•^\^x^^^i 
 
 ^^^.im^^mm^J-'^'"^' 
 
 w% 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 '^, 
 
 Division ._DS 2li-.) 'O7 
 Section ^.^.ZX^^ - 
 
 S/ie//. 
 
 NuTnber 
 
 ^311 
 
I 
 
BY THE SAME AUTHOR. 
 
 OHEISTIANITY AKD SEOULAEISM. 
 
 OPINIONS OF THE PRESS. 
 
 " We commend it to the careful and respectful perusal of our readers." — Reasoner. 
 
 " Radiant with intellectual light." — British Messenger. 
 
 "A very clear, compendious, and able vidimus of the subject, and calculated, 
 from its size and shape, as well as from its execution, to be very useful. "—Bev. 
 George GiJjillan. 
 
 " The work bears evident marks throughout of high talent and great research." 
 —Scottish Press. 
 
 " This author is no windy polemic. Almost every page of the little work bears 
 evidence that the author is a hard thinker and diligent student. The style is terse and 
 vigorous, and the argument proceeds with clearness and force."— ^f^errfeen Herald. 
 
 " The object of this treatise is to meet secularists on their own ground. This 
 task is accomplished in a most satisfactory manner, in ten short chapters, in which 
 the leading doctrines of the Christian faith are established on grounds which reason 
 must acknowledge to be sufficient, and does in all other matters acknowledge to 
 be suflScient. The spirit in which the whole discussion is carried on is admirable." 
 — Scottish Guardian. 
 
 " Such as are capable of relishing a subtle ethical disquisition may expect a treat 
 of no common order. The wi-iter is one of those close, logical thinkers, more nearly 
 allied to the controversialists of a former and sturdier generation, than the literati 
 of the present age of light and flashy writing. This book is the production of a 
 man awake to the great realities of life, and anxious to assist others who may be 
 struggling with error. We recommend this book as a work of the right sort, and 
 which, if force of reasoning could suffice, might convert even Mr. Holyoake him- 
 self. " — Caledonian Mercury. 
 
 " Many of the thoughts interspersed throughout this small treatise are striking 
 and pregnant, and are pervaded by a fine Christian spirit. Opponents are met by 
 argument, not by invective ; so that to all interested in speculative questions we 
 can recommend the work, as containing a clear and masterly refutation of the 
 doctrines now in vogue among secularists and free-thinkers in general. " — T/ie 
 Wit7iess. 
 
 ' ' The principles of this author are those of the Scottish School of Philosophy, of 
 which he makes a most vigorous and successful application to this controversy. 
 The book is one of decided promise. We give a specimen of the writer's strength of 
 thought and clearness of style. "— United Presbyterian Magazine. By Rev. Br. Cairns. 
 
 " A brief but valuable book. Mr. Scott is thoroughly master of his subject. His 
 argument takes a wider range than secularism, which is the modern phase of 
 atheism. The counter arguments are stated with perfect fairness and candour, and 
 refuted with real ability. The book is highly creditable to Mr. Scott's talents and 
 acquirements, and must weigh with the more thoughtful infidels." — British and 
 Foreign Review. By Principal Cunningham. 
 
 " A book of invincible logic."~Meliora. 
 
PRINCIPLES 
 
 OF 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
PRINTED BY MURRAY AND GIBB, 
 FOR 
 
 T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH. 
 
 LONDON, HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO. 
 
 DUBLIN, ROBERTSON AND CO. 
 
 NEW YORK, .... SCRIENER, WELFORD, AND ARMSTRONG. 
 
PRINCIPLES 
 
 OF 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION 
 
 ESTABLISHED AND APPLIED TO BIBLICAL CRITICISM 
 
 AND SPECIALLY TO THE GOSPELS 
 
 AND PENTATEUCH. 
 
 EEV. JAMES ^'SCOTT, M.A., B.D. 
 
 Trjith, like a torch, the more 'tis shook, it shines. 
 
 &zttinti ^liitton. 
 
 EDINBUEGH: 
 T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET. 
 
 MDCCCLXXVII. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 This work consists of five principal parts — the forms 
 of New Testament quotation, together with their 
 analogous patristic and classical forms, their principles 
 of interpretation, the vindication of these principles, 
 and their application to biblical studies. Its object 
 is to verify and vindicate them by the analogy of 
 patristic, ecclesiastical, and classical citation, and to 
 apply the principles evolved to biblical doctrine, 
 exegesis, and apologetic. 
 
 We believe that biblical students, for whom chiefly 
 the work is designed, wiU readily admit the necessity 
 of some such work, especially on the principles of 
 interpretation involved in the quotations of the New 
 Testament from the Old. It is needed at once to 
 stimulate and to facilitate bibhcal inquiries, and not 
 only to shed some light on a broad and dark domain 
 of Scripture, but to furnish keys of solution. We 
 have endeavoured to supply this want in some measure, 
 not by a special examination and defence of all the 
 instances, which has been already done by several 
 
VI PEEFACE. 
 
 critics, but by presenting principles of interpretation 
 and the logic of the whole subject on an ample basis 
 of induction in biblical and cognate quotation, and 
 with special reference to the wide and important field 
 of biblical apologetic. This is attempted throughout 
 upon rational principles, which, if successfully applied, 
 justify the title of the work. 
 
 We append an index of quotation passages, and 
 prefix a table of contents, together with a list of the 
 principal works consulted or referred to in this volume 
 in connection with the literature of the subject. 
 
 Aberlour, August 1877. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PART I. 
 ^femulas 0f (LjuotctibiT. 
 
 SECTION riKST. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Importance of the Subject — Number of Quotations and of Quota- 
 tion Passages — Sources of Quotations — Their Classification — 
 Formulas of Citation and their Classification — Unaccredited 
 Citations by Satan and Uninspired Men Irrelevant, . .17 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 Their Classification — Literal, Substantial, Synthetic, Analytic, and 
 Idealistic Citation — Examination of Instances — Allusion, . 21 
 
 PART II. 
 
 SECTION FIKST. 
 
 Connection between Forms and Principles of Quotation — Classifica- 
 tion of Principles — Examination and Illustration of Instances — 
 Psychological, Grammatical, Analogical (Facts, Principles, Doc- 
 trines), S}Tithetic, and Prophetic Principles of Interpretation, . 32 
 
VIU CONTENTS. 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Pi'ophecy, Direct and Indirect — Typical Messianic and Non- 
 Messianic Prophecy, . . . . . .51 
 
 PART III. 
 
 SECTION riEST. 
 
 Patristic Quotation from Old Testament — Its Sources — Quotation 
 Formulas — Correspondence with Formulas of New Testament, . 63 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 Forms of Citation — Literal, Substantial, Synthetic, Paraphrastic", 
 Eclectic — Patristic Allegory — Its Causes and Effects, . . Q7 
 
 SECTION THIRD. 
 
 Patristic Citation of New Testament— Literal, Substantial, Syn- 
 thetic, Idealistic Quotation — Patristic Allusion — Degrees of 
 Allusion, General, Special, and Literal — Logical Value of Literal 
 Allusions — Guiding Principles of Judgment -Review of Patristic 
 Citation — Its Formulas and Forms similar in Earlier and Later 
 Fathers, but Progressive — A Parallel in Nomenclature of Gospels 
 — Citation from Memory— Scarcity of Copies of Scriptures — 
 Patristic Interpretation similar to New Testament Principles — 
 Difference — Allegory, Causes, and Results — Parallelism between 
 Fathers and New Testament in respect of Doubtful Cita- 
 tions, . . . . . . . .75 
 
 SECTION FOURTH. 
 Ecclesiastical Citation — Table of Reference — Vulgate Cited — Pro- 
 gress towards more Exact Citation — Regulating Principles — 
 Aquinas — A Kempis — Calvin — Bacon — Owen — Grotius — Butler 
 — Rutherford, . . . . . . .83 
 
CONTENTS. IX 
 
 SECTION FIFTH. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Classical Quotation — Citations of Philosophers from Classics the 
 Connecting Link — >Similar Formuias and Forms as elsewhere — 
 Bacon — Quintilian — Analogy of Written Citation and Written 
 Reporting — Agreement and Difference — Diversity in Reports of 
 same things in Old and New Testaments, and in Josephus and 
 Classical Historians, . . . . . .87 
 
 PART lY. 
 
 ©inbicatioiT 0f ^)itoicttioiT» 
 
 SECTION FIRST. 
 
 Recapitulation of Principles and Results — Septuagint preferred in 
 Citation — Reason why — Looser Forms not due merely to Cita- 
 tion from Memory, nor reconcilable with Hebrew on Basis of 
 Various Readings — To be determined by Facts of General Cita- 
 tion — Conditions of Problem — Status questionis — Literal Quo- 
 tation the Normal 'Form — Primary Object of all Citation to 
 reproduce Sense of Text — Freer Forms compatible with this 
 Object — Observed by Ecclesiastical and Classical Writers — 
 Foimded on Reason and Expediency — Objections contrary to 
 Analogy and Self-contradictory — Reason of alternate Use and 
 Disuse of Septuagint — Validity of General Principles of Quota- 
 tion a Presumptive Proof of its Accuracy — Difficulties and Dis- 
 crepancies to be expected — Modes of Solution, . . .92 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 Principles of Interpretation — Relation of Forms of Quotation and 
 Principles of Interpretation — Old Testament Rationally Written 
 and to be Rationally Interpreted — Psychological and Grammatical 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Principles Vindicated — An Author's Stand-point to be Considered 
 — All Texts, Literal and Tropical, to be Grammatically Interpreted 
 — Extremes of Literalism and Allegory — Their Ecclesiastical His- 
 tory—Mutual Relation and Definition of Metaphor, Synecdoche, 
 Enigma, Analogy, Allegory, Parable, Proverb, and Type — A 
 Common Basis of Similitude— Analogy defended on Logical 
 Grounds — Definition of Type— Its Basis, Elements, and highest 
 Form — Specific Difference between Symbol, Analogy, and Type 
 — Reason, Hypothetical Necessity and Suitableness of Type — 
 Connection with Plan and Progress of Revelation — Relation of 
 Type and Prophecy — General Characteristics of Prophecy — 
 Special Classes, Direct and Indirect Prophecy — Special Kinds, 
 Messianic and Non-Messianic — Vindication of Principles involved 
 — Mutual Relations of Divine Purpose, Prophecy, and Promise 
 — Key of Solution of Parallel Difficulties — Synthetic Interpreta- 
 tion — Its Basis — Alternatives — Gnosticism, Rationalism, and 
 Anabaptist Views of Old Testament, . . . .102 
 
 PART V. 
 
 SECTION FIRST. 
 
 Proof of External Unity of Canon— Evidence of Patristic Quotation 
 for Authenticity and Credibility of Old and New Testaments — 
 Argument Cumulative — Attacks on Gospels — Historical, Ration- 
 alistic, Mythical Theories— Protevangelion Theory — Solution of 
 Similarity and Dissimilarity of Gospels — Full Force of Patristic 
 Argument— Argument from Citation of Epistles — Connection 
 between Authenticity, Credibility, and Inspiration — Reflex Argu- 
 ment from Inspiration for Credibility — Proof of Plenary Verbal 
 Inspiration, . . . . . . .130 
 
CONTENTS. XI 
 
 SECTION SECOND. 
 Internal Unity of Scripture — Two Covenants, Works and Grace 
 — Two Economies, Law and Gospel — Elements of Sinai tic 
 Covenant, Moral, Ceremonial, Civil — Dispensations Identified, 
 Historically, Morally, Prophetically, Exegetically, DoctrinaUy, 
 and Apologetically — Eelation of Eevelation and Dispensa- 
 tion — Former the Law of Latter— Former remains when Latter 
 changes — Consequences of Confusion on Subject — Apologetic 
 Inferences from Unit}'' of Dispensations — Author of Nature 
 the God of Providence — Gnosticism — Common Origin of Spiritual 
 Principles in Divine Nature — Progressive Development mthout 
 Increment of Absolutely New Truth — Morality and Religion of 
 Old and New Testament same in Kind, but diJBferent in Degree 
 — Historical and Doctrinal Proof of this Position — Decalogue, 
 its Character and Permanence — Identity of the Moral Law and 
 Decalogue — Vindication of Decalogue — Modern Attacks — Solu- 
 tion of Difficulties — Conclusion, . . . . .142 
 

 ERRATA. / 
 
 Page 15, 
 
 read im. for in Nov. Test. 
 
 „ 15, 
 
 ,, Ueberweg /or IJberwig. 
 
 „ 88, 
 
 ,, fingit /or fingil. 
 
 „ 105, 
 
 ,, violation for violence. 
 
 , 112, 
 
 ,, Melchisedec /or Melchesedec 
 
 „ 137, 
 
 ,, causally /or casually. 
 
LIST OF WOEKS 
 
 CONSULTED OR REFERRED TO IN THIS VOLUME. 
 
 Alfoed — Commentary on Greek New Testament. 
 
 A Kempis — De Imitatione Christi. 
 
 Aknold, M. — Contemporary Review, 1875. Article I. 
 
 Aquinas, T.— Opera, Tom. Tertius. 
 
 Bacon — Essays, and Advancement of Learning. 
 
 Bengelii Gnomon Nov. Test. 
 
 Bauk, C, F,— Das Christentlium und Die Christliche Kirche, and Ten- 
 
 denz-Kritik. 
 Beck — Propad. Entwicklung, 242. 
 Bkown, Dr. D. — Introduction to Four Gospels. 
 BuTLEE — Analogy of Religion. 
 Calvini in Nov. Test. Commentaria. 
 Calvin's Letters by Bonnet, 
 CjUIPBELL — Dissertations on Gospels. 
 CiCEEONis Epistolce, et Orationes. 
 Ceemee — Lexicon of Greek New Testament. 
 Davidson, S. — Herm, Sac, and Introduction. 
 DiODATi — Annotationes. 
 
 Eenesti — Principles of Biblical Interpretation. 
 EusEBius — Ecclesiastical History. 
 Faikbaien — Hermeneutical Manual, and Typology. 
 
XIV WORKS CONSULTED IN THIS VOLUME. 
 
 Gkotius, H. — Defensio Christ, Eeligionis. 
 
 Gaussen — Inspiration of Scripture, and Canon of Scripture. 
 
 Hall, E.— Works, Vol. 11. 
 
 Hug — Einleitung. 
 
 Hengstenberg — Christology, and Commentaries. 
 
 HoRATius — Ars Poetica. 
 
 JosEPHUS — Wars of Jews. 
 
 Klausen— Hermeneutik. 
 
 Lardner — Credibility of Gospel History. 
 
 Livil Titi Historise. Lib. xxxix. 40. 
 
 Lee— Inspiration of Scriptures. 
 
 Michaelis — Introductory Lectures to New Testament. 
 
 Marsh, Bishop — Lectures. 
 
 MosHEiM — Ecclesiastical History. 
 
 Norton — Genuineness of Four Gospels. 
 
 Olshausen — Introduction, and Commentaries. 
 
 Patrum Apos. Opera. Hefele, 4to edition. 
 
 Pareau — Principles of Interpretation, 
 
 Prideaux — Old and New Testament Connected. 
 
 Quintilianus — Opera, Lib. viii. 9. 
 
 Review, British and Foreign, 1872, April and October. Articles I. 
 and VI. 
 
 Robinson — Greek and English Lexicon of New Testament. 
 
 Rainy — Cunningham Lectures. 
 
 Rudelbach — Zeitschrift. 
 
 Rosenmuller — Messianic Psalms. 
 
 Supernatural Religion, &c. Two Volumes, 1875. 
 
 Schleiermacheb's Works. 
 
 Stier, Rudolph — Words of Jesus. 
 
 Strauss — Leben Jesu. 
 
WORKS CONSULTED IN THIS VOLUME. XV 
 
 Stuart, M. — Commentary on Hebrews. 
 
 Septuagint Version. 
 
 Tdrpie — Old Testament in New, and New Testament View of Old. 
 
 Tholuck — Das A. Test, in N. Test. 
 
 Trench — Synonyms, and On Miracles. 
 
 Uberwig — History of Phil. Vol. I. 
 
 ViTRiNGA — Observationes Sacrte. 
 
 Vulgatfe Biblia Sacra. 
 
 Webster and Wilkinson — Greek New Testament. 
 
 Winer — Grammar of New Testament Diction. 
 
 WiTSius De Economia Foederum. 
 
INTRODUCTIOK 
 
 Soon after tlie publication of this work, several months 
 ago, a fresh interest and impulse were given to the 
 study of the whole subject of New Testament quota- 
 tion, specially in its application to biblical criticism, 
 by the appearance of the critical methods and results 
 of rationalism in a very prominent form, and in a 
 very unlikely quarter, in this country. 
 
 The object of this Introduction is to readjust and 
 apply the principles established in this volume to the 
 present phase of the controversy on the Continent and 
 in Britain. 
 
 Modern rationalism may be classified under the 
 two forms of rational naturalism and rational super- 
 naturalism, which differ in regard to the sources and 
 substance of religious truth, but agree regarding its 
 test or standard. These principles are so different in 
 reference to revelation, that the one school may be 
 called believing and the other unbelieving ; but they 
 have so much in common as regards the interpretation 
 of Scripture, that both may fairly be designated 
 rationalistic. The former evolves all religion from 
 the human consciousness, the latter admits an objective 
 
 h 
 
XVlll INTRODUCTION. 
 
 revelation of God in the events of His government, 
 and even a modified inspiration in the recipients or the 
 writers of it ; but they both deny the plenary inspira- 
 tion of the authors, and the original and absolute 
 truth and authority of the Scriptures, and also pro- 
 ceed less or more on the principle that reason is the 
 test not only of the credentials of a revelation, but 
 also of the truth of its contents. And as principles 
 not only of revelation and interpretation, but of 
 inspiration, go together, the mental condition necessary 
 to receive and to record a revelation is regarded as the 
 mere enlightenment of the religious consciousness, 
 compatible with a large measure of error, and not as 
 involving the infallible guidance of the Holy Spirit 
 into all truth, so that the record is as true as the 
 revelation. Such are the proper results of rationalism 
 applied either to revelation, inspiration, or interpre- 
 tation, which are psychologically and historically 
 associated. 
 
 These negative and destructive principles appeared 
 in close succession in Britain and Germany ; in the 
 former, in the practical form of objections to Scripture 
 facts and doctrines ; in the latter, as speculative 
 theories of the literary origin and authorship of the 
 books of Scripture. Then, English pragmatism paved 
 the way for continental speculation ; now, the Conti- 
 nent aspires to lead England. The British deists 
 were the pioneers of the continental rationalists, who 
 have laboured ever since either to fill up or to bridge 
 over the chasm between reason and revelation. In 
 
INTRODUCTION. XIX 
 
 Germany, believing theologians, who carry out their 
 principles fully, are the exception ; in England, they 
 are the rule. But if rationalism in any form gain 
 the ascendency in Christendom, the Protestant prin- 
 ciple of the infallible authority of Scripture will not 
 only be subverted, but theology will be corrupted, and 
 the spiritual life of the Church will decline. The 
 form of godliness will die away with the power, public 
 worship and the preaching of the gospel will be 
 neglected, and the sanctuaries of God in England, as 
 in Germany, be left desolate. 
 
 2. The objections of extreme rationalists to the age, 
 authorship, and historical truth of certain books of 
 Scripture are ultimately based on the alleged impossi- 
 bility of the supernatural ; but the moderate rationalists, 
 who believe in revelation, rest them entirely on in- 
 ternal grounds, in which their great strength is said 
 to lie.'"* They find certain internal marks indicative 
 of the growth and age of these books, like the rings 
 around the trunks of certain trees. There are certain 
 anachronisms in words and dates, self-contradictions 
 in fact and doctrine, not only diversities but discre- 
 pancies of style, and points of similarity and of dis- 
 similarity in matter or in form. Many of these 
 difficulties are clearly imaginary, whilst others are 
 greatly exaggerated ; but the critics, instead of 
 patiently waiting and working for their solution, 
 have invented a new method of criticism and a new 
 theory of inspiration, either to remove or merely to 
 ♦Article "Bible," p. 644. 
 
XX INTRODUCTION. 
 
 account for discrepancies, which a higher style of 
 criticism may ultimately solve. Some of them have 
 been guilty of the fallacy of the old Greek philo- 
 sophers, who first framed a theory, and then sought 
 facts to sustain it ; others have prematurely admitted 
 the discrepant facts alleged, and then formed a theory 
 to cover them. 
 
 The single fragment of external evidence adduced 
 in favour of the late composition or completion of 
 the Gospels by such critics as the author of the 
 article " Bible " in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, is a 
 certain possible construction of the Xo^ia of Papias 
 which is very improbable, but which, though correct, 
 would not even point to, much less warrant, " the 
 conclusion that the synoptical Gospels are non-apos- 
 tolic digests of spoken and written apostolic tradition, 
 and that the arrangement of the material in orderly 
 form took place only gradually and by many essays." ^ 
 Colenso and Davidson, admitting the uncertainty of 
 this sort of evidence, have come to the same conclu- 
 sion on internal grounds alone. The above quotation 
 contains as many misstatements as it does sentences. 
 "We might meet one possibility by alleging another — 
 that the \o<yia of Matthew Tiiay mean his Gospel in 
 Hebrew. But we have earlier external testimony to 
 the originality and authenticity of the four Gospels, 
 furnished by the quotations of the Apostolic Fathers, 
 who were prior to Papias. And though the term 
 Xoyoa, contrary to New Testament and patristic usage, 
 * Article "Bible," pp. 634-645 ; Eusebius, H. E. iii. 39. 
 
INTRODUCTION. XXI 
 
 meant a collection of the words of Christ, and not a 
 complete gospel, the general inference drawn from it 
 would not follow ; for the context of the extract from 
 Papias, in Eusebius, shows that the \6^ia of Matthew 
 were understood to denote his Gospel in Hebrew, as 
 certainly as the Xo7ta of Mark his own Gospel. 
 
 Authorship and credibility are justly regarded as 
 closely, if not causally, connected ; for the authors of 
 the four Gospels claim to have been either eye- 
 witnesses or contemporaries, and so thoroughly con- 
 versant with the events recorded, that they could not 
 be mistaken ; but as the negative critics do not admit 
 the originality and authenticity of our Gospels, they 
 must deny their historical credibility, or maintain it 
 only b}^ assuming as a last resort their inspiration. 
 
 3. We have ample evidence of the existence of both 
 the Gospels and the Epistles long prior to the period 
 which the critics assign towards the close of the 
 second century.* And if we maintain that the four 
 Gospels as we have them are " non-apostolical digests of 
 spoken and written apostolic tradition," which gradually 
 assumed their present form without leaving any traces 
 of the process, we must admit that, as tradition is the 
 mother of fable, a traditional source of the Gospel, 
 wholly or in part, is a concession made to its historical 
 inaccuracy.f 
 
 We know that Matthew and John were personal 
 
 * The Gospels in the Second Century, by W. Sanday, M.A., D.D. 
 + Introduction to the Study of the New Testament, vol. i. p. 463, 
 by Samuel Davidson, D.D. 
 
XXll INTRODUCTION. 
 
 friends and followers of Christ ; while Mark and Luke 
 not only examined and verified for themselves the facts 
 of their histories, but also got them from the lips of 
 eye-witnesses and ministers of the word, some of whom, 
 such as Peter and Paul, are reported to have approved 
 and authorized their writings, which are therefore indi- 
 rectly apostolical.-'^ And as these evangelists were 
 apostolic men, companions and co-workers with these 
 apostles, if not themselves apostles, they shared not 
 only in the fulness of the prophecy of Joel, of the 
 Pentecostal effusion, and of the special promise of 
 Jesus,f but possessed the extraordinary gifts of the 
 Spirit in common, not only with such fellow-labourers 
 as Timothy and Titus,J but also with the ordinary 
 members of the Church, in the special forms of 
 tongues, miracles, and prophecy. § 
 
 4. This theory of the formation of the fourfold 
 Gospel is applied substantially to the Pentateuch, 
 which sustains a relation to the Old Testament, and, 
 indeed, to the whole revelation, similar to that of the 
 Gospels to the New Testament. In its present form of 
 both history and law-book it is said to be post-Mosaic ; 
 its credibility is admitted by the moderate, but denied 
 by the extreme rationalists — such as Ewald and 
 Kuenen, Colenso and Davidson. The critical prin- 
 ciples of Professor Smith, which are not yet matured 
 
 * Luke i, 1-3 ; Irenseus, Advers. Hseres. iii. 1, and iii. 14 ; Euseb. 
 H. E, iii. 4, iii. 39, and vi. 14. 
 t Joel ii. 28, 29 ; Acts ii. 16, 17 ; John xiv. 26. 
 X 1 Tim. iv. 14, and vi. 20. 
 § 1 Cor. xii. 1-11 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 1-28 ; Mark xvi. 17, 18 ; Acts ii. 4. 
 
INTKODUCTION. XXIU 
 
 nor fully applied, tend to subvert its historio-al truth, 
 which he appears to conserve by the illogical and 
 clumsy expedient of inspiration. If its Mosaic author- 
 ship be denied, its historical credibility may be assumed, 
 but it cannot be defended. 
 
 Deuteronomy in particular is declared by some to be 
 pseudo-Mosaic— a mere literary fraud ; by others, to be 
 " a prophetic legislative programme," ascribed to Moses 
 by a just and common form of literary presentation, 
 which amounts to personation/'" Such a programme of 
 thoughts, or of things to be done or realized, is quite 
 intelligible; but such a sketch or scheme of things 
 already attained is not only a palpable misnomer, but 
 palpable nonsense, and a direct self-contradiction. 
 
 Critical objections to the Mosaic authorship of the 
 Pentateuch rest chiefly on three things — the different 
 elements, such as Elohim and Jehovah, found there ; 
 the special contradiction alleged between the use of 
 Jehovah in Genesis, and the particular statement in 
 Exodus regarding this name ; together with diverse 
 anachronisms in names and dates and contradictions 
 in matters of fact. We may safely concede two or 
 any number of elementary, and even documentary 
 sources of the history, such as Spinoza, de Wette, and 
 Kuenen, or others postulate ; and we may also admit 
 apparent contradictions between the different parts of 
 the whole, and yet be able so to utilize the one and to 
 solve the other as to preserve the internal harmony 
 and credibility of the whole revelation. 
 * Article "Bible," pp. 637, 638. 
 
XXIV ' INTRODUCTION. 
 
 5. This may be done in various ways. We may 
 apply the principle of 'proU'psis^ recognised by them- 
 selves, to the history both of the fathers of the race 
 and of Israel, in connection with the latter of which 
 chiefly the above alleged contradiction exists. The 
 author of the history of the patriarchs expressly states 
 in Exodus that the Lord was revealed to Abram as 
 El-Shaddai, which is self-definitive ; but though he 
 uses Jehovah alternately with Elohim throughout, he 
 is careful not to put this singular name into their 
 mouths. We may also take the narrative as it stands, 
 in all its unique simplicity and beauty, and urge that 
 the passage in Exodus refers to the realization of the 
 name Jehovah, and not to its primary revelation.t 
 Moreover, on the principles of grammatical exegesis 
 we may argue that Elohim and Jehovah are employed 
 synonymously throughout for God generally, notwith- 
 standing a radical difference of meaning as revelations 
 of the divine nature, the former properly denoting 
 Creator-God, or true Divinity in a creative potency 
 which embraces all things ; the latter, the unity of the 
 divine self- existence as the one living and true God, 
 which involves the idea of all-sufficiency to His people 
 in revelation and redemption.^; 
 
 We can also maintain on historical grounds that the 
 old world had lost, both before and after the flood, the 
 knowledge of the one true God, and of the grand dis- 
 
 * See Gen. xii. 8 ; Gen. xiii. 3 ; Gen, xxviii. 19, and Gen. xxxv. 15. 
 + Ex. vi. 3 ; Gen. xvii. 1, xxxv. 11, and xlviii. 3. 
 X Gen. xvii.-xxii. 
 
INTRODUCTION. XXV 
 
 tinctive name of Jehovah, which in all the fulness of 
 its meaning was merely reproclaimed to Moses at the 
 burning bush in Egypt. The various Scripture notices 
 of the cliaracter of the world before and after the flood, 
 and more especially the atheism, as well as polytheism, 
 implied in the building of rebellious Babel onwards to 
 the calling of Abram, himself an idolater among idola- 
 ters, show that the significance of the name Jehovah, 
 if not the name itself, had fallen into oblivion, and 
 must be republished to a people whose sires in Chal- 
 dea, and their sons, not only in Egypt but in Canaan, 
 manifested a peculiar proneness to idolatry/'^ 
 
 6. Till negative critics agree among themselves 
 regarding the origin or date of such geographical 
 names as Dan and Hebron,t and other things, their 
 objections from such sources might be left unnoticed. 
 It not only cannot be shown that these names arose 
 after the conquest of Canaan, and therefore could not 
 have come from the pen of Moses, but the contrary can 
 be established by a constructive critical argument. 
 There is no stronger evidence in Joshua and Judges of 
 their posterior origin than there is of the name Bethel, 
 which, though expressly mentioned in Genesis as having 
 l)een given by Jacob, is yet referred to after the con- 
 quest exactly in the same way as the other names — 
 Dan and Hebron.;}; But for this notice in Genesis, the 
 
 * Gen. vi. 1-8 ; Gen. xi. 1-9. + Gen. xiii. 18, and xiv. 14. 
 
 X Gen. xxviii. 19 ; Josh. vii. 2 ; Josh. xiv. 15, and xv. 13, 14 ; and 
 Judg. i. 23; Judg. i. 10. The Hebrew for ''be/ore" in these 
 passages means formerly, or aforetime, in general, and not before the 
 conquest in particular. 
 
XXVI INTRODUCTION. 
 
 same inference might have been drawn in regard to it 
 as to them from the references in other places, 
 
 Hebron is expressly said to have been built seven 
 years before Zoan (Tanis), the ancient capital of 
 Egypt,* well known to Moses as one of the most 
 ancient and famous cities in the world, and expressly 
 declared by some of the prophets to have been the 
 scene of some of his miracles, and of the judgments of 
 Heaven on his opponents.t In the time of Abram 
 it bore the name of Mamre, which it took from the 
 name of the Amorite prince, its possessor.^ The 
 name Hebron, therefore, was prior to that of Kirjath- 
 Arba,§ which it received long afterwards from Arba, 
 a great man among the Anakinis, who expelled the 
 ancient Amorite inhabitants of the country. || Hence 
 we find in Genesis that Mamre and Kirjath-Arba are 
 both defined as the old Hebron in the land of Canaan 
 proper, H that the original name gave place to Kirjath- 
 Arba, and that it was restored after the conquest, the 
 more effectually to obliterate the pagan and political 
 associations of Arba.'"'''^^ 
 
 It is very improbable that the Dan of the Penta- 
 teuch ft is the Laish-Dan of Joshua, for it would not 
 
 *]Srumb. xiii. 22. 
 
 t Ps. Ixxviii. 12, 43 ; Isa. xix. 11, 13 (cf. Ex. vii. and Ex. xii.). 
 
 X Gen. xiii. 18 ; Gen. xiv. 13. § Gen. xiii. 18. 
 
 II Josh. xiv. 15 ; Josh. xv. 13. 
 
 ^Gen. xiii. 18 ; Gen. xxiii. 2, 19 ; Gen. xxxv. 27 ; Gen. xxxvii. 14. 
 See Keil, Introduction to Old Testament, vol. i. pp. 188, 192 (Clark). 
 
 ** Josh. xiv. 15. See Keil on Josh. xiv. 15, p. 361 (Clark), and 
 Hengstenberg, Beitrage, iii. p. 187 sqq. 
 
 +t Gen. xiv. 14, and Deut. xxxiv. 1. Kurtz, History of Old 
 Covenant, vol. i. p. 216 (Clark). Josh. xix. 47 ; Judges xviii. 29. 
 
INTRODUCTION. XXVll 
 
 suit the geographical conditions of the narrative in 
 Genesis,'"^ and there is another Dan more suitable, 
 called in Samuel Dan-Jaan, and probably situated in 
 the north of Palestine, t The negative critics, unable 
 to establish their long array of evidences of a later 
 date, have reduced their number till they have shrunk 
 into little measure, which weighed in the balance is 
 found wanting. 
 
 Other objections, drawn from the presupposed 
 existence of a kingship in Israel,;]; from supposed 
 references in the Pentateuch to the conquest, § from 
 marks of a development in ritual and doctrine, as 
 well as from contradictory legislation respecting the 
 proper place of sacrifice, || are not critically formid- 
 able. Moses certainly knew from the prophecy of 
 Jacob that there would be kings of the line of Israel, 
 as there were dukes or princes of the line of Esau.'I 
 The Israelites were out of the desert proper and on 
 the skirts of the Promised Land when the episode in 
 Numbers was written.'"'"''^ The ceremonial law in Exodus 
 about the place of sacrifice is a general precept,tt 
 which was acted on during the sojourn in the desert, 
 and during the subsequent troublous times of the 
 Judges and Kings till the permanent establishment of 
 
 * Gen. xiv. 14. 
 
 t 2 Sam. xxiv. 6. See Keil, vol. i. p. 192, and Hengs. p. 194. 
 t Gen. xxxvi. 31. 
 
 § Gen. xii. 6 ; Dent. ii. 12 ; Num. xv. 32. 
 
 II Article " Bible," pp. 634, 635. Ex. xx. 24 (cf. Dent, xxxiii. 19 ; 
 1 Kings xix. 14 ; 2 Kings xxii. and xxiii.). 
 IT Gen. xlix. 8, 9, 10. 
 ** Numb. XV. 32-36. +t Ex. xx. 24. 
 
XXVm INTRODUCTION. 
 
 a central house of worship in the days of Solomon. 
 This law contemplated the worship of Jehovah in 
 every place where He recorded His name, but not on 
 any or other altars, which were interdicted as not only 
 politically inexpedient, but as morally dangerous, by 
 fostering foul idolatry in the absence of proper priestly 
 supervision.'"' This law, however much it may have 
 been violated by idolatrous kings and their subjects, 
 and even ignored in times of reformation,! was ob- 
 served in principle by such prophets as Samuel and 
 Elijah and Gad, even in the apparent breach of the 
 letter, when in special emergencies they exercised 
 their prophetical authority from God in making the 
 ceremonial give place to the moral, sacrifice to mercy, 
 and mere sanctuary to service.^ And finally, between 
 the giving of the Law in Exodus and its repetition in 
 Deuteronomy, at the close of nearly forty years, there 
 is ample time to account for any diversity of style, and 
 any development, not only of subjective belief, but of 
 objective doctrine and even ritual, which can be shown 
 to exist. Deuteronomy repeats and expounds, but it 
 does not alter nor even modify the primary legislation 
 of Exodus in regard either to doctrine or to worship. 
 
 We might even plead with the critics themselves 
 in other cases the possibility, especially in connection 
 with names and definitions of place, not only of 
 
 * Josh. xxii. 15-32. 
 
 1 1 Kings XV. 14, and 1 Kings xxii. 43 ; 2 Cliron. xiv. 13, and 2 
 Chron. xx. 32, 33. 
 
 Z 1 Sam. vii. 9 ; 1 Sam. ix. 13, 1 Sam. xi. 14, 15, and 1 Sam. 
 xvi. 1-5 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 18 ; 1 Chron. xxi. 18. 
 
INTKODUCTION. XXIX 
 
 occasional undesigned corruptions, but of deliberate 
 interpolation by scribes and copyists ; we shall, how- 
 ever, merely notice that the writers, who added to 
 Deuteronomy and Joshua the accounts of the deaths 
 of Moses and his successor,"^* might have also inserted 
 other words and particulars without appreciably 
 affecting not only the Mosaic authorship but even the 
 integrity of the Pentateuch. And even though it 
 were true that the critics have made out a case on 
 one or two minor points, we would not be thereby 
 compelled to remodel the history and to read it 
 backwards. 
 
 7. But it is necessary to examine more particularly 
 the logic of the higher criticism. Beginning with the 
 New Testament, we find that the final editor or editors 
 were neither apostles, nor their companions, nor their 
 contemporaries, nor even known authors, much less 
 eye-witnesses of the events recorded.t 'Now this 
 editor must have been either inspired or uninspired. 
 If the latter, then the Gospels have no title to supreme 
 and infallible authority. They cannot even claim to 
 be true, as the writings of contemporary and credible 
 authors, who saw what they wrote, much less can they 
 be called authoritative. They possess neither the 
 secondary authority of mere credibility, nor the 
 supreme authority of God speaking in them. 
 
 If this unknown editor was inspired, then the proof 
 of the authority of the Gospels is a mere assumption. 
 
 * Dent, xxxiv. 1-12 ; Josh. xxiv. 29-33. 
 t Article ** Bible," in Encyclop. Britann. 
 
XXX INTRODUCTION. 
 
 We have no historical evidence of the continuance of 
 inspiration down to the period postulated, but we have 
 ample evidence of the contrary in the doctrinal and 
 moral degeneracy of the Church of the second century. 
 This mode of proof assumes inspiration, and then 
 reasons from it to authority. It takes for granted that 
 the Gospels are somehow inspired, and then concludes 
 that they are authoritative. It involves several 
 fallacies, the first of which is petitio principii under 
 two forms. The critics first assume that some un- 
 known but inspired author edited the Gospels. Then 
 they reason. Some unknown editor must have digested 
 the Gospels : therefore the Gospels are authoritative. 
 
 This, again, contains the fallacy of hysteron proteron, 
 the last put first. Thus, the Gospels are inspired, 
 therefore they are true ; instead of the logical method, 
 the Gospels are credible, therefore they are inspired 
 and consequently authoritative, according to their own 
 external evidence in the special promise of the Spirit 
 to guide the writers into all truth,'"'' as well as their 
 own consciousness of inspiration! and the powers 
 which they exercised as seals of their mission.^ 
 
 These two errors end in the fallacy of the circle, or 
 in circular reasoning. Thus, the Gospels are inspired, 
 therefore they are authoritative ; then, next, the 
 Gospels are authoritative, involving credibility, there- 
 fore they are inspired. 
 
