{"id":3747,"date":"2014-11-23T08:47:41","date_gmt":"2014-11-23T12:47:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/?page_id=3747"},"modified":"2022-05-06T15:12:36","modified_gmt":"2022-05-06T19:12:36","slug":"gnome","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/?page_id=3747","title":{"rendered":"Gnome"},"content":{"rendered":"


\nGNOME; or, QUOTATION.
\nGn\u014d’-mee<\/em>. Greek, \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u03b7, knowledge<\/em>, understanding<\/em>: also a means of knowing<\/em>.
\nFrom \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, (gn\u014dnai<\/em>), to know<\/em>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Hence, the term Gnome is given to the citation of brief, sententious,
\nprofitable sayings expressive of a universal maxim or sentiment which
\nappertains to human affairs, cited as well-known, or as being of general
\nacceptance, but without quoting the author’s name.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In Prov. 1:2<\/a> they are called \u201cwords of understanding.\u201d
\nThe Scriptures, as Bengel remarks, are so \u201c full of the best things,
\nthat these constitute, as it were, certain continued sentiments openly
\nset forth in the form of gnomes<\/em>.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

When these are applied to a certain person, time, or place; or to individual cases;
\nor are clothed with circumstantial particulars, the figure is called NOEMA, \u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1
\n(no-ee-ma<\/em>), (plural, NOEMATA), i.e<\/em>., sense<\/em>, thought<\/em>, that which is thought<\/em>, from
\n\u03bd\u03bf\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, to perceive<\/em>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

When the author’s name is given, the figure is called CHREIA, \u03c7\u03c1\u03b5\u03af\u03b1, (chree’-a<\/em>), use<\/em>, usage<\/em>, or usance<\/em>, (from \u03c7\u03c1\u03ac\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9, chraomai<\/em>, to use<\/em>).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

For the Greek name of the figure Gnome<\/em> the Latins substituted SENTENTIA
\n(sen-ten’-ti-a<\/em>), sentiment<\/em>, or a sententious saying<\/em>; a philosophic aphorism<\/em>, maxim<\/em>,
\nor axiom<\/em>, which is quoted on account of its application to the subject in hand.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

These are exactly what are referred to in Ecc. 12:11.
\n.<\/span> …..<\/span>\u201cThe words of the wise
\n. ……….<\/span>Are as goads;
\n. ……….<\/span>And as tent-pegs well fixed are
\n……<\/span> [The words<\/em>] of the masters of assemblies.\u201d*
\n* See under Ellipsis<\/a><\/em>, page 74<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

A Gnome<\/em>, however, differs from a Proverb in this:
\nthat every Proverb is a Gnome<\/em>, but every Gnome<\/em> is not necessarily a Proverb.
\nA Gnome<\/em> is, properly speaking, a quotation: and therefore this figure opens up
\nthe whole question of the Quotations from the Old Testament in the New.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThis is a large subject, many volumes having been written upon it,
\nboth in ancient and in recent times.
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIt is also a difficult subject, owing to certain phenomena which lie upon its surface.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIt is a fact that there are variations between the quotations and the Text quoted from.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nSometimes they agree with the Septuagint translation, and differ from the Hebrew, and vice versa<\/em>; and sometimes they differ from both.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nSometimes they are direct quotations; at other times they are composite
\nquotations of several passages joined in one; while others are mere allusions.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nConsequently it is difficult for anyone to make a list or table of such quotations
\nwhich shall agree with those made by others.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe general fact seems to be that there are 189 separate passages quoted*
\nin the New Testament, according to Spearman’s reckoning:\u2020 i.e<\/em>., counting a passage only once, though it may be quoted several times. Including the whole, there are, according to Bishop Wetenhall’s<\/a> method, 244: of which 147 agree with the LXX,
\nand 97 differ from it.
\n<\/span><\/span><\/span>* If it is merely a reference<\/em> or allusion<\/em>, as distinct from a quotation<\/em>,<\/strong>
\nthen there are many more, of course<\/strong>.
\n\u2020 Letters to a friend<\/em>. Edinburgh, 1759
\n(\u201cLetters To A Friend<\/em>:
\nConcerning The Septuagint Translation<\/em>, And The Heathen Mythology<\/em>\u201d
\nby Robert Spearman<\/a>)<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe Lord Jesus Himself referred to 22 out of our 39 Old Testament books.
\nIn Matthew there are references to 88 passages in 10 Old Testament books.
\nIn Mark to 37 passages in 10 books.
\nIn Luke to 58 passages in 8 books.
\nIn John to 40 passages in 6 books.
\nDeuteronomy and Isaiah, the two books most assailed by the Higher Critics,
\nare referred to more often than any other Old Testament books.
\nWhile Revelation contains no less than 244 references to 25 Old Testament books.
\nIn Romans there are 74 references. Corinthians, 54. Gal., 16, Eph., 10, Heb., 85.
\nIn all, out of 260 chapters in the New Testament, there are 832 quotations,
\nor references, or allusions to the Old Testament Scriptures.
