secondary interpretation, as a species of the allegorical, and yet rejects the latter. If, however, the terms be employed interchangeably, as many German writers loosely express themselves,† then is allegorical exposition founded upon the practice of the sacred authors themselves. This indeed is not denied. So Bauer; "Nos quidem non negamus scriptores Nov. Test. nonnunquam allegoricam interpretandi rationem sectari. Imprimis autorem epistolæ ad Hebræos in eo argumento versari scimus, ut Jesum, doctrinamque ab illo traditam, cum Mose, Aarone, institutisque religiosis Vet. Test. comparet, et quid præcipui nova œconomia habeat, clare demonstret." Still they are unwilling to allow it that authority and place which are necessarily its just prerogative. There are types in the Old Testament representing and adumbrating persons, things, and places in the spiritual kingdom of Christ. In the Epistle to the Hebrews the apostle has clearly shewn that the Old Testament economy was expressly adapted to symbolise the dispensation of grace by which it was succeeded. (Compare Hebrews, 9th chapter, 1-10 verses.) Believing then as we do, that events, individuals, places, and transactions, were designed to set forth spiritual truths, and to foreshadow coming realities, a sure foundation is laid for spiritual interpretation, in which the literal sense is stripped off, and the deeper or róvOIC brought out. As long as there are types and real allegories in the Scriptures, so long must there be secondary or spiritual interpretation. Allegorical interpretation, however, as we understand it, is not a kind or species of typical, but an unwarranted and unscriptural extension of it. It finds allegories where none were intended by the inspired writers. Without necessity or reason, it puts a deeper sense under the envelope of the letter. arbitrarily adds to Scripture, to make it fuller in sense, or more befitting the dignity of its divine Author. Die enge Verbindung, pp. 631, 2. + See Loehnis' Grundzüge der biblischen Hermeneutik und Kritik, Giessen, 1839, 8vo, p. 29, where mediate, symbolical, mystical, and typical, are all taken synonymously. Hermeneut. Sac. p. 2 28. CHAPTER V. HISTORY OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. IN giving the history of Biblical interpretation from the earliest period of the Christian Church, we shall adopt the division of Klausen into periods:-1st, the patristic period, reaching to the 7th century. Secondly, the hierarchical, from the 7th to the 16th. We omit his last three periods, because their history would occupy much more space than could be given to them in the present work. PATRISTIC PERIOD. The majority of the fathers belonging to this period are characterised as allegorical interpreters. Not a few, however, of those who thus designate them, put to their account as items of allegorising exposition, specimens of true, spiritual interpretation. They may be called mystical expounders, not because they pursued a system essentially and radically wrong, as many suppose; but because they followed a true system beyond its just and reasonable limits. Such an exegesis would not have been so general in the Christian Church, from the earliest time downward, had it been founded on a basis totally unsound. In characterising the majority of the fathers as allegorical interpreters, we do not blame them for being spiritual interpreters ;-their anxiety for the holy character of revelation was too great to prompt the entire rejection of mystical meanings;—but we impugn their injudiciousness and folly in the excessive application of a principle to portions of the Scripture for which it has no affinity. Perhaps, too, the frigid opponents of all spiritual interpretation, have usually looked at the instances of sound, secondary exposition, and of allegorical together; as though they were equally faulty. Hence an epistle or commentary may be described as allegorical in its character, when it contains much fewer specimens of this method than rationalistic writers perceive or allow. Next to the apostles themselves, come, in order of time, the apostolic fathers. These are five; Barnabas, Hermas, Clement of Rome, Ignatius, and Polycarp. Of Barnabas one epistle is extant. Some indeed have questioned or doubted its authenticity, such as Basnage, Jones, Cotelerius, &c. ; but the majority of the learned, among whom are Pearson, Cave, Du Pin, Vossius, Hammond, Bull, Wake, and Lardner, suppose it to be a real production of Barnabas the companion of Paul (Acts iv. 36, 37; xv. 36.) The epistle consists of two parts, the first containing "an exhortation and argument to constancy in the belief and profession of the Christian doctrine; particularly the simplicity of it, without the rites of the Jewish law. The second contains moral instructions." In the first chapter Barnabas promises that he would communicate to the Christians to whom he wrote, things adapted not only to establish them in religion, but to increase and perfect their yvos, by which he means the recondite sense of Scripture; for after quoting Leviticus xx. 24, in which God promises to the Israelites the possession of a land flowing with milk and honey, he adds, "Now what the spiritual meaning of this is, learn. It is as if it had been said, put your trust in Jesus, who shall be manifested to you in the flesh. For man is the earth which suffers; forasmuch as out of the substance of the earth, Adam was formed." | In the 7th chapter, the following commentary is given upon the precepts respecting the Jewish sin-offerings. The two goats (Leviticus xvi.) were to be fair and perfectly alike; both therefore typified the one Jesus, who was to suffer for us. The circumstance of one being driven forth into the wilderness, the congregation spitting upon it and pricking it; whilst the other, instead of being accursed, was offered upon the altar to God, symbolised the sufferings and death of Jesus. The washing of the entrails with vinegar, denoted the vinegar mixed with gall which was given to Jesus on the cross. The scarlet wool, put about the head of one of the goats, signified the scarlet robe put upon Christ before his crucifixion. The taking off the scarlet wool and placing it on a thorn-bush, refers to the fate of Christ's Neander thinks that the present epistle is unworthy of the companion of Paul, and that it proceeded from a Jew educated at Alexandria, who had embraced Christianity. I. 3, p. 1100 et seq. + Lardner's Works, London, 1788, 11 vols., vol. ii. pp. 11, 12. "Scilicet quis sensus spiritualis et mysticus?" says Cotelerius in his edition of the Apostolic Fathers, vol. i. p. 18 (2 vols. fol. Amstel. 