 8. The more moderate rationalists, and in particular 
 
 * Jolin xiy. 26. t 1 Cor. ii. 13. 
 
 % Mark xvi. 20 ; Luke xxiv. 49. 
 
INTRODUCTION. XXXI 
 
 the author of the article " Bible," rest the authority of 
 the Pentateuch, and specially of Deuteronomy, on the 
 witness of the Lord and the testimonium Spiritus 
 Sandi.^ But this method of proof is by itself not 
 only ambiguous, but one-sided and inconclusive. 
 
 If by the testimony of the Spirit, as distinct from 
 Christ's, be meant the witness of the Holy Ghost in 
 the apostles, then the long array of citation texts, 
 which is allowed to prove the authority of the Book 
 of Deuteronomy, proves also its authorship.^ The one 
 involves the other. It is the authentic, and there- 
 fore the authoritative, writing of Moses the prophet. 
 The latter is admitted with some reserve, but the 
 former is denied. The critics concede that such 
 quotations decide the truth and authority of the 
 sayings and doings specified, but they deny that they 
 prove the authenticity of the books as being from the 
 pen of Moses. But the writings and sayings of 
 Moses alike are those ascribed to him by the Jews in 
 the books called by his name,;]; and therefore these 
 two synonymous modes of quotation prove their 
 authorship as well as their authority. This is a 
 position, however, which must be maintained with 
 caution and discrimination. Though it could be 
 
 * Remarks by Professor Smith on a memorandum of sub-committee 
 of the Free Church College, on the article "Bible," in the Encyclo- 
 paedia Britannica ; also Assembly Papers, part 2, p. 141, 1877. 
 
 + Matt. xix. 8, Deut. xxiv, 1 ; Mark x. 5, Deut. xxiv. 1 ; Mark 
 xil. 26, Ex. iii. 1-6 ; John v. 46, 47-Acts iii. 22, Deut. xviii. 15-19 ; 
 Rom. X. 5-9, Lev. xviii. 5, Deut. xxx. 12, 13; Rom. x. 19, Deut. 
 xxxii. 21 ; 1 Cor. ix. 19, Deut. xxv. 4. 
 
 ::: Matt. V. 21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43. 
 
XXXll INTRODUCTION. 
 
 shown that Jude quoted the apocryphal book of. 
 Enoch, instead of reproducing on the authority of 
 inspiration a well-known tradition, we would not be 
 warranted to regard the work as authentic and authori- 
 tative just because it is not found in the canon of 
 Scripture. "^^ If citations from the Pentateuch are not 
 allowed to demonstrate both authorship and authority, 
 we have only three things between which to choose — 
 either such texts are spurious, or our Lord and His 
 apostles did not know the authorship of the books 
 cited, or they knowingly accommodated themselves to 
 the phraseology of the times, which they knew to be 
 contrary to truth. The first will not be maintained 
 by any who believe in the integrity of Scripture, nor 
 the second by believers in the divinity of Christ and 
 in the plenary inspiration of the apostles, so that the 
 last is generally accepted notwithstanding the illogical 
 and injurious consequences which it involves. The 
 theory of accommodation is one of the most dangerous 
 in character and tendency. Whether it be represented 
 as done in ignorance or in knowledge, it is fatal alike 
 to the moral character and the intellectual competency 
 of Christ and His apostles as teachers or interpreters 
 of Scripture. It may be argued that they accom- 
 modated to Jewish conceptions in connection with 
 other facts within the wide spheres of creation, pro- 
 vidence, and redemption, such as the origin of the 
 world, the fall, and the flood, the incarnation and 
 atonement of Christ. The history of German theology 
 
 * Jude, vers. 14, 15, 16. 
 
INTRODUCTION. XXXUl 
 
 abounds with instances, especially the frequent identi- 
 fication of things connected but not the same, such as 
 demons with diseases, and the casting out of demons 
 with the cure of diseases. 
 
 Moreover, not only is the Old Testament founded 
 on Moses as directly as the New Testament is on the 
 Gospels, but even the whole Scripture rests on the 
 Pentateuch, just as all the law and the prophets 
 depend on two principles. Moses relates the creative 
 and redemptive works of God, which the other Scrip- 
 tures commemorate and carry forward to their goal. 
 If, therefore, we deny the historical truth of the books 
 of Moses, no solid basis of fact is left for the subse- 
 quent developments of the Old and New Testaments. 
 Not only would the doctrines and duties of the pro- 
 phets be mere dissolving views, — a mere Oriental 
 mirage, or the baseless fabric of airy visions, — but 
 the exegesis of our Lord and His apostles would rest 
 on fictions instead of on facts. And, indeed, some of 
 the advocates of these principles seem to have already 
 arrived at this goal ; for they make a distinction as 
 regards authority between Christ and His apostles, 
 and though they admit a certain sort of inspiration 
 everywhere, they find supreme and absolute authority 
 nowhere.^ 
 
 If, again, the testimonium Spiritics Sancti means the 
 moral and internal evidence which Deuteronomy con- 
 tains of its divine inspiration, it is not only a mere 
 
 * Revelation and Inspiration : A Sermon. By Marcus Dods, 
 D.D. 
 
XXXIV INTRODUCTION. 
 
 assumption on the pseudo-Mosaic view of the book, 
 but carries on its forehead its own disproof, in being 
 a literary fiction, which is a literary falsehood or pious 
 fraud. It were at best but a false account or repre- 
 sentation of good moral legislation, — a thing not only 
 unparalleled but indefensible. The morality of any 
 work of fiction could not justify its representation as 
 a fact, or its imputation to an unreal author. There 
 is nothing analogous in the whole range of human 
 legislation or of profane history. Both the Code and 
 the Institutes of Justinian exhibit the historical 
 development of Eoman jurisprudence, of which they 
 are summary digests ; but they do not present the 
 anomaly involved in the theory which regards Deuter- 
 onomy as at once law-book and history.'"'" The laws 
 of Menu, though founded not on abstract principles 
 of equity, but on concrete cases brought before the 
 Great King for judgment, are not at all a history of 
 the legislation and reign of that real or fictitious 
 sovereign. 
 
 This theory of Deuteronomy, as merely ascribed to 
 Moses, sustains the same relation to the speeches 
 which Homer and Livy put into the mouths of their 
 heroes as the frost-work on a window to a flower. 
 Between the literary presentation or personation of 
 the Deuteronomist and the speeches of Livy there is 
 a superficial resemblance, but there is no radical 
 agi'eement. It is certainly one thing to make a 
 speaker or even a writer act in character, and quite 
 
 * Article ** Bible," pp. 636, 637. 
 
INTRODUCTION. XXXV 
 
 another tiling to impute to an author what he neither 
 spoke nor wrote in any form. 
 
 9. The single fragment of Scripture, adduced in 
 proof or even in illustration of this theory, is a passage 
 in Ezra,* which is singularly inapposite and inconclu- 
 sive. One critic says : " I do not of course aver that 
 this is an exact account of the way in which the Penta- 
 teuch grew, but something of the kind seems to have 
 taken place and to be recognised by Ezra, when he 
 quotes a law which in its form of words purports to 
 have been given in the wilderness, and yet ascribes it, 
 not to Moses, but to the prophets — that is, to the 
 post-Mosaic period." t 
 
 The learned scribe could not have referred in more 
 apposite terms to certain passages in the Pentateuch 
 in proof of the greatness of the evil which he denounced, 
 and of the consequent duty which he urged on the 
 people of the restoration. The prophets, whom God 
 had sent among them from Moses and Joshua 
 downwards to Jeremiah, had forbidden those inter- 
 marriages with the heathen which had been the 
 fruitful source all along of that gross idolatry to 
 which Ezra at the reforming period applied the 
 pruning-knife.* 
 
 If the testimony of the Spirit signifies His subjec- 
 tive witness jper se and apart from other, evidence, then 
 the authority of Deuteronomy becomes a matter of 
 
 * Ezra ix. 11, 12 ; Ex. xxiii. 32 ; Ex. xxxiv. 16 ; Deut. vii. 3, 4, 
 and xxiii, 6 ; Numb. xxv. 1, 2 ; Josh, xxiii. 12, 13 ; Judg. ii. 3, 17 ; 
 1 Kings xi, 4-7 ; Jer. iii, 8, 9 ; Jer, xxxv. 15. 
 
 + Blue Book, 1877. Report on case of Professor Smith. 
 
XXXVl INTRODUCTION. 
 
 mere opinion or mere feeling, and not of evidence. 
 And, finally, if it be identified with the doctrine of 
 the Westminster Confession regarding the work and 
 witness of the Spirit by the word in the human 
 heart, which is the experimental or self-evidencing 
 power of the truth, then it becomes a psychological 
 impossibility, for the Spirit bears witness by the word, 
 understood and accepted on other and prior grounds 
 internal and external, of its credibility. The self- 
 evidence of a work of grace in the soul involves the 
 prior or the concurring influence of the other evidences. 
 " He that believeth on the Son of God," on such 
 grounds, then " has the witness in himself" ^ It is 
 therefore evident that such criticism of the Pentateuch 
 involves and repeats the fallacies already enumerated 
 in connection with the Gospels. That the whole law 
 of Moses was digested and completed by some unknown 
 editor, endowed with the same prophetic spirit, is a 
 gratuitous assumption for a special necessity, and finds 
 no analogy in the case of the Book of Genesis, for the 
 authorship of which we can assign the well-known 
 name of the prophet Moses. 
 
 10. We must conclude this review of the prin- 
 ciples and leading positions of rationalistic criticism 
 by indicating their obvious tendencies and conse- 
 quences. 
 
 The theory of the origin and growth of the Penta- 
 teuch, and specially Deuteronomy, founded on the 
 different elements and alleged internal discrepancies in 
 
 * 1 John V. 10. 
 
INTRODUCTION. • XXXVll 
 
 them, not only merely accounts for their being there 
 (as the critics themselves confess"^), but, so dislocates 
 and deranges the history as to produce greater differ- 
 ences and difficulties than any which it professes to 
 remove. 
 
 In particular, nothing can be more evident than that 
 any logical proof of not only the inspiration and 
 authority, but even of the authorship of Scripture, 
 becomes impossible. The doctrine of not only the 
 Westminster, but of the Eeformed Confessions generally, 
 may be admitted on such questions, but it cannot be 
 defended. 
 
 The next step on the part of some daring inquirer 
 will be to carry out these principles to their logical 
 consequences. The inspiration of Scripture being 
 found to be an assumption, the next thing will be to 
 discard it altogether, and thereby the supreme authority 
 of God there, or to admit a merely secondary authority, 
 founded on the substantial truth of Scripture history 
 or doctrine. According to the common belief of such 
 critics, God's word will be in the Scriptures, but the 
 Scriptures will not be the word of God.t And hence 
 inspiration itself, instead of being regarded as the in- 
 fallible guidance of the Spirit both in speaking and 
 writing, according to the Scriptures and the best 
 Eeformed creeds, will be so qualified or graduated as 
 merely to amount to the spiritual illumination common 
 
 * Colenso, Pentateuch (People's Edition), p. 27, 9 ; Kuenen, The 
 Five Books of Moses : A Lecture, 1870, passim. 
 
 t Davidson's Introduction to Study of New Testament, preface, 
 p. 10. 
 
XXXVlll INTRODUCTION. 
 
 to all believers, and to be quite compatible witli a 
 large admixture of error.^^ 
 
 And as principles of revelation and interpretation 
 are closely associated, this position would lead logically 
 and morally to penultimate rationalism, which makes 
 the human mind the test of inspiration and authority, 
 the court of last appeal. And this position, once 
 deliberately assumed, would inevitably conduct to the 
 last stage of extreme rationalism, which represents the 
 mind of man as not only the test but the source of 
 religious truth, and supernatural revelation as either 
 impossible or unnecessary. Then divine revelation 
 being thus undervalued and inspiration viewed as 
 "almost universally diffused, the salvation of the 
 heathen by the light of nature and the secret agency 
 of the Spirit without the word will be proclaimed 
 not only as a speculation, but as a creed.t 
 
 These results will be as sure, and probably as 
 sudden, as the descent of a rolling rock from the brow 
 of a mountain into the quagmire at its base. 
 
 Such has already been the disastrous issue, accord- 
 ing to the testimonies of Tholuck, and of Krummacher 
 in his Autobiography, among the youth of Germany, 
 the religious literature of which, while nobly distin- 
 guished by profound biblical research and discovery, is 
 yet sadly disfigured by intellectual aberration. Chris- 
 tendom owes Germany a standing debt of gratitude for 
 
 * Revelation and Inspiration : A Sermon. By Marcus Dods, 
 D.D. 
 
 t Mohammed, Buddha, and Christ. By Marcus Dods, D.D. 
 
INTRODUCTION. XXXIX 
 
 brilliant achievements in the field of learning, but it 
 were weak and foolish to be either fascinated or 
 forced by the arguments of negative critics into an 
 attitude of hostility to the supreme authority of 
 Scripture. 
 
PRINCIPLES 
 
 OF 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 PAET I. 
 
 FORMULAS OF QUOTATION. 
 
 Section First. 
 
 1. We must confine ourselves in this inquiry to tlie 
 formal and specific quotations made by our Lord and 
 His apostles, with a merely passing reference to the wide 
 but critically unimportant field of allusion. The 
 subject is acknowledged both by the friends and the 
 foes of revelation to be as difficult as it is important, 
 and to be one of those problems of modern exegesis which 
 loudly call for solution. But biblical critics vary in 
 their estimates of the number of the books of the Old 
 Testament quoted in the New, and of both the cited 
 and the citation passages. There is more uncertainty 
 in regard to the latter than the former. Not more 
 than 2 5 of the 3 9 books of the Old Testament can be 
 said to be formally cited in the New. The passages 
 once quoted are 220, but the whole number of 
 repeated citations amounts to 290. Seventeen only of 
 the 27 books of the New Testament contain quotations 
 
 B 
 
18 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 from the Old. The single citations may be estimated 
 at 226, and their whole number by repetition at 284. 
 The difference in both cases between the quoted and 
 the quotation passages themselves, and between these 
 and one another, arises from repeated citation of 
 the same texts, and from the simultaneous quotation 
 of the substance of several similar passages, which 
 render the source of a particular citation the 
 more questionable. Were we to loosely reckon the 
 numerous references in the New Testament to the 
 Old, which are not valid for hermeneutical, and least 
 of all for apologetic purposes, the number of quota- 
 tions Would be more than trebled. The precise 
 number is doubtless interesting in itself and important 
 in connection with the value of certain passages, but 
 the solution of the problem of quotation mainly 
 depends on the character of the citations and the 
 principles which they involve. There is a sufficient 
 basis of clear and confessed quotations for the induc- 
 tion of principles adequate to the solution of any ques- 
 tion that is not insoluble. A proper combination of 
 analysis and synthesis, on a basis of reliable and 
 collated quotation, will lead the candid inquirer 
 through the winding maze. 
 
 Some critics have rashly alleged that these citations 
 are made solely from the Hebrew, others solely from 
 the Septuagint, while others maintain that they are 
 taken from neither exclusively, but from either alter- 
 nately. But a careful examination will show that 
 there is a large class which, instead of being directly 
 
FORMULAS OF QUOTATION. 19 
 
 drawn from either language, simply paraphrases the 
 substance of either or of both texts according to the 
 purpose of the writer. 
 
 In an uncritical age assumptions are made and 
 assertions hazarded which will not stand the test of 
 scientific criticism. 
 
 We find the following four forms or kinds of quota- 
 tion : — One class coincides with the Hebrew literally or 
 substantially, a second with the Septuagint, a third 
 accords with both, which in this case tally with one 
 another, while a fourth formally agrees with neither, 
 whether they agree or differ. This classification, 
 which might be subdivided, is sufficient for exegetical 
 and apologetic purposes. We find that Home, 
 Gaussen, Fairbairn, and Turpie classify from different 
 stand-points, the first and last making five classes, the 
 third four, and the second three. 
 
 2. The various introductory formulas are of two 
 kinds, special and general, or definite and indefinite. 
 There is a class of generally acknowledged quota- 
 tions which have no formal marks. They are known 
 to be such by a combination of collateral evidence, 
 such as their formal introduction in other places, the 
 authority with which they are advanced and applied in 
 the context, together with their substantial and some- 
 times even their formal agreement with the original 
 texts. The writers or speakers manifestly assumed that 
 they would be recognised at once as true and trans- 
 parent citations. They stand midway between allusions 
 
20 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 and quotations, and exhibit within the domain of revela- 
 tion the grand principle of gradation which prevails 
 throughout the three kingdoms of the material world. 
 
 These formulas may be reduced to three classes. 
 The first represents a thing as written in the Scriptures 
 generally, or in some particular place of Scripture. 
 The second declares a particular Scripture to be fulfilled 
 iu a special way and for a special purpose. The third 
 affirms a thing to have been spoken by God Himself, or 
 by one of His servants — as Moses, David, or Isaiah — 
 either generally without stating where, or in some par- 
 ticular Scripture. By the alternate or indiscriminate 
 use of the words, God, Moses, Scripture, and of the 
 past and present tenses, the particular saying becomes 
 identified with Scripture, and not with mere tradition. 
 The spoken word coincides with the written word, 
 where it lies embodied and embalmed. The word of 
 God endureth for ever, and the prophets, though dead, 
 are heard speaking to us. 
 
 We must here discriminate between the formal char- 
 acter of New Testament citation and the character and 
 authority of particular quotations, such as those of 
 Satan and his allies, which may be correct in point of 
 form, but irrelevant in point of argument; fairly 
 quoted, but falsely applied. The devil's citation from 
 the Psalms at the Temptation was not so much a mis- 
 quotation as a misapplication of Scripture.'" It may 
 be accepted as formally correct, but it must be rejected 
 as an interpretation of Scripture and a ground of duty 
 
 * Matt. iv. 6 ; P.<. xci. 11, 12. 
 
FORMS OF QUOTATION. 21 
 
 in the circumstances. The word of God, like the 
 great Teacher Himself, when demons paid unwelcome 
 homage to His divinity and divine commission, neither 
 needs nor admits a declaration of its meaning or a 
 defence of its truth from the mouths of adversaries. 
 The general citation from Moses, advanced by the 
 Jewish Sadducees as a crucial test of the disputed 
 question of the resurrection, is substantially correct; 
 but though it bears witness to the authenticity of the 
 Pentateuch, it is not an authoritative application, and, 
 therefore, does not belong to the class of texts which 
 are said to conflict with the inspiration of the Scrip- 
 tures.'" All such instances proclaim the Jewish 
 national belief in the authority of the Old Testament ; 
 but even though they were wholly informal and irre- 
 levant, they would not invalidate the authority of the 
 New, because their authors neither possessed nor 
 claimed any inspiration. Consequently, all objections 
 taken to the truth of Scripture must be urged against 
 the authoritative quotations of Christ and His apos- 
 tles, or inspired and accredited agents. 
 
 Section Second. 
 
 We proceed from the quotation formulas to the 
 forms themselves, between which there appears to be 
 no special and significant connection. The character 
 of the formula does not determine either the source 
 or the character of the citation, whether from the 
 Hebrew or from the Greek, and whether loose or 
 
 * Matt. xxii. 24 ; Deut. xxv. 5. 
 
22 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 literal. The same formula is not always prefixed to 
 the same form of repeated citation. The same passage 
 is quoted in the same words in different places under 
 different formulas. And yet it were unreasonable to con- 
 clude that they are employed indiscriminately. They 
 appear to be chosen out of three correlative consider- 
 ations, the formal character of the context into which 
 the cited text was to be woven, the mental attitude of 
 the two classes of readers primarily addressed, whether 
 believing Jews or unbelieving Gentiles, and the purpose 
 of the writer, whether didactic or demonstrative. 
 
 When we come to investigate formal principles we 
 find that several critics have carefully examined the 
 agreement or disagreement of the various quotations 
 with their linguistic sources, but they have not classi- 
 fied their specific forms and determined their regulative 
 principles. There may be ample room for diversity 
 of judgment regarding the formal character of some 
 of them, and the special category to which they 
 belong, but they are in general sufficiently definite for 
 classification and the enunciation of formal principles, 
 which when clearly determined at once explain the 
 forms of citation and make them capable of formal 
 vindication. We annex to the several classes a variety 
 of instances in support of the principles involved, which 
 we cannot examine and vindicate in detail without 
 instituting comparisons which any scholarly student can 
 make for himself, and which he will find already made 
 by biblical critics who have cultivated this particular 
 section of the field. Some of these citations are so 
 
FORMS OF QUOTATION. 23 
 
 similar, and apparently so conjoint, that their specific 
 difference and the class to which they are referrible 
 may be doubtful, but if they be carefully collected 
 and considered, an ample basis of distinctive principles 
 will remain. These forms, involving as many prin- 
 ciples, may be reduced to five classes, which we 
 describe in order, beginning with the more distinct 
 and advancing to the more obscure. They may be 
 even still further generalised, and classed as literal and 
 as loose quotations. Neither of these two forms, if 
 any of all the five following, is new and unprecedented. 
 Both modes at least are followed by the Old Testament 
 authors in quoting from each other. 
 
 We adduce under the several classes a few appro- 
 priate instances, the logical value of which we shall 
 estimate at the proper place. 
 
 1. Literal or verbal quotation. It is not necessary 
 here to inquire or to determine why the writers 
 both of the Old and New Testaments so seldom cite 
 each other's writings. This is neither so easy nor 
 so interesting as the question why the latter so 
 frequently cite the former in proof or in illustration 
 of their teaching. Yet amongst the few internal 
 citations found in both revelations we meet with the 
 same principles. We find the prophet Jeremiah in a 
 notable passage formally quoting the prophet Micah 
 literally.''" This circumstance, whether it be a mere 
 reference or a regular citation, at once partly occasions 
 * Jer. xxvi. 18 ; Micah iii- 12. 
 
24 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 and partly solves an enigma in the New Testament, 
 according to which the words of one author are 
 ascribed to another, of the secondary writer to the 
 primary, even when the former is specially referred to 
 or directly quoted. Thus Matthew ascribes the words 
 of Zechariah regarding the formative art of the potter 
 to Jeremiah, who first employed them in a very 
 mystical manner, and who sustained the same relation 
 to the minor prophet as Ezekiel and Daniel did to the 
 Apocalypse.'"' 
 
 An examination of the whole number of citations 
 in the New Testament from the Old shows that not 
 less than a fourth part is taken verbally from the 
 Hebrew or from the Greek, the latter of which is 
 more frequently quoted than the former.f The Hebrew 
 is literally translated into Greek, and the Septuagint 
 is verbally cited when it renders the Hebrew loosely 
 
 * Matt, xxvii. 9 ; Zech. xi. 13 ; Jer, xviii. 1-3, and xix. 2. 
 
 t Bebreiv—MB.tt. xix. 18, 19 ; Matt. xxi. 16 ; Matt. xxii. 39 ; Mark 
 vii. 10 ; Mark xi. 17 ; Mark xii. 31 ; Luke x. 27 ; Luke xviii. 20 ; John 
 X. 34 ; John xix. 24 ; Acts i. 20; Acts ii. 34, 35: Acts iv. 25, 26; Acts 
 xiii. 33, 35; Kom. iii. 13; Rom. iv. 17, 18; Rom. viii. 36; Rom. ix. 7, 
 12, 15 ; Rom. x. 13 ; Rom. xiii. 9 j Rom. xv. 3 ; 1 Cor. x. 7, 26 ; 2 Cor. 
 iv. 13 ; 2 Cor. vi. 2 ; 2 Cor. ix. 9 ; Gal. iii. 16 ; Gal. v. 14 ; Heb. i. 
 5, 8, 9, 13 ; Heb. iii. 15 ; Heb. iv. 3, 7 ; Heb. v. 5, 6 ; Heb. vii. 17-21 ; 
 Heb. xi. 18 ; James ii. 8, &c. Greek — Matt. iv. 7 ; Matt. xiii. 
 14, 15 ; Luke iv. 12 ; Acts ii. 25-28 ; Acts viii. 32, 33 ; Acts xxviii. 
 26, 27 ; Rom. vii. 8 ; Rom. x. 18 ; 1 Cor. ix. 9 ; 1 Cor. xv. 32 ; Gal. 
 iv. 27; Matt. xxi. 41 ; Mark xii. 10, 11 ; Luke xx. 17; John xii. 38 ; 
 Rom. X. 16 ; Rom. xii. 20 ; Rom. xv. 10, 21 ; 1 Cor. vi. 16 ; Rom. 
 XV. 12; Rom. xi. 21, 34; Heb. ii. 13; Heb. x. 37, 38; Heb. ii. 
 6-8 ; Heb. x. 5, 7 ; Gal. iii. 16 ; Rom. x. 20, 21 ; Rom. xii. 20 ; Rom. 
 XV. 10, 21 ; Heb. xiii, 6 ; 1 Peter ii. 7 ; Heb. x. 5-7 ; Rom. iv. 3 ; Rom. 
 ix. 29 ; James ii. 23 ; James iv, 5, &c. 
 
FOKMS OF QUOTATION. 25 
 
 as well as literally. Verbal citation is evidently the 
 normal form, in connection with which no formal 
 textual difficulties can arise. Such questions as why 
 the Greek version is so frequently preferred to the 
 Hebrew text, even when it differs from it, belong to 
 a subsequent stage of this inquiry. 
 
 2. Substantial quotation. Here also the authors 
 of the Old Testament anticipated the writers of the 
 New, in occasionally embodying the substance of each 
 other's writings.''' We find that the substance of the 
 words, and the sense of the passage quoted, have con- 
 jointly determined the form of the quotation. The 
 words are changed to suit the new subject, and the 
 form is adapted to the writer's text. This is effected 
 both by abbreviation and by augmentation of the 
 primary text, by occasional transposition of words, or 
 of whole clauses, and by a change of persons and of 
 tenses to suit not merely the author's context, but 
 the altered circumstances and the higher form of the 
 new evangelical economy.f The preliminary revela- 
 tion, which was the law of the dispensation, is still 
 furthur developed and adapted to the higher character 
 
 * Obadiah i. 4, and Jer. xlix. 7-22 ; Tsa. xi. 9, and Hab. ii. 14 ; Isa. 
 xiii. 9-22, and Jer. i. 39, 40 ; Exod. xv. 2, and Isa. xii. 2 ; Isa. Hi. 7, and 
 Nahum i. 15; Isa. xlvii. 8, and Zeph. ii. 15 ; Isa. ii. 2-4, and Micah 
 iv. 1-3. 
 
 t Matt. i. 23 ; Matt. iv. 15, 16 ; Matt. xi. 10 ; Matt, xxvii. 9, 10: 
 Mark iv. 12 ; Mark x. 6 ; John xii. 18 ; John vi. 45 ; Kom. iii. 15, 17 ; 
 Rom. ix. 33 ; Eom. xi. 34 ; Eom. xi. 26, 27 ; Rom. ix. 27, 28 ; Rom, iii, 
 11, 12; Rom. x. 15; Rom. xiv. 11 ; 1 Cor. i. 19, 31 ; 1 Cor. ii. 9; 1 Cor 
 X. 20 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 21 ; 1 Cor. xv. 56 ; 2 Cor. vi. 17 ; Rom. ix. 25 ; Gal. iv 
 30 ; Heb. x. 37, 38 ; Heb. xi. 20, 21 ; 1 Peter ii. 6 ; 1 Peter xxiv. 25. 
 
2(5 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 and requirements of the new manifestation of grace 
 and truth. This was the result not of vague and 
 uncertain citation from memory, nor even of the 
 conscious freedom and security of a guiding inspira- 
 tion, but of the unity and progressive development of 
 revelation and the special purpose of the writers. 
 
 8. Analytic or eclectic quotation. In this case the 
 cited text was mentally analysed, and the part of it 
 most appropriate to the subject or the object of the 
 writer was selected. ''' He cited merely what was strictly 
 relevant, as the best writers, both Pagan and Christian, 
 do in similar circumstances. Nothing can tend more 
 to encumber a writer's text or to overlay and hide his 
 meaning than an array of cumbrous and indefinite 
 citations. The sacred writers also presumed on the 
 religious knowledge and spiritual discernment of their 
 readers, to whom as wise men even a word would 
 be sufficient to recall and identify the cited Scripture. 
 And they manifestly regarded a pointed and well put 
 quotation, based on subjective analysis, as more ex- 
 pressive than emphasised pronunciation, or the modern 
 device of citation marks, or of an italicised text. It 
 may be either literal or general, the exact copy or the 
 general form and substance of the original text, but in 
 either case it is regulated by the eclectic principle. 
 Thus John selects from a long passage of Zechariah 
 the very words, and nothing more, that suit his pur- 
 
 * Matt, ii 5 ; Mark iv. 12 ; Luke iv. 4 ; John xii. 14, 15 ; John xix. 
 37; Kom. x. 15; Kom. x. 11; 1 Cor. ii. 16 ; Gal, iii. 16. 
 
FORMS OF QUOTATION. 27 
 
 pose, ''And they shall look on Hmi whom they have 
 pierced," merely changing the first personal pronoun 
 into the third, to adapt it to his own stand-point, and 
 to the historical fulfilment of the prophecy/"' This 
 form was evidently chosen in preference to more prolix 
 citation, because it was more suitable to the presenta- 
 tion of the truth, as well as to the purpose of the 
 author, and more complimentary to the intelligence of 
 his readers. 
 
 4. Synthetic or combined quotation. This appears 
 under two forms, collective and combined citation. 
 A series of passages is either adduced and linked to- 
 gether in proof of a particular proposition, as in the 
 third chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, or they 
 are blended together, and the substance of the whole 
 is synthetically quoted.f The former is merely the 
 initial form of the latter, which thus presents a synop- 
 tical view of the substance of several homogeneous and 
 correlative passages, all referring to the same subject, 
 like the whole series of similar events comprehended 
 in a single prophecy. A combination of heterogeneous 
 texts, never attempted by the sacred writers, were as 
 great an anomaly as the reduction of dissimilar events 
 to the same prophetic formula. This mode is also 
 found in the Old Testament, where citation and even 
 allusion are comparatively rare. Thus Nahum alludes 
 to the words of Isaiah, while Jeremiah manifestly 
 
 * John xix. 37 ; Zech. xii. 10. 
 
 t Eom. iii. 10-18, and Ps. liii. 1 ; Ps. v. 9 ; Ps, cxl. 3 ; Ps. x. 7 ; 
 Isa. lix. 7, 8. 
 
28 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 combines the statements of both in one/'' It is speci- 
 ally characteristic of the latter author to refer fre- 
 quently to the earlier writings of the Old Testament, 
 and to blend into one two, or more passages, moulded 
 or modified according to his purpose. f The New 
 Testament is full of such quotation, which forms a 
 most interesting biblical study, and completely ex- 
 plains why the major prophet is preferred to the 
 minor, and the primary author is named even when 
 the secondary writer is more directly cited.;|; By 
 combining the sense of several passages, instead of 
 being a free use of a particular text, it involves the im- 
 portant principle of the continuity of revelation. The 
 more carefully such passages are compared and examined 
 the more clearly is their combination seen, and the 
 unity in diversity of the divine economy displayed. § ^ 
 
 5. Idealistic or paraphrastic quotation. These are 
 merely manifestations of the same principle, different 
 aspects of the same thing. It is idealistic in reference 
 to the internal sense of the text cited, and paraphrastic 
 in regard to its objective expression or embodiment. 
 
 * Nahum i. 13 ; Isa. x. 27 ; Jer. xxx. 8. 
 
 t Jer. xlviii. 45 ; Nahum xxi, 28, 29 ; Num. xxiv. 17. 
 
 :;: Matt, xxvii. 9, 10 ; Zech. xi. 13 ; Jer. xix. 2, 10, 11 ; Jer. xviii. 2 ; 
 Mark i. 1, 2 ; Mai. iii. 1 ; Isa. xl. 3. 
 
 § Matt. xxi. 5, Zech. ix. 9, and Isa. xl. 3. Matt, xxvii. 9, 10, Zech. 
 xi. 13, and Jer. xix. 2, 10, 11. Mark i. 2, 3, Mai. iii. 1, and Isa. xl. 3. 
 John vii. 38, Isa. xliv. 3, and Isa. Iv. 1, Isa. Iviii. 11. Acts vii. 7, Gen. 
 XV. 14, and Exod. iii. 12. Acts iii. 25, Gen. xxii. 18, and Gen. xii. 3. Acts 
 xiii. 22. Ps. Ixxxix. 21, and 1 Sam, xiii. 14. Rom. ix. 33, Isa. xxviii. 16, 
 Isa. viii. 14. Rom. xi. 8, Deut. xxix. 3, 4. 2 Cor. vi. 18, 2 Sam. vii. 
 8, 14. 2 Cor. vi. 16, Lev. xxvi. 11, 12, Ezek. xxxvii. 27. 
 
FORMS OF QUOTATION. 29 
 
 The writer fixed his eye on the psychology of the 
 text, and seized the underlying idea, which he expressed 
 in a paraphrase.''" The sense or idea of the text and 
 not its form was caught and presented under another 
 body or form. It ^vas also still further generalised 
 and presented in a form wholly new\ So far, there- 
 fore, it agrees with substantial citation, and so far it 
 differs from it. It gives the substance of the sense, 
 without the substance of the form, and in a more 
 idealistic and less formal manner. The mental action 
 or process of the writer involved four things — an 
 analysis of the text, abstraction of the sense from the 
 form, generalisation of the internal idea, and a corres- 
 ponding objective expression. It is, therefore, as real 
 though not so palpable as any of the other forms 
 already adduced. The idealisation of a single passage, 
 or the generalisation of several, ought to be regarded 
 as valid citation, admirably adapted to a concise and 
 complete presentation of the truth, and furnishing a 
 kind of philosophy of revelation. Matthew generalises 
 the ancient prophetic conception of Messiah as lowly 
 and despised, and embodies it in a single opprobrious 
 epithet, borrowed from the usage of enemies, " He 
 shall be called a Nazarene."t And John not only 
 idealises the living water of ancient prophecy as a 
 
 * Matt. ii. 23, with Isa. xi. 1, and Isa. liii. 3. Matt. x. 10, Luke x. 7, 
 1 Cor. ix. 9, 1 Tim. v. 18, with Lev, xix. 13, Deut. xxv. 14, 15. James 
 iv. 5, Ezek. xxiii, 25, and Pro v. xxi. 10, John vii, 38, Isa. xliii. 3, Isa. 
 li. 1, Isa. Iviii, 11. John vii. 42, with 2 Sam. vii. 11-13, Mai. v. 1, 1 Sam. 
 xvi. 1-13. Eph. V. 14, Isa. Ix. 1, 19, 20. 
 
 t Matt, ii. 23 ; Isa. liii. 2-4. 
 
30 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 symbol of grace, but generalises it to signify the Spirit 
 of life Himself, the source and sum of all gracious 
 influence.'" 
 
 These five forms of quotation, even when they run 
 into one another, yet retain their specific differences 
 by which they may be severally discriminated. They 
 are recognised by carrying on their forefront notation 
 marks, by containing sometimes the very body of the 
 passage cited, sometimes merely the semblance of its 
 form, but always its significance. f 
 
 Such passages as are justly regarded as quotations, 
 though they want the formula, occupy an intermediate 
 place between formal citation and mere allusion, with 
 the latter of which we close our examination of the 
 forms of quotation. 
 
 Allusion is of two kinds, to the sense and to the 
 mere sound or form of Scripture. They either represent 
 the former, or formally reproduce the latter. They are 
 a silent appropriation of the facts and forms of thought, 
 of the sentiments and sentences of the Old Testament, 
 and, even more than the different modes of citation, 
 pervade the whole revelation. They are the natural 
 outcome of memories saturated with divine truth, and 
 of imaginations laden with Scripture imagery. They 
 strew the whole field of revelation in countless numbers. J 
 
 * John vii. 37, 39 ; Isa. Iv. 1. Also, John ii. 22 ; John xx. 9 ; John 
 vii. 42 ; Mark xii. 30, 31 ; 1 Cor. xv. 4. 
 
 t Matt, xxvii. 46 ; Mark iv. 12 ; Luke x. 7 ; 1 Peter iv. 8. 
 
 t Luke i. 17, 37, 46, 47, 76, 78 ; Kom. x. 8 ; 1 Cor. x. 8, 9, 10 ; 
 2 Cor. ix. 7, 10 ; James v. 11, 12, 20 ; 1 Peter ii. 9, 22, 24 ; 1 Peter 
 iii. 10, 14, 15 ; Heb. x. 37, 38 ; Heb. ii. 21, &c. 
 
FOEMS OF QUOTATION. 31 
 
 They must not be confounded with quotations, 
 and thereby allowed to cumber and complicate the 
 problem to be solved. "We must carefully distinguish 
 between their respective characters and value. They 
 are sometimes identified by popular writers, and even 
 professional critics are not always careful to discrimi- 
 nate between them. This circumstance has set in 
 motion the pens of the enemies of inspiration. It is a 
 relic of the inconsiderate assumptions of an uncritical 
 age, which modern science has chased away. 
 
PAET 11. 
 
 PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Section First. 
 
 The forms of quotation and their interpretation are 
 two interdependent parts of the same problem. The 
 conception of the writer determined the form, which 
 embodies and reveals the principle on which it is made. 
 They ought to be discussed and vindicated in their 
 correlation as distinct but connected questions. And 
 as the spirit of revelation is paramount to the mere 
 letter, so are the hermeneutics of quotation to its form. 
 We are here restricted to a discussion of the parti- 
 cular principles on which the writers proceeded in 
 quotation, which, so far as they are applicable, are sub- 
 stantially the principles of all biblical interpretation. 
 