\nEvery Old Testament book is referred to with the exception of Ezra, Neh., Est.,
\nand Canticles. The Apocryphal books are not referred to at all.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nReckoning according to Spearman, we find, out of the 189
\npassages quoted, 105 that agree with the Septuagint, 21 that differ
\nfrom it, 45 that differ from both it and the Hebrew, and 18 neutral.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThese may be exhibited in the following table: \u2014<\/span>
\nNo. of Quotations\u00a0 \u00a0 Total\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Acc. to\u00a0 \u00a0 Differ From\u00a0 \u00a0Differ From\u00a0 \u00a0 Neutral<\/span>
\nin\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0LXX\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0LXX\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Both<\/span>
\nMatthew\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 38\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 25\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 4\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a08\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01<\/span>
\nMark\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 3\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u2014\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 2\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u2014<\/span>
\nLuke\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>.\u00a0 \u00a0.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0 5\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/span> .. <\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 3\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02<\/span>
\nJohn\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0<\/span>. .\u00a0<\/span> 11\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 3\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 2\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>.<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a05\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01<\/span>
\nActs\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 19\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a011\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 1\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 7\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014<\/span>
\nRomans\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>..<\/span><\/span>51\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 30\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a04\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 5\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 12
\n1 Corinthians\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 <\/span>. .11\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 4\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 2\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0..<\/span>5\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014
\n2 Corinthians\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 8\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0. .4\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 1\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 1\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 2
\nGalatians\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 ..<\/span>4\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 3\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 1\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u2014\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u2014
\nEphesians\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0..<\/span>1\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 1\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 .\u2014
\nHebrews\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 22\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 15\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a03\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0..4\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 . . <\/span>\u2014
\n1 Peter\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 7\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a06\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a01
\nJude\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 1\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 1\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u2014
\nRevelation\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 7\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 2\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 3\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u2014
\n.<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0.<\/span><\/u>
\n——————————–\u00a0 <\/span>189\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0105\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 21\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 44\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a019
\n
\nIt will thus be seen that by far the larger number of quotations correspond
\nwith the Septuagint translation.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nNow, all the difficulties have been caused by thinking and speaking only of the instrument or the agent employed: instead of having regard to the great and important fact that the Bible has only one Author, and that \u201cHoly men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost\u201d (2 Pet. 1:21).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nOur studies will certainly be incomplete if we do not observe the manner in which
\nthe Holy Spirit quotes in the New Testament those Scriptures which He had before inspired in the Old.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nNotice, then, the following examples: \u2014<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMark 12:36<\/a> \u2014 \u201cDavid himself said by the Holy Ghost\u201d
\nThis was the introduction to a quotation from Psalm 110:1<\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 15:4<\/a> \u2014 Referring to Ex. 20:12<\/a> our Lord says \u201cGod commanded saying\u201d, etc<\/em>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 3:7<\/a> \u2014 Referring to Psa. 95:7-11<\/a>.
\n\u201cWherefore as the Holy Ghost saith\u201d not \u201cas David saith\u201d or \u201cas the Psalmist saith\u201d.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 9:8<\/a> \u2014 Referring to Ex. 25\u201340<\/a> ( concerning the Tabernacle and its teaching),
\n\u201c the Holy Ghost this signifying,\u201d etc<\/em>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 10:15<\/a> \u2014 Quoting Jer. 31:33, 34<\/a> ,
\n\u201cWhereof the Holy Ghost is a witness to us\u201d.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nActs 1:16<\/a> \u2014 Peter, quoting Psa. 41:9<\/a> (10), says,
\n\u201cThis Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost,
\nby the mouth of David, spake before concerning Judas.\u201d
\nObserve, that while David spake, the words were not his, but
\n\u201c the words of the Holy Ghost.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nActs 3:18<\/a> \u2014Peter, referring to the Old Testament prophecies of Christ, says,
\n\u201cThose things, which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets,
\nthat Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nActs 28:25<\/a> \u2014Paul, quoting Isa. 6:9<\/a> exclaims,
\n\u201cWell spake the Holy Ghost by Isaiah the prophet unto our fathers\u201d.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nOld Testament passages are introduced in various ways:<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1. \u03b3\u03ad\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9\u00a0(gegraptai<\/em>), it standeth written<\/em>.
\nMatt. 4:4-10<\/a>. Luke 4:4, 8<\/a>.
\nRom. 1:17<\/a>; 3:4<\/a>, 10<\/a>; 10:15<\/a>. 1 Cor. 1:19<\/a>, 31<\/a>. 1 Pet. 1:16<\/a>, etc<\/em>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n2. \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u1f21 \u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03ae (legei gar hee graphee<\/em>), for the Scripture saith<\/em>.
\nRom. 9:17<\/a> (Ex. 9:16<\/a>). Rom. 10:11<\/a> (Isa. 28:16<\/a>). 1 Tim. 5:18<\/a> (Deut. 25:4<\/a>).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n3. \u1f41 \u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2 (ho nomas<\/em>) The Law<\/em>.
\nJohn 15:25<\/a>, from Psa. 35:19<\/a>; 69:4<\/a> (5), emphasizes the fact that the Sacred Writings
\nof the Old Covenant, viewed as a whole, constituted the Law of Israel.
\nThe pronoun \u201ctheir\u201d shows this.
