enable us to perceive great propriety and beauty in various portions of the Scriptures. The place may be ascertained,

1st, From express mention, as Matthew v. 1; John i. 29; Acts xvii. 22. Here again it is necessary to bear in mind, that subscriptions to the New Testament books are neither always correct nor consistent with one another.

2dly, From internal circumstances taken in connexion with other accounts. Thus in the Pauline epistles we may learn from the salutation and names of persons, from mention of his bonds, &c. &c., where the apostle was. The epistle to the Romans was written from Corinth during Paul's third journey, as may be inferred from comparing Romans xv. 17–32; xvi. 1, 23, with 2d Cor. x. 15, 16; Acts xix. 21; 1st Cor. xvi. 1, &c.; 2d Cor. viii. 9; Acts xx. 22; and 1st Cor. i. 14. The epistles to Philemon, Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians, were written at Rome during Paul's first captivity, as the following passages in them appear to prove Ephes. iii. 1; iv. 1; vi. 20; Philemon 9; Colos. iv. 3, 10, 19. Hence we find in the epistle to the Philippians mention made of Cæsar's house, iv. 22; and in i. 13, the open chains show, that he had not been kept a close prisoner at Rome, but allowed some liberty in his bonds. This forms a contrast with his captivity at Cæsarea, where, persecuted by Palestinian Jews, he had been kept in close confinement. Thus also the obscure word gairúgov, i. 13, must be referred to Rome; although Böttger ingeniously endeavours to turn aside the evidence.†

David was in the wilderness remote from the worship of God when he composed the sixty-third Psalm. Hence the expressions were suggested to him-" My soul thirsteth for thee"-" in a dry and thirsty land, where no water is."

With regard to the book of Job, it is impossible to discover with certainty, whether it was written in Arabia; although this is connected with another question, whether the composition may receive much illustration from the Arabic language. Some have even conjectured, that it was originally written in Arabic, and afterwards rendered into Hebrew.

Quibus auxiliis, with what helps? This includes the circumstances which conspired to bring about an event; the means

* See Credner's Einleitung in das Neue Testament. Halle, 8vo, 1836, § 139, p 377; and Stuart's Introduction to the Ep. to the Romans, § 3.

+ Compare Olshausen's Biblischer Commentar. Vierter Band. p. 131, et seq.; Credner, § 144, p. 389.

Tt

by which impediments were removed and obstacles overcome; the mental and physical resources possessed by the individuals described. The weapons of our warfare, says an apostle, are mighty through God. They are spiritual not carnal. "I will pray the Father," said the blessed Redeemer, "and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever." To show the opposition the apostles had to encounter, Jesus informs them, "I send you forth among wolves." Such were the gracious promises which the primitive teachers of Christianity received. Encouraged by divine aid, they went forth to evangelise the world. Warring with spiritual weapons, they came off victorious. If then their resources were such, we should interpret their language accordingly. The genius of Christianity is pacific, except in so far as vice and sin are to be contended with. The Rationalists of Germany, disbelieving the inspiration of the sacred writers and the nature of the promises made to the commissioned servants of God under the old and new covenants, have made woful havoc of divine truth.

Cur, why? This coincides with scope, and has been already treated.t

Quomodo, how? In historic facts, the mode in which a thing has been brought about, or still takes place, should be attended to. Thus the manner in which Sennacherib's army was destroyed before Jerusalem, has been said by some interpreters to have happened by the Simoom. This is questionable. The poisonous and fatal effects attributed to this wind in the East have been manifestly exaggerated. So recent scientific travellers assert. Unless it had been supernaturally charged with noxious properties, it could not have been employed to destroy the Assyrian army. It is simply said, that an angel of Jehovah went forth and smote in the Assyrian camp 185,000 men. One of the spiritual messengers, who are constantly employed in ministering to Jehovah, effected the total overthrow of the army. As far as the Scripture account goes, the agent is mentioned, but not the mode in which he accomplished his fatal embassy. In Isaiah xxxvii. 7, our translators, probably supposing that the destruction was caused by the Simoom of the desert, have," Behold, I will send a blast upon him." But

denotes disposition, spirit, resolution. "I will give him spirit or determination." The Neologians of Germany have + See page 267, &c.

