particular pas- 
 sage or of a whole book, how great the efficacy of 
 judgment is, every one must easily understand, who 
 will consider what great discrimination is required 
 in order to express, as far as possible, the mind of 
 any writer justly and agreeably to the genius of the 
 language into which the translation is made. But 
 why should we not assign to genius also some part 
 in this process? For the more prompt and culti- 
 vated, and at the same time luxuriant this faculty 
 is, will it not the more assist in expressing as near- 
 ly the force of certain, particularly poetical pas- 
 sages, as the diversity of the language will permit? 
 To the illustration also of any writing, every one 
 must readily conclude, from the very nature of the 
 thing, that no less useful assistance is derived both 
 from genius and from judgment as to the understand- 
 ing of it. As often too as reasons are to be brought 
 forward by the interpreter to justify his exposition, 
 in discovering and urging these, from whatever source 
 
p. I. S. II. C. II. § 1. 
 
 155 
 
 they may be derived, the force of genius is of the 
 greatest use, through which he both easily brings be- 
 fore his mind what may serve his purpose, and readily 
 institutes judicious comparisons, and, in fine, felici- 
 tously illustrates what may seem dark and abstruse. 
 But likewise in bringing forward the same reasons in a 
 manner fitted to convince, in making a prudent se- 
 lection of them, and in arranging them in a neat and 
 perspicuous manner, it requires no argument to prove 
 that this will be done in a very superior manner by 
 those who are possessed of a sound and correct judg- 
 ment. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 OF THE PRINCIPAL VIRTUES OF THE MIND, WHICH 
 AN INTERPRETER OF THE OLD TESTAMENT OUGHT 
 TO POSSESS, PARTICULARLY IN THIS AGE. 
 
 §1- 
 
 It is by no means of little consequence in 
 what spirit one applies himself to the interpre- 
 tation of the Old Testament, and occupies him- 
 self in it; and consequently there are some vir- 
 tues, of which the more one is possessed, the 
 more will he be enabled to employ himself aright 
 in this study, and in a manner more adapted to 
 the present age. 
 
156 PRIN'CIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Obs. 1 . There is a connection, and as it were an 
 affinity, between the endowments of the understanding 
 and the virtues of the mind. For although there is 
 neither always the greater love of moral rectitude and 
 goodness in a man in propoi'tion to the superiority of 
 his intellectual talents, nor from the greater desire of 
 virtue which any one manifests, are we entitled im- 
 mediately to ascribe to him an excellence in mental 
 faculties : yet virtue and perspicacity of intellect, in- 
 timately conjoined in the same person, mutually as- 
 sist, strengthen, sharpen, and perfect each other. 
 Here, however, we do not mean the love of virtue 
 generally, but certain peculiar good and laudable af- 
 fections of the mind ; such as the highest ardour for 
 knowledge, a greater propensity towards that m hich is 
 useful than that which is dazzling, an ingenuous love 
 of liberty, which repudiates the slavery of prejudice, 
 and many others which are highly valuable for con- 
 ducting properly the study of all the sciences. For, 
 as it is of no little consequence with respect to these 
 sciences, whether one be furnished by nature with 
 the more excellent endowments of the mind or not; 
 so also the more any one possesses a mind of a higher 
 and more elevated cast, and in all respects better 
 adapted to them, the more successfully will he labour 
 in them, and produce the greater advantage to him- 
 self and others. 
 
 Obs. 2. This being the case, we by no means con- 
 sider it of little moment, wliat are the powers and 
 state of mind possessed by the person who employs 
 himself in the reading and study of the Old Testa- 
 ment, but are convinced that there are certain vir- 
 
r. I. s. II. c. n. § 2. 157 
 
 tiies exceedingly useful to its right interpretation ; 
 and this experience will readily confirm. Therefore 
 we lay doMn this position, that as many requisites 
 are indispensable in this study, an interpreter ought 
 to labour to acquire that spirit which the importance, 
 the dignity, and the difficulty of the subject require ; 
 and, on this account, it does not seem inconsistent with 
 the object of the present work briefly to pass in re- 
 view the chief commendable virtues and affections of 
 the mind, wliich, in this our age, will more particu- 
 larly have the effect of rendering an interpreter of 
 the Old Testament distinguished. 
 
 The first and most useful, nay indispensable 
 virtue of the miiul to a good iiiterui'eter of the 
 Old Testament, we account to be a due vene- 
 ration for the books which are contained in this 
 sacred volume. 
 
 ()js. 1. After the Babj-lonish captivity, the Jews 
 began to hold in great veneration their religion, which 
 before they had esteemed very lightly. h\ process 
 of time they increased this veneration to a supersti- 
 tious degree, i;nd perverted it, by transferring this 
 excessive and i-uperstitious veneration of their reU- 
 gion to the sacred books themselves, ivdy even to the 
 very language in which ihey were written, which 
 finally introduced a minute, absurd, and monstrous 
 
158 PRINCIPLES OV INTERPRETATION. 
 
 method of interpretation. For they became accus- 
 tomed not only to hold in veneration the Hebrew 
 language, and also its letters, but its points also, as 
 sacred and of divine origin. They therefore held 
 that each word must have in it the whole of those 
 meanings which it could signify, and that, from those 
 meanings, it was required to evolve the deepest mys- 
 teries which the Divine Spirit, who inspired the 
 writers, had involved in them ; and they are con- 
 stantly inculcating that it is unlawful to make any 
 change, even the most trifling, because the industry 
 of the Masorites has sufficiently fixed the text in all 
 respects : and by indulging in the most silly fictions 
 of a diseased ir.iagination, they have been so far, by 
 this their veneration for the sacred books, from 
 adding to the honour and dignity of them, that, on 
 the contrary, they are justly reckoned to have de- 
 tracted from these very highly. 
 
 Obs. 2. The opinion which many Christians for 
 along time entertained regnrding the sanctity of the 
 books of the Old Testament, though less supersti- 
 tious, must not, however, be held to be altogether 
 free from superstition. For although they did not 
 conform themselves in all things to the Jewish trifling, 
 they yet, in imitation of the Jewish masters, believed 
 that the Hebrew language was sacred, and that there 
 was a divine power in the words themselves, nay 
 even, that certain most holy mysteries lay concealed 
 in innumerable passages under this exterior rind. 
 Even after the restoration of letters, and the blessed 
 reformation of religion, a veneration almost too 
 high remained long among not a few, who doubted 
 
p. I. s. II, c. II. § 2. 139 
 
 not that each word had been divinely inspired and 
 coniinuriicated to the sacred writers, and religiously 
 abstained from critical emendation, as unlawful, pro- 
 fane, and impious. 
 
 Obs. 3. For some time past, however, the auda- 
 city of a great number has taught very differently 
 concerning the dignity of the books of the Old Tes- 
 tament. For not only have they denied any sort of 
 inspiration or peculiar assistance from God in the 
 writing of these books, but even that in them any 
 really divine revelations were contained; and they have 
 affirmed confidently, that they contained nothing at 
 all which ought to be attributed to any extraordinary 
 information given by God, or which ought to be ac- 
 counted miraculous. From which new method of 
 interpretation, which we have combated in the sixth 
 chapter of the former section, it has happened, that 
 wherever it prevails, much of the dignity and utility 
 of the study employed on the Old Testament has 
 been diminished among those engaged in publicly 
 teaching religion. 
 
 Obs. 4. Having, in the place just quoted above, vin- 
 dicated a divine intervention in the ancient Mosaic 
 religion, and the circumstances relating to it, and in 
 the writing of the books themselves of the Old Tes- 
 tament, and at the same time defined the proper no- 
 tion wiiich we ought to forin regarding this divine 
 intervention, it will readily be understood what is the 
 sort of veneration which we would commend in an 
 interpreter of those books in our times. It is that 
 which holds a middle course between the extravagant 
 estimation of the Jews, and even of many Christians, 
 
160 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 particularly of former times, and the reckless licen- 
 tiousness of the more recent philologers. He who 
 keeps to this middle and highly commendable course, 
 will not only seem to himself to see in each of the 
 expressions and words, the words of God himself, and 
 not merely to hear every where the words of men, 
 but will remember that he is reading those books in 
 which is contained the doctrine whose authors had 
 God for their imiuediale guide and assistant ; nay, 
 whose writers are not only in themselves most trust- 
 wortliy, but likewise, as far as was necessary, were 
 divinely preserved free from error. — He who thus 
 justl^"^ estimates these books, will also be persuaded, 
 that in miracles those laws enacted by God, the 
 author of nature, were not subverted ; but whenever 
 he observes clearly in the relation of events, that 
 powers of nature were employed by God in bringing 
 about events differing from the ordinary course of 
 nature, there, full of veneration, will he adore the 
 divine wisdom ; and will not endeavour everj'^ wliere 
 to bend, by every mode of interpretation, and by 
 fictions of a luxuriant imagination, the miracles which 
 are related, to the ordinary course of nature. — Be- 
 sides, he v\ho wishes to render due veneration to the 
 divine writings, will not every where seek for mys- 
 teries, and obirude them on the authors who had 
 none such in their minds, neither will he endeavour to 
 infringe upon the natural force of the words ; but, 
 following those sound rules which have been justly 
 established for the interpretation of other writings, 
 will incline in no respect to detract from the dignity 
 of the writers, or the importance of their matter. — 
 
p. I. s. II. c. II. § 3, 161 
 
 Finally, a due veneration for tliese books will not 
 indeed induce one to start back from conjectural cri- 
 ticism, as if it were laying profane hands on a writing 
 which, as it has come doivn to vs, is divine and most 
 sacred ; but so to exercise it when necessary, as that 
 by its means he may advance the dignity of the sa- 
 cred writers. 
 
 §3. 
 
 The second virtue, which is required of a good 
 interpreter of the Old Testament, closely con- 
 nected too with that of which we have just 
 treated, and very necessary in the circumstances 
 of our times, is what we would call true libe- 
 rality, through which one shews himself free 
 from all party bias. 
 
 Obs. 1. There is no word which, for some time 
 past, a number of the cultivators of sacred philology 
 have more delighted to employ, and none which has 
 been more abused than liberality. By this term is 
 meant, that virtue in an interpreter, which incites 
 him to shew himself free from all party spirit, and 
 shaking off the yoke of prejudices, enables him un- 
 shackled to pursue that path which alone he considers 
 becoming in a candid interpreter. All those more 
 recent interpreters, therefore, who, ridding themselves 
 of the chains of all theological slavery, pursue a more 
 n 
 
162 
 
 PKINCllM ES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 iVee course than was formerly trodden, are desirous 
 of being distinguished for this virtue. But there are 
 many among them, who, whilst they rush headlong 
 into the most unbridled licentiousness, seem to them- 
 selves highly liberal, and wish to be so esteemed by 
 others. As on this account these persons have 
 brought the name of liberality into disrepute, it will 
 be worth while to define with some degree of accu- 
 racy what we understand by true liberality. 
 
 Cbs. 2. That genuine liberality which appears to 
 us a highly commendable virtue, in interpreting the 
 Old Testament, exists, when one furnished with those 
 endowments of mind which constitute a good inter- 
 preter of these books, or, at least, cultivating aright 
 those which he has received from nature, neither 
 follows servilely the old method of interpretation, nor 
 eagerly adopts the new ; but interprets with freedom 
 and prudence, without allowing himself to be carried 
 away by any party feeling. For he is not at once to 
 be reckoned a liberal interpreter of the Old 'i'esta- 
 ment, who delights to bring forward, and is immo- 
 derately delighted with every ingenious imagination, 
 which may present a specious and dazzling appearance 
 to the mind. Such interpretations, frequently, when 
 examined by a sound judgment, are found to be 
 merely specious, and to have in them nothing solid. 
 Neither is he entitled to the honourable appellation 
 of a liberal interpreter, who almost always deserts, 
 disapproves, undervalues, and finds fault with the old 
 mode of interpretation, while, on the other hand, he 
 admires and praises solely, and adopts anxiously, and 
 follows with a blind impulse, as it were, every thing 
 
p. r. s. n. c. II. § 3. 163 
 
 uhich has the commendation of novelty. By acting 
 thus, while he avoids being carried along by the love 
 of antiquity, he is altogether led away by the desire 
 of novelty, and while he throws away one set of 
 chains, he forges to himself new ones, with which he 
 is wonderfully delighted. In fine, liberality of inter- 
 pretation refuses not to entertain as its companion 
 and ally, a complete veneration for the books of the 
 Old Testament, as sacred. Nay, indeed, since in 
 these books, both in respect to their contents and 
 composition, there is something divine ; to be unwill- 
 ing to acknowledge this when interpreting them, or 
 to endeavour by every means to deprive them of this 
 distinction, deserves not the name of liberality, but 
 of licentiousness. True liberality, therefore, guards 
 itself, indeed, from too excessive a veneration for the 
 b;)ok3 of the Old Testament, while, however, at the 
 same time, it dreads incurring the charge of levity and 
 rashness. 
 
 Obs. 3. What has now been said, may suffice re- 
 garding the true nature of liberality, as it respects the 
 interpretation of the Old Testament. And, indeed, 
 this genuine liberality, and that just veneration for 
 the Old Testament, of which we have treated in a 
 n)rmer section, have such a connection witli each 
 other, that they cannot be disjoined, and are qualifi- 
 cations diifering more in name than in reality. How 
 useful, however, this liberality is to an interpreter, and 
 how commendable in him, must be very evident ; as 
 he who neither suffers himself to be bound by the 
 chains, if I may so speak, of antiquity, nor of novelty. 
 
164 PRINCIPLES OF INTHKPRETATION. 
 
 by avoiding, as far as possible, in a prudent manner, 
 what, on either side, is extreme or excessive, will best 
 consult, both the dignity of the sacred books, and the 
 advantage of his own age. 
 
 §4. 
 
 A third virtue, which is of tlie greatest use to 
 an interpreter of the Old Testament, is patient 
 endurance of labour. 
 
 Ohs. 1. As the difficulty of interpreting the Old 
 Testament aright, is, on the \vhole great, and as 
 very many things must be known and attended to by 
 the interj)reter, no little labour, certainly, is required 
 of him, who is desirous of attaining to any excellence 
 in it ; the more patient of labour, therefore, that any 
 one is, the more may he hope for more valuable fruits 
 from his labour. 
 
 Obs. 2. This patient endurance of labour is most 
 useful to all who wish to apply particularly to the 
 study of the Old Testament, whether nature has be- 
 stowed on them great endowments, or been more 
 parsimonious in that respect. For, as no poet, or even 
 orator, is born i)erfect, he whom nature has endow- 
 ed with a capacity of attaining in time to the reputa- 
 tion of a perfect orator or poet, will only arrive at 
 the perfection of this character, b}' long continued 
 labour; so likewise, nav, much more will he, whom 
 
p. I. s. II. c. 11. § 4. 165 
 
 nature has qualified for becoming a consummate in- 
 terpreter, only attain this honour after long and per- 
 severing exertion. For labour both nourishes the 
 genius, and supplies its riches, and is continually add- 
 ing to the materials which it may with most advan- 
 tage employ ; while it forms and perfects the judg- 
 ment, and collects for it, every day, more aids which 
 it may wisely make use of. It is, therefore, the cause 
 why the more any one excels in natural endowments 
 the more will he become eminent in that nice perspi- 
 cacity, both in understanding and explaining, by 
 whicli a good interpreter is distinguished. Nay, in- 
 deed, intense labour, although it cannot altogether 
 supply or quite compensate for the defects of nature, 
 can so aid an inferior genius, as, in process of time, 
 to amplify, in an incredible manner, very moderate 
 powers, and to render them productive of great 
 fruits. 
 
 Obs. 3. This patient labour in those who have op- 
 portunity and leisure, and a certain propensity of 
 mind to the study of the Old Testament, is high- 
 ly deserving of commendation, particularly in our 
 times. To most of the interpreters of the Old 
 Testament, indeed, in former ages, no one will find 
 it easy to refuse the praise due to this virtue ; but 
 that the same commendation is due to the more re- 
 cent interpreters, is far from being true. For it can 
 scarcely be expressed, how many immature fruits of 
 luxuriant genius, our age has seen brought fortli, 
 which, through novelty alone, have appeared splen- 
 did, while they seemed quite insipid to the more wise 
 
IGf) I'RIN'rirLKS OF jntkupket.vtiox. 
 
 and skilful. I'liose, therefore, who have prnpused to 
 themselves, the imitation of the patient lalxnir of the 
 more ancient interpreters, of whom, not a few obtained 
 celebrity, and who endeavour to employ in adaptation 
 to the circuujstances of the present age, the many more 
 and superior aids to correct interpretation, which are 
 in their hands, will not find wanting the means, in the 
 immense multitude of things which remain to be done, 
 for illustrating the Old Testament, by which they 
 may deserve well of the public, and of the sacred 
 books themselves, and by which, likcMise, they ma^'' 
 obtain the highly desirable [)raise of industry, from 
 the wisest and best judges. 
 
 §5. 
 
 Lastly, tlie being possessed with a true 
 sense of human weakness, will be of no mean 
 service to an interpreter of the Old Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 Obs. 1. From what we have Jilready said, it Mill 
 be easily seen, that such a sense of human weakness 
 as will dispose to patient labour, is considered b}' us 
 as necessary. We therefore highly reprobate that 
 unnatural state of feeling which debilitates the mind 
 and renders it incapable of attempting any thing diffi- 
 cult, and only praise and highly commend that state 
 
p. r. s. II. c. II. 5j 5. IG7 
 
 of mind, wliicli makes one, while he is not sparing of 
 his labour, alwaj's to perceive in what he is deficient, 
 and continually to remember, that being a man, he 
 can neither understand, nor explain, nor define, nor 
 reduce to the level of his capacity, nor render a rea- 
 son for, every thing. 
 
 Ohs. 2. It is not difficult to shew why such a sense 
 of human weakness is most useful to an interpreter of 
 the Old Testament. For, when animated by this 
 feeling, he neither altogether trusts to himself, nor 
 will he acquiesce immediately in every view that is 
 presented to him, but will endeavour to contemplate 
 a subject on everj'^ side, and will be desirous of not 
 omitting any means, by which he may properly ex- 
 plain, if possible, whatever is obscure and difficult. 
 This feeling, therefore, most useful in the study of 
 every science, will render an interpreter of the Old 
 Testament, cautious, prudent, very attentive in ob- 
 serving where difficulties lie, and in every thing, not 
 too precipitate. Farther, it will be the cause of his 
 never being contented with any acquisitions in know- 
 ledge he may have already made, but will actuate 
 him more and more every day, with an insatiable ar- 
 dour for learning, and will make him anxious to en- 
 deavour continuall)^ to increase and perfect his acqui- 
 sitions. It will also be the cause of his never forget- 
 ting that his labours are bestowed on the most ancient 
 of all books, which are, too, by their very subject, 
 distinguished from human writings ; neither will he 
 be astonished or offended at finding in them, not a 
 few things which are extremely puzzling, and not 
 
168 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 easily explained, so as to be, in all things, equally sa- 
 tisfactory to all. In many cases, therefore, he will 
 ingenuously confess his ignorance, and, in the hope 
 that time will perhaps open clearer views, he will fre- 
 quently not wish to decide definitively ; and in many 
 other cases, being rightl}' persuaded that a peculiar 
 intervention of God must be acknowledged, he will 
 not be of opinion, that he can reduce every circum- 
 stance to ordinary causes ; bearing continually in re- 
 membrance, that weak and blind mortals, in the 
 things constantly before their eyes, and in the ordi- 
 nary course of nature, are unable to investigate the 
 laws which the divine providence pursues. 
 
 Obs. 3. This virtue is the more to be commend- 
 ed, from there being many in the present daj', who 
 seem to be destitute of it. For, among not a iew of 
 the more recent interpreters of the Old Testament, 
 who have struck out a new path for themselves, 
 there is so little modesty, that one who will take a 
 more accurate view of their trifling performances, 
 and observe how confidently and overbearingly they 
 pronounce their dicta, as from the tripod of an 
 oracle, will find himself sometimes inclined to smile, 
 and at other times to be filled with indignation. It 
 must, indeed, be acknowledged, that the whole of the 
 more ancient interjireters, can, by no means, be ac- 
 quitted of the charge of too much arrogance ; but, 
 such is the contagion of this vice at the present 
 time, as to be greatly opposed to sound interpreta- 
 tion, and highly pernicious to the dignity of the sa- 
 cred books. Every one, therefore, who attempts the 
 
P.I. s. II. c. II. § 5. 169 
 
 interpretation of the Old Testament, ought anxiously 
 to guard against allowing himself to be tinctured or 
 contaminated by the pollution of this contagion, and 
 ought ever to bear in mind, that a modest opinion 
 of one's self, is a virtue highly becoming, in an inter- 
 preter of the Old Testament, and one too of the 
 greatest excellence and utility. 
 
PART FIRST. 
 SECTION THIRD. 
 
 OF THOSE SL'BSrniARY STUDIES WHICH ARK AV OP.- 
 NAMENT AND AID TO AN ACCOMPLISHED INTNR- 
 J'HKTER OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 CHAPTER FIRST. 
 
 OK THE STIDY f)F ANCirNT I.lTKRAl IRK A \ D 
 PHILOSOPHY. 
 
 The study of ancient literature {Iliimav. Liif.) 
 considered in itself, is highly valuable to an in- 
 terpreter of the Old Testament, but particularly 
 SO from the circumstances of the jiresent a<^e. 
 
 Obs. 1. It remains for us to speak of some ac- 
 quirements, which are valuable as ornamrnts. and 
 aids to an interpreter of the Old Testament: which, 
 indeed, though we stile them subsidiary, we do not 
 wish to be understood as if an accomplished inter- 
 preter of the present day could easily do without 
 them ; but we assert, that though perhaps at tirst 
 sight they may perhaps appear less necessary, they 
 are, however, of the greatest utility. Among these 
 
p. I. s. III. c. I. § 1. 171 
 
 •ne reckon the study of ancient literature, and of 
 pliilosopliy, and also some other particular branches 
 of knowledge, which are frequently of the greatest 
 use to an interpreter. 
 
 Gbs. 2. Of what value the excellent productions 
 of Greece and Rome, which have deservedly re- 
 ceived their name of the Uumaniorcs Litercr, from 
 humanity itself, are to the interpretation of the Old 
 Testament, history abundantly evidences. For, when 
 the literature of these nations was generally ne- 
 glected by Cliristians, and even by Christian teach- 
 ers, the state of the interpretation of the sacred vo- 
 lume was most wretched ; and the more the ignorance 
 of this species of learning generally prevailed, the 
 mode of interpreting the Old Testament grew worse 
 and worse. The first dawning, too, of a better mode 
 of interpretation must be dated fiom the time when 
 reviving literature began to dispel the gloom of the 
 horrid night of superstition. And should ever again 
 the calamity overtake the Christian world, of this 
 learning becoming almost ever}' where neglected, 
 a barbarous mode of interpretation, most hostile to 
 the understanding of the Old Testament, would cer- 
 tainly ensue. 
 
 Ohs. 3. Not only does history demonstrate the 
 great utility of ancient literature to the interpretation 
 of the Old Testament, but it is easy to prove the 
 same thing from the very nature and genius of this 
 kind of learning. 
 
 1. For, as the study of this literature has the ad- 
 mirable quality of preparing the mind for the right 
 cultivation of every kind of learning, it is also of much 
 
172 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 use in rightly conducting the interpretation of the 
 Old Testament, For, as it tends generally to culti- 
 vate, ennoble, and exalt the mind, to excite and 
 nourish the genius, to exercise and perfect the judg- 
 ment, and to loosen and break the force of prejudices, 
 it becomes most powerfully efficacious in conducting 
 to a candid, liberal, and satisfactory interpretation of 
 the Old Testament. 
 
 2. The more prepared by the cultivation of an- 
 cient literature a person comes to the study of the 
 Old Testament, the more will he bring with him to 
 that study the habit of treating and interpreting an- 
 cient books : and the more he has learned to throw 
 himself back to the times, and to enter into the ge- 
 nius of the Greek and Roman writers, the less diffi- 
 culty will he find in reading and interpreting the 
 much more ancient Hebrew books, so as to pay due 
 attention to their times and genius. 
 
 3. From the reading and study of these authors, 
 too, not a few advantages are derived for the inter- 
 pretation of the Old Testament. For, however dis- 
 similar these languages may be, there are still many 
 things to be found in the Greek and Latin languages 
 which may be usefully applied both with respect to 
 the etymological nature, and different uses of some 
 words in the Hebrew language, and also for the 
 better understanding of some phrases. But, besides, 
 in illustrating not a few things, which occur in the 
 Old Testament, these Greek and Latin writers afford 
 advantages by no means contemptible. For, not to 
 instance in other things which may afterv.ards with 
 propriety be touched upon, the example of the best 
 
P.I. s. III. C.I. § 1. 173 
 
 interpreters has clearly shewn how much pleasing 
 and useful illustration of certain actions, laws, and 
 manners may be derived from a comparison of the 
 antiquities of other nations. 
 
 4. Lastly, to the study of the Hebrew poets in 
 particular, may be advantageously joined the study 
 of the Greek and Latin poets. For a comparison 
 of those ancient poets is not a little valuable for 
 better perceiving and illustrating the nature and 
 force of the Hebrew poetical expressions and images ; 
 and for this purpose the Greek poets are particularly 
 excellent, as the greater part of them, both from their 
 greater antiquity, and from the similarity and con- 
 tiguity of their climate, approach nearer to the He- 
 brew poets. But as it universally holds, that in 
 studying all kinds of poetry in a poetical manner, a 
 nice sense of the beautiful is of the greatest service ; 
 for exciting, nourishing, forming aright, and guiding 
 this sense, who has ever doubted of the immense use 
 to be derived from an acquaintance with the Greek 
 and Latin poets ? But although a person, endued 
 with a proper sense of the beautiful, on instituting a 
 comparison of each of these poets and of the Hebrew 
 poets, will perceive less perfect cultivation and art 
 in the latter than in the former ; he will yet universally 
 observe among the Hebrew poets a greater sub- 
 limit}' of diction, and a majesty of conception, which 
 is highh' remarkable in the sacred writers, and re- 
 dounds much to their honour. 
 