\nJohn 10:34<\/a> (from Psa. 82:6<\/a>) is written in Ex. 21:6<\/a>; 22:8, 9<\/a> (7, 8). And 1 Cor. 14:21<\/a> (from Isa. 28:11, 12<\/a>) has a reference to Deut. 28:49<\/a>. Thus the reference is carried back, not only to the passage quoted, but to the one still earlier, in which it had its origin.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In the New Testament eight men are specified as the agents employed by the Holy Spirit: Moses, 13 times; David 7; Elijah, once;
\nIsaiah, 12; Joel, once; Hosea, once; Jeremiah, twice; Daniel, once.
\nIn Matthew an agent is named 13 times (Jeremiah, Isaiah, Moses, David, and Daniel).
\nIn Mark, 7 (Moses, Isaiah, David, Daniel).
\nIn Luke, 6 (Moses, Isaiah, David).
\nIn John, 4 (Isaiah, Moses).
\nIn Acts, 10 (David, Joel, Moses, Isaiah).
\nIn Rom., 10 (David, Hosea, Isaiah, Moses, Elijah).
\nIn 1 Cor., (Moses) once.
\nIn Hebrews, 3 (David, Moses).
\nIn Rev., (Moses) once.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThus, 14 passages are ascribed to the agency of Moses; 8 to that of David; 13 of Isaiah; 2 of Hosea; 2 of Jeremiah; 1 of Daniel; 1 of Joel; 1 of Elijah.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThese facts are deeply instructive; because, for example, while the modern critics divide the book of Isaiah into two authorships, the New Testament ascribes six out of the thirteen passages to Isaiah in the first part of the prophecy (chaps. 1-39), and seven out of the last part (chaps. 40-46). The recognition of this one simple fact demolishes completely the hypothesis of the Higher Critics, and will cause us to prefer the statements of God to the imagination of men.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn making a quotation from the Old Testament in the New, surely the Holy Spirit is
\nat liberty to do what any and every human writer may do, and frequently does, in his own works. Human writers and speakers constantly repeat, refer to, and quote what they have previously written and spoken, introducing the words in new senses, in different connections, with varied references, and in fresh applications.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThis is the case with the quotations in the Bible, and this one consideration explains all the so-called difficulties connected with the subject.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nOur work, then, in considering these differences, becomes totally different in character from that which treats them merely as discrepancies, arising from human infirmity or ignorance. These differences become all important, because they convey to us Divine comments, and reveal to us new truths.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn quoting, or using again, words and expressions which the Holy Spirit has before used, we may note the following interesting ways in which He varies the sense or the words in order to convey to us new truths and lessons by the new application.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn referring to these by way of illustration we have not classified them according to these definitions and divisions, as the student can determine each case for himself. But we have followed the arrangement of Glassius<\/a> in his chapter on Gnomes. *
\n* Which Keach<\/a> translates almost verbatim, without any acknowledgment.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nI. As to their INTERNAL<\/strong> form (i.e<\/em>., the sense<\/em> as distinct from the words<\/em>).
\n
\n. 1. Where the sense originally intended is preserved.
\n
\n. 2. Where the sense is modified.
\n
\n. 3. Where the sense is accommodated (ACCOMMODATIO).
\n
\nII. As to their EXTERNAL<\/strong> form (i.e<\/em>., the words<\/em> as distinct from the sense<\/em>).
\n
\n. 1. Where the words quoted are the same as the Hebrew or the Septuagint.
\n
\n. 2. Where the words are varied as to omission, position, or addition.
\n
\n. 3. Where words are changed:
\n
\n. \u00a0 (a) by a reading:
\n
\n. \u00a0 (b) by an inference:
\n
\n. \u00a0 (c) in number:
\n
\n.\u00a0\u00a0 (d) in person:
\n
\n.\u00a0 \u00a0(e) in mood or tense.
\n
\n. 4. Where several citations are amalgamated (composite quotations).
\n
\n. <\/span> 5. Where the quotations are made from books other than the Bible.
\n
\nWe will now consider these forms of Quotation in order: \u2014
\n
\nI. AS TO THEIR INTERNAL<\/strong> FORM, i.e<\/em>., the sense<\/em> as distinct from the words<\/em>.
\n
\nIn the consideration of Quotations, care must be taken to note what is said to be \u201cspoken<\/em>,\u201d and what is said to be \u201cwritten<\/em>\u201d. Some prophecies were written and never spoken; some were spoken by the Prophet and afterwards written down in his \u201cprophecies\u201d; others were \u201cspoken\u201d and never written down at all, and when, therefore, a passage is quoted as having been \u201cspoken<\/em>,\u201d we may or may not find it written down in the Old Testament Scriptures. But when it is said to have been \u201cwritten<\/em>,\u201d then we shall find it surely written down in the Scriptures of truth.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nSurely there is all the difference in the world between \u03c4\u1f78 \u1fe5\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd (to rheethen<\/em>),
\nthat which was spoken<\/em>, and \u1f41 \u03b3\u03ad\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 (ho gegraptai<\/em>), that which standeth written<\/em>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThere is a further consideration which will help us when the quotations are prophecies. Prophecy is the utterance of the Lord\u2014 Jehovah: He Who was and is and is to come. His words, therefore, may often have a past, present and future reference.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nProphecy frequently has all three:
\n. (1) the reference to the events at the time of its utterance;
\n. (2) a subsequent reference to some great crisis; and
\n. (3) a final consummation, which shall fulfill and exhaust it.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nWhen a prophecy is said, therefore, to be \u201cfulfilled,\u201d that exhausts it.
