stumbling, and a rock of offence. They DISBELIEVING THE WORD (tw doyw anɛiderres), that is, the word of the Gospel, which contains this testimony, stumble at this corner-stone, whereunto they were appointed: But YE (believers, who rest your salvation on it), are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a peculiar people, &c. &c. Hence, it is evident that the meaning of 1 Pet. ii. 8. is not, that God had ordained them to disobedience (for in that case their obedience would have been impossible, and their disobedience would have been no sin): but that God, the righteous judge of all the earth, had appointed or decreed, that destruction and eternal perdition should be the punishment of such disbelieving persons, who wilfully rejected all the evidences that Jesus Christ was the Messiah, the Saviour of the world. The mode of pointing above adopted, is that proposed by Drs. John Taylor, Doddridge, and Macknight, and recognised by Griesbach in his critical edition of the Greek Testament, and is manifestly required by the

context.

3. A verse or passage must not be connected with a remote context, unless the latter agree better with it than a nearer context.

Thus Rom. ii. 16. although it makes a good sense if connected with the preceding verse, makes a much better when joined with verse 12. (the intermediate verses being read parenthetically as in the authorised version); and this shows it to be the true and proper context.

4. Examine whether the writer continues his discourse, lest we suppose him to make a transition to another argument, when in fact he is prosecuting the same topic.

Rom. v. 12. will furnish an illustration of this remark. From that verse to the end of the chapter Saint Paul produces a strong argument to prove, that as all men stood in need of the grace of God in Christ to redeem them from their sins, so this grace has been afforded equally to all, whether Jews or Gentiles. To perceive the full force, therefore, of the apostle's conclusion, we must read the continuation of his argument from verse 12. to the close of the chapter.

5. The parentheses which occur in the sacred writings should be particularly regarded: but no parenthesis should be interposed without sufficient reason.

Parentheses, being contrary to the genius and structure of the Hebrew language, are, comparatively, of rare occurrence in the Old Testament.

The prophetic writings indeed contain interruptions and interlocutions, particularly those of Jeremiah: but we have an example of a real parenthesis in Zech. vii. 7. The Jewish captives had sent to inquire of the prophet, whether their fasting should be continued on account of the burning of the temple, and the assassination of Gedaliah: after a considerable digression, but closely connected with the question proposed, the prophet at length replies, in ch. viii. 19. that the season formerly devoted to fasting should soon be spent in joy and gladness. The intermediate verses, therefore, from ch. vii. 4. to ch. viii. 17. are obviously parenthetical, though not marked as such in any of the modern versions which we have had an opportunity to examine.

In the New Testament, however, parentheses are frequent, especially in the writings of Saint Paul; who, after making numerous digressions, (all of them appropriate to, and illustrative of, his main subject), returns to the topic which he had begun to discuss.

Thus in Rom. ii. verses 13, 14, and 15. are obviously parenthetical, because, as above remarked, the context evidently requires verses 12. and 16. to be read together. In Rom. v. verses 12. 18, 19. evidently form one continued sentence; and all the intermediate verses are undoubtedly to be read as a parenthesis, though they are not marked as such in the authorised translation. I Cor. viii. 1. begin. ning with the words, Knowledge puffeth up, &c. to the end of the first clause in verse iv. is in like manner parenthetical. The connection therefore of the first with the fourth verse is this: - Now, as touching things offered unto idols, we

voce, to whom we are chiefly indebted for this note,) considers aradav as synonymous with απιςειν. Απείθειν δοτική απιςειν.

For examples, in which the derivative substantive arudua means disbelief, or contempt of the Christian doctrine, see Schleusner's Lexicon, sub voce.

know that we have all knowledge. We know that an idol is nothing, &c. 1 Cor. x. 29. latter clause, and verse 30., are parenthetical; as also are 2 Cor. ix. 9, 10. which are so printed in our version. A still more signal instance of parenthesis occurs in Eph. iii. where the first and fourteenth verses are connected, the twelve intermediate verses (2 to 13) being parenthetical; as also is 1 Tim. i. verses 3. to 17. inclusive. "In this passage," says Professor Franck, "taking occasion from the false teachers, Saint Paul speaks of the law according to the Gospel committed unto him; and having given vent to the feelings of his heart, he returns, in verse 18. to the scope he had in view in the third verse, where he intimates, by using the comparative particle, as (xadws), that the completion of the sense was to be expected in the subsequent verses. The whole of the discourse connects thus: -"As I besought thee to charge some that they teach no other doctrine, but seek after godly edifying; and that the end of the commandment is love out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned, &c.: so now I commit the same charge unto thee,—that thou mayest hold faith and a good conscience," &c.1