 Obs. 4. As then ancient literature is highly useful 
 to the study of the Old Testament, it is certainly 
 much to be wished, that as many as apply themselves 
 
174 PRINCIPLES OF IXTKRPEETATION. 
 
 to this study should also apj-ly themselves strenuously 
 to ancient literature. He tiiei eforc ought to be reckon- 
 ed a sound counsellor to a theologian, part of whose 
 dutj' it is to study the Old Testament, who shall ad- 
 vise him to bestow all that time on ancient literature 
 which can be spared from the immensity of that mul- 
 titude of other things, of which he must acquire the 
 knowledge : and that not only at the time when he 
 cummcnci^s that course of study, by which he is to 
 })reparc and qualify himself for performing aright 
 afterwards the duties of the most sacred office, but 
 likewise during the whole course of these studies ; 
 nay even that he should not neglect or omit this li- 
 terature when he shall have to perform the weighty 
 duties of a Chiistiau teacher. For this pleasing and 
 valuable literature, besides that it constantly affords 
 some alleviation of the most difficult labours, will be 
 of the greatest service for the better understanding 
 of the sacred volume, and in particular the Old Tes- 
 tament, which is highly valuable to him in the exer- 
 cise of his office. And this ought to be the more 
 urged in our age, because more and greater aids, for 
 the attainment of this valuable literature, particularly 
 in our own country, are now in our power, and be- 
 cause it is more advantageous, and more recjuired 
 by the circumstances of our times, that an interpreter 
 of the sacred volume should, by a more refined man- 
 ner of treating its books, endeavour by every means 
 to consult theii- honour and dignity. 
 
p. I. s. III. c. I. § 2. 175 
 
 He>iiles rlie study of Greek and Latin litera- 
 ture, which is most useful to prepare one for a 
 natural and just mode of interpreting the Old 
 Testament, the study of philosophy is not a lit- 
 tle useful for the same object 
 
 Obs. 1. When we here speak of the study of phi- 
 losophy, wo do not understand the whole of that part 
 of human knowledge generally known under that 
 name, but only that part of it which teaches to think 
 rightly and to conduct aiight all the processes of the 
 mind. This was called by the ancients Dialectics, or 
 the manner and science of reasoning, " which," as 
 Cicero in his Tuscul. Qucest. b. v. 25, says, " flows 
 and is diffused through all the parts of knowledge, 
 defines a subject, divides it into its parts, connects 
 consequences, draws just conclusions, and separates 
 ti-iith from falsehood." It therefore requires no proof 
 that philosophy, in so far as it teaches us to use ariirht 
 the faculties of our minds, and to direct them pro- 
 perly, is, in all cases, most useful to the theologian in 
 respect to the doctrines of religion, and for the ri^ht 
 investigation and proper communication of them to 
 others ; not only of those doctrines which may be in- 
 vestigated by the aid of reason alone, but also of 
 those which are derived from Scripture. It is not, 
 however, so immediately evident wiiut is its value in 
 
176 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 the interpretation of the Old Testament. Let us 
 tlierefore now observe what may principally deserve 
 our notice on this point. 
 
 Obs. 2. He then who shall have rightly studied 
 the philosophy oF which we speak, not so as merely to 
 retain in his memory the rules of the art, but rather 
 he who has learned to think and reason aright, will 
 reap from it the most excellent fruits for the inter- 
 pretation of the Old Testament when he applies him- 
 self to it. 
 
 1. We have already said, that the study of philo- 
 sophy, rightly conducted, is admirably adapted to 
 form the judgment, which ought to be cultivated 
 with the utmost care by every interpreter of sacred 
 writ. For nothhig is more generally efficacious in 
 exciting that perception of truth, which we vulgarly 
 denominate common sense, if it be latent in the mind, 
 or to polish it if uncultivated, or further to sharpen 
 or perfect it in the person on whom nature has be- 
 stowed a more than ordinaty share of it. 
 
 2. When one does not merely apply himself to the 
 words, but endeavours to understand and express the 
 sentiments and mind of these writers ; and also oc- 
 cupies himself in explaining facts, and where reason- 
 ing occurs, cautiously inquires into its nature and 
 force — the right use of philosophy, in all the doc- 
 trines, opinions, or arguments which he meets with, 
 will keep him always mindful of the remote age on 
 which ho is employed, and will make him endeavour 
 to guard against attributing to it any thing not con- 
 gruous to its nature and genius. 
 
 3. But even in the explication of words philoso- 
 
p. I. s. in. c. I. § 2. 177 
 
 pliy is by no means useless. In saying this, we 
 do not wish to be understood as recommending sub- 
 tle philosophical disquisitions regarding the use and 
 meaning of Hebrew words, or^ accommodating their 
 proper significations to philosophical views. For as 
 the Hebrew language seems to reach back to the 
 highest antiquity, and even to the infancy of the hu- 
 man race, and as far as concerns its peculiar nature, 
 remained, as long as it continued a living language, 
 quite unchanged ; true and genuine philosophy will 
 lead one carefully to attend to the very great anti- 
 quity and the peculiar infantile simplicity of this lan- 
 guage, and to adapt to this his grammatical exposi- 
 tions, and not to seek for the primary meaning of its 
 words in those notions which are abstruse or abstract, 
 and separated from our senses, but in those which are 
 derived from things falling under their cognizance, 
 and frequently also from some natural sounds, which 
 mankind have endeavoured to express and imitate. 
 
 4. In the last place, true philosophy conduces not 
 a little to foster those virtues, which in our times par- 
 ticularly ought to be wished for and cultivated by an 
 interpreter of the Old Testament. Thus, it is the 
 part of a philosopher to account unworthy of an in- 
 genuous mind every thing which has in it a trace of 
 superstition, and to preserve himself pure, as far as 
 possible, from its contamination : whilst, at the same 
 time, it is his part also to treat every thing agree- 
 ably to its own particular nature ; and consequently 
 
 a In the original, " aut proprias notiones ad philosophicas 
 notiones exigi oportere." 
 
 N 
 
178 PRINCIPLES OV INTERPRETATION. 
 
 not to account divine and human things on the same 
 level : tnie philosophy' therefore, which teaches to 
 observe a just medium in all things, Avill dispose to 
 that proper veneration for the books of the Old Tes- 
 tament which their sacredness requires. In the same 
 way it leads one also to true liberality. For as it is 
 hostile to all extremes, so likewise it cares not what 
 the ancients or what the moderns teach, but only 
 what is right and just and true ; and therefore con- 
 temns and despises indignantly the chains of either 
 party, by which one becomes servilely bound. Con- 
 sequently the interpreter under the influence of true 
 philosophy, conscious to himself of his real love for 
 truth and religion, will not suffer himself, either by 
 the clamours of those whose judgment is obscured 
 by an excessive veneration for antiquity, or b}' the 
 sneers of those who are carried away by a blind love 
 of novelty, to be prevented or restrained from sted- 
 fastly following, at all times, what he is persuaded is 
 alone right and true. Besides, the more completely 
 a man's mind is imbued with the precepts of philoso- 
 phy, the more will he be patient of labour. For this 
 is the excellent fruit of true philosophy, that it ex- 
 cites and compels us continually to cultivate the 
 mind, and to perfect and augment more and more 
 every day the endowments of nature and the ac- 
 quirements of learning ; and whilst it shews us the 
 best way by which we may attain these objects, it 
 impels us to avoid no labour, but to exert all our 
 powers to accomplish the utmost of which we are 
 capable. Finally, true philosophy is not to be sup- 
 posed useless in fostering in us a genuine sense of 
 
p. I. s. in. c. I. § 2. 179 
 
 human weakness. We know indeed that the phi- 
 losophy of many moderns, if it does not absolutely 
 lay down precepts of a directly opposite nature, yet 
 certainly has had the effect of rendering men more 
 proud and presuming than they ought to be. But 
 without entering into the tenets of this philosophy, 
 Ave hesitate not to affirm, that right philosophy, or 
 that which is adapted to and built as it were upon 
 human nature, must render a man at all times con- 
 scious and never unmindful of his very circumscribed 
 and infirm nature, and consequently modest, and 
 averse from all pride and arrogance ; in a word, such 
 an one as will not, in divine writings or things, be led 
 by a blind faith, nor will he, on the other hand, ab- 
 stain from investigating them, but will, at the same 
 time, be able to restrain himself, and will not imagine 
 that he can measure and square all things by the 
 rule of his own weak capacity. 
 
 Obs. 3. From the observations we have made in 
 this chapter, it appears that ancient literature and 
 philosophy harmoniously conspire to form a good in- 
 terpreter of the Old Testament. It is indeed noto- 
 rious, that not unfrequently literary men and philoso- 
 phers disagree greatly, and that each of these parties 
 is possessed with such an attachment to their pecu- 
 liar branch of knowledge, as to contemn the other 
 and inveigh bitterly against it. And, indeed, as the 
 study of a barren and imaginary literature is incon- 
 sistent with the pursuit of a liberal and enlightened 
 philosophy, so is the study of a barbarous and scho- 
 lastic philosophy with the pursuit of polished learn- 
 ing. But these branches of knowledge, when studied 
 
180 PRINCIPLES OF INTEUPRETATION. 
 
 aright, are by no means opposed ; but, on the con- 
 trary, are happily linked together, and mutually as- 
 sist and perfect each other ; and a true lover of lite- 
 rature derives as great advantage from sound philo- 
 sophy, as a genuine philosopher derives from the 
 cultivation of literature. In the interpretation of the 
 Old Testament, both these studies are happily con- 
 joined, and, provided they be rightly conducted, mu- 
 tually assist each other, and are nearly of equal value 
 in forming such an interpreter of the Old Testament 
 as our times in an especial manner require. 
 
 CHAPTER SECOND. 
 
 OF SOME OTHER BRANCHES OF KNOWLEDGE, THE 
 STUDY OF WHICH IS USEFUL FOR THE INTERPRE- 
 TATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 §1- 
 
 Among the branches of knowledge which are 
 of signal utility to an interpreter of the Old 
 Testament, we reckon, above all things, an- 
 cient history; not only the domestic history of 
 the Hebrew nation itself, but likewise that of 
 other nations, particularly in so far as it may be 
 intimately connected with the affairs of this 
 people. 
 
p. I. s. III. c II. § 1. 181 
 
 Obs. 1 . As a great part of the Old Testament is 
 historical, the study of the domestic history of the 
 Hebrews is necessarily contained in the study of the 
 Old Testament itself: we shall, therefore, afterwards 
 treat in another place of the interpretation of the his- 
 torical writers of the Old Testament in particular. 
 Here, however, it will not be useless to make a few 
 remarks, which are principally referable to two heads. 
 The one is, that we can derive little or no light to 
 the ancient history of the Hebrews from the writers 
 of the other nations of antiquity, because they con- 
 tain only very few things relating to it, and these 
 mixed with the most absurd fables ; such, for ex- 
 ample, as those from Trogus Pompeius, related by 
 Justin xxxvi. 2. But, as the history of the Hebrews, 
 contained in the books of the Old Testament, ends 
 near to the time of their return from the Babylonish 
 captivity, it may be completed partly from the first 
 book of Maccabees, which is held by all to be of 
 great authority ; but principally from the very noble 
 work of Josephus on Jewish antiquities, which, if 
 prudently consulted, is the best source from which, 
 next to the sacred volume, the ancient history of the 
 Hebrews may be derived. In the second place, we 
 wish it to be observed, that an accurate knowledge 
 of this history gives some aid to the better under- 
 standing of certain writings which are not historical. 
 For, besides that not unfrequently in some parts of 
 both the prose and poetical compositions, allusion is 
 made to other more ancient events ; there are not a 
 few poems, particularly those of David, whose histo- 
 rical occasion the more surely we investigate, the 
 
182 PRINCU'LES OF i.\TERFRETATIO\. 
 
 more correct will be our explication of them. In 
 the collection of the Psalms, there are to be found 
 some poems which must be referred to the late age 
 of the Maccabees, and must be explained from the 
 suppositio!) of that fact. There are also many pre- 
 dictions of the prophets, which receive no little illus- 
 tration from a knowledge of the Jewish affairs in later 
 times, which they predict. 
 
 Obs. 2. But, in general, the history of the other 
 nations of antiquity, rightly and judiciously applied, 
 may be useful in more ways than one to the inter- 
 preter of the Old Testament. For each nation has 
 something peculiar to itself; yet, in this diversity of 
 nations, we may always see mankind much alike in 
 nature and disposition : the observation, therefore, of 
 both their diversity and similitude, which the history 
 of ancient nations supplies, is of no small value in 
 enabling one to form a better judgment of many of 
 the sayings and actions of the Hebrews, and, in every 
 case for assisting in the explanation of the Hebrew 
 history unprejudicedly. There is, besides this effect, 
 pleasing in itself and also valuable, flowing from the 
 study of ancient history, that we are enabled to un- 
 derstand and observe how nations originated, grew 
 considerable, and came to ruin, and that we can, with 
 probability, investigate the immediate causes, b^- which 
 the various vicissitudes and fates of nations were 
 brought about, and by which the different condition 
 of each may be explained. Neither will the inter- 
 preter of the Old Testament recoil from disquisitions 
 of this sort when studying the affairs of the Hebrew 
 nation, as if they Mere at variance with that peculiar 
 
p. I. s. 111. c. II. § 1. 183 
 
 divine government, which we must ackuowledge to 
 have had place among them. For since, not even 
 in miracles, as we have already observed, s. i. c. vi. 
 § 5, obs. 8, must God be supposed to have departed 
 from the fixed laws of nature, his peculiar divine go- 
 vernment of that nation, therefore, by no means in- 
 terfered with or took away natural causes : but whilst 
 God left to these all their power, he directed them 
 wisely and agreeably to his own purposes. This 
 wisdom, therefore, of the Almighty, the interpreter 
 will be able to display the more clearly and evidently, 
 in proportion as he has, with superior sagacity, when 
 occasion offers, investigated and demonstrated to 
 others the immediate causes of events. 
 
 Obs. 3. In the history of nations external to the 
 Hebrews, there are some of them which particularly 
 deserve the attention of the interpreter of sacred 
 writ, from the frequent mention of them occurring in 
 Scripture, and from their affairs being intimately con- 
 nected with those of the Hebrew nation. Some of 
 these are not even named by the historians of the 
 other nations, for example, the Ammonites, Moabites, 
 and Edomites ; others again more celebrated are fre- 
 quently spoken of by them ; although they by no 
 means give such full accounts of them, as will in all 
 respects satisfy an interpreter of the Old Testament, 
 in every case where mention of them occurs. Every 
 thing, however, regarding the Phenicians, Egyptians, 
 Chaldeans, Medes, and Persians, who are much ce- 
 lebrated in the history of the Hebrews, and regarding 
 the genius and fates of these nations, should be taken 
 from the best authorities which the interpreter can 
 
184 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 find adapted to his purpose. These are principally 
 Herodotus, the father of historians among the Greeks, 
 whose autliority is now every day more and more 
 being confirmed and established, and Diodorns Si- 
 culus, who, although a much more recent author, yet 
 employed the utmost diligence in investigating and 
 relating the affairs of the most ancient nations. 
 
 Closely connected with the study of history 
 is that of chronology : which, although by its 
 extent and nature most difficult, and not re- 
 quiring to be studied throughout by every in- 
 terpreter, must not, hoM^ever, be altogether ne- 
 glected; and in every case it is necessary, as 
 far as may be, that regard be had to the nature 
 of the different periods. 
 
 Obs. 1. How arduous, and attended with what 
 insuperable difficulty in more cases than one, the la- 
 bour which has been undertaken by some, of attempt- 
 ing to reduce to correct chronological order, every 
 thing related in the sacred history, and to bring it 
 accurately to agree with the history of other nations, 
 taking into account the exact lapse of time, no one 
 for whom this treatise is intended can be ignorant. 
 A task of such magnitude, therefore, we neither pre- 
 scribe nor advise that such should impose upon them • 
 
p. I. s. III. c. II. § 2. 185 
 
 selves, but rather that they should leave this most 
 troublesome undertaking to those to whom it may 
 be agreeable. Let them be satisfied with making 
 use of the labours of those who have employed the 
 greatest diligence on this point : such as the cele- 
 brated Eusebius among the ancients, in his Chrono- 
 logical Canons, published long ago by Scaliger, and 
 which have been lately brought from Armenia much 
 more complete and full, and now published. ^ 
 
 Obs. 2. Although we do not, therefore, recom- 
 mend as absolutely necessary the fullest study of 
 sacred and profane ancient chronology to the inter- 
 preter of the Old Testament, we do not, however, 
 consider it to be altogether foreign to his duty, nor 
 quite unworthy of his care. For there occur in the 
 sacred history, occasionally, some chronological ques- 
 tions, which an accurate interpreter can by no means 
 pass over or neglect, but in discussing them will em- 
 ploy usefully his genius and judgment, making use 
 at the same time of the best aids. In every case, 
 too, it will be most useful to know, at what time, in 
 the annals of profane history, each one of the sacred 
 writers and celebrated persons lived, and when the 
 most remarkable events happened among the ancient 
 Hebrews : and it is deservedly accounted most va- 
 luable to the cause of truth, to have such a respect 
 to the different eras, as to enable one to form a just 
 judgment of the various transactions of the Hebrews, 
 and of their manners and institutions. 
 
 " Eusebii Pamphili Chronicorum libri duo, editoribus An- 
 gelo Majo et Johanne Zohrabo, Medial. llilS. 
 
186 PRINCIPLES OF INTEKPRETATION. 
 
 It is also most useful, and connected by the 
 bond of affinity with the study of history, to be 
 well acquainted with ancient geography, both 
 profane and sacred, but particularly the latter ; 
 which will be of frequent use to the interpreter 
 of the Old Testament. 
 
 Obs. 1. As a right knowledge of the country in- 
 habited by any nation, conduces very much to un- 
 derstanding tiie history and writings of that nation, 
 so the study of sacred geography is most useful for 
 rightly explaining the history of the Hebrew nation, 
 and likewise many of the writings of every sort 
 which have been published in it. For often the de- 
 scription of any action, or a speech, or a poem, in 
 the Old Testament, cannot in all respects be suffi- 
 ciently understood, without the assistance of a know- 
 ledge of places. The whole of the Mosaic constitu- 
 tion even, and many of its particular parts, are best 
 illustrated from the situation, extent, and nature of 
 the Israelitish country. On this account Josephus, 
 from whom, next to the sacred code, we derive the 
 best knowledge of the history of the Hebrews, will 
 be consulted advantageously by the interpreter of 
 the Old Testament ; as he describes the situation of 
 places, whenever it appears necessary. Among the 
 a ncients, Eusebius too, and Jerome in his Onomas- 
 
p. I. s. in. c. 11. § 3. 187 
 
 tico7i of Cities and Places, who purposely composed 
 works on sacred geography, deserve to be placed in 
 the first rank in this department by an interpreter. 
 Among the moderns, those are principally to be es- 
 teemed, who have with learning and industry given 
 an account of bibhcal geography, in conjunction with 
 those who have travelled into Palestine, and accu- 
 rately described its soil and climate. 
 
 Obs. 2. Neither ought the study of the geography 
 of other nations to be neglected by the interpreter of 
 the Old Testament, as it is useful for his purpose on 
 many occasions. In particular, he requires to have 
 a competent knowledge of those countries in which 
 the Israelites lived before they occupied Palestine, 
 and likewise of those into which they were afterwards 
 carried into captivity. But frequently, also, other 
 nations and other countries are mentioned in the 
 Old Testament, regarding which, whatever is known 
 may be usefully applied in interpretation. For which 
 purpose, those writers among the ancients, of whom 
 we have already spoken, Josephus, Eusebius, and Je- 
 rome, are of some assistance, to whom we here add 
 that most excellent geographer, Strabo : and among 
 the moderns, those travellers who have published a 
 description of their routes, are occasionally of con- 
 siderable utility. And he who is able to consult the 
 Arabic vvriters, who have given a geographical de- 
 scription of Asia, Egypt, and the other countries of 
 Africa, will from them derive no mean advantage. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 §4. 
 
 Natural history too, in as far as it relates to 
 the Old Testament, is occasionally not a little 
 useful to its interpretation. 
 
 Obs. 1. When we here speak of natural history, Me 
 wish the term to be understood in the widest sense 
 so as to embrace other subjects which may, from their 
 nature, be referred to it, such as astronomy and the 
 knowledge of diseases ; but which are not generally 
 comprehended under this science. 
 
 Obs. 2. Regarding astronomy, very few things are 
 found in the Old Testament ; the cause of which is 
 very evident. For although the study of this science 
 began early in the East, and was afterwards much 
 cultivated, the laws of Moses were not favourable to 
 it, as it was indissolubly connected with astrology, 
 or a superstitious contemplation and observation of 
 the stars, such as was intended to be subservient to 
 the detection and discovery of future events. The 
 mention of diseases is very frequent ; but almost only 
 of such as are peculiar to the East, and particularly 
 to Palestine. 
 
 Obs. 3. As to tliose things which are usually re- 
 ferred to natural history, many of them occur in the 
 books of the Old Testament. Nothing is more fre- 
 quent than the mention of animals, trees, and plants 
 of every kind which are peculiar to eastern countries ; 
 and from them the Hebrew poets delight to draw 
 
p. I. s. III. c. II. § 5. 189 
 
 their images. Precious stones, metals, glass, and 
 ivory, are spoken of, and those other things which are 
 most prized in the East ; and we find a description of 
 mines highly adorned with poetic imagery in Job, 
 chap, xxviii. 
 
 Obs. 4. As often as mention is made of these na- 
 tural objects, it is generally of great moment to in- 
 vestigate their nature, and in what manner they were 
 employed by human industry. It is therefore useful 
 often to compare what has been said by those of the 
 ancients who have treated of natural history either in 
 whole or in part ; the principal of whom are Aris- 
 totle, iElian, and Pliny. Those of the moderns again 
 who should chiefly be consulted, are such as either 
 from their travels in the East, or from other sources, 
 have endeavoured accurately and learnedly to ac- 
 quire information in order to illustrate the ancient 
 Scriptures. 
 
 §5. 
 
 Lastly, It is commendable in an interpreter 
 of the Old Testament, to direct his attention to 
 the study of ancient manners, laws, institutions, 
 doctrines, and opinions, in as far as may conduce 
 to the better understandino: of those books. 
 
 Obs. 1. As numerous things occur in almost every 
 one of the writings of the Old Testament, which, 
 whether they relate to the Hebrew people, or to other 
 
190 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 nations, seem not a little strange to us, who are ac- 
 customed to a very different mode of thinking and 
 acting, an interpreter ought constantly to take these 
 things into account, that he may the better discharge 
 his own immediate function, and defend the honour of 
 the sacred writings. 
 
 Obs. 2. For this purpose it will not only be most 
 advantageous to make a proper use of all that can be 
 learned regarding the sacred, civil, or domestic an- 
 tiquities of the Hebrews, either from the comparing 
 of the sacred books with each other, or through the 
 best foreign aids, but also to attend to whatever has 
 been made known by the inquirers into these sub- 
 jects respecting the other nations mentioned in the 
 Old Testament. For certainly the better any one is 
 versant in investigating and tracing up to its source 
 the manner of thinking and acting of any of the an- 
 cient nations, particularly of the Orientals, and in 
 showing the mode in which the nature of man alvvays 
 proceeds, advancing step by step as it were, and at 
 last attains cultivation, the more easily will he him- 
 self be able to understand, and to explain to others 
 the state even of the most ancient ages. But it is suf- 
 ficient here to have dropped a hint upon this subject, 
 which we shall afterwards illustrate in another place, 
 as far as may seem necessary for the purposes of an 
 interpreter. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION 
 
 OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 PART SECOND. 
 
 OF THE INTERPRETATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT 
 IN GENERAL. 
 
 SECTION FIRST. 
 
 or THE TRUE MANNER OF INTERPRETING TUE OLD 
 TESTAMENT. 
 
 § 1 
 
 As what belongs to the interpretation of the 
 Old Testament is partly of a general and partly 
 of a particular nature, according to the diversity 
 of matter and style, it is proper that we should 
 treat of each of these separately ; and as all do 
 not follow one and the same method, but some 
 pursue methods extremely dissimilar, it will be 
 of advantage to commence by briefly illustrating 
 these various modes. 
 
 Qbs. 1. After having explained, in the former part, 
 what things are principally required in our times for 
 
192 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 aiding in the right accomplishment of the interpre- 
 tation of the Old Testament, we now proceed to 
 what belongs to the interpretation , itself. This re- 
 gards either the whole books of the Old Testament 
 generally, or respects the nature of that diversity 
 which is perceivable either in their matter or style. 
 As these two cannot with propriety be conjoined, 
 but require rather to be treated separately, we are in- 
 clined to prefer this last mode ; and we approve 
 highly of the method which distinguishes the general 
 from the special hermeneutics of the Old Testament, 
 and treats of them separately. But although the ex- 
 tent of each is very great, yet we shall be enabled to 
 treat them more briefly, in proportion to the length 
 and the accuracy permitted by the nature of our un- 
 dertaking, with which we have already discussed 
 those points which seem to have no small effect on 
 the interpretation of the Old Testament. 
 
 Obs. 2. As certain general rules belong to the 
 subject of this second part, which must be observ- 
 ed in the interpretation of almost every individual 
 writer of the Old Testament, these shall be laid down 
 and explained in their order, as far as we shall judge 
 to be necessary. But, before we proceed to this, it 
 will be of use, shortly to review the principal various 
 methods recommended by various interpreters, and 
 candidly to state regarding these, what should be ap- 
 proved, and what rejected. 
 
193 
 
 §2. 
 
 The allegorical and mystical mode of inter- 
 pretation, by which a double meaning is assigned 
 to words, which long prevailed, both among 
 Jews and Christians, although it sometimes has 
 its uses, ought deservedly, however, to be reject- 
 ed, when we inquire, what is the real mind of 
 the writer. But the typical exposition of cer- 
 tain things, we consider to stand on a very dif- 
 ferent footing. 
 
 Obs. 1. It is not necessary here to treat of the 
 Jewish Cabalistical method of interpretation. From 
 what we can see through the darkness and abstruseness 
 of this plan of interpretation, stuffed with the most 
 trifling, nay, monstrous allegories ; this, at least, we 
 clearly perceive, that it is altogether such as to be 
 undeserving of being explained or illustrated. 
 
 Obs. 2. But there is another kind of allegorical and 
 mystical interpretation, which is rather more toler- 
 able, and seems to be, in some degree, recommended 
 by the authority of the men of great name who have 
 employed it ; of all of whom, let one, the Apostle 
 Paul, serve as an example, who has applied it to his 
 own purpose more than once. Let us then see what 
 is the nature of this allegorical and mystical method, 
 and what judgment we ought to form regarding it. 
 
194 PRINCIPLKS OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Obs. 3. An allegorical and mystical interpretation, 
 as commonly understood, is that which conjoins 
 with the simple and immediate signification, which 
 the words have in themselves, one more abstruse and 
 remote, which was involved in the words, either by 
 the writers themselves, or by the divine Spirit, by 
 whom they were inspired. But this definition may 
 be supposed to embrace in it the description of every 
 sort of double sense, of the grammatical itself even, 
 or literal, as it is called, and also of the typical. But 
 we do not wish to include in it the typical inter- 
 pretation, which regards words more than things, 
 and respecting which, therefore, we shall afterwards 
 treat. 
 