\nIn other cases, where that final fulfillment is still future, the quotation is general\u2014
\n\u201cas it is written,\u201d or some such indefinite reference.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe mistake made by most students of prophecy consists in this: that they do not bear in mind this threefold aspect of prophecy; but take one part, and put it for the whole.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nFor example, with regard to the prophecy in Dan. 11. There was a reference to Antiochus Epiphanes, now past; but this neither fulfilled nor exhausted the prophecy; which waits for the yet future revelation of one who shall fill it full: while there may be a historical reference to the course of events between. Each is true as part of the general fulfillment; but neither contains the whole truth embodied in the fulness of the prophetic record.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nAn example of this may be seen in the very first recorded fulfillment of prophecy in the New Testament (Matt. 1:23 below). We there see how the same Holy Spirit who first inspired that prophecy afterwards Himself interprets and applies it.
\n
\n. 1. Where the sense originally intended by the Holy Spirit is preserved, though the words may vary.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 1:23 \u2014 \u201cBehold a virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a son,
\nand they shall call his name Emmanuel.\u201d This prophecy was \u201cspoken\u201d by Isaiah to Ahaz, (Isa. 7:13, 14<\/a>), and afterwards written down. It was first spoken with special reference to Ahaz and the circumstances then existing; but was afterwards fulfilled and quoted with reference to the event which the prophet, who was merely \u201cthe mouth,\u201d did not understand, but which the Lord really intended. The words<\/a> differ from both the Heb. and the LXX., but the sense is the same.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIt never had or could have a proper fulfillment, except in Christ, for no virgin ever conceived and bore a child. In the days of Isaiah a certain woman, who was a virgin at the time when the prophecy was uttered, afterwards brought forth a son, whom they were told to name \u201cEmmanuel\u201d; and, before that child was old enough to know how to refuse the evil and choose the good, the deliverance promised to King Ahaz was wrought for him. But this prophecy did not have its complete and proper fulfillment in the days of Ahaz, because a real virgin did not conceive and bring forth a real Emmanuel.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThis is not a prophecy, therefore, where the original sense is modified; for this was the sense in which it was originally intended, although there was a preliminary and partial fulfillment at the time.*
\n*See Number in Scripture<\/a> (page 63) by the same author and publisher.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 2:6<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Mic. 5:2<\/a> (1). The words differ from the Heb. and LXX,
\nbut the sense originally intended is preserved.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 11:10<\/a> \u2014 (Mark 1:2<\/a>, etc<\/em>.). Quoted from Mal. 3:1<\/a>.
\nHere the words differ from the Heb. and the LXX, though the original sense intended is preserved.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 12:17<\/a> etc<\/em>.\u2014Quoted from Isa. 42:1-4<\/a>.
\nThe words differ from the LXX, but the original sense is preserved.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 13:14, 15<\/a> \u2014 (Mark 4:12<\/a>; Luke 8:10<\/a>; John 12:40<\/a>; Acts 28:26, 27<\/a>).
\nQuoted from Isa. 6:9, 10<\/a> agreeing with the LXX.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 21:5<\/a> \u2014 (John 12:14, 15<\/a>).
\nQuoted from Isa. 62:11<\/a> and Zech. 9:9<\/a>, agreeing with LXX.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 21:16<\/a> \u2014 \u201cHave ye never read, Psa. 8:2<\/a> (3), ‘Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected (or prepared) praise,’.\u201d which agrees with the LXX.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 21:42<\/a> \u2014 (Mark 12:10<\/a>; Acts 4:11<\/a>; 1 Pet. 2:7<\/a>).
\nQuoted from Psa. 118:22, 23<\/a> (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 22:44<\/a> \u2014 (Mark 12:36<\/a>; Luke 20:42, 43<\/a>; Acts 2:34, 35<\/a>; 1 Cor. 15:25<\/a>; Heb. 1: 13<\/a>). Quoted from Psa. 110:1<\/a> (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 26:31<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Zech. 13:7<\/a>.
\nThough the words differ both from the Heb. and the LXX,
\nthe sense originally intended is preserved.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 27:35<\/a> \u2014 (John 19:24<\/a>).
\nQuoted from Psa. 22:18<\/a> (19) (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nLuke 4:18, 21<\/a> \u2014
\nQuoted from Isa. 61:1,2<\/a>. The words differ both from the Heb. and LXX,
\nthough the original intention is preserved.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nJohn 19:37<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Zech. 12:10<\/a>.
\nThe words differ from the LXX, but the sense is the same.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nActs 3:22, 23<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Deut. 18:15-19<\/a> (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nActs 13:33<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Psa. 2:7<\/a> (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nActs 15:16,17<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Amos 9:11,12<\/a>.
\nThe words differ from the Heb. and LXX., though the sense is preserved.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 14:11<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Isa. 45:23<\/a>.
\nThe words differ both from the Heb. and the LXX, but the original sense is preserved.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 15:3<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Psa. 69:9<\/a> (10) (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 15:12<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Isa. 11:1,10<\/a> (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nEph. 4:8<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Psa. 68:18<\/a> (19). Here the original sense is preserved,
\nthough the words differ both from the Heb. and the LXX.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 1:8,9<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Psa. 45:6, 7<\/a> (7, 8), etc<\/em>. (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 1:10-13<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Psa. 102:25<\/a> (26), etc<\/em>. (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 5:6<\/a> and 7:17<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Psa. 110:4<\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 10:5, 6<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Psa. 40:6-9<\/a> (LXX).
