OUTLINES OF HERMENEUTICS. SECTION I. ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT AND ITS HISTORY. I. THE art of interpreting the Sacred Writings, supposes the faculty, improved by cultivation and exercise, of discovering and exhibiting that sense, which the Sacred writers themselves attached to the words they used. The same rules, which regulate the explanation of other documents, are of authority in reference to the Scriptures: these rules, it is the business of Criticism and Hermeneutics to exhibit. Hence, Sacred Criticism, and Sacred Hermeneutics, demand our attention. The utility of attending to these subjects is the greater, because, from various causes, the interpretation of the sacred writings, is peculiarly difficult, and errors, are here more frequently committed, than in the exposition of other works. Gelbricht. Comm. qua docetur, interpretationem librorum divinorum ab interpretatione librorum humanorum nihil differre. Cizæ, 1774. Jo. Asboth Comm. de interpretatione codicis sacri, ad communia om B nes libros interpretandi principia revocata, præmio ab ord. Theol. Gatt. ornata. Gætt. 1791. Guil. Nic. Freudentheil Comm. de codice sacro more in reliquis antiquitatis libris solemni ingenue interpretando, adjectis difficultalibus N. T. propriis. Chemn. 1791. May there not, however, be rules of interpretation, applicable to other books, which, in the New Testament, have no authority? and may it not be properly enquired, what influence the inspiration of the New Testament should have upon this subject? The earlier commentaries on the interpretation of the New Testament, taught that the sense was to be determined by the opinions of the ancient writers, from the judgment of the church-from a certain internal sense-from the analogy of faith-and from the formularies of Philosophy. Those of a later date, lay more stress upon the dictates of reason. Hermeneutics, in an extensive sense, includes Criticism, and is distinguished from Exegesis. The science of interpreting the Sacred Writings, belongs to what is called special Hermeneutics. Attention, therefore, to this subject, presupposes a knowledge of the rules of universal Hermeneutics, which prescribe the method of investigating the signification of words and modes of expressiondetermining the sense of every passage-estimating and explaining the sentiment, &c. The Hermeneutics of the Bible has two parts, the one general, the other special. On the causes of the difficulty of the interpretation of the SS., see J. S. Ernesti d. de difficultatibus N. T. recte interpretandi 1755. OppCritt. et Phill. The following writers have, more or less extensively, treated the subject of sacred Hermeneutics. J. S. Semler Vorbereitung zur Theolog. Hermeneutik, Halle 1760-69. J. Gottlieb Toellner Grundriss einer erwiesenen Hermeneutik des N. T. Zuell. 1765. Joach. Ehrenfried Pfeiffer, Institutiones hermeneutica sacræ, veterum atque recentiorum et propria quædam præcepta complexæ. Ecl. 1771. Jo. Bened. Carpzovius, Primæ lineæ hermeneuticæ, et philologie saeræ cum vet. tum novi Test. brevibus aphorismis comprehensee in usum lect. acadd. Helmst. 1790. Geo. Fr. Seiler, Biblische Hermeneutik, oder Grundsaetze und Regeln zur Erklaerung der Heil. Schr. des A. und N. T. Erl. 1800. G. W. Meyer Grundriss einer Hermeneutik des A. und N. Test, und einer Anl. 2 .-zur populaeren und pract. Schrifterklaerung, Goett. 1801. Jo. Aug. Ernesti Institutio interpretis N. T. ad usus lectionum. Fourth edition. 1792. J. Sal. Semler Apparatus ad liberalem N. T. interpretationem. Hal. 1767. II. The method of interpreting the sacred writings, has undergone a great many changes. It has been regulated more by the disposition, object, piety, and even example of interpreters, than by any adequate and stable rules; and the rules which were prescribed, were not in all cases, derived from the most proper sources. Before the advent, the Jews had begun to seek after various senses, in their sacred oracles, and those of Alexandria especially, were much attached to the allegorical method of interpretation. It is, therefore, not a matter of wonder, that this method was transferred to the christians, and