 Obs. 4. With the allegorical mode of exposition, or 
 the investigation of the double sense which the words 
 may equally convey, is connected very peculiarly, 
 the highly important question regarding the double 
 sense o some prophecies ; the one sense being that 
 which respects the immediate event; the other that 
 which has respect to a more remote subject, either 
 the Messiah, or the nature and fate of that religion 
 which he was to establish. As to this question, 
 which will be more properly discussed in another 
 place, it will be sufficient at present, to make our re- 
 marks of a general nature ; and in particular, we wish 
 it to be observed, that this double sense is to be care- 
 fully distinguished from a degree of ambiguity of 
 meaning, which the writers themselves sometimes 
 affect, and of which we shall afterwards speak at 
 another opportunity. 
 
 Obs. 5. We are of opinion, that the double gram- 
 
p. 11. s. I. § 2. 195 
 
 jnatical and mystical sense of words ought by no 
 means to be admitted of. For in no place are those, 
 for whose use the books of the Old Testament were 
 immediately written, clearly premonished of this, nor 
 is any indication given by any of their writers that 
 such a mode of interpretation should be admitted. 
 Should the authority of the Apostle Paul be objected 
 to us, it is to be observed that he is a more recent 
 writer, who, as we shall afterwai'ds see, only accom- 
 modated himself to the custom of his age. And, in- 
 deed, it appears from history, that the discovery of a 
 double sense was merely a human invention, which 
 passed from the Greeks to the Jews, and from them 
 to the Christians. It is, too, a mode of interpretation 
 altogether imaginary and arbitrary, and cannot be li- 
 mited by any certain laws. Grammatical interpreta- 
 tion is subjected to certain rules derived from the 
 nature of things, which prudence wdll dispose us to 
 follow : but the allegorical interpretation is wholly 
 dependent on the caprice of interpreters ; and no 
 precepts can ever be devised, by which the freaks of 
 a luxuriant imagination can be restrained in hunting 
 for, and carrj'ing allegories beyond all bounds. 
 
 Obs. 6. But although we strongly condemn this 
 double sense, we do not deny that there is a kind of 
 allegory, which may be very properly employed. 
 For one may indeed accommodate figuratively what 
 has been said elsewhere in a proper and simple sense to 
 his own purpose, in such a manner as not only not to 
 incur reprehension, but even, if respect be had to the ef- 
 fect of a wise application, so as to deserve pr use. And 
 this we consider to be the case with those instances 
 
196 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION, 
 
 where tlie Apostle Paul has really applied the allego- 
 rical mode. For the other instances which wear in 
 his writings the appearance of allegorical interpreta- 
 tion, really belong to the topical mode of which we 
 shall soon speak. Other cases ought not to be re- 
 ferred to either of these sorts, such as 1 Cor. ix. 9., 
 and 1 Tim. v. 18., with which compare Deut. xxv. 4., 
 where is contained only an argument, which rises 
 from the less to the greater ; so likewise Rom. x. 18, 
 with which compare Psal. xix. 5, where the Apostle 
 uses and applies to his own purpose the words of 
 David, but does not say, that they were employed by 
 the author, or inspired by God in that remote sense. 
 The same thing may also undoubtedly be said of some 
 other passages, and of Rom. x. 6 — 8., with which com- 
 pare Deut. XXX. 12 — 24., where the Apostle, agree- 
 ably to the manner of his age, expresses what he 
 wished to say in words taken from the Old Testa- 
 ment ; and though used there in a very different 
 meaning, yet notwithstanding, 'are most excellently 
 adapted to his purpose. But, in a particular manner 
 is the passage in Gal. iv. 22 — 26., to be referred to 
 the subject we are treating of; where, however, the 
 Apostle does not say that the figurative sense v. Inch 
 he brings forward, was the sense intended in the his- 
 torical narrative in the book of Genesis, to be con- 
 veyed along w ith the simple sense of the words ; but 
 as those, to whom he was writing, delighted in alle- 
 gorical expositions, he, with singular ])riidence, accom- 
 modating himself to the understanding of the Jews, 
 at the same time attacked them with their own wea- 
 pons, which he pretty clearly indicates in verse 
 
p. ir. s. 1. § 2. 197 
 
 24tli, where he says, anva isriv aXXriyoooviMva, i. e. 
 these things, even according to your own opinion, ad- 
 mit an allegorical and figurative interpretation. 
 
 Obs. 7. The typical interpretation, which may be 
 referred to the allegorical method, and has with it 
 some degree of affinity, we at the same time do not 
 oppose nor reject. But, as it seems to us, the one 
 ought to be distinguished from the other. For the 
 t3'pical sense, if we are right, exists in things, while 
 the allegorical is derived from words. When we ex- 
 plain a passage tj'pically, we only subjoin one sense 
 to the words, which is not the case in those passages 
 which are understood allegorically. For a type is 
 nothing else but a certain similitude between two 
 persons or things, of which the one contains a sha- 
 dowing forth of the other. That in maii}^ of the rites 
 prescribed by the laws of Moses, there were types of 
 this sort, can scarcely be denied. The genius of the 
 ancient Hebrews being such, as to be powerfully, nay, 
 almost solely moved by objects presented to their 
 senses, in accommodation to this constitution of mind 
 among them, things removed from the senses were 
 represented to them by the similitude of other things 
 affecting their senses. Frequently, therefore, in the 
 Old Testament, symbolical actions and ceremonies are 
 made mention of, which were types or images of cer- 
 tain things. Thus, in particular, the rites of purifica- 
 tion were of this nature, whose symbolical object was 
 to place before their eyes the pollution of sin, from 
 which they ought to be cleansed. The whole nature 
 of expiator}^ sacrifices also, and of most of those things 
 which were to be performed by the High Priest on 
 
198 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 the solemn day of expiation, was so constituted, that 
 in them we may see a shadowed forth representation 
 of those things which were brought into the fullest 
 light by Jesus Christ, the redeemer of the human 
 race. See Col. ii. 17. That this typical nature 
 of certain rites did not altogether escape the notice 
 of the more intelligent Israelites at least, may be 
 gathered from their custom of symbolical actions 
 derived from their forefathers, and also from Psalms 
 xxxviii. 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12., and li. 4, 9., where David 
 describes the greatness of the sin he had committed 
 by images taken from the disease of leprosy and 
 its purification. There is, besides, no slight, nor 
 altogether far-fetched similitude between certain his- 
 torical events of the Old and New Testament, which 
 occasionally may be usefully attended to and pointed 
 out : and, therefore, we shall afterwards see that 
 David, from the contemplation of his own circumstan- 
 ces, was more than once brought to the contemplation 
 in some degree of similar circumstances in the life of 
 the Messiah. How poetically, for instance, has he 
 described, in Psalm Ixviii. 19., the triumphal proces- 
 sion of the sacred ark, which was the symbol of the 
 jmmedi«tte presence of God, when borne up to Mount 
 Sion : an event which suggested to the mind of the 
 Apostle, through a certain natural similitude between 
 them, the Messiah ascending in a triumphant manner 
 to heaven, Ephes, iv. 8 — 10., and in the same way 
 as David himself likewise, as we think, celebrated 
 this event in Psalm ex. Such, in almost all cases, is 
 the nature of those other passages, where those things 
 V Inch are typically explained in the New Testament 
 
p. II. s. I. § 2. 199 
 
 do not establish a double sense latent in those passages 
 of the Old Testament which are quoted, but their 
 mutual connection is caused merely by some degree 
 of similitude between them. 
 
 It is scarcely necessary, in our times, to observe that 
 this tj'pical relationship ought not everywhere too 
 sedulously to be sought for and pressed, as was the 
 manner of many of the ancient Theologians. It may 
 suffice to say, in general, that an interpreter ought to 
 beware, when types may appear to present them- 
 selves, of indulging his imagination too far ; and 
 should endeavour, for the most part, to content him- 
 self with tracing out a general similitude, and remem- 
 ber that the more natural, simple, and agreeable to the 
 nature of things the similitude he represents, the more 
 should the plan he has proposed to himself to pursue 
 be approved. 
 
 Obs. 8. We come, then, to the conclusion, that the 
 literal sense of the words, as it is called, is that only 
 true sense which should be sought for by an interpre- 
 ter of the Old Testament. For it is quite evident, 
 that this is the sense which is to be held as that, which 
 the writer himself intended by his words, whether he 
 used them in their proper or metaphorical sense. 
 There are indeed in the Old Testament, particularly 
 in the poetical books, many things set forth under 
 figures and images, and some even in an allegorical 
 form. But, even the simple grammatical interpreta- 
 tion of these passages requires that thej^ be not ex- 
 pounded by the words taken in their proper sense, 
 but that a due regard be had to the figurative lan- 
 guage 
 
200 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 §3. 
 
 There is also a species of allegorical interpre- 
 tation which is denominated moral; but, in the 
 sense in which that term is understood, undeserv- 
 ing of our approbation. 
 
 Ohs. 1. As in the books, particularly of the Old 
 Testament, many things occurred, which, in the opi- 
 nion of the most celebrated philosopher of our age, 
 Kant of Koinigsberg, could not be reconciled to the 
 purest precepts of religion and ethics, were they to be 
 understood in their natural sense, he determined to 
 explain such things in a manner accommodated to true 
 religion, virtue, and morals, which therefore might be 
 denominated »?ora/ interpretation. This sense of the 
 sacred writers, therefore, however forced it might often 
 be, he was of opinion ought to be adopted, just in the 
 same way as the moral philosophers among the Greeks 
 and Romans expounded their fabulous doctrines re- 
 garding the gods in a symbolical and mystical man- 
 ner, that they might bring it nearer to sound philo- 
 sophy. 
 
 Ohs. 2, AH that Kant and his followers have said to 
 recommend this mode of interpretation, is certainly 
 not suffiiijuiit to persuade us to adopt it. It has, in- 
 deed, some specious points, and seems to present some 
 advantages to a philosopher: by its aid even some 
 things dithcult to be understood, foreign to our modes 
 of thinking, and which seem not reconcileable to pure 
 
p. 11. s. i.§ 3. 201 
 
 doctrine, a theologian possessed of a felicitous genius 
 might easily explain and adapt to the common use of 
 mankind. Notwithstanding of this, if we wish to 
 speak with accuracy, it does not deserve to bear the 
 name of interpretation. For the interpretation of 
 scripture, according to the Kantian mode, is really 
 nothing else but expressing one's own thoughts in 
 words taken from the sacred books, and understanding 
 them for the most part in a far different sense from 
 what was intended by the authors^ and obtruding as it 
 were this sense upon these authors; thus making them, 
 against their will, say what may be accommodated to 
 a moral use, and vulgar understandings. 
 
 Obs. 3. But, should one meet with things in the 
 Old Testament which he cannot approve, he certainly 
 will not advance the honour of the sacred writers by 
 perverting the natural sense of the words, and thus 
 eliciting from them, what modern philosophy may ap- 
 prove. It rather becomes him to preserve that ven- 
 eration due to these writings, by ascribing what may 
 be matter of offence in them, partly to the nature of 
 the very ancient Mosaic institution of religion, wholly 
 constituted in adaptation to tlie genius, and for the 
 use of the Israelitish nation, partly to the imperfect 
 notions of God and virtue, which times so ancient 
 could receive, and partly, in fine, to a manner of 
 thinking and speaking, and to customs, adopted in 
 such remote antiquity, and under a climate altogether 
 different from ours. But should any one wish to ap- 
 ply to the common use of mankind even those things 
 wliich to us seem least approvable ; more than sufficient 
 will be supplied to him which may serve both for wise- 
 
202 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 ly regulating our conduct, and teaching us to avoid 
 what is blame worthy, and also for enabling us rightly 
 to estimate that divine goodtiess through which we 
 have obtained a knowledge of the purer and more 
 perfect doctrine of Christ. 
 
 §4. 
 
 Nor is their method to be approved, who, in 
 the employment of the sacred writings, seem to 
 have a greater regard to their own theological 
 opinions than to the true meaning of the writers ; 
 wliich manner of interpretation, we may call 
 the theological mode ; although, at the same time, 
 we are quite of opinion that the scheme of 
 that religion, delivered in the sacred volume, 
 ought ever to be kept in view by a prudent in- 
 terpreter. 
 
 Obs. 1. The custom of most of the ancient Christian 
 interpreters, which has indeed been less followed by 
 the moderns, although not altogether abandoned, was 
 to be guided by the tenets and dogmas of their own 
 sect in the interpretation of the books of the Old Tes- 
 tament, when they made use of them as theologians. 
 Consequently they eagerly laid hold of every thing 
 which they could collect for the confirmation of 
 their theological system in the writers of tlie Old 
 Testament, and, provided they could explain them 
 agreeably to what they called the analogij of faith, 
 
p. II. s. I. § 4. 203 
 
 they were persuaded that they had attained their true 
 meaning. 
 
 Obs. 2. Respecting this mode of interpretation, it 
 Avill be sufficient to notice only some of the principal 
 points. 
 
 1 . The true sense of the sacred writers should not 
 lie derived from theological compends, or inferred 
 from them, but should be searched out from the writers 
 themselves : and where there is any discussion about 
 the sense of a passage, the tenets of any sect of di- 
 vines ought to have no more weight than the decrees 
 of councils. The abuse in theology of twisting and 
 accommodating the sense of scripture, to opinions 
 delivered in the schools on one side or another, 
 was certainly very common ; but it was equally op- 
 posite to the true method of interpretation with the 
 allegorical and moral, both of which attribute a sense 
 to the sacred writers altogether arbitiary, and quite 
 foreign to their meaning and intention. 
 
 2. The analogy of faith, as it may be called, or the 
 digest of the principal heads of the doctrines of di- 
 vine revelation cohering apply together — even this 
 analogy of faith ought not to be sought for in theo- 
 logical compends, which are the woiks of man, and 
 not by any means agreeing together, nay, very often 
 differing and violently opposed to each other : but 
 the doctrine of God should be drawn from the foun- 
 tain in which it is contained, and after that we should 
 investigate how each of its parts^ as delivered at va- 
 rious times and by different writers, cohere together. 
 For as we believe that the doctrines contained in the 
 Old and New Testaments proceeded from one and 
 
204 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 the same God, it is natural to expect that there shonhl 
 not only be no opposition, but the greatest harmony 
 between them. Therefore, as it is proper in interpret- 
 ing every human author, to compare such different 
 passages as may illustrate each other, so are we par- 
 ticularly called upon to act thus in interpreting the 
 divine writers, and in bringing them to a just agree- 
 ment where it is necessary. But the searching For 
 each of the points of doctrine, in both the Old and 
 New Testament, as partly revealed for the first time 
 by Christ and his Apostles, partly placed by them in 
 a much clearer light, and giving equal faith to those 
 who lived in the times of the old and new rehgion in 
 a digested compend, is not the business of the in- 
 terpreter but of tlie theologian, anxious solely about 
 the building of his system and adorning and amplify- 
 ing it by every means in his power. But, however, 
 as there is a great difference l)etwecn the old and 
 new religion, and divine wisdom proceeded gradually 
 in unfolding the truths of religion, always accommo- 
 dating itself to the understandings of mankind and 
 the circumstances of the times, it is the duty of the 
 Christian interpreter to be solicitous and careful not 
 to obtrude upon ancient times, and to ascribe to what 
 may be called the precursory doctrine, that whi'^h only 
 can belong to more recent times and a more perfect 
 doctrine. 
 
 3. Although the analogy of faith, rightly under- 
 stood and confined within its just limits, may be most 
 useful to an interpreter of the Old Testament, its use, 
 however, derives its value more from the nature of 
 the thing than from any direct or clear authority of 
 
p. II. s. I. §4. 205 
 
 Scripture. There is, indeed, only one passage which 
 has given ground for the expression, in which, indeed, 
 those who are addicted to the dogmatical interpreta- 
 tion of the Old Testament persuade themselves that 
 they have discovered a high authority for defending 
 their views. The Apostle Paul, treating in Rom. xii. 
 6., of the different faculties, powers, and offices assign- 
 ed to the teachers of the primitive Christian church, 
 and of the manner in whicli they were to be exercised, 
 particularly mentions 'Tt^o'^riruav prophecy, which was 
 to be exercised xara rr^v avakoyiav rrjg ototewj, {ciccord- 
 ing to the analogy of faith as it is in the English 
 translation :) in which passage Tgo^jjre/a may mean 
 the interpretation of the sacred code, or the Old Tes- 
 tament, and avoKoyia rrig TiGnug, the doctrine deliver- 
 ed by Christ consisting of various heads connected 
 together in the closest manner ; in conformity with 
 which, therefore, the Old Testament ought to be in- 
 terpreted. But ava'kojia, in this sense, is not to be 
 found in any example exactly similar : it signifies 
 the proportion observable between various dissimilar 
 things, and of which we take account. llPo(pri-iia 
 again here, and in other places, signifies the gift, or 
 faculty of discussing divine subjects, in the sacred as- 
 semblies of Christians, and of instructing others re- 
 garding them ; and of explaining the sacred books of 
 tlie Jews, in a manner suitable to the interests of piety 
 and virtue. Lastly, martg, as it seems to us, in this 
 passage, means the knowledge of the Christian religion, 
 (compare 1 Thes. iii. 10.,) which some possessed in a 
 more full and perfect degree than others. To the 
 avoKoyia, or varying proportion of this knowledge, ac- 
 
206 PRINCIPLES OF INTEllPRErATION'. 
 
 cording to the prudent counsel of the Apostle, the 
 ■•zoo(p'/\Tiia, or public divine instruction in the sacred as- 
 semblies, was, by each particular person to bp accom- 
 modated. See on this subject 1 Corinth, iii. 1, 2. 
 Heb. V. 12. 
 
 Obs. 3. Let us now briefly illustrate what we have 
 said of intei*preting the Old Testament, according 
 to the true analogy of faith, or agreeably with the 
 doctrine of religion : and at the same time adduce 
 some examples on this point, by which, what we mean 
 may be clearly understood. 
 
 1. We strongly then condemn that mode of inter- 
 pretation, by which, formerly many expressions of the 
 Old Testament were brought together to prove the 
 doctrine of the Trinity, which, when the words were 
 taken by themselves, and apart from their connection, 
 had somewhat of speciousness ; but afforded no sort 
 of proof when considered in connection with the con- 
 text. Of this kind, is Psalm xxxiii. 6., where, as Je- 
 hovah, his ivord and spirit are mentioned, most inter- 
 preters doubted not that the Trinity was there clearly 
 described : whilst, however, from the parallelism of 
 Hebrew poetry, the word of Jehovah and the spirit, 
 or rather the breath which is in his month, are quite 
 synonymous, and the latter expression is merely a 
 poetic periphrasis for the former. 
 
 2. But yet, a candid theologian and interpreter of 
 the Old Testament, will acknowledge that there are 
 passages in the Old Testament, which will not be ex- 
 plained according to the rules of sound interpreta- 
 tion, unless we call to our asistance the distinction . 
 taught in many passages of the New Testament, as 
 
p. 11. s. I. § 4. 207 
 
 belonging peculiarly to the Deity. The author of 
 the xlv Psalm, ascribes in the 7th verse, divine ma- 
 jesty to a most illustrious king, whom we call the 
 Messiah, and addresses him by the appellation of God : 
 and it appears from the context that this name must 
 be received in all its plentitude, because, under the 
 same appellation of God, the prophet addresses the 
 Messiah in the following verse, and which is no Avise 
 different from that which is applied to God in the 
 same place. Unity of interpretation therefore com- 
 pels us to understand both in the same sense. Of 
 the same nature nearly are the passages in Isaiah ix. 
 5, (6 of the Eng. trans.) and Jerem. xxiii. 5, 6. 
 
 3. In passages of this sort, what then must the in- 
 terpreter do ? Must he expound the words in a 
 simple and natural sense, in spite of the context, in 
 order to avoid the accusation of what we have called 
 theological interpretation ? Certainly not — for Avhen 
 he perceives that by a right and sound interpretation 
 of such passages, a superior and divine nature is at- 
 tributed to the Messiah, who was to come in future 
 ages, he does not proceed as a theologian, but as a 
 good interpreter when he expounds them in this 
 sense : and it is not only allowed to him, but it is 
 quite proper, that by the help of the clearer light in 
 which this superior nature of Christ has been placed 
 in the New Testament, he should illustrate and con- 
 firm these passages of the Old Testament. 
 
208 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 §5. 
 
 Finally, we ought carefully to guard against 
 coinciding with a multitude of late interpreters, 
 who, while they will not admit any thing in 
 the facts and doctrines of the Old Testament, 
 unless what is quite consentaneous with that 
 order of things to which they have been accus- 
 tomed, and of which they can easily form a con- 
 ception, interpret the sacred books agreeably to 
 this opinion of theirs: which mode of interpre- 
 tation we may with much propriety call ultra- 
 philosophical. 
 
 Obs. 1. We have already shown, P. i. S. iii. c. i. § 
 2. that the study of philosophy, which teaches to judge 
 and reason correctly, when properly conducted, is of 
 great advantage in the interpretation of the Old Tes- 
 tament. We therefore do not condemn the applica- 
 tion of philosophy to interpretation, but, on the con- 
 trary, highly approve of it when understood in a 
 right, sense ; and much wish that an interpreter at- 
 tend not to the words alone, but also to the meaning, 
 purpose, and ideas of the author ; and, when opportu- 
 nity occurs, to the causes, botli of the facts which the 
 author relates, and of certain modes of speaking which 
 he employs. 
 
 Obs. 2. In former times, a great controversy 
 
p. II. s. 1. § 5. 209 
 
 existed in our country of Holland, whether philosophy 
 should be applied as an interpreter of scripture or not. 
 A book was published at Eleutheropolis or Amster- 
 dam, in the seventeenth century, with this title, Philo- 
 sophia scriptures interpres, exercitatio paradoxa, in 
 which philosophy is treated of as far as employed 
 about reason,^ which Socinus- and his followers held 
 out as the judge of Scripture, so that nothing should 
 be admitted in the doctrine divinely revealed which a 
 man could not comprehend : and, consequently, were 
 of opinion that all the parts of that doctrine should 
 be accommodated to the standard of human reason. 
 
 Obs. 3. Of late, the rashness of a number of inter- 
 preters has proceeded much farther : who, abusing the 
 light of philosophy, have strenuously contended, that 
 whatever the Scripture contains, usually ascribed to 
 divine appointment, and even the extraordinary 
 events themselves, ought to be explained conformably 
 to the understanding and opinions of men, and to the 
 ordinary and usual course of human transactions. 
 Regarding this mode of interpretation, as far as con- 
 cerns the Old Testament, we have treated, P. i. S. ii. 
 c. ii. § 2, 3., — which, if we denominate ultra philoso- 
 phical, we consider that we give it its true name. 
 
 Obs. 4. Thinking that we have said enough, in op- 
 position to this method of interpretation already, in 
 the place just quoted, and in P. i. S. i. c. vi., it may 
 suffice here to make one or two remarks. 
 
 1. This philosophical interpretation is equally 
 founded in preconceived opinions, as the theological 
 
 a In the original, " in quo libro agitur de pbilosophia, 
 qiiatenus de ratione usurpabatur." 
 P 
 
210 PRINCIPLES OF IXTERPRETATfON. 
 
 mode which we attacked in the former §. For, as 
 theologians, who follow this method, search for in the 
 Old Testament, and even by their interpretation foist 
 into it, whatever seems to be consonant with their 
 theological system ; in exactly the same way the phi- 
 losophical interpreters go to the books of the Old Tes- 
 tament, with no other view but to discover in them 
 what they can bring into conformity with their own 
 opinions. Both these parties, therefore, introduce an 
 equally arbitrary mode of interpretation, which does 
 not bring out and set before us what really is to be 
 found in the Old Testament, but what they wish 
 should be there. 
 
 2. Neither is it true what these interpreters pre- 
 sume to be the case, that thej'^ thus promote the credit 
 and honour of the sacred books ; for, in reality, they 
 detract greatly from their dignity. They are indeed 
 continually repeating that this method appears to 
 them every way worthy of adoption, because, by its 
 means, a very great number of difficulties which have 
 been objected to the books of the Old Testament, are 
 happily removed, and nothing is left which can prove 
 an offence to any one. We certainly confess, that, in 
 tliis way, they give the highest gratification to the 
 adversaries of our religion. But, to gratify them by 
 taking away all divine intervention, what else is this, 
 I beseech you, than to yield up the victory to them, 
 and to betray the cause you have undertaken to de- 
 fend ? For you will better defend the honour, even 
 of the ancient Scriptures, when you are not liable to 
 the suspicion of conspiring with the open enemies of 
 revealed religion. You will then prove yourself tlieir 
 
p. II. s. 1. § 6. -11 
 
 defender, when you come more and more to under- 
 stand what is excellent and altogether divine in 
 these books, and candidly and manfully explain it on 
 every proper occasion to others. And, should many 
 things occur to you as abstruse, and liliely to give 
 offence, remember always, that a .vast number oi 
 things occur, even in the ordinary course of divine 
 providence, which, although you cannot explain, it is 
 yet your duty to believe that they are wisely consti- 
 tuted and arranged. 
 
 §6. 
 We conclude, from what has been said, that 
 the only method of interpretation, deserving 
 commendation, is that which seeks for no other 
 sense, than can with probability be shown to 
 have been attached by the writers themselves 
 to the words which they employed ; and we con- 
 sider it as an established maxim, that, in this 
 respect, the same method must be pursued 
 with the sacred, as with profane authors ; and 
 therefore we may conveniently refer, what we 
 have to say on the interpretation of the Old 
 Testament, to these two divisions — the explana- 
 tion of words — and the explanation of the things 
 signified by the words. 
 
 Obs. 1. As in each of those modes of interpretation 
 which we have considered, it must be held that men 
 
212 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 liave attended more to their own opinions, than to the 
 true mind of the writers ; or, at least, that most of 
 them have certainly been more biassed by the love of 
 their own opinions than was proper, and did not la- 
 bour solely to investigate rightly, and exhibit trul}', 
 what the writers wished to say ; from the errors, there- 
 fore, into which they have fallen, it will be manifest to 
 every reflecting person, what ought to be avoided, and 
 what performed by a true interpreter of Scripture ; 
 and, consequently, that the right mode of interpreta- 
 tion which ought to be followed, and which is recom- 
 mended by the very nature of the thing, is that, 
 which, laying aside all preconceived opinions, seeks 
 only to explain to others, what may properly be 
 shewn to have been in the mind of the writers. 
 