 1. It is evident that the fundamental principle is 
 the psychological. It is not only the proper stand- 
 point, but the general condition of all interpretation. 
 The thought of the writer, duly ascertained, is as 
 consciousness to cognition. Our prospect depends 
 upon our stand-point, just as the type is the view-point 
 of the antitype. The writers of the New Testament, 
 accordingly, in quoting the authors of the Old, put 
 
PKINCIPLES OF INTERPKETATION. 33 
 
 themselves into their position, investigated their 
 thoughts, and developed the connection and bearing of 
 the comprehensive and holy revelations of the Spirit of 
 Christ. From this point of view they surveyed and 
 contemplated the diversified landscape of the whole 
 ancient revelation of grace and truth.*'" 
 
 2. The grammatical or philological principle. It 
 embraces and covers both the literal and the tropical 
 text of Scripture. Most passages are literally cited, 
 but all are grammatically interpreted.! No construction 
 is ever put upon a text which is not either expressed 
 or implied in the language quoted. Literal and 
 tropical passages are alike grammatically interpreted. 
 The difference between them lies in themselves and not in 
 their principle of interpretation. This is evident from 
 the definition of the terms. Language is literal when 
 the same words uniformly represent the same things 
 or thoughts, which are thus spontaneously presented 
 to the mind as soon as the word is seen or heard. It 
 is figurative when words become conventionally the 
 signs of other things or thoughts than those of which 
 they are the natural or ordinary symbols. This im- 
 plies as its basis that natural things themselves, of 
 which words are the signs, are made the symbols of 
 spiritual thoughts or things. The theory of all forms 
 of language may be summed up in a single syllogistic 
 formula — words are the signs of things, things are 
 
 * Eom. ix. 2>assim; Kom. xi. 26, 27 ; John vii, 38, 42 ; Eph. v. 14, 
 t Matt. iv. 4, 6, 7, 10 ; Matt. xxii. 31 ; John xix. 36, 37 ; Gal. 
 iii. 16 ; Heb. i. 5, &c. 
 
 C 
 
84 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 made the signs of thouglits, therefore words are the 
 signs of thoughts. Accordingly, the text of the ancient 
 Scripture, whether literal or figurative, was grammati- 
 cally interpreted, as is done now by all true critics. 
 The evangelical writers acknowledged a double refer- 
 ence, based on the relation between natural and 
 spiritual things, but not a double or divided sense 
 which did not lie in the language. They regarded the 
 sense of Scripture as one, and, therefore, to be inter- 
 preted philologically, whether the words were literal 
 or figurative. They carefully avoided the rock of 
 literalism on the one hand, and the whirlpool of 
 niysticism on the other. They did not, like Cocceius, 
 find Christ everywhere, nor, like Grotius, nowhere. 
 They read the language of the ancient Scripture in 
 the light of usage as well as in the light of inspiration, 
 and not in the light of things, such as preconceived 
 opinions, or the principles of the Rabbinical or the 
 Pagan schools. They did not interpret by the prin- 
 ciples of philosophy a revelation which came from God 
 and not from human reason. They understood the 
 use and the abuse of reason in the interpretation of the 
 divine word, of which some of the early Fathers, their 
 successors, were profoundly ignorant. We find nothing 
 in their exegesis akin to the fanciful allegories of Bar- 
 nabas, or the manifold senses of Origen, or the plastic 
 symbolism of Ammonius Saccas, who laboured to har- 
 monise all the systems both of philosophy and of reli- 
 gion, not only with themselves, but with each other. 
 There is no trace of the Neoplatonism of Philo and 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 35 
 
 Joseplius and of the Rabbinical literature after tbe 
 close of the Canon and during the prevalence of the 
 Oriental and Alexandrian philosophies. We meet with 
 no cabalistic interpretation or science of the hidden 
 sense. The following testing instances may be for- 
 mally Judaical, but they are philologically correct. 
 Paul interprets the Abrahamic covenant negatively and 
 positively, and applies the promise to Christ ^^ — " He 
 sa3^eth not, And to seeds, as of many; bat as of one. 
 And to thy seed, which is Christ." The word for seed 
 in the Old Testament is in several instances — as Seth,t 
 Samuel, J and Solomon^ — individual, though generally 
 collective. And though it did not directly signify 
 individuality in the context of the promise, it might 
 connote or involve it in all the circumstances of the 
 case, which embraced the whole chosen seed and Christ, 
 the seed of Abraham and of Adam. The Abrahamic 
 covenant was essentially a revelation of the covenant 
 of grace, " confirmed of God in Christ," with whom it 
 was primarily made, as the second contracting party 
 and prospective fulfiller, and merely secondarily made 
 with Abraham. Consequently, the chosen seed from 
 the beginning derived their whole federal standing, 
 character, and destiny from Christ as their Surety or 
 Head. The words of promise expressed plurality 
 rather than individuality, yet they connoted unity, 
 or many in one, the members in the Head. And 
 still more specifically, the context also, in which 
 
 * Gal. iii. 16 ; Gen. xvii. 6-8. t Gen. iv. 25 ; Gen. xxi. 13. 
 
 J 1 Sam. i. 11. D''Ii^ji< i^"lt, a male child or a seed of men. 
 § 1 Chron. xxii. 10 ; Ps. Ixxxix. 26 ; 2 Sam. vii. 12-11. 
 
86 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 the promise sits, and in the light of which it must 
 be read, expressly singles out and signalises one 
 individual, one family, and one class of spiritual char- 
 acter, as destined to culminate in one Person, whom 
 both Abraham and Moses knew to be the seed of pro- 
 mise, the grand personage by whom the elect seed 
 would realise their destiny. And hence both kinds of 
 unity, which involve one another, are thus grammati- 
 cally interpreted and summed up in the aptest terms — 
 '' He saith not, And to seeds, as of many ; but as of 
 one. And to thy seed, which is Christ."'"' He speaks 
 not of seeds as of several individuals, or of several sorts 
 of seed, which He would have done had He meant both 
 Ishmael and Isaac and their families, but He speaks 
 as of one, Isaac and his posterity, both genealogically 
 and spiritually, which is Christ collectively or Christ 
 in the Church. In like manner the Great Teacher, 
 when accused of blasphemy in calling Himself the Son 
 of God, rejoined by an argument drawn from the very 
 words of Scripture, and involving both a comparison 
 and a contrast. He thus reasons analogically — If the 
 Scripture calls human judges or magistrates, to whom 
 the word of God merely came, gods, or God officially, 
 how can I, the Sent of God, be called a blasphemer, 
 simply because I call myself the Son of God ? And 
 then, reasoning from the less to the greater, and con- 
 trasting them with Himself, He says — If earth-born 
 and earthly judges be called gods, TYiuch more am I, 
 who have been set apart by the Father and sent into 
 
 * 1 Sam. viii. 15, Ci^y"lT. Mark iv. 31, s^t^f^ara. Matt. xiii. 31, 32. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 37 
 
 the world as the Word of God, His primary and per- 
 sonal Revealer, entitled to be called the Son of God, 
 very God of very God.'"' 
 
 8. The synthetic or imitive principle of interpre- 
 tation. It is synthetic because it gives the combined 
 sense of several passages, and unitive because it tends 
 to that unity which is the end of all philosophy and 
 of all theology. It is based on two things, the pro- 
 gressive development of revelation and the unity of 
 the economies. These general principles of revelation 
 underlie all principles of interpretation, and especially 
 the synthetic and prophetic. And this objective unity 
 of revealed truth involves a corresponding subjective 
 unity of conception in the Revealer and in the writer 
 of the revelation. These two things are correlative, 
 the one being the counterpart of the other. All the 
 works of God are known to Him from the beginning, 
 so that there can be no progress of the divine intelli- 
 gence, but subjective unity of purpose must be regarded 
 as real and as relative to its objective embodiment. 
 Hence the New Testament interpreters, in declaring 
 the conjunct sense of Scripture, were regulated by 
 these general principles, and recognised it as one 
 whole — ab imo ad summum simplex et unum. Judaism 
 was to them rudimentary or initial Christianity, and 
 the whole Old Testament merely a prophecy of the 
 New. They read the ancient Scriptures in the light 
 of the new economy as well as in their own light — 
 
 * John X. 34-36 ; Ps. Ixxxii. 1, 6. 
 
88 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 in a double blended light, which radiated all around 
 and chased away the shadows of the night. And 
 hence also any germinal or undeveloped truth of the 
 old revelation is called that truth, as subsequently 
 developed, not by synecdoche or any other linguistic 
 figure, but in its formal appearance and position in 
 the ecclesiastical heavens. The partial appearance 
 and apparent magnitude of any truth are declared to 
 be that truth, rising higher and higher in the sky 
 unto the perfect day, but not the perfect truth. Here 
 we find natural analogues in abundance. When we 
 see one exposed side or dimension of a buried rock, 
 we recognise or infer a corresponding underlying basis 
 or whole. A single exposed fragment of rock may 
 reveal the character of the range of which it forms a 
 part. A range of the same mountain granite suggests 
 the unity of a common basis. A single phase of the 
 moon is called the moon, because it implies the whole. 
 This principle is analogous to that in comparative 
 anatomy, whereby from a few fragments of bone or 
 fossil the physiologist can construct a skeleton and 
 conclude a species or a genus. 
 
 4. The analogical principle. Analogy is a recog- 
 nised though variously estimated principle of applied 
 logic. It implies at once the objective unity of reve- 
 lation and the harmony of truth, and, consequently, of 
 thought. Accordingly, we have legal and grammatical, 
 philosophical and physical, moral and theological ana- 
 logy. It is not a mere resemblance between things, as 
 
PEINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATIOK. 39 
 
 between a flower and frost-work on a window, where 
 there is a merely superficial and seeming sameness of 
 structure. It is a radical and real agreement of prin- 
 ciple or internal character between things or thoughts, 
 as between the organic forms of different human 
 bodies, or the primary forms of thought of different 
 minds. This involves corresponding logical relations 
 which are the basis of analogical reasoning or com- 
 parative logic.'"' A popular theologian, misconceiving 
 the value of analogy as applied to theology, has de- 
 nounced it as a factitious and assumptive test of a 
 text or truth. But a greater theologian has applied 
 it with irresistible force to the defence of natural and 
 revealed religion. It has both a negative and a 
 positive value, disproving error while it establishes 
 truth. It is a valid but not the strongest form of the 
 theistic argument, according to which we may legiti- 
 mately reason from design in the works of man to 
 design in the adaptations of the external world. It 
 may be applied within its proper sphere to the prin- 
 cipal truths of revealed as well as of natural religion. 
 The scriptural expression, analogy or '' proportion of 
 faith," directly denotes the subjective faith of the 
 individual, but it also implies in the correlation of 
 subject and object the harmony of objective faith, or 
 the proportion of the parts of truth, in accordance with 
 its etymological, classical, and ecclesiastical signi- 
 ficance.! As a hermeneutical principle of Scripture, 
 
 * Heb. xii. 3- ayxXoyiffxtrh tov ^Introvvy for the purpose of comparison. 
 •f* Kom. xii. 6 — 'avaXoyia, Tr,i ^iffTiu;. 
 
40 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 it appears iinder three forms — facts, principles, and 
 doctrines — which are all mutually related and inter- 
 dependent. 
 
 (1.) These facts are the basis of the moral principles 
 exhibited and of the formal doctrines enunciated. 
 The events appealed to are always parallel to the 
 circumstances of the writer, and accordingly when they 
 repeat themselves, and are repeatedly cited, it is in 
 similar circumstances or under the same conditions. 
 This is equally true of the spiritual principles and 
 formal doctrines evolved, which are merely the philo- 
 sophy or theology of the facts. The circumstances 
 associated with the cited passage and the citation itself, 
 and all the concomitant truths and principles involved, 
 are throughout parallel and homogeneous. These 
 forms of analogy may occasionally run into each other 
 and be commingled in any quotation, especially the 
 facts and doctrines, but their distinctive characters 
 are seen in the interpretation given and the appli- 
 cation made. Generally, however, they may be 
 clearly distinguished and severally exemplified. Thus, 
 Paul accused the unbelieving Jews of his age of 
 blaspheming God before the heathen on the principle 
 of historical analogy.'" Between the circumstances 
 and sins of the Jews in the days of the prophets and 
 of Paul there was a close and complete historical 
 parallel. Both alike in similar circumstances pro- 
 faned or aspersed God's holy name in the sight of the 
 heathen. We find him elsewhere citing historical 
 
 * Eora. ii. 24: Isa. lii. 5. See also 2 Cor. viii, 15: Eom. xi. 3-5. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 41 
 
 facts in tlie life of ancient Israel as types or pro- 
 spective signs, that the same sins in similar circum- 
 stances would meet with the same punishment/'' So 
 close, indeed, is the correspondence between the cir- 
 cumstances and specially the sufferings of ancient 
 Israel and of the early Christian Church, that we may 
 read the history of the one in that of the other.f 
 
 Frequently an event, instead of standing by itself, 
 appears wrapt up in a prophecy or historical pro- 
 gramme of the future, founded on the analogy of facts. 
 The prophet Jeremiah's vivid picture of Rachel, the 
 ancestral mother of a captive band, weeping for her 
 lost children, is interpreted as being fulfilled or filled 
 up in the massacre of the infants of Bethlehem and 
 the mourning of the miserable mothers. Between 
 these two events there are points of difference as well 
 as of agreement, and accordingly the one is represented 
 as accomplished in the other on the principle of his- 
 torical parallel rather than of prophetic anticipation, 
 " Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the 
 prophet Jeremiah."! In a similar instance our Lord 
 is said to have spoken in parables that He might 
 fulfil a special function of the prophetic office, ex- 
 ercised in the revelation of truth in symbol, rather 
 than the prophet's representation of a series of under- 
 lying parallel and prophetic circumstances between 
 Israel present and prospective. § It becomes evident 
 that historical analogy is simply history repeating or 
 
 * 1 Cor. X. 7-11. + Heb. xi. 36-38. 
 
 X Matt. ii. 18 ; Jer, xxxi. \[ 
 
42 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 reproducing itself, and becoming the basis of analogical 
 interpretation. 
 
 (2.) The analogy of principles refers to the moral 
 principles of the divine character and government and 
 of human nature, which are correlate and combined in 
 any instance or event. The analogy of the divine 
 dispensations implies similar or the same human 
 character and circumstances. The same divine and 
 human principles in operation become the basis of 
 the analogy of the divine dealings in the moral world, 
 according to which God treats men in the same way 
 under the same conditions of character and circum- 
 stances. Moral analogy, therefore, implies the divine 
 immutability and the moral identity of human nature, 
 which are constituent elements of the divine action, 
 according to which it is impossible for God to err. 
 And, accordingly, as a princij)le of interpretation, it is 
 the solvent of many quotations, the key which lays 
 open the moral world from stem to stern.'"' Thus, 
 Paul interprets and applies to the adequate mainten- 
 ance of the Christian ministry the principle of a com- 
 mandment of Moses in regard to the feeding of working 
 oxen.f Elsewhere he declares a special principle of 
 Hoshea in regard to the life of faith to be a general 
 principle or condition of the higher spiritual life, 
 
 * Matt, xxi, 16; Matt. xv. 8; Luke xviii. 20; John viii. 17; Rom. 
 i. 17 ; Rom. iii. 4 ; Rom. xi. 9, 10 ; 1 Cor. ix. 9 ; 2 Cor. mI 2, 16, 17, 18 ; 
 2 Tim. ii. 19; 1 Tim. v. 18; Acts xiii. 41; Heb. ii. 6-8; Heb. x. 15; 
 Heb. xiii. 5, 6; Heb. x. 5-11; Heb. xii. 5, 6; John ii. 17; Rom. viii. 
 36 ; Rom. xv. 3. 
 
 + 1 Cor. ix. 9; Deut. xxv. 4. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 43 
 
 whicli is alwaj^s gained and sustained by faitb in the 
 divine revelation of grace.'"' Our Lord, in like manner, 
 intrepreted a special oracle of Isaiah against the hypo- 
 critical and heartless formalists of his age, as involving 
 a principle of universal application under the same 
 moral conditions, f The application, also, of a singular 
 passage from a signal psalm to the jubilant shout of the 
 children in the temple in honour of Messiah's name, 
 appears to be made not in fulfilment of a special 
 prophecy, but in verification of the principle, founded on 
 some known analogous instances, that the foolish things 
 of the world are used to confound the wise, to stop 
 the mouths and stifle the rage of envious enemies. | 
 The long and elaborate quotation from a Messianic 
 psalm, applied by Paul to the person and work of 
 Christ, involves the important principle that willing 
 obedience to the divine will is better than mere 
 sacrifice. § This principle was applied by the Lord on 
 two several occasions to vindicate before the captious 
 Pharisees both His own observance of the Sabbath 
 and His intercourse with publicans and sinners, " I 
 will have mercy and not sacrifice." || So also Paul, 
 in declaring the ministerial destiny of man under the 
 Mediator, adduces the fact of his primal dignity and 
 dominion as lord of creation and prime minister of 
 God, of which the shadow only now remains, and 
 
 * Eom. i. 17 ; Gal. iii. 11 ; Heb. x. 38. 
 
 + Matt. XV. 8 ; Isa. xxix. 13. 
 
 + Matt. xxi. 16 ; Ps. viii. 3. § Heb. x. 5-8 ; Ps. xl. 6-8. 
 
 II Matt. ix. 13 ; Matt. xii. 7 ; Hosea vi. 7, 8. 
 
44 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 argues that when taken in connection with the promise 
 of grace and the redemptive work of the representative 
 Man, it involves the principle of man's restoration 
 and realisation of his destiny."" He also cites a psalm 
 in which Jehovah, as idol-breaker of the world-power 
 of Assyria, claims the worship of the heavenly hosts, 
 and thence evolves the principle that the Son of God, 
 the destroyer at His several advents of the works of 
 the world-god, deserved and obtained the same hom- 
 age, f He reasons throughout the whole of the first 
 chapter that the Son is not only superior to angels, 
 but God of very God, because the same divine titles, 
 worship, and works are ascribed to Him in Scripture, 
 the exact method of proof followed by modern 
 theologians. 
 
 (3.) Doctrinal analogy deals with doctrines which 
 are the philosophy of facts or of principles. Conse- 
 quently, quotations adduced to declare or to defend a 
 particular doctrine must also wrap up an emergent 
 fact or principle of experience. The Old Testament is 
 the germ of the New, as the gospels are the germ of 
 the epistles, which are their full development. This 
 organic unity of the two economies is the foundation of 
 the doctrinal analogy which prevails throughout and 
 appears prominently in quotation, as some hills of the 
 same mountain range tower above the rest. The doc- 
 trine contained is generally conspicuous, but it is 
 sometimes merely inferential, which renders its appli- 
 cation less palpable. Paul, in the grand doctrinal 
 
 * Heb. ii. 6-8 ; Ps. viii. 4-6. f Heb. i. 6 ; Ps. xcvii. 7. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 45 
 
 Epistle to the Komans, demonstrates in order, by a 
 series of texts from the Old Testament, the sinful- 
 ness of man; justification in the sight of God by faith 
 alone without works ; the sovereignty of God in the 
 election of individuals and communities to grace as 
 well as to privileges ; the calling of the Gentiles ; and 
 the final judgment of the world/" At other times the 
 application of a citation is indirect and inferential. 
 The same apostle inferred, from a passage in the 
 Psalms, which does not appear to be Messianic, and in 
 which the writer declared that he would praise God 
 among the Gentiles, that they being privileged to hear 
 His glorious praise must be also partakers of His sal- 
 vation by the gospel.f He also concludes, indirectly, 
 from a text which, whether taken from Isaiah or from 
 David, and even whether it be Messianic or not, admit 
 of doubt, that Christ and all believers are brethren on 
 the ground of a common faith which makes them all 
 children of one Father and of one family.;]: He applied, 
 with some modification, a directly Messianic passage 
 from Isaiah indirectly to himself and Barnabas as a 
 special warrant to them, as the ministers or represen- 
 tatives of Christ, to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, 
 according to the maxim of jurisprudence — " Qui facit 
 per alium facit per se."§ In the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews, which, in reference to quotation, may be 
 
 * Rom. i. 17 ; Rom. iv. 3 ; Rom. iii. 10-18 ; Rom. x. 5-11 ; Rom. 
 ix. 9, 12, 15, 25, 27, 29, 33 ; Rom. xi. 3, 5, 8 ; Rom. xiv. 1] ; Rom. x. 
 19, 20 ; Rom. xv. 9-12. 
 
 + Rom. XV. 9 ; Ps. xviii. 49. Matt. xxii. 31, 32 ; Exod. iii. 6. 
 
 Z Heb. ii. 13 ; Isa. viii. 17 ; Ps. xviii. 2. 
 
 § Acts xiii. 47 ; Isa. xlix. 6. 
 
46 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 called the cross of interpreters, he was addressing not 
 only Jews, but Christian Jews, who believed the Christ 
 to be the Son of God, identical with the Logos, the 
 delegated Maker of the worlds by His own power, and, 
 therefore, he applies indirectly to the Son a passage 
 which primarily applied to Jehovah, as Creator and 
 covenant God of Israel. This interpretation is less 
 fetched and forced than to regard the psalm as Mes- 
 sianic, presenting Jehovah as the Church's covenant 
 God in Christ, and thereby ascribing to the latter thi) 
 attributes of God, according to the analogy of ancient 
 Scripture and the faith of believing Israel.'"' 
 
 5. The prophetic or prospective principle we place 
 last, because it involves and combines less or more all 
 the others, psychology and philology, synthesis and 
 analogy. It appears under two forms, type and pro- 
 phecy, which are both alike prognostic of the future. 
 They are radically connected as different forms of the 
 same thing, and mutually related as things and words, 
 which are the signs of things or thoughts. The type 
 may be defined generally as a divine idea or purpose 
 of something present or prospective, embodied in a 
 thing as its symbol. Defined specifically, as a figure 
 of things to come, it is a proleptic sign of the future, 
 expressive of a divine purpose or promise of something, 
 which is called the antitype. Typology is founded on 
 a system of divine ideas or intentions, whether em- 
 bodied in a person, a place, an institution, or an event. 
 
 '' Heb. i. 10, 12 ; Ps. cii. 25-27. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 47 
 
 It is biblical both in name and thing — a distinct form 
 of divine communication not to be confounded with 
 allegory and analogy, or with progressive revelation. 
 The Adamic and Abrahamic promises were both par- 
 tial and proleptic revelations, but they were not formal 
 types, even though the former was conserved in primi- 
 tive sacrifice, and the latter confirmed by the seal of 
 circumcision. The divine wisdom might have seen fit 
 to set up a series of types as mere signal-posts along 
 the long and winding route of revelation down to 
 Christ, but they were certainly of a more substantial 
 and significant nature. They were not factitious or 
 conventional things, like all language not strictly 
 onomatopoetic, but organic parts of revelation, being 
 as well as showing the thing, sample signs suggestive 
 of the whole truth. How far the primary authors of 
 Scripture realised the divine design of the type, so that 
 its divine and human elements coincided in their con- 
 sciousness, is a fit question of criticism, but it is evi- 
 dent that the New Testament interpreters dealt rather 
 with the divine than with the human idea. It is 
 evident that holy men of God, living in peculiar times, 
 must have realised a deeper meaning in their com- 
 munications than rationalistic critics are willing to 
 admit, and that the evangelical writers in citing the 
 ancient types construe them rationally in the light of 
 the signal and significant facts of their institution, of 
 the germinant buds of the early promises which were 
 the hope of the Church, and of the development and 
 continuity of revelation. Modern apologists of inspira- 
 
48 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 tion need not complicate the question of quotation by 
 insisting on more types than are expressly recognised 
 in Scripture. But while we acknowledge generally an 
 underlying and sometimes an outstanding parallelism 
 between the two economies, we must also maintain 
 special points of distinct typical significance. The 
 following may be regarded as clear and confessed 
 examples. Adam, the covenant head of fallen human- 
 ity, is declared to be a type of Christ, the representa- 
 tive Head of redeemed humanity.'"* In their federal 
 capacity they are compared, but in the results they are 
 contrasted. The most natural interpretation of the 
 perplexed passage, in which Abraham is said to have 
 received back his son from imminent death in a figure, 
 is to regard the whole transaction, embracing the vir- 
 tual death of Isaac and his restoration to his father by 
 the actual substitution of the ram, as a joint type of 
 the vicarious death and resurrection of Christ, whose 
 day the patriarch rejoiced to see.f 
 
 We are expressly told in the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 which is a commentary on the ritualism of the law, 
 that the temple and the whole of its rites were types 
 or shadows of better things to come. The tabernacle, 
 which was the prototype of the temple, was not only 
 made according to a divine type or pattern, but was 
 itself a type in its material splendour of the moral 
 glory of the House of God, both on earth and in 
 heaven. J Even its principal contents or furniture had 
 
 * Kom. V. 14-18. t Heb. xi. 19. 
 
 t Heb. X. 1 ; Heb. ix. 8, 9 ; Heb, viii. 2, 5. 
 
PEINCIPLES OF INTERPKETATION. 49 
 
 a special typical significance, which the apostle did not 
 find it necessary to particularise.'"' Several events in 
 the history of the old world and of Israel were types 
 or symbols of higher spiritual realities. f The salvation 
 of one righteous family, through the medium of an 
 element which drowned the wicked world, was a type 
 of Christian baptism, which is called its countertype, 
 and in which the washing away of the filth of the 
 flesh signifies the washing of regeneration and the re- 
 mission of sins. I The passage of ancient Israel through 
 the aqueous elements of the sea and the cloud was a 
 kind of baptismal sign of their entrance into the 
 covenant and Church of God, and of their self-dedica- 
 tion to the Lord.§ The paschal lamb of the Passover, 
 which was both retrospective and prospective, sacrificial 
 and commemorative, is a type of Christ our Passover 
 sacrificed for us.|| The bread and Avater which sus- 
 tained the people in the desert were symbols of the 
 bread and water of life, or of Christ Himself. H The 
 ceremonial washings were present emblems of moral 
 purity in regeneration and remission of sin. The 
 animal sacrifices and blood-sprinklings were not only 
 present signs of the desert of sin and the necessity of 
 satisfaction, but also prospective types of the sacrifice 
 of Christ and of the cleansing power of His sprinkled 
 blood.'""' Certain also of the divine dealings with ancient 
 Israel are said to be types or examples of the fixed 
 
 * Heb. ix. 5. 1 1 Cor. x. 7-11. 
 
 + 1 Peter iii. 20, 21. § 1 Cor. x. 1-4. 
 
 II 1 Cor. V. 7 ; John xix. 36. H 1 Cor. x. 3, 4. 
 
 ** Heb. ix. 23 ; Heb. x. 1. 
 
 D 
 
5 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 principles of the divine moral government, and to be 
 recorded for our admonition, on whom the ends of the 
 age are come."'' All these types were a kind of dumb 
 parables, which, like the word-parables of the great 
 Teacher, at once half revealed and half concealed the 
 truth. David, in his kingly capacity, and especially 
 in the troubles of his kingdom, is so clearly a type of 
 the humiliation and sufferings of Christ, that the anti- 
 type is called by the name of the type.f Solomon, as 
 David's seed or son of promise, was a type of the 
 Messiah in the extent and peace and glory of His 
 kingdom. The sojourn of Israel in Egypt, with their 
 bitter bondage and their subsequent deliverance ; their 
 sad captivity in Babylon and their ultimate redemption, 
 are correlative and complimentary types of man's cap- 
 tivity by Satan and his restoration by Jesus Christ. 
 The brazen serpent, between which and Himself our 
 Lord instituted so striking a comparison, is so signal 
 and appropriate an emblem of the mode of our salva- 
 tion by faith in the crucified Redeemer, that it may 
 justly be regarded as a type of Christ.^ 
 
 Jonah's deliverance from the whale's belly, where 
 he lay buried for three days and three nights, and by 
 which his commission to preach repentance to the 
 Ninevites was attested, typified the burial and resur- 
 rection of Jesus, by which He was declared to be the 
 Son of God with power. § 
 
 * 1 Cor. X. 5-13. + Isa. Iv. 6. J Jolin iii. 14. 
 
 § Matt. xii. 40 ; Jonah i. 17 ; Eom. i, 4. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 51 
 
 Section Second. 
 
 1. There is a natural transition from inarticulate 
 yet significant tilings to articulate words revealing the 
 future directly or indirectly through things of which 
 they are signs. We pass, accordingly, from analogy 
 and type to typical or indirect prophecy, which formally 
 differ though they possess a common underlying prin- 
 ciple or basis, which is sometimes allowed to hide their 
 differences. 
 
 Prophecy, the second form of the prospective prin- 
 ciple, may be defined generally as a verbal sign or 
 formula of the future. It assumes two forms, direct 
 and indirect, or direct and typical prophecy. Mes- 
 sianic prophecy, in particular, exhibits both forms. 
 From the very nature of the ancient economy, both 
 typical and direct non-Messianic prophecy are com- 
 paratively limited. Christ was the central object of 
 the divine revelation from the beginning. The patri- 
 archs from Adam to Abraham spake, and the prophets 
 from Moses to Malachi wrote of the Messiah, the 
 Saviour of Israel and the light of the Gentiles. The 
 whole Old Testament was a prophecy of the New 
 generally, and of Christ specially. And, consequently, 
 the ancient prophecies, not strictly Messianic, are yet 
 all less or more connected with the person and work 
 and times of the Messiah. There are not many direct 
 and still fewer typical non-Messianic prophecies, and 
 apparently not any citations of the latter kind. Ezekiel's 
 
52 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 vision of the dry bones of the house of Israel, in so far 
 as it is prophetic, is typical. It is a visionary scene, in 
 which natural things become the signs of present and 
 the prospective types of future realities. The moun- 
 tain of the Lord's house which Isaiah saw established 
 on the tops of the mountains is a kind of typical 
 prophecy, founded on the site of the temple, of the 
 visible establishment, extension, and moral glory of the 
 Church of Christ. We have seen that the events 
 generally of the ancient theocracy were not only pre- 
 sent instances and muffled types, but oracular announce- 
 ments of the principles of the divine government in 
 every age. The symbolic utterances of the ancient 
 prophets, in which they suited the action to the word, 
 and the word to the action, were typical predictions, 
 involving promise or commination. This form of pro- 
 phecy illustrates the connection between type and 
 prophecy already indicated. The former is the basis 
 of the latter. Prophecy is the articulate expression or 
 exponent of type, the tongue by which it speaks ex- 
 pressly. It preannounces and quotation interprets 
 the typical facts or prospective aspects of the divine 
 economy. Type and typical prophecy are so closely 
 connected, that in any special instance they are forms 
 of the same thing. A careful analysis, also, of type 
 and prophecy in all its aspects, direct and indirect. 
 Messianic and non-Messianic, shows them to be in 
 their roots so closely intertwined, that they are some- 
 times combined in the same instances, and all culminate 
 in Christ, the antitype, the focus of their convergent 
 
PKINCIPLES OF INTERPKETATION. 53 
 
 lights, the grand goal of their divergent routes, the 
 ocean of their confluent streams/'' 
 
 The real character of any prophecy, whether Mes- 
 sianic or non-Messianic, is more easily determined than 
 its formal character, whether direct or typical. There 
 is ample room occasionally for difference of opinion 
 regarding the latter forms. The internal character of 
 any Messianic prophecy and its external form combine 
 to form and to determine its specific class or category. 
 Both classes are numerous, but the typical are fewer 
 than the direct, and more debateable. The distinc- 
 tion between them is sometimes less palpable, from 
 the fact that the circumstances of the writer and his- 
 torical elements have sometimes furnished the occa- 
 sion, and even the form of a prophecy, which is not 
 properly typical. Sometimes a prediction cannot be 
 fairly interpreted as typical, because the points of 
 agreement between the supposed type and counter- 
 type are merely apparent, while the points of difference 
 are numerous and real. It may be highly figurative, 
 and 3^et not typical; and the circumstances or sur- 
 roundings of the author may be merely the back- 
 ground of his picture, and not the formal basis of the 
 prophetic fabric, the towers of which afford a com- 
 manding and glorious prospect of the kingdom of 
 Messiah. 
 
 2. The following are clear instances of the class 
 that has a typical foundation. Matthew declares 
 
 * Matt. ii. 18 ; Matt, xiii. 35 ; Acts i. 20 ; Pvom. xi. 9, 10 ; IJek ii. 6-8. 
 
54 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 that the Scripture, " Out of Egypt have I called my 
 son," was spoken of the Son of God by the prophet 
 Hoshea.'" It is based on typical facts in the history 
 of Israel, called the son of God, the first-born of Jeho- 
 vah, preserved for a season in Egypt, and thence 
 called to the mission of a high destiny among the 
 nations, as a type of the Son of God, the infant 
 Redeemer, who found shelter in Egypt from the rage 
 of Herod.t Of all the ancient, and especially the 
 paschal Scriptures, said to have been fulfilled in con- 
 nection with the crucifixion, there is none more clearly 
 typical than the injunction regarding the paschal lamb, 
 which the evangelist applies to Christ, with merely a 
 change of pronoun, which makes the type clearer — '' A 
 bone of Him shall not be broken.";]; 
 
 The great Teacher is said to have spoken in par- 
 ables, that the mode of instruction adopted by an 
 ancient prophet of God, similar in substance, yet dis- 
 similar in form, might thereby be fulfilled.^ It was 
 necessary that a method of teaching which, under a 
 diversity of form, was not only peculiar to the East, 
 and singularly appropriate to a rudimentary dispensa- 
 tion, but specially characteristic of the prophetic office, 
 should be reproduced and realised in its highest form 
 
 * Matt. ii. 15 ; Matt. xiii. 35 ; Matt. xxi. 42 ; Matt, xxvii. 46 
 John XV. 25 ; John xix. 24, 28, 36 ; Acts i. 20 ; Acts ii. 25-28 
 Acts xiii. 33-35 ; Acts iv. 25, 26 ; Eph. iv. 8 ; John ii. 17 
 Heb. 1, 5 Ip. ; Heb. ii. 12, 13 ; Heb. x. 5-8 ; Heb. i. 8, 9 ; Horn. 
 XV. 3. 
 
 f Matt. ii. 15 ; Hosea xi. 1. J John xix. 36 ; Exod. xii. 46. 
 
 § Matt. xiii. 35 ; Ps. Ixxviii. 2. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 55 
 
 in the great Prophet of the Church. He taught by 
 parables not merely that the integral and uniform 
 principles of human nature, or of the divine moral 
 government, might receive their fullest exemplifica- 
 tion, but more particularly that an expediential prin- 
 ciple of the divine scheme of revelation might obtain 
 its highest fulfilment. 
 
 The ancient psalms, so emphatically declared by 
 Peter to have been spoken by the Holy Spirit concern- 
 ing Judas, and fulfilled in his dismal doOm, though 
 they involve in their application to Judas the priuciple 
 of moral analogy, must be specifically interpreted as 
 indirect Messianic prophecies, according to which Ahi- 
 thophel and his fellow-conspirators, the enemies of 
 David, represented Judas and his wicked associates, 
 the betrayers and murderers of the Lord.'''"" Still more 
 clearly is this the exegetical principle of that grand 
 prophetic psalm of the resurrection of Christ, which 
 declared that His soul would not be left in hades nor 
 His flesh see corruption.! ''The sure mercies of David," 
 promised to Christ and to all His people, involve the 
 resurrection from the dead, as a part and pledge of their 
 full possession.;]; The pregnant and profound words of 
 the second psalm, '' Thou art my Son, this day have I 
 begotten Thee," are a typical prediction of the incarna- 
 tion of Messiah, or of His being raised up into theworld.§ 
 The repeated quotation, ''The stone which the builders 
 
 * Acts i. 20, with Ps. Ixix. 25, and Ps. cix. 
 
 + Acts ii. 25-28, with Ps. xvi. 8, 11, and Acts xiii. 35-37. 
 
 :): Acts xiii. 34, with Isa. Iv. 3. § Acts xiii. 33, with Ps. ii. 8. 
 
5Q PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 rejected, the same is become the head of the corner/' 
 primarily described the rejection by the old world 
 builders of Israel, the son of God, and the type of the 
 Messiah and His people, Christ personal and collective.""' 
 The long and elaborate quotation in Hebrews from one 
 of the psalms, so replete with Messianic ideas and con- 
 nected with other similar psalms, is to be understood 
 as made on the same typical principle, though it also 
 implies the analogy of the same spiritual sentiments in 
 David and in Christ.f In the citation of the sisfnal 
 promise made to David regarding his son and heir, 
 Solomon is evidently typical of the Messiah.! The 
 cited passage, " Behold, I and the children which God 
 hath given me," is indirectly Messianic ; the prophet 
 Isaiah being there in his official character and functions 
 a type of the Great Prophet of Israel. § 
 
 These instances are sufficient to show the close 
 relation of material type and typical prophecy, and the 
 radical and real agreement between type and antitype. 
 But as typical prophecies are simply a combination of 
 type Avith prophecy, of words with things as signs, it 
 follows that the prophetic word may point solely to 
 Christ ; and, therefore, that the quotations made from 
 such prophecies may be directly Messianic. The 
 quotations already given, by which Peter proves the 
 resurrection of Christ, and Paul His divinity, are of 
 this character. This consideration prevents confusion 
 
 * Matt. xxi. 42, with Ps. cxviii. 22, 23. 
 t Heb. X. 5-9, with Ps. xl. 6, 7. 
 + Heb. i. 5 Ip., with 2 Sam. vii. 14. 
 § Heb. ii. 13 Ip., with Isa. viii. 14, 18. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF IJ^TERPRETATION. 57 
 
 in the classification of Messianic prophecy, and indi- 
 cates the point of contact and transition between the 
 two classes. Among the direct prophecies of Messiah 
 we class several, sometimes improperly regarded as in- 
 direct, merely on account of their setting and scenery, 
 which do not determine their character. The back- 
 ground of a prophecy must not be confounded with 
 its basis, nor its occasion with its character, nor figura- 
 tive language with determinate form. Thus, Isaiah's 
 prophecy of the child Immanuel, though invested with 
 the form and body of the times, is not a typical Mes- 
 sianic prophecy, founded on a typical birth, which can- 
 not be discovered ; but a direct Messianic announcement 
 of the birth of an extraordinary child, which the author 
 expected to be born of the virgin, a singular person, 
 and to be one Avho would carry out and complete the 
 covenant of David, and confirm his kingdom for ever, 
 even after not only Syria and Israel had gone down, 
 but Judah also had been diminished and shorn of its 
 glory.'''" The singular quotation from the sacred pro- 
 phetSjf '' He shall be called a ISTazarene," found formally 
 nowhere, is not a typical prediction, founded merely on 
 a symbolical and philological relation between netzer 
 and Nazareth, but a direct Messianic prophecy, in the 
 paraphrastic form of quotation, grammatically inter- 
 preted and applied to His reputed character and birth- 
 place, for both of which He was despised, and, in point 
 
 * Matt. i. 23, with Isa. vii. 14. 
 
 t Matt. ii. 23, with Isa. liii. 2, 3, &c., and Isa. xi. 1, and Isa. iv. 2 ; 
 Zech. iii. 8, and Zech. vi. 12. 
 
