Companion to the Bible Part 42

Luke 8:10.

He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they might not see with the eyes, and understand with the heart, and be turned, and I should heal them. John 12:40.

These quotations of the same pa.s.sage by different New Testament writers furnish a remarkable example of their free manner, while the spirit and scope of the prophet are kept by all.

In Heb. 10:5 we have a quotation from the Septuagint where it differs widely from the Hebrew of Psa. 40:7. This reads: "Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened" (Heb. _bored_ or _digged_). But the apostle quotes after the Septuagint: "Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared for me." The attempted explanations of this difference are not very satisfactory. It is to be noticed, however, that the apostle builds no essential part of his argument upon the clause in question.

In the long quotation from Jeremiah in Heb. 8:8-12, the clause, "and I regarded them not" (ver. 9), is perhaps correct for substance; since many prefer to render the corresponding Hebrew clause not as in our version--"though I was a husband unto them,"--but, "and I rejected them."

When, on the contrary, the spirit and scope of a pa.s.sage are lost in the version of the Seventy, the New Testament writers quote directly from the Hebrew. Examples are the following:

"When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt." Hosea 11:1, quoted in Matt. 2:15. Here the Seventy render: "Out of Egypt I called my children," a variation from the original which makes the pa.s.sage inapplicable; since Israel, as G.o.d's first-born son (Exod. 4:22, 23), was the type of Christ, and not the individual Israelites.

Again, to the pa.s.sage Isa. 42:1-4, quoted in Matt. 12:18-21, the Septuagint gives a wrong turn by the introductory words: "Jacob my son, I will help him: Israel my chosen, my soul hath accepted him: I have put my Spirit upon him; he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles,"

etc.; whereas the Hebrew speaks not of Jacob and Israel, but of G.o.d's servant: "Behold my servant, whom I uphold; my chosen, in whom my soul delighteth," etc. Matthew accordingly follows the Hebrew, yet in a very free manner: "Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul delighteth," etc.

For other examples see Mal. 3:1, as quoted by Matt. 11:10; Mark 1:2; Luke 7:27; Isa. 9:1, 2, as quoted by Matt. 4:15, 16.

3. Pa.s.sing now to the consideration of the New Testament citations on the side of their _inward contents_, the first question, that arises has respect to the so-called _principle of accommodation_. There is a sense in which the writers of the New Testament sometimes employ the language of the Old in the way of accommodation; that is, they use its phraseology, originally applied in a different connection, simply as expressing in an apt and forcible manner the thoughts which they wish to convey. Of this we have a beautiful example in Rom. 10:18, where the apostle says, in reference to the proclamation of the gospel: "But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world," meaning that what the psalmist says of the instruction given by the heavens, Psa. 19:1-4, is true of the preaching of the word; so that none are excusable for their unbelief. Another striking example is found in the same chapter (ver. 6-8), where "phraseology originally used by Moses to express the way of justification contained in the law (Deut. 30:11-14) is adapted to the gospel as properly descriptive of the salvation propounded in it."

Davidson's Hermeneutics, p. 471.

But that the Saviour and his apostles used accommodation in the commonly received sense of the term; that is, that they quoted, in accommodation to the ideas of their age, pa.s.sages from the Old Testament as applicable to the Messiah and his kingdom, which they knew to have no such application when fairly and legitimately interpreted; that, for example, they used the hundred and tenth psalm as a prophecy of the Messiah (Matt. 22:41-46; Mark 12:35-37; Luke 20:41-44; Acts 2:34, 35; Heb.

1:13), simply because this was the current interpretation of their times--this is not to be admitted for a moment. That the Saviour dealt prudently with the prejudices of his age is admitted; but he did not build upon them his claim to be the Messiah, nor solemnly appeal to the authority of Moses and the prophets knowing this to be only a dream of fanciful interpretation. If Christ and his apostles taught any thing, it was that he had come in accordance with the prophecies of the Old Testament, and in fulfilment of these prophecies. Did they indeed, in all this, only act upon the maxim which Paul rejects with abhorrence as d.a.m.nable? "If the truth of G.o.d hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? And not rather (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say), Let us do evil that good may come? whose d.a.m.nation is just."

4. The writers of the New Testament often cite the Old by way of _argument_. Thus the Saviour argues against divorce at the husband's will "for every cause" by an appeal to the original inst.i.tution of marriage (Matt. 19:3-6); and Paul proves that the man is the head of the woman, and that she owes subjection to him, from the order of creation and its accompanying circ.u.mstances. 1 Cor. 11:8, 9; 1 Tim. 2:11-14.