 Obs. 2. It has been made a question whether, in 
 interpreting the sacred writings, the same laws should 
 be observed as are held good in the explanation of 
 every other sort of compositions, or whether a dif- 
 ferent set of laws are required. On this point our 
 opinion is, that the same rules should be universally 
 observed, as being the only ones which shew the 
 way by which we can arrive at the discovery of the 
 true meaning of writers. Those who composed and 
 wrote the sacred books were men. They used the 
 language employed in their own times and among 
 their countrymen, and by means of it they expressed 
 that which was in their minds, and which they wished 
 to communicate to others. Why then, in interpreting 
 them, should other laws and rules be devised than 
 are justly esteemed to be in force in every other 
 case ? We readily allow, that in the sacred writings 
 
p. II. s. I. S 6. 213 
 
 is contained a religion of divine origin, established 
 by the extraordinary and very frequent interposition 
 of God himself: which, too, we think ought to be 
 carefully kept in mind by the interpreter. But this 
 high and divhie excellence of the subject matter, 
 whatever may be the effect it ought to have on the 
 interpretation, most certainly does not prove to us 
 that we should ever depart from the common method 
 of interpretation universally received, whose only ob- 
 ject is to ascertain what writers meant to say when 
 they used one set of words or another. This verj' 
 excellence of the sacred books is to be established by 
 reason and argument ; but their meaning must be 
 elicited from their words, as in every other writing. 
 We certainly do not den}', that the sacred writers 
 were guided and enlightened by God : but this in- 
 spiration, as it is called, incites us only to a fuller 
 confidence in what they say, but not to assign to 
 their sayings any other sense than what their words 
 can bear. But in any other writings, when anything 
 is attributed to God, whether expressions, or actions 
 and events; just interpretation does not require that 
 we should believe in this divine interposition as having 
 reall}' taken place, although the words seem to im- 
 ply it. We must determine by other means whether 
 interposition of that nature was believed by the 
 writers themselves or not, and if believed, what is 
 the ground of their behef : but, on the other hand, 
 it would not be agreeable to reason from the fabulous 
 or fictitious divine intervention, so frequently oc- 
 curring in profane writers, at once to form the same 
 judgment regarding that divine intervention which 
 
'214 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 is spoken of by the sacred writers. Yet, however, 
 while induced by the strongest arguments, we are of 
 opinion that it was both intended, and on good 
 grounds believed in every case by them, we at the 
 same time think that it ought to be inquired into, 
 whether they always, and on all occasions, had in 
 their thoughts an extraordinary interposition, or were 
 persuaded that it really took place : and, in order to 
 determine this, their modes of thinking and acting 
 must be taken into account, and the nature of the 
 things treated of, together with the difference between 
 the style of poetry and prose. We consider, there- 
 fore, the consistency of interpretation, of which we 
 have spoken, as grossly perverted by those, who, be- 
 cause in not a few of the other writings of antif|uity 
 the Deity is brought in as ex machina, say that the 
 same thing takes place in the sacred writings, and 
 go so far in this way as even to compare, and put 
 on a level the heathen poets with the sacred histo- 
 rians : and we are also convinced that this consistency 
 of interpretation is neglected, and not attended to 
 by those who interpret the sacred books according 
 to the opinions and dogmas of theologians, in such 
 a way as that their authors, were they to revive, 
 would at once acknowledge that they were miserably 
 misrepresented. 
 
 Ohs. 3. Writers on sacred hermenoutics have 
 invented various distinctions, which we do not deny 
 to be of some advantage ; but we at tlie same time 
 think that we ouglit to be much on our guard, lest, 
 by making too many distinctions, and by multiplying 
 terms, we should injure perspicuity, and fall back 
 
p. II. s. I. § 6. 215 
 
 into the scholastic mode. We at least, without em- 
 ploying these different distinctions and multiplied 
 terms, and avoiding, as far as possible, technical 
 phrases, shall follow the simple method of embracing, 
 under two general heads, what we have still to say 
 on the manner of interpreting the Old Testament ; 
 the first of which shall be regarding the understand- 
 ing and explanation of words, and the second regard- 
 ing the understanding and explanation of things. 
 
PART SECOND. 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 
 OF THE UNDERSTANDING AND EXPLANATION OK 
 WORDS. 
 
 §1- 
 
 For attaining a right understanding of every 
 part of the Old Testament, when engaged in 
 the study of it, above all things the most useful 
 is knowing, or, at least, when requisite, inves- 
 tigating what the words, taken apart and by 
 themselves, signify. 
 
 Obs. 1. In learning every living language, it is 
 requisite, in the first place, to attend to the usage of 
 those ulio speak it, which is observable in the writing, 
 pronunciation, signification, and construction of the 
 words : and this usage is acquired partly from the 
 best writings, but principally from frequent and fa- 
 miliar intercourse with those to whom the language 
 is vernacular, and by whom it has been cultivated, 
 and is correctly spoken. But in different languages 
 there is always a form of speech altogether founded 
 upon the different genius, and internal and peculiar 
 nature of each : although this form of speech, through 
 
p. II. s. II. § 1. 217 
 
 the greater cultivation and increasing extent of the 
 language, and through the mutability of ages and 
 human events, or other causes, partly depending on 
 the caprice of men, partly on external occurrences, 
 does not, while the language remains a living lan- 
 guage, always preserve the same equable state, but 
 becomes occasionall}^ varied in many ways. In dead 
 languages, again, the forms of speech must princi- 
 pally be derived from those Avriters to whom they 
 were vernacular ; and good interpreters and lexico- 
 graphers, if such exist, are of great use in acquiring 
 the knowledge of them : but what exactly their par- 
 ticular forms were in various ages, cannot be fully 
 and perfectly determined, whatever helps we may 
 have in our power ; not to say any thing of the pro- 
 nunciation, which no one can fully restore in lan- 
 guages that are dead. As, for example, it may 
 happen, that a meaning of a Latin word or phrase, 
 which may be perfectly consonant to the purest and 
 most exquisite use of the language, may not be found 
 in the writings of Cicero, or of the other authors of 
 the Latin golden age ; but which, even at that very 
 time, may have been employed by the most correct 
 speakers. 
 
 As to the writings of the Old Testament, which 
 are not numerous, and which are the sole remains of 
 the ancient Hebrew language ; from these, its genius, 
 and likewise its grammar and syntax generally, may 
 be known and determined, many words and phrases 
 may be collected which were in most frequent use 
 while the language flourished, and the most common 
 significations of each of these ma}- be arranged in a 
 
218 PRIXCITLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 certain order, and some changes may also be remark- 
 ed, which tlie language, notwithstanding the little 
 tendency to change observable in the Hebrews, as 
 well as the other Oriental nations, underwent in the 
 progress of time, and whilst it continued among them 
 in all its vigour : but who will take upon himself to 
 say, that he can set before us the usage of the He- 
 brew language, as it existed at various times in all 
 its living energy, or bring it out from its ruins in all 
 its fulness ? For there are forms, words, and phrases, 
 which occur rarely, or but once only ; there are, like- 
 wise, occasionally certain significations, both probable 
 in themselves, and mucli adapted to the context, 
 other instances of which are sought for in vain in the 
 sacred volume ; all which ^ no one can examine closely 
 according to the usage of the language, and abso- 
 lutely demonstrate their meaning. As then the path 
 which leads'" to discovering the ancient power of the 
 Hebrew language is very slipjiery, obscure, and dif- 
 ficult to investigate, we certainly would rather de- 
 cline giving any directions for discovering its power 
 and meaning. Yet we are of opinion that this sub- 
 ject, which is generally designated in hermeneutical 
 treatises by the term i/sus loqiiendi, is worthy of in- 
 vestigation, and must not be altogether passed over 
 by us. Our sole aim then, when treating of the 
 usus loquendi, which obtains in tlie sacred volume, is 
 
 " III the original, " nemo proxime ad iisuin loquendi ex- 
 epferit." — Tr. 
 
 '' In tlie original, " ad reperiendura priscum Heliriforiim 
 usuin loijuundi." — Tr. 
 
p. II. s. II. § 1. 219 
 
 to investigate by means of the best aids, the sense of 
 its words and phrases, and, as far as possible, to de- 
 fine their signification conformably to the genius of 
 the language which the writers employed. The par- 
 ticular usus loquertdi which we assign to the different 
 sacred writers, is the mode of expressing himself pe- 
 culiar to each ; which, as far as it is connected with 
 defining correctly the sense of the words, will not 
 require to be explained apart by itself, as it belongs 
 almost wholly to that place where we shall treat of 
 endeavouring to the utmost to fix the signification of 
 words agreeably to the context, and the true mean- 
 ing of the writers. 
 
 Obs. 2. The plainest way, then, which we can 
 adopt in interpreting the very ancient writings of the 
 first part of the sacred volume is, that we should 
 know, or, as far as necessary, investigate what each 
 of the words of an author individually signifies, and 
 that we should then, from the context, as far as pos- 
 sible, ascertain which of the different significations, 
 which the words admit, is most proper and most ex- 
 pressive of the sense of the writer.^ That we should 
 begin with words taken by themselves, is both ne- 
 cessary in itself, and a dictate of prudence, as it is 
 indubitable that a signification has frequently been 
 given to words from the context alone, which a more 
 correct know ledge of the language has afterwards re- 
 
 " A sentence is here omitted which is introduced tiy the 
 author, uierely to guard against the amliiguity of verbzim in 
 Latin. It is as follows: — " Verba autem dicinuis, et ea in- 
 telligimus, qnas speciatim ita vocari solent a Grammaticis, et 
 ceteras uratiouis partes." — Tr. 
 
220 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 pudiated as utterly false, or as not congruous. In 
 no language, therefore, must this general rule be 
 observed, more than in the Hebrew — that the sig- 
 nification of a word can scarcely be held to be clear 
 in any passage, unless it can be properly shewn 
 by some other means than from the context, that the 
 meaning assigned belongs to it. 
 
 Obs. 3. Having premised these things, let us 
 now see in what manner the signification of individual 
 words may be best discovered. To this disquisition 
 we have already, as it were, paved the way in P. i. 
 S. i. c. i. § 5., when we treated of the means by which 
 we came to the knowledge of the Hebrew language. 
 
 1. As to many words, then, and particularly those 
 which most frequently occur, it cannot be doubted 
 that the signification attributed to them by the Jews 
 is the true one which has been preserved by uncor- 
 rupted tradition. Without bringing forward exam- 
 ples from all the parts of speech, it will be sufficient 
 to give instances in a few verbs. That the verb 
 ira means to lie, ni)2 to die, Dip to rise up, as the 
 Jews say, innumerable places of tlie Old Testament, 
 in which they are found, prevent us from doubting. 
 
 2. But there is very frequently occasion, in order 
 to discover and properly determine the meaning of 
 words, to seek assistance from other quarters than 
 from the llabbins. For neither have they delivered 
 to us all the significations of all words, nor are we to 
 admit those which they have delivered on their sole 
 authority — nay, there are even not a few confidently 
 determined by them, which ought undoubtedly to be 
 rejected. — Again, there are «ords of frequent use 
 
p. II. s. II. § 1. 221 
 
 which cannot always convenient!}' be accepted in the 
 same sense : and should a more rare sense belong to 
 any word which may suit some passages, this suit- 
 ableness merely does not afford a sufficient ground 
 on which we can securely rely. The noun rrpTX, 
 for instance, does not everywhere conveniently re- 
 ceive the sense of justice, righteousness, but in some 
 passages seems more fitly to convey the notion of 
 benignity, benevolence : it follows not, however, im™ 
 mediately that, because this seems to be sometimes 
 the more convenient signification, the noun was ever 
 used in this sense, particularly when the two signifi- 
 cations are so dissimilar. 
 
 Farther, the Jewish masters sometimes confidently 
 ascribe to one and the same word, and its derivatives, 
 significations so little congruous and connected with 
 each other, that it may almost be doubted whether 
 such significations be rightly assigned ; and, undoubt- 
 edly, it is of importance to inquire, whether any 
 light can be derived from other quarters, by which 
 we may be induced unhesitatingly to admit them. 
 The verb ~i33 affords a striking example : for in this 
 word they say, that two significations, quite opposed 
 to each other, are found — that of knowing, and of 
 7iot knotving. — Lastly, there are not a few words, 
 which occur rarely or only once ; there are also de- 
 rivatives whose primitives are lost: in determining 
 the signification of both which classes, consequently, 
 no cautious person will trust to the Rabbins alone, 
 even although the context of the passages in which 
 they occur may seem to be in their favour. 
 
222 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 3. Although most words have many significations, 
 some of them more, and some less, connected with 
 each other, it is always of much importance to inves- 
 tigate what is the primary signification. Should one 
 seek for this in any abstract or general notion remote 
 from the senses, he would greatly impose upon him- 
 self, and would little attend to the great antiquity 
 and simplicity of the language, whicii always requires 
 that the primary signification of every word should 
 be sought in what is immediately obvious to the 
 senses, and often particularly in what expresses the 
 imitation of some sound. See the remarks we have 
 already made, pages 176, 177. When, however, this 
 primary idea is once correctly ascertained, the se- 
 condary significations in which the word and its de- 
 rivatives are employed, will be more easily explained 
 and arranged in proper order : and by this means 
 one will be able better to penetrate into the native 
 genius of the language, and the meanings best adapted 
 to each passage will be more certainly determined. 
 
 4. In this great penury of domestic resources, we 
 must look around to see whether we can discover an}' 
 other aids, fit for our purpose, through means of 
 which the former may either be strengthened, or 
 greatly added to. And such we shall find in tlie an- 
 cient translations of the Old Testament, but particu- 
 larly in the other Oriental languages which are re- 
 lated to the Hebrew. — The ancient, translations made 
 from the Hebrew text have greater authority in pro- 
 portion to their antiquity and accuracy. And they 
 confirm the significations of most of the words tliat 
 
p. II. s. II. § 1. 223 
 
 are in general use assigned to them by the Jews, and 
 that too in the significations which are more or less 
 freqnont. In the more unusual words relating prin- 
 cipally to natural objects, they are of more authority 
 than the traditions of the Rabbins: but in discover- 
 ing primary significations they are of little use, al- 
 though in other respects Aquila endeavoured to ex- 
 press the particular meaning of words, and his re- 
 mains, consequently, are frequently useful in deter- 
 mining the meaning of words taken by themselves. — 
 But, indeed, as the best ancient versions are not on 
 all occasions guides sufficiently to be relied on, and 
 often fail the interpreter, when he requires more aid, 
 the safest of all resources is furnished by the cognate 
 dialects ; of whose employment and utility therefore 
 it is worth while to speak somewhat more fully in this 
 place. 
 
 Obs. 4. The utility of the eastern dialects, parti- 
 cularly of the Arabic, in determining the signification 
 of individual words, is various and manifold. 
 
 1. They clearly confirm numerous generally re- 
 ceived significations of verbs, nouns, and particles. 
 Those words which we produced in the beginning of 
 the former observation, are instances of this ; and there 
 are many others, besides multitudes of nouns, such as 
 IX, afat/ter, nx, a brother, tDX, a mother, Csn, a 
 father-? n- late, CdV, a day, most of the personal pro- 
 nouns also, and not a few particles of every kind, are 
 in the same circumstances ; which being in use in tlie 
 other dialects, we can be as well assured of their sig- 
 nification, as if the Hebrew were a living language at 
 this day. 
 
224 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 2. Sometimes the words of frequent use in these 
 dialects present a sense which is more unusual, and 
 much more congruous. The noun pi^f for instance, 
 commonly signifies justice, righteousness, but oj^^^j 
 is used by the Arabians in the sense of truth, which 
 signification is more adapted to Psalm lii. 5, where it 
 is opposed to "ipiy, a lie. 
 
 3. Sometimes these dialects bring back, as it were, 
 into use words which occur but very rarely, and of 
 whose signification it was judged or conjectured 
 merely from the context. Of this n'n, which oc- 
 curs only in Isaiah xi. 8, is an example, which is 
 very frequently used by i\^e Arabians in isds^ and by 
 the Syrians in jjoi in the meaning of directing, which 
 applies well to the passage. 
 
 4. There are also words of dubious and uncertain 
 signification, which are best fixed by the cognate 
 dialects. We may take as an example the word 
 *133, whose true meaning is to boil, boil over, which 
 survives in the Arabic word JiJ, and is employed by 
 the Hebrews in various ways, which have escaped 
 the notice of even the most ancient interpreters. 
 
 5. There are, besides, not a few derivatives, whose 
 primitives are not found in the very circumscribed 
 compass of the Hebrew language, such as the well- 
 known noun in the sacred volume m'jN, generally 
 used for God. But the word nbx, which occurs not 
 in Hebrew, is much used by the Arabians in the 
 sense of to fear, dread, so that the noun nibx, s^^ 
 will signify dreadful, deserving of the highest venera- 
 tion. 
 
p.ir. s.ii, § 1. 225 
 
 6. Some Hebrew words, which are sought for in 
 vain in most lexicons, may be felicitously restored by 
 the aid of these dialects — such, for instance, as DDJ, 
 'n Arabic dx^bJ) ^'^ wounded ivith a spear, and put 
 tojiight. Numb. xiv. 45 ; Deut. i. 44. 
 
 7. Lastly, The cognate dialects are highly useful 
 in investigating and detecting the primary signiiica- 
 tion of words : but, above all the others, the Arabic 
 is valuable in this way, both on account of its re- 
 markable copiousness and antiquity, and because it 
 has had excellent lexicographers, who have collected 
 its varied riches. The utility of this primary signi- 
 fication, when discovered by a properly directed 
 comparison of these dialects, is chiefly twofold : the 
 one, that by this means the various, and sometimes 
 opposite, significations of one and the same word, 
 common to the Hebrews and other Oriental nations, 
 may be reconciled ; the other, that a satisfactory 
 reason may be rendered for a peculiar Hebrew sig- 
 nification, better suited than the usual one to certain 
 passages. — Of the first sort is the word nr)K, which, 
 among the Hebrevvs, has the signification of inclina- 
 tion, propensity to, but among the Arabians (^^\ 
 means to refuse, decline. Hence, among other words, 
 is derived ::ik, (_j1, a father, p'-ix, poor, s\J\, reeds. 
 The primitive meaning of the verb is to bend oneself, 
 and to be bent like a reed : whence is derived the sig- 
 nification of assenting, and the opposite one of re- 
 fusing ; likewise the signification of a father, affec- 
 tionately inclined towards his children, and of a 
 supplicating poor man constantly bending himself 
 downwards to obtain aid ; and, finally, of a reed 
 
 Q 
 
226 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 easily hent, in which noun the clearest vestige re- 
 mains of the primary signification, which we have 
 assigned. Of the same sort is the word 1D3, of wliicli 
 we have already spoken in a former observatio?i, No. 
 2, which, referring to the primitive Arabic word 
 ■«=^j. signifying to prick, to mark hy pricking, is used 
 in the opposite senses, of that, which one, by mark- 
 ing in some way, acknotvledges and admits, or again, 
 of that, which one does not acknowledge, and refuses. — 
 Of the second kind, npi2{ affords an example, which 
 we adduced in the same place, as sometimes being 
 best interpreted by benignity. The primitive word 
 pT2{, c_j\x<»^5 is applied to what is straight, as a line. 
 Hence, for the most part, it is used by the Hebrews, 
 Araraseans, and Ethiopians, of the straight forioard 
 strictness of justice, but by the Arabians, of the 
 straight forward love of truth. But as the significa- 
 tion of straight is also, especially by the Hebrews, 
 transferred to that which is correct in morals, or to 
 the love of virtue in general, hence, it is peculiarly 
 applied to benevolence, the most esteemed virtue 
 among the Orientals: and an indication of this appli- 
 cation is even found in Arabic, where the noun 
 »ji,y*a generally signifies kindness shewn to the poor, 
 or alms : and the same noun is found in almost the 
 same sense in the Syriac dialect. 
 
 Obs. 5. In comparing these dialects, we ought to 
 proceed cautiously, and not rashly : and there are 
 certain rules which must be carefully observed, the 
 principal of which we shall briefly notice. 
 
 1. The person skilled in Oriental literature, who 
 desires to proceed rightly in illustrating any Hebrew 
 
p. II. s. II. § 1. 227 
 
 word, should, as much as possible, compare all the 
 cognate dialects: for the more dialects in which the 
 same word is foimd, the more light will be thrown 
 on the Hebrew word. But very frequently what 
 we seek will be found only in seme of them, some- 
 times only in one of them. For the most part, how- 
 ever, the Arabic and Syriac dialects will not fail us, 
 particularly the former, as being, of all the others, 
 the most cultivated, the most copious, and also a 
 living language at the present day. 
 
 2. In the comparison of each of these dialects, we 
 must attend to the ready interchange and sometimes 
 the transposition of certain letters. For not only are 
 the letters called quiescent frequently interchanged, 
 as for instance a word having x for one of its letters 
 should be compared with a similar word having "> or > 
 in place of x ; in general, too, letters pronounced 
 by the same organs, nay even y and :{ connected 
 merely by their form and not by their pronunciation, 
 are sometimes exchanged the one for the other. It 
 is not even unexampled that one Hebrew word cor- 
 responds with two Arabic — such for instance as poiu, 
 which has the significations both o^ fatness and the 
 number eight, the former of which is in Arabic 
 
 ^^ the latter .-♦.j. It is also worthy of re- 
 mark, that words, which have the second and third 
 radical similar, not unfrequently agree with those 
 which have the middle or last quiescent, as in the He- 
 brew language itself, the words nnu;, niu;, and nrr^y 
 have in common the proper signification of sinking 
 down. Lastly, certain letters are occasionally trans- 
 posed: of which we have a clear example in "ira and 
 
228 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 T"ii, j)V=» and jj-^? to cut. But we ought to he. 
 very cautious of calling in rashly this kind of com- 
 parison to our assistance, and only rely on it when 
 the greatest similitude and consonance of significa- 
 tion appears. 
 
 3. In comparing the dialects, it is not sufficient to 
 trust to dictionaries alone. For although in satisfy- 
 ing one's self as to the common use of any word, it is 
 quite safe to trust to the Arabic dictionaries of Golius 
 and Giggeius, and to those of Castello and Schaaf for 
 the Syriac : this confidence must not be equally ex- 
 tended to all the significations given by them without 
 discrimination, and particularly to the more rare 
 meanings, as it is not always immediately apparent on 
 what authority they are assigned. We are not, there- 
 fore, rashly to adopt any more unusual signification, 
 even although given in the best dictionaries of the 
 cognate dialects : but the more one has acquired for 
 himself an acquaintance with the best writers to be 
 found in the other dialects, the greater authority for 
 the different and even rarer significations of the same 
 word will he be able to produce, and even to discover 
 some which are not given in the dictionaries. 
 
 4. No signification, particularly if rare, whatever 
 jjroof we have for it, is, v ithout great caution, to be 
 obtruded on Hebrew words from another dialect. 
 For as the same Avords, in the various dialects, have 
 evidently undergone changes of signification, it might 
 easily happen that a peculiar signification may have 
 obtained in some one of these dialects which never 
 had place in the Hebrew. From the great copious- 
 ness and antiquity of the Arabic language particu- 
 
p. II. s. II. § 1. 229 
 
 larlj', it necessarily follows that not a few significa- 
 tions in process of time were attached to words, of 
 which the ancient Hebrews never once seem to have 
 thought. 
 
 5. In comparing the dialects with each other, we 
 ought carefully to attend, as much as possible, to the 
 primary signification of words. For by this means 
 words, which at first glance may not seem to agree, 
 will be brought to a coherence with each other : as 
 for instance, lyxi, to stink, and y^L» to be bold, the 
 primary signification of which is to be sharp, bitter : 
 and one will thus be able to see what secondary sig- 
 nifications most nearly approach to the primary, and 
 what recede farther from it. The former however 
 chiefly, if in any case they be suitable to the Hebrew 
 writers, though rarely, may be safely admitted with- 
 out any doubt ; of which an example is given in the 
 former observation. No. 2, in the noun pn:j which is 
 used for truth in Psalm lii. 3, plainly as the Arabic 
 (_J5»X>«? which properly expresses what is straight, 
 right ; see Obs. No. 7, of this §. So likewise the 
 word "i2,n, which has usually the signification of speak- 
 ing, sometimes more agrees with the signification of 
 laying snares (insidias struendi^ which is most close- 
 ly connected with the primary signification of piling 
 one thing above another (struendi) ; compare with it 
 the Arabic word ^^. — We have an instance in Gen. 
 xxxiv. 13. 
 
230 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 §2. 
 
 In fixing the signification of single words we 
 must attend to their grammatical nature. 
 
 Obs. I. How necessary, in all cases, it is for the 
 interpreter of the Old Testament to have studied 
 the grammar of the Hebrew language, we have al- 
 ready shewn, P. i. S. i. c. i. § 6. We therefore only 
 here speak of attending to the grammatical nature of 
 single words, which, when well knowu, has generally 
 some effect in determining the signification. For, as 
 in other languages, so in the Hebrew, there is some- 
 thing in the varied form both of verbs and the other 
 parts of speech, which either augments the significa- 
 tion, or in some way changes it. 
 
 Obs. 2. Though what we are here speaking of be not 
 obscure, it may not, however, be useless to adduce 
 some few examples. It is well known that among the 
 Hebrews, who never used prepositions to form com- 
 pound words, the verbs had different forms, or con- 
 jugations as they are sometimes called, whose par- 
 ticular signification, though not always to be insisted 
 on, ought, however, always to be attended to: to this 
 end comparison with the other dialects, but particu- 
 larly the Arabic, is highly useful, because in it there 
 is a remarkable variotj^ of conjugations in the verbs 
 extremely useful for knowing and explaining certain 
 conjugations of the Hebrew verbs. Thus the more 
 
p. II. s. II. § 2. 231 
 
 rare conjugation byxs more usual among the Arabs 
 ^cli, expresses what we call relative action, to 
 which the conjugation byxsrin, J^liu adds the 
 reciprocal action : whence npsnn for ipNSnn sig- 
 
 nifies, he presented himself to be inspected by another. 
 But as from different conjugations of the verb dif- 
 ferent forms of nouns proceeded, their force must 
 be determined from that of the conjugation ; pnii 
 
 therefore, and KZsn, if explained from the intensive 
 
 T ~ 
 
 force of the conjugation Pihhel, from which they are 
 immediately derived, the former will mean exceeding- 
 ly just and upright as man, and the latter a grievous 
 sinner, or a most ivicked man. — The word m"iX, ge- 
 nerally signifying a locust, is of another nature : its 
 primitive signification is highly multiplied, as it comes 
 from nil multiplied with n intensivum prefixed, 
 which is exceedingly common in Arabic: so that 
 locusts derive, as it were, their name from the incre- 
 dible multitude in which they assail the East. We 
 also add the word ending in ^ heemantic, which oc- 
 curs once in Lament, iv. 10, nv3?2m, (the plural of 
 ^373 m,) used of women, who by their very nature are 
 mild and compassionate. Lastly, the noun Q^^'irrxn, 
 2 Sam. xxiii. 1, which we consider to be a noun of 
 exactly the same form, is not there derived from 
 pinx,) last, but from ••aiinx, to be reckoned among 
 the last, which is found no where else, but is used 
 here of the words of David, belonging from their sub- 
 ject to a period later than that of which the historian 
 was giving an account. 
 