58 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 of fact, rejected by the Jews. Thus there was not 
 only a coincidence between name and thing, between 
 Nazareth and contempt, which made the fulfilment of 
 the prophecy more striking, but the divine prophetic 
 idea was realised and expressed in the highest possible 
 form. The place of Messiah's upbringing was fitted, 
 and therefore designed, to incur contempt and rejection; 
 and, therefore, the ancient prophecies which went 
 before regarding Him must be accomplished there. 
 These ideas are expressed in the passages cited, and 
 form the basis of an application, in which there is 
 nothing peculiar, except the local element of His resi- 
 dence at Nazareth. On the same grounds we classify 
 and interpret two signal quotations, made from the 
 same unique but mysterious range of prophecy of 
 Zechariah, but ascribed in one of the instances to 
 Jeremiah, not only as the major prophet, but also as 
 having furnished the basis of the minor prophecy, both 
 in its conception and its dramatic action.''' The pro- 
 phet, instead of representing himself and the treatment 
 which he or any other faithful prophet or wise shepherd 
 did or would receive from the false and fickle flock of 
 Judah, as a type of more indignant treatment of the 
 covenant God of Israel, the Good Shepherd, merely 
 personates Jehovah-Messiah, of whose manifestation all 
 the prophets spake, and presents Him as directly 
 declaring His own fate, not only at the hands of a 
 faithless flock, but of God Himself, together with not 
 
 * Matt. xxvi. 31, Matt, xxvii. 9, 10, with Zech. xiii. 7, and Zech. xi. 
 12, 13. 
 
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 59 
 
 merely tlie immediate dispersion of His followers on 
 the night of His betrayal, but also the ultimate dis- 
 persion of the nation. Reading in this light the 
 prophecy and its application, we may well say, with 
 Hengstenberg, '' The agreement of prophecy and fulfil- 
 ment is so striking, that it would force itself upon us 
 although it had been indicated by no declaration of the 
 New Testament. What could the last and most fearful 
 expression of ingratitude towards the Good Shepherd 
 here predicted be, other than the murderous plot by 
 which the Jews rewarded the pastoral fidelity of Christ, 
 and for the accomplishment of which Judas was bribed?" 
 The quotation, " And let all the angels of God worship 
 Him," applied to our Lord's advent into the world, is 
 made from a prophetic psalm, which, like others of the 
 same character, contains the mystery of Messiah, in 
 whom alone it finds its proper and true fulfilfnent.''^' 
 The other Messianic prophecies are so decidedly direct 
 as to be self-evident. We submit a table of the whole 
 in the full consciousness of the frequent difficulty of 
 discriminating indirect and immediate Messianic pro- 
 phecies. f There is no question on which students of 
 prophecy have been more divided, and none that is 
 
 * Heb, i. 6, with Ps. xcvii. 7. See also Ps. xciii., xcv., xcvi,, xcviii., 
 zcix., ci., cii. 
 
 + Matt. ii. 6 ; Matt. iii. 3 ; Matt. iv. 14-16 ; Matt. xi. 10 ; Matt. 
 xii. 17-21 ; Matt. xxii. 43, 44 ; Matt. xxvi. 31 ; Matt. i. 23 ; Matt. 
 xxvii. 9, 10 ; Matt. ii. 23 ; Matt. viii. 17 ; Matt. xxi. 4, 5 ; Mark xv. 
 28 ; Mark i. 3 ; Luke iii. 4 ; Luke xxii. 37 ; John i. 23 ; John xix. 3, 7 ; 
 Acts ii. 34 ; Acts iii. 22, 23, 25 ; Acts iii. 25 ; Rom. xiv. 11 ; Rom. ix. 
 33 ; Rom. xi. 26, 27 ; Rom. xv, 12 ; Rom. x. 13 ; Gal. iii. 8, 16 ; Eph. 
 V. H ; with Isa. Ix. 1, 19, 20 ; Heb. i. 8 ; Heb. v. 6. 
 
60 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 more open to doubtful disputation. We conclude this 
 investigation by an induction of quotation prophecies, 
 which may be designated involute rather than either 
 typical or direct Messianic. And as typical prophecies 
 less or more directly predict what they indirectly pre- 
 figure, so the involute Messianic imply the personal 
 advent and work of Christ, but directly declare their 
 results in the salvation of believers and the deeper 
 damnation of unbelievers, in the illumination of some 
 and the judicial blindness of others, in the regeneration 
 of society and the downfall of Satan's kingdom, in times 
 of refreshing from the presence of the Lord and in tides 
 of judgment, in the rejection of the faithless Jews and 
 the calling of the benighted Gentiles. They express a 
 Messianic condition of things, which completely solves 
 the mystery of the Messiah, wrapt up in the ancient 
 prophecies. They announce the antecedents, concomi- 
 tants, and consequences of an advent and redemptive 
 work, which another class of prophecies directly pro- 
 claims.'"'' 
 
 3. The quotations already adduced, classed, and 
 partly illustrated under the different aspects of pro- 
 phecy, may be regarded as sufficient to show the prin- 
 ciple of interpretation on which the New Testament 
 writers proceeded. "We conclude this part of the sub- 
 
 ^' Matt. iii. 3 ; Mark i. 2 ; Matt. xiii. 14, 15 ; Matt. xv. 8, 9 ; Luke 
 iii. 4 ; John vi. 45 ; Johnxii. 38, 40 ; Acts ii. 16-21 ; Acts xiii. 40, 41 ; 
 Acts XV. 16, 17 ; Kom. ix. 25, 26, 27, 28 ; Eom. xv. 9, 10, 11 ; 1 Cor. 
 XV. 54 ; 1 Cor. ii. 9 ; Eom. x. 19, 20 ; Eom. xi. 9, 10 ; Eom. iv. 18 ; 
 Gal. iv. 27 ; Heb. ii. 6-8. 
 
PKINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 61 
 
 ject by a passing reference to the principle, or rather 
 practice, of accommodation, which is the correlative of 
 the principle of allusion, already examined. It con- 
 sists in appropriating the form merely, and not the 
 matter of a passage. It accommodates or applies 
 Old Testament forms of thought or phraseology to the 
 expression or the illustration of evangelical sentiments 
 or doctrines. To these the writers merely allude, that 
 they may apply them loosely to the presentation of 
 other and higher truths. They are invariably em- 
 ployed to communicate and commend truth, and not 
 to convey and to countenance error.''' Thus, the Scrip- 
 ture, " The man who doeth these things shall live by 
 them," is a proper quotation and application of a 
 passage in the law which describes the results of legal 
 obedience ; but the subsequent context of Paul, though 
 it contrasts the righteousness of faith with that of 
 works, is not an authoritative interpretation of Moses, 
 but a parenthetical modification and accommodation of 
 the form of a graphic passage, descriptive of the near- 
 ness or accessibility of the law and the facility of 
 obedience, to the presentation of the higher evangelical 
 truth of justification or righteousness by faith in the 
 gospel of Jesus Christ. f 
 
 The application of the passage from the nineteenth 
 psalm, describing the circuits of the orbs of heaven, 
 "Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their 
 words to the end of the world," to the general procla- 
 mation of the gospel to the world, is an accommo- 
 
 * Kom. X. 5 ; Lev. xviii. 5. t Rom. x. 6-9 ; Deut. xxx. 12, 14. 
 
62 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 dation of the form of the text, and not a fanciful 
 analogue between the lights of the natural and the 
 moral worlds, much less a typical prediction founded 
 on typical natural facts,'"' In such instances the pri- 
 mary idea is modified by a paraphrase, or so palpably 
 accommodated in its form as to carry no logical autho- 
 rity, and to occasion no difficulty of interpretation. 
 
 * Eom. X. 18 : Ps. xix. 3, 4. 
 
PAKT III. 
 
 ANALOGOUS QUOTATION. 
 
 THE APOSTOLIC AND EARLY FATHERS. 
 
 Section First. 
 
 1. We shall employ the same method in connection 
 with this cognate department of quotation, examining 
 in order the sources of the citations made by the early 
 Fathers, their introductory formulas and forms, and 
 the principles of interpretation followed. We shall 
 find a general agreement on these points between the 
 authors of the New Testament and the Fathers of the 
 Church, with some specific differences, especially of 
 interpretation, the character and value of which re- 
 main to be discussed and determined. The Apostolic 
 Fathers, so called as having been contemporary with 
 the Apostles, are five in number — Hermas, Barnabas, 
 and Clement of Rome ; Poly carp of Smyrna, and Igna- 
 tius of Antioch. Like the authors of the New Testa- 
 ment, they all wrote in Greek, though Barnabas at 
 least was a Jew. Irenseus expressly states that both 
 the Apostles and the Fathers quoted the Septuagint, 
 or Seventy Elders.'''" The conquests of Alexander the 
 Great and the Septuagint version had made the Greek 
 language so current throughout the Roman empire, 
 
 ■* Iren. lib. iii. c. 21. 
 
64 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 and especially tlirougiioat the Cburcli, that Hellenistic 
 Jews, as well as Greeks, generally preferred the Sep- 
 tuagint, even when less accurate, to the old vernacular 
 Hebrew. The Jews, ever since the Babylonish capti- 
 vity, had lost the full and facile command of their 
 native tongue, and spoke the Aramaean or Syro-Chal- 
 daic, which is a branch or dialect of the ancient 
 Hebrew. This was less or more the oral language of 
 the Jews in the days of our Lord, as is evident from 
 the formal and frequent citation of His very words in 
 the gospels. It had been used from the time of Ezra 
 downwards to Christ as the language of formal com- 
 ment on the Hebrew text of the law in most of the 
 Jewish synagogues. But it gradually died out, both 
 as the language of ordinary life and of religious wor- 
 ship, till, at the Christian era, we find the Greek 
 tongue in common use both in social life and in the 
 synagogue by the Jews, who were called Grecists or 
 Hellenists. Accordingly, the authors of the period, 
 such as Philo and Josephus, the writers of the New 
 Testament, and the earliest Fathers, Jewish and Greek, 
 wrote in Greek, and generally cited the Septuagint. 
 The Christian Jews retained their national forms of 
 thought, and wrote impure or Hellenistic Greek ; while 
 the Greek Fathers, who generally were ignorant of 
 Hebrew, from their habitual converse with the Sep- 
 tuao-int and the influence of the new ideas of the 
 Christian economy on their language, would become 
 tino-ed with Hebraism, and lose their classic peculiarity 
 or propriety. 
 
PATKISTIC QUOTATION. 65 
 
 The Apostolic Fathers cited or alluded to the Old 
 or the New Scriptures as their subject and their cir- 
 cumstances demanded. In the Shepherd of Hennas 
 we find numerous allusions, both literal and ideal, to 
 most of the books of the New Testament, and especi- 
 ally to the four gospels; but the allegorical or mystical 
 character of the work, which consists of visions, simili- 
 tudes and precepts delivered by angels, did not any 
 more than the Apocalypse require express or formal 
 quotation. The epistles of Barnabas and Clement are 
 full of citations from the Old Testament and of 
 frequent allusions to the New, which are of such a 
 character, and made in such circumstances, as to have 
 the value of quotations. Clement ascribes to Paul 
 the First Epistle to the Corinthians, which Polycarp 
 expressly quotes, as well as Paul's epistles to the 
 Philippians and Ephesians, the last of which Ignatius 
 in his epistle to them attributes to the same Apostle. 
 Polycarp and Iguatius, on the other hand, seldom 
 either cite or refer to the Old Testament, but the}' 
 frequently both quote and allude to the New, under 
 the designation of ''Holy Scriptures," or "Sacred 
 Writings," and "The Gospel," and "Apostles," corre- 
 sponding to " the law and the prophets " of the Jewish 
 nomenclature. 
 
 2. The quotation formulas both of the Apostolic 
 and post- Apostolic Fathers may be thus stated and 
 classified and compared with one another, and specially 
 with those of the New Testament. Among the 
 
 E 
 
66 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 earliest Fathers we find the following diversity of 
 form'" — 'at is written;" ''God," "The Lord," or " The 
 Son of God," " said, or says, or shows;" "The Holy 
 Spirit says;" "The Holy Scriptures," or " The Sacred 
 Word," "show us;" "Paul," or other writer, "says." 
 The later Fathers use substantially the same marks of 
 quotation! — "We read in the law;" "It is said in 
 the gospels;" " Christ Himself has said;" " The Lord 
 hath taught us;" "The Lord says in the gospels;" 
 " The Holy Spirit in the Apostle says;" "The gospel 
 says; " "The evangelic voice teaches; " "The Scriptures 
 teach;" "The Divine Word teaches;" "The Apostle 
 says," or " Paul has explained," or " The admirable 
 Apostle," "The excellent Paul," "explains;" "Peter," 
 or " John," or "Mark," or " Luke," "says; " " John, one 
 of the Apostles, prophesied;" " As they have taught who 
 have written the history of those things concerning 
 Jesus Christ." It is evident that these several formulas 
 of the Fathers are similar, and correspond each to each, 
 that they may all be reduced to two classes correspond- 
 ing to those of the New Testament already stated as 
 general, particular and prophetic formulas, of which 
 the last is not found in the Fathers. 
 
 * Clem. (Rom.) caps. 13, 18, 24, 23, 36, 30, 46, 56. Bar. caps. 4, 7. 
 Ig. Eph. 5. Poly. Phil. caps. 2, 8, 11, 12. 
 
 t Just. Apol. p. 94 ; Dial. pp. 266, 317, 308 ; Apol. p. 267. Diog. 
 Epis. passim. Iren. lib. iii. cap. 10, sec, 6. Theoph. lib. ii. iii. Clem. 
 (Alex.) Paed. lib. i. ii. iii. vi. Strom, lib. i. ii. vii. 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 67 
 
 Section Second. 
 
 When we examine the forms of citation, we find a 
 still closer correspondence with those of the New 
 Testament. Even the principles of interpretation 
 which appear to have regulated the Fathers in quota- 
 tion substantially agree with those of the inspired 
 writers, with a signal exceptional difference, which 
 increases rather than reduces the apologetic value of 
 their evidence. And, as the form of a quotation and 
 its application or interpretation are closely connected, 
 and sometimes coincident, we shall simplify and 
 curtail the discussion as much as possible by examin- 
 ing both together. This observation is specially ap- 
 plicable to the first in order, viz. — 
 
 1. Literal quotation. Clement of Rome and Bar- 
 nabas not only quote, but generally at the same time 
 interpret literally the Old Testament, and almost in- 
 variably the Septuagint.'" Cited passages are certainly 
 
 * Clem. 4 and Gen. iv. 3, 8. Clem. 4 and Exod. ii. 14. Clem. 6 and 
 Gen. ii. 23. Clem. 8 and Isa. i. 16-20. Clem. 10 and Gen. xii. 1-3. 
 Clem. 10 and Gen. xiii. 14-16, and Gen. xv. 5, 6. Clem. 14 and Ps. 
 xxxvi. 35-37. Clem. 15 and Isa. xxix. 13, Ps. Ixi. 5, Ps, xxx, 19, Ps. 
 Ixxvii. 36, 37. Clem. 16 and Isa. liii., Ps. xxi. 7-9. Clem. 17 and 
 Gen. xviii. 27. Clem. 18 and Ps. 1, 3-19. Clem. 22 and Ps. xxxii. 11- 
 18. Clem. 29 and Deut. xxxii. 8, 9. Clem. 35 and Ps. xHx. 16, 23. Clem. 
 36 and Ps. ciii. 4. Clem. 36 and Ps. ii. 7, 8. Clem. 36 and Ps. ex. 1. 
 Clem. 39 and Job iv. 16-18, Job iv. 19-21, Job v. 1-5, Job xv. 15. Clem. 
 46 and Ps. xvii. 26, 27. Clem. 48 and Ps. cxvii. 19, 20. Clem. 50 and 
 Isa. xxvi. 20. Clem. 50 and Ps. xxxii. 1, 2. Clem. 52 and Ps. Ixviii. 
 31, 33, Ps. xUx. 15, Ps. 1. 19. Clem. 53 and Deut. ix. 12, 13, 14. Clem. 
 
68 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 not always interpreted on a principle correlative to 
 the mode of their citation, but in the following 
 illustrative instances the form and the principle of the 
 quotations are coincident. Most of the literal cita- 
 tions in particular are evidently literally or grammat- 
 ically interpreted. This is evident from a comparison 
 of the form of a passage with its application. Thus, 
 Clement cites and interprets the Septuagint literally, 
 *^ This is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh." 
 And Barnabas, quoting the same version, says, '^ Let us 
 make man according to our image and our likeness."'"' 
 And even when the interpretation of a text does 
 not answer to its form, and is altogether irrelevant, 
 there is yet ample evidence of the recognition of 
 certain principles, even in their misapplication. 
 
 2. Substantial quotation. Here, as in the New 
 Testament, we find the substance of a passage both in 
 sense and form combined in quotation. f Clement, 
 
 54 and Ps. xxiii. 1. Clem. 56 and Ps. cxl 5. Clem. 56 and Job v. 17, 
 26. Clem. 57 and Prov. i. 23, 31. Bar. 4 and Isa. v. 21. Bar. 5 and 
 Gen. i. 26. Bar. 5 and Ps. xxi. 21. Bar. 5 and Isa. 1. 6, 7. Bar. 6 
 and Isa. xxii. 16, 18, Ps. cxviii. 12. Bar. 6 and Gen. i. 26, 28, Ezek. 
 xi. 19, xxxvi. 26. Bar. 6 and Isa. iii. 9. Bar. 6 and Ps. cxvii. 
 22, 24. Bar. 9 and Isa. i. 2. Bar. 10 and Ps. i. 1. Bar. 11 and Jer. ii. 
 12, 13. Bar. 11 and Isa. xvi. 12. Bar. 11 and Isa. xxxiii. 16-18. Bar. 
 11 and Ps. i. 3-6. Bar. 12 and Ps. cix. 1. Bar. 12 and Isa. xlv. 1. 
 Bar. 13 and Gen. xxv. 23. Bar, 14 and Dent. ix. 12. Bar. 14 and Isa. 
 xlii. 6, 7. Bar. 14 and Isa. xlix. 6, Isa. Ixi. 1, 2. Bar. 15 and Gen. ii. 2 
 (Heb.) Bar. 15 and Ps. Ixxxix. 4. Bar. 16 and Isa. Ixvi. 1. Ig. 5, ad 
 Epb. and Prov. iii. 34. Ig. ad Mag. 12 and Prov. xviii. 17. Ig. 
 Martyr 6 and Prov. x, 24. Ig. Martyr 2 and Lev. xxvi. 12. 
 
 * Clem. 6 and Gen. ii. 23. Bar. 5 and Gen. i. 26. 
 
 ■f Clem. 3 and Deut. xxxii. 15. Clem. 8 and Ezek. xxxiii. 11, Ezek. 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 69 
 
 citing and applying to the Corinthian Church the 
 ■wayward folly and ingratitude of Jeshurun or Israel, 
 says, " The beloved ate and drank and was enlarged, 
 and ^vaxed fat and kicked." And Barnabas aj)plies 
 to the Judaising Christians of his time the words of 
 the Lord to Moses on the mount, in reference to back- 
 sliding Israel, " Moses, descend quickly, for thy people 
 whom thou hast led out of the land of Egypt have 
 transgressed the law."'" These instances may suffice 
 to indicate the principle, but a detailed examination 
 of the whole class is necessary to clarify and confirm 
 it. Most of the cases are grammatically interpreted 
 and justly applied, but the gnostic or allegorical 
 principle of interpretation occasionally appears, especi- 
 ally in the writings of Barnabas, who declares that 
 the good land of Canaan, flowing with milk and honey, 
 denotes primarily the human nature of Christ, and 
 next the renewed nature of Christians, so that the 
 promise of Cannan was a prophecy of Christ, for science 
 
 xviii, 30, Ezek. xxxiii. 12. Clem. 14 and Prov. ii. 21, 22. Clem. 13 and 
 Jer. ix. 23, 24. Clem. 13 and Isa. Ixvi. 2. Clem. 17 and Job i. 1. 
 Clem. 23 and Mai. iii. 1. Clem, 26 and Job xix. 26. Clem. 26 and 
 Ps. iii. 6. Clem. 28 and Ps. cxxxviii. 7-10. Clem. 33 and Gen. i. 26, 27. 
 Clem. 43 and Num. xii. 7. Clem. 52 and Exod. xxxii. 7-9. Clem. 
 53 and Exod. xxxii. 33. Bar. 2 and Isa. i. 11-14, Jer. vii. 22, 23, Zech. 
 viii. 17, Ps. 1. 19. Bar. 3 and Isa. Iviii, 4, 5, Isa. vi. 10. Bar. 4 and 
 Exod. xxxii. 7, Deut. ix. 12. Bar. 5 and Isa. liii. 5, Prov. i. 17. Bar. 5 
 and Ps. xxii. 16. Bar. 6 and Isa. xxviii. 16, Isa. 1. 8, 9, Isa. 1. 7. Bar. 
 6 and Ps. xxii. 21. Bar. 7 and Lev. xvi. 7, 10. Bar. 9 and Ps. xvii. 
 45, Isa. xxxiii. 10, Jer. iv. 4, Jer, vii, 2, Isa. i. 10, Jer. ix. 25, 26. Bar. 
 10 and Deut. xiv., Lev. xi. 3. Bar. 11 and Isa, xlv. 2, 3, Bar, 12 and 
 Isa, Ixv. 2. Bar, 12 and Num. xxi. 9. Bar, 15 and Isa, i. 13. 
 
 * Clem, 3 ; Deut. xxxii, 15 ; and Bar. 4 ; Deut, ix, 12, Exod. xxxii. 
 7,8. 
 
70 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 said of it, " Hope in Jesus, who is about to be mani- 
 fested in the flesh to you."'" 
 
 3. Synthetic quotation is as frequent in the Fathers 
 as in the New Testament, f Two or more texts are 
 conjoined or combined in one citation. Sometimes 
 they stand simply in juxtaposition, sometimes in closest 
 combination. Clement thus combines two passages 
 from Moses, " Who am I that thou sendest me ? for 
 I am of slow tongue, and of feeble speech. ";[ He de- 
 clares the reward of good works by conjoining Isaiah 
 with the Apocalypse, " For He foretells us, ' Behold, 
 the Lord cometh, and His reward is before Him, to 
 render unto every one according to his own work,'"§ 
 He proves chastisement, divine or human, to be salutary 
 and a sign of the divine love by a combination of texts 
 from David and Solomon, " For thus sayeth the Holy 
 Word, ' The Lord hath certainly chastised me, and 
 hath not given me over unto death ; for whom the 
 Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son 
 whom He receiveth.' "|| 
 
 We find also that the synthesis is sometimes literal, 
 
 * Bar. 6 and Exod. xxxiii. 3. 
 
 t Clem. 17 and Exod. iii. 11, Exod. iv. 10. Clem. 34 and Isa. xl. 10, 
 Kev. xxii, 12. Clem. 34 and Dan. vii. 10, Isa. vi. 3. Clem. 56 and 
 Ps. cxvii. 18, Prov. iii. 12. Bar. 2 and Jer. vii. 22, 23, Zech. viii. 17. 
 Bar. 4 and Exod. xxxi. 18, Exod. xxxiv. 28. Bar. 6 and Exod. xxxiii. 1, 
 Lev. XX. 24. Bar. 9 and Gen. xiv, 14, Gen. xvii. 26, 27. Bar. 13 and 
 Gen. xlviii. 9, 11. Bar. 13 and Gen. xv. 6, Gen. xvii. 5. Bar. 14 and 
 Exod. xxiv. 18, Exod. xxxi. 18. 
 
 X Clem. 17 and Exod. iii. 11, Exod. iv. 10. 
 
 § Clem. 34 and Isa. xl. 10, Isa. Ixii. 11, Apoc. xxii. 12. 
 
 II Clem. 56 and Ps. cxvii. 18, Prov. iii. 12. 
 
PATKISTIC QUOTATION. 71 
 
 at other times substantial, and sometimes merely para- 
 phrastic.'"' But under all its forms it involves two 
 important hermeneutical principles recognised by the 
 Fathers. It assumes the unity of revelation not only 
 in diversity but in development, which is the foun- 
 dation of both synthetic and analogical interpretation. 
 These authors, amid occasional vagaries and even 
 false principles of interpretation, generally understood 
 the unity of the economies, and also applied the facts 
 and truths of ancient Scripture to the illustration or 
 defence of corresponding evangelical doctrines. Even 
 gnostic allegory, so prominent in Barnabas and others, 
 in multiplying types and carrying analogy to ridiculous 
 excess, recognises the unity of Scripture. 
 
 4. Paraphrastic is similar to substantial citation, 
 but more loosely rendered. It translates the sense of 
 a passage without its form into another and generally 
 a higher and more ideal form.f Clement cites in this 
 
 * Clem. 29 and Num. xviii. 27, 2 Chron. xxxi. 14. 
 
 t Clem. 8 and Ps. cii. 1, Isa. i. 18, Jer. iii. 19, 22. Clem. 17 and 
 Job xiv. 4, 5. Clem. 18 and Ps. Ixxxviii. 21. Clem. 20 and Job 
 xxxviii. 11. Clem. 21 and Prov. xx. 27. Clem. 26 and Ps. xxvii. 7, Ps. iii. 
 6, Job xix. 25, 26. Clem. 29 and Num. xviii. 27, 2 Chron. xxxi. 14. 
 Clem. 32 and Gen. xxii. 17. Clem. 42 and Isa. Ix. 17. Clem. 50 and 
 Ezek. xxxvii. 12, 13. Bar. 4 and Dan. vii. 24, Dan. vii. 7, 8. Bar. 6 
 and Isa. viii. 14. Bar. 6 and Ezek. xi. 19, Ezek. xxxvi. 26. Bar. 6 and 
 Ps. xli. 3. Bar. 7 and Lev. xvi. 7-10. ' Bar. 9 and Ps. xxxiii. 13, Isa. 
 xl. 3, Jer. iv. 3, Jer. vii. 26. Bar. 9 and Gen. xvii. 26, 27, Gen. xiv. 14. 
 Bar. 10 and Lev. iv. 1. Bar. 11 and Zeph. iii. 19. Bar. 11 and Ezek. 
 xlvii. 12. Bar. 12 and Exod. xvii. 14. Bar. 13 and Gen. xlviii. 18, 19. 
 Bar. 15 and Exod. xx. 8, Deut. v. 12. Bar. 15 and Jer. xvii. 24, 25. 
 Bar. 16 and Isa. xlix. 17. Bar. 16 and Jer. xxv., Isa. v. Bar. 16 and 
 Dan. ix. 24-27, Haggai ii. 6-10. Bar. 7 and Lev. xvi. 8, 10, 21. 
 
72 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 way three passages from the books of Psahns and of 
 Job, " For He somewhere sayeth, And Thou wilt raise 
 me up, and I shall confess unto Thee.""'' ''And, I 
 went to sleep, and slept ; I awoke for Thou art with 
 me." These texts are applied improperly to prove 
 the resurrection of the dead, but the form of the 
 citations is valid. The form may be correct and yet 
 the interpretation false, but not reversely. "And again 
 Job says. And Thou wilt raise up my flesh, which 
 has borne all these things." f This class of quotations 
 is sometimes so loose and vague that some critics refer 
 them to the apocryphal books, but the writers them- 
 selves declare them to be spoken by God Himself 
 " someiuhere/' which shows that they were taken 
 from Scripture and made from memory. J Sometimes 
 we meet with a paraphrastic synthesis of several texts, 
 in which all the freedom consistent with quotation is 
 used as in the New Testament, and even when the 
 citation is incorrect, both in form and sense, we have 
 a recognition of the principle. In Barnabas we find 
 some signal examples of idealistic quotation, especially 
 his definition or designation of azazel or the scapegoat. 
 " Take two he-goats, good and like, and offer them, 
 and let the priest offer the one goat for a holocaust, 
 and let the other be 'accursed.'"^ The one goat was 
 set apart for sacrifice or atonement, the other, or 
 azazel, as both the derivation of the term and the 
 description of the function of the animal imply, was 
 
 * Ps. iii. 5 ; Ps. xxii. 25. f Job xix. 26. 
 
 t 'Tov —Clem. 26 ; Ps. xxvii. 7. 
 
 § i-prtxaTK^KTos. Bar. 7 ; Lev. xvi. 8, 10, 21. 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 73 
 
 for removal or dismissal as tlie sin-bearer, laden witli 
 the iniquities of the people, and consequently accursed 
 of God. These animals, thus disposed of on the great 
 day of atonement, were complemental types of Christ, 
 our Sin-bearer, under the double but not divided 
 aspects of atonement and remission of sin. 
 
 5. Eclectic quotation is a select extract from a 
 passage instead of the whole. Nothing in citation can 
 be more natural, appropriate, and expedient. It con- 
 tributes to the brevity, point, and force of a writer's 
 argument. Barnabas thus analyses and cites two 
 passages from the law and the prophet Isaiah : '' Ye 
 shall have nothing either graven or molten for a god 
 to you ; " and, '' Who hath measured the heavens with 
 a span, and the earth with the palm of the hand ? Is 
 it not I ? " '" In the " Martyrdom of Ignatius," an 
 early writing, but not of the apostolic age, we find the 
 martjrr thus answering the Emperor by an excerpt 
 from the law : '' Trajan said, ' Dost thou then carry in 
 tliyself the Crucified ? ' Ignatius said, Yes, for it 
 is written, ' I will dwell and I will walk among 
 them,' " t The citation and its interpretation are alike 
 valid. 
 
 6. The prospective principle of interpretation, espe- 
 cially in its typical form, is carried to excess by these 
 Fathers, and particularly by Barnabas, who finds types 
 
 * Bar. 12 ; Lev. xxvii. 15. Bar. 16 ; Isa. xl. 12. 
 t Ig. Martyr 2 ; Lev. xxvi. 12, 2 Cor. vi. 16. 
 
74 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 of the person and passion of Christ, and of the institu- 
 tions of the gospel, in almost everything connected 
 with the ceremonial or ritual economy. Not only 
 certain public persons and the public animal sacrifices, 
 but the meat offerings themselves, and even the clean 
 and unclean meats, were symbols both of present truths 
 and of prospective Messianic benefits. Contending 
 with the Judaisers, who maintained that Christians 
 were bound to observe the law of Moses, he labours in 
 several successive chapters to demonstrate by a tissue 
 of frequently fantastic types, allegorically interpreted, 
 that the ceremonial law was a transient shadow of the 
 new covenant. And, accordingly, we expect to find in 
 these writers typical prophecy, which is prophecy on 
 the basis of type. On this principle m.ost of their 
 quotations of ancient prophecy were made. We recog- 
 nise like citations in the New Testament as valid, and 
 are bound to investigate and determine not only the 
 fact but the form of the principle on which they are 
 made, whether it be typical or direct ; but in patristic 
 quotation the same issues are not at stake, and it is 
 sufficient for our purpose to find there the principle of 
 Messianic prophecy. The Fathers cite and apply the 
 same prophecies, and sometimes in the same way and 
 on the same principles. In an uncritical age prin- 
 ciples may be realised and acted on without having 
 been made the objects of formal examination or of 
 reflective consciousness. Philosophers, in the successful 
 study both of matter and of mind, proceeded occasion- 
 ally, and perhaps unconsciously, on inductive principles. 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 75 
 
 before Bacon published bis Novum Organum, or 
 Descartes bis Metapbysics. Tbe frequent difficulty 
 of determining tbe specific cbaracter of a Messianic 
 propbecy and tbe principle on wbicb it is interpreted 
 in tbe New Testament, is felt to be still greater in tbe 
 case of tbe Fatbers, wbo carried tbe Messianic principle 
 so far as to find propbecies of Cbrist in plain bistorical 
 statements, sucb as tbe following, wbicb Barnabas 
 applies to tbe crucifixion of Cbrist : " All day long I 
 bave stretcbed out my bands to a people incredulous 
 and contradictory to my just way."''' But all tbat our 
 argument requires is evidence tbat ancient Scripture 
 was interpreted by tbe Fatbers as Messianic propbecy, 
 wbetber direct or indirect. Barnabas applies distinctly, 
 and apparently directly, to Cbrist tbe following pas- 
 sages : — " And again sayetb tbe propbet, He is placed 
 like a strong stone for bruising ; " and, " Bebold I put 
 into tbe foundations of Zion a stone, precious, elect, a 
 corner stone, bonourable." " And, again, tbe propbet 
 says, Tbe stone w^bicb tbe builders rejected, tbe same 
 bas become tbe bead of tbe corner, "t 
 
 Section Third. 
 
 We bave found tbat tbe earliest Cburcb Fatbers 
 distinctly quote, and generally even interpret, tbe Old 
 Testament in tbe same way and on tbe same principles 
 as tbe autbors of tbe New Testament. We sball next 
 
 * Bar. 12; Isa. Ixv. 2. 
 t Bar. 6 ; Isa. viii. 14, Isa. xxviii. 16, Ps. cxvii. 12. 
 
76 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 examine how these writers cite the New Testament, 
 both gospels and epistles ; and if we find that they are 
 quoted in the same way as the ancient Scripture, we 
 shall obtain a double analogy, the basis of a double or 
 cumulative argument in defence of New Testament 
 quotation. 
 
 1. Literal quotation appears upon the forefront of 
 all these writings. Barnabas, citing a memorable say- 
 ing of the Lord in the gospels, says, " Let us therefore 
 take care lest we be found as it is written, Many are 
 called, few are chosen.""" Polycarp says, "Do we not 
 know that the saints shall judge the world ? as Paul 
 teaches."! And again, ''For I trust that ye are well 
 exercised in the Holy Scriptures, as it is said, ' Be angry 
 and sin not ; and let not the sun go down upon your 
 wrath. •" J Ignatius says, " The tree is manifest by its 
 fruit."§ 
 
 2. Substantial citation occurs frequently, and, whether 
 made from memory or from the book, clearly shows 
 that the Fathers, like the New Testament writers in 
 their quotations from the Old Testament, and in their 
 different reports of the sayings of the Lord, paid more 
 regard to the sense than to the mere form of Scripture. 
 
 Polycarp in this way cites Paul, '' According as He 
 
 * Bar. 4 ; Matt. xx. 16. f Poly. 11 ; 1 Cor. vi. 2. 
 
 X Poly. 12 ; Eph. iv. 26. 
 
 § Ig. Eph. 14 ; Matt. xii. 33. See also Poly. 7 ; Matt. xxvi. 41. 
 Poly. 1 ; 1 Peter i. 8. Poly. 2 ; 1 Peter iii. 9. Poly. 10 ; 1 Peter v. 5. 
 Diog. ; 1 Cor. viii. 1. 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 77 
 
 hath promised us, that He will raise us up from the 
 dead, and that if we walk worthy of Him, we shall 
 also reign with Him."'" In the epistle to Diognetas 
 we read, " Christ has taught us not to be solicitous 
 about raiment or food."t And of Christ it is said, 
 *' He Himself took our sins." J 
 
 3. S}m thesis in quotation, involving the underlying 
 principles of interpretation already indicated, pervades 
 the Fathers. § Polycarp thus quotes in combination 
 several of our Lord's sayings — *' But remembering 
 what the Lord said, teaching : ' Judge not, that ye be 
 not judged. Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven. Be 
 merciful, that ye may obtain mercy. With what 
 measure ye mete, it shall be meted to you again. 
 And blessed are the poor, and they that are persecuted 
 for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of 
 God.'" On the same principle Clement cites the same 
 or similar passages in a different order. || 
 
 4. Paraphrase in quotation, in a form as highly 
 ideal as in the New Testament, is not uncommon in 
 the Fathers.il Barnabas, in a passage which stands 
 connected with the prospect of perilous times, citing 
 
 * Poly. 5 ; 2 Tim. ii. 11, 12. See also Poly. 11 ; 2 Thess. iii. 15. 
 
 t Diog. c. ix. ; Matt. vi. 25-31. :|: Diog. c. ix. ; 1 Peter ii. 24. 
 
 § Poly. 2 ; Matt. v. 3, 7, 10, Matt. vii. 1, 2, Luke vi. 20, 36, 38. 
 
 II Clem. 1, 13 ; Luke vi. 36, Matt. vii. 1, 12. 
 
 t Bar. 4 ; Matt. x. 32, 33, 38, 39, James iv. 7, 2 Tim. ii. 19. See 
 also Bar. 7 ; Matt, xvi. 24. Clem. 23 ; James i. 5-7, 2 Peter iii. 4. 
 Clem. 47 ; 1 Cor. i. 12. 
 
