J. E. C. Schmidt Bibl. für Kritik und Exeg. des N. Test. und älteste Christengesch. I. Band, 1787, II, B. Beyträge zur histor. Interpretation des N. Test. aus den damals herrschenden Zeitbegriffen. von Otmar dem zweyten, Henke Neues Mag. III, 201. ss. IV. 23. ss. On the books whence the opinions, and forms of expression, prevalent during the age in which our Saviour appeared, and in that part of the world, may be most advantageously learned-see, Gurlitt Spec. II. Animadverss. in auct. vett. p. 22. e. The method adopted by the Jewish doctors, in their instructions. Gu. Chr. G. Weise diss. de more domini acceptos a magistris Judd. loquendi ac disserendi modos sapienter emendandi, Vit. 1792, and in the Commentt. Theoll. edd. a Velthusen, &c. V, p. 117. ss. f. The natural history of Palestine and the adjacent countries. J. W. Drasdo Pr. de justa rerum naturæ scientia sanctioris disciplinæ cultoribus utilissima, Vit. 1788. A. Fr. Michaelis d. de studio hist. nat. præstantissimo theol. tractandæ discendæque adjumento. Vit. 1790. Cph. Fr. Jacobi d. de physica, sacrorum librorum interpretationis administra, Hal. 1746. 4. g. Those circumstances of a historical character, which relate to the book we wish to examine. As for example; its author; the person who is introduced as speaking (Rom. VII); what his character and circumstances were, and what his state of mind, as exhibited in the passage under consideration; with what design, upon what occasion, at what time, in what place, and with what feelings the author wrote; what person he sustained, his own, or that of others; (Rom. VII, 7. ss.) to whom he wrote or spake. As to this last point, we must not place much confidence in the subscriptions at the close of many of the epistles, but must appeal to better authority, and especially to the indications to be observed in the book itself. Baumgarten. Unterricht, S. Hauptst. von den. histor. Umständen Sect. 36. ss. Chr. Theoph. Zeizeri Epist. ad Maur. Gu. Schelsier, Zwiecav. 1782. Jr. Fr. Reuss resp. Plank d. theol. de canone hermen. quo scripturam per scripturam interpretari jubemur. Tub. 1774. 4. Thus much belongs to the means of determining the historical sense. All the means, however, which have been here enumerated, are to be united, to discover the true sense of a passage, and this sense is one. For the allegorical sense should be referred, to the grammatical, the mystical, (if such a sense be admitted) to the historical, the moral or practical to the explanation rather than the interpretation of the true sense. 1. Negative rules. a. No sense should be admitted, which is plainly at variance with the usus loquendi. b. A sense, inconsistent with the nature of the subject cannot be correct. c. A frigid sense, or one foreign to the design of the author, should be rejected. d. A sense, which contradicts the series of the discourse, is not to be attributed to the words. 2. Positive rules. a. The sense, which is indicated by all the sources of information already pointed out, or by the greater part of them, is alone correct. b. The sense, which is supported by parallel passages, is to be preferred to every other. - III. Particular care will be requisite, in determining the sense, in those cases in which more than usual copiousness or brevity is employed. In either case, however, it will be of great assistance, to observe with diligence, the familiar and customary phraseology of the author. Although there may be considerable obscurity, yet that sense, which ap pears the most probable, from the author's design, or from other sources, should be maintained. 1. In those cases, in which there is more than usual copiousness, it will be necessary to separate, what relates to the principal idea, from what is added, for the sake of amplification, illustration, or ornament. To these latter, it is evident no peculiar force is to be attributed. Every word, especially in comparisons, similes, repetitions, rhetorical expressions, is not to be urged too far. 2. Brevity, has respect either to single words or the style generally. In the first case, many ideas are comprehended in one word, (pregnantia verba ;) in the second, something is left to be supplied by the reader, which the nature of the subject, and common usage, it is presumed will suggest. At times ideas seem to be omitted, where the particle yag does not very closely connect the two sentences. Act. II. 34. The Sacred Writers adopted a very sententious and brief style, in their discourses, arguments, and sometimes even in their narrations. 3. In difficult passages, we must a. Endeavour to discover the precise point where the difficulty lies. b. We must observe what sense the passage will not bear. c. The causes of the ambiguity or obscurity, we should endeavour to remove. d. We must examine what sense is rendered most probable, from the usus loquendi, from the design of the writer, from his state of mind, from the context, from history. J. C. G. Ernesti diss. de usu vitæ communis ad interpretation Test. L. 1779.4. ON THE METHOD OF CHAPTER IV. CONSTRUCTING THEIR DISCOURSES PE CULIAR TO THE SACRED WRITERS. I. From the character and design of the Sacred Writers, it is evident, that every thing like refinement and subtlety would be banished from their writings, and that a peculiarity of construction, and simplicity of diction, conformable to the Jewish manner of writing, would characterize their compositions. Besides this general character common to them all, each of the inspired penmen has his own manner, which is to be learned by careful attention. From these remarks, it will appear, what rules, as it regards this point, the interpreter ought to observe. What is here said is not intended as inconsistent with the acuteness and terseness ascribed to the Sacred Writers, especially St. Paul. J. W. Fuhrmann Comm, de concinnitate Pauli in Ep. ad Rom. L. 1776. The peculiarity or novelty, as to the structure of their sentences, is to be traced to their familiarity with the Hebrew language, and therefore should not be regarded as authorizing any unusual sense of words. Fischer Proluss. de Vit Lex. P. 410. ss. The simplicity of style observable in their narration, mode of teaching, disputing, and arguing, relates not only to the use, of certain phrases, of numerous finite verbs, and of conjunctive particles, but in the whole form of their periods, and mode of expression. Different subjects, have each their influence on this general character of style. 1. The structure of the language in the N.T. is to be understood, from the familiar method of instruction, conversation and writing. 2. For this purpose it will be highly expedient to examine the Eastern and especially the Hebrew method of narration, instruction, and composition. 3. We must observe what is peculiar to each author, in his method, of constructing his discourse. 4. The peculiar kind of writing, (poetic, prosaic, aphoristic, didactic, uniform or variable, polished, sublime,) deserves our attention, as the whole character of the composition depends upon this circumstance. II. The most important characteristics of the Sacred Writers as to the general structure of their discourses, are, 1. The connexion is not always obvious and continued but is frequently broken and abrupt. 2. Additions are frequently made which do not appear essential to the expression of the sentiment. 3. And in other cases the construction is eliptical. 4. They are not always exact in the grammatical structure of their sentences. 1. The interruptions in their discourses. a. From digression, when the writer passes from one subject, to others connected with it, sometimes not returning to his original point at all, and at others, not for a considerable time. The occasion of these digressions, is sometimes in the ideas themselves, at others in the words; or it is furnished by the circumstances of the case, the time or place, the state of feeling in the writer or reader. Gal. IV, 24; Hebr V, 2; Joh. VI, 32. b. By parenthesis, which is longer or shorter, and at times one parenthesis arises out of another. J. Fr. Hirt d. de parenthesi et generatim et speciatim sacra. Jen. 1745. 4. |