232 PRINCIPLES OF INTEKPRETATION. 
 
 §3. 
 
 As it is accordino^ to the (jenius of the Orien- 
 tal languages in general, and of the Hebrew 
 language in particular, that most of their words, 
 and even those which are in most frequent use, 
 admit of more significations than one, an inter- 
 preter must carefully endeavour to ascertain 
 which of the various significations ought to be 
 preferred in each particular passage. 
 
 Obs. 1. Although we may hold it as indisputable, 
 that the meaning of any Hebrew word is not to be 
 determined from the context alone, yet, however, we 
 do not deny that the context has very great weight 
 in determining the signification, provided it agree to 
 the words taken separatel}^ For the significations of 
 the same word are very often numerous : consequently 
 one will not properly explain its meaning in any one 
 passage, who does not rightly attend to the connec- 
 tion of the discourse in wliich it occurs. But if, in 
 interpreting any Greek or Latin writer, great M'eight 
 is to be laid on the context ; how much greater must 
 be allowed to it in an ancient Hebrew writer, who 
 employs an oriental language in which there are 
 many more differences of significations belonging to 
 most words, than in Greek and Latin ? How much 
 then the context in the Hebrew language may at 
 
p. II, s. II. § 3. 233 
 
 times avail us in fixing the vague and uncertain signi- 
 fication of a very common word, it may be proper, 
 although no one disputes the fact, to demonstrate by 
 one example. The noun blp, of most extensive use, 
 occurs in Genesis iii. 8, which bj^ some is there un- 
 derstood to mean thunders as that is sometimes called 
 the voice of Jehovah ; but is by most understood of 
 the voice of Jehovah speaking, which our first pa- 
 rents heard about the evening, after they had vio- 
 lated the divine command. But there is nothing in 
 the passage to lead us to think of thunder — indeed 
 the signification of articulate voice appears much 
 more congruous with the general strain of the sense. 
 As God, hoAvever, is not said to have spoken to 
 Adam, till after he had hid himself on hearing God, 
 and as God is not described as speaking, but "jbnnTO, 
 walking through the trees of the garden, we consider 
 it to be more natural and consonant to understand it 
 of the sound or noise of God approaching in the 
 human form, as he was accustomed to do. In the 
 same manner, therefore, Adam is to be understood in 
 the 10th verse, / heard the sound of thee (not thy 
 voice), or / heard thee in the garden approaching. 
 That the word may be understood in this sense, 
 which scarcely any one will deny, is however quite 
 clear from 2 Sam. v. 24, where m'il bip means 
 the sound of steps, or the noise which indicates some 
 one approaching. 
 
 Ohs. 2. Sometimes it is not so difficult for one 
 who is attentive immediately to determine, which of 
 the various significations is most to be preferred in 
 a passage. Thus the verb nay, whose primary sig- 
 
234 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 nification is to flow, when employed of the flow of 
 speech, is not only applied to him who answers 
 another, but also to him who begins to speak, as ap- 
 pears from Job. iii. 2, as well as from other passages. 
 — The noun C3''2nD, whose primarj^ signification is, 
 persons approaching, is employed generally of the 
 immediate ministers of God in sacred things, or 
 priests ; but as from its nature it may be applied to 
 the immediate servants of a king, it is so used in 2 
 Sam. viii. 18, as appears from the context. Lastly, 
 as tlie most usual name of God nibx, properly sig- 
 nifies dreadful, next to he reverenced, it has many 
 more general applications: and is applied to the ma- 
 gistrates of the people most deserving of honour, 
 Exod. xxi. 6, xxii. 27 ; 1 Sam. ii. 25 ; it is also used 
 in speaking of certain beings more excellent than 
 man, Psalm viii. 6 ; likewise of a form particularly 
 venerable, 1 Sam. xsviii. 13; and in Psalm xlv. 7, 8, 
 the context almost requires that it be applied to the 
 divine nature of the Messiah. — These examples then, 
 and many others easily producible, clearly shew the 
 use of the context in fixing the signification, of which 
 the words admit. 
 
 Ohs. 3. It, however, not rarely happens, that it 
 does not so readily appear which of the various sig- 
 nifications of any word should be preferred. And 
 in this variety of significations, difticulties sometimes 
 exist of that nature, which render it scarcely possible 
 to lay down any certain rules by which they may be 
 altogether overcome. Nevertheless, there are not a 
 few means within our power, which, if rightly em- 
 ployed, will be found very useful to the interpreter : 
 
p. II. s. II. § 3. 235 
 
 the principal of which we shall briefly state, confirm- 
 ing them for the most part by examples, when it 
 seems requisite. 
 
 1. Although by far the greater part of the words 
 in the Old Testament are not generally employed in 
 their primary but secondary significations, sometimes, 
 however, the primary sense is employed, particularly 
 by the poets, or is alluded to. To give one instance 
 of the former kind well adapted to our purpose, we 
 shall take the very common noun npTit, which occurs 
 in several significations — in Psalm v. 9, it may sig- 
 nify either the righteousness of God, or his benignity, 
 or the virtuous conduct prescribed by him : each of 
 which significations seems so agreeable to the context, 
 that it may fairly be doubted which of them was in 
 the mind of the poet. But when we call to mind 
 that its projjer signification is that of straightness, we 
 immediately perceive that this meaning alone is ap- 
 plicable, and that we must translate the passage thus. 
 Lead me into thy straight way, and thus it answers to 
 wliat follows. Smooth thy path before me; and the 
 straight ivay of God may be understood of his pro- 
 vidence over men, through which all things succeed 
 according to their wishes. — An example of the other 
 kmd may be found in Prov. xxviii. 1, where the 
 word n:3:i occurs in its secondary and common signi- 
 fication of confidence ; as this, however, seems not to 
 come up to the point of the sentiment, we can scarce- 
 ly doubt that the poet had regard to its primary sig- 
 nification of resting securely on the ground ; and, as- 
 suming this signification, the whole force of the sen- 
 timent will be more clearly perceived. 
 
236 PRINCIPLR3 OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 2. In order that we may, among the different se- 
 condary significations, make a proper choice, we shall 
 be often greatly aided by the parallelism of the sen- 
 tences, which we shall shew in its proper place to be 
 a peculiarity of Hebrew poetry. In Psalm xxiv. 5, 
 for example, we may gather, that the noun npT2f, of 
 which we have just spoken, ought to be understood 
 in the meaning of benignity, from the former hemis- 
 tich, where na'ii, blessing or favour, answers to it : 
 while again, in Prov. xi. 5, the noun nriyn, moral 
 depravity, opposed to it in the latter hemistich, leads 
 us to translate it virtue. 
 
 3. If there be any ambiguity apparent in the use of 
 a word, it is sometimes laid hold of by the author 
 himself, so that he may in reality wish to conjoin the 
 twofold signification of the word. This frequently 
 happens in other languages, when riddles or witti- 
 cisms, and pointed sayings are produced — but among 
 the Orientals, who are highly enamoured of such 
 plays of the fancy, is exceedingly common. Ex- 
 amples occasionally occur among the Hebrews, par- 
 ticularly in their proverbs : in these, therefore, we 
 not only allow, but even consider it necessary to ad- 
 mit a double sense, but a very different double sense 
 from that which we formerly considered inadmissible. 
 
 4. There are also some words, whose most usual 
 signification is a general idea comprehending various 
 particular ideas, often in the vague, and not sufficient- 
 ly definite Hebrew manner of thinking and speaking. 
 When such occur, it is highly useful carefully to attend 
 to the most extended idea, and to explain it by the con- 
 text by which it is particularly restricted. Of this 
 
p. II. s. II. § 3. 237 
 
 kind peculiarly is the noun rrTODn, which, in its ge- 
 neral use, is applied to one who shews himself en- 
 dowed with reason and understanding ; but, in its 
 peculiar application, is employed with regard to the 
 divine government of human affairs. Job xi. 6, xii. 13, 
 XV. 8 ; Prov. viii. 22 — 31 ; also of the perspicacity of 
 the human intellect in investigating subjects, Job xii. 
 2 ; and of prudence and cunning, 2 Sam. xx. 22, 
 compared with xiv. 2 ; and likewise of probity of 
 manners, which is the best demonstration of human 
 wisdom in common life, Deut. iv. 6 ; Prov. viii. 1 — 
 21. 32—36. 
 
 5. The comparison of parallel passages is sometimes 
 of the greatest utility. When we assert this, we do 
 not speak of those passages in which the same word 
 occurs. From passages of this kind, indeed, com- 
 pared with each other, the various significations of a 
 word may be attained, and admirably confirmed : but 
 its signification, in particular passages, can Only be de- 
 termined by consulting their contexts. But we now 
 speak of passages in which the same thing is con- 
 veyed to us by a different word : here, however, we 
 must carefully ascertain whether the same thing ex- 
 actly be intended or not. Thus, what we have said 
 in Obs. ], of the noun ca^^no, 2 Sam. viii. 18, not 
 signifying priests, but the immediate servants of the 
 king, as appearing from the context, is confirmed in- 
 dubitably from the parallel passage, 1 Chron. xviii. 
 17, where those who are the same persons spoken of 
 in the other passage, are called "[^nn T'b D^Jiyx'i, the 
 chief servants of the king. So likewise those who, in 
 Dan. ii. 27, are called ]n?:i, cutters, are the same with 
 
238 PRINCIPLES CF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 those whom Isaiah xlvii. 13, calls £:3"'7D12; >~inrr, whose 
 primary meaning is cutters of heaven, from iirr, in 
 Arabic yj^ to cut, i. e. astrologers, who distri- 
 buted, and, as it were, cut the starry heaven into 
 different portions or constellations. Both these in- 
 stances are almost trite : but we shall produce another, 
 from which it has appeared to us of how great value 
 the right consideration of parallel passages may be. 
 The inhabitants of heaven, who are of a superior 
 nature to man, are designated in the book of Job by 
 various names, and among the rest by that of holt/ 
 ones ; which one can scarcely doubt, who compares 
 the remarkably parallel passages in chap. iv. 18, and 
 XV. 15. We, therefore, think that the same beings are 
 spoken of, (chap. v. verse 1.) : we are even persuaded 
 that one of these heavenly inhabitants is mentioned un- 
 der the name of a saint or holy one, in vi. 10, or the same 
 heavenly spirit whom Eliphaz feigns to have appeared 
 to himself, iv. 12, &c — This example then shews how 
 useful it sometimes is, that one should carefiiUy at- 
 tend to the style of writing peculiar to an author, or 
 to what is generally called the peculiar nsus lo- 
 quendi. 
 
 6. This careful consideration of those things which 
 are peculiar to a writer, affords likewise other valuable 
 fruits to an interpreter : which we shall now endea- 
 vour to demonstrate from tlie same author of the 
 book of Job, whom, indeed, we have observed to 
 have occasionally something peculiar in his manner 
 of writing, which being attended to, may conduce to 
 the explanation of some passages. This writer, then, 
 has more than once added the letter x at one time, 
 
p. II. s. II. § 3. 239 
 
 and suppressed it at another : this being observed, 
 the word bnx^ then, chap. xxv. 5, which, from the 
 
 collation of some manuscripts, seems to be the true 
 reading, will be for bn> from bbn, in the sense which 
 is particularly adapted to the passage ; he hath not 
 even declared the moon splendent: but again, ^in in 
 chap xxxi. 35, which has caused a great difficulty, 
 we think has been written for '•"ixn, my desire. 
 
 7. Lastly, we recommend to the interpreter to 
 pay every attention to the subject of the writing, 
 and the age of the writer : because the more con- 
 siderately he does this, the more frequently will he 
 discover rightly the signification of the words, even 
 in those instances vvhere the signification is unusual. 
 Two examples will shew what advantage may occa- 
 sionally be derived from this. The first is from 
 1 Sam. xiii. 3, 7, where C3>'i:irn, used by the Is- 
 raelites themselves, is not the proper name of the 
 Hebrews, such as it was among themselves in the 
 former ages of their state, and as it was for a long 
 time afterwards among the neighbouring nations, 
 compare 1 Sam. iv. 6, 9, but what originally it was, 
 an appellative, and so applied to the Israelites who 
 dwelt beyond Jordan. The second example is from 
 Job xl. 23, where the mention of Jordan, a Canaan- 
 itish river, in the description of tlie river horse of the 
 Nile, and that, too, by a very ancient writer, who 
 did not dwell in the Canaanitish country, is quite 
 incongruous. But in this passage, pT* written with- 
 out rr prefixed, is, as we doubt not, an appellative 
 applied to a river jloioing ivitli a great stream of 
 water, from n-i> to descend, and is the same with its 
 
240 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 synonym "irr3, in the former hemistich of the verse, 
 or a great river, and is consequently the Nile itself. 
 
 §4. 
 
 That we may understand the meaning of whole 
 phrases, regard must not only be had to the sig- 
 nification of the individual words, but, in a par- 
 ticular manner, to their construction, or syntax, 
 as it is called. 
 
 Ohs. 1. As in all languages, an interpreter ouglit 
 carefully to attend to the structure of the words in 
 the author whom he expounds, so in the Old Testa- 
 ment writers this is particularly requisite, in propor- 
 tion as their manner of speaking, arising from their 
 very distant age, from the difference of their climate, 
 and from the genius of the nation, differs from what 
 we observe in the modern and European languages, 
 nay, in the ancient Greek and Roman languages. 
 Should one then not be sufficiently versant in the 
 syntax of the Hebrew language, however much he 
 may be acquainted with the etymology and proper 
 signification of the particular words, he must fre- 
 quently fall into error in explaining whole phrases. 
 
 Ohs. '2. For thus understanding the construction of 
 Hebrew words, so as to derive therefrom great ad- 
 vantage in interpreting, the constant perusal of the 
 books of the Old Testament is of the utmost use. 
 
p. II. s. II. § 4. 241 
 
 For although the number of these books is very much 
 circumscribed, it is, however, sufficient for determin- 
 ing and satisfactorily fixing its whole syntactic na- 
 ture ; and, indeed, we have much fuller means af- 
 forded us for this purpose, than for investigating and 
 developing the proper meaning and power of indivi- 
 dual words. The books, indeed, are by different au- 
 thors, and of different ages : but the manner of con- 
 struction is observed to be almost always extremely 
 similar, and in the great uniformity of the language it 
 has undergone very little change through the process 
 of time. The very great difference even between 
 the simple prose style and the more sublime and poetic 
 diction, which is in genera! more abrupt, elliptical, and 
 difficult, causes no very remarkable diversity in the 
 genius of the construction. 
 
 Obs. 3. The comparison of the cognate dialects, 
 and particularly the Arabic, which is so useful in fix- 
 ing the signification of individual words, is by no 
 means useless for illustrating the structure of the 
 Hebrew language : and the more any one is well ac- 
 quainted with these dialects, the more will he under- 
 stand the whole nature of the Hebrew manner of ex- 
 pression, the more easily will he explain it, and the 
 better will he be enabled to enter into the more un- 
 usual Hebrew constructions, and to establish, illustrate, 
 and place them beyond doubt. 
 
 Obs. 4. Out of many examples which we might 
 ])roduce, two may suffice for our purpose, in confirm- 
 ing what we have alluded to in the former observa- 
 tions. Instances have occurred, where persons not 
 sufficiently skilled in an accurate knowledge of the 
 
 K 
 
242 PRINCIPLES OF INTEUI'Ltr/rATION. 
 
 syntax have supposed an error to exist in passaaes 
 where there was really no such thing, and have, in 
 consequence, disputed the received reading without 
 any just ground. Thus in Ps. ix. 7, the expression 
 nj^n i:D^^t nSK, has vehemently offended many ; but 
 here the separate pi'onoun is joined to the affixed pro- 
 noun for the sake of increasing the force of the ex- 
 pression, so that it ought to be translated thus. The 
 memory of them^ even of these very men, has perished : 
 and a similar construction is far from being unusual 
 in Arabic. — There are some constructions in Hebrew 
 not difficult indeed, but not siifficipntly in general at- 
 tended to, which, however, are worthy of notice. Of 
 this sort is that, in which two synonymous verbs or 
 nouns, or at least allied in their signification, are so 
 joined without a conjunction, as that the connection 
 may be of a closer kind — a construction very fre- 
 quent among the Arabians. Thus Noah is called a 
 man a'lTDn '^'^'^'Ji just and perfect, Gen. vi. 9. The 
 poet, in Psalm x. 3, speaks, as it seems to us, in the 
 same manner regarding the wicked man. And rapa- 
 cious of gain as he is, mni yKS "j^i he bids adieu to 
 and despises Jehovah. 
 
 Gbs. 5. We may here also take the opportunity of 
 remarking the peculiar use and syntactical force of 
 some formulae peculiar to verbs, which can be de- 
 termined only by the context. For as the forms of 
 the tenses among the Hebrews are in their own na- 
 ture indefinite, it can only be discovered by the con- 
 text what relation they have to time : and here there 
 is something which is occasionally not generally ob- 
 served. Fcr instance, the form of the verb which 
 
p. II. s. II. § 5. 243 
 
 has the name of the ^?'e^e?'//(? among the grammarians, 
 but is equally aopis-og as that other form which is 
 called thefuture, is to be understood, according to a 
 well known rule of syntax, in the meaning of either 
 the future or imperative, when it is joined with either 
 a preceding future or imperative by the prefixed con- 
 junction. But as it has been properly remarked, that 
 the signification of the future tense must sometimes be 
 given to it, even when the conjunction is not employed 
 — why then should it not sometimes require the signifi- 
 cation of the imperative when the conjunction is not 
 present, although this has been less observed ? We 
 therefore have no doubt but that n"iiy JOSiyw, Ps. vii. 
 7, should be translated, command judgment. It like- 
 wise seems to us that this idiom is found in some other 
 passages ; as in Ps. iv. 2 ; xxii. 22 ; Ixxi. 3. 
 
 §3. 
 
 As in some otiier languages, so particularly in 
 the Hebrew that very ancient Eastern lan- 
 guage, the style is very often tropical and figu- 
 rative : consequently, the nature and genius of 
 this species of style must be carefully attended 
 to by an interpreter of the Old Testament. 
 
 Ohs. 1. When treating here of the tropical man- 
 ner of speaking, we do not allude to that figurative 
 siirnification of words which is more common than the 
 
244 paiNciPLES OF interpretation. 
 
 proper signification. For in the Hebrew language, 
 numerous words from necessity are often used in a 
 figurative sense, and some even have so deviated from 
 the proper signification, that it seems ahnost to have 
 faUen into desuetude : an example of which we have 
 in the very common verb yn"", whose usual significa- 
 tion is to knoiv, whilst its proper signification is to 
 place, to lay up, hence to lay vp in mind ; compare 
 the Arabic word ci»- This species of trope is of 
 much greater extent, and belongs rather to etymo- 
 logy, and to the understanding and explication of par- 
 ticular words, than to our present object, when we 
 are considering the figurative and tropical style in 
 general. This, then, of which we now treat, is not 
 so much to be attributed to necessity, but rather must 
 be derived, partly from the disposition of men little 
 cultivated, being chiefly moved by objects affecting 
 the senses, partly, however, also from the desire of 
 delighting or persuading. For the imperfect, vague, 
 and not accurately defined manner of speaking among 
 mankind was such, that they often put the eff"ect for 
 the cause, or the cause for the eftisct, a part for the 
 whole, or tlie whole for the part, and made many 
 other such changes, which are generally classed under 
 inetonomy and synecdoche. For although the more 
 cultivated nations did not altogether abstain from 
 these, yet they are observed to have made much less 
 frequent use of them than those who were less culti- 
 vated. But as the very nature of these figures is to 
 present things to the senses, therefore men are more 
 prone to emploj' them the more frequently in propor- 
 tion as they happen to hv more disposed to be atiected 
 
p. II. s. 11. § 5. 245 
 
 by things presented to the senses : and they are used 
 frequently b}^ men in all ages and of every nation, 
 especially, however, by poets, both for adding strength 
 to their expressions, and also for affording delight. 
 It will, therefore, not be improper to make a few brief 
 remarks upon them. 
 
 Obs. 2. The Hebrews were fond of a style full of 
 tropes and figures of various kinds ; and their poets 
 indulged greatly the luxuriancy of their imagination 
 in the employment of them. But even in prose, the 
 more simple style used in common life, tropes were 
 much employed by them. And in treating here of 
 these tropes and figures, we have to observe, that there 
 is in them a certain degree of similitude between two 
 things which may be placed in different lights, and 
 consequently represented by diflferent words. If the 
 similitude be directly pointed out, it is called com- 
 parison ; if there be no direct mark of the comparison, 
 and if at the same time it be more brief, it is called a 
 metaphor ; if it be continued through a long and con- 
 nected description, it is an allegory ; if it represent a 
 feigned story, it is a parable ; if the action of the nar- 
 ration be transferred from man to the Deity, it is 
 called anthropopathy ; if any thing peculiar to men 
 be attributed to the lower animals, or to inanimate 
 things, or even to virtues and vices, as if those things, 
 which are destitute of the properties of real persons, 
 could really be endued with their nature, it is called 
 prosopopeia, or, personification . 
 
 Obs. 3. No one need wonder that the most of tlies<^ 
 figures of speech are very common in all the Hebrew 
 writers, when we recollect that the ancient Hebrews 
 ivere strongly excited by sensible objects ; that they 
 
246 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPHETATION. 
 
 retained nuicli of the primitive infantile simplicity of 
 n)an, particularly in their original state down to the 
 Babylonish captivity, and that they lived under an 
 eastern climate, where the imagination is almost al- 
 v/ays lively and fervid. The more one attends to 
 these circumstances, the more easily will he compre- 
 hend the cause why the Hebrev/ poets in particular 
 sliew greater boldness in the use of these figures than 
 would be easily tolerated in the present da}^ and not 
 unfrequently, by their figurative language, exaggerate 
 things, and emplo}^ an hyperbolical manner of ex- 
 pressing themselves. 
 
 Obs. 4. The Hebrews took their tropes and images 
 from those things principally, by which they were 
 most accustomed to be affected. They had therefore 
 different sources of these images, from which they 
 supplied themselves at pleasure. Most frequently 
 they derived them from natural objects : and there 
 were no objects in heaven or in earth, nor in the va- 
 rious animals and different products and plan's of the 
 soil ; nothing, in a word, which offered itself to their 
 view, which they did not convert to their use, that 
 they might the better express their thoughts to others 
 and convey them to their feelings. There are no 
 images which thoy more frequently employ' than those 
 which are taken from light and darkness, which th.eir 
 poets vary in infinite ways, and often shew in them 
 great boldness, luxuriance, and licence of imagina- 
 tion ; so that even Isaiah himself (xxx. 23,) that 
 most cultivated poot, in describing the promised feli- 
 city, paints the moon shining like the sun in his meri- 
 dian brightness, and the sun increased sevenfold in the 
 splendour of his light. — Numerous images again are 
 
p. II. s. It. § 5. 247 
 
 taken from common life, and particularly from agri- 
 culture and the attendance on cattle ; which, although 
 in their own nature they are extremely simple, and 
 majf sometimes appear to us low, are, however, la- 
 boured by the best poets to admirable purpose, and 
 in the most excellent manner. B}- an image of this 
 kind Isaiah describes the external nations trodden 
 down like corn in the tiu'eshing floor, and winnowed 
 by tlie Israelites, (xli. 15, 16;) and Job compares 
 the admirable care, with which he was formed by the 
 supreme artificer of nature in the womb of his mother, 
 with the care, with which milk is coagulated for the 
 formation of cheese, (x. 19.) — Their history, also, 
 but particularly tiieir religion, supplied some images 
 to the Hebrews. Of the former kind is the descrip- 
 tion of a ruined country, by images taken from the 
 destroyed Sodomitic region. Isaiah xxxiv. 8 — JO. 
 Of the latter kind we shall bring one example, that 
 of Psalms xxxviii. and li., quoted by us on a for- 
 mer occasion, p. 198, pertaining to the peculiar ge- 
 nius and object of the Israelitic sacred rites, where 
 David has compared the turpitude of his heinous 
 crime with the loathsome disease of leprosy, and the 
 
 great care with which the leper was to be purified 
 
 Finally, there are not wanting images taken from 
 fictions, such as we designate by the name of fdiles, 
 with which the poets were particulaily delighted : 
 but of these we shall speak more conveniently in 
 another place. 
 
 Ohs. 5. For understanding the nature, force, and 
 variety, of tropical language, those books are not in- 
 deed useless, which treat purposely of the tropes and 
 
248 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 figures particularly occurring in the sacred scriptures. 
 But although one should be completely master of 
 even the best of these books, and wei'e able to enu- 
 merate in order, and to call all the various tropes by 
 name ; and thus, when any of these tropes was pro- 
 posed to him, could immediate)}', like a most diligent 
 scholar in a rhetorical school, by the aid of a faithful 
 and prompt memory, define it, and assign to it its 
 proper designation : still he ouglit not, however, in con- 
 sequence, to be esteemed to be one who fully perceives 
 the force and genius of tropical lansrnage, and the 
 nature of every image ; nor would such an one easily 
 explain what is the power of each, and how it is 
 adapted, and prooer for the author's purpose. For, 
 in the same manner as the structure of the Hebrew 
 language is much better learned by use and exercise 
 than from the rules of grammarians merely, so the 
 diligent and assiduous reading of the Old Testament 
 is far more useful in attaining an understanding of the 
 tropical language of the Hebrews than the best pre- 
 cepts of the Rhetoricians. For this purpose, there- 
 fore, the reading of the Old Testament is highly to 
 be recommended — because the more any one is ver- 
 sant in it, the more will lie contract a familiarity' with 
 the tropical nature of the language which is found in 
 it, and the more easily will he insinuate himself into 
 its inmost recesses. — But farther, it is very useful, 
 nay even necessary, to gain a knowledge of the 
 things themselves, from which these images are prin- 
 cipally derived. For without this, no one can to- 
 lerably explain what is their force and signification 
 
 Besides, in order tliat one may form a conect and 
 
p. II. s. ir. § 5. 249 
 
 true judgment concerning many of the Hebrew tropes, 
 it is requisite to pay particular attention to the man- 
 ners of the nation, and to their ways of thinking and 
 acting so very unhke to ours : because if this is not 
 done, not a few images which occur in their very 
 best poets will appear to him less apt, or not suffi- 
 ciently forcible, nay, sometimes not becoming or de- 
 corous. — Lastly, as the writers in the cognate dia- 
 lects afford much aid to the better understanding of 
 the structure of the Hebrew language, so likewise 
 the other Avriters, in a similar style in that language, 
 but especially the Arabic authors, such as have par- 
 ticularly distinguished themselves in the more sub- 
 lime and poetic style, are of no small advantage in 
 leading to the understanding and explication of the 
 tropical diction of the Hebrews. For although very 
 many of these are by far more daring and less pure 
 than the Hebrews in the use of images and figures, 
 and do not altogether derive them from the same 
 sources as they do : the similarity, however, of the 
 tropical diction in both is as great, as we might ex- 
 pect in nations living under the same climate, and 
 the colour of whose minds, so to speak, was so much 
 alike, although not agreeing otherwise in their insti- 
 tutions and fortunes, in which, indeed, in many in- 
 stances, they M-ere exceedingly unlike. 
 