Another instance of the parenthesis we have in Phil. i. 27. to ch. ii. 16. inclusive: in which the apostle discusses a subject, the proposition of which is contained in ch. i. 27.; and afterwards, in ch. ii. 17. he returns to the topic which he had been treating in the preceding chapter. "In conformity with this statement we find (ch. i. 23.), that Saint Paul says, he is influenced by two things— a desire both of life and death; but he knows not which of these to choose Death is the most desirable to himself; but the welfare of the Philippians requires rather that he may be spared a little longer; and, having this confidence, he is assured that his life will be lengthened, and that he shall see them again in person. Then, after the interruption which his discourse had received, he proceeds (ch. ii. 17.) as follows: "Yea, and if I be offered upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I joy and rejoice with you all." The intervening charge is happily and judiciously introduced by the apostle, in order that the Philippians might not remit their ex ertions until his arrival, but contend for the faith of the Gospel with unity and humility; as will be evident to those who examine the point with attention and candour."2

In 2 Tim. i. 16-18. we have a beautiful example of the parenthesis. The apostle, acknowledging the intrepid affection of Onesiphorus-who, when timorous professors deserted him, stood by him and ministered to him- begins with a prayer for the good man's family; The Lord grant mercy to the house of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chains, but, being in Rome, very carefully sought me, and found me out. Saint Paul then stops his period, and suspends his sentence, to repeat his acknowledgments and prayer with renewed fervour and gratitude (The Lord grant that he may find mercy from the Lord in that day,) and in how many instances he ministered to me at Ephesus, you very well know. If we peruse the choicest authors of Greece and Rome, we shall scarcely find, among their many parentheses and transpositions of style, one expressed in so pathetic and lively a manner, nor for a reason so substantial and unexceptionable.3

Additional instances might be offered, to show the importance of attending to parentheses in the examination of the context; but the preceding will abundantly suffice for this purpose. The author has

1 Franck's Guide to the Scriptures, p. 188. By the judicious application of the parenthesis, that very difficult passage in Rom. viii. 19-21. has been rendered perfectly easy and intelligible by a learned divine of the present day. He proposes to translate and point it thus: — The earnest expectation of the creation waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God: (for the creation was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who subjected it) in hope that the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the sons of God. Those who are acquainted with the original language will, on consideration, easily perceive the justice of this translation. For the reasons on which it is founded, and for an able elucidation of the whole passage, see "Sermons preached at Welbeck Chapel by the Rev. Thomas White," sermon xx. pp. 363-380. Griesbach has printed in a parenthesis only the middle clause of verse 20. ("not willingly, but by reason of him who subjected it"); which certainly does not materially contribute to clear up the difficulty of this passage. 2 Franck's Guide, p. 189.

Backwall's Sacred Classics illustrated, vol. i. pp. 68, 69. 3d edit.

been led to discuss them at greater length than may seem to have been requisite, from the circumstance, that less attention appears to be given to the parenthesis, than to any other species of punctuation, in the different works on the study of the Scriptures in our language, that have fallen under his notice.