78 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 the sense of several sayings of Christ regarding cross- 
 bearing, which implies the hatred and avoidance of 
 evil, sums up the whole in a paraphrase — '' As the 
 Son of God says, ' Let us resist all iniquity, and hate 
 it.' " This quotation is a specimen of others of the 
 same character, of which it may be said, " Ex uno 
 disce omnes." It may be compared with a similar 
 citation in the Acts of the Apostles of a written or of 
 an unwritten saying of Christ — '' And to remember 
 the words of the Lord Jesus, how He said, It is more 
 blessed to give than to receive."'" Both agree in 
 their form, which is a paraphrase of Scripture, or, in 
 the latter case, the citation of an oral tradition, but 
 they differ in their formulas of quotation, and espe- 
 cially in the tense of the verb. This difference of 
 tense, however, which might appear to represent the 
 one as a past oral utterance of the Lord, the other as 
 a written and present saying, gives no support to the 
 mythical theory of Strauss, which denies the proper 
 date of the gospels, because we find the same tenses 
 interchanged in the quotations made by the Fathers 
 from both the Old and New Testaments.f 
 
 5. Allusion is of even more interest and importance 
 in connection with patristic than with Scripture quota- 
 tion, which is so complete and cogent that an array of 
 
 * Acts XX. 35. 
 
 t Clem. 46 ; Matt. xxvi. 24. Clem. 36 ; Ps. ii. 7, 8. Clem. 18 ; 
 Ps. Ixxxviii. 21, 1 Sam. xiii. 14. Clem. 56 ; Prov. iii. 11, Heb. vi. 
 9-11. Clem. 30; 1 Peter v. 5. 2 Clem. 5 ; Matt. x. 16. 2 Clem. 8 ; 
 Matt. xii. 50. 2 Clem. 6 : Luke xvi. 13. 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 79 
 
 references is less valuable. The quotations made by 
 the Fathers are generally less definite, both in their 
 formulas and forms, and more in need of the support 
 of reliable allusions. Lardner and others, without any 
 reason assigned, have employed these terms indiscrimi- 
 nately as of equal value. But it is evident that they 
 are formally , if not alway really different, and of differ- 
 ent apologetic value. There are three forms and grades 
 of allusion in the New Testament and in the Fathers 
 — general, special, and literal ; to the general idea, to 
 the substance, and to the exact form of the text, the last 
 of which only cau be said to be tantamount to a formal 
 quotation. But even in the winding maze of allusion 
 a guiding principle may be supplied. Ignatius espe- 
 cially alludes in all these forms to the gospels, which 
 he styles in their unity '' the gospel." He also alludes 
 to the Epistle to the Ephesians, which he calls Paul's, 
 as Clement does the First Epistle to the Corinthians. 
 We may therefore lay it down as a general rule — that 
 allusions, elsewhere found as formal citations, or made 
 to documents which can be otherwise proved to have 
 had contemporaneous existence, and to have been 
 known and accepted by the writers, rise especially in 
 their literal form to the value of express quotations. 
 
 (1.) We may here review the ground traversed on 
 the field of patristic literature and the results gained. 
 We have not quoted the doubtful or supposititious 
 writings ascribed to these Fathers, such as the Second 
 Epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians and 
 the whole seven epistles of the shorter recension of 
 
80 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 Ignatius. We liave followed the Syriac version, which 
 contains three only of this number, the epistles to the 
 Ephesians, to the Romans, and to Polycarp, which are 
 unquestionably authentic and authoritative evidence 
 not only of the authenticity of the New Testament, but 
 of the way in which the Fathers cited it. 
 
 We have found a progression in the C{uotation for- 
 mulas, according to which the authors or the books of 
 the New Testament are more frequently and more 
 distinctly named in the later than in the earlier 
 Fathers. There is a gradual advance from the general 
 to the particular, from the citation of Scripture to some 
 particular writing or v/riter. This is accompanied by 
 a corresponding clearness and fullness of the forms of 
 quotation, which a similar examination of the post- 
 Apostolic Fathers would show to be also progressive. 
 Throughout these formulas and forms are the same in 
 kind but different in degree. Both are closely con- 
 nected and illustrated by a similar parallel in the 
 nomenclature of the evangelical writings. The term 
 gospel is applied in the New Testament, in Church 
 history, and in modern use to the whole doctrine of 
 grace or of Christ in the Christian revelation. Now, 
 as the writings of the evangelists were produced 
 separately, at different times, and by different writers, 
 they would doubtless be called, as they were severally 
 known and accepted, gospels singly, such as Matthew's 
 or Mark's Gospel. But we have nowhere any ancient 
 historical evidence or indication that only a single one 
 of the four gospels was in use or was known to exist 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 81 
 
 separately. "' The Churches are represented as possess- 
 ing the entire collection of the four gospels, which, 
 with special reference to their internal character as a 
 fourfold revelation of grace, were first styled, "The 
 Gospel," and then subsequently, and more specifically, 
 with regard to their external unity as a collection, 
 " The Gospels," or, " The Holy Quaternion of the Gos- 
 pels," and " The Memoirs of Christ." 
 
 It is also evident that not only the variety of allu- 
 sions in the New Testament and in the Fathers, but 
 also occasionally the form of the quotations, are due to 
 memory. Copies were scarce both of the Old and 
 New Testaments, which were more in men's minds 
 than in their hands. The use of memory may have 
 also led to the occasional confusion of tradition with 
 Scripture, observed especially in Barnabas, and to the 
 quotation of the Apocrypha as authoritative. 
 
 (2.) We have also seen that the Fathers of the apos- 
 tolic era interpreted Scripture on substantially the 
 same rational principles as the authors of the New 
 Testament, except the vicious method of allegorising, 
 with which some of them were tainted, the result of 
 the application of Oriental philosophy to Christianity. 
 The errors of Barnabas — an Apostolic Father, contem- 
 porary with Ignatius and Polycarp, if not an apostolic 
 man, the Barnabas of Scripture — sprang from the abuse 
 of a right principle, the symbolic or typical, con- 
 spicuous in Scripture, and carried to excess in the 
 symbolism of the East. It is also worthy of notice 
 
 * Olshausen, Comment, on Gospels. Introduction. 
 
 r 
 
82 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 that this writer, whose name reveals his nationality, 
 sometimes cited, like the inspired writers, the Hebrew 
 rather than the Septuagint, the common source of 
 quotation. In both cases this was done because it 
 best answered the purposes of the writers. 
 
 (8.) We even find a parallel between New Testament 
 and patristic quotation in those more doubtful and 
 difficult instances which are nowhere formally found, 
 the source of which we must either seek in the sub- 
 stance of Scripture, or in tradition, or in special reve- 
 lation. The following citation of Barnabas, already 
 adduced — '' As the Son of God hath said, ' Let us 
 resist all iniquity, and hate it ' " — seems to embody 
 the substance of several texts; while Luke's notice of 
 the signal saying of the Lord, ''It is more blessed to 
 give than to receive,"'" rather appears to be one of 
 those traditional and well-known words of Jesus which 
 were too numerous to be recorded. The only citation 
 of Siny sort in Hernias — " The Lord is nigh to them 
 that turn to Him, as it is written in Heldam and 
 Modal, who prophesied to the people in the wilder- 
 ness " — is evidently taken from a written tradition, 
 though the same sentiment pervades the Pentateuch.f 
 Jude's citation of a prophecy of Enoch regarding the 
 coming of the Lord, not found in Scripture, was 
 derived either from the apocryphal book of Enoch, 
 which is a written tradition, or from direct revelation.;]; 
 
 We sum up these observations by repeating that 
 
 * Acts XX. 35. t Hermas ; Num. xi. 26 27. t Jude 14, 15. 
 
PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 83 
 
 the canonical writers and the Fathers substantially 
 agree in their forms of citation, and that the differ- 
 ence of their principles of interpretation and applica- 
 tion confirms the authority of the former, and finds 
 its proper explanation only in the differential principle 
 of inspiration. 
 
 Section Fourth. 
 
 Corresponding forms of citation might be reproduced 
 in order from the ante-Nicene Fathers, such as Justin 
 Martyr, the great apologist of Christianity, Irenseus of 
 Lyons, Theophilus of Antioch, and Clement and Origen 
 of Alexandria ; but as their evidence does not bear so 
 directly as that of the Apostolic Fathers on a collateral 
 department of our subject, the authenticity of the 
 books of the New Testament, we merely submit for 
 examination a table of reference/'' It is evident that 
 the prosecution of the method of adducing instances 
 throughout the long line of the post-Nicene Fathers, 
 Eastern and Western, Greek and Latin, the latter of 
 whom cited the Vulgate, which is the version of a 
 version, downwards to the scholastic writers, and on- 
 
 * Substantial Quotation — as Justin Apol. i. p. 75 ; Luc. i. 31. Just. 
 Dial. p. 64 ; John xiv. 24. Just. Dial. p. 301 ; Matt. xxv. 41. Iren. 
 Hser. lib. iii. c. 4 ; Acts xv. 39, and xvi. 8-11. Iren. lib. i. c. 16 ; 
 2 John 10, 11. Theoph. Autoly. lib. iii. ; Rom. xiii. 7, 8. Theoph. Aut. 
 Hb. iii. ; Matt. v. 28, 44. 
 
 Paraphrase— Just. Dial. p. 316 ; John i. 20, 27. Clem. Alex. Strom. 
 lib. i. p. 346 ; Matt. vi. 33. Psed.lib. ii. p. 100 ; John vi. 53, 54. Strom, 
 lib. iv. p. 511 ; Phil. iv. 5. 
 
84 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 wards to the Reformation and to modern times, were 
 a task tedious and almost interminable. But' we also 
 find in these Fathers and schoolmen the same forms of 
 quotation as in the New Testament and the earliest 
 Fathers, accompanied with a growing tendency or gra- 
 dual progress towards more literal or formal exactness. 
 A Kempis renders the Vulgate of Job, " Malitia est 
 vita hominis super terram," thus, " Tentatio est vita 
 humana super terram." He combines and cites two 
 passages from Ezekiel in this form — " Vivo ego, dicit 
 Dominus, qui nolo mortem peccatoris, sed magis ut 
 convertatur et vivat, quoniam peccatorum suorum non 
 recordabor amplius, sed cuncta sibi indulta erunt.'"" 
 The following passage, " Iniquitates meas supergressse 
 sunt caput meum et sicut onus grave gravatse sunt 
 super me," is thus condensed and quoted by Aquinas, 
 "Iniquitates mese aggravatse sunt super me."t It is 
 also clear that the rationale of the forms of quotation 
 lies mainly in these two pervading and regulating 
 principles — the purpose of the writers, whether strictly 
 demonstrative or merely didactic, or even devotional, 
 and the accessibility of the sources of quotation. 
 Hence, when their object was logical, their citations 
 were more literal ; when merely didactic, they were 
 more free ; while the rarity of copies of the Scriptures, 
 prior to the completion or recognition of the New 
 Testament Canon, and the multiplication and circula- 
 
 * A Kem. lib. i. cap. 13 ; Job vii. 1. Lib. iv. cap. 7 ; Ezek. xxxiii. 11, 
 Ezek. xviii. 22. 
 
 t Aquin. in Matt. cap. 6 ; Ps. xxxviii. 4. 
 
MODERN QUOTATION. 85 
 
 tion of the Divine Oracles, threw them back, in a 
 great measure, on their memories, which were satu- 
 rated with Scripture. And, accordingly, the learned 
 and devout Calvin, in his numerous letters, lately 
 edited by Jules Bonnet, cites the Scriptures at once 
 for the same purposes and in the same manner as the 
 Fathers and the authors of the New Testament. He 
 quotes the Epistle to the Romans thus : " Paul, 
 treating of charity, does not forget that we ought to 
 weep with those that weep."'"' The well-known text, 
 " I know in whom I have believed," he thus para- 
 phrases, without naming the author or the epistle : 
 " You can say, Avith that valiant champion of Jesus 
 Christ, ' I know from whom I have received my 
 faith.' "t His third letter is full of allusions, but does 
 not contain a single formal citation.J The letters of 
 Samuel Rutherford, in more modern times, written in 
 similar circumstances, exhibit like forms of quotation. § 
 He thus cites the substance of the well-known text of 
 the Christian life : " I live no more, but Christ liveth 
 in me." He also selects and alters the tense of the 
 verb of a sentence from a passage in the Psalms, " I 
 bless the Lord who gave me counsel." In like manner 
 he says that Christ's saints bear, '' as the apostle saith, 
 the remnants or leavings of the cross." The follow- 
 ing citation is a synthesis of several passages : " Thank 
 
 * Calvin's Letters, vol. i. p. 295 ; Rom. xii. 15. 
 
 t Letters^ vol. i. p. 389 ; 2 Tim. i. 12. See also Calv. Sacs. p. 8, 
 Gal. iii. 27, 1 Cor. xii. 13 ; and p. 10, Ps. cxix. 10, Ps. cxi. 1 ; p. 164, 
 John vi. 56 ; p. 178, 1 Cor. xi. 27, 27. 
 
 t Letters, p. 382. § Letters, p. 196 ; Gal. ii. 20. 
 
86 PKINCIPLES OF NE^Y TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 your God, who saith, ' I have the keys of hell and of 
 death — I kill, and I make alive. The Lord bringeth 
 down to the grave and bringeth up.' "''' These 
 numerous but short letters, written in prison to friends 
 for devotional and hortatory purposes, are full of 
 formal citations, most of which are literal and of 
 literal allusions equal to quotations. Owen, in his 
 dogmatic and apologetical writings, cites the Scrip- 
 tures in the same way. In the following citation 
 the form of the original text is slightly altered, 
 but the substance remains : " He hath also committed 
 all judgment unto Him, that all men might honour 
 Him, even as they honour the Father." f He thus 
 paraphrases the principle of legal obedience, '' Do and 
 live ;" and the principle of the legal curse, " Cursed be 
 every transgressor." | We find also that philosophers 
 as well as theologians follow the same mode of quota- 
 tion. Bacon, the father of inductive philosophy, and 
 the connecting link between the scholastic philosophers 
 and those of the Keformation, thus freely renders 
 Christ's reply to the captious Pharisees, '' The phy- 
 sician approaches the sick rather than the whole. "§ 
 The learned and accurate Grotius cites Paul in the 
 former of the following passages almost exactly, but in 
 the latter quite loosely : '' For if we believe that Jesus 
 died and rose again, even so them that are asleep will 
 
 * Letters, p. 266 ; Eev. i. 18, Deut. xxxii. 39, Ps. xxii. 15. 
 •|- Owen's Essays, p. 142, John v. 21-27 ; and p. 250, 1 John iii. 2. 
 X Owen's Essays, p. 44, with Gal. iii. 12 and Gal. iii. 10 ; and 
 p. 153 with Gal. i. 8-10. 
 
 § Bacon's Essays, p. 144 ; Matt. ix. 12. 
 
QUOTATION OF THE CLASSICS. 87 
 
 God bring with Him ; " and, " All things fall out for 
 the best to those who purely worship God." '"" The 
 celebrated Butler not only quotes occasionally from the 
 original instead of from the authorised version, but 
 also modifies and adjusts the passage cited to his 
 own text.f We shall merely add that similar forms 
 of citation pervade the secular and religious productions 
 of the modern pen, press, and pulpit. 
 
 Section Fifth. 
 
 1. But it is more pertinent to our subject to notice 
 the way in which the philosophers, mediaeval and 
 modern, cite the Greek and Roman classics. Livy's 
 character of Scipio Africanus, " Memorabilior prima 
 pars vitse quam postrema fuit," is thus paraphrased 
 by Bacon, " Ultima primis cedebant."J The same 
 writer's eulogy of Marcus Porcius Cato, " In hoc viro 
 tanta vis animi ingeniique fuit, ut quocunque loco 
 natus esset, fortunam sibi ipse facturus fuisse vide- 
 retur," he quotes substantially, '' In hoc viro tanta vis 
 animi et ingenii inerat, ut quocunque loco natus esset 
 sibi ipse fortunam facturus videretur."§ In the same 
 way Spartian's account of the life of Septimus Severus, 
 '' Juventutem egit erroribus, imo furoribus, plenam," 
 
 * Grotius, Epis. Consol ; 1 Thess. iv. 14, Horn. viii. 28. 
 
 t Analogy, part i. cap, 2, and part ii. cap. 4 ; Prov. i. 28, 1 Peter 
 i. 11, 12. See Newt. Cardiph, vol. ii. p. 251 ; vol. i. p. 70 ; vol. i. 
 p. 26. 
 
 X Bacon's Essays, p. 95 ; Liv. xxxvii. 53. 
 
 § Advanc. Learn, p. 177 ; Liv. xxxix. 40. 
 
88 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 is thus altered and rendered, ''Juventam plenam 
 furorum nonunquam et criminum habuit."*"' 
 
 This is the connecting Hnk between ecclesiastical 
 and classical citation, both of which exhibit the two 
 general principles of scriptural quotation, the literal 
 and the loose. We meet with like citation formulas 
 as — '' Apud Virgilium," " Apud Livium," '' Ut ait 
 Cicero," " Horatius fingil," " Quale est Sallustii," " In 
 tertio de Oratore ita Scriptum est," " Cicero ad Brutum 
 dicit," '' Homerus ait."t 
 
 The citations themselves are generally literal, but 
 often free. Neither the classical historians, nor even 
 the classical poets cite each other with verbal accuracy. 
 In the case of the latter, the prosody is certainly 
 always preserved, but the words are sometimes altered, 
 a word of the same quantity being put for another. 
 Quintilian, the rhetorician, substitutes in citing the 
 following line of Virgil num for nunc'^- — 
 
 " Num quis te, juveniini confidentissiine ? " 
 
 In another citation we find me for nunc — 
 
 " Hen, qiice me tellus, inqiiit, quaenie sequoia possunt accipere ? " 
 
 In the following passage — 
 
 " Addunt ill spatia, et frustra retinacula tendens," 
 
 * Essays, p. 94 ; Spart. Vit. Sev. P. 144 ; Virg. .En. xii. 600. 
 Ad vane, of Learn, p. 2 ; Tac. xiii, 3. Essays, p. 95 ; Cic. Brut. 95. 
 
 t Quint, lib. ix. 1 ; Cic. de Oratore, lib. iii. 53. Quint, lib. xi. 1 ; 
 Cic. de Orat. lib. iii. 55. 
 
 J Quint, lib. ix. p. 136 ; Virg. Georg. iv. 445. 
 
WRITTEN REPORTING. 89 
 
 we find in Virgil — 
 
 " Addimt se in spatia, frustra retiiiacula tendens."* 
 
 Such instances of quotation from the poets by poets, 
 philosophers, and historians might be multiplied. 
 Even Quintilian, who dealt with words and discussed 
 sentences, reckoned it sufficient in citing poetry to 
 retain the sense and to maintain the integrity of the 
 verse. In the same author we have this formal 
 citation from Cicero ad Brutum, " Nam eloquentiam, 
 quae admirationem non habet, nuUam judico."t In 
 all the extant letters of the Roman Orator to Brutus 
 this quotation is nowhere formally to be found, but 
 we find the substance of it in the following passage, 
 regarding the eloquent Messalla : " Cave enim, exis- 
 times, Brute, . . . ut eloquentia, qua mirabiliter 
 excellit, vix in eo locum ad laudandum habere vide- 
 atur.":|: 
 
 2. We conclude the subject of analogous quotation 
 by a reference to written reporting, between which and 
 written citation there is a real agreement with a formal 
 difference. The latter is the reproduction of a record 
 or text, the former of a speech. Both agree in repro- 
 ducing the substance or sense of the writing or utter- 
 ance. Reporting, therefore, is analogous to quoting, 
 
 * Quint, lib. ix. p. 115 ; Virg. ^n. ii. 69. Lib. viii. p. 76 ; Virg. 
 Georg. i. 513. Also Quint, lib, viii. p. 98 ; Virg. ii. 541. Hor. Epis. 
 ad Pison. ; Horn. Odyss. lib. i. 
 
 t Quint, lib. viii. cap. 3. 
 
 t Cic. ad Brutum, lib. i. epis, 15. 
 
90 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 fulfilling the same conditions. Hence tlie Old Testa- 
 ment reports of the same communications, whether 
 made directly or indirectly, and whether to the mind or 
 to the ear, formally vary but substantially agree, as 
 may be seen by comparing Deuteronomy with Exodus 
 and Leviticus. The ten words, indeed, are neither a 
 quotation nor a report, but a copy of the original text, 
 written by the finger of God on tables of stone. And 
 yet Moses in the second book of the law gives a 
 version of the fourth commandment differing in 
 some particulars from the original form in Exodus, 
 and forming the basis of a new and special admo- 
 nition.'"'' The different reports in the gospels of the 
 sayings of the Lord vary in form while they agree 
 in sense. Even the grand Sermon on the Mount, 
 once only recorded, may not be the very words 
 of the great Teacher, of whose beautiful parables 
 and speeches we certainly find different reports, f 
 Even also the Lord's Prayer, which we might expect 
 to be strictly literal, is reported with some verbal 
 variations. ;|; Josephus, the Jewish historian, reports 
 the same speeches, such as Herod's to his men of war, 
 with considerable variety.^ Classical historians, as 
 Tacitus, Herodotus, and Livy, and poets, such as Hesiod, 
 Homer, and Ovid, merely recite the substance of judicial 
 
 * Exod. XX. 8-11 ; Deut. v. 12-15. 
 
 f Comp. Mark iv. with Luke vili. and Matt, xiii, ; and Mark iii. with 
 Matt. xii. 
 
 t Matt. vi. 9-14, with Luke xi. 1-4. 
 
 § Comp. Wars of Jews, book i. cap. 19, sec. 4, with Antiq. book 
 XV. sec. 3. 
 
WRITTEN REPORTING. 91 
 
 and municipal speeches and military despatches, and of 
 the sayings and songs of their gods and heroes, with 
 such prefaces as " ita," " in hunc modum," " w?/' 
 " ovTco<i." On such occasions truthful representation, 
 and not verbal accuracy, was all that was required or 
 sought. 
 
PAET IT. 
 
 THE FORMS OF QUOTATION. 
 Section Fiest. 
 
 1. We have already found five distinct forms of quo- 
 tation in the New Testament from the Old. We have 
 also discovered substantially the same forms not only 
 in the Old Testament, in so far as the authors of it cite 
 each other, but also in the earlier and later Fathers of 
 the Church, and throughout the long and dreary reign 
 of scholasticism, downwards to the Reformation. We 
 have also seen that the theologians and philosophers of 
 the reforming period and of more modern times like- 
 wise cite both the Scriptures and the classical authors 
 in the same way as the New Testament. We have 
 traced similar forms of citation from the prose and 
 even from the poetry of the classics themselves. And 
 we concluded by noticing the point of contact between 
 quotation and relation, both in sacred and secular 
 literature. We observed that these five forms might 
 be reduced to two general classes, literal and loose, of 
 which the others were less or more modifications and 
 combinations. We also found a gradual progress to- 
 wards more exact quotation, as either the subject or the 
 object of the authors dictated, or as their circumstances 
 
VINDICATION OF FOKMS. 93 
 
 made it available. Literal citation may be regarded 
 as the normal form, but tbe other forms are equally 
 employed, and for similar reasons — the requirements, 
 purposes, and facilities of the writers. And in making 
 their citations the authors of the New Testament and 
 the Fathers generally preferred the Septuagint, not only 
 because its forms of thought or phraseology were more 
 suitable to the conceptions and objects of most of the 
 writers, but because of the general prevalence of the 
 Greek language and its peculiar capability of containing 
 the new ideas of Christianity. 
 
 The various attempts of learned critics to account 
 for such forms of citation are quite inadequate. The 
 frequent allegation of Olshausen and others, that the 
 looser forms are wholly due to memory, is contrary to 
 evidence. Both the evangelists and the apostles in 
 their epistles directly quote sometimes from the Hebrew, 
 sometimes from the Greek, and at other times from 
 neither, according to the requirements of their subject. 
 It is still more significant that when they exactly follow 
 neither text, they verbally agree in many of their cita- 
 tions, a coincidence which cannot be accounted for by 
 quotation from memory.'" It is evident that as similar 
 forms pervade alike all sacred and secular literature 
 they must stand or fall together. It also follows that 
 the attempts of certain learned Oriental scholars to 
 reconcile New Testament quotation with the Hebrew 
 text, on the basis of the various readings, or of the 
 
 * Matt. xi. 10, Luke vii. 27, Mark i. 2, with Mai. iii, 1. 1 Peter ii. 6 
 with Kom. ix. 33. 
 
94 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 different senses of which the text is susceptible, whether 
 read in its own or in the light of certain cognate 
 dialects, though occasionally successful, are utterly in- 
 adequate to explain the whole phenomena. On several 
 passages of Scripture, indeed, they cast a shade of light 
 significant of alterations or applications, which scarcely 
 affect the integrity much less the sense of the text ; 
 but they neither account for all the citations of Scrip- 
 ture, nor for the other analogous forms already adduced, 
 especially the classical questions, which certainly cannot 
 be traced to a slavish subservience to scriptural pre- 
 cedent. All such inadequate attempts assume as 
 legitimate, and endeavour to impose a yoke of literalism 
 too heavy for our fathers and for us to bear. This 
 maxim of Horace must be our guiding principle — 
 
 " NuUius addictus jurare in verba magistri."* 
 
 2. It is, therefore, evident, under all the conditions 
 of the problem, that the status questionis must be 
 determined or defined in the light of the general facts 
 of quotation. In this view the question is not how 
 any citation may have been made, whether from the 
 book or from memory; nor its source, whether the 
 Hebrew Text or the Greek version ; nor even whether 
 it be literal or loose. These are questions of subordi- 
 nate importance, which by themselves neither deter- 
 mine nor vindicate the principles of New Testament 
 citation. We must take our standard of quotation 
 not from abstract ideas of what is proper but from 
 
 * Hor. ad Maecen. lib. i. 14. 
 
VINDICATION OF FORMS. 95 
 
 facts which show that it consists in the adequate 
 representation or reproduction of the truth of the cited 
 text. The questions, therefore, involved in the discus- 
 sion and defence of principles are the following : — Is 
 proper citation possible on such principles? Has it 
 been realised in New Testament quotation ? Is the 
 sense of the cited Scripture fully or faithfully rendered ? 
 Do the quotations adequat(;ly reproduce that phase of 
 the text which suited the writer's subject or object ? 
 In discussing such questions we must keep in view two 
 considerations of importance. As the forms of these 
 citations involve a corresponding sense or construction 
 of the text, all quotations must be examined and 
 vindicated in the light of the principles which regulate 
 both their form and sense, which imply all the ordi- 
 nary and available resources and methods of biblical 
 exegesis. We must also remember that no theory can 
 be accepted as sufficient which is not in harmony with 
 the facts of all quotation. They must be all alike 
 defended on the same rational principles and consider- 
 ations, which are presumed to have determined their 
 form and sense. The quotations of the New Testa- 
 ment, for which we claim no special privilege on the 
 ground of its character, must be defended on the 
 principles of reason and not of inspiration. 
 
 3. The literal may be regarded as the normal or 
 highest form of quotation, but it were manifestly absurd 
 on all grounds to deny the formal validity of the other 
 subordinate forms which are found in Scripture. We 
 
96 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 must not assume that verbal accuracy is tlie end, and 
 therefore the test, of all citation, and thereby reject 
 or except the less exact forms already advanced. We 
 must rather assume in any attempt at vindication that 
 the literary object of all quotation, sacred and secular, 
 is to reproduce the correct sense rather than the exact 
 form of the cited text. If this principle be ignored, 
 the true relation of words and ideas is subverted, and 
 the proper use of language misconceived ; truth is made 
 subordinate to form, and sense to sound. These forms 
 may be defended as legitimate on several grounds. We 
 might take up in order, and examine singly under 
 their several categories, the whole of the New Testa- 
 ment texts, and determine whether they realise the 
 proper idea of quotation. This, which has been already 
 partially done in connection with the more difficult 
 citations, may be found fully, if not finally, executed in 
 several works of biblical exegesis. The object, how- 
 ever, of this work is not formally to examine these 
 quotations one by one and to harmonise them with 
 their sources, but to deduce and to defend the prin- 
 ciples on which this is to be done, and to give both 
 the logic of quotation and its logical application to 
 Christian exegesis and apologetics. 
 
 We begin, therefore, our vindication of these forms 
 by the question, Are the looser or freer forms mani- 
 festly incompatible with proper citation? Are they 
 prima facie inadequate or insufficient to represent, 
 according to the design of the writer, the primary or 
 the secondary sense of a passage, the principal or any 
 
VINDICATION OF FORMS. 97 
 
 subordinate idea of tlie cited text ? We must answer 
 in the negative unless we are prepared to maintain 
 that literal citation only is valid, and that all the other 
 forms, so closely woven into the tissue of all literature, 
 sacred and profane, are illegitimate. But we further ask. 
 In what respect are such forms insufficient ? Is it not 
 sufficient to render the substance of both the sense and 
 the form of a text ? or to idealise and paraphrase a pas- 
 sage ? or to extract from a text a single sentence or thread 
 of sentiment appropriate to the writer's text or object ? 
 or to represent the combined sense of several similar 
 passages ? Accordingly, we find such forms of citation 
 actually employed by writers of different ages and of 
 distant countries, writing in different languages, on 
 various subjects and in various stages of civilisation. 
 We must consider the logical value of this general 
 fact, and not allow preconceived ideas of what consti- 
 tutes proper quotation to neutralise or to weaken its 
 force. We must accept and examine quotation in all 
 its extent, as we find it in general literature as well as 
 in the New Testament. The general adoption, there- 
 fore, of such modes of citation by writers of all ages 
 and stages of intellectual development, must be re- 
 garded as rational or logically right. The scholastic 
 maxim, as a test of truth, is applicable here, '' Quod 
 semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditum fuit." 
 Quotation which adequately represents the sense of a 
 passage the general consent of the intellectual world 
 declares to be founded on reason. Involving univer- 
 sality, one of the tests of even a necessary truth, it is 
 
 G 
 
98 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 the testimony of human reason to the validity of such 
 forms. They cannot be traced to mental peculiarities 
 or to moral prejudice. And though they cannot be 
 ascribed to fundamental or necessary laws of the 
 human mind, which, like the general forms of human 
 thought and language, must be followed, they com- 
 mend themselves to human reason as being in the 
 circumstances valid forms of citation. 
 
 Consequently, objections made to Scripture quota- 
 tion, being equally applicable to all quotation, not only 
 violate the analogy of facts and conflict with the 
 general judgment of mankind, but prove too much, 
 and therefore prove nothing. 
 
 4. But the general use of such principles of quota- 
 tion proves them to be, not only just, but highly 
 expedient, or suitable to the circumstances of their 
 application. As applied to the text of Scripture, they 
 play the part of the raindrops which unfold to our 
 admiring gaze in the rainbow the manifold and rich 
 colours of the pregnant light. They show the various 
 forms which divine truth can assume, more wonderful 
 and more significant than any fabulous transformations, 
 without any loss or even change of its internal char- 
 acter. They reveal a diversity in unity, and a higher 
 beauty in the divine word than appear in the material 
 world an3rwhere. They are keys which open the 
 Scripture cabinet, and display the gems and jewels 
 which lie encased there, to be examined and employed 
 to adorn the temple of the living God. They enabled 
 
VINDICATION OF FOKMS. 99 
 
 the inspired writers to apply the Scripture, not only to 
 the form and colour of their own text, so as to become 
 the weft of its warp, and to present a particular aspect 
 of their subject, but also to suit their special object, 
 whether demonstration, or doctrine, or admonition. 
 All these objects were more suitably accomplished by 
 a transformation or verbal adaptation of the form of 
 the text, than by an application of it which left its 
 form unaltered and its sense less perspicuous. All 
 Scripture, being theopneustic, is thus more clearly seen 
 to be profitable to the manifold wants of humanity.'"' 
 Such considerations of expediency not only afford a 
 defence of the principles of quotation, but a better 
 explanation of the alternate and apparently capricious 
 use and disuse of the Septuagint in citation, than can 
 be found in any known analogical relations or spiritual 
 principles. We do not find that this celebrated version 
 is used or disused, according to its aoTeement or dis- 
 agreement with the Hebrew. On the contrary, it is 
 alternately used when it differs from the original, and 
 disused when it agrees with it.f But if the specific 
 object of the writers was to exhibit the fulness of 
 Scripture, or to present it under a particular form for 
 a special purpose, such irregularity was not only 
 natural, but necessary, both in regard to the Septuagint 
 and the Hebrew, between which, in this respect, there 
 is no difference. This is, however, rather a mere 
 literary curiosity in itself, than a question of principle, 
 as affecting the inspiration and authority of Scripture 
 
 * 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17. t Matt, xxvii. 9, 10, and John xv. 25. 
 
100 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 except when the Greek version faithfully renders the 
 Hebrew, to which we advert in the proper place. 
 
 5. These principles of quotation, thus vindicated on 
 grounds both of reason and utility, may be applied in 
 proof of the justness of the citations themselves. If 
 the principles on which they are made be right and 
 defensible, it will follow that the quotations are pro- 
 bably or presumptively correct representations of the 
 cited text or truth. A right principle may, indeed, 
 be misapplied, but a just form of thought or principle 
 of reason, tends to regulate and determine its own 
 application. "We would, therefore, expect to find these 
 quotations to be substantially correct, merely on the 
 a priori ground of the principles on which they are 
 made. And if they can be further shown, on a posteriori 
 grounds, by a critical analysis of their character, to 
 realise the proper and proposed idea of quotation, we 
 need not, in the present unsettled and imperfect con- 
 dition of biblical criticism, be either startled or stag- 
 gered by a few apparent anomalies or discrepancies, 
 much less propound or parade them as misquotations 
 and palpable disproofs of the inspiration and authority 
 of the New Testament. Thus, the different forms of 
 quotation afford us inductive principles, which we may 
 carry in our minds and apply as keys to assist in 
 unlocking the mysteries of the several forms. And if 
 in any instance they prove inadequate, reason requires 
 us to review our principles, rather than condemn the 
 citations as inaccurate. And since the forms of so 
 
VIXDICATIOX OF FORMS. 101 
 
 many can be explained and vindicated, we may con- 
 clude that others, not yet solved, are still not insoluble. 
 We would merely add that any remaining difficulties 
 may be solved, or at least objections be silenced, by the 
 following considerations. The generally recognised 
 Hebrew text may not be in every instance genuine, or 
 the original text of Scripture. We have ample evi- 
 dence of its general integrity, but not of its absolute 
 verbal accuracy or identity, as the authorised recension 
 of some ancient prophet or inspired apostle. The 
 various readings of ancient Scripture, though they 
 neither affect the substance of revelation nor the prin- 
 ciples of quotation, certainly solve some of its formal 
 divergencies arising from the similarity of letters, which 
 have occasionally been interchanged.''" Besides, we 
 ought to make the same allowance for occasional 
 obscurity in the sense of the ancient Scriptures as of 
 the ancient classics, on the text of which we expend 
 endless time and toil of revision and translation, rather 
 than convict the authors of absurdity, of false prosody, 
 or of improper idiom. The candour and caution, also, 
 of true philoso23hy forbid a 'priori conclusions and 
 precipitate judgments, founded on a narrow basis of 
 evidence; and require us to await fresh elements of 
 solution here, as in all scientific difficulties, seeming 
 anomalies, and even contradictions. No existing literary 
 or philosophical or scientific system, nothing but the 
 exact sciences themselves, can abide the crucial test of 
 
 * Comp. Acts xiii. 41, with Hab. i. 5 ; and the Heb. of Ps. xix. 13, 
 Avith Sept, 
 
102 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 perfect harmony or self-consistency, from the abnormal 
 phenomena of physical science upwards, to the apparent 
 contradictions of natural and revealed theology, the 
 anomalies of moral science, and the antinomies of 
 rational philosophy. There are many things on earth, 
 as well as in heaven, not yet written down in our 
 philosophies, none of which on these subjects can be 
 said to be exhaustive, homogeneous, and self-harmonious. 
 Moreover, expositors may certainly be wrong in their 
 attempts to harmonise the citations of the New Testa- 
 ment with the Hebrew text, as they have been in their 
 harmonies of the gospels, and of science with revelation. 
 Their exeo'esis is not to be ree^arded as final, nor their 
 imperfect success to be ascribed to inaccurate citation. 
 
 Section Second. 
 
 We proceed from principles of quotation to prin- 
 ciples of interpretation, the mutual relation of which 
 has been already indicated. The former are in a great 
 measure conditioned and characterised by the latter, 
 the discussion of which involves principles both of 
 revelation and of interpretation, which go together. 
 Hermeneutical principles are founded chiefly on the 
 revelation principles of progression and unity already 
 stated. Any defence of these principles must assume 
 that the Old Testament was rationally written, and is 
 therefore to be rationally interpreted. We must deal 
 with it from the critical stand- j)oint of reason, and not 
 from the theological stand-point of inspiration. It 
 
VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 103 
 
 must be shown that the apostles reasonably interpreted 
 what the prophets reasonably wrote. Revelation, 
 though not the outcome of reason, but founded on 
 the basis of a divine delivery, direct or indirect, of 
 supernatural facts and doctrines, must be rationally ex- 
 pounded, and all principles of interpretation be ration- 
 ally vindicated. It does not claim to be exempted 
 from rational interpretation because based upon hyper- 
 physical phenomena, or phenomeaa due to direct 
 divine interposition, sometimes singly efficient, some- 
 times coefficient, and at other times merely counteractive 
 of natural powers, but in every case the incommg of a 
 new power or cause, resulting either in a higher effect 
 of the same kind, or in a new effect of another kind, 
 such as the miracles of the dividing of the sea, or of 
 the resurrection of Lazarus. New Testament quota- 
 tion must therefore be handled and defended in the 
 same way as ecclesiastical and classical citation. 
 
 1. The psychological principle, which is the com- 
 mon basis of all other principles, and the general 
 stand-point of which they are merely special views, 
 can scarcely be said to need vindication. The inter- 
 preters of any text or record ought to look at it from 
 the authors view-point, to see it with his eyes, to 
 enter into his conception, so as to be in full sympathy 
 with him and his objects. They must read any book 
 or passage of Scripture in the light of the writer's 
 thought, gathered from his own context and from his- 
 tory, and not in the light of anything external to the 
 
104 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 text, whether an abstract principle or a formulated 
 creed of the Church, or even a concrete truth of Scrip- 
 ture. The neglect of this condition of all sound 
 interiDretation accounts for much of the partial, party- 
 coloured, and perverse exegesis by which Scripture has 
 been disfigured and defamed. 
 