 Obs. 6. In distinguishing tropical language, and 
 in discriminating it from that which we must under- 
 stand in the proper sense, he will succeed best who 
 rightly attends both to the scope of the passage, to 
 the age of the writer, and to the nature of the things 
 treated of, and who is actuated by no other wish 
 
250 PRINCIPLES OF INTEUPKETATION. 
 
 than that of arriving at tlie meaninj^ of tlie author. — 
 If tho subject be historical, and not treated in a poeti- 
 cal but historical manner, tilings are, for the most 
 part, described in the most simple language, and there 
 are no other figures employed except those which 
 are frequently used in common life, and therefore 
 quite easily iniderstood. But that things of this 
 nature are often amplified and adorned by various 
 figures and images by poets, we need scarceh' re- 
 mark : and, indeed, v. hat the difference is, even in 
 the same writer, and in the same subject, between 
 history and poetry, very clearly appears in the histo- 
 rical account of the passage of the Red Sea by the 
 Israelites, and of the overwhelming of the Egyptian 
 army, given in Exod. xiv. and the poetical account 
 Exod. XV. But it deserves to be remarked, however, 
 that not only do the speeches written in prose in the 
 historical books abound in more images and tropes 
 for the sake of adding greater force to the argument, 
 and for expressing more strongly the feelings of those 
 speaking, but likewise that certain particular things, 
 intended to affect the mind more strongly, are clothed 
 in a loftier and more figurative style : of which par- 
 ticular instances are found in the giving of the law at 
 Sinai, Exod. xix. iS, 19, in the celebrated battle of 
 Joshua successfully prolonged in consequence of his 
 prayers, Josh. x. 11 — 14, and in tlie miracle of the 
 prophet Elijah carried away to heaven, 2 Kings ii. 
 11, 12. — Nay even, in the most ancient of all histo- 
 rical writings, which are contained in the first part of 
 the book of Genesis, more things are related in a 
 figurative manner, than ara found in those parts of less 
 
p. II. s. II. § 3. 251 
 
 antiquity : and the cause of this must be sought for in 
 the genius of this very remote antiquity, because 
 such was the manner of speaking among the first of 
 mankind, living as it were in a state of childhood, as 
 being particularly delighted with figures and images : 
 and therefore it is not m ithout reason that we have 
 said that careful attention ought to be paid to the age 
 of a writer. — Farther, there is no one who will not 
 readily acknowledge, that the nature of the things 
 treated of, must be particularly regarded. And here, 
 innumerable examples immediately occur, in which 
 the sacred writers themselves speak of God either 
 after the manner of man, or exhibit him so speaking ; 
 and that suc'.i should frequently be the case" in both 
 the historical and poetical writings of every age, the 
 very nature of the Supreme Deity, which is not com- 
 prehensible by man, and requires to be brought down 
 in some manner to the human understanding, renders 
 absolutely necessary. That more frequent, and also 
 more remarkable examples occur in the most ancient 
 writings, must be attributed partly to a nearer in- 
 tercourse of God with men, to whom he occasion- 
 ally appeared in a human form, but must principally 
 be accounted for from the circumstances of that re- 
 mote antiquity to which we have already alluded. — 
 Besides, the context which is most usefully ap])lied 
 to defining the sense of particular words, is likewise 
 of the greatest advantage in enabling us to distinguish 
 tropical language; and from it a sagacious and well 
 instructed interpreter, for the most part, will bo able 
 fully to collect and to explain the author's meaning. 
 It will suffice to adduce one example of this. That 
 
252 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 wisdom which is introduced, speaking in Proverbs viii. 
 22 — 31, is nothing else but the virtue which is gene- 
 rally called by this name in the book of Proverbs. 
 It is there, by a poetic and oriental image, introduced 
 as a person who is the inseparable companion of 
 God, and who offers himself to men as an affection- 
 ate counsellor, verses 32 — 36; ix. 1 — 11, with which 
 compare iii. 13 — 20 ; iv. 5 — 9. We have selected 
 this example, because not a few of the ancient theo- 
 logians, from not attending at all to the context, were 
 of opinion that not a fictitious but a real person was 
 described as the continual companion of God ; namely, 
 that person who, in the beginning of the Gospel of 
 John, is called the Xoyoc. This absurd interpretation, 
 adopted among Christians from the desire of defend- 
 ing by every means theological opinions, was also 
 current among the Jews, from the Pharisaic super- 
 stition urging too far the proper signification of the 
 words ; and from the same cause the}' have adopted 
 the opinion, that in Exod. xiii. 8 — 10, 16; Dent. vi. 
 4 — 9 ; xi. 18 — 20, they are ordered to write some 
 portions of the divine law on slips of parchment, and 
 to bind them on their forehead and arms, and to tie 
 them to the door-posts of their houses, when, in fact, 
 if they had been actuated only by the desire of un- 
 derstanding and explaining the precept according to 
 the mind of the legislator, they would have easily 
 perceived that the highest and most assiduous atten- 
 tion to the divine laws was described in that figura- 
 tive language which presents, as it were, objects to 
 the senses. 
 
 Obs. 7. Lastly, we may make a remark or two on 
 
p. 11. s. 11. § 5. 253 
 
 the manner in which tropical language should be in- 
 terpreted. And here we shall observe generally, in 
 order not to interfere with what must afterwards he 
 attended to when we treat of the interpretation of 
 the poets, who are wont to be much delighted with 
 this kind of writing, that we ought only to seek for 
 that in images and figures, which the author intended 
 to signify by them, and ought not to assign to them 
 any other meaning than what can be fairly shewn to 
 have been in his mind : in which one will more 
 readily succeed, the better he has been prepared by 
 the auxiliary studies, and the more he has endeavour- 
 ed to transfer himself into the situation of the writer. 
 This rule, indeed, holds in the interpretation of all 
 kinds of writings, but especially in the case of the 
 Hebrew writers, who indulge even to luxuriance in 
 the use of images, figures, and comparisons, and often 
 carry them to the highest pitch,^ so that he who may 
 wish to apply and accommodate each of their parts 
 to the subject in hand, will generally depart widely 
 from the true meaning of the author. But we are 
 particularly anxious that this rule be scrupulously at- 
 tended to in the explication of the allegories and pa- 
 rables which occur in the Old Testament; of which 
 the nature is not much dissimilar, unless that in the 
 latter more than in the former the subject matter has 
 more of action in it, and that too occasional!}' less re- 
 moved from historicn.1 truth. Such in particular is 
 that most admirable parable, by which Nathan the 
 prophet endeavoured to bring David to a sense of 
 
 * III the origi;;al. " easque saepe mirificeexor;ianc." 
 
254 PPaNCIPLES OF interpuetation. 
 
 the crime which he had committed, 2 Sam. xii. 1 — 6. 
 This parable, setting forth a fictitious case framed so 
 simi'ar to a real one, tliat the king could not doubt 
 that a true cause was brought before him for judg- 
 ment, must be interpreted agreeably to the sole ob- 
 ject of the author, which was to endeavour to show 
 clearly to David, not aware of his purpose, the atro- 
 city of liis crime ; and not by cutting it down as it 
 were into minute portions and particles, and com- 
 paring each of these portions with those of the real 
 facts. And should one imagine that this, which is 
 proper to be avoided in explaining the meaning of 
 parables, is allowed to him in interpj'eting allegories, 
 he may indeed shew a sort of ingenuity, but w ill not 
 deserve the praise of being accounted a just and cor- 
 rect interpreter. The longest and most elaborate of 
 all the allegories of the Old Testament, which repre- 
 sents the Jewish people under the image of an adul- 
 terous woman (Ezek. xvi.), affoixls, indeed, ample 
 materials to an interpreter who indulges in the spe- 
 cious fancies of imagination ; but it has no other 
 meaning according to the real intention of the au- 
 thor, however much he varies and dwells upon this 
 image, except that the Jewish people, who had. 
 shamefully perverted the divine blessing of that pure 
 religion by which alone they were distinguished, had 
 incurred the penalty of the severest punishment. 
 
p. II. s. II. § 6. 255 
 
 §6. 
 
 The lan;^uiige of the Hebrew books, particu- 
 larly where it is figurative, has very frequently 
 a certain peculiar force, which must not be ne- 
 glected by an interpreter. But, at the same 
 time, it ought to be carefully guarded against, 
 that we do not suppose more or gre&tev emphasis, 
 as they are called, in words or phrases, than 
 were intended by the M'riters tliemsclves. 
 
 Obs. 1. As the Orientals g-enerally, mors strongly 
 affected by their sensations, and naturally endowed 
 with more vehement feelings, are accustomed to ex- 
 press these feelings and affections of their minds by 
 certain external signs, and particularly by their lan- 
 guage, so no one can doubt but that the Hebrews 
 possessed this in common with them. There is, it)- 
 deed, an admirable force of diction in most of their 
 poems : and this must not only be ascribed to the 
 subjects on which they are employed, but also to the 
 style itself, to the tropes and figures also, and to 
 the structure of their language itself, which is excel- 
 lently adapted to express, and, as it were, to paint 
 the feelings of the mind. Nay, even when writin"- 
 prose, if their minds are affected more strongly than 
 usual, this appears either in the structure of the words, 
 or by tiie addition of the paragogic letters, as they 
 are called, or by the accent differently placed, and 
 
236 PRINCIPLES OF INTEKPRETATION. 
 
 consequently by certain changes induced on tlie words 
 themselves. An interpreter, therefore, ought not to 
 neglect these, or other things of a siniihu' nature, lest 
 he should ditninish the natural force of the words. 
 
 Ohs. 2. But should any one wish to refer to the 
 head of e/nphasis, such circumstances as we have just 
 alluded to, he may certainly do so if he understands 
 by the term emphasis, as is frequently done, what we 
 generally denominate strength or weight of expres- 
 sion. Eynphasis, however, strictly so called, is un- 
 derstood to exist, when to any word or expression, 
 beside the signification which it generally has, is con- 
 joined some other idea, which adds to it a peculiar 
 force. Thus the verb r^^'n, to live, is frequently used 
 to express a happy life ; and the verb yis to know, 
 is applied either to that knowledge which implies 
 in it a benignant care, or to that knowledge with 
 which is conjoined a most immediate sense of merited 
 punishment, or lastly, to that knowledge which ex- 
 presses at the same time decorously, the conjugal 
 conjunction. — The context will readily point out to 
 an attentive reader, not unacquainted with the Hebrew- 
 idiom, emphases of this sort. 
 
 Obs. 3. But the al)sui'd and minute industry of 
 many of the Eabbins on the one hand, and a certain 
 excessive officiousness of not a few Christians, out of 
 a mistaken zeal for piety,* on the other, have infinitely 
 multiplied these and other kinds of emphases, and 
 hav(! often introduced them where the authors did 
 
 * 111 tlie original, " iiimii* — Christianorum sedulitas, pieta- 
 tis nomine non nisi iiiaiiein prai se ferens specieni commeii- 
 dationis." 
 
p. II. s. II. § 6. 257 
 
 not intend them ; nay, they have even obtruded them 
 in opposition to their intention. For they have not 
 unfrequently imagined an incredible energy to exist 
 in single words, in letters, and even in the points 
 themselves. In former times, they were accustomed 
 confidently to lay it down as a rule, that as even the 
 words themselves had been inspired and suggested to 
 the sacred writers by the Deity, therefore, as great 
 emphasis should be assigned to each word as possible. 
 But he who will observe a just medium in his vene- 
 ration for the sacred volume, whilst he will not wish 
 to detract any thing from the natural force of the 
 words, neither will he be desirous of attributing any 
 force to them, except what the sound rules of inter- 
 pretation authorize and direct — and will, therefore, 
 prescribe to himself this law : that he must not assign 
 to words any other signification than Avhat can pro- 
 perly be shewn to have been intended by the writers. 
 Ohs. A. We take this opportunity of admonishing 
 the interpreter not to employ the highly useful study 
 of etymology in such a manner, as through its means 
 to endeavour to discover emphases in themselves very 
 improbable. Although, at the present day, this abuse 
 is almost obsolete, we have not deemed it improper 
 briefly to advert to it. The investigation of the pri- 
 mary or proper notions implied in words for fixing 
 the signification of individual words, taken by them- 
 selves, and apart from the connection in which they 
 stand, is very valuable : and these primary ideas are 
 sometimes employed, or had respect to : See p. 235. 
 But as this is not always the case, and as tlie second- 
 ary significations are chiefiy in use, these must, in the 
 s 
 
258 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 great majority of cases, be attended to by the inter- 
 preter in the investigation of the meaning. From 
 etymology, therefore, in some instances, the appro- 
 priate use of words may be demonstrated : but througii 
 its means to discover emphases, would be exactly the 
 same thing as to endeavour to discover elegancies in 
 the Latin writers in passages where nothing else is 
 to be found but the appropriate and most common 
 use of words. 
 
 §7. 
 
 For the right and proper understanding and 
 exposition of the language of each writer of the 
 Old Testament in all eases, the comparison of 
 parallel passages, the investigation of the con- 
 text and subject, and a just attention to the re- 
 moteness of the age, deserve to be recom- 
 mended. 
 
 Obs. 1. When discussing above in § 3, Obs. 3, 
 the manner of settling the meaning of words admit- 
 ting of different significations, among the other aids 
 for this purpose, we pointed out the comparing of 
 parallel passages : but then we only treated of that 
 sort of passages, in which one and the same thing is 
 expressed, not by the same but different words. Here, 
 however, where we have regard to whole phrases, 
 and the vhole st\le of the writer, we, in addition. 
 
p. n. s. li. § 7. 259 
 
 take into consideration those passages, in which the 
 same or very similar expressions, though not alto- 
 gether applied to the same things, must be under- 
 stood in the same meaning, and consequently mu- 
 tually illustrate each other. What, therefore, we said 
 in§ 5, Obs. 6, of interpreting the passages in Exod; 
 
 xiii. 8 — 10, 16.; and Deut. vi. 4 9.; xi. 18 20.- 
 
 not literally but figuratively, may be 'confirmed" b^ 
 comparison with Prov. vi. 20—22.; vii. 1_:3. in 
 which Solomon, recommending the precepts of wis- 
 dom or virtue to be tied to the neck, breast, and 
 fingers, and to be inscribed on the tables of the heart, 
 means the continual remembrance and care of them,' 
 just as Moses did by similar figurative expression! 
 employed, as adapted to his purpose, in a different 
 case. Nor is the poetic phraseology made use of by 
 Isaiah xlix. 16., unlike, where God is represented as 
 having delineated on the palms of his bands the image 
 of Jerusalem: which certainly signifies nothin- else 
 but his constant and benignant divine care of that 
 city, which was manifest, as it were, to the eyes of 
 all. What advantage accrues from the comparison 
 of passages, in which the same thing is described by 
 similar expressions, will appear from one example 
 alone. We have already shewn by the context only, 
 that m Prov. viii. 22, &c. not any real person was 
 indicated, but merely the wisdom of God clearly 
 manifested in the creation, which was recommended 
 to man as what he ought to shew forth by the pur- 
 suit of virtue. That this is the true interpretation, 
 may be confirmed by instituting a comparison with 
 Job xxviii. 20-28., where that wisdom, which God 
 
260 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 manifested in tlie works of creation, and wliicli man 
 ought to shew forth by the love of goodness and rec- 
 titude, and by avoiding iniquity, is manifestly treated 
 of. — Here, however, it will not be superfluous to in- 
 culcate the necessit}' of carefully ascertaining, whether 
 by the apparent exact similitude of expressions the 
 same or a different thing be intended. Thus, in 
 Zephan. i. 9., leaping over the threshold,^ is thought 
 to be illustrated by a similar expression in 1 Sam. 
 V. 5., where those Philistines, who, from that time 
 downwards, entered the temple of Dagon, are said 
 not to have touched its threshold with their feet, be- 
 cause the head and hands of that God had lain there. 
 But in the passage in Zephaniah there is no reference 
 to any superstitious rite of that nature, but by a pro- 
 verbial expression, the very prompt obsequiousness 
 of servants shewn in executing the commands of their 
 masters, hovvever unjust or wicked, is described. This 
 one example sufficiently shews, how much prudence 
 is required to prevent one from thinking that, on ac- 
 count of some degree of similitude between certain 
 ])hrases, passages are parallel wiiich really are not so. 
 But on this occasion, we, in one word, remark, that 
 sometimes we may derive no less assistance from the 
 ))oetical parallelism of thoughts for the right under- 
 standing of certain phrases, tlian for fixing the signi- 
 fication of words : but this will be more properly il- 
 lustrated as far as necessary, when we come to treat 
 of the interpretation of the poetical writers. 
 
 * III our translation, it is " leap on the threshold," which 
 is a mistake. Vid. Winer's Lex. & RosenmuUer's Schol. ilvtiii 
 the primary meaning of ^1' is above, not on or upon — Tr. 
 
p. n, s. II. §7. 261 
 
 Obs. 2. It may be useful, by one or two examples, 
 to shew how valuable the context and attention to 
 the scope of the writer is to the right interpretation 
 of certain phrases — Moses, in predicting to the Is- 
 raelites, Deut. iv. 28., that, when in future times they 
 should desert the worship of the one true God, they 
 would be expelled from the promised land, and driven 
 into exile among foreign nations, certainly did not 
 intend to say that then theij tmuld worship strange 
 gods; for he immediately adds, that in this, their af- 
 flicted condition, they would seek Jehovah their own 
 God, and should find him, if indeed they would seek 
 him with their wjiole heart. The word iiy, there- 
 fore, in that passage, is not applied to religious wor- 
 ship, nor in Deut. xxviii. 36 and 64., where we find 
 the same prediction, but signifies to be subjected to the 
 power of another, in which sense it is used in the 
 same book, chap, xxviii. 48., concerning the Israelites 
 being subjected to the power of their enemies. Thus 
 then, in these predictions uttered generally in a more 
 lofty strain of expression, the Israelites are described as 
 then to be subjected to the power of those foreign gods 
 with whom they wore about to be so much delighted as 
 that they would desert Jehovah their own God, arid 
 should thereexperience how vain, andaltogetherwitiiout 
 power, these gods were, whom foreign nations feigned 
 to be their tutelar deities.—But, to adduce another 
 example of more extensive application— Me spirit of 
 God is often mentioned as the means bv which men 
 do things: the force of which expression, in the 
 passages in which it occurs, must be determined fi'om 
 the context, and also from the nature of the things 
 
2^-2 PRINCIIM^KS OF IVTEUPRKTATION. 
 
 tlieiii.selvps which are done. When God is said to 
 have ttlh-d Bezaleel vvith his spirit to render him fit 
 for executing the sacred tabernacle, Exod. xxxi. 2 — 1 1 . ; 
 XXXV. 30 — 35., this is not to be understood of his 
 power exerted on the mind of the man in an extra- 
 ordiiiarv mann(>r, but, from the very nature of the 
 tliin<^. (compare also xxxvi. 1.,) must be understood 
 of those natiu'al talents with which God had endowed 
 him. But when the prophets say that they were in- 
 spired by the Divine Spirit, then certainly it is right 
 that we should think that they speak of the extra- 
 ordinary power and action of God exerted upon their 
 minds, because they demonstrated this by the very 
 subject of their writings, and sustained the divine le- 
 gation with which they declared themselves entrusted 
 in the most worthy manner. In this, however, there 
 is nothing surprising ; for the ancient Hebrews, ac- 
 customed to the greatest simplicity in speaking of all 
 things, in all which they acknowledged the interven- 
 tion of Divine Providence, whether they were of an 
 ordinary or extraordinary nature, were of course wont 
 to ascribe them to the Divine Spirit or Divine ]>ower, 
 employing in both cases the same expressions. 
 
 Obs. 3. The proper consideration of the remote age 
 of these writings, which we recommended in the last 
 place, is also not a little useful to the interpreter. For 
 as the ancient Hebrews applied the same expressions 
 to the ordinary and extraordinary operations of the 
 Deity, so also tlu^y employed the same phrases for 
 expressing what God wished and effected, and what, 
 from the wisest counsel, he permitted and suttered to 
 be (lone. That phraseology, by which God is said to 
 
p. II. s. II. § 7. 263 
 
 have hardened and rendered obstinate the mind of 
 Pharaoh, is well known : which certainly is not to be 
 understood as if God was to be held as the author of 
 this obstinacy, because not even in the most remote 
 antiquity were opinions of this sort regarding the 
 Supreme Deity prevalent among the Hebrews, and 
 because this obstinacy is imputed to Pharaoh as a 
 crime. Nothing else, therefore, is intended by this 
 phraseology, but that God permitted for the wisest 
 purpose tliat which he strongly condemned, and 
 judged worthy of the severest punishment. David 
 too, when he wished to signify that the abandoned 
 Shiraei was allowed by God to indulge his own wick- 
 ed disposition, and that in this the merited divine 
 judgment was executed on himself, describes this 
 man as ordered by Jehovah to pronounce curses and 
 
 heap injuries on him, 2 Sam. xvi. 11 The due 
 
 consideration of the remoteness of the times will 
 also prevent us, when God is represented very much 
 like man, from urging too strongly these anthropo- 
 pathic expressions, and will induce us to explain them 
 agreeably to the simplicity of these very ancient 
 times. There is a particularly remarkable instance 
 in Gen. xviii. 20, 21., where God is represented, after 
 deliberating with himself, as having descended to in- 
 quire into the conduct of the inhabitants of Sodom, 
 and to act with regard to them as they should de- 
 serve. By this description flowing naturally from 
 the frequent apparition of God in a human form, 
 this only was signified, and almost impressed upon 
 the senses, that the calamity, about to fall on these 
 wicked men, would be a punishment inflicted by the 
 
264 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 most just judgment of God. For the opinion enter- 
 tained by some that this description is to be ascribed 
 to mean notions regarding the greatness of the Su- 
 preme Deity, is quite refuted by the intercession of 
 Abraham made with God for the inhabitants of that 
 country, Gen. xviii. 23 — 33., which, whatever ideas 
 maj' be formed of the state of these remote ages, and 
 of the familiar intercourse of God with men, must be 
 allowed to breathe a spirit properl}' affected with, and 
 altogether full of a sense of the supreme Divine Ma- 
 jesty. 
 
 §8. 
 
 Lastly, a proper use of the best interpreters, 
 both ancient and modern, will not a little assist 
 the understanding and explanation of the phra- 
 seology everywhere employed by the Hebrews. 
 
 Ohs. 1. The more any one is endowed with those 
 gifts of nature, and acquisitions of learning, by which 
 a good interpreter of the Old Testament is distin- 
 guished, the more ought he diligently to search into 
 the sense of any passage or more extended portion, 
 which he is studying, before he consults others, how- 
 ever high their reputation may be. For it readily 
 happens, that, if tliey propound clearly the reasons of 
 their interpretation ; satisfied with these, one does 
 not inquire farther himself; whereas, if with the em- 
 ployment of all necessary aids, he applies himself 
 
p. 11. s. n. § 8. 265 
 
 to the point, and only afterwards consults others, he 
 may perhaps discover something preferable himself; 
 undoubtedly, at least, after having studied the thing, 
 he will be able to form a much better judgment of 
 the opinions of others, and to perceive clearly what 
 ought to be approved or disapproved in them. This is 
 indeed a laborious method of proceeding, but is, at the 
 same time, highly useful ; and is indeed so much so, 
 as abundantly to compensate the magnitude and diffi- 
 culty of the labour, to an ingenuous mind. 
 
 Obs. 2. But, as it is not given to all to be able to 
 pursue the mode of proceeding which we have just 
 recommended, and, as even the most experienced in- 
 terpreter occasionally either cannot extricate himself 
 from some difficulty, or is prevented, from want of 
 time, or some other cause, from not following the 
 more tedious process ; then, one has at hand the aid 
 of interpreters, of whom he may make a wise and 
 proper use. For this purpose, good sense will not 
 dictate, that one should consult all the commentators 
 and interpreters within his reach, but only those who 
 are best. Neither will good sense dictate, that over- 
 looking the more ancient, we should only appl}' to 
 the more recent ; but, on the contrary, should prefer 
 those, of whatever age, who have employed all the best 
 aids in tlieir power, and have shewn the greatest care, in 
 honestly searching into the sense of the sacred writers. 
 Nor will it advise, but, on the contrary, powerfully 
 dissuade from estimating authority, or any splendour 
 of reputation, more highly than real excellence. In a 
 word, it will onl}' impel, and highly recommend to an 
 interpreter, while he estimates those from whom he 
 
26G PRINCIPLES OF IXTERPRETATIO.V. 
 
 seeks assistance, more by their excellence than their 
 number, not to give himself up wholly to the guidance 
 of any one, wliom he follows blindly ; but to take 
 from each candidly and willingly, what is suitable to 
 his purpose, and which the love of truth alone leads 
 him to approve. 
 
 Obs. 3. To these general and brief observations, 
 we shall now subjoin a few remarks regarding the use 
 of the interpreters themselves, of every age. 
 
