Cph. Wollii Comm. philol. de parenthesi s. præf. præmisit, C. F. Bocnerus, Lips. 1726. 4.

Ad. Bened. Spizneri Comm. theol. de parenthesi libris sacris V. et N. T. accommodata, L. 1772. 8.

Both digressions and parentheses may be discovered, a. from the nature and series of the ideas, b. the character of the discourse, and the use of the particles, especially the conjunctions.

We must not always expect to find the discourse constructed according to the rules of art, nor proceeding in an unbroken order.

2. The abrupt construction, is when excitement of feeling, or any other cause, induces the writer either to suppress something (drodiúandis,) or suddenly to pass to a different subject. In the historical books, and in the writings of St. Paul, there are various examples of this kind. It is obvious, that in such cases, we are not to look for a continued narration or argument.

3. Pleonasm is either of single words, as when to verbs signifying action, the member of the body by which the action is performed is added; of pronouns (auros after is,) of particles—of phrases (as ἐπάρας τὲς ὀφθαλμὲς, ἀνοίξας τὸ ςόμα) or of whole sentences, In these instances, some are peculiar to the East, others common to all popular discourses.

4. Tautology is where the same idea is expressed by various synonymous words or phrases.

It is clear that we should not endeavour to explain as different, expressions intended to convey the same idea.

Jo. Fr. Kluge Doctrinæ de taulologiis ad vindicandos scriptores sacros, et profanos Specimen. Vit. 1760. 4.

5. Ellipsis is either grammatical or rhetorical, constant or temporary. It is either of single words, or of

sentences.

Some writers have, very unreasonably, multiplied ellipses, and others. have entirely proscribed their application

to the interpretation of the Scriptures. To the first class belongs Lamb. Bos, see his work on the Greek Ellipses. It is, therefore, the more necessary, that attention should be paid to this subject.

a. No ellipsis should be admitted which is not confirmed, by constant or frequent usage.

b. The character of the passage ought to give evidence, from the mode of construction, from the state of feeling in the writer, from the nature of his subject, or disposition of his readers, that the occurrence of an ellipsis, is not unlikely. This occurrence is to be looked for when the discourse is vehement, or negligent.

c. There should be good reason assigned for the admission in every instance.

d. The more obviously and easily the ellipsis can be supplied, the more probable it is that an ellipsis should really be acknowledged.

e. What is stated fully in some places, may be expressed more briefly in others, so as to render it obvious, that the latter expression is elliptical. Thus of our Saviour, it is sometimes said, έρχεσθαι, an elliptical form of ἔρχεσθαι εἰς τὸν κόσμον.

J. A. Wolfi Comm. I. et II. de agnitione ellipseos in interpretatione librorum, SS. L. 1800. 4.

Chr. Benings libellus de silentio SS. sive de iis. quæ in verbo divino omissa aut præterita vel sunt vel videntur. Adjectæ sunt in calce dissertatt. aliquot affinis argumenti, Frf. 1750. 8.

CHAPTER V.

ON DISCOVERING THE GENERAL MEANING, AND UNDERSTANDING THE NARRATION OR ARGUMENT.

I. The meaning of passages, is to be distinguished from the meaning of the individual words, and is discovered, if after the sense of their several

constituent parts has been ascertained and accurately considered, it is perceived, what the writer intended by the whole, and what he wished his readers to understand.

The general meaning is sometimes expressed in few and short propositions, at other times, these propositions are numerous and more extended; sometimes it is simple, at others it consists of various parts.

It is requisite for the interpreter,

1. Carefully to consider and compare, the several parts of which he has already ascertained the meaning, that he may see what constitutes the simple sense, and what is added for the sake of explanation, illustration, or ornament.

2. He should so examine the several parts of the general meaning, and so compare them among themselves, that he may understand which are primary and which are merely adjuncts.

3. He should not neglect any part, or expression, by which the extent, or force, of the sense is defined, limited, or increased.

4. He should diligently observe, which appear to partake of the character of familiar usage, and which bear the character and manner peculiar to the East.

5. He should also endeavour to observe the connexion between the several general ideas in which it would be well for him to remember what we have already said regarding the context.

He will find it a profitable exercise, to analyse books, and larger sections, and reduce them to their several parts, remembering, however, that poetical and popular writers, are not to be subjected to the strict rules which writers of a different description have observed.

II. The mode of narration, adopted by the Sacred Writers, is remarkably simple, such as their

own character and that of those to whom they wrote, seemed to require. The interpreter, therefore, of the historical books, should not seek any thing artificial in their narrations; but should understand every thing in a manner consistent with the simplicity of their style.

S. F. N. Mori Defensio narrationum N. T. quoad modum narrandi, Opuscc. I, p. 1. ss.

1. Every thing is so narrated, a. as that the events and facts could be easily known and understood, b. those things which they commonly taught were delivered in a language to which they did not always attach the same ideas, c. their manner is marked by great brevity, d. it is not entirely destitute of ornament, but the ornament is of the simplest kind.

2. The interpreter must distinguish between the substance of the event or fact, and the account or exhibition of it.

3. Neither should the narration be confounded with the opinion, which the writer sometimes adds-see,

More Comm. qua illustratur loeus Joh. XII, ss. Opuscc. II, p. 106. ss.

4. The interpreter is not at liberty, to add, to curtail, or in any way to change, the narration, although it may appear too brief, obscure, or inconsistent with his own. opinions.

Those things, which, on this subject do not relate to interpretation, but to the higher criticism, will be consi dered in Section V.

III. The popular method of instruction and argument, was adopted by the Sacred Writers, which being in general use, would have the greatest effect on the minds of their readers or hearers. This me

thod, therefore, the interpreter should understand, and constantly remember, that he may be able to perceive the true meaning and force of the Sacred Writers. And this method was simple and inartificial, most wisly adapted, as to the subjects, their connexion and narration, to the times, place, and character of the people.

1. Here it should be observed,

That in the communication of doctrines, or precepts, or in conducting their arguments, they are not to be considered as moulding them to scholastic rules.

2. We should notice, the occasion which gave rise to the consideration of each subject, and to what class of men, and in what place, each was proposed.

3. We must carefully distinguish between, those things which are asserted or maintained, without limitation, and those which are restricted to a particular view or application; and this restriction, may be either expressly stated, or merely intimated by the circumstances of the case.

4. The interpreter ought to distinguish between the propositions themselves, and the arguments by which they are supported; between the arguments and the mode of treating them; between the subject and the illustrations or examples of it.

5. It becomes him to endeavour to place himself in the situation of those, to whom the Sacred Writings were originally addressed, to enter into their views and feelings, diligently comparing the different parts of the Sacred Books together, and using every other means to discover what their views and feelings were.

6. He should be extremely cautious, lest he should even unintentionally, change the true sense of the Sacred Writers, to make it coincide with his own opinions, whether theological, philosophical, or of any other character.