 2. The grammatical principle is the first law of all 
 interpretation, and though it may appear self-evident, 
 and in no need of vindication, it has been widely con- 
 troverted and counteracted. It is equally applicable 
 to literal and to tropical texts, both of which are to be 
 interpreted grammatically, according to the proper 
 sense of the words in the circumstances. This sense, 
 whether literal, tropical, or typical, is always one and 
 not many, even when it combines two correlated and 
 analogous though disparate subjects. ^ It is one even 
 when twofold, with a double reference to two similar 
 subjects, and not double, both literal and figurative,' 
 and therefore the principle of interpretation is also 
 one, the philological or grammatical, and not double, 
 both literal and allegorical. Otherwise, on any other 
 method of interpretation, if this first principle of 
 language were violated and the usus loquendi 
 disregarded, the formation and philosophy of lan- 
 guage would become impracticable, and its interpre- 
 tation so irregular and uncertain as to be impossible. 
 Other principles, whether employed singly or con- 
 jointly, have run to such excess of riot as to explode 
 themselves, and to leave the true principle consjoicuous 
 
VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 105 
 
 and commanding as a column amid a lieajD of ruins. 
 The history of the application of a principle is the 
 witness of its truth or its absurdity. Thus tested, 
 philological interpretation, on the broad basis of 
 grammar and not of narrow literalism, is vindicated 
 as the only rational and reliable jDrinciple. All Scrip- 
 ture is interrogated and interpreted by the authors of 
 the New Testament upon this principle, the viol^i^ 
 of which has occasioned the extremes of rationalism 
 and allegorical mysticism so conspicuous in Rabbinical 
 literature and in both ancient and modern Church 
 dogma. The Jewish doctors allegorised the literal and 
 literalised the allegorical, producing negative morality, 
 rational 'theology, and Christology without the cross. 
 The opposite ecclesiastical schools of Alexandria and 
 Antioch, represented respectively by Origen and Theo- 
 dore of Mopsuestia, were founded on these two con- 
 flicting principles of interpretation. The former 
 attributed to Scripture three elements — the literal, 
 the moral, and the mystical, the last of which con- 
 tained two senses, the analogical and the anagogical. 
 Theodore dwelt almost exclusively on the letter of 
 Scripture, which he thereby rationalised, assigning to 
 the ancient prophecies a merely literal, logical, and 
 present application. These counter-tendencies, after 
 having produced and j)eTvaded the rationalism and 
 mysticism of the scholastic period, and been repudiated 
 by the reformers of the sixteenth century, reappeared 
 in the writings of Grotius and Cocceius, and still 
 appear in modern Christian spiritualism, especially in 
 
106 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 Swedenborgianism, and in the many but kindred forms 
 of rationalism and literal millenarianism. Extremes, 
 first seen in operation in tbe ancient pagan, Jewish, 
 and ecclesiastical schools, are found, after having run 
 their long and divergent course, to meet in an un- 
 natural and arbitrary interpretation of Scripture, con- 
 trary to the great philological principle of New 
 Testament exegesis, which not only recognises both the 
 historical truth or literal sense of the text and its 
 deeper spiritual significance, but combines the latter 
 with the former as its natural basis. 
 
 3. As the interpretative principles of analogy and 
 type rest on a common basis of similitude, we shall 
 pave the way for their vindication by developing and 
 defining the various kindred forms or figures of speech 
 under which it appears. The Scripture abounds with 
 symbols, both things and words, the ground of which 
 in every form is similitude, real or aj)parent. The 
 metaphor, based on the resemblance between two 
 things, which image one another, is manifestly the 
 germ 'of all symbolism, whether single or sustained. 
 Even in such figures as synecdoche, where a part 
 represents the whole; or metonymy, where the effect 
 stands for the cause; or personification, where per- 
 sonal properties are ascribed to impersonal things, 
 there are not only the ideas of coexistence and of 
 causal connection, but an underlying basis of real or of 
 phenomenal resemblance between part and whole, 
 between the nature of the cause and the nature of the 
 
VINDICATION OF PEINCIPLES. 107 
 
 consequent, and between a person and the thing per- 
 sonified. 
 
 The language also of the enigma, such as Samson's 
 riddle of the honey in the carcase of the lion, is not 
 necessarily figurative ; but it covers a mystical mean- 
 ing by being purposely indefinite and obscure.''" But 
 similitude is manifestly the ground of all allegory and 
 analogy, proverb, parable, and type employed in the 
 communication or in the elucidation of truth. These 
 are all intimately related, not only in their principle, 
 but in their structure and uses. 
 
 Analogy, in the form of logical comparison, implies 
 a radical correspondence or agreement between things 
 or thoughts, whereby we can reason from the one to 
 the other, or predicate the same things regarding 
 them. Such analogy pervades the Scriptures, and is 
 the principle of many quotations. f 
 
 Allegory, as David's vine brought out of Egypt, and 
 planted in the land of Canaan, the Song of Solomon, 
 Isaiah's song of the fertile vineyard, Paul's representa- 
 tion of the two covenants under the emblems of Hagar 
 and Sarah, and our Lord's figure of the vine and 
 branches, is simply a sequence of continuous meta- 
 phor, or a series of set and sustained symbolism, 
 representing generally, under the form of fiction, but 
 sometimes of fact, the spiritual principles of the king- 
 dom of God. This definition is justified both by its 
 
 * Judges xiv. 14. 
 
 t Ps. Ixxx. 8-16 ; Isa. v. 1-8 ; Gal. iv. 22-28. " aV/va strnv akX*,- 
 
108 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 etymology^'' and by its use, which declare it to be an 
 extended trope, by which one thing is expressed and 
 another thing resembling it is meant. 
 
 Parable and proverb are closely connected with one 
 another, and with the figures already defined.f The 
 same Hebrew word covers both, which contain in com- 
 mon the ideas of similitude and comparison. | They 
 are figurative sayings, single and complex respec- 
 tively, involving comparison on the ground of simili- 
 tude. The parable has two forms, a developed and 
 an undeveloped form. In the former it is substan- 
 tially a historical allegory, or figurative representation 
 of things wont to happen, for moral purposes, but 
 more complete in form and more definite in signifi- 
 cance than mere allegory. In the latter form, as 
 applied to a concrete case, or derived from it, it is a 
 figurative comparison between two things, which, from 
 its form and sense, naturally becomes or passes into 
 a proverb, as is seen in the writings of Solomon, and 
 other proverbial sayings of Scripture. § Hence the 
 Greek biblical equivalents correspond,|| the one com- 
 pletely to the generic Hebrew word in all its uses, 
 and the other to the proverb specifically, which means 
 
 * kXXoi, and ocyo^ivu. 
 
 t 2 Sam. xii. 1-6 ; Ps. Ixxviii. 2, with Matt. xiii. 13, 35 ; Judges ix. 
 7-15 ; Luke xii. 41 ; Matt. xiii. 18-24, 31, 33, 36, 53 ; Matt. xxi. 33, 45 ; 
 Mark iv. 10, 13 ; Mark vii. 17 ; Mark xii. 12 ; Luke viii. 9, 11 ; Luke 
 xiii. 6 ; Luke xv. 3 ; Luke xviii. 1, 9 ; Luke xix. 11 ; Luke xx. 19. 
 
 T T 
 
 § Proverbs passim, and Luke iv. 23. 
 II ^a^cc^oXvi, and Tra^oiyAoc. 
 
VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 109 
 
 in all languages a saying of common use, or maxim of 
 common life, coming forward in common conversation, 
 and involving a comparison between things, such as, 
 " Physician, heal thyself," and " The labourer is worthy 
 of his hire."" Hence, also, these Avords are used 
 synon3nnously in the Greek of the Old and New Tes- 
 taments, and specially in John's Gospel,t the parable 
 in a particular form becoming j)roverbial, and the pro- 
 verb parabolic, as involving in its concrete form com- 
 parison. And as all figures or symbols are less or 
 more obscure, half-concealing, half-revealing, both the 
 proverbs and the parables of Scripture are veiled or 
 hidden, and, as such, employed for special purposes. 
 Together, they combine the ideas of resemblance and 
 comparison, currency and mystery. 
 
 Analogy is a radical correspondence or agreement 
 between things or thoughts, whereby we can reason 
 from the one to the other, or predicate the same 
 things regarding them. It pervades the Scriptures, 
 and is the principle of many quotations. There is a 
 real agreement between the facts adduced, the prin- 
 ciples involved, and the doctrines taught. Herein it 
 differs generally from tropes, allegories, and parables, 
 where there is similarity of form, but no unity of prin- 
 ciple, while it specially agrees with the type. These 
 homologous facts furnish moral principles and spiritual 
 truths, which were applied by the Apostles to the cor- 
 responding facts and principles which emerged under 
 the new economy. They have no prospective signi- 
 
 * Luke iv. 23. + 'rx^oifjcicc, John x. 6 ; John xvi. 25, 29. 
 
110 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 ficance by themselves, like the types, in virtue of 
 their peculiar form or place in the divine economy, 
 though they sustain the same relation to the unifor- 
 mity of the divine moral government and the pro- 
 gressive evolution of the divine redemptive work. As 
 a principle of interpretation, it is as undeniable, and 
 as reliable, as the uniformity both of nature and of the 
 divine moral government, and as the manifest pro- 
 gression of revelation and of the work of redemption. 
 It is in its principle logically as true as that things 
 which are equal to the same thing are equal to one 
 another, and, consequently, that the same things may 
 be predicated of both alike. Underlying unity of prin- 
 ciple between things or events involves logical inference 
 from the one to the other, and the legitimate applica- 
 tion made in quotation. 
 
 Moreover, if the logic of analogy be denied we must 
 also renounce induction from classified analogous facts, 
 which involve a common ^^rinciple of agreement, and 
 thus at once subvert the new method of the sciences 
 and arrest all scientific discovery and advancement. 
 Logic, also, would become limited to deduction from 
 assumed primary or secondary truths, in which the 
 conclusion is merely an evolution of the premises, and 
 available only for the defence of realised or of reputed 
 truth, according to the method of Aristotle, so long 
 and so injuriously applied to theology. Even pure 
 logic, or the science of the harmony of thought, and 
 the exact sciences themselves, would become discre- 
 dited, because logic which could not be applied in 
 
VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. Ill 
 
 sustained reasoning to the same truths, quantities, 
 and relations of things, could not be formally self- 
 harmonious ; and being thus incapable of verification, 
 could only be regarded as an unmeaning formula, a 
 treacherous light leading to the vortex of absolute 
 scepticism where nothing can be known. 
 
 4. The facts of analogy with the principles involved 
 meet and merge in the type, which is accordingly 
 defined in Scripture as being generally an analogous 
 instance or example, either for imitation or for w^arn- 
 ing.'" They both rest upon an ultimate basis of fact 
 or reality, in which they differ from metaphor, allegory, 
 and parable, which may rest on mere resemblance. 
 In all these forms of thought or speech we must deal 
 first with the words, and next with the things denoted 
 by them, which in turn represent higher truths or 
 realities. But the form of the trope is figurative, the 
 allegory is generally both fictitious and figurative, the 
 parable is literal in language but figurative in thing, 
 and rests generally on a basis of wonted fact, in which 
 it coincides with analogy and type. 
 
 It follows that the things denoted by example, 
 shadow, and type are analogous.f The first denotes 
 the mechanical pattern or rough outline of heavenly 
 things, the second its spiritual significance, and the 
 third both together. The significance of the type in 
 the New Testament may be thus developed. The 
 generic or primary sense is a stroke or blow, then the 
 
 * 1 Cor. X. 11. i" v'TodityfA.a,, (Tkik, tutos. 
 
112 PRINCIPLES OF NEVf TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 mark or impression so produced.'" The more specific 
 senses t are a figure or pattern of things or persons 
 present, a material or a moral model according to 
 which they are to be conformed. J Then, next, it 
 becomes a prospective sign or shadow of things or 
 persons to come, or still more generally of the charac- 
 ters and relations, official rather than personal, of men, 
 as of Adam and Melchesedec, who were types of Christ. 
 It is thus evident that the type proper in its full 
 form is an accomplished fact or transaction, involving 
 and presenting a present principle or truth, which is 
 not merely a symbol, but a sample of higher truth to 
 be revealed. This definition completely realises the 
 New Testament idea of the whole Mosaic ritual, and of 
 the historical types of every kind and grade, as being 
 collectively shadows of better things to come, of which 
 Christ is the body, § The types, not merely as acted 
 but as written, are not figures of speech nor historical 
 records, but the literal records of facts or events, con- 
 taining a present truth, the sample of an ultimate 
 truth, its counterpart or complement. The first duty, 
 therefore, of the critic is to find the type and then 
 the antitype. We may find the former apart from the 
 latter, the present involute or truth of a fact apart 
 
 * John XX. 25 — tvtos. 
 
 f Acts vii. 44 ; Amos v. 26 ; Acts xxiii. 25 ; Kom. \i. 17 ; Phil. iii. 
 17 ; 1 Thess. i. 7 ; 2 Thess. iii. 9 ; 1 Tim. iv. 12 ; Titus ii. 7 ; 1 Peter 
 V. 3. 
 
 t E,om. V. 14 ; Heb. vii. 3. Melchesedec, " aCfiufAttu^ivo; raJ via rou 
 hou " — the Son of God being both architype and antitype. 
 
 § Heb. X. 1. 
 
VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 113 
 
 from its ulterior development, but we cannot deter- 
 mine the latter apart from the former or primary 
 principle. It is not necessary to decide, in connection 
 with any investigation into type or prophecy, how far 
 the divine element or idea was realised by either the 
 recipient or the writer of the revelation, because such 
 knowledge of the divine design is not necessary to 
 the prophetic character of any communications. The 
 human authors of both type and prophecy sometimes 
 wrote or spoke without foresight, sometimes without 
 knowledge, and sometimes even against their will. '"" 
 
 5. The proper or plenary definition of the type 
 contains all its elements or properties, which may be 
 thus evolved in order. We have already seen that 
 there lies between type and antitype a real unity of 
 idea, which excludes all fanciful allegory and baseless 
 analogy by which the literature of the subject is dis- 
 figured, showing that mere resemblances have been 
 mistaken for realities, and that a lawless imao-ination 
 has framed types where rational criticism could not 
 find them. This continuity of idea enables us to 
 thread our way through the long and obscure vista of 
 type and countertype, which are found to be merely 
 different forms and degrees of the same truth. 
 
 It follows, also, that types have a special significance, 
 the ultimate corresponding to the present tyj)ical truth, 
 which also like typical prophecies may be fulfilled in 
 more than in one of the stages and departments of the 
 
 * Gaussen on Insp. p. 284. Transl. 1850. 
 
 H 
 
114 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 kingdom of God, all of which are closely related and 
 pervaded by common principles. Their relations, ac- 
 cordingly, are seen to be fixed and determinate, even 
 in the only two instances in which they might appear 
 to be interchangeable, in the one of which the taber- 
 nacle is said to be the antitype, not of the heavenly 
 temple, but of the prior type or pattern shown to 
 Moses on the mount, of which heaven is the real 
 antitype ; and in the other Christian baptism is pre- 
 sented as at once the countertype of the waters of 
 the flood, as a medium of preservation, and as the 
 type of regeneration and remission of sins.'" More- 
 over, the ancient types are not only founded on 
 facts or transactions, but upon facts generally of a 
 very signal and significant character, and upon the 
 more special arrangements of divine wisdom for the 
 advancement of the scheme of revelation and redemp- 
 tion. The chief of these were the typical relation of 
 Adam, as the federal head of all mankind, to Christ, 
 the covenant Head of redeemed humanity ; the 
 Abrahamic covenant, involving the coming of Christ 
 and the calling of the Gentiles ; the deliverance of the 
 chosen seed from Egypt, and their introduction into 
 Canaan; their subsequent redemption from captivity 
 in Babylon; together with not only several other 
 subservient transactions or events, but more especially 
 with the whole Mosaic ritual, which is expressly inter- 
 preted as a shadow of better things to come, f Accord- 
 ingly, these outstanding historical and ritual types 
 * Heb. viii. 5 ; 1 Peter iii. 21. + Heb. x. 1. 
 
VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 115 
 
 alike possess not only a s^Decial significance, but a 
 peculiar and prominent form, having a special and 
 distinct evangelical counterpart. Their particular forms, 
 which embody a divine idea, when read in connection 
 both with their appointment as events or institutions, 
 and with the prophecies and promises with which they 
 are generally associated, are shadows which forecast 
 ultimate realities. The typical system, therefore, was 
 more directly connected with the development of 
 divine revelation and redemption than the ordinary 
 events of the divine moral government, which form 
 the ground of analogical interpretation. The divine 
 revelation was thereby not only delivered here a little 
 and there a little, at sundry times and in diverse 
 manners, but also developed. The typical relations 
 of such persons as Adam and Melchesedec, and even 
 Isaac, to Christ were developed by the legal types, 
 which also, together with the grand redemptive events, 
 were still further unfolded and interpreted by the 
 prophecies, direct and typical, which read at once the 
 revelation past and future. Revelation as progressive 
 was developed in its delivery, and delivered in its 
 development, which things are merely different aspects 
 of the same divine self-manifestation. From the be- 
 ginning revelation came, like redemption itself, from 
 God Himself, and was not an evolution, even under 
 divine guidance, of the contents of the human spiritual 
 consciousness. The Old Testament revelation, also, 
 like the New, of which it is the counterpart, was 
 founded on extraordinary events in the intercourse of 
 
116 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 God with man, whicli succeeded and revealed each 
 other. The patriarchal dispensation, during which 
 there was no written revelation, because God con- 
 versed with men, together with the subsequent de- 
 velopment of the law and the prophets, may be re- 
 garded as corresponding to the actual life of Jesus 
 Christ on earth, of which the gospels are the fourfold 
 memoir and the doctrinal epistles the ultimate develop- 
 ment. Revelation, as from the first a development of 
 the divine word spoken or written, differs widely both 
 from the extraneous accretions or traditions of the 
 Jewish Talmud, which is a collection of merely human 
 dogma, and from the patristic development of doctrine, 
 which was made not from the divine word, but from 
 the subjective belief of the Church.'''" Accordingly, 
 the one development ended in a plenary or perfect 
 revelation, God who spoke in past times to the fathers 
 having spoken unto us by His Son, the highest and final 
 form of His self-manifestation ; the other terminated 
 in a tissue of truth and error, the result of various 
 hostile elements and influences, and in which error ulti- 
 mately predominated in the abnormal and successive 
 growths of Gnosticism, Mysticism, and Romanism. 
 
 We also add that these types, to answer the design 
 of their appointment, must have been not only know- 
 able, but less or more known by spiritual Israelites, 
 who might have seen that the blood of animals could 
 not atone for human sin, because there is between 
 them no natural connection, much less any adequate 
 
 * See Dr. Eainy's " Delivery and Development of Doctrine." 
 
VINDICATION OF PKINCIPLES. 117 
 
 proportion. Their form, also, as well as their sub- 
 stance, especially as read in the light of the character 
 of the economy and of the divine promises, might 
 have been seen to forecast the future. If they had 
 not appeared to preintimate better things to come, 
 and have thereby sustained the faith and hope of the 
 people, they could not have fitly formed part of a 
 preparatory dispensation. It is essential to the char- 
 acter both of a prophecy and of a type, which is a 
 silent prophecy, that at least the rude outline of their 
 meaning may be understood before their fulfilment. 
 We are expressly told that the prophets, with this 
 general idea in their 'minds, searched both the time 
 and the character of the times, which the Spirit of God 
 in them did signify when He testified beforehand the 
 sufferings of Christ and the glory that would follow.''^ 
 
 In the determination of types and prophecies we 
 have certainly to deal both with the divine and the 
 human elements embodied there, but we have, as 
 theologians, to do with the former more than with the 
 latter. It is not necessary in any special instance to 
 determine precisely how far the human writers, or the 
 revelation people, realised the divine idea. The more 
 completely the human mind conceives the divine, both 
 in His works and in His word, the nearer does it attain 
 to true science ; still such knowledge is not necessary 
 to the existence of the phenomena of nature or of re- 
 velation, in both of which God's thoughts are not as 
 our thoughts, nor His ways as our ways. It is just as 
 * 1 Peter i. 10-12. 
 
118 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 certain that spiritual Jews saw througli the veiled face 
 of Moses the face of Christ, and looked steadfastly to 
 the end of that which is abolished, as that others, 
 especially of the later Jews, regarded the initial and 
 transitory economy as the full and final form of the 
 divine kingdom, and were indignant even at the idea 
 of innovation or of abolition.'"' 
 
 6. But, on the other hand, the Apostles, contemplat- 
 ing the law from the high stand-point of the gospel, 
 read and rendered, as faithful interpreters, the real and 
 full significance of the divine truth embedded there. 
 This is evident from the whole tenor of their writings, 
 but more especially from such prominent passages as 
 declare that Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Christ ; 
 that believing Israel ate the same spiritual bread and 
 drank the same spiritual water as we ourselves, even 
 Christ the manna and the water of the desert ; that 
 they all died in faith, not having received the promises ; 
 and that the Abrahamic promise, in particular, is fulfilled 
 in Christ, and in the calling of the Gentiles to the fel- 
 lowship of the gospel.f These writers put into the 
 vague and indefinite formulas of the law Christ, their 
 real and full value. It is also evident that they re- 
 garded themselves as expounding the Old Testament, 
 and not as accommodating it to evangelical ideas and 
 uses. The accommodation theory is not only inadequate 
 
 * Acts xxi. 21. 
 
 t John viii. 56 ; 1 Cor. x. 1-4 ; Heb. xi. 39 ; Gal. iii. S ; Eom. iv. 16 ; 
 Acts iii. 25. 
 
VINDICATION OF PKINCIPLES. 119 
 
 to explain the phenomena, but charges the authors 
 with culpable incapacity and disingenuity, which would 
 subvert at once the authenticity and the authority of 
 both the gospels aud the epistles. It is a baseless 
 assumption with the view of escaping from acknow- 
 ledged difficulties in connection with the problem of 
 quotation, which it encumbers rather than relieves. 
 
 We conclude this attempt to develope the proper 
 typical idea by remarking, that though it is a first 
 principle of science and theology that no more causes 
 natural or moral are to be admitted than are real and 
 necessary to explain phenomena, and though unity is 
 the end of all true science, the view here presented is 
 not only as much in harmony with the unity of revela- 
 tion as any system of simple symbolism can be, but is 
 more adapted to the whole form and objects of a 
 rudimentary dispensation. 
 
 7. Such being the full and proper definition of the 
 type, its place and use in the divine revelation and in 
 New Testament quotation become necessary in the cir- 
 cumstances. Neither types nor typical prophecies, 
 indeed, can be said to be absolutely necessary as modes, 
 or as component parts of a divine revelation of re- 
 demption. The Son of God might have become the 
 son of man immediately on man's fall, the first-born 
 seed of the woman might have been the seed of pro- 
 mise, and paradise have been no sooner lost than won. 
 But it is evident that the relation of the modes and 
 times both of revelation and of redemption might be 
 
120 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 such as to require types, both as parts and as proofs of 
 better things to follow. We find, accordingly, that it 
 was the will of divine wisdom to throw the redemptive 
 work of Christ into the distant future, called '' the ful- 
 ness of the time," for reasons which, if at all discover- 
 able, must be gathered inductively from the facts of re- 
 demption, instead of being deduced from the attributes 
 of God and the general principles of His moral govern- 
 ment. This purpose, taken in connection with the 
 salvation of men during the long interval, rendered a 
 typical system conditionally or provisionally necessary, 
 as part of a preparatory but progressive and unique 
 revelation, coupled with a gradual development of the 
 divine kingdom by didactic teaching and practical 
 training. The revealed law of the initial kingdom 
 must be such as at once to instruct the Church in the 
 knowledge of salvation, to shut her up unto the faith 
 to be revealed, and to conduct her down to Christ, not 
 only in point of fact, but in point of faith and feeling. 
 And this, again, could be best effected, not merely by 
 direct promises and prophecies, but by a systematic 
 series of historical and ritual types and typical pro- 
 phecies, founded upon facts in the experience of the 
 Church. Merely verbal communications, or abstract 
 representations of sin and holiness, atonement and 
 salvation, would not have been intelligible apart from 
 their actual delineation in historical facts and religious 
 rites addressed to the external senses. The types 
 were a kind of pictorial writing, admirably adapted to 
 the pupilage of the Church, aiding also not a little our 
 
VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 121 
 
 conception of divine realities, and revealing the unity 
 throughout of the revelation of grace both in words 
 and in ideas. These types, being a series of pictures 
 and the typical prophecies illuminated pictures, to- 
 gether constituting a picture gallery of spiritual realities 
 present and prospective, were a kind of teaching 
 specially accommodated to the minority of the Church 
 and to her preparation for the antitype, or end of the 
 whole economy. We find a complete analogue in the 
 symbolic actions and parabolic representations of the 
 Great Teacher, by which the infancy of the New 
 Testament Church was educated. Types and parables 
 are alike adapted to babes, who need milk and not 
 strong meat, and must be led forwards from first 
 principles to perfect truths. It is, therefore, evident 
 that the New Testament authors would have miscon- 
 ceived the Old if they had not interpreted the types as 
 they have done. 
 
 8. Type and prophecy are related, as the basis and 
 the towers of a building, or as a perspective view in 
 different degrees of elongation. The prophets appear 
 to have generally received their communications in the 
 form of mental visions, in which their utterances were 
 characterised by timelessness and ideality. Their 
 minds, in the first instance, were receptive and not 
 reflective ; their faculties, when stimulated by the com- 
 munication, were constructive rather than analytic; and, 
 consequently, their writings are more descriptive than 
 distinctive. We have already shown that they under- 
 
122 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 stood the relative order in time of the events predicted, 
 but not the precise period of their accomplishment in 
 the progress of the divine kingdom. Their visions 
 were a grand perspective view of the future, which took 
 note of the order of events, but not of the special modes 
 or times of their occurrence. Their descriptions, also, 
 of things were ideally perfect in their form, and not 
 according to the measure of their form at any stage or 
 period of their progressive fulfilment. The grand 
 realities of sin and salvation, reward and penalty, were 
 seen and depicted in their ultimate and full results, 
 and not merely in their successive and modified forms. 
 This fact, which is most conspicuous in typical pro- 
 phecies, such as the deliverances from Egypt and 
 Babylon, not only accounts for the colours of the picture, 
 gloomy or glowing, which appear to outshine reality, 
 but is in perfect harmony with the relation of type and 
 antitype already indicated, and with the development 
 of revelation and redemption.*"' 
 
 We have already noticed that there are two classes 
 of prophecy — direct and indirect ; and two kinds — 
 non-Messianic and Messianic. And though there may 
 be a difference of opinion respecting the category or 
 the character of particular prophecies, two distinct 
 classes are generally acknowledged. All prophecy, 
 indeed, which is fulfilled in the times and kingdom of 
 the Messiah, may, in this sense, be termed Messianic. 
 It is also admitted that Messianic prophecy consists of 
 
 * British and Foreign Evangelical Reviciv, 1S72, April and October. 
 Arts, i. and vi. 
 
VINDICATION OF PEINCIPLES. 123 
 
 two kinds — direct and typical — of which the latter is 
 a combination of type and prophecy, made in different 
 ways, which need not be specified, because they must 
 be all expounded and defended on the same principle. 
 There is, also, room for different opinions of the man- 
 ner in which they were combined in the conceptions of 
 both their authors and their interpreters ; but the fact 
 of some kind of combination must be admitted. The 
 view of the Church Fathers generally, that all Messianic 
 prophecy is spoken directly of Christ, without reference 
 to any human medium or circumstances, not only fails 
 to represent the language of the writers, but misrepre- 
 sents the Messiah, by ascribing to Him confession of 
 personal sin.'"" Another school of interpreters, repre- 
 sented by Hengstenberg on the Continent, and by Alford 
 in England, makes the subject of most Messianic pro- 
 phecies, especially those of the suffering Messiah, 
 to be an ideal rather than a real personage; Christ 
 collective, or Christ in the Church His body, and 
 not Christ personal. Any advantages which this 
 view may betimes appear to possess are more fully 
 realised on the typical principle, as generally main- 
 tained ; while the language of such prophecies clearly 
 presents the present personal situation of tlie writer as 
 the basis of the prophetic prospect, and speaks of the 
 personal Christ, and not merely of Christ in the Church, 
 too decidedly and directly to admit of an ideal inter- 
 pretation, which introduces vagueness and confusion 
 into the prophetic representation. 
 
 * Ps. xl. 12 ; Ps. Ixix. 5. 
 
124 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 9. The truths akeady elicited and applied in con- 
 nection with types are alike applicable to the inter- 
 pretation especially of typical prophecy. That the 
 prophets intended to prophecy and predicted events, 
 which the apostles interpreted as fulfilled in the new 
 economy, is undeniable. Otherwise, not only would 
 language have no meaning, and their writings no credi- 
 bility, but prophecy, as a miracle of knowledge, must 
 be regarded as impossible. We need not discuss or 
 define how much could be known by natural suggestion 
 and rational foresight in the circumstances, and how 
 much was revealed. It is sufficient to know that the 
 prophecy was prior to the event, and that holy men of 
 old spake, being moved by the Holy Ghost, and not by 
 their own will. They may not have known reflectively 
 the form of their own prophecies, whether direct or 
 typical ; but the spirit and style of their utterances 
 show that they generally spoke consciously of Christ, 
 which is the highest kind of Messianic prophecy. 
 
 We find, then, that New Testament quotation is 
 made throughout on the principle that prophecy must 
 be read as it is written. Its ideal or perfect pictures 
 of things are applied to successive events, which do not 
 realise their full significance. And, yet, this progres- 
 sive fulfilment, which merely requires similar events, 
 occasions no difficulty of interpretation. It is always 
 interpreted as accomplished in events which, if there be 
 any recognised connection between words and things, 
 must be regarded as its complement. 
 
 It is also equally evident that its interpreters looked 
 
VINDICATION OF PEINCIPLES. ^ 125 
 
 to the divine as well as to the human idea or element, 
 and read the ancient j)rophecies inductively, and not 
 merely deductively, in the light of the facts of the 
 gospel, and not merely in their own light. And as 
 they knew that the old prophets ministered, not unto 
 themselves, but unto us, the grand facts and truths of 
 the gospel, they read and applied their prophecies in 
 the light of the times of their accomplishment. 
 
 10. Messianic prophecy is uniformly interpreted as 
 such, whatever view its interpreters may have enter- 
 tained of its form or structure, whether direct or typi- 
 cal. The correct interpretation of any prophecy does 
 not depend so much on its formal as upon its real 
 character, and the mode of its ajoplication. And when, 
 in any instance, its principle is admitted but its appli- 
 cation denied, the question must be determined exe- 
 getically. The Messianic prophecies apj^lied to the 
 grand facts and doctrines of the gos23el must be ex- 
 amined and vindicated individually. 
 
 It is of more importance to determine the concep- 
 tion of the relation of type and antitype in the minds 
 of both their authors and their interpreters. Typical 
 prophecy was both written and rendered as having a 
 double reference, in the type to present, and in the 
 prophetic word to future realities, which were regarded 
 as two forms of the same underlying truth, and not as 
 disparate subjects, the one of Avhich, as in allegory, is 
 a mere symbol of tlie other. New Testament inter- 
 pretation deals with the words of such prophecy in 
 
126 PKINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 both its applications, and thereby maintains through- 
 out the real unity of the revelation, instead of dealing, 
 as in the interpretation of allegory, first with words, 
 and next with things, as the symbols of truths. 
 
 11. This subject affords a fit opportunity of defin- 
 ing the mutual relations of the divine purpose, the 
 divine prophetic word, and the divine promise, which 
 have occasioned considerable discussion among stu- 
 dents of prophecy, and clear views of which are essen- 
 tial to its correct interpretation. 
 
 The secret or subjective will of God is absolute or 
 unconditioned in all circumstances, at once under- 
 lying and determining all the divine works and the 
 divine word in every form of prophecy. " Known 
 unto God are all His works from the beginning of the 
 world." " And His counsel shall stand, and He will 
 do all His pleasure." Prophecy, in reference to the 
 divine will, simply or subjectively, is absolute, and 
 must be fulfilled, being coincident with the divine 
 decree, the ground of which is unconditional. But 
 applied prophecy, viewed in its objective form as a 
 divine communication addressed to the human will, 
 presumed to be free and not forced, is certainly con- 
 ditioned by human free agency, and contains, accord- 
 ingly, the elements or aspects of promise and of com- 
 mination. As, indeed, all physical contingent events, 
 being mutually related or interdependent, are mutually 
 conditioned in regard to each other, yet absolute in 
 relation to the divine will in the law of causation ; so 
 
VINDICATION OF PKINCIPLES. 127 
 
 prophecy, involving promise and threatening, is con- 
 ditioned yet absolute, the conditioned absolute, God 
 thereby declaring and doing His will under certain 
 conditions of human choice or conduct, to which in 
 His moral government He has respect. Prophecy, 
 therefore, in this form is conditioned, not in anthro- 
 pomorphic accommodation to the human faculties, but 
 in real accommodation to facts. This conception of 
 prophecy in this aspect, while it maintains the unity 
 of the divine will throughout, leaves the question of 
 the divine decree in its relation to human responsibi- 
 lity unsolved, and perhaps insoluble. 
 
 12. This view may serve as a key to the solution 
 of parallel difficulties. God is said both to repent 
 and to be incapable of repentance. He repented that 
 He had made man and destroyed the old wicked 
 world. And He repented that He had made Saul 
 king, and deposed him from the throne. And yet we 
 are told that He is not a man that He should repent, 
 nor the son of man that He should change. Repent- 
 ance has two forms, internal and external, the latter 
 being the effect and outward evidence of the former. 
 The divine will, as incapable of repentance, is abso- 
 lute ; as mutable, it is conditioned by human conduct ; 
 according to which Saul was rejected from being king, 
 because he had rejected the Lord. But the divine 
 will was one throughout regarding both his appoint- 
 ment and his deposition; for Saul was given in His 
 anger, and taken away in His wrath. The change. 
 
128 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 therefore, was apparent, and not real — a change of 
 procedure, and not of purpose, which throughout was 
 one. The phraseology of such passages is anthropo- 
 morphic only in the sense in which all language is 
 human, being the ]3roduct of the human, faculties and 
 forms of thought. 
 
 13. We place synthetic interpretation last in the 
 order of vindication, because it implies the other prin- 
 ciples already discussed. The substance of several 
 passages is combined and interpreted either grammati- 
 cally, analogically, or typically. It is founded on the 
 unity of the revelation, or of the dispensations, a truth 
 which cannot be denied without denying not only the 
 uniformity of the divine operations, but more especially 
 the unity of revealed religion in its several forms, 
 and thereby even the unity of the divine nature. We 
 would be also thrown back on one or other of the 
 following theories : — On simple Gnosticism, which attri- 
 buted the Old Testament, as well as the creation of 
 the world, to the Demiurge, on the ground of their 
 alleged imperfection; or on Gnosticism in the form 
 of Marcionism, which rejected the Old Testament be- 
 cause of the prominence of the attribute of justice 
 there ; or we must endorse the rationalistic prin- 
 ciple, which practically disunites the economies by 
 explaining away the distinctively typicai and sacri- 
 ficial elements of the law; or, again, admitting the 
 element of sacrifice, we may on the same vicious 
 principle substantially dissolve their connection by 
 
VINDICATION OF PEINCIPLES. 129 
 
 exaggerating the secular aspects of the old economy, 
 and by representing circumcision as the seal of a civil 
 instead of a religious covenant, and the primary insti- 
 tution of the Passover as a merely memorial, and not 
 as at once a sacrificial and a typical ordinance. But 
 the Apostles manifestly treated revelation as one whole 
 throughout, to be interpreted as it is written. As, 
 therefore, we find synthesis in the Old Testament as 
 well as in the New, we must accept the principle, 
 unless it can be shown to be misapplied, as not only 
 just, but the key to the fulness of Scripture and the 
 solvent of many difficulties in biblical exegesis. 
 
PAET Y. 
 
 APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 
 
 Section First. 
 
 1. We have noticed the various ways in which the 
 quotations already adduced are applied by the writers 
 of the New Testament. They may be said generally 
 to be employed for doctrine, for argument, and even 
 for mere illustration in the few cases of formal accom- 
 modation. Together, they present a special and splendid 
 illustration of the text, " All Scripture is theopneustic, 
 and profitable for doctrine and for reproof, for correc- 
 tion and for instruction in righteousness; that the 
 man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto 
 all good works." 
 
 Our object here is to apply these quotations to cer- 
 tain departments of biblical criticism and of biblical 
 doctrine. We shall employ them to demonstrate both 
 the external and internal unity of the canon of revela- 
 tion. And we shall proceed upon the method of 
 rising from facts to principles, and of reasoning from 
 the greater to the less, from the more distinct to the 
 more obscure, that the argument may be all the clearer 
 and more conclusive. As the books of the New Tes- 
 tament are universally acknowledged to have existed 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 131 
 
 by the end of the second or the beginning of the third 
 century, we shall advance the evidence afforded by 
 the quotations of the earliest Fathers for the credi- 
 bility of the New Testament, and specially of the 
 four gospels. These writers possess in point of proxi- 
 mity more than they want in point of formal and full 
 quotation, so that they are singularly valid and valu- 
 able witnesses to the authenticity and authority not 
 only of the cited books of the New Testament, but 
 also of the Old. We shall restrict the argument to 
 the value of their attestation, without attempting to 
 produce the other branches of the evidence, external 
 and internal, which may be found duly estimated and 
 applied in various works on the subject. 
 
 We shall find that the argument from the Apostolic 
 Fathers is cumulative, being founded on the double 
 analogy contained in their at once quoting the New 
 Testament as they cite the Old, and in their quoting 
 the Old as it is cited in the New. And we shall 
 endeavour to adjust the argument so as historically to 
 meet the 'different assaults that have been made upon 
 the credibility of the gospel history, which, though fre- 
 quently challenged by unbelievers without the Church, 
 was not denied by Christian critics till towards the 
 close of the last century. 
 