 The writers of the New Testament offer them- 
 selves to us in the first place ; who, as we have already 
 remarked, must be reckoned among the number of 
 the interpreters of the Old Testament. P. i. S. i. C. 
 iv. § 1. Obs. 2. For, if sometimes in the more recent 
 writings of the Old Testament, some passages of the 
 more ancient writings in that volume are explained, as 
 we have seen to be the fact in the place just quoted, 
 Obs. 1.; of such it is not necessary now to treat par- 
 ticularly : although even these on occasion a good in- 
 terpreter will by no means neglect, but will be able 
 to turn to the best advantage. — With regard to the 
 use of the writers of the New Testament in the inter- 
 pretation of the Old Testament, it cannot, indeed, be 
 denied that passages are frequently quoted in the 
 New Testament, which are employed in a meaning 
 different from that which the author intended ; such, 
 for instance, as that which we adduced in the former 
 Section, § 2, Obs. G. But, he who adopts the opinion 
 that the same is manifestly the case with almost all 
 the passages of the Old Testament quoted in the New 
 Testament, and, consequently, that Christ, his Apos- 
 tles, and the writers of the New Testament, are of no 
 
p. ir. s. II. § 8. 267 
 
 authority in Ibis respect ; in our judgment such an one 
 rashly detracts very much from the divine excellence 
 of these persons. Therefore, not to say anything of 
 the passages referring to the Messiah in the New 
 Testament, of which we shall afterwards speak, it will 
 be sufficient here generally to recommend to the in- 
 terpreter, that, as often as he observes any passage 
 from the Old Testament to be quo!ed in the New 
 Testament, so as that a real interpretation seems to be 
 given of it, he should, throwing aside all prejudice, 
 sedulously inquire, whether by the sound rules of in- 
 terpretation that passage can be pro))erly interpreted in 
 the manner in which it is explained in the New Tes- 
 tament ; and we doubt not, but by ingenuously pur- 
 suing this method, he will be led clearly to perceive 
 the meaning and force of some passages of the Old 
 Testament, tlirough the guidance of the Nev. Testa- 
 ment. We certainly believe that this will be the 
 case, particularly with regard to the following. Genes. 
 V. 24., with which compare Heb. xi. 5. Genes, xvii. 
 1. 7., compared with Heb. xi. 16. Genes, xxviii. 1:3., 
 and Exod. iii. 6., compared with Math. xxii. 23 — S'2. 
 Those who are commonly and properly denomina- 
 ted the ancient interpreters, thong!) of inferior autho- 
 rity, have yet their use in interpretation. It is, in- 
 dited, quite certain that they are of the greatest value 
 in criticism ; but, no competent judge will assign to 
 them the same weight, when applied to aiding the 
 better understanding and exposition of words and 
 phrases. They are of no little service, indeed, in con- 
 firming the most usual significations of single words, 
 and, occasionally, for attaining a knowledge of their 
 syntactical and etymological relations ; which may ap- 
 
268 PRINCIPLKS OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 pear from what we have already said, P. i. S. i. C. i. 
 § 5, Obs. 4. With which compare C. iv. ^ 2, Obs. 12, 
 at the beginning, and P. ii. S. ii. § I, Obs. 3, n. 4. 
 But, if the meaning of passages themselves be in- 
 quired into, they are very far from deserving the high- 
 est praise of excellence. 
 
 What estimation is due to Philo Judaeus, Flavius 
 Josephus, and the Talmudic writers, when employed 
 to aid interpretation, we have already stated, P. i. S. i. 
 C. iv. § 1, Obs. 3; and we there saw that Josephus 
 alone of these would be found useful in the depart- 
 ment of interpretation. For, if we look to the rest of 
 the native Hebrew writers, we shall not find that even 
 those who seemed to deserve the highest reputation as 
 interpreters, will be of much use to a candid expositor, 
 although they ought not altogether to be neglected by 
 a learned Christian interpreter. 
 
 Finally, the most ancient among the interpreters of 
 all ages who have been followers of the Christian re- 
 ligion, the less they have pursued the allegorical 
 method, and the more they have studied correctly to 
 investigate the meaning of the words, deserve the 
 more to be recommended to the study of those, who, 
 in consequence of their otftce, or tlu-ough inclination, 
 apply themselves particularly to the study of the Old 
 Testament. In general, not to waste words on the 
 intermediate ages when little valuable was done re- 
 lating to our present subject, those interpreters who 
 have appeared since the restoration of learning are of 
 greater utility, and, consequently, are those whom 
 we have particularly had respect to, and already ad- 
 vised to be prudently consulted in Obs. 2. 
 
PART SECOND. 
 SECTION THIRD. 
 
 OF THE UNDERSTANDING AND EXPLAINING OV 
 THINGS. 
 
 §1. 
 
 While it is the duty of a good interpreter of 
 the Old Testament, to endeavour rightly to un- 
 derstand and explain the words, phrases, and 
 also the whole language of that volume, it is 
 also his duty, through means of the best aids in 
 his power, to endeavour to understand himself, 
 and carefully to explain to others the things ex- 
 pressed by the words. 
 
 Obs. 1. Every one must readily perceive that the 
 understanding and exposition of words, and the things 
 expressed by words, are connected in the strictest 
 manner. Nay, it ought to be the principal object 
 of the interpreter who explains words, to pave the 
 way which shall lead to the better understanding of 
 things, although he himself may not be desirous of 
 employing his labour peculiarly in illustrating the 
 
270 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 things seen or related by the writer. Tiie more, 
 therefore, one endeavours rightly to explain things 
 also, when it seems requisite and proper, the more 
 will he be striving to fulfil all the duties of a good in- 
 terpreter aright, and in a manner adapted to the 
 condition of our times. For obscurity is found some- 
 times to exist more in the things than in the words ; 
 and, whilst the language is perspicuous, it is doubtful 
 what the author means. The understanding of the 
 subject too which is treated of, frequently assists very 
 much the understanding of the words ; as for example, 
 when mention is made of laws, ceremonies, or insti- 
 tutions, or of the objects of natural history, or when 
 figures are derived from them, or reference made to 
 them : and that errors have been committed in the 
 exposition of words, through ignorance of such things, 
 is certainly not unexampled. 
 
 Chs. 2. When we here speak of things expressed 
 by language, we do not intend the things alone, and 
 considered apart by themselves, but likewise their 
 nature, genius, and object, when these conduce either 
 to comprehending the meaning of the writer, or, are 
 closely connected with the right understanding of 
 the thingsjhemselves. Besides, in explaining either 
 a discourse, or a poem, a diligent interpreter ought 
 to enquire into the particular views of the things 
 to be explained, which were present to the mind 
 of the writer, and into their mutual connection. 
 Farther, v/hen at any time, either a shorter or longer 
 train of reasoning occurs, a right study of things will 
 induce the interpreter to investigate the nature of the 
 {jrounds, and the grounds themselves, on which it 
 
p. II. s. iii.§ 2. 271 
 
 rests. And lastly, if any thing occurs which seems 
 at variance with what is found in another place, the 
 right study of things requires that he should be soli- 
 citous to determine what opinion ought to be formed 
 jegarding the apparent discrepancy, and in what man- 
 ner the one passage may fairly be brought to agree 
 with the other. 
 
 In explaining-, therefore, the historical parts 
 of the Old Testament, the object ought to be, 
 to form just notions of the events related : and 
 wherever it can be done, their causes and in- 
 tention ought to be inquired into> 
 
 Obs. 1. What we here mean by the historical 
 things of the Old Testament, are not only histories 
 strictly so called, but likewise chronology and geo- 
 graphy, the objects even of natural history, and also 
 received rites and customs. For the explanation of 
 each of these, we have already seen in P. i. S. iii. C. 
 ii. how much certain aids are required. Let us 
 now then see how, by means of these aids, they are 
 to be explained. 
 
 Obs. 2. We begin with the histories of the Old 
 Testament, sti"ictly so called. If any one wishes 
 successfully to employ himself in explaining these, it 
 behoves him, as far as possible, to carry himself wholly 
 back to the very age described, accompanied by the 
 
272 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 help and illuminated by the light of such aids as are 
 to be had, and that he endeavour to understand, ex- 
 plain, and form a just opinion of the things transacted 
 in each particular nation, in remote antiquity, from 
 the genius and real motives of that antiquity, so very 
 different from the nature of our times. And whilst 
 we are desirous that this be particularly observed in 
 explaining the Hebrew histories, we likewise wish 
 that the peculiar design of God in separating the 
 Israelitish race from oth(;r nations, which was the 
 preservation of true religion, be diligently attended 
 to. For to him who either overlooks this design, or 
 denies it, the whole history of the Israelites will be 
 full of obscurity, and difficult to be understood ; out 
 of which darkness and difficulties he will not be able 
 to extricate himself by resorting to the fiction of God 
 being brought in continually ex machina. On the 
 other hand, he who rightly attends to this design, 
 provided he be possessed of a sufficient share of learn- 
 ing and liberality, when he attempts the exposition of 
 the events, will be able to place the most singular of 
 them in the best light, and will himself perceive, often 
 with the most delightful feeling of true pleasure, and 
 usefully explain to others their nature, causes, and 
 most wise intention. 
 
 But, beside the prudent contemplation of tins di- 
 vine intention just mentioned, which may be admir- 
 ably employed for illustrating the whole history of 
 the Israelites, it is highly pleasing and useful to the 
 interpreter to direct his attention, in such a manner, 
 to those things which deserve i)raise or blame, and 
 also to the actions of men, particularly of those who 
 
p. ir. s. HI. § 2. 273 
 
 acted a principal part in the history of the Israelites; 
 as that he may properly explain with what object, 
 and induced by what reasons, they acted as they 
 did, and not otherwise. It is, however, scarcely ne- 
 cessary to observe, in this case, that the genius of the 
 times, of the nation, and of the individuals themselves, 
 must constantly be attended to. — There is no one, for 
 instance, who does not confess that the immoveable 
 generosity of David towards Saul, bis most bitter 
 enemy, deserves to be praised : and no one, who is in 
 any respect acquainted with the disposition of the man, 
 will readily be inclined to ascribe it to any degree 
 of weakness. What, however, impelled him to this 
 so uncommon generosity, will be easily perceived by 
 an attentive interpreter. For David himself has suffi- 
 ciently clearly signified, that he was penetrated by 
 veneration for the man anointed by the divine com- 
 mand to the royal dignity, and who occupied the 
 place of Jehovah in the theocratic government of 
 the nation, 1 Sam. xxiv. 7, 8. This noble motive 
 then, of his religion, which he professed from the bot- 
 tom of his heart, and by the deepest rooted feeling of 
 which he was actuated, had so great a power over 
 his mind, that he restrained even his fierce compan- 
 ions from the murder of the unguarded king, which 
 they might easily have accomplished, and chose 
 rather to expose himself in future to the various in- 
 conveniences and dangers of a precarious life, than 
 himself to perpetrate, or to permit others to do, that 
 which he deemed unlawful; from all which, an inter- 
 preter will be able so to explain the v, luile of David's 
 conduct in this matter, as that it may be understood 
 
274 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 how admirable it was through the whole of the time of 
 his wretched wanderings, and that too in an Oriental 
 man of tlie most lively feelings, and otherwise not de- 
 void of the desire of revenge. — But the same David 
 has fallen under the reprehension of numbers, on ac- 
 count of his pretended madness with Achish, king of the 
 Philistines, 1 Sam. xxi. II — 15., which certainly is by 
 no means deserving of praise, no more than the feign- 
 ed madness of Ulysses, wishing to escape from military 
 service, regarding which consult Cicero, 0^\ iii. 26, 
 or that of Solon desirous of providing for the safety 
 of his own life, and for that of the state, Off", i. 30, or 
 that of L. Junius Brutus, anxious for an opportunity 
 of delivering the Republic from the tyrannj' of Tar- 
 quinius Superbus, of which Dionys. Halicarnassus has 
 given an account, A?itiq. Rom. L. iv., deserves to be 
 celebrated under the name of prudence ; it becomes 
 us, however, to excuse that dishonourable dissimula- 
 tion in the exiled David, when reduced to the greatest 
 straits, and to judge of it, as of other like pieces of 
 condiu't, not arising from any bad intention, from 
 the nature of the men and the times : which mode of 
 proceeding, the more correctly it is followed out by the 
 interpreter, the more will it be productive of usefulness. 
 Obs. 3. We proceed to chronology. There is no 
 one who is ignorant that this study, as far as it is oc- 
 casionall}^ conjoined with the interpretation of the Old 
 Teslanient, and relates to the events described in it, 
 which are to be explained by the interpreter, is at- 
 tended with very great difficulty. Nor, indeed, from 
 its verj'^ nature, can it be easy. For in such high 
 antiquity, who can believe that all events could liave 
 
p. 11. s. III. S 2. 275 
 
 been arranged and reduced to an accurate order of 
 time? Should one then meet with chronoh)gical dif- 
 ficulties of that nature, from which, even after the 
 prudent employment of the best aids, he knows not 
 how to extricate himself: let him not wonder that a 
 Just and accurate order in the history-, which shall be 
 satisfactory in all points, has not been possible to be 
 made out from books so ancient, written too for the 
 sake of religion, and not of chronology. But, should 
 he happen to be so successful, as in any probable 
 manner to overcome one or more of the greater 
 chronological difficulties which have heretofore seem- 
 ed insuperable, let him rejoice in the fruit of his un- 
 pleasant labour, which may redound to the honour of 
 the sacred volume. — There is a difficulty, however, 
 deserving to be here briefly noticed, which arises from 
 the chronology of some other of the ancient nations 
 extending itself to a much more remote date than the 
 sacred chronology, but which is not of so serious 
 a nature as some have imagined. It appears then, 
 that not a few nations of ancient times, particularly 
 the Egyptians, sought to acquire a great name, by 
 pretending to a very great and improbable degree 
 of antiquity — But, as this may be esteemed to belong 
 more to the study of chronology than to the exposi- 
 tion of things which we are presently discussing, we 
 shall only subjoin one brief observation, which is 
 closely connected with the interpretation itself, and 
 is of no little importance; regarding the manner, we 
 mean, in which wc are to understand years in the 
 first part of Genesis. Some late writers, offended with 
 the longevity of the first men, say, that originally the 
 
276 PRIN'CIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 year consisted only of one month, or at most of 
 three ; that afterwards it was lengthened out to six 
 months, and only at a late period, about the age of 
 the patriarch Joseph, cameto consist of twelve months. 
 Ingenious enough this, truly ! but is indeed an assump- 
 tion without the smallest probability ; for, omitting 
 other things, according to this opinion, there would 
 have been persons among those wlio are mentioned 
 in Genesis v. and xi., who begot children before the 
 eighth or tenth year of their life. But it is neither 
 necessary nor proper, by assuming rash conjectural 
 fictions, to diminish the longevity of the first men to 
 the ordinary brevity of human life at the present day. 
 For it was very much accommodated to the primeval 
 state* of human affairs, to various purposes among men, 
 placed as it were in a state of childhood, and to the 
 divine intention in creating them : which every intel- 
 ligent and candid interpreter will be able to make 
 manifest to the advantage of those whose minds are 
 free from prejudice. 
 
 Ohs. 4. With regard to geography : it will not un- 
 frequently be useful to an interpreter, solicitous about 
 the proper explanation of things, that he form to himself 
 correct ideas of the piace where any action is describ- 
 ed to have taken place, and apply these to the ad- 
 vantage of others. An example of this may betaken 
 from the relation of the celebrated passage of the Red 
 Sea by the Israelites, when they went out of Egypt, 
 Exod. xiv. 21, 22., which has light cast upon it from 
 the fact, that the passage, as may be collected from ob- 
 servations made upon the spot, happened at a nar- 
 row part of that sea, or Arabic gulf, where the depth 
 
p. II. s. III. § 2. 277 
 
 was not great, Mhile the bottom on each side being 
 lower, retained the water, affording to the Israelites 
 the advantage of a degree of protection on each side. 
 — There is another remarkable instance in the his- 
 tory of David, when flying from Saul, which we have 
 in J Sam. xxiv., when David, with his companions 
 hid in the deepest recess of a cave, observed Saul 
 taking his mid-day sleep in the entrance of it. There 
 are in the mountainous country of Palestine, caverns 
 very large and spacious, observed by modern travel- 
 lers, which have more than one entrance to them. 
 Of such a cavern then, he who shall have formed to 
 himself a clear notion, will more clearly understand 
 how Saul might not even have suspected that David 
 was in it to observe him. 
 
 But, as the knowledge of the peculiarities of the 
 nature of the soil and of the climate of the Israelitish 
 country, also belongs to the study of ancient geogra- 
 phy, it is pro|)er that an interpreter cull from this 
 knowledge Avhatever may tend to the better under- 
 standing of things. There is, to adduce only one in- 
 stance, no difficulty in the language of the historical 
 relation in 1 Sam. xii. 17, but the thing will not be 
 properly understood, unless it be known that there 
 is neither thunder nor rain in the time of the wheat 
 harvest in Palestine : when, therefore, these took place 
 in consequence of the prayers of Samuel, verses 18, 
 19., we see from this that the Israelites were much 
 astonished because of the uncommon nature of the 
 thing. 
 
 Ohs. 5. Let us now attend to the exposition of na- 
 tural things, on which point it will suffice for our pur- 
 
278 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPKETATIOX. 
 
 pose to adduce two examples : the one from natural 
 history, strictly so called, the other from diseases, 
 which we have already referred to that sort of his- 
 tory taken in the widest signification, P, i, S. iii. C. 
 ii. ;^ 4, Obs. 1 — Two very strong and fierce animals, 
 the hippopotamus and crocodile, mentioned and de- 
 scribed in Job xl. and xli., shall serve as the first : of 
 which animals, certainly the more accurate the no- 
 tion any one has been able to form, the more clearly 
 will he understand their poetic description. But 
 should one, in addition, be able to explain and make 
 clear, for what reason, in a magnificent address ascrib- 
 ed to God, they are presented to the consideration 
 of Job ; and, if he should also shew that these were 
 the most terrible and frightful animals in the country 
 of Egypt well known to Job, and therefore exhibited 
 an apt image of proud and fierce men, whose life 
 and prosperity seemed to Job to be at variance with 
 the divine justice : then certainly will he have ex- 
 plained the meaning and force of this admirable pas- 
 sage. — The second example is more clear, and respects 
 that most direful of all diseases, the disease of leprosy. 
 A perfect acquaintance with the nature, severity, great 
 contagiousness and diflficult cure of this disease, will 
 then bo highly useful both for the better understand- 
 ing what things are directed concerning it in the laws 
 of Moses, and also for the more proper explanation 
 of many places in the book of Job, who was afflicted 
 with a very severe species of this disease. And when 
 one is employed in the interpretation of passages, 
 where images derived from this disease are applied 
 to describe the vilencss of iniquity, such as those in 
 
p. II. s. III. § 2. 279 
 
 the xxxviii. and li. Psalms, it must be useful for the 
 explication of these, to have given just notions, as far 
 as necessar}', of this disease : and it is also proper to 
 observe, that in the purification from this disease, pre- 
 scribed by God in Levit. xiv., respect was had to the 
 vileness of the sins of men, and to taking away their 
 guilt and punishment. See p. 198. 
 
 Obs. 6. Lastlj', we shall make some brief observa- 
 tions on the exposition of received customs and rites, 
 which we have also comprehended under the general 
 idea of what belongs to history. As then, in the case 
 of other nations, these are best explained from the 
 genius of those nations, and from the general state of 
 antiquity, so also the interpreter of the sacred books 
 will employ both these methods whenever he finds it 
 proper and suitable to his purpose. Thus, for example, 
 when we read in Gen. xliii. 32., that it was not cus- 
 tomary for the Egyptians to eat with the Hebrews : 
 tiiis may be parti}' illustrated from the genius of an- 
 tiquity, through which the people of each nation look- 
 ed down contemptuously upon others as barbarians ; 
 but chiefly, from the peculiar genius of the Egyptian 
 nation, which held in abhorrence eating with any 
 other nation whatever, looking on them as polluted. 
 Compare Herodotus, ii. 41, and 91., at the beginning. 
 — With regard to what relates to the received cus- 
 toms and rites of the ancient Hebrews, which may re- 
 quire to be explained by the interpreter ; the more 
 these appear to be singular, and to recede farther 
 from ours, the more useful will it be in itself, and oc- 
 casionally the better suited to vindicate the honour 
 of the sacred volume, if their causes are investigated 
 
280 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 asoriginating partly from the geniusof the nation, partly 
 from the general circumstances of ancient nations, par- 
 ticularly the Oriental, but partly likewise from a cer- 
 tain state as it were of childhood particularly in which 
 the Hebrews long continued. — The genius of this 
 nation, therefore, was, that they were much moved by 
 things affecting their senses ; and such was the state 
 of feeling common to almost the whole of the ancient 
 nations, but particularly those of the East : but the 
 Hebrews shewed themselves more under this impulse, 
 from their remaining longer in the primitive state of 
 mankind allied to children in their manners. From 
 these three causes, intimately connected with each 
 other, a prudent interpreter of things will explain 
 some particulars which appear singular, and also sym- 
 bolical actions, by which things remote from the 
 senses might in some measure be subjected to them ; 
 and of which the use so much prevailed, that even 
 men of the highest authority conformed themselves 
 to it by tlie divine admonition. See Jer. xxvii. 1 — 
 11., wviii. 10 — 14. Nay, even from this cause 
 W'hicli we have indicated, may probabl}' be explained 
 why the Hebrews shewed themselves violenth' ad- 
 dicted, before the Babylonish eaptivitj', to pa\' impious 
 homage to the gods of foreign nations, whom they 
 could see with their eyes, and why the same people, 
 w^hom no fhrealenings of remote evils, and of the de- 
 struction of their country and supervening exile, 
 could recal from that propensity, at last, when 
 struck with a sense of these calamities pressing upon 
 tliem, showed themselves so affected as to become al- 
 most quite changed in their dispositions and manners. 
 
p. II. s. III. § 3. 281 
 
 §3. 
 
 In the exposition of the laws prescribed by 
 Moses, under the divine direction, it is absolutely 
 necessary to attend to their intention and occa- 
 sion : in the exposition again of the opinions 
 and doctrines, whether they regard religion or 
 things connected with it, respect must always 
 be had to the age to which they belong. 
 
 Obs. 1. As it is necessary to reckon among the 
 things to be attended to by an interpreter, both the 
 laws and statutes of which mention is made in the 
 books of the Old Testament, and likewise the opinions 
 and doctrines, either more fully or briefly recounted 
 or indicated : very ample, nay, infinite materials, offer 
 themselves to us, if we were to pass the whole of those 
 things in review which belong to each of these heads, and 
 to give an account of the manner in which an interpre- 
 ter ought to treat eacli of these particulars separately. 
 Therefore, we shall choose out, and briefly touch on 
 those instances which occur under each of these heads 
 most frequently, or which may be attended with the 
 greatest utility. 
 
 Obs. 2. The Mosaic laws then, being enacted by 
 divine authority, have been so diffused, as it were, 
 through by far the greatest part of the sacred volume, 
 and often so interwoven in various ways with the 
 histories, transactions, and the very subject even of 
 
282 PRINCirLES OF INTERPUETATrON. 
 
 these writings, whether in prose or poetry, that the 
 understanding of them liohls by no means the lowest 
 place among the duties of the interpreter, in order 
 that he may derive from this knowledge, when neces- 
 sary, what may be suitable to the present age, which 
 is not satisfied with mere industry bestowed on in- 
 vestigating the meaning of words. For one while it 
 will be required of him to illustrate the whole nature 
 of the splendid sacred ritual, from the divine inten- 
 tions in distinguishing the Israelitish nation, and in 
 training them to the best religion of which they were 
 capable : at another time it will be of no little conse- 
 quence to demonstrate the divine wisdom, which, ac- 
 commodating itself to the genius of men exceedingly 
 captivated with external appearance, subjected to 
 their senses things of high importance, which were 
 not recognizable by the senses, and inspired into as 
 many as were of more exalted minds, by the very 
 constitution of the sacred rites, true religious feelings 
 and affections, and conjuined and coupled the liberty 
 and prosperity of the whole nation by a natural and 
 indissoluble bond, with the observation of the pre- 
 scribed worship As to the Mosaic civil laws again, 
 
 a fit occasion frequently offers itself to the interpreter, 
 when he can shew either the highly useful connection 
 of these with religion, or when he may carefully re- 
 mark their admirable efficacy in promoting the safe- 
 ty, humanity, and general virtue of the people, or 
 finally, when he may investigate the sources and oc- 
 casions of these laws, and thus derive them partly 
 from the natural principles of justice and equity, part- 
 ly from the institutions of their ancestors, to which 
 
p. II. S. III. 
 
 3. 283 
 
 the Hebrews were pertinaciously attached, partly 
 from the very celebrated jurisprudence of the Egypt- 
 ians applied by Moses to his own purposes, and part- 
 ly also from the state and circumstances of the nation 
 itself, to which they were admirably adapted by di- 
 vine wisdom It is indeed sufficient for the object of 
 
 our work, to have slightly touched on the principal of 
 these kinds of observations, which, if the interpreter 
 bring forward on all proper occasions, he will in no 
 mean degree be useful in this age which is disposed 
 to inquire curiously into the causes, nature, and object 
 of things. 
 
 Obs. 'S. It will also be of signal utility in this age, 
 in expounding the opinions and doctrines either re- 
 lating to religion, or things connected with religion, 
 which occur in the Old Testament, to have a proper 
 regard to that age to which they belong. For, as it 
 was formerly the custom of most Christians to ascribe 
 too much to those ancient times which were blessed 
 with divine instruction, so now it is customary with 
 numbers to form too mean a judgment of those ages. 
 The duty, therefore, is now imposed on a candid in- 
 terpreter of things, that he rightly distinguish the no- 
 tions of the vulgar from those of the more intelligent 
 concerning religion and other most important doc- 
 trines, and that he likewise study to separate prudent- 
 ly those doctrines which owe their origin to divine 
 instruction from those which men formed for them- 
 selves, or embellished in a poetical manner; and final- 
 ly, that he attend to the diversity of times, which is 
 chiefly deserving of his attention. — The interpreter, 
 therefore, will candidly observe, that it is manifest, 
 
284 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 from certain indications, that it was a superstitious 
 opinion held by the common people of the Hebrews, 
 conformable to the universal sense of antiquity, that 
 there were more gods than one, and that each nation 
 had its own gods ; but he will also remark that Mo- 
 ses, David, Isaiah, and other superior men, were free 
 from this superstition, although, on more occasions 
 than one, they seem to have accommodated them- 
 selves to the vulgar opinion, in order the more suc- 
 cessfully to oppose it — The interpreter will not deny 
 that the sad and mournful region of the dead, which 
 represented the life after death as only a thin flitting 
 shade, thus furnishing ample materials to the luxuriant 
 imagination of the poets, was a mere fiction of human 
 genius, and will confess this to be the fact when he 
 meets with any mention of this popular fable : but, at 
 the same time, he will not attempt to explain away, 
 nor will he neglect to perceive, the sufficiently clear 
 traces of a better life, to wliich the good men among 
 them hoped to be recalled after death. But, in ex- 
 pounding these and other opinions and doctrines, he 
 ought, as it were, to forget his own times, and transfer 
 himself wholly into that age about which he is employ- 
 ed. And the more carefully he does this, the more 
 rightly and truly will he judge of the notions of the 
 ancient Hebrews relating to religion, and the more 
 easily will he perceive, and the more clearly explain 
 to others, the divine wisdom which, in teaching man- 
 kind, adapted itself to their capacity, and instructed 
 them only in those things which they could bear, and 
 which were quite accommodated to their circumstances. 
 — For, although from the most remote antiquity, and 
 
p. II. s. III. § 3. S85 
 
 even from the very origin of the human race, the no- 
 tions which occur in the Old Testament, and are due 
 to divine instruction regarding the supreme God, are 
 so admirable, that among all other ancient nations 
 nothing comparable is to be found : still something 
 adheres to them, connected with the nature of the 
 tmes and the genius of the men, and the more an- 
 cient they are, the more is perceived in them borrow- 
 ed from the nature of man and his modes of acting, 
 and suited as it were to the instruction of children. 
 Those opinions again, which the Israelites received 
 successively from Moses and the prophets, are altoge- 
 ther adapted to the disposition of the nation, affected 
 only by what struck their senses, and at the same 
 time exceedingly conceited and quite obstinate : and 
 as also, God is nowhere in express terms declared to 
 be a pure spirit, but this nature of his, which exceed- 
 ed the conception of the men of ancient times, is pre- 
 sented to their understandings in a popular manner 
 as much as possible, as it was not allowed to represent 
 him by any corporeal similitude, nor was there any 
 appearance in the adytum of the sanctuary, so also 
 such attributes of God are chiefly brought into view as 
 are most powerful in exciting the highest reverence 
 tor hmi, and for inspiring the greatest awe.— Besides 
 although in the very general expectation amon.o- man- 
 kmd of some sort of a future life, it would be quite 
 improper to deny some ideas of it to the ancient 
 Hebrews, who were blessed with a divine revelation, 
 It would be quite improper, on the other hand, to' 
 expect from them those correct notions on this sub- 
 ject which the more perfect revelation of Christ has 
 
286 PRINCIPLES 01' INTEUPUETATION. 
 
 opened up ; we must, therefore, only suppose them 
 to have entertained such opinions on this point as 
 might be expected from the minds of these ancient 
 men who required the motives of immediate rewards 
 and punishments, and who were capable of forming a 
 conception of receiving life anew at some future 
 period, much more than of the immortality of souls ; 
 because, in short, they were not yet ripe for the ex- 
 pectation of a full retribution of all their actions from 
 the Supreme Judge after death : for entertaining 
 which expectation, the human mind can only become 
 fitted in the slow progress of ages. — These remarks 
 may serve as a specimen, in this most extensive sub- 
 ject, to shew what we think is required of an inter- 
 preter, as often as an opportunity occurs to him for 
 expounding things relating to religion. 
 