\nHere the words differ from the Hebrew (see below page 793),
\nthough the original intention and scope of the words is preserved.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1 Pet. 2:6<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Isa. 28:16<\/a> (LXX).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n. 2. Where the original sense is modified in the quotation or reference.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 12:40<\/a> \u2014 Where, in the reference to Jonah 1:17<\/a> (2:1),
\nthe words are used with a new and different application.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nJohn 3:14, 15<\/a>, where the words respecting the brazen serpent,
\nthough not directly quoted, are modified in their new application.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nJohn 19:36<\/a> \u2014 \u201cA bone of him shall not be broken.\u201d
\nQuoted from Ex. 12:46<\/a>, where we have the words, \u201cNeither shall ye break a bone thereof.\u201d That \u201canother Scripture saith\u201d this, is perfectly true, but not in the same sense. It was said of the passover lamb, and it is here modified and applied to Christ.
\n(See 1 Cor. 5:7<\/a>).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nEph. 5:31, 32<\/a> \u2014 Where, in the reference to Gen. 2:23, 24<\/a>, the words are used
\nwith a new application.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

….<\/span>
\n
\n. 3. Where the sense is accommodated, being quite different from that which was first intended, and the sense is accommodated by analogy to quite a different event or circumstance. Hence this particular form of the figure is called ACCOMMODATIO.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 2:15<\/a> \u2014 \u201cOut of Egypt have I called my son,\u201d which agrees with the Hebrew of Hos. 11:1<\/a>, and not with the LXX, which has \u201chave I sent for his (i.e<\/i>., Israel’s) children.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 2:17, 18<\/a> \u2014 From Jer. 31:15<\/a>: but differs both from the Heb. and the LXX (38:15<\/a>). The sense of each is given, but is accommodated to the new circumstances.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 8:17<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Isa. 53:4<\/a>, but differing from the LXX, and exactly answering to the Hebrew. The sense is accommodated; for, whereas the Spirit in Isaiah uses the words of Christ bearing our spiritual infirmities and sins in His
\npassion and death (as shown in 1 Pet. 2:24, 25<\/a>), the same Spirit uses them in Matthew, and accommodates them to other circumstances, viz<\/em>., to Christ’s healing people of their bodily sicknesses (Matt. 8:16<\/a>). But this only shows the wonderful fulness of the Divine words.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 13:35<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Psa. 78:2<\/a>: but the sense in which Christ used them was different from that in the Psalm, where they are used of the past history of Israel:
\nhere they are accommodated by Christ, the Speaker, to the present circumstances. The words are said to be \u201cfulfilled,\u201d because, though the agent or speaker knew not
\nof this ultimate use of the words, the Holy Spirit, Who spake by him, foreknew it.
\nThe words are said to be \u201cspoken by the prophet,\u201d and so they were (see Psa. 78:1, 2), though they were afterwards written down.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe actual words differ both from the Heb. and the LXX, as well as from the sense which is accommodated to them.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nChrist was making known concerning that Kingdom certain things which
\nwould happen on its rejection. These things were not the subject of Old Testament prophecy, but had been \u201ckept secret,\u201d and are therefore called \u201cthe mysteries of
\n(or secrets concerning) the kingdom.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 15:8,9<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Isa. 29:13<\/a>, according to the Septuagint,
\nbut accommodated to different circumstances from those to which the words
\nreferred when first spoken.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 27:9,10<\/a> \u2014 \u201cThen was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; And gave them for the potter’s field,
\nas the Lord appointed me.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn the margin the reference given is Zech. 11:12,13<\/a>: but the words differ so widely both from the Heb. and the Septuagint that it is more than doubtful whether this can be the passage which is said to be fulfilled.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nAs no such passage is found in Jeremiah, the difficulty is supposed to be very great.
\nAs an example of misapplied ingenuity, we give the various attempts<\/a> which have been made by way of evading the difficulty:
\n
\n.<\/span>1. It was a mistake of Matthew’s memory.
\nThis was Augustine’s opinion, followed by Alford, who says:
\n\u201cThe citation is not from Jeremiah, and is probably quoted from memory and unprecisely.\u201d
\n
\n.<\/span>2. The reading, \u201cJeremiah\u201d is spurious<\/a>. (Rupert von Deutz and others).
\n
\n.<\/span>3. It occurs in a work of Jeremiah’s which has been lost. (Origen and others).
\n
\n.<\/span>4. It was in Jeremiah, but the Jews have expunged it (Eusebius),
\n
\n.<\/span>5. That, Because Jeremiah, in the Talmud, and some MSS., commences the \u201clatter\u201d prophets, his name is put for the whole body of their writings which would include Jeremiah. (Lightfoot, Adam Clark, Scrivener, and others).
\n
\n.<\/span>6. Wordsworth boldly asserts that the mistake was purposely made; the name Jeremiah being substituted for Zechariah in order to teach us not to depend on
\nthe prophets who were merely channels and not the sources of Divine Truth.