* John xiv. 16.

sadly misinterpreted Scripture, by inventing modes in which occurrences are supposed to have taken place, even when there is nothing revealed concerning the quomodo of a transaction. They first invent a quomodo, and then compel Scripture to agree with it. This is not to explain, but to burlesque the word of God. Whenever the how is not revealed, we need not look out for a method in which a historical fact took place. If it has been miraculous, why should we needlessly inquire after means employed, and then force the exegesis into accordance with our fancied quomodo?

For example, Eichhorn and Bauer attempt to account for the extraordinary occurrences that took place at the promulgation of the law by natural means, affirming that when a violent thunderstorm, such as are frequent about Sinai, happened, Moses seized upon the phenomenon to give sanction to his laws. This is opposed to the whole narrative as far as it contains within itself the elements of its own interpretation, no less than to all other portions of the Bible that touch upon the same thing.*

Thus also Ammon, Eichhorn, and others, have sought to account for the conversion of the Apostle Paul on natural grounds, supposing that the entire occurrence was pictured in his imagination, or represented in a dream. This is the psychological interpretation, which cannot be true.†

Quando, when? At what time, and on what occasion? The time when a book was written must be attended to by the interpreter. The books of the Old Testament were composed at very different periods, and partake, in some measure, of the characteristics of the age in which they appeared. In regard to the greater number of them, it can be determined with tolerable certainty when they were written; though the precise date is often obscure.

The gospels are placed in very different years by different commentators; although, at the greatest interval that can possibly exist between all the times assigned to their composition, the origin of one could not have been far remote from that of another. The time may be known,

1st, From express mention, as Hosea i. 1; Isaiah vi. 1.

* Ἐμοὶ ἀνάγκη ταῦτα ἱστορεῖν καθάπερ ἐν ταῖς ἱεραῖς βίβλοις ἀναγέγραπται. Joseph Antiquit. Judaic. lib. tert. cap. 4, p. 77, (Coloniæ, 1691. fol.)

+ See Neander's History of the Planting and Training of the Christian Church, by the Apostles, translated by J. E. Ryland, vol. i. p. 100. (Biblical Cabinet, vol. 35, 36.)

2dly, From expressions containing in themselves indications of the time of writing. Thus, from Romans xv. 19, it is apparent that the epistle was written subsequently to the occurrences in Acts xx. 3, and the first letter to the Corinthian church. (Compare 1 Cor. xvi. 4, 9; xii. 2.) Persons or occurrences which are only mentioned incidentally, may serve as guides to the time of composition.

Again, the occasion of Paul's writing to the Galatians, was their having been led astray by certain Judaising teachers, who had endeavoured to undermine the authority of the apostle, by affirming that he believed circumcision to be necessary, and that it was incumbent on Christians to observe the Mosaic law. The apostle, therefore, wrote to the churches in Galatia, to vindicate his apostolic dignity, and to show that the ceremonial law was not obligatory on Christians. The great body of the Galatians had been heathens; and to account for their acquaintance with the Jewish Scriptures, we may suppose that the Jews had gained numerous proselytes among them. Hence it is easy to see the propriety of the minute narrative respecting himself, given in the first and second chapters, in which he vindicates his apostleship, proves that his calling was immediately from God, and shows, that so far from being inferior to Peter, Peter was even censured by him.

The occasion on which he wrote will also cast light upon Ga latians iii. 3. "Having begun in the spirit, are ye now making an end in the flesh?" They had set out with an attachment to the spiritual doctrines of the gospel, especially justification by faith alone without the deeds of the law, as Paul had taught it, and sanctification by the Holy Spirit; but now, they were making an end, by returning to circumcision and other fleshly ordinances.

The words of our Lord, John iii. 20, 21, receive a peculiar emphasis and beauty from the occasion on which they were uttered. It was when Nicodemus had come to him by night to inquire of his doctrine, that Christ said, "For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh he to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God."

The time when a book was written has come to exercise a most important influence on its exegesis. This is particularly the case with the Old Testament Scriptures. By bringing down the date

of their composition to a much later period than that which is commonly assigned, prophetic inspiration has been done away, and the knowledge of future events, instead of being viewed as the express communication of heaven coming through human agents, is said to have been obtained after the events themselves happened. Hence numerous perversions, alike repugnant to the fact of inspiration and derogatory to the honour of God, have been introduced into the exegesis of the text. Such as are acquainted with the theological literature of Germany will at once see the justice of these remarks, and lament the infatuation of the men whose conduct is so justly censurable.