 In interpreting any composition, whether in 
 prose or poetry, it is often extremely useful to 
 inquire into the thoughts whicli were in the 
 mind of the author and into their connection : 
 and when a train of reasoning occurs, to resolve 
 it into its first principles and elements. 
 
 Ohs. 1. It is certainly highly conducible to the at- 
 taiimicnt of a proper understanding of any comi)osition, 
 either in prose or poetry, that one has arrived at a full 
 
p. It. s. in. § 4. 287 
 
 understanding both of the particular expressions, and 
 of the things signified by the woi'ds, and also taken 
 apart by themselves : but something farther often de • 
 serves to be recommended, namely, that an interpre- 
 ter carefully investigate what the author himself par- 
 ticularly had in view. For which purpose, it is not a 
 little advantageous that the occasion of the composi- 
 tion, whether in prose or poetry, be ascertained, and 
 the disposition, age, and circumstances of the author 
 be investigated. In most of those writings which con- 
 tain historical narrations, this appearrs at a glance ; in 
 many poems, through the aid of histor}', it is not very 
 difficult to discover ; in not a few, however, which re- 
 late to a particular, and not altogether ascertained 
 event, it is sometimes so difficult that ample room is 
 left for conjecture. We shall not bring forward ex- 
 amples of each of those cases to which we have al- 
 luded, which, in what must be sufficiently clear to 
 every one, does not seem to be required, but shall 
 content ourselves with one from that most nol)le hymn 
 the xc. Psalm, whose author is indicated by the in- 
 scription, and the occasion of it appears from the sub- 
 ject ; compare Num. xiv. 26, &c. In the explication 
 of this hymn, the interpreter will best succeed wlio has 
 penetrated most deeply into the genuis of the poet, 
 and transferred himself as it were into his circum- 
 stances. He should then represent to himself Moses, 
 a man of an exalted mind and understanding, ad- 
 vanced in life, the deliverer of the Israelites oppressed 
 by Egyptian bondage, and likewise their lawgiver and 
 leader, a person too, full of a sense of the divine ma- 
 jesty, and altogether intent upon the weli'are of his 
 
288 PRINCIPLES OF INTEPKRETATION. 
 
 countrymen, the greater part of whom he had seen, 
 after he had successfully brouglit tlieni out of Egypt, 
 at the end of a long wandering through the deserts of 
 Arabia, carried off by an untimely death, the merited 
 punishment of their perversity ; all the survivors of 
 whom he intends to represent in this poem as express- 
 ing themselves in the way in ^vhich they ought to 
 have been affected in their circumstances. If tiien 
 the interpreter substitutes himself as it were, wholly 
 in the situation of Moses at the time when he com- 
 posed this hymn, and endeavours to think and feel 
 as he did, the following will appear to him to be 
 nearljf the plan of the whole poem. Moses commences 
 with adoring Jehovah as the best and only refuge in 
 the most afflicted circumstances ; such as he had, in- 
 deed, ever been in all past ages, and would continue 
 to be in all time to come. Reflecting, at the same 
 time, on the eternal and immutable duration of the 
 Supreme God, to which, in a mournful strain, he op- 
 poses the shortness and pitiable weakness of human 
 life, the poet describes this external duration as far an- 
 terior to, and to last greatly longer than the moun- 
 tains themselves, those ancient children, as it were of 
 the earth, which presented themselves to his view, 
 whilst, again, the grass now green, but suddenly 
 withering before evening by a burning and desolating 
 blast, offered to him a sad image of the miserable and 
 transitory life of man. He then bewails the unhappy 
 state of this life^ and deplores the almost intolerable, 
 though just severity of the divine wrath. But, that 
 the Israelites might be the better instructed to be- 
 come wise through a deep sense of this wrath, he 
 
p. II. s. III. § 4. 289 
 
 pours out wishes from the bottom of his heart, and at 
 the same time in treats with earnest prayer, full of 
 hope, that God would pity the Israelites, and benig- 
 nantly grant to them more prosperous fortune to 
 compensate for the length of evils which they had 
 suffered, and that he would quickly direct the im- 
 mediate, successful, and altogether happy occupa- 
 tion of the promised land. 
 
 Obs. 2. What we have said regarding the investi- 
 gation of the thoughts, in the mind of the author of 
 any composition, in prose or in verse, is of most use 
 when a train of reasoning occurs, which, in order to 
 be rightly understood, must be resolved as it were 
 into its first principles and elements, by an interpre- 
 ter who attends to things. This, indeed, is frequently 
 not an arduous task ; sometimes, however, it is in the 
 highest degree difficult, when thick clouds of obscu- 
 rity are induced by the writers differing from us in 
 their thoughts, and circumstances of climate, genius, 
 and times, for dispelling which, as far as the nature 
 of the things will permit, much labour, penetration, and 
 patience must be required even from the most skilful 
 interpreter. This observation particularly applies to 
 the reasonings contained in the speeches in the poem 
 of Job, and in the Book of Ecclesiastes ; the force, na- 
 ture, and object of which, and consequently the very 
 principles on which they depend, how difficult it is to 
 explain, is sufficiently evident from the remarkable 
 differences alone of the interpretations given. There- 
 fore we advise the interpreter, who can see with his own 
 eyes, and, aided by the light of his own judgment and 
 learning, applies himself to these more obscure reasou- 
 u 
 
290 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 ings, that, laying aside his own modes of thinking and 
 those of his age, he study to assume as it were the per- 
 son of those ancient Oriental men, who are introduced 
 as speaking, and to investigate, and candidly and sedu- 
 lously to weigh their arguments, as derived from their 
 times and the notions then entertained. By this mode 
 of proceeding he will sometimes have the satisfaction 
 of discovering the truth, which had escaped other 
 interpreters : and certainly will merit the praise of an 
 interpreter suited to the wants of our times. — But, in 
 producing examples of reasoning, two shall suffice, 
 one taken from history, the other poetical. The 
 argument of the cunning woman which occurs in 2 
 Sam. xiv. excellently contrived for inducing and per- 
 suading David to rccal Absalom from exile, has in it 
 something difficult and obscure ; in disentangling and 
 illustrating which, the interpreter may exercise him- 
 self. The thing, above all others to be attended to 
 in this matter is, that Absalom having slain his brother 
 Ammon, was desirous of avoiding the merited anger of 
 his father, and therefore had left the country ; and that 
 David, on the other hand, from his great indulgence 
 towards his children, felt no small degree of propensity 
 towards his exiled son. The woman then, suborned 
 by Joab, who was in the interest of Absalom, brought 
 to the tribunal of David a feigned story, but wearing 
 greatly the appearance of truth, regarding her only 
 surviving son, whose death was demanded by his 
 whole family, because he had killed his brother in a 
 fierce quarrel, vs. 6, 7. She therefore, when the 
 king, prone to benevolence in giving judgment, had 
 promised that he would inquire into the matter, and 
 
p. ir. s. III. § 4, 291 
 
 give sjLicli directions as would remove the fears of 
 tiiis afflicted woman, knowing that, according to the 
 divine law, the person who killed another designed- 
 ly must be given up to death, and wishing to ob- 
 tain something more determinate from the king, 
 said, that she desired that if there seemed to be 
 any thing unjust in granting mercy to one who had 
 slain his brother, that the whole of the injustice 
 might fall upon her and upon her family, vs. 8, 9. 
 Still, not content with the absolute promise of the 
 protection of the king, she so moved David by her 
 supplications, that he confirmed his promise with a 
 solemn oath, verses 10, 11. After she saw that she 
 had obtained her object, without any circumlocution, 
 she told the king that he had pronounced sentence 
 in his own cause, which it was unlawful to retract ; 
 and prudently tempering, and appositely softening 
 her audacity, by the melancholy image of water spilt 
 upon the ground, which cannot be gathered up again, 
 well adapted for powerfully affecting the mind of a 
 most affectionate father, she insinuated that his son 
 might die in exile, and never be restored to the 
 wishes of his father ; and, that she might take away 
 every impediment which might restrain David, whose 
 mind was deeply affected by a sense of religion, she 
 declared that she had reason to hope, that God him- 
 self, confirming the milder sentence of the king ap- 
 pointed by himself, would forgive Absalom's crime, 
 and would not reject him who had been an exile, and 
 judged worthy of death, nor take him from the num- 
 ber of the living, verses 12 — 14 — We here take the 
 word 3iiyn, verses 14 and 13, in the significatioa of 
 
292 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 decreeing, judging, and translate this part of the pas- 
 sage thus : Nor shall God take away his life, bat 
 shall pass this sentence, that he will not reject him ivho 
 has now been driven into exile — Finally, the woman, 
 to excuse herself in some degree for having addressed 
 the king in this covert manner, indicated her fear, 
 that if she had not pursued this method, she would 
 not have attained her object ; and, at the same time 
 said, that she was persuaded that the king, if he should 
 concede mercy in a feigned case, and should thus 
 perceive that he had been unawares compelled to 
 concede mercy to Absalom, would by this means be 
 enabled to bring the anxiety of his mind to rest about 
 his son : and that he would perceive this, she was 
 satisfied, from his admirable and superhuman wisdom, 
 verses 15 — 17. 
 
 We shall now subjoin to this example, taken from 
 history, which, although somewhat long, seemed par- 
 ticularly suited to our undei'taking, a second of a 
 poetical character, but shorter and less difficult. In 
 the first Psalm, the time of the composition of which, 
 its occasion, or who is to be reckoned the author of it, 
 in no manner afiects its subject generally — in the 
 1st and 2d verses of this Psalm, then, the happiness 
 of the righteous above the impious is celebrated. Of 
 the former, a tree planted by the river of water, ever 
 green, and producing its fruit in its season, affords a 
 most delightful image to an Oriental man, while the 
 worthless, unstable, and transitory prosperity of the 
 impious, brought to his mind the chatf scattered by 
 tlie wind from the uncovered threshing floors, verses 
 3, 4. To this description, which must be examined 
 
p. ir. s. III. § 5. 293 
 
 by the rules of Oriental poetry, is next subjoined an 
 argument, likewise dressed up in the poetical and 
 Oriental manner, which is peculiarly adapted for per- 
 suading the Hebrews of a remote age, verses 5 and 6, 
 the amount of which is, " The state of the righteous 
 and of the w icked cannot possibly be the same, be- 
 cause God, the constant observer and most just judge 
 of men, approves the righteous and condemns the 
 wicked." For p by does not there signify, on this 
 account, therefore, but because that, since ; neither is 
 the last future judgment after death alluded to, bul 
 that moral government of God which is continu- 
 ally executing against individuals. God, the very 
 present judge of all men, is represented as erecting 
 his tribunal, before which he calls the righteous and 
 the vvicked, to each of whom he renders according to 
 his works, so that the wicked cannot stand among 
 the righteous, but are condemned, and shall not be 
 absolved from the punishment they have deserved. 
 A similar figui*e occurs on other occasions — and in 
 Ps. vii. 7, 8 ; ix. 4, 5 ; 1. and cxxx. 3. 
 
 §5. 
 
 Lastly, As a mutual and harmonious settle- 
 ment of those passages, which, in the Old Tes- 
 tament, seem to be in opposition, belongs to the 
 interpretation of things, it is the duty of a pro- 
 per interpreter to give his anxious attention to 
 this point in all necessary cases. 
 
294 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Ohs. 1. It is impossible but that, in books of the 
 greatest antiquity, written by different authors, and at 
 different times, vmder a foreign climate, and in a 
 language long since dead, some things should occa- 
 sionally occur which seem to be not altogether in 
 harmony, nay even to be at variance with each other. 
 For, indeed, if through the most complete agreement 
 in things having a reference to the principal object 
 of these books, all of them so conspired, that in the 
 most minute circumstances there was not the least 
 appearance of discrepancy, a just suspicion of an in- 
 tended agreement would arise, which would either 
 fall on the writers themselves, or upon the Jews, as 
 having dared to abolish every sort of opposition or 
 discord among them : and, consequently, our confi- 
 dence in the integrity of those books, which we so 
 justly attribute to them, and their authority in things 
 pertaining to religion, would be greatly shaken. 
 
 Obs. 2. When any disagreement in things occurs, 
 the first object of inquiry is, from what persons it 
 proceeds, and whether it be of such a nature as the 
 interpreter should labour to reconcile. For as no 
 one will see any cause of offence in the bitter and 
 opposing arguments between Job and his three 
 friends, on things of the utmost importance, there is 
 therefore no necessity, when any one of these, who 
 is introduced as speaking, seems to err from the 
 truth, for the interpreter to suppose that this error is 
 only apparent, and therefore, that this appearance of 
 error ought by all means to be removed. — Because 
 in 1 Sara. iv. 8., the Philistines say that the Egyptians 
 were grievously afHicted with plagues in the deserts 
 
p. ir. s. in. § 5. 295 
 
 of Arabia, by the tutelary Deity of the Israelites, 
 there is no reason why we should attempt to recon- 
 cile this with the true history, since it was very easy 
 for the Philistines to fall into error in this thing, 
 which they had only heard by report, and from an 
 ancient and confused tradition. In like manner, the 
 Abimelech who, in 2 Sam. xi. 21., is called by Joab 
 the son of Jerubbesheth, is named in the history to 
 which he refers, Judg. ix. 1, 53., the son of Jerub- 
 baal : this trifling difference may be explained from 
 the different names which the same man bore, or be 
 attributed to an error in writing the name : but why 
 may we not even suppose that the memor}^ of Joab, a 
 military man, failed him in referring to the name of 
 a man in ancient historj' ? Some of the ancient in- 
 terpreters have corrected this error : but the author 
 himself did not think proper to correct either this or 
 the former mistake, as he chose to represent men not 
 speaking as they ought to have done, but as they 
 really did — Another discrepancy, which may be 
 thought of more importance, and which is certainly 
 of a different nature, of which we shall take notice 
 here, is that Nathan, a divine prophet, immediately 
 approved of the proposition of David, when wishing 
 to build a temple to Jehovah, as what would be most 
 acceptable to him, but soon after, as if at variance 
 with what he had formerly said, dissuades him from 
 itas contrary to the will of Jehovah, 2 Sam. vii. 1 — 
 13. But, indeed, what he said at first was merely 
 from his own judgment, and in his own name, but, 
 when divinely admonished, he changed his opinion, 
 and, as became a divine ambassador, he advised in 
 
296 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 that capacity what was at variance with that which 
 he had said in liis own person. 
 
 Obs. 3. Neither, in general, is it any difficulty, when 
 the same writer, according to the different state of 
 his affections, or the different manner in which he 
 views a subject, expresses opposite feelings, or oppo- 
 site thoughts. Not a few such instances are found in 
 the Psalms of David, and in the speeches of Job, 
 where every one must acknowledge the feelings to 
 have been so powerfully affected, as to afford a suf- 
 ficient reason why these persons should not al- 
 ways have been quite consistent, and should even 
 seem to contradict themselves. — But, passing over 
 these, we shall adduce an instance easj' to be un- 
 derstood, which may perhaps open the way to under- 
 standing some more difficult cases. In the admir- 
 able Ixxiii. Psalm, the philosophic poet Asaph has 
 exhibited the perverted sentiments which arose in his 
 mind, fi'om observing the prosperity of the wicked, 
 and the more correct sentiments which succeeded 
 them, when he had fully pondered their unstable and 
 uncertain state — nearly in the same manner as Clau- 
 dian, in the celebrated passage of his poem, entitled 
 Rufinus, Lib. i. v. 1 — 23., represents himself on a 
 similar occasion, as having doubted of a divine pro- 
 vidence superintending human affairs, until these 
 impious feelings of his mind were done away by the 
 punishment of Rufinus. Now then, from this clear 
 example, the more obscure book of Ecclesiastes may 
 be illustrated, which has seemed to the interpreters 
 of all ages to contain many arguments repugnant to 
 each other, for no other reason, but that the author 
 
p. H. s. III. § 5. 297 
 
 brings forward the various reflexions not unfrequent- 
 ly at variance with each other, which he had enter- 
 tained according to the various points of view in 
 which he had considered the cares and pursuits of 
 
 men There is a remarkable example in Prov. xxvi. 
 
 4, 5., of a designed opposition in sentiment, but 
 which is full of wise acuteness of observation, where 
 we have two opposite admonitions : the first of which 
 is, Answer not a fool according to his folly, and the 
 second, answer a fool according to his folly. In the 
 first of these, the answer is understood to be such, 
 as will shew the person answering, to be like to the 
 fool : in the second, the answer is understood to be 
 sudh as is suited to repress the folly of the fool. 
 
 Obs. 4. A greater difficulty at times occurs, when, 
 in the divine doctrines and laws, something appears 
 80 dissimilar, that, at first glance, no slight repug- 
 nancy seems to exist. We do not here refer to that 
 greater fulness and perfection, observable in the pro- 
 gress of time, of the notions delivered and represented 
 of the Supreme Deity, a thing quite consistent with 
 the gradual advancing cultivation of the human mind. 
 They are things of a diff'erent nature pertaining to di- 
 vine matters, and having an appearance of repugnancy, 
 which we here intend. — Of this sort, of which we shall 
 only select a few examples, one instance is, when God is 
 described in the same historical relation to be moved, 
 and not to be moved, to repentance, 1 Sam. xv. 11, 
 29, and 35. The former of these, which frequently 
 occurs, represents God as affected after the manner 
 of man, when any one does not answer his purpose, 
 and is rejected by him as unMorthy of his kindness ; 
 
298 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 the latter of these instances denies that God is really 
 like to changeable man, who changes his opinion, and 
 repents of his intentions — To the same class we also 
 refer God's saying, Exod. vi. 2, 3., that he was not 
 known by the name of Jehovah to the Patriarchs, 
 though, at the same time, when addressing Abraham, 
 Gen. XV. 7., he gives himself this appellation : but, we 
 ought to understand this declaration as applicable 
 merely to what was implied in the name, which the 
 posterity of the Patriarchs only at last came to under- 
 stand, when they worshipped him under that appella- 
 tion as the tutelary God of their nation, by which he 
 was clearly distinguished from the gods of other 
 nations, who were distinguished each by their own 
 name. — Farther, it is remarkable, that the value of 
 the external worship prescribed by Moses by divine 
 command, and sanctioned by the severest punish- 
 ments, was afterwards so disparaged, and even abo- 
 lished as disagreeable to God, nay as quite displeas- 
 ing to him, by men divinely inspired; as for example 
 by Samuel, 1 Sara. xv. 22., by Asaph, Ps. 1., and by 
 Isaiah, chap. i. But, in these instances, what is 
 taught is, that external service is of no value in the 
 sight of God, unless a mind, full of reverence for him 
 and addicted to that piety and virtue recommended 
 by him, be added. — Again, Moses does not seem con- 
 sistent with himself as a divine legislator, when, in 
 Levit. xvii. 3, 4., he forbids them to kill any animal, 
 allowed to be eaten, at home, while he permits them 
 to do this in Deut. xii. 15 and 20. But, the former 
 precept manifestly refers to the time when the Israel- 
 ites were in the deserts of Arabia, and when they had 
 
p. II. s. III. § 5. 299 
 
 little flesh meat, and the latter when they were to 
 dwell in the promised land. — The opposition, which 
 we shall notice in the last place, appears much greater 
 between the penal sanction annexed to the first and 
 second law of the Decalogue, where God openly de- 
 clares, that he will visit the iniquities of the fathers 
 upon the children even to the third and fourth gene- 
 ration, and between the no less clear declaration of 
 the divine will which is found in Deuter. xxiv. 16., 
 that the parents are not to be punished for the chil- 
 dren, nor the children for the parents. But indivi- 
 duals only are had respect to in this latter law, as 
 appears by comparing in particular Deut. xvii. 2 — 7., 
 while in the penalty attached to the two former laws, 
 regard is had not to individual Israelites, much less 
 to individuals of any other nation, but to the whole 
 Israelitish people, who, if they should be guilty of 
 defection from the worship of the true God, were to 
 suffer the punishment of this defection even to the 
 third and fourth generation, (compare Deut. iv. 25 — 
 27, and vii. 9 — 11,) which, accordingly happened to 
 them in the destruction of their state, and subsequent 
 exile. 
 
 Obs. 5. Such discrepancy as occasionally appears 
 in the description of things, for the most part readily 
 disappears when we attain to a right understanding of 
 the words and phrases. Thus, when in 2. Sam. 
 xxiv. 1., God is said to have instigated David to take 
 a census of the whole people, for the purpose of form- 
 ing a standing army,» if we consult the context, we 
 
 • In the origiual, " ut totum populum ad militiara conscri- 
 beret perpetuam." 
 
300 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 shall see that this means, that God permitted that 
 David should be instigated : neitlier is the word "i73xb 
 there to be referred to God, but ought to be trans- 
 lated, lohen it loas said to David. Observing this, 
 there will not exist the smallest appearance of opposi- 
 tion between this passage and that in 1 Chron. xxi. 1., 
 where this instigation is attributed to Satan, or 
 rather to some enemy or evil counsellor. — It has also 
 been foolishly thought, that there is an opposition 
 between what is said in Job xxxviii. 7., that the 
 morning stars sung for joy when God laid the foun- 
 dations of the earth, and the history in Genesis i., of 
 the creation of the stars after the creation of the 
 earth. But when, in Genesis i. 1., the heavens and 
 the earth are said to have been created, the stars 
 are afterwards represented to have been adapted to 
 the uses of the earth : while again, in the passage 
 of the book of Job, the heavenly inhabitants are de- 
 scribed as rejoicing, on the first morning of the earth, 
 over it just created. For as the visible heavens are 
 understood to consist of the sun, moon, and stars, 
 and the heavens are poetically used in Job xv. 15., 
 for the inhabitants of heaven, these last are those 
 who are there intended, or the same beings who are 
 called the sons of God in the parallelism of the sen- 
 tences. 
 
 Obs. 6. The examples of historical discrepancy, 
 which are also brought from the Old Testament, 
 are, for the most part, referable to an imperfect mode 
 of relating history, which often attends not particu- 
 larly either to the order of time, or of nice arrange- 
 ment; in clearing up these difficulties, however, the 
 
p. II, s. in. § 5. iiOl 
 
 exercise of an unprejudiced judgment, illuminated 
 by the light of true learning, is of much value. 
 These discrepancies are partly also to be referred 
 to the proper names of persons, which are not always 
 written in the same way, and frequently one man 
 has more names than one ; and partly they regard 
 numbers, which are sometimes written full and com- 
 plete, and at other times reduced to some greater 
 general computation, in stating which, no one need 
 wonder that errors have occasionally been com- 
 mitted. 
 
 Obs. 7. If all these things be as we have stated 
 them, and as we firmly believe them to be, it follows, 
 that an interpreter of the Old Testament must se- 
 dulously endeavour, when any appearance of discre- 
 pancy occurs, to ascertain whether it be of such a 
 nature as to need explanation, and how it is best re- 
 concilable. There are, indeed, persons in our times 
 who confidently affirm that real discrepancies do 
 occasionally occur in the books of the Old Testa- 
 ment, which are to be ascribed to the authors them- 
 selves. But when, in the profane writers of antiquity 
 of the best character and reputation, some things 
 occur related by them, which either seem to be in 
 opposition to each other, or to others certainly known 
 from other sources ; whether is it becoming boldly 
 and arrogantly to pronounce that an error exists, 
 when perhaps you are only betraying your own pre- 
 cipitancy or shameful ignorance, and through a little 
 more care bestowed on endeavouring to understand 
 the words and things, you might easily remove the 
 apparent inconsistency? Nay, even although this 
 
302 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 occasionallj' may not be possible, is it not more be- 
 coming to derive the cause of this from the number 
 of ages which have elapsed, from the great diversity 
 between our language and people and theirs, from 
 the loss of records, and our ignorance of many things ; 
 in fine, from the unskilfulness, negligence, or rash- 
 ness of transcribers? What then equity requires to 
 be done with regard to the best writers of antiquity, 
 is much more demanded in respect to these most 
 ancient of all writings, which are also of singular 
 excellence, and of divine origin ; and, as not a few 
 things, which formerly seemed to be most discor- 
 dant, have since been brought to accordance by 
 the attempts of unprejudiced interpreters, we ought 
 certainly not to despair of many others, as yet ob- 
 scure from their apparent inconsistency, being in time 
 satisfactorily illustrated : although there are certainly 
 many passages corrupted by the fault of transcribers, 
 which cannot be remedied by the best interpreter, on 
 which, therefore, the power of critical emendation 
 must be tried — of which we shall treat in the follow- 
 ing section. 
 
 END OF vol . I.