66

6. No explanation must be admitted, but that which suits the context. In direct violation of this self-evident canon of interpretation, the church of Rome expounds Matt. xviii. 17. if a man neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and as a publican, of the infallibility and final decisions of all doctrines by the (Roman) Catholic church. But what says the evangelist? Let us read the context. "If," says our Lord, “ thy brother shall trespass against thee, go, and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear, take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of one or two witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. (verse 15 -17.) That is, if a man have done you an injury, first admonish him privately of it; if that avail not, tell the church; - not the universal church dispersed through out the world, but that particular church to which you both belong. And if he will not reform upon such reproof, regard him no longer as a true Christian, but as a wicked man with whom you are to hold no religious communion, though, as a fellow man, you owe him earnest and persevering good-will and acts of kindness. Through the whole of this context there is not one word said about disobeying the determination of the Catholic church concerning a disputed doctrine, but about slighting the admonition of a particular church concerning known sin ; and particular churches are owned to be fallible.2

7. Where no connection is to be found with the preceding and subsequent parts of a book, none should be sought.

This observation applies solely to the Proverbs of Solomon, and chiefly to the tenth and following chapters, which form the second part of that book; and are composed of separate proverbs or distinct sentences, having no real or verbal connection whatever, though each individual maxim is pregnant with the most weighty instruction.3

From the preceding remarks it will be evident, that, although the comparison of the context will require both labour and unremitting diligence, yet these will be abundantly compensated by the increased degree of light which will thus be thrown upon otherwise obscure passages. The very elaborate treatise of Franzius, already referred to, will supply numerous examples of the Holy Scriptures which are rendered perfectly clear by the judicious consideration of the context.

1 Christopher Wollius published a very valuable treatise, De Parenthesi Sacrâ, at Leipsic, in 1726. 4to. The same subject has also been discussed in the following works, viz. Joh. Fr. Hirt, Dissertatio de Parenthesi, et generatim, et speciatim Sacrâ, 4to. Jena, 1745. Joh. Gottl. Lindneri, Commentationes Duæ de Parenthesibus Johanneis, 4to. 1765. Ad. Bened. Spitzneri Commentatio Philologica de Parenthesi, Libris Sacris V. et. N. T. accommodata. 8vo. Lipsia, 1773.

2 Whitby on Matt. xviii. 15-17. Bishop Porteus's Confutation of the Errors of the Church of Rome, pp. 13, 14.

3 J. B. Carpzov. Prim. Lin. Herm. pp. 36, 37. Bauer, Herm. Sacr. pp. 192-200. Pfeiffer, Herm. Sacr. c. x. (op. tom. ii. pp. 656-658.) Franzius, Pref. pp. 8—11. Tract. pp. 48-51. Morus, in Ernesti, tom. i. pp. 161-163. Viser, Herm. Nov. Sacr. pars iii. pp. 189-194. Wetstein et Semler de Interpret. Nov. Test. pp. 116 -120. Franckii Prælectiones Hermeneuticæ, pp. 61-94. Rambach, Inst. Herm. pp. 197-216. Jahnii Enchirid. Herm. Generalis, pp. 51-71. Chladenii Institutiones Exegetica, pp. 366-374. J. E. Pfeifferi Institutiones Herm. Sacr. pp. 464 -468. 507-534. Schæfer, Institutiones Scripturisticæ, pars ii. pp. 56-62.

SECTION VI.

ON HISTORICAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

Historical Circumstances defined.-I. Order.-II. Title.-III. Author.-IV. Date of the several Books of Scripture.-V. The Place where written. VI. Chronology.-VII. Occasion on which they were written.-VIII. Scope or Design.-IX. Analysis of each Book.-X. Biblical Antiquities, including, 1. The Political, Ecclesiastical, and Civil State; -2. Sacred and Profane History;-3. Geography;-4. Genealogy;-5. Natural History; and 6. Philosophical Sects and Learning of the Jews and other nations mentioned in the Scriptures.

HISTORICAL Circumstances are an important help to the correct understanding of the sacred writers. Under this term are comprised: -1. The Order; 2. The Title; 3. The Author; 4. The Date of each of the several books of Scripture; 5. The Place where it was written; 6. The Chronology or period of time embraced in the Scriptures generally, and of each book in particular; 7. The Occasion upon which the several books were written; 8. Their respective Scopes or designs; and 9. An Analysis of each book. 10. Biblical Antiquities, including the Geography, Genealogy, Sacred and Profane History, Natural History and Philosophy, Learning, and Philosophical Sects, Manners, Customs, and private Life of the Jews and other nations mentioned in the Bible. How important a knowledge of these particulars is, and how indispensably necessary to a correct interpretation of the inspired volume, we are now to consider.