\nConcerning this Alford says: \u201cI put it to any faithful Christian to say, whether of
\nthe two presents the greater obstacle to his faith, the solution given above
\n(see No. 1 above), or that given in Wordsworth’s note.\u201d
\n
\n.<\/span>7. Others again think Matthew’s mistake arose from the Jewish tradition
\n\u201cZechariam habiusse spiritum Jeremi\u00e6\u201d (\u201cZechariah had the spirit of Jeremiah \u201c).
\n
\nNeed we say, with regard to these seven, that…
\n…<\/span>1. Is improbable: inasmuch as he quotes Zechariah elsewhere (21:5<\/a>, \u00a026:31<\/a>).
\n…<\/span>2. Is devoid of MS. authority, which is essential in a case of this kind.
\n.<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Origen and Eusebius suspect it, but only conjecturally.
\n…<\/span>3. This, too, is only a conjecture.
\n…<\/span>4. So with this.
\n…<\/span>5. This has more weight, but is unlikely and unsatisfactory: so evidently a makeshift.
\n…<\/span>6. We admire Wordsworth’s faith in the accuracy of the Bible more than Alford’s free .<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0handling of the Word: but it is, after all, a wild conjecture.
\n…<\/span>7. The same is the case with this. Now these are just the sort of explanations which do more harm than.<\/span>all the assaults of the enemies of the Bible. But they serve to prove the truth of inspiration, in that the Bible still stands in spite of all the defenses of its friends!<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIf it be a quotation from Zechariah, it can be so only by accommodation,
\nor by composition (see below page 797, \u201ccomposite quotations\u201d),
\nin which case it combines four different quotations: \u2014
\n…….<\/span>(a) \u201cThey took the thirty pieces of silver,\u201d which is derived from the narrative,
\n.<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0with special reference to Zechariah;
\n…….<\/span>(b) \u201cThe price of him that was valued,\u201d also after Zechariah.
\n…….<\/span>(c) \u201cWhom they bought of the children of Israel\u201d (A.V. marg.) as Joseph was.<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0bought and sold. After Gen. 37:<\/a>
\n…….<\/span>(d) \u201cAnd gave them for the potter’s field,\u201d the narrative of the text,
\n.<\/span>\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0with a special reference to Zechariah.
\n…….<\/span>(e) \u201cAs the Lord appointed me,\u201d which is from Jer. 32:6,8<\/a>, and connects the transaction in Matthew with that in Jer. 32. A field was bought in each case; and the latter, like the former, has special reference to the future. Thus they treasured up a witness against their own perfidy, while Jeremiah witnessed to the Lord’s faithfulness.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nBut in reality, all these so-called explanations are utterly beside the point, and are
\nnot only unnecessary, but absolutely worthless. The mention of them here would be a waste of paper and printer’s ink, except that they testify to the fact that, like most other difficulties, this one is first invented and put into the text, and then it is wrestled with, and the text wrested.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThere is not a word about the prophecy being written in Jeremiah at all.
\nIt says \u03c4\u1f78 \u1fe5\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd (to rheethen<\/em>) \u201cthat which was SPOKEN\u201d; but these clever critics
\npractically take the trouble to exchange these two words, and put in two others
\n\u1f43 \u03b3\u03ad\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c0\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 (ho gegraptai<\/em>), or \u1f26\u03bd \u03b3\u03b5\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd (een gegrammenon<\/em>), \u201cthat which is written.\u201d And then, having made the assertion that it was written in Jeremiah,
\nthey have to show cause why it cannot be found there.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nSome prophecies were written and never (so far as we know) spoken at all;
\nothers were both spoken and written; while some were spoken and never written.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIt says: \u201cThat which was SPOKEN by Jeremiah the prophet.\u201d Surely it is neither suspicion nor conjecture, nor \u201cunprecise\u201d to maintain that it was thus \u201cspoken.\u201d
\nWho can prove that it was not \u201cspoken by Jeremiah?\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nTrue, Zechariah may have written down similar words, though not referring to
\nthe same circumstances; but it ought never to have occurred to anyone to say that Matt. 27:9, 10 was quoted from what is written by Zechariah, when it positively states that it was \u201cspoken by Jeremiah\u201d.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nActs 13:40, 41<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Hab. 1:5<\/a>, according to the LXX<\/a>, but accommodated to another set of circumstances, and to the Romans rather than to the Chaldeans.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 9:27, 28<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Isa. 10:22, 23<\/a>, nearly according to the LXX.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 9:29<\/a> \u2014 Quoted Isa. 1:9<\/a>, according to the LXX.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 10:6-8<\/a> \u2014
\nWhere what the Scripture (or, rather, the righteousness which is of faith)
\n\u201csaith\u201d (Deut. 30:12-14<\/a>) is accommodated to different circumstances\u2014
\nverses 6 and 8 agreeing with the LXX, and verse 7 differing from it.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1 Cor.1:19, 20<\/a> \u2014 Quoted from Isa. 29:14<\/a> and 33:18<\/a>, and differing from the LXX,
\nas well as accommodated to other circumstances.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1 Cor. 10:6, 11<\/a> \u2014 \u201cThese things happened unto them for ensamples.\u201d
\nWhere the events cited are used and accommodated to our sins and infirmities.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRev. 1:7<\/a> \u2014 An allusion to Zech. 12:10<\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRev. 1:17<\/a> \u2014An allusion to Isa. 41:4<\/a> and 44:6<\/a>, but differing from the LXX.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRev. 11:4<\/a> \u2014Quoted from Zech. 4:14<\/a>, differing both from the Heb. and the LXX,
\nand accommodated to different circumstances.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nII. As to their EXTERNAL<\/strong> FORM (i.e<\/em>., the words, as distinct from the sense).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1. Where the words are from the Hebrew, or from the Septuagint.
