[Image]  [Hi-Res Image]

Page 240

point. But conceptions that are foreign or dogmatic merely are misleading in the use of hypothesis. The mistake must not be made of confusing historical learning with historical insight or the historic sense. A century ago all religion was regarded as the production of priestcraft, and Jesus was regarded simply as a wise teacher. In the present, under the influence of the doctrine of evolution, religion is regarded as the product of a process of unfolding, and the ethical and intellectual elements of the religious life suffer the consequences. The antidotes for the eieegesis and dislocations which in the interest of dogmatics have invaded this province are reality and piety, especially piety. The interpreter of Scripture handles books which are religious sources for the communities of believers. It is not his task to infer hypothetically the religion of Israel and the Gospel and to discover the real behind that which is alleged, but to bring to the understanding the actual fact as it exists. Like the historian, he seeks the objective sense, not the subjective.

Stylistic or rhetorical exegesis, according to Luther (Preface to Ecclesiastes), seeks to know the scope of a book, its object and aim. This complements the work of philological and historical exegesis, and places the document in its literary category. When historical exegesis has shown the purpose, rhetorical exegesis reveals the connection

of the means devoted to that purpose.

g. Stylistic This operation arranges its work in Exegesis. rhetorical and in logical departments.

The former concerns the quality and propriety of the expression, the turns and variety of usage, the art or naYvetd of the narration, the art-forms of literary expression, and the like. The latter looks at the thought construction, estimates it as closely woven or flowing or disconnected, as orderly or of mere aggregated parts. It sets forth the inner life and the totality of character of the whole document. It serves to give the psychological side of historical exposition, reveals the relation of the author to the writing, and in this way discovers the individuality of the author.

The writings unified in the Bible have either little or no connection with the Greek productions with which they are often compared. This is especially true of the Old Testament, and almost equally of the New Testament, particularly of the Gospels and Epistles. These sprang out of the new needs of missionary enterprise and the founding of Christian communities. Consequently they have their own modes of expression and means of explanation, to interpret which requires entry into their world of thought. Religious pragmatism, prophetic oracle, the disclosure of apocalyptic, the liturgical lyric and gnomic wisdom continue to exist in the New Testament, but the center in this case is the work of Jesus. The difference between the sayings and parables of Jesus and the dialectic of Plato is very great. It is therefore of importance exactly to catch the imagery and the peculiar usage of these writings. Whoever sees merely pictur2 and metaphor where the picture is the very impress, the integrating essence, of truth makes a beast of burden of a Pegasus. If one takes the symbolism

of a religious outlook (like Luke xvi. 19-20) or a promise (like Mark xiv. 25) as literal, he falsifies the idea by a process of mythologizing. To treat the paradoxes of Jesus literally as statement of a law, as one might the command about baptizing, leads into absurdity. Emphasis upon the word " is " in the institution of the Lord's Supper makes one a captive to dogmatic authority. " One may translate literally, but that is not the way to exposition or understanding." Stylistic exegesis leads from the whole to the parts, and so brings the exegetical process to its fit conclusion.

III. Historical Review of Exegetical Principles and Methods: The development of exegetical theory was parallel with the history of doctrine, or, rather, there was a reciprocity of interaction, since exegesis apprehends the sources in sense and meaning as a help to the building of dogma. So the history of the science of exegesis is not to be confused with the history of exegesis, the one having to do with the theory, the other with the practise. The early

Church assumed the inspiration of r. Transi- Scripture and sought a serviceable

Dogmatic sition. The growth of the historical to Historical sense and the rise of an independent

authority of Scripture, and the dogma of inspiration and of infallibility could not halt the movement thus begun. In this respect the Tractatus theologico-Politzcrc of Spinoza (1670 in Eng. transl., new ed., London, 1877) was epochmaking. The seventeenth century saw the gradual rise of a science of antiquities, which brought new material and new points of view. Then came the consideration that the authors of the books of the Bible were to be regarded as human authors. Next questions of method arose, and the schools of classical philology, Pietism, and rationalism expressed their aims. Men debated how far profane writers could be used in the process of elucidation, and unsifted material was collected by Grotius, Wetstein, and many others. The result of all this work was summed up in Wolle'g Reguhe triginta hermeneuticee ad circurrespectam scriptures illustrationem. ex autoribua profanis utiles (Leipsie, 1722). The end of the eighteenth century, by which time greater independence had been gained, brought a deepening of the work, which was largely accomplished through the effort after a historical theology.

Origen was the first to construct a theory of explanation of Scripture. With all patristic exegetes he assumed that Scripture contained divine wisdom and the teachings of salvation, and that the spirit of God was the author. The sense is therefore in all circumstances deep, clear, true, and productive of salvation. But it is evident that many passages are obscure if the sense of the words is taken in such passages as those which refer to the days of creation, to the Garden of Eden, the anthro-

pomorphisms, and the "high mountain" 2. Origea. in the story of the teuiptation. In

case the obvious sense given is not worthy, there must be an undersense which is concealed and must be brought out. Indeed,