preferred to that which was strictly grammatical. Even those writers, who did not entirely neglect the grammatical method of interpretation, were not free from the disposition to allegorize, then so prevalent. The Hermeneutical rules laid down, were not sufficiently recommended, by their liberality, correctness, order, and connection. Notkeri libellus de illustribus viris, qui ex intentione S S. Scripturas exponebant. in Galland. N. Bibl. P P. xiii. J. Geo. Rosenmuelleri Historia interpretationis librorum S S. in eccl. Christ, inde ab apostolorum aetate usque ad Origenem. Phil. Henr. Schueler, Gesch. der populaeren Schrifterklaerung unter der Christen von dem Anfange des Christ. bis auf die gegenwaertigen Zeiten. G. W. Meyer, Geschichte der Schrifterklaerung seit der Wiederherst. der Wiss. J. B. Goett. 1802. Buddei Isag. hist. theol. ad Theologiam universam. Rich. Simon, Histoire Critique des commentateurs du N. T. Rotferd. 1703. On the origin of Allegorical Interpretation.—See Chr. Gfr. Schuetzii Progr. Jenæ 1794. Jo. Chr. Pfisteri diss. præs. Jo. Frid. le Bret de originibus et principiis allegorice sacrarum litt. interpretationis, Tub. 1795. Eichhorn, Briefe der Bibl. Exegese betreffend, Bibl. der Bibl. Litt. vol. v. The later Jews have followed the same method. See, Surenhusius Bẞhos xaraλλays. Vitringa Obss. Sacr. III. Frommann, de erroribus, qui in interpretatione N. T. a Judæis manarunt, opuscc. p. 82. Mosheim d. de Judæ orum statuto Scripturæ sensum inflectendi. On the method, in which Christ and the Apostles quoted and employed the O. T., these writers have treated in the general, when explaining the passages in which such quotations occur. In the first Christian Churches, as in the Synagogues, the chapters which had been previously read, were explained. Frommann, de hermeneuta veteris ecclesiæ . Opp. Phil. p. 421. This practice was extended to the books of the N. T., and gradually gave rise to homilies, which were not without their influence upon the exposition of the Bible. The Apostolical Fathers. The Christian Apologists who wrote in Greek-Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Theophilus Alex. &c. Irenæus, Hippolytus, Methodius. The Apostolical constitutions. The Alexandrian Teachers, as Clemens Alexander. Allegorical and Mystical exposition.-Sec Jo. Christ. Caster diss, de mysticarum interpretationum studio ab Aegyptiis maxime patribus repetendo. Hal. 1760. On the Allegories of the Fathers, consult J. G. Karneri Prr. II. de allegorica interpretandi ratione.-L. 1782. Origen by no means entirely neglected grammatical interpretation. See, J. A. Ernesti. d. de Origene interpretationis LL. SS. grammaticæ auctore L. 1756, in Opuscc. Rosenmueller Progr. de fatis interpretationis litt. SS. in Eccl. Christ. The Latin Fathers were even less skilled in interpretation. Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius. During the 4th, 5th, and 6th centuries, the Greek Church produced several interpreters of rather better character. Many grammatical Commentaries of this period have perished. The most distinguished Greek writers were, Eusebius, Chrysostom, Isidore of Pelusium, Theodoret, Procopius of Gaza. The doctrinal interpreters, were, Athanasius, Basil the Great, Gregory of Nyssa, and Gregory Nazianzen, Cyril of Alexandria, &c. &c. Among the Latins, Hilary, Ambrose, Arnobius, jun., Victor of Capua, and especially Jerome, Augustine, and Gregory the Great, who were long leaders to later writers. J. G. Rosenmueller, Pr. de traditione hermeneutica, L. 1786. During this period, some rules on Interpretation were laid down-See Hieronymi Epist. ad Pammachium de optimo genere interpretandi. Tychonii Regulæ VII. ad investigandam intelligentiam SS. SS. Augustin, LL. IV. de doctrina Christ. Adrinai εισαγωγὴ εἰς τας θείας γραφὰς &c. &c. III. From the 7th to the 16th century, very few examples of correct interpretation are to be found. The writings of that period, exhibit the judgment and success of their authors in selecting the opinions of the ancients, rather than their own skill in exposition. For the authority of the early teachers was so great, that most writers preferred selecting |