Respecting this cla.s.s of quotations, it is only necessary to remark that the validity of the arguments depends on the historic truth and divine authority of the pa.s.sages adduced. The Saviour and his apostles professedly build their arguments on the record of the Old Testament. If this is sand--mythical quicksand--their house falls, and their authority with it. But if the foundation is rock--an inspired record of facts--their house stands, and with it their character as truthful teachers.

5. Far more numerous are the pa.s.sages which are cited as _prophecies of Christ and his kingdom_. These are introduced by various formulas: "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet;"

"that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet;" "in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias;" "this day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears;" "this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled;" "it is contained in Scripture;" "another Scripture saith;"

"this that is written must yet be accomplished in me," etc.

The common formula, "that it might be fulfilled," means that the event recorded took place _in order that_ the purpose of G.o.d announced in the prophecy might be accomplished. The prophecy was not the main thing, but the purpose of G.o.d contained in it. For the accomplishment of this purpose, and thus of the prophecy which revealed it, G.o.d's truth was pledged. In the same way are to be understood the words of John (chap.

12:39, 40): "Therefore they could not believe because that Esaias saith again, He hath blinded their eyes," etc. The hinderance to their belief lay not in the prophecy, but in that which the prophecy announced.

6. Of the prophecies quoted, some refer _immediately to Christ_. Such are the following: "The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool" (Matt. 22:44, from Psa.

110:1); "The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek" (Heb. 7:21, from Psa. 110:4); "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth," etc. (Acts 8:32, 33, from Isa.

53:7, 8); "A Prophet shall the Lord your G.o.d raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear," etc. (Acts 3:22, 23; 7:37, from Deut. 18:15, 18, 19).

7. Others refer _ultimately to Christ, but under a type_. An undeniable example is the following: "A bone of him shall not be broken" (John 19:36, from Exod. 12:46; Numb. 9:12); words originally spoken of the paschal lamb, which was the type of Christ, and now fulfilled in the great Ant.i.type. Again, we read in Hosea (chap. 11:1): "When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt;" words which Matthew quotes as fulfilled in Christ (chap. 2:15). It was the purpose of G.o.d, namely, that the history of Israel, G.o.d's first-born son (Exod.

4:22, 23), in his national childhood, should foreshadow that of Jesus, the only begotten Son of G.o.d.

To the same cla.s.s belongs apparently the following citation: "What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honor, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet." Heb. 2:6-8, from Psa. 8:4-6. It seems impossible to deny that the immediate reference of the psalm is to man's exalted dignity and high prerogatives as the lord of this lower world. But, as the writer to the Hebrews argues, the words have no complete fulfilment in man considered apart from Christ. It is in the person of Christ alone that the high destiny of human nature finds its full realization. He is made Lord of all, and "crowned with glory and honor" for himself and for all his disciples also, who shall reign with him in glory for ever. We add one more example from Heb. 1:5, where the writer quotes and applies to Christ the words of Nathan to David: "I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son." 2 Sam.

7:14. The promise undeniably had immediate respect to Solomon; not to Solomon, however, in his simple personality, but to Solomon as the first after David of a line of kings that should end in Christ, in whom alone it has its true fulfilment. G.o.d took Solomon, and in him the whole line of kings on David's throne, into the relation of sonship, and thus of heirship. Rom. 8:17; Gal. 4:7. To Solomon, as G.o.d's son, the kingdom was confirmed for ever through Christ; and Solomon's lower sonship, moreover, adumbrated the higher sonship of the last and greatest of his sons, to whom the promise was: "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord G.o.d shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end." Luke 1:32, 33.

To draw the exact line of separation between the two above named cla.s.ses of citations is difficult, and in some cases perhaps impossible. Nor is it necessary, since the essential truth is, that all these prophecies find their accomplishment in Christ; those of the former cla.s.s directly, those of the latter through types of divine appointment.

The exegesis of the New Testament quotations presents many difficult questions, relating partly to the true rendering of the original words, partly to the deviations of the Septuagint from the Hebrew, and the citations from both the Septuagint and the Hebrew; partly to the original application of the pa.s.sages cited and the use made of them in the New Testament. For the details the student must be referred to the commentators. All that has been here attempted is a statement of the general principles that must govern us in interpreting the quotations from the Old Testament which are found in the New.