di of the O. T., and of the later Jews, and the history of the opinions which then prevailed, must be attended to. The usage, also, of the N. T. writers themselves, the comparison of perspicuous with difficult expressions, and the history of early christian opinions, serve to elucidate the force of expressions of peculiar import, in the N. T.

Examples of this class of words and phrases, are εὐαγγέλιον ; βασιλεία τῶν ἐρανῶν ; παρεσία χρισ8 (see D. Flatt Symbolarum ad illustranda nonnulla ex iis N. T. locis. quæ de ragsría Chr. agunt, Partic. I. Tub. 1801. 4)

θεῖ, ὑιὸς τὰ ἀνθρώπε, νόμος (see P. N. Jochims de variis σε νόμε signiff. in epp. Paulinis obviis, Meldorp. 1788.) midtig (N. Reden d. præs. Wallenio de varia signif. voc. Tissus in N. Τ. 1802.) ἔργα, δικαιῖσθαι, άφεσις ἁμαρτιῶν ; παλιγγενεσία ; πνεῦμα (see J. F. Schleusner, d. de vocabuli vsua in Libris N. T. vario usu Gött. 1791, 4. Griesbach. Commentt. de

vera notione vocabuli vεupa in cap. VIII. Ep. ad Romanos, Jenæ editis.) dagg Tho. Stuemmer Tentamen exeg. crit, circa quæstionem: quæ significandi vis vocabb. πvɛʊμɑ et dag in stilo Paulino insit? Wirceb. 1802. See also Campbell's Preliminary Dissertations. To discover the meaning of such expressions, the connexion of the discourse is of great importance,

II. The tropical signification of words and phrases, in the New Testament, has, in part, the same sources, and is regulated by the same principles, as among other people and other authors; and in part, is derived from sources, and rests on principles, peculiar to the Sacred Writers. The duty of the interpreter, in accurately investigating. and properly explaining the figurative language of the New Testament, is derived from these considerations, and he may also hence discover the faults to be avoided.

Fr. W. Mascho Unterricht von den Bibl.-Tropen und Figuren-Halle 1773. 8.

Job. Gf. Hegelmaier Libri III. de dictione tropica etiam Scr, Sacræ. Tub.

1779. 8.

Tropes are either necessary, arising from the poverty of language, and the magnitude of the subject treated, or they are used for the sake of varying and ornamenting the style. They are grammatical, or rhetorical; general, or appropriate to particular kinds of writing.

They rest upon similitude, or the various connexions and relations of things.

Metaphor, metonyme, synecdoche, and anthropopeia may be separately treated.

The sources of tropes in the New Testament are, a. nature itself, b. common life, c. history, d. the Sacred Writings of the Jews.

1. Tropical expressions, are derived from either of these sources, especially the last, and may be discovered,

a. From the nature and character of the subject, sentiment, or expression.

b. From the series of the discourse, and from certain words, frequently added for the sake of illustration.

c. From the nature and design of the discourse, or argument.

d. From parallel passages, where the same subject, or idea, may be literally expressed.

e. From the usus loquendi and history.

f. From the connexion of the doctrine itself.

2. In explaining the foundation of the similitude, we must endeavour, in the first place, so to represent it, that it may agree with the genius of the East; and secondly, to have respect, not only to general usage, but also to the particular passage, in which the trope occurs; so that the full force of the figure may be perceived.

3. The cautions necessary to be observed on this subject, are, that we do not press the etymology of the tropi

cal word too far-that we do not too much extend the force of the figure—nor seek in it more than the nature of the passage will admit-and that we do not unnecessarily multiply tropes.

III. Some words and phrases are either constantly, or occasionally used in such a manner, that, to the idea which is commonly and properly attached to them, there is added something of enlargement, of weight, or sublimity; or on the other hand, their usual force is diminished. The more frequently writers have run into extravagance in interpreting these emphatical expressions, in former times; the more careful should we be to observe moderation. The same remark is applicable to Euphemism.

J. Chr. Gottleberi d. præs. Nagelio de emphasium judicandarum difficultate, Alt, 1761. 4.

E. A. Frommann Comm. de verbis N. T. quæ plus aut minus, quam ordinarie solent, interdum significant, opuscc. phil. I, 342. ss.

Emphasis was formerly divided into real and verbal. Constant emphasis is to be learned, from the direct testimony of authors, or from the constant usage of the language, during a particular age; temporary emphasis, is generally to be learned from the context, or from the nature of the subject.

There are forms of speech, which have, by common consent, lost that energy which originally and naturally belonged to them.

We should be cautious not to consider words emphatical, merely because they are of rare occurrence, derived from a foreign language, figurative, or different in their grammatical form, from the languages, ancient or modern, with which we may happen to be acquainted.

On Euphemism-see,

Chr. Wollii d. de usu et abusu euphemismi sacri L. 1732. 4.

It is always to be judged of, from the character of the age and people-not from our own taste or opinion.

CHAPTER II.

ON DISCOVERING THE USUS LOQUENDI OF THE SACRED WRITINGS.

I. The usus loquendi, is the manner of speaking or writing, which custom, or common usage has sanctioned. It is evident, therefore, that it must be very various, and different in different kinds of writers. We need not be surprized that there should be a mode of writing peculiar to the N. T., and that this mode, should not be the same in all the Sacred Writings. The sources of information are either external or internal, and are very similar to those mentioned in the preceding chapter.

The usus loquendi, is national or provincial, public or private, religious or profane, ancient or recent; solemn, technical, or common; poetical or prosaic; philosophical, doctrinal, or historical; epistolary or popular.

The interpreter should always be careful, not to be guided by the suggestions of his own imagination, or inclination, but should attend to the usus loquendi.

are,

The internal means of discovering the usus loquendi,

1. The genius and character of the writers.

These are formed, through the influence of the age and nation to which they belong, by their education, method. of life, &c. These points are to be ascertained from the history of the writers themselves, and of the times in which they lived, and from their writings.

2. The nature of the subject, and the mode of treating it.

Every subject has a method, in some measure its own; and authors are either original in their style and manner, or imitators of other writers. When this latter is the case, the style of their models should be investigated and understood by the interpreter.

3. The writings themselves, which the authors have left; for it not unfrequently happens, that writers define, explain, or illustrate their method of writing.

All the foregoing remarks may be applied to the New Testament.

The external means of discovering the usus loquendi, are, the knowledge of the history, both of opinions and facts, of the period to which the writer belongs, the comparison of authors of the same kind, character, and age; the use of competent early translators, and the observance of that usage which approaches most nearly to that of the writers in question.

Some observations on the usus loquendi, of the popular Greek writers.

1. They do not accurately follow grammatical rules, concerning the distinction of words, the use of the article, the middle voice, the moods and tenses of verbs, &c. Hence their language is not always to be interpreted in strict accordance with these rules.

Ammonius de adfinium vocabb. differentia Cum animadverss. L. C. Valckenaer L. B. 1739. II. 4. c. obss. Cph. Fr. Ammon. Erl. 1787. 8.

S. F. Dresigii Commentarius de verbis mediis N. T. cura J. F. Fischeri etc. Ed. altera, L. 1792.

Cph. Wolli Collectio quartior de verbis Græcorum mediis dissertationum

L. 1733.

Adr. Kluit Vindicia articuli o rò in N. T. Partis prioris T. I—III. posterioris T. I. II. Trag. 1786~1771–8.

θεος

The dispute is principally about the words iugos, & deos and θεος.

In the moods and tenses of verbs, the Sacred Writers not unfrequently, follow the usage of the Hebrew; hence