\nMatt. 2:15<\/a>, from Hos. 11:1<\/a>; Matt. 2:6<\/a>, from Mic. 5:2<\/a> (1);
\nMatt. 12:18-21<\/a>, from Isa. 42:1-4<\/a>.
\nThese and other passages are from the Hebrew and not from the LXX.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nLuke 4:18<\/a> quoted from the LXX. of Isa. 61:1, 2<\/a>. We have already instanced this as a citation in which the original sense is preserved. But we repeat it here because the words are varied.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n\u201cThe Spirit of the Lord (Heb., Adonai Jehovah) is upon me because he
\n(Heb., Jehovah) hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor;
\nhe hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives,
\nand recovering of sight to the blind.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThus far we have the words of the LXX.
\nThe last sentence \u201cthe recovering of sight to the blind,\u201d not being in the Hebrew Text*;\u00a0 while the last sentence in the Hebrew is not in the LXX. But the two words
\nin the Hebrew contain both senses. \u05e4\u05bc\u05b8\u05e7\u05b7\u05d7 (pahkach<\/a><\/em>) means simply to open.
\nSpoken once of the ears (Isa. 42:20<\/a>);
\nand often of the eyes (2 Kings 4:35<\/a>; 6:17, 20<\/a>; 19:16<\/a>: Dan. 9:18<\/a>: Job 27:19<\/a>: Prov. 20:13<\/a>: Jer. 32:19<\/a>: Isa. 42:7<\/a>). Hence the first of the two words means to open the eyes of:
\nand the other word means prison. Thus, in reading, the sense of the first word was expanded and given in the words of Isa. 42:7; while that of the second word was expanded and given in the words of Isa. 58:6<\/a>\u2014the two together meaning that the eyes of the prisoners should be opened on being released from the darkness of their prison. Or, to open [their eyes, and open or release] the prisoners. The explanation lies in the fact that the eyelids were called \u201cthe doors\u201d of the eyes (\u05e2\u05b7\u05e4\u05b0\u05e2\u05b7\ufb44\u05b7\u05d9\u05b4\u05dd, aphappayim<\/em>)
\n(Psa. 132:4<\/a>: Prov. 6:4<\/a>: Job 16:16<\/a>, etc<\/em>.).
\nHence the term \u201cto open\u201d applies equally to the eyes and to prison doors.
\n* See Ginsburg’s Hebrew Bible, which gives two readings.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n2. Where the words are varied by omission, addition, or transposition.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 4:10<\/a> and Luke 4:8<\/a> \u2014 \u201cThou shalt worship the Lord thy God,\u201d
\nfrom Deut. 6:13<\/a> and 10:20<\/a>; and then the Lord added His own Divine
\nconclusion from this: \u201cAnd Him only shalt thou serve.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe Heb. and the LXX. have \u201cfear\u201d: but the fear of God includes the worship of God; and as worship was the matter in question (see Matt. 4:9), the \u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b7\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b7 (phobeetheesee<\/em>), thou shalt fear, of the LXX. is changed by the Lord to \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ba\u03c5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2 (proskuneeseis<\/em>), thou shalt worship.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 4:15, 16<\/a> from Isa. 9:1, 2<\/a> (8:23; 9:1). Here, the quotation differs both from the Hebrew and from the LXX. But this is partly an accommodation; because in Isaiah (LXX) it is prophecy, while in the Gospel it is fulfillment that is in question.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 5:31<\/a> from Deut. 24:1<\/a>: but here it is not given as an exact quotation.
\nIt introduces the words by the simple formula: \u201cIt hath been said,\u201d
\nimplying that those who thus said, put their own meaning on what the Law said.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 12:18-21<\/a> from Isa. 42:1-4<\/a>. Here, the Gospel differs from the LXX, scarcely a word being the same till we come to the last clause. It differs, too, from the Hebrew
\nin the last clause, because it records the act of \u201cfulfillment\u201d, and not merely the words of the prophecy. The words, therefore take the form of a Divine comment or re-statement.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 19:5<\/a> \u2014 \u201cAnd they twain\u201d (\u03bf\u1f31 \u03b4\u03cd\u03bf, hoi duo<\/em>). These words are added to the usual text of Gen. 2:24<\/a>: and yet the sense is the same, for only of two were these words spoken. The quotation agrees with the LXX.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 22:24<\/a> \u2014 From Deut. 25:5, 6<\/a>. But here it is the Sadducees, who do not quote,
\nbut merely give the substance of the matter under the loose formula \u201cMoses said.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 11:3, 4<\/a> \u2014 From 1 Kings 19:10, 14, 18<\/a>. Here neither the Heb. nor the LXX is followed, but the facts are recorded; while the destruction of the altars and the killing of the prophets are transposed.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1 Cor. 2:9<\/a> \u2014 From Isa. 64:4<\/a> (3). It is clear from this that the formula, \u201cAs it is written,\u201d refers to the sense rather than to the words; and that the Divine Author, in repeating the words, sometimes varied them, as He does here; first, by transposing the hearing and the seeing; and then, by adding \u201cneither have entered into the heart of man,\u201d
\nthus varying both from the Heb. and the LXX. Moreover, He employs the general sentiment in a particular case. For what is said in the abstract, and universally,
\nin Isaiah, is here put in contrast to some particular things which are revealed.