I. A knowledge of the Order of the Different Books, especially such as are historical, will more readily assist the student to discover the order of the different histories and other matters discussed in them, as well as to trace the divine economy towards mankind, under the Mosaic and Christian dispensations.

This aid, if judiciously exercised, opens the way to a deep acquaintance with the meaning of an author; but, when it is neglected, many things necessarily remain obscure and ambiguous.

II. The Titles are further worthy of notice, because some of them announce the chief subject of the book

As Genesis, the generation of heaven and earth- Exodus, the departure of the Israelites from Egypt, &c.; while other titles denote the churches or particular persons for whose more immediate use some parts of the Scriptures were composed, and thus afford light to particular passages.

III. A knowledge of the Author of each book, together with the age in which he lived, his peculiar character, his sect or religion, and also his peculiar mode of thinking and style of writing, as well as the testimonies which his writings may contain concerning himself, is equally necessary to the historical interpretation of Scripture.

For instance, the consideration of the testimonies concerning himself, which appear in the second epistle of St. Peter, will show that he was the author of that book: for he expressly says, 1. That he

was present at the transfiguration of Jesus Christ (2 Pet. i. 18.); 2. That this was his second epistle to the believing Jews (iii. 1.); and that Paul was his beloved brother (iii. 15.); all which circumstances quadrate with Peter. In like manner, the coincidence of style and of peculiar forms of expression, which exist between the second and third epistles of Saint John, and his other writings, prove that those epistles were written by him. Thus we shall be able to account for one writer's omitting some topics, and expatiating upon others—as Saint Mark's silence concerning actions honourable to Saint Peter, and enlarging on his faults, he being the companion of the latter, and writing from his information. A comparison of the style of the epistle to the Hebrews, with that of Saint Paul's other epistles, will show that he was the author of that admirable composition.1

IV. Knowledge of the Time when each book was written sometimes shows the reason and propriety of things said in it.2

Upon this principle, the solemn adjuration in 1 Thess. v. 27. which at first sight may seem unnecessary, may be explained. It is probable that, from the beginning of the Christian dispensation, the Scriptures of the Old Testament were read in every assembly for divine worship. Saint Paul, knowing the plenitude of the apostolic commission, now demands the same respect to be paid to his writings which had been given to those of the antient prophets: this, therefore, is a proper direction to be inserted in the first epistle written by him; and the manner, in which it is given, suggests an argument that the first epistle to the Thessalonians was the earliest of his epistles. An accurate knowledge of the date of a book is further of peculiar importance in order to understand the prophecies and epistles; for not only will it illustrate several apparently obscure particulars in a prediction, but it will also enable us to ascertain and to confute a false application of such prediction. Grotius, in his preface to the second epistle to the Thessalonians, has endeavoured to prove that the Emperor Caligula was the man of sin, and Simon Magus the wicked one, foretold in the second chapter of that epistle; and has fruitlessly laboured to show that it was written A. D. 38; but its true date, a. D. 52, explodes that application, as also Dr. Hammond's hypothesis that Simon Magus was the man of sin, and the wicked one.

V. Not unfrequently, the consideration of the Place, 1. Where any book was written; or, 2. Where any thing was said or done, will materially facilitate its historical interpretation, especially if regard be had, 3. To the nature of the place, and the customs which obtained there.

1. For instance, it is evident that St. Paul's second epistle to the Thessalonians was written, shortly after the first, at Corinth, and not at Athens, as its subscription would import, from this circumstance, viz. that Timothy and Silvanus or Silas, who joined him in his first letter, were still with him, and joined him in the second. (Compare 2 Thess. i. 1. with 1 Thess. iii. 6. and Acts xviii. 1-5.) And as in

1 This topic has been ably proved by Braunius, in his Commentarius in Epistolam ad Hebræos, pp. 10-21.; by Pritius, in his Introductio in Novum Testamentum, cap. iv. § iii. pp. 47, 48., and by Langius in his Commentatio de Vita et Epistolis Pauli, p. 157. Le Clerc has some pertinent remarks on the same subject, in his Ars Critica, pars iii. sect. ii. cap. vi. p. 372.

2 Rambach, Inst. Herm. Sacr. p. 116.