1724, by Le Clerc.) Wake's translation of the genuine Epistles of the Apostolical Fathers, 6th edition, London, 1833, p. 300. The words of the original are “ Τί λέγει ἡ γνῶσις, μάθετε. Ἐλπίσατε ἐπὶ τὸν ἐν σαρκὶ μέλλοντα φανεροῦσθαι ὑμῖν Ἰησοῦν. "Ανθρωπος γῆ ἐστι πάσχουσα ἀπὸ προσώπου γὰρ τῆς γῆς, ἡ πλάσις τοῦ ̓Αδὰμ ἐγένετο.” Vol. i. p. 18. church; "for, as he who would take away the scarlet wool must undergo many difficulties, because that thorn was very sharp, and with difficulty get it; so they, says Christ, that will see me and come to my kingdom, must through many afflictions and troubles attain unto me.' In the 8th chapter, the red heifer brought forth without the camp and there slain and burned, whose ashes the young men should take up and put in vessels; and with which, having tied a piece of scarlet wool and hyssop on a stick, they should sprinkle every one of the people that he might be freed from his sinsthis heifer, is said to be a type of Christ led forth to death: the young men who performed the sprinkling are the preachers of the gospel; three in number, to denote Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because they were great before God. The wool was put upon a stick, because the kingdom of Jesus was founded upon the cross. "But why were the wool and hyssop put together? To signify, that in the kingdom of Christ there shall be evil and filthy days, in which, however, we shall be saved; and because he that has any disease in the flesh by some filthy humours, is cured by hyssop." The 9th chapter is occupied with the signification of circumcision. Abraham, it is said, who was the first that brought in circumcision, circumcised 318 men of his house, because this number in Greek letters (I=10, H=8, T=300, i. e. 318) signifies Jesus, and the figure of his cross. Such, he adds, is the mystery of three letters received by Abraham; and this circumcision pointed to the death of Jesus as its object. That Barnabas assigned great value to this Cabbalistic interpretation is apparent from his own words: "No one ever learned from me a more genuine truth; but I know that ye are worthy."‡ In the 15th chapter, the words of the 90th Psalm 4th verse are adduced to prove, that the present world will continue 6000 years, and that in the succeeding period a glorious rest will take place. This sentiment was quite common both among the Greek and Latin fathers, as Cotelerius has shewn in a note to the present chapter (note 65.) The specimens given from Barnabas Wake's translation, p. 303, and Cotelerius' edition of the Apostolic Fathers, pp. 20-24, vol. i. + Wake's version, p. 304, — Διὰ τί δὲ ἅμα τὸ ἔριον καὶ τὸν ὕσσωπον; ὅτι ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ αὐτοῦ ἡμέραι ἔσονται πονηραὶ καὶ ῥυπαραὶ, ἐν οἷς ἡμεῖς σωθησόμεθα· ὅτι καὶ ἀλγῶν τὴν σάρκα διὰ τοῦ ῥύπου τοῦ ὑσσώπου ἰᾶται. p. 26, vol. i. ed. Cotel. † Οὐδεὶς γνησιώτερον ἔμαθεν ἀπ' ἐμοῦ λόγον· ἀλλὰ οἶδα ὅτι ἄξιοι ἐστε ὑμεῖς. p. 30. Pp. 44, 5, vol. i. Rosenmüller, after Bernard, endeavours to shew, that Barna justify the decision that his expositions are highly fanciful, and that he may be truly styled an allegorical interpreter. Hermas.-The Shepherd of Hermas was written in Greek, but now we have only an old Latin version with a few fragments of the original. It consists of three books, the first containing four visions, the second twelve commands, and the third ten similitudes. It has no Scripture quotations; and therefore it is impossible to judge of the mode in which Hermas interpreted the sacred writings. The entire treatise is made up of peculiar and exaggerated allegories having no foundation in the Bible. Clemens Romanus.—The only genuine remains of Clement are his first epistle to the Corinthians, which is almost wholly practical. It contains but one express mention of a New Testament book, viz. 1 Cor. i. 12, although there are various quotations and allusions. The data for ascertaining the manner in which this father interpreted Scripture are slight. It would seem, however, that he was not averse to allegorical exposition; for in the 12th chapter, where he praises the faith and hospitality of Rahab, he supposes, that by the scarlet thread suspended from her house was signified the redemption that should be to all who believe and hope in God.* The same allegory is found in a number of the fathers, in Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Origen, Ambrose, &c., as is shewn by Cotelerius. Ignatius.-The Ignatian epistles contain nothing definite with respect to any principle of interpretation. Polycarp.-Polycarp's epistle to the Philippians has many citations from the New Testament, but they are not explained. Justin Martyr (†163.) — Next to the apostolic fathers is usually placed Justin Martyr, who belongs to the early apologists for Christianity. He was born at Flavia Neapolis, formerly called Sychem, in Samaria. After studying various systems of philosophy, he adopted the Platonic, which, however, he professes to have renounced after his conversion to Christianity, observing, that he found the latter to be "the only certain and useful philosophy." In general he is distinguished by his allegorising. After this fashion he explains, not only the Greek and Latin poets, but also the Old Testament. He endeavours to reduce to a con bas' words should be understood of the things that were to happen until the times of the gospel, and not of those about the end of the world. Part i. p. 70 et seq. * ὅτι διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ Κυρίου λύτρωσις ἔσται πᾶσι τοῖς πιστεύουσιν καὶ ἐλπίζουσιν ἐπὶ τὸν Θεόν. Ρp. 154, 5, vol. i. K |