 2. These attacks may be designated as the histori- 
 cal, the rationalistic, in the two forms of naturalism 
 and supernaturalism, and the mythical, represented 
 respectively by the following theories. The learned 
 
182 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 Eicborn, of Gottingen, in the beginning of the present 
 century, endeavoured, in his " Introduction to the 
 New Testament," to establish the plausible proposition 
 that there is no evidence of the existence of our gos- 
 pels before the end of the second century, when the 
 general judgment of the Church selected and acknow- 
 ledged as credible four out of the many floating and 
 jarring narratives which laid claim to this character. 
 This theory admits the general credibility, but denies 
 the authenticity of the Fourfold Gospel, and thereby 
 breaks the connection between these two things, and 
 leaves the truth of the gospels defenceless and vulner- 
 able both in the heel and in the head. This theory 
 is in all respects unhistorical. We have adequate 
 historical evidence that apostolic writings were not 
 only carefully preserved by tradition in the Church's 
 memory, but also jealously conserved in her archives 
 or depositories, so that spurious gospels or epistles 
 would not have gained general acceptance as authentic 
 and authoritative. 
 
 Moreover, though the Council of Hippo, in 393, 
 united by a decree the smaller divisions of the writings 
 of the New Testament in one collection, still there is 
 ample proof that the canon was completed and acknow- 
 ledged long prior to this date ; while there are absolutely 
 no historical traces of such an act as this theory pre- 
 sumes. 
 
 Schleiermacher, who acknowledged a supernatural 
 element in Christianity, and combined in himself the 
 spirituality of the Mystics with the rationalism of 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 133 
 
 the Gnostics and the Scholastics, admitted, like Eichorn, 
 the general authenticity and truth of the gospels, but 
 represented them as a crude but candid story, out of 
 which reason, by a process of historical analysis, must 
 elaborate the real history. This theory breaks down 
 all the defences of the gospel history nearly as com- 
 pletely as the following scheme of pure rationalism. 
 
 The pure rationalists of the school of Tubingen, 
 including such men as Baur and Zeller, Schwegler and 
 Kostlin, whose guiding principle is that pure reason 
 is at once the source and the test of truth, admitted 
 that the gospels contain a basis of truth, but denied 
 their authenticity and general credibility, especially in 
 regard to miracles, and ascribed their origin or com- 
 position to the circumstances of the times, in which 
 they found at once their date and their design. 
 
 3. Every form of the rationalistic theory assumes 
 what is amply disproved by facts — the intellectual, if 
 not the moral incompetency of the writers of the gos- 
 pels ; while the speculation of the school of Tiibingen 
 is contrary to the general fact urged by Olshausen to 
 sustain their authenticity, '' that we nowhere find in 
 any writer of any part of the ancient world any indi- 
 cation that only a single one of the four gospels was in 
 use, or ever known to exist separately. All possessed 
 the entire collection of the four gospels."'"' This also 
 the celebrated Tertullian, in his • reply to the heretic 
 Marcion, who rejected Luke on doctrinal grounds, main- 
 * Introduc. (Clark). 
 
134 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 tainecl to be a fact so undeniable in bis day tbat be 
 laid tbe weigbt of bis wbole argument upon it.'" 
 
 It is bardly less evident tbat Avorks, originated or 
 composed on tbis principle, could not bave been so gene- 
 rally accepted as apostolical witbout evidence, and tbat, 
 even tbougb tbey bad been so formed, we would still 
 expect to possess some bistorical traces of tbeir origin. 
 
 Tbe tbeory of a protevangelion, or primary gospel, 
 prepared by tbe Apostles as a common guide-book for 
 tbemselves in tbeir ministry, and employed by some 
 critics to barmonise tbe formal similarity of tbe four 
 gospels witb tbeir frequent dissimilarity, as it denies 
 tbeir individual autbenticity, is open to tbe same 
 bistorical objections as tbe otber tbeories. Sucb a 
 gospel, even tbougb well autbenticated, and necessary 
 eitber to tbe uses of tbe Apostles tben or of tbe critics 
 now, would ratber prove, wbat rationalism most abbors, 
 tbat tbe supernatural element common to tbe four 
 gospels is integral, and not adventitious. 
 
 Tbe notorious Strauss, wbo was botb tbe pupil and 
 latterly tbe master of Baur, absolutely denied tbe bis- 
 torical trutb of tbe gospels in any sense, by maintain- 
 ing tbe wbolly negative and destructive tbeory tbat 
 tbey are merely a collection or concretion of oral 
 mytbs or legends, formed around a nucleus of trutb, 
 wbicb grew up like a fungus in tbe early Cbristian 
 Cburcb, and of tbemselves account for tbe miraculous 
 element in tbem. But, as if conscious tbat be pro- 
 pounded a literary romance ratber tban a reality, be 
 
 * Adv. Marc. c. 2 and 5. 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 135 
 
 has studiously left both the precise period and the 
 cause of their composition undetermined. This specu- 
 lation, like the physiological theory of transmutation 
 of sjDecies in its connection with the more general 
 theory of development, is fitly designated mythical, 
 for it cannot point to a single historical specimen as 
 the organic remains of the process of transformation of 
 the fungous myth, by which it professes to account for 
 the gospels. The more recent rationalist writers on 
 the Christian evidences, such as Mr. Arnold'" and the 
 author of " Supernatural Religion," occupy the same 
 stand-point, and differ merely in the length to which 
 they carry their principles. Their tactics consist 
 in not onlv minimisino- adverse evidence, but in 
 denying its validity. The latter writer rejects the 
 fragments of Muratori and Apollinaris, because they 
 conflict with his theory. Both alike maintain that 
 the earliest patristic citation is not from our gospels, 
 but from earlier writings. Arnold asserts that the 
 record of the life of Jesus Christ, when we first get it, 
 has passed through half-a-century or more of oral 
 tradition, and at least through more than one written 
 account. He gives one long passage from Clement to 
 show that the Fathers always cite the Old Testament 
 literally. But we have given many passages to prove 
 that they cite the New Testament, as both they and 
 the evangelists quote the Old, both loosely and liter- 
 ally, and without naming in either case the authors, 
 so that we have thereby a double analogy, which links 
 
 * Arnold, Contemporanj Review, 1875, Art. 1. and "Super. Keligion." 
 
13G PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 together in the bonds of the same evidence the 
 authenticity and authority of the Old and New Testa- 
 ments. And even though it were otherwise, the 
 degree of accessibility of the primary texts or records 
 would of itself at once occasion and account for certain 
 differences of citation. Such assertions, unsupported 
 by any real evidence, are not only neutralised, but the 
 opposite is established by the double analogy of 
 quotation. 
 
 4. "We have said that the Apostolic Fathers quote 
 the New Testament, as we have seen that they cite 
 the Old, both literally and loosely, naming at the same 
 time the writers or books cited, or the Scripture 
 generally. We have adduced frequent instances of 
 formal quotation of this kind. We have also found a 
 numerous array of allusions to both the gospels and 
 the epistles of such a character, and made in such 
 circumstances, as to amount to formal quotations. 
 Literal references, especially when taken in connection 
 with a general acknowledgment of Scripture, or, in 
 particular, of the books alluded to, the existence of 
 which may also be otherwise proved from contem- 
 porary history, possess the evidential value of formal 
 citations. We have also shown that these Fathers 
 quote the New Testament exactly as the New cites 
 the Old. If, therefore, patristic citation from the Old 
 Testament be held to prove the existence of not only 
 the books cited, but of the volume as a whole, the 
 same analogical argument is applicable to the New 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 137 
 
 Testament. The evideDce is the same in both cases, 
 which must stand or fall together. And therefore the 
 quotations of the early Fathers, made in the same way 
 as the New Testament cites the Old, prove the age 
 and authorship or the authenticity of the cited writings 
 of the New. 
 
 Moreover, as these Fathers quote expressly certain 
 books or authors of the New Testament, the presump- 
 tion arises that allusions similar in form to formal 
 citations are also real quotations, and have the same 
 logical value. And, further, as they also cite certain 
 epistles already named, which not only embody, but 
 allude to prior well-known and admitted facts as their 
 basis, we have here another presumption, apart from 
 other evidence, that such facts were not only orally 
 transmitted, but recorded ; that the Gospels are the 
 seed-plot of the epistles, the facts of which they are 
 the philosophy — the historical basis of their developed 
 doctrine. 
 
 The Gospels, therefore, are to be regarded as 
 authentic on grounds of both positive and negative 
 criticism. 
 
 5. It is evident that the authorship and the credi- 
 bility of any writing are closely, if not easually, con- 
 nected. The testimony of an author who wrote at 
 the time and in the midst of the events recorded is 
 presumably true. And if he also give sufficient evi- 
 dence of his intellectual and moral competency, his 
 testimony is to be accepted as credible. The earliest 
 
138 PEINCIPLES OF NE\Y TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 patristic quotation proves that the gospels were 
 written in the age to which they profess to belong, 
 and by authors who were not only, as eye-witnesses, 
 entirely conversant with the facts recorded, but whose 
 writings show their intellectual, and their sufferings for 
 the truth their moral competency as historians. They 
 themselves appeal to their personal knowledge and 
 sufferings for the gospel as an obvious evidence of 
 their competency and the credibility of their testi- 
 mony, which formerly was wont to be attacked by 
 avowed unbelievers only. And even now it is the 
 mental ability of the writers, and the facts of their 
 testimony, that are arraigned, and not their moral 
 competency, nor the validity of argumentation from 
 competency to credibility. But our special argument 
 here from the facts of quotation is founded on the 
 testimony borne to the credibility of the gospels by 
 contemporary authors, who, as the disciples and asso- 
 ciates of the Evangelists, must have known their com- 
 petency, and the truth of their testimony in the 
 circumstances. They w^ould not have cited as credible 
 what they did not credit, and they would not have 
 accepted as true, without the amplest evidence, state- 
 ments on which the weightiest issues, temporal and 
 spiritual, depended. And more especially, as we have 
 found that the earliest Fathers expressly mention some 
 of the earlier Pauline epistles, such as those to the 
 Ephesians and Philippians, and the first to the Corin- 
 thians, the authenticity of which is admitted by hostile 
 critics, we can occup)^ this new position and thence 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 139 
 
 review and command the whole battle-field. We have 
 in them direct evidence of the truth of the principal 
 facts of Christianity, and, therefore, of the credibility 
 of the gospel history. This ought to be made, espe- 
 cially in the present state of the apologetic controversy, 
 the principal position, instead of being, as hitherto, 
 regarded as merely subordinate, and even as itself 
 needing support. 
 
 On such a combination of evidence, which cannot 
 be advanced in favour of any spurious work of anti- 
 quity, the Four Gospels are to be regarded as histori- 
 cally credible. 
 
 6. By a similar argument, containing an essential 
 point of difference, the truth of the Old Testament 
 may be also demonstrated. The New Testament con- 
 tains clear quotations from at least twenty-five out of 
 the thirty-nine books of the Old, which is cited under 
 the divisions or designations of " Moses," or " the law 
 and the prophets," to which is sometimes added the 
 *' Psalms." These facts of themselves prove that not 
 only the several books cited, but also the whole canon 
 of the Old Testament, were accepted, not only by the 
 authors of the New, but by the people to whom the 
 revelation was given, who received them as credible on 
 evidence similar to that on which the credibility of the 
 New Testament rests. 
 
 The argument in this form, and at this stage, regards 
 the Apostles as mere historians, and Jesus Christ as a 
 merely human teacher, citing for certain purposes 
 
140 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 existing and acknowledged writings. But when we 
 come to the question of authority, which does not 
 depend merely on the objective truth of the Scriptures, 
 but on God speaking in them, we must take our stand 
 on the higher ground of inspiration. We have seen 
 the evidence, as derived from quotation, on which their 
 credibility rests ; and we now advance a step by main- 
 taining that their truth involves their inspiration, and 
 thereby their authority. As Jesus Christ promised to 
 guide His Apostles by the Holy Spirit into all truth, 
 and to brinof to their remembrance all that He had 
 spoken, and as they themselves not only expressly 
 claimed infallible guidance, but best knew the kind of 
 influence under which they spoke and wrote, we must re- 
 gard the New Testament as the inspired, and, therefore, 
 authoritative will of God through human free agency. 
 
 And, moreover, as Christ, the incarnate Word of 
 God, and His inspired Apostles, quote and apply the 
 Old Scriptures so frequently and so faithfully, we must 
 regard them not merely as inspired because credible, 
 but as authoritative, both because they are inspired 
 and because they are so pronounced by the Lord and 
 the inspired authors of the New Testament. From 
 the wide field, therefore, of biblical and patristic quota- 
 tion we draw the inference that all Scripture is given 
 by inspiration of God, through holy men moved by the 
 Holy Ghost. We are not called on to discuss here the 
 nature and extent of inspiration, or the distinction 
 that may be made between revelation and inspiration. 
 It is evident that the early Fathers of the Church did 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 141 
 
 not attempt to define the cliaracter and degree of 
 inspiration which belong to the Scriptures. It is also 
 clear that the subjective influence under which they 
 claim to have been given involves a corresponding 
 objective character or property of the records, whereby 
 tbey are really the word of God throughout in true 
 objective expression or development. This is more 
 important to the biblical student than any line of 
 demarcation which may be drawn between revelation 
 and inspiration, which being intimately, if not insepar- 
 ably connected, may be so defined as either to iu elude or 
 to exclude one another, according as they are regarded 
 as differing in kind or merely in degree. But as these 
 terms are both applied to Scripture, and cannot be 
 shown to be synonymous, inspiration, in its full and 
 proper sense, is to be regarded as the subjective 
 influence or condition necessary to receive or to deliver 
 the truth communicated by revelation. 
 
 It may be further argued, both from the nature of 
 the case and from Scripture itself, that the language 
 as well as the matter of revelation is inspired. Both 
 are given alike and at once in inspiration. Paul 
 declares that he uttered spiritual things in spiritual 
 words, not in the words of man's wisdom, but in the 
 words of the Holy Ghost. And as inspiration is a 
 subjective state under divine influence, it must extend 
 to both the forwj and the suhstmice of the revelation. 
 It appears, indeed, to be impossible to separate these 
 two elements in any communication, human or divine. 
 The one psychologically involves the other less or 
 
142 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 more, especially in intense mental states, which spon- 
 taneously embody themselves in corresponding words. 
 This view of inspiration, as dynamical, places the 
 plenary inspiration of all Scripture on a solid basis, 
 such as the mechanical theory, Avhich represents the 
 writers as the passive instruments of the Spirit, cannot 
 lay. Revelation is seen to be the word of God in the 
 fullest and most literal sense, and the verbal differ- 
 ences in the several reports of our Lord's sayings in 
 the Gospels, as well as the free translations and even 
 departures from the Hebrew in several quotations, if 
 they cannot be regarded as the primary and very 
 words of God or of Christ on the occasion, are still the 
 very words of the inspiring Spirit. Any argument 
 against verbal inspiration from such sources argues 
 ignorance of the real nature and extent of the divine 
 influence, assumes as true the palpable absurdity that 
 language best suited to one age or occasion is best 
 adapted to all others, and also limits the free agency 
 of the Sovereign Spirit, who is a law unto Himself, 
 Avhile His operations are diverse and yet one. We 
 conclude, therefore, that the volume of the book of 
 revelation is one, and throughout the word of God, 
 stamped without with the seal of Heaven. 
 
 Section Second. 
 
 New Testament quotation equally demonstrates 
 
 the internal unity of revelation. We find there two 
 
 covenants of life, generally designated as the covenant 
 
 of works and the covenant of grace. The former was 
 
APPLICATION OF PKINCIPLES. 143 
 
 made Avitli man unfallen, tlie latter was made by God 
 with His Son, and given to man fallen. The one 
 having been broken is abolished, the other being 
 fulfilled by Christ remaineth. As revelations of the 
 divine will they closely followed one another, and. 
 thus the restoration to God followed the fall. The 
 covenant of grace was revealed successively to Adam 
 and to Abraham, to Moses and by Christ, under 
 different forms of development, which are to each 
 other as the germ, the blade, the ear, and the full 
 corn in the ear. The Sinaitic covenant Avas a preli- 
 minary form of the dispensation of grace. Its peculiar 
 national character was the Theocracy, all its moral, 
 religious, and civil laws having been directly given by 
 God, and administered under Him by judges and 
 kings, priests and prophets. As a rudimentary and 
 theocratic dispensation, its component parts were all 
 combined in one formal covenant, which could not 
 have assumed any other form in the circumstances. 
 Each of these elements had its own specific and appro- 
 priate use. They were respectively the rule of religious 
 belief, of moral obedience, and of social life. The 
 ceremonial institute formed the substance of the cove- 
 nant of grace, the moral and civil laws were merely 
 codicils or corollaries appended, just as the law is 
 added to the gospel, good works to grace, under the 
 new dispensation, especially in the grand Epistle to the 
 Romans, which begins with the cardinal doctrines of 
 in-ace and ends with the cardinal duties of life. 
 
 These quotations, then, enable us to demonstrate 
 
144 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 the substantia] identity of the dispensations, and to 
 deduce important apologetical inferences. The two 
 forms of the covenant are united organically, like the 
 root, trunk, and branches of a tree, which is pervaded 
 from the root to the topmost branch by a common 
 system of tissues and fibres, sap-veins, and circulating 
 fluids. They are radically and vitally connected, like 
 the head and all the members of the body. 
 
 (1.) They are united providentially or historically. 
 The Theocracy ended with the captivity of Judah ; the 
 revelation was closed soon after her return from cap- 
 tivity. Ezra was the last inspired scribe, and Mala- 
 chi the last prophet; but the dispensation continued 
 till Christ, by whom it was fulfilled and abrogated. 
 The Jewish nation was the Lord's covenanted people ; 
 Jerusalem was the centre of His kingdom, the temple 
 the seat of His glory, and the Shechinah the symbol of 
 His presence as theocratic King. 
 
 We find a continuous chain of historical facts per- 
 vading and connecting these economies. These facts 
 are of two kinds, ordinary and extraordinary. The 
 former are like the underlying and invisible rocks 
 which unite two countries divided by a chasm, or two 
 continents divided by a sea. The histories of both 
 dispensations show a fine network, a wondrous web of 
 ordinary providences, fitting into each other, and ful- 
 filling one will. There is, indeed, no sacred historical 
 link across the chasm between them — no prophet 
 crying in the desert during the dark ages of Judaism, 
 and ostensibly preparing the way of the Lord ; but the 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 145 
 
 Apocrypha and the Targums, profane histories and 
 the writings of the Jewish Josephus, demonstrate 
 the continued identity of the Jewish nation amid 
 many catastrophes, the continuity of the course of 
 divine providence towards the Church, and the con- 
 tinuous connection of the economies. Jesus Christ 
 was born of the Jewish nation, and of the royal 
 family, under the same dispensation of grace, and 
 amid the same continuous march of grand moral 
 events. And even during the darkest ages, when 
 there was scarcely a star in all the sky, ordinary 
 events were paving the way for a better dispensation, 
 a more excellent way, according to the voice of all 
 the prophets. 
 
 The extraordinary moral events which pervade the 
 Old and New Testaments are like a series of erupted 
 rocks, of upheaved mountain chains, which hide their 
 heads in heaven. Both economies Avere alike introduced, 
 pervaded, and sustained throughout by a grand course 
 of similar moral miracles. There is a complete moral 
 analogy between them, ending in the logical proof of 
 a perfect moral identity. No other religion has ever 
 furnished or appealed to such evidence of its origin 
 and authority. These grand events fall Iq and fit 
 into one another, forming part of a common divine 
 plan and common continuous providence. The Judaism 
 of the Old Testament historically ends in the evan- 
 gelism of the New. Both the underlying and the 
 outstanding historic bonds of unity are palpable. A 
 series of events, thus developed and linked into each 
 
 K 
 
146 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 other, proves that these dispensations are substan- 
 tially, if not formially one. 
 
 (2.) They are also connected prophetically. There 
 are distinct kinds of Old Testament prophecy ful- 
 filled in the New. There are typical persons and 
 typical places, typical institutions and typical events 
 of the old economy, realised in the gospel. All 
 these are silent prophecies, the significance of facts, 
 revealing the dawn that would chase the shadows 
 away. 
 
 And, then, there is the grand array of word pro- 
 phecies, shining like stars in the night until the day 
 dawned and the day-star arose. 
 
 We have also distinct classes of prophecies, already 
 enumerated, in the Old and New Testaments. Some 
 of these are as clearly fulfilled as others are manifestly 
 unfulfilled. Many of the former are fulfilled in the 
 latter; while some of both Testaments overleap the 
 events of the evangelical history, such as the planting 
 and propagation of Christianity, and terminate in long 
 posterior events. Some are single prophecies, having 
 but one reference, and fulfilled in single or solitary 
 events ; others have a double reference, a temporal 
 and a spiritual aspect, and both an early and a late 
 fulfilment. Some, accordingly, found a complete pre- 
 sent accomplishment in the events of the time ; but 
 most prophecies have a progressive development or 
 fulfilment, embracing and being fulfilled in the similar 
 grand moral events of successive ages. But all clearly 
 fulfilled prophecy, of every kind and class, identifies 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 147 
 
 the economies, and binds tliem together by bonds that 
 cannot be broken. Every prophecy of the Old ful- 
 filled in the New links them together by a chain of 
 adamant. And the prophecies common to both, clearly 
 accomplished in the later events of the world or the 
 Church, are a double-linked chain, uniting both econo- 
 mies, and declaring them to be not disjointed and dis- 
 cordant systems, but parts of a grand moral unity in 
 diversity — elements of the great redemptive plan of 
 love and wisdom — the woof and warp of the varie- 
 gated web of providential grace, which God has been 
 weaving since time began — winding labyrinths of 
 which we have the clue — mysterious plots of which 
 we know the plan. 
 
 (3.) They are identified morally and spiritually. 
 The same moral principles of truth, justice, and 
 benevolence prevail throughout the Scriptures. The 
 normal moral code of both Testaments is the same. 
 The Decaloo^ue is the moral law for all men and for 
 all ages. It consists of two grand principles, supreme 
 love to God and sincere love to man, on which hang 
 all the law and the prophets and apostles, as all the 
 branches of a tree depend upon the trunk. The 
 ground or basis of obedience is the revealed character 
 of God, and especially His love as the Lord our God 
 and Redeemer, and the motive or mainspring in the 
 human soul is felt love. The righteousness of this 
 law the Son of God, as the Son of man, has not only 
 fulfilled but magnified and made honourable. And, 
 accordingly, obedience under the gospel is enjoined on 
 
148 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 the same grounds and from the same motives — love to 
 God for the manifestation of His love in the character 
 and work of Christ. The new moral commandment 
 of the gospel is certainly not that we love God 
 supremely or one another with a pure heart fervently, 
 but that we love each other as Christ hath loved us. 
 It is a new yet an old commandment, old as Adam in 
 its principle, and as Moses in its formal basis, and 
 new merely in its formal motive, the gracious work of 
 Christ, which is a new thing in the earth, a new form 
 of the divine love. 
 
 We also find that all the spiritual feelings required 
 and actually exercised under the law and the gospel 
 are the same. The form of worship is different, but 
 the spirit is one. The former, accordingly, is changed, 
 but the latter abides unchanged and unchangeable. 
 The same faith and the same fear, the same hope and 
 the same joy, the same humility and the same holiness, 
 run like a perennial stream throughout both economies. 
 The principles of subjective religion are throughout 
 the same. A complete moral and spiritual identity 
 prevails. 
 
 (4 .) They are identified doctrinally. Their doctrinal 
 oneness is as conspicuous as the harmony of the solar 
 system, as the unity of the earth itself, or the un- 
 broken unity of the arch of heaven. Not only is the 
 grand method of salvation doctrinally the same, there 
 is a complete aod constant agreement in the minor 
 details of the development of doctrine, expressed in 
 different languages and in different forms of phrase- 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 149 
 
 ology. Christ and the authors of the New Testament 
 constantly quote and comment upon the facts and 
 doctrines of the Old Testament as inculcating the 
 same truths which they more fully developed and 
 declared. It is, indeed, their text-book and book of 
 reference on all occasions. They treat the doctrine of 
 the old pro]Dhets as the same as their own, both in its 
 source and in its substance. A grand series of writers 
 of different ages and countries, some of whom were 
 ignorant of each other's writings at the time they wrote 
 themselves, have concurred in revealing the same 
 truths in different forms to us, on whom the ends of 
 the world are come. The Scriptures, like Joseph's 
 coat, are of many colours ; and like Christ's, without 
 seam, woven from the top throughout. 
 
 (5.) They are related exegetically. The two Testa- 
 ments are mutually interpreting. The New Testament 
 interprets the Old, which in turn illustrates the New. 
 Both are to be expounded on substantially the same 
 principles. They are like a double lock with double 
 keys, either of which opens both compartments. 
 Necessary to one another and unintelligible singly, the 
 one unlocks the other. We read the Old in the 
 clearer light of the New, and the New in the light of 
 the language and literature of the Old. The philo- 
 logical and exegetical uses of the Old Testament are 
 invaluable. As the human race was furnished through 
 the sensible signs and sacrifices of the law with the 
 high ideas of sin, satisfaction, and salvation, realised in 
 the gospel, we must now read the dispensations in 
 
150 PEINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 each other's light. The Epistle to the Hebrews in 
 particular is a key to the symbolism of the law, which 
 is a rude outline of the gospel, but the life of Jesus 
 Christ, the end of all the law, is the light in which 
 we read those mystical sacrifices which threw their 
 shadows before them, and now shed down their light 
 upon the cross. The law and the gospel are not 
 merely the lesser and greater lights that rule night 
 and day, but binary stars that commingle and combine 
 to dispel the darkness of the moral world. 
 
 (6.) The Old and New Scriptures, as thus internally 
 connected, are consequently related apologetically. 
 We have not only the evidence of external and 
 internal testimony in favour of their credibility and 
 authority, but the evidence of their internal harmony 
 in proof of their divine origin, authority, and perpetual 
 obligation. The same things are demonstrated in 
 different ways and from different stand-points. In 
 estimating the value of the internal argument, it is of 
 importance to notice that a revelation and a dispen- 
 sation, though mutually related, and probably contem- 
 poraneous and coincident, are certainly not identical. 
 The revelation is not the dispensation, but its law. 
 The dispensations, both old and new, commenced, and 
 were carried on for a time, without written revelations 
 or records. There was, indeed, an oral, but there was 
 no written revelation. The economies were established 
 less or more, especially the patriarchal and evangelical, 
 and then their laws were recorded. Oral revelation, 
 or a divine communication from God to man, is the 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 151 
 
 instrumental cause of any form of the kingdom of God, 
 and a written revelation its law. In one or other 
 form, revelation mediately creates and directly regu- 
 lates the dispensation. 
 
 Hence the form of a dispensation may be changed, 
 and yet the revelation remain; the one may not only 
 be fulfilled while the other is not annulled, but the 
 abolition of the one may become the confirmation of 
 the other. Besides, a dispensation may change its 
 form and yet retain its substance. The Old and New 
 Testaments contain merely two forms of the same 
 covenant of grace. Consequently, changes which 
 affected the form of the dispensation would not affect 
 the substance of the revelation. Hence the New 
 Testament is not an absolutely new revelation, but 
 another and higher form of the old revelation. Modern 
 errors. Continental and British, regardino^ the character, 
 authority, and permanence of the Old Testament, and 
 specially of the Decalogue, arise mainly from miscon- 
 ception on this subject. They confound the revelation 
 with the dispensation, and then reason analogically, 
 that the abrogation of the latter involved the abolition 
 of the former. They ignore the fact that the law 
 embodies and exhibits the same spiritual and immut- 
 able principles of morality and religion as the gospel. 
 A new and clearer exhibition of old truths is also 
 confounded with truths absolutely new. It is also 
 forgotten that, in connection with the permanence of 
 the revelation, the question, or the contrast, is not 
 between the moral and the ceremonial element of the 
 
152 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 revelation, but between the permanence of the reve- 
 lation and the change of the dispensation. 
 
 These preliminary observations are illustrated by 
 the following apologetic inferences from the internal 
 unity of the revelation already demonstrated : — 
 
 [1.] The analogy of the facts of history or providence 
 proves that the God of nature is the God of provi- 
 dence, the God of history the God of revelation, and 
 particularly, that the Author of the Old Testament is 
 the Author of the New. Gnosticism, the first and 
 most formidable speculative heresy of the early Church, 
 ascribed creation and the Old Testament to the same 
 evil author, the world-god, and the New to the God 
 and Father of Jesus Christ, sent to deliver mankind 
 from the bondage of corrupt matter. Marcion, who 
 was a Gnostic, not only rejected the Old Testament, 
 but all the gospels except Luke's, which he also purged 
 of its supposed Judaism. Our modern Marcionism, 
 though less negative, is not much more rational. We 
 find the same carnal views of the Old Testament, and, 
 consequently of its Author, formed also from similar 
 stand -points. 
 
 [2.] The identity of the moral and spiritual prin- 
 ciples of Scripture evinces a common origin in the 
 divine nature, of which His will is the index, and His 
 word the law. It proves them to be alike divine 
 and immutable. Their formal expression may change, 
 but their substance is permanent— the underlying 
 principle of the form is free from all change. Thus, 
 the peculiar Judaical form of the preface to the ten 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 153 
 
 commandments, and the form of the promise annexed 
 to the fifth commandment, contain two spiritual and 
 immutable principles. 
 
 It. also follows, from what has been already said, 
 that there may be a progressive development of reve- 
 lation without an increment of essentially new truth. 
 As the oak lies in the acorn, so the New Testament 
 lies in the Old. The new phase of truth, as a develop- 
 ment or fuller revelation, is merely relatively new — a 
 new phenomenon, and not a new truth. Neither the 
 morality nor the religion of the Old Testament are so 
 clear and full as those of the New, but they are the 
 same morality and religion. The inner and outer 
 religious life of ?;aints under both economies are the 
 same in kind, though they are or ought to be different 
 in degree.''^ The new facts of the gospel history have 
 not altered, but merely enlarged the basis of both 
 doctrinal and moral theology. Thus, the incarnation of 
 the Son of God, the grandest fact of history, together 
 with all the singular events of His life, death, and 
 resurrection, is a new and unexampled phenomenon, 
 the basis not of other truths, but of higher truths of 
 faith and moral duty than were revealed and incul- 
 cated in the law. But even these new facts and higher 
 truths were preintimated . or prefigured since creation 
 and the covenant, so that they appear as fuller and 
 clearer revelations of similar grand facts and principles 
 of belief and duty. The revelation preceded and pro- 
 claimed the facts and doctrines, and the philosophy 
 
 * Heb. xi. 13-40. 
 
154 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 follows the facts. And, therefore, although the facts 
 as facts, or events of time and space, be new, neither 
 the facts nor the truths are new in reference to the 
 revelation, which contained much that was misunder- 
 stood by the people to whom it came. The law was 
 the nursery of the gospel, as the gospels are the nur- 
 sery of the full gospel of the epistles. Jesus Christ 
 carried the law forward to its ultimate development, 
 and became its end both for revelation and for right- 
 eousness. At once the goal and the glory of the law, He 
 supplied new motives to belief and obedience — rather 
 than an entirely new, much less another basis of faith. 
 
 In like manner, in the moral region we have in the 
 gospel merely a fuller and clearer enunciation of the 
 morality ; not of the law of natural conscience, but of 
 the revealed law of the Decalogue. As revealed reli- 
 gion is higher than natural religion, so revealed mora- 
 lity is higher than natural morality. The foundation 
 of all moral obligation is the moral relations of the 
 Creator and the creature. Natural moral duty rests 
 on the facts of creation and providential care only ; 
 but revealed morality embraces all the divine and 
 human correlations of creation and the cross, which 
 are fixed and immutable. The Decalogue, as some- 
 thing more than natural morality, is the divine and 
 unchangeable expression in Ten Words of the whole of 
 our moral relations, adapted in its form to the circum- 
 stances in which it was given. Hence we may have 
 better morals and higher developments of moral law 
 in the gospel, but we cannot have other or higher 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 155 
 
 morality in kind. We have in the New Testament 
 ampler and clearer announcements and applications in 
 morality as in religion. "We have morality in a life 
 which is more vivid and striking than in a cold code. 
 The life of Jesus Christ is more expressive, and, there- 
 fore, more impressive, than the Decalogue. It is a 
 living law, which gives not only the precept, but the 
 special instances or illustrations. The gospel history, 
 the Sermon on the Mount, the doctrinal epistles, and 
 especially the twelfth chapter of the Epistle to the 
 Romans, are commentaries on the law and confirma- 
 tions of its truth and perpetuity. The evangelical 
 commandment, " And ye ought also to lay down your 
 lives for the brethren," cannot be higher in principle 
 than the moral teaching of the law in obedience to 
 which the Jewish saints laid down their lives for 
 Christ and the Church.'" The morality of the gospel 
 cannot be higher in kind than that of the law, when 
 one grand end of the former is to restore humanity by 
 redemption and regeneration to the obedience of the 
 grand principles on which hang all the law and the 
 prophets — supreme love to God, and sincere love to 
 man, known by Jewish believers, and beyond which we 
 cannot further go. The new commandment which Jesus 
 gave His disciples is new only in its motive. His own 
 example, that we love one another as He hath loved us. 
 Hence we conclude that neither the Decalogue nor 
 the ancient Scriptures, of which it formed a part, 
 have passed away. All passages which might be so 
 
 * 1 Johniii. 16; Heb. xi. 
 
156 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 construed are capable of clear definition and defence. 
 The Lord's Sermon on the Mount has a double design, 
 at once to correct the carnal notions of Paganism and 
 Judaism, and to reveal the perfection of the primary 
 and integral principles of the law. He does not 
 enunciate a single truth, the root of which is not to be 
 found in the Old Testament. He corrects the carnal 
 maxims of Paganism, and the corrupt glosses of the 
 Scribes, but not the primary and normal legislation of 
 the law. The contrast is not between His own teaching 
 and the doctrine of the law, but between His teaching 
 and their teaching. Between the obscure legislation 
 of the law and His own clearer legislation, there is a 
 comparison, but no radical contrast. The Judaical 
 form of the Decalogue contains and covers eternal 
 principles, which merely need to be translated into 
 modern phraseology. Our Lord's much-disputed utter- 
 ance regarding the law and the prophets, refers to the 
 revelation rather than to the dispensation of which it 
 was the law.'" He emphatically declares that the Old 
 Testament will not lose one jot or tittle of its truth 
 and authority till the consummation of all things. 
 The Scriptures will not pass away till they be perfectly 
 fulfilled in Christ, and in the age which He inaugurated. 
 They were not wholly fulfilled in Christ Himself, 
 when the moral law was magnified and the ceremonial 
 accomplished; for the prophecies are being fulfilled in 
 the history of the Christian Church from its com- 
 mencement to its consummation. And, therefore, 
 *Matt. V. 17, 18. 
 
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 157 
 
 although the ancient dispensation is fulfilled, and 
 thereby annulled in Christ, still the revelation remains 
 as binding as ever in respect to religious belief and 
 moral duty. 
 
 [3.] The assertion, lately made with all the assurance 
 of a positive discovery, that the Decalogue has formally 
 passed away, is based upon the distinction made 
 between the moral law and the Decalogue. Both are 
 admitted to be moral, but the former is called natural 
 moral, the latter moral positive or moral ceremonial. 
 But the Decalogue, given to fallen man as a rule of 
 life, is at once natural, moral, and positive. It is 
 natural, as founded on the law of our nature, moral, as 
 expressing our moral relations and obligations, and 
 positive, as enjoined on us as the law of our life. It 
 is well, also, to consider the goal to which this baseless 
 and reckless speculation conducts. The dogma of a 
 transient Decalogue in any form, except as a formal 
 and binding constituent of the old Sinaitic Covenant, 
 logically tends to sap the foundation of all moral and 
 religious obligation. If the revealed moral law has 
 passed away, then morality is ceremonial or positive, 
 founded on the mere arbitrary will of God, and not 
 upon the moral relations of Creator and creature, and 
 consequently has become obsolete — conscience and 
 religion are mere names — God and man are non- 
 moral beings, and though man be conscious of his own 
 existence,, yet the moral personality of God, if not 
 the existence of an Almighty Intelligence, or of an 
 impersonal Power, cannot be demonstrated. 
 
158 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 [4.] We conclude by urging the argument furnished 
 by all clearly fulfilled prophecy in favour of the in- 
 spiration and authority of revelation. Accomplished 
 prophecy of every kind and form demonstrates the 
 unity of the Scriptures, and thereby the authority not 
 only of the particular author of any prediction, but of 
 the whole canon. If writers, born in different ages 
 and countries, and often unknown to each other, could 
 tell without collusion so concordant a tale, weave so 
 unique and beautiful a web of truth, and utter so 
 many clear and concurrent prophecies, the Scripture 
 must be true from the beo^inninof, from Moses to 
 Malachi, and from Jesus to John, and holy men have 
 spoken, being moved by the Holy Ghost. 
 
 We have presented throughout a few aspects of the 
 unity of the Divine Word, the full glory of which is 
 incomprehensible. When we look upon a grand 
 landscape from a low level, through the mists of its 
 mountains and the vapours of its sky, we cannot 
 discern the unity in diversity of its heights and 
 hollows, and the unique beauty of the scene. Now we 
 know but in part, and prophecy in part, but when 
 that which is perfect is come, that which is in part 
 shall be done away. We shall be able to read from 
 the high stand-point of heaven all the revelations of 
 wisdom and love in each other's light, in the light of 
 our own experience, and in the light of that glory, to 
 which they lighted and led the way. 
 
 FINIS. 
 
INDEX 
 
 OP 
 
 NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION. 
 
 New Testament. 
 
 Old Testament. 
 
 Matthew!. 23, 
 
 Isa. vii. 14. 
 
 II ii. 6, 
 
 Mic. V. 1, 2. 
 
 1. ii. ]5, 
 
 Hos. xi. 1. 
 
 ii. 18, 
 
 Jer. xxxi. 15. 
 
 ii. 23, 
 
 Isa. xi. 1. 
 
 II II 
 
 Isa. liii. 3. 
 
 iii. 3, 
 
 Isa. xl. 3. 
 
 II iv. 4, 
 
 Deut. viii. 3. 
 
 •• iv.6, 
 
 Ps. xci. 11, 12 
 
 II II 
 
 Ps. xc. 
 
 .1 iv. 7, 
 
 Deut. vi. 16. 
 
 II iv. 10, 
 
 Deut. vi. 13. 
 
 iv.15, 16, 
 
 Isa. viii. 23. 
 
 II M 
 
 Isa. ix. 1,2. 
 
 II viii. 17, 
 
 Isa. liii. 4. 
 
 ix. 13, 
 
 Hos. vi. 6. 
 
 xi. 10, 
 
 Mai. iii. 1. 
 
 II xii. 7, 
 
 Hos. vi. 6. 
 
 xii. 18-21, 
 
 Isa. xiii. 1-4. 
 
 II xiii. 14, 15, 
 
 Isa. vi. 9, 10. 
 
 xiii. 35, 
 
 Ps. ixxviii. 2. 
 
 „ II 
 
 Ps. ixxvii. 
 
 XV. 4 fp. 
 
 Exod. XX. 12. 
 
 XV. 4fp, 
 
 Deut. V. 16. 
 
 ,1 xv.41p, ... . 
 
 Exod. xxi. 17. 
 
 11 XV. 8, 9, 
 
 Isa. xxix. 13. 
 
 II xviii. 16, 
 
 Deut. xix. 15. 
 
 II xix. 4, 
 
 Gen. i. 27. 
 
160 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 New Testament. 
 Matthew xix. 5, 
 xix. 18, 
 
 xix. 19 fp, 
 
 xix. 19 Ip, 
 xxi. 5, 
 xxi. 13 fp, 
 xxi. 13 Ip, 
 xxi. 16, 
 xxi. 42, 
 
 II 
 xxii. 24, 
 xxii. 32, 
 xxii. 37, 
 xxii. 39, 
 xxii. 44, 
 
 M 
 
 xxvi. 31, 
 xxvii. 9, 10, 
 xxvii. 35, 
 
 II 
 xxvii. 46, 
 
 Mark i. 2, 
 1.3, 
 iv. 12, 
 vii. 6, 7, 
 vii. 10 fp, 
 vii. 10 Ip, 
 X. 6, 
 X. 7, 8, 
 X. 19 fp, 
 
 II 
 X. 19 Ip, 
 X. 19 Ip, 
 xi. 17 fp, 
 xi. 17 Ip, 
 xii. 10, 11, 
 
 Old Testament. 
 Gen. ii. 24. 
 Exod. XX. 13-16. 
 Dent. V. 17-20. 
 Exod. XX. 12. 
 Deut. V. 16. 
 Lev. xix. 18. 
 Zech. ix. 9. 
 Isa. Ivi. 7. 
 Jer. vii. 11. 
 Ps. viii. 3. 
 Ps. cxviii. 22, 23. 
 Ps. cxvii. 
 Deut. XXV. 5. 
 Exod. iii. 6. 
 Deut. vi. 5. 
 Lev. xix. 18. 
 Ps. ex. 1. 
 Ps. cix. 
 Zech. xiii. 7. 
 Zech. xi. 13. 
 Ps. xxii. 19. 
 Ps. xxi. 
 Ps. xxii. 2. 
 Ps. xxi. 
 
 Mai. iii. 1. 
 Isa. xl. 3. 
 Isa. vi. 9, 10. 
 Isa. xxix. 13. 
 Exod. XX. 12. 
 Exod. xxi. 17. 
 Gen. i. 27. 
 Gen. ii. 24. 
 Exod. XX. 13-17. 
 Deut. V. 17-21. 
 Exod. XX. 12. 
 Deut. V. 16. 
 Isa. Ivi. 7. 
 Jer. vii. 11. 
 Ps. cxviii. 22, 23. 
 Ps. cxvii. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 IGl 
 
 New Testament. 
 
 Mae 
 
 K xii. 19, 
 
 „ 
 
 xii. 26, 
 
 It 
 
 xii. 29, 30, 
 
 II 
 
 xii. 31, 
 
 II 
 
 xii. 36, 
 
 „ 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 xiv. 27, 
 
 II 
 
 XV. 28, 
 
 II 
 
 XV. 34, 
 
 II 
 
 " 
 
 Luke i, 17, 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 It 
 
 ii. 23, 
 
 II 
 
 ii. 24, 
 
 II 
 
 iii, 4-6, 
 
 II 
 
 iv. 4, 
 
 It 
 
 iv. 8, 
 
 II 
 
 iv. 10, 11, 
 
 It 
 
 n 
 
 II 
 
 iv. 12, 
 
 II 
 
 iv. 18, 19, 
 
 II 
 
 vii. 27, 
 
 11 
 
 viii. 10, 
 
 It 
 
 X. 27 fp, 
 
 M 
 
 x. 27 Ip, 
 
 " 
 
 xviii. 20 fp. 
 
 II 
 
 It 
 xviii. 20 Ip, 
 
 It 
 
 xix. 46 fp, 
 
 It 
 
 xix. 46 Ip, 
 
 II 
 
 XX. 17, 
 
 II 
 
 It 
 
 11 
 
 XX. 28, 
 
 II 
 
 XX. 42, 43, 
 
 II 
 
 XX. 42, 43, 
 
 It 
 
 xxii, 37, 
 
 II 
 
 xxiii. 46, 
 
 Old Testament. 
 Deut. XXV. 5. 
 Exod. iii. 6. 
 Deut. vi. 4, 5. 
 Lev. xix. 18. 
 Ps. ex. 1. 
 Ps. cix. 
 Zech. xiii. 7. 
 Isa. liii. 12. 
 Ps. xxii. 2. 
 Ps. xxi. 
 
 Mai. iii. 23, 24. 
 Mai. iv. 4, 5. 
 Exod. xiii. 2. 
 Lev. xii. 8. 
 Isa. xl. 3-5. 
 Deut. viii. 3. 
 Deut. vi. 13. 
 Ps. xci. 1], 12. 
 Ps. xc. 
 Deut. vi. 16. 
 Isa. Ixi. 1, 2. 
 Mai. iii. 1. 
 Isa. vi. ix. 
 Deut. vi. 5. 
 Lev. xix. 18. 
 Exod. XX. 13-16. 
 Deut. V. 17-20. 
 Exod. XX. 12. 
 Deut. V. 16. 
 Isa. Ivi. 7. 
 Jer. vii. 11. 
 Ps. cxviii. 22. 
 Ps. cxvii. 
 Deut. XXV. 5. 
 Ps. ex. 1. 
 Ps. eix. 
 Isa. liii. 12. 
 Ps. xxxi. 6. 
 
 Ps. XXX. 
 
 L 
 
162 INDEX. 
 
 New Testament. Old Testament. 
 
 John i. 23, Isa. xl. 3. 
 
 M ii. 17, Ps. Ixix. 10. 
 
 II I! ... ... Ps. Ixviii. 
 
 II vi. 31, Ps. Ixxviii. 24. 
 
 II M ... ... ... ... Ps. Ixxvii. 
 
 II vi. 45, ... ... ... ... Isa. liv. 13, 
 
 II vii. 38, ... ... ... ... Isa. xliv. 3. 
 
 II II ... Isa. 1. 1. 
 
 II II ... ... ... ... Isa. Iviii. 11. 
 
 II vii. 42, 2 Sam. vii. 11-16. 
 
 II II ... ... ... ... 1 Kings viii. 25. 
 
 II II Isa. xi. 1. 
 
 11 II ... ... ... ... Jer. xxiii. 5. 
 
 ,1 II Mic. V. 2. 
 
 II II 1 Sam. xvi. 1-13. 
 
 II viii. 17, ... ... Deut. xix. 15. 
 
 II X. 34, ... ......... Ps. Ixxxii. 6. 
 
 II II ... ... ... ... Ps. Ixxi. 
 
 II xii. 14, 15, ... ... ... ... Zech. ix. 9. 
 
 II xii. 38, Isa. liii. 1. 
 
 II xii. 40, ... ... Isa. vi. 10. 
 
 II xiii. 18, Ps. xii. 9. 
 
 II II 
 
 Ps. xl. 
 
 II XV. 25, ... ... Ps. XXXV. 19. 
 
 II II ... ... ... ... Ps. xxxiv. 
 
 II II ... ... ... ... Ps. xxxviii. 20. 
 
 M II ... Ps. Ixix. 5. 
 
 II II ... ... ... ... Ps. cix. 3. 
 
 II xix. 24, Ps. xxii. 19. 
 
 II II ... ... ... ... Ps. xxi. 
 
 II xix. 36, Exod. xii. 46. 
 
 II II Ps. xxxiv. 21. 
 
 II II ... ... ... ... Ps. xxxiii. 
 
 II xix. 37, ... Zech. xii. 10. 
 
 ACTSi. 20fp, Ps. Ixix. 26. 
 
 II i. 20 fp, Ps. Ixviii. 
 
 II i. 20 1p, Ps. cix. 8. 
 
 II II ... ... ... ... Ps. eviii. 
 
 „ ii. 17-21, Joel iii. 1-5. 
 
 II M Joel ii. 28-32. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 168 
 
 Xew Testament. 
 Acts ii. 25-28, 
 
 M 11 
 
 ,. ii. 34, 35, 
 
 II iii. 
 
 22, 23, 
 
 (1 iii. 
 
 25, 
 
 .1 iv. 
 
 11, 
 
 II II 
 
 II iv. 
 
 25, 26, 
 
 II vii. 
 
 3, 
 
 II vii. 
 
 6,7, 
 
 II vii. 
 
 26, 28, 
 
 ,1 vii. 
 
 32, 
 
 II vii. 
 
 33, 34, 
 
 II vii. 
 
 35, 
 
 II vii. 
 
 37, 
 
 ,1 vii. 
 
 40, 
 
 II vii. 
 
 42, 43, 
 
 II vii. 
 
 49, 50, 
 
 II viii 
 
 . 32, 33, 
 
 II xiii 
 
 22, 
 
 II 1 
 
 
 II xiii 
 
 33, 
 
 II xiii 
 
 34, 
 
 11 xiii 
 
 35, 
 
 II 1 
 
 
 ;i xiii 
 
 41, 
 
 11 xiii 
 
 47, 
 
 II XV. 
 
 16, 17, 
 
 II xxiii. 5, 
 
 .1 xxviii. 26, 2 
 
 3MANS i 
 
 .17, 
 
 ,1 ii. 24, 
 
 II iii. 4 fp, 
 
 11 II 
 
 II iii. 4 Ip, 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 
 II iii. 10, 
 
 Old Testament. 
 Ps. xvi. 8-11. 
 Ps. XV. 
 Ps. ex. 1. 
 Ps. cix. 
 
 Deut. xviii. 15-19. 
 Gen. xxii. 18. 
 Ps. cxviii. 22. 
 Ps. cxvii. 
 Ps. ii. 1, 2. 
 Gen. xii. 1. 
 Gen. XV. 13, 14. 
 Exod. iii. 13, 14. 
 Exod. iii. 6. 
 Exod. iii. 5-10. 
 Exod. ii. 14. 
 Deut. xviii. 15. 
 Exod. xxxii. 1, 23. 
 Amos V. 25-27. 
 Isa. Ixvi. 1, 2. 
 Isa. liii. 7, 8. 
 1 Sam. xiii. 14. 
 Ps. Ixxxix. 21. 
 Ps. Ixxxviii. 
 Ps. ii. 7. 
 Isa. Iv. 3. 
 Ps. xvi. 10. 
 Ps. cxv. 
 Hab. i. 5. 
 Isa. xlix. 6. 
 Amos ix. 11, 12. 
 Exod. xxii. 27. 
 Exod. xxii. 28. 
 Isa. vi. 9, 10. 
 
 Hab. ii. 4. 
 Isa. Hi. 5. 
 Ps. cxvi. n. 
 Ps. cxv. 
 Ps. Ii. 6. 
 Ps. 1. 
 Eccles. vii. 20. 
 
164 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 New Testament. 
 KOMANS iii. 11, 12, 
 
 iii. 13 fp, 
 iii. 13 Ip, 
 
 iii. 14, 
 
 iii. 
 
 15, 17, 
 
 iii. 
 
 18, 
 
 iv. 
 
 3, 
 
 iv. 
 
 7,8, 
 
 iv. 
 
 17, 
 
 iv. 
 
 18, 
 
 vii 
 
 ■ "7, 
 
 viii. 36, 
 
 II 
 ix. 7, 
 ix. 9, 
 ix. 12, 
 ix. 13, 
 ix. 15, 
 ix. 17, 
 ix. 25, 
 
 ix. 26, 
 
 ix. 27, 
 
 28 
 
 ix. 29, 
 
 
 ix. 33, 
 
 
 11 
 X. 5, 
 
 
 X. 6-8, 
 
 
 X. 11, 
 
 
 X. 13, 
 
 
 x! 15, 
 
 
 X. 16, 
 
 
 X. 18, 
 
 
 Old Testament. 
 Ps. xiv. 2, 3. 
 Pg. xiii. 
 Ps. v. 10. 
 Ps. cxl. 4. 
 Ps. cxxxix. 
 Ps. x. 7. 
 Ps. ix. 28. 
 Isa. lix. 7-, 8. 
 Ps. xxxvi. 2. 
 
 Ps. XXXV. 
 
 Gen. XV, 6. 
 Vs. xxxii. 1, 2. 
 Ps, xxxi. 
 Gen. xvii. 5. 
 Gen. XV. 5. 
 Exod, XX. 17. 
 Deut. V. 21, 
 Ps. xliv. 23, 
 Ps, xliii. 
 Gen, xxi. 12. 
 Gen. xviii. 10. 
 Gen. XXV. 23. 
 Mai. i, 2, 3. 
 Exod. xxxiii. 19. 
 Exod. ix, 16, 
 Hos. ii, 25. 
 Hos. ii. 23. 
 Hos. ii. 1, 
 Hos, i, 10. 
 Isa, X. 22, 23. 
 Isa. i. 9, 
 Isa, viii, 14. 
 Isa, xxviii. 16. 
 Lev. xviii. 5. 
 Deut. XXX. 12-14. 
 Isa. xxviii, 16. 
 Joel iii. 5. 
 Joel ii. 32. 
 Isa. Hi. 7. 
 Isa. liii. 1. 
 Ps. xix, 5, 
 
INDEX. 
 
 165 
 
 New Testament. 
 Romans x. 18, 
 X. 19, 
 X 20, 21, 
 xi. 3, 
 xi. 4, 
 xi. 8, 
 
 II 
 xi. 9, 10, 
 
 II 
 xi. 26, 27, 
 xi. 27, 
 xi. 34, 
 xii. 19, 
 xii. 20, 
 xiii. 9 fp, 
 
 II 
 xiii. 9 Ip, 
 xiv, 11, 
 XV. 3, 
 
 XV. 10, 
 
 XV. 11, 
 
 XV. 12, 
 XV. 21, 
 
 1 COKINTHIANS i. 19, 
 
 i. 31, 
 
 ii. 9, 
 
 II 
 ii. 16, 
 iii. 19, 
 iii. 20, 
 iii. 20, 
 vi. 16, 
 ix. 9, 
 X. 7, 
 X. 20, 
 
 Old Testament. 
 Ps. xviii. 
 Deut. xxxii. 21. 
 Isa. Ixv. 1, 2. 
 1 Kings xix. 14. 
 1 Kings xix. 18. 
 Deut. xxix. 3. 
 Isa. xxix. 10. 
 Ps. Ixix. 23, 24. 
 Ps. Ixviii. 
 Isa. lix. 20, 21. 
 Isa. xxvii. 9. 
 Isa. xl. 13. 
 Deut. xxxii. 35. 
 Prov. XXV. 21, 22. 
 Exod. XX. 13, 17. 
 Deut. V. 17-21. 
 Lev. xix. 18. 
 Isa. xlv. 23. 
 Ps. Ixix. 10. 
 Ps. Ixviii. 
 Ps. xviii. 50. 
 Ps. xvii. 
 Deut. xxxii. 43. 
 Ps. cxvii. 1. 
 Ps. cxvi. 
 Isa. xi. 10. 
 Isa. Iii. 15. 
 
 Isa. xxix. 14. 
 Jer. ix. 23. 
 Jer. ix. 24. 
 Isa. Ixiv. 3. 
 Isa. Ixiv. 4. 
 Isa. xl. 13. 
 Job V. 13. 
 Ps. xciv. 11. 
 Ps. xciii. 
 Gen. ii. 24. 
 Deut. XXV. 4. 
 Exod. xxxii. 6. 
 Deut. xxxii. 17. 
 
166 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 New Testament. 
 
 1 Corinthians x. 26, 
 
 ,, 
 
 X. 28, 
 
 „ 
 
 xiv. 21, 
 
 " 
 
 XV. 25, 
 
 I 
 
 II 
 XV. 27, 
 
 II 
 
 XV. 32, 
 
 11 
 
 XV. 45, 
 
 II 
 
 XV. 54, 
 
 II 
 
 XV. 55, 
 
 Old Testament. 
 
 Ps, xxiv. 1. 
 
 Ps. xxxiii. 
 
 Isa. xxviii. 11, 12. 
 
 Ps. ex. 1. 
 
 Ps. cix. 
 
 Ps. viii. 7. 
 
 Isa. xxii. 13. 
 
 Gen. ii. 7. 
 
 Isa. XXV. 8. 
 
 Hos. xiii. 4. 
 
 2 COEINTHIANS iv. 13, 
 
 vi. 
 
 2, 
 
 vi. 
 
 16, 
 
 vi. 
 
 17, 
 
 vi. 
 
 18, 
 
 viii, 15; 
 
 ix. 
 
 7. 
 
 ix. 9, 
 
 xiii. 1, 
 
 Ps. cxvi. 10. 
 Ps. cxv. 1. 
 Isa. xlix. 8. 
 Lev. xxvi. 11, 12. 
 Ezek. xxxvii. 27. 
 Isa. Iii. 11, 12. 
 2 Sam. vii. 8-14. 
 Exod. xvi. 18. 
 Prov. xxii. 9. 
 Prov. xxii. 8. 
 Ps. cxii. 9. 
 Ps. cxi. 
 Deut. xix. 15. 
 
 Galatians 
 
 ; iii. 6, 
 
 •• 
 
 iii. 8, 
 
 II 
 II 
 
 iii. 10, 
 
 II 
 
 iii. 11, 
 
 II 
 
 iii. 12, 
 
 II 
 
 iii. 13, 
 
 „ 
 
 iii. 16, 
 
 „ 
 
 iv. 27, 
 
 II 
 
 iv. 30, 
 
 II 
 
 V. 14, 
 
 Ephesians iv. 8, 
 
 II 
 
 II 
 V. 14, 
 
 II 
 
 V. 31, 
 
 Gen. XV. 6. 
 Gen. xii. 3. 
 Gen, xviii, 18, 
 Deut. xxvii. 26. 
 Hab. ii. 4. 
 Lev, xviii, 5. 
 Deut. xxi. 23, 
 Gen, xxii, 18. 
 Isa, liv. 1, 
 Gen, xxi. 10. 
 Lev. xix. 18. 
 Ps. Ixviii. 19. 
 Ps. Ixvii. 
 Isa. Ix. 1, 19,20. 
 Gen. ii, 24. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 167 
 
 New Testament. 
 Ephesians vi. 2, 3, 
 
 Old Testament. 
 Exod. XX. 12. 
 Deut. V. 16. 
 
 1 Timothy v. 18 fp, 
 II V. 18 Ip, 
 
 2 Timothy ii. 19, .. 
 
 Hebrews i. 5 fp, .. 
 i. 5 Ip, .. 
 i. 6, 
 
 II 
 i. 7, 
 
 II 
 i. 8, 9, . 
 
 II 
 i. 10, 12, 
 
 II 
 i. 13, 
 
 ii. 6-8, .. 
 ii. 12, . 
 
 II 
 ii. 13 fp, 
 ii. 13 Ip, 
 iii. 7-11, 
 
 iii. 15, . 
 
 iv 
 
 4, 
 
 
 iv 
 
 7, 
 II 
 
 
 V. 
 
 5, 
 
 
 V. 
 
 6, 
 
 
 V. 
 
 6, 
 
 
 vi 
 
 .14, 
 
 
 vii. 17, 
 
 21 
 
 Deut. XXV. 4. 
 Lev. xix. 13. 
 Deut. XXV. 14, 15. 
 
 Numb. xvi. 5. 
 
 Ps. ii. 7. 
 2 Sam. vii. 14. 
 Ps. xcvii. 7. 
 Ps. xcvi. 
 Ps. civ. 4. 
 Ps. ciii. 
 Ps. xlv. 7, 8. 
 Ps. xliv. 
 Ps. cii. 26-28. 
 Ps. ci. 
 Ps. ex, 1. 
 Ps. cix. 
 Ps. viii. 5-7. 
 Ps. xxii. 23. 
 Ps. xxi. 
 Isa. viii. 17. 
 Isa. viii. 18. 
 Ps. xcv. 7-11. 
 Ps. xeiv. 8-11. 
 Ps. xcv. 7, 8. 
 Ps. xciv. 8. 
 Ps. xcv. 11. 
 Ps. xciv. 
 Gen. ii. 2. 
 Ps. xcv. 7, 8. 
 Ps. xciv. 8. 
 Ps. ii. 7. 
 Ps. ex. 4. 
 Ps. cix. 
 Gen. xxii. 17. 
 Ps. ex. 4. 
 Ps. cix. 
 
168 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 New Testament. 
 
 Hebrews viii. 5, . 
 viii. 8-12, 
 
 ix. 20, 
 
 X. 5-7, 
 
 X. 16, 17 
 
 II 
 X. 30, 
 
 X. 37, 38 
 xi. 18, 
 xi. 21, 
 xii. 5, 6, , 
 xii. 20, 
 xii. 21, 
 xii. 26, 
 xiii. 5, 
 
 11 
 xiii. 6, 
 
 James ii. 8, 
 
 
 M ii. 11, 
 
 
 II 11 
 
 
 II II 
 
 
 1, ii. 23, 
 
 
 II iv. 5, 
 II II 
 
 
 II iv. 6, 
 
 
 ,1 V. 20, 
 
 
 1 Peter i. 16, 
 
 
 II i. 24, 
 
 25, 
 
 II ii. 6, 
 
 
 II ii. 7, 
 
 
 II II 
 ii. 9, 
 
 
 1, ii. 22 
 
 
 Old Testament. 
 Exod. 25, 40. 
 Jer. xxxi. 31-34. 
 Jer. xxxviii. 31-34. 
 Exod. xxiv. 8. 
 Ps. xl. 7-9. 
 Ps. xxxix. 
 Jer. xxxi. 33, 34. 
 Jer. xxxviii. 
 Deut. xxxii. 35, 36 
 Ps. cxxxv. 14. 
 Ps. cxxxiv. 
 Hab. ii. 3, 4. 
 Gen. xxi. 12. 
 Gen. xlvii. 31. 
 Prov. iii. 11, 12. 
 Exod. xix. 12, 13. 
 Deut. ix. 19. 
 Hag. ii. 6. 
 Deut. xxxi. 6, 8. 
 Josh. i. 5. 
 Ps. cxviii, 6. 
 Ps. cxvii. 
 
 Lev. xix. 18. 
 Exod. XX. 13, 14. 
 Exod. XX. 13, 15. 
 Deut. V. 17, 18. 
 Gen. XV. 6. 
 Prov. xxi. 10. 
 Ezek. xxiii. 25. 
 Numb. xi. 29. 
 Prov. iii. 34. 
 Prov. X. 12. 
 
 Lev. xi. 44. 
 Isa. xl. 6-8. 
 Isa, XX viii. 16. 
 Ps. cxviii. 22. 
 Ps. cxvii. 
 Exod. xix. 6. 
 Isa. liii. 9. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 169 
 
 New Testament. 
 
 1 Peter ii. 24 fp, 
 ii. 24 Ip, 
 iii. 10-12, 
 
 II 
 iii. 14, 15, 
 iv. 8, 
 
 2 Peter ii. 22 fp, 
 Eevelation ii. 27, 
 
 Old Testament. 
 
 Isa. liii. 4, 11, 12. 
 
 Isa. liii. 5. 
 
 Ps. xxxiv. 13-17. 
 
 Ps. xxxiii. 
 
 Isa. viii. 12, 13. 
 
 Prov. X. 12. 
 
 Prov. XX vi. 11. 
 
 Ps. ii. 9. 
 
 LORIMER AND GILLIES, PRINTERS, CLYDE STREET, EDINBURGH. 
 
wo RKS 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH, 
 
 In crown 8ro, price is., 
 
 AIDS TO THE STUDY 
 
 OF 
 
 GERMAN THEOLOGY. 
 
 By Rev. GEORGE MATHESON, M.A., B.D., 
 
 MINISTER OF INNELLAN. 
 
 1. Natural Theology of Kant. 2. Kant's Interpretation of the Facts of 
 Scripture. 3. Transition of Schleiermacher. 4. Thought-Transla- 
 tion of the System of Schleiermacher. 5. Diversities in his School. 
 6. Fichte. 7. Introduction to the Theology of Hegel and Schelling. 
 8. Trinity of Hegel and Schelling. 9. Evolution of Hegelian 
 Trinity in Time. 10. And in the History of the Church. 11. The 
 Eic^ht and Left. 12. Mythical Theory of Strauss. 13. Breaking 
 up^'of the Mythical Theory— School of Tubingen. 14. Signs of a 
 Return to the Old Rationalism. 15. " The Old Faith and the New." 
 16. Parallel between the History of English and German Theology. 
 " The writer of this treatise has formed to himself singularly clear conceptions, 
 and he possesses in a remarkable degree the faculty of lucid exposition. . 
 Besides serving as an admirable introduction to the study of German theology, this 
 little volume will be valuable to the general reader, as furnishing an intelligible 
 and interesting account of the principal phases which theological speculation has 
 
 assumed in Germany in modern iivae^."— Scotsman. . ^ ^ ^. ^ , , . . 
 
 " This little volume is a valuable and instructive introduction to a department ot 
 theological literature that every student is now compelled to examine. —Bntisli 
 Quarterly Review. 
 
 Just published, in demy Sro, price 10s. M., 
 
 DELIVERY AND DEVELOPMENT 
 
 OF 
 
 CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. 
 
 mit gM} ^txm ai i\t Cwnnmgfeam lectures. 
 By ROBERT RAINY, D.D., 
 
 PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY AND CHURCH HISTORY, NEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH. 
 
 " We gladly acknowledge their high excellence and the extensive learning which 
 they aU display. They are able to the last degree ; and the author has in an unusual 
 measure the power of acute and brilliant generalisation. He handles his array of 
 multifarious facts with ease and elegance ; and we must needs acknowledge (and we 
 do it willingly) that the Lectures are a real contribution to the settlement ot the 
 vast and obscure question with which they are occupied."— Literary Churchman. 
 
Works p2LblisIicd by 
 
 Just 2^iiblishcd, in demy 8vo, ^^(i pages, price 10s. 6d., 
 
 MODERN DOUBT AND CHRISTIAN BELIEF. 
 
 ^ 3mt$ of gipologtlk ^ctturcs abbrc^stb to ^mmBt 
 ^tthxB after S^rwt^. 
 
 By THEODORE CHRISTLIEB, D.D., 
 
 UNIVERSITY PREACHER AND PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT BONN. 
 
 Translated, with the Author's sanction, chiefly by the Rev. H. U. Weit- 
 BRECHT, Ph.D., and Edited by the Rev. T. L, Kingsbury, M.A., 
 Vicar of Easton Royal, and Rural Dean. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 FIRST LECTURE. —The Existing Breach between Modern Culture 
 AND Christianity. — Introduction. — I. Causes of the Breach. II. Present 
 Extent of the Breach. III. Can the Breach be filled uj)? 
 
 SECOND LECTURE.— Reason and Revelation.— Whence do we 
 derive our knowledge of God ? — I. Natural Theology, or the Knowledge of 
 God derived from Nature and Reason ? II. Supernatural Theology, or the 
 Knowledge of God derived from Revelation. III. Relation between 
 Revealed Religion and Natural Theology. 
 
 THIRD LECTURE.— Modern Non-Biblical Conceptions of God.— 
 Present Condition of the Controversy resi^ecting the Idea of God. — 
 I. Atheism. II. Materialism. III. Pantheism. IV. Deism and Rational- 
 ism. 
 
 FOURTH LECTURE. —Theology of Scripture and of the Church. — 
 I. Biblical Theism. II. Trinitarian Conception of the Divine Nature. 
 
 FIFTH LECTURE.— The Modern Negation of Miracles.— Miracles 
 the greatest stumbling-block to the spirit of our age — The consequences 
 of their Negation — Annihilation of all Religions, and of the Moral Person- 
 ality of Man — Fundamental importance of the question. — I. Nature and 
 Possibility of Miracles. II. Necessity and Historical Manifestations of the 
 Miraculous. III. Are Miraculous Manifestations still vouchsafed? 
 
 SIXTH LECTURE.— Modern Anti-MiRxVculous Accounts of the 
 Life of Christ. — The Christological Problem, the great Theological 
 question of the present day— Variety in the Rationalistic methods of 
 treating the Life of Christ — All combine in the denial of the Miraculous- 
 Rationalism and Mythicism. — I. Old Rationalistic Accou.nts of -the Life of 
 Christ. II. Schenkel's '" Sketch of the Cliaracter of Christ." III. Strauss' 
 "Life of Christ." IV. Renan's "Vie de Jesus." 
 
 SEVENTH LECTURE.— Modern Denials of the Resurrection.— 
 I. Anti-Miraculous Theories. II. The Historical Testimonies. III. Col- 
 lapse of the "Visionary HyiDothesis." 
 
 EIGHTH LECTURE.— The Modern Critical Theory of Primitive 
 Christianity. — The Tubingen School and its Founder, F. C. Baur. — 
 I. The Principles of the Tiibingen School. II. Critique and Refutation 
 of this Theory. 
 
T. and T. Clark, Edinbn7^gh. 
 
 DR. LUTHARDTS NEW WORK. 
 
 Just published, in demy 8vo, iwlce 9s., 
 
 ST. JOHN THE AUTHOR OF THE 
 FOURTH GOSPEL. 
 
 By Professor C. E. LUTHARBT, 
 
 AUTHOR OF "fundamental TRUTHS OF CHRISTIANITl," ETC. 
 
 By C. E. GKEGORY, Leipzig. 
 
 Chap. I. Tradition, II. St. John's Authorship disputed. III. The 
 Testimony of the Church. IV. Testimony outside of the Church. 
 V. St. John's Eesidence at Ephesus. VI. The Passover Contro- 
 versy. VII. The Testimony of the Gospel itself. VIII. St. John's 
 Gospel and the Second Century. IX. St. John's Gospel and the 
 Synoptists. X. St. John's Gospel and the Revelation. XI. St. 
 John's Christology psychologically possible. Appendix. — Litera- 
 ture of the disputed Origin of the Fourth Gospel, from 1792 to the 
 present, 
 
 " A jvork which must be regarded as a very able and almost exhaustive summary 
 of the arguments in favour of the catholic tradition on this subject — exhaustive, 
 that is to say, in the present state of the question, and until new evidence shall 
 have been discovered. Nothing can be more lucid or effective than the author's 
 method of arranging and presenting his arguments."— Scotsman. 
 
 " There are few works in the later theological literature which contain, in such a 
 confined space, such wealth of sober theological knowledge, and such an invulner- 
 able phalanx of objective apologetical criticism."— Pro/essor Guericke. 
 
 " In. this work, from the pen of one of the greatest divines of Germany, the 
 facts are made to speak for themselves, and the result is a complete refutation of 
 the Anti-Johannine school of criticism, and a correspondingly complete establish- 
 ment of the truth on which the unanimous testimony of the ancient Church is 
 shown to rest. . . . Such a work as this was much needed."— -Dicfci)iso?i's QMarieWy. 
 
Works pjtbllshed by 
 
 Just published, in demy ^vo, price 7s. 6d., 
 THE 
 
 MIRACLES OF OUR LORD 
 
 IN RELATION TO MODERN CRITICISM. 
 
 BY 
 
 F. L. STEINMEYER, D.D., 
 
 ORDINARY PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF BERLIN. 
 
 TRANSLATED, AVITH THE PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR, FROM 
 THE GERMAN BY 
 
 L. A. WHEATLEY. 
 
 Introduction. — The Problem. 2. Method of Solving it. 3. Value of 
 the Solution. Jesus as a Worker of Miracles. 
 
 First Group. — Miracles considered as Signs of the Kingdom of Heaven. 
 
 Second Group. — Miracles considered as SymlDols. 
 
 Third Group. — Miracles as Witnesses of the Power of the Kingdom of 
 Heaven. 
 
 Fourth Group. — Miracles as Proi3hecies. 
 
 " In this exegesis Dr. Steinmeyer displays a very high degree of critical acumen 
 and a rare subtlety and originality of thought."— 5coisnia?i. 
 
 " We have read this excellent translation of Professor Steinmeyer's famous woi'k 
 on Miracles with great satisfaction. It is a careful and masterly reply to Strauss — 
 to his attack on the historical veracity of the Gospels and on the reality of Biblical 
 Miracles. It is therefore, by anticipation, a reply to ' Supernatural Religion. ' 
 . . . We most cordially recommend the volume to young theological students. " — 
 Watchman. 
 
 " This work will be found of great and lasting service in the cause of truth 
 against the sceptical tendencies of the present eager age. . . . The whole argument 
 is bold, masterly, and convincing ; and the essay will take its place among the 
 best recent volumes of Christian evidence." — Standard. 
 
T. and T. Clai'k, Edind2C7^gh. 
 
 Jmt puhUshed, Fourth Edition, price 65., 
 
 THE TRIPARTITE NATURE OF MAN, 
 
 SPIRIT, SOUL, AND BODY, 
 
 Applied to Illustrate and Explain the Doctrines of Original Sin, the 
 New Birth, the Disembodied State, and the Spiritual Body. 
 
 By Rev. J. B. HEARD, M.A. 
 
 WITH AN APPENDIX ON THE FATHERHOOD OF GOD. 
 
 " The author has got a striking and consistent theory. Whether agreeing or dis- 
 agreeing with that theory, it is a book which any student of the Bible may read 
 with pleasure. " — Guardian. 
 
 ' ' A valuable and interesting treatise on the ' Tripartite Nature of Man/ the 
 first English theological work of any pretensions which has dealt with the subject 
 in a methodical and systematic manner. " — Dean of Norwich. 
 
 " It is with considerable satisfaction we note the issue of a fourth edition of this 
 most original and valuable treatise, which, without exaggeration, may be described 
 as one of the ablest contributions to oiir theological literature which has been 
 published of late jea,is."— English Indcxicndcnt. 
 
 In croicn Siv, price 5s., 
 
 VOICES OF THE PROPHETS. 
 
 Twelve Lectures Preached in the Chapel of Lincoln's Inn, in the 
 Years 1870-74, on the Foundation of Bishop Warburton, 
 
 By ED^WARD HAMILTON GIFFORD, D.D. 
 
 " The author has long ago attained high position as a scholar, a man of science, 
 and a theologian, and in the volume before us he offers his readers some of the 
 best fruits of these varied accomplishments." — Standard. 
 
 "This volume deals with the subject of prophecy in a clear and forcible manner. 
 The objections to a belief in prophetic utterance are ably met, and much light is 
 thrown upon the matter, which has here been dealt with in a scholarly and 
 Cliristian spirit." — Rock. 
 
Works piLblished by T. and T. Clark, 
 
 DR. MURPHY'S NEW WORK. 
 
 Just lyubllshed, in demy Svo, 700 pages, p-ice 15s., 
 A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY 
 
 ON THE 
 
 BOOK OF PSALMS, 
 
 SHitlj a U^fo translation. 
 By JAMES G. MUEPELY, LL.D., T.C.D., 
 
 AUTHOR OF COMMENTARIES ON THE BOOKS OF GENESIS, EXODUS, ETC. 
 
 •' Every Bible student will look upon this volume with interest, and should give 
 warm thanks to the learned author for the care and erudition which have been 
 bestowed upon it. . . . The introductory chapters are very valuable, referring both 
 to the nature of the Psalms, their themes, their authors, and their arrangements. 
 The exegesis is admirable, and the spirit is devout." — Methodist Recorder. 
 
 Just published, in Tiuo Vols. 8fo, price 21s., 
 
 A COMMENTARY 
 
 ON THE 
 
 GOSPEL OF ST. LTJKE. 
 
 By F. GODET, 
 
 DOCTOR AND PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY, NEUCHATEL. 
 
 franslai^ir from tl^z ^ttoxi)i cfr^ntlj ^^itxom 
 
 " We are indebted to the publishers for an English translation of the admirable 
 work which stands at the head of this review. . . . It is a work of great ability, 
 learning, and research." — Christian Observer. 
 
 " The whole book is very valuable, and is the work of a critic, scholar, and divine 
 of no ordinary attainments, who has devoted to it wonderful conscientiousness and 
 diligent care." — Union Review. 
 
n 
 
Date Due 1 
 
 ^ ACUL 17 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .^mm^m^'' 
 
 ,. 
 
 
 
 ^iLL^f^^^ffd^m 
 
 f' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 45M*****t|, 
 
 ^^^8^ 
 
 
 
 J^^mmmmL^^ 
 
 
 
 *''"***^*«mi. 
 
 
 
 
 IM*- 
 
 1 
 
 
 , 
 
 ii^l^l^^. 
 
 
 
 ^.^^^'MS^^^' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 f 
 
 
 
 
''^^^^'^'^^^^^'^' --->^.^-^-vv ^^.-^ 
 
 ^ 1 
 
 r^ 
 
 
 . '"^^'"ent quotation 
 
 Pnnc, 
 
 5»Ml.'r°'°9'"'Sern, 
 
 '.nary-Speer 
 
 Library 
 
 1^01200080 Se