\nSee verse 10.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1 Cor. 14:21<\/a> \u2014 From Isa. 28:11, 12<\/a>. Here the quotation differs both from the Heb.
\nand the LXX: and is accommodated to the new circumstances by the omission of
\nthe middle passage, which was not relevant.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1 Pet. 1:24, 25<\/a> \u2014 From Isa. 40:6-8<\/a>. Here the words are not introduced by any formula as a quotation. Isa. 40 is referred to; and certain words are used again by the same Author: and, therefore, some are omitted; as not being relevant, or necessary for the purpose in hand.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n3. Where the words are changed by a reading, or an inference; or in number, person, mood, or tense.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nWe all constantly thus quote the Scriptures: and, in adapting them by application
\nto some special circumstance, we depart from the original interpretation as to the
\nspecial circumstances connected with them, and do not hesitate to change a tense,
\nor number, or person, etc<\/i>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIt is no less authoritative, as Scripture, nor does it alter the word of God.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n.<\/span> (a.) By a different reading.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 10:5<\/a> (7) \u2014 \u201cA body hast thou prepared me.\u201d
\nThese words are like the LXX of Psalm 40:6<\/a> (39:6),
\nand differ from the Hebrew, which is, \u201cMine ears hast thou opened.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nBut this is not given as a quotation. It does not say, \u201cas it is written\u201d;
\nbut it gives the words which \u201che saith,\u201d \u201cwhen he cometh into the world.\u201d
\nWhat he then said in the accomplishment of a prophecy must certainly differ
\nfrom the form in which the event was foretold and written centuries before.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nWhat we have here is an adaptation or accommodation (see above page 786) of a prophecy; and the words are changed to make it suit the actual fulfillment of the prophecy.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIt consists of four lines arranged alternately: \u2014
\n\u2026..<\/span>a \/ \u201cSacrifice and offering thou didst not desire;
\n\u2026…….<\/span>b \/ Mine ears hast thou opened:
\n\u2026..<\/span>a \/ Burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required;
\n\u2026…….<\/span>b \/ Then said I, Lo, I come … to do thy will, O my God.\u201d
\n
\nHere in a and a we have sacrifices; while in b and b we have obedience.
\nThis is another statement of the truth in 1 Sam. 15:22:
\n\u2026..<\/span>a \/ \u201c To obey
\n\u2026…….<\/span>b \/ Is better than sacrifice,
\n\u2026..<\/span>a \/ And to hearken
\n\u2026…….<\/span>b \/ Than the fat of rams.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHere, again, we have obedience and sacrifice set in contrast.
\nAnd that is exactly what we have in Heb. 10:5, except that the obedience is differently expressed.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn Psa. 40:6, the symbol is the opening or boring of the ears, which is in harmony
\nwith Isa. 1:5<\/a>; 48:8<\/a>; and an allusion to Ex. 19:5<\/a>; 21:5, 6<\/a>; and Deut. 15: 16, 17<\/a>; while the contrast is in harmony with 1 Sam 25:22<\/a> and Jer. 7:22<\/a>. The boring of the ears signifies the voluntary acceptance of bond-service, and the promise to perform it. But in
\nHeb. 10:5 we have not the promise (as in Psa. 40: 6), but the actual performance, and therefore the words are changed by the One who came to do that will of God. Surely He had the right to change them, and to state as a fact, \u201cA body hast thou prepared me\u201d in which to obey, and by that perfect obedience unto death to do that which is \u201cbetter than sacrifice\u201d. The \u201cgreat delight\u201d (1 Sam. 15:22<\/a>) of the Father is expressed in Matt. 3:17<\/a>, as well as foretold in Isa. 42:1<\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 11:21<\/a> \u2014 This is not a quotation; but, as it is generally treated as such, and as being in discrepancy with Gen. 47:31<\/a>, we refer the reader to Hysteresis<\/i> (q.v<\/i>.).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n.<\/span> (b) By an inference.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 2:6<\/a> \u2014 Here we have several changes by way of inference and explanation, bringing out more of the meaning of the words in the prophet. Micah 5:2<\/a> (1) reads (R.V.): \u201cBut thou Bethlehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands
\nof Judah, out of thee shall One come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel.\u201d
\n
\nIn Matt. 2:6 we have \u201cland of Judah\u201d instead of Ephrathah, which was its ancient name (see Gen. 35:16, 19<\/a>: 48:7<\/a>), as being better understood by Herod.
\n
\nInstead of the positive \u201cart little,\u201d we have the negative, \u201cart in no wise least,\u201d because, though little in the time of Micah, yet now, after the birth of the Messiah (Matt. 1), it could no longer be so called, in view of the event which had given the city true greatness.
\n
\nInstead of \u201cthousands,\u201d we have the Metonymy<\/em> (q.v<\/em>.), properly translated \u201cprinces,\u201d because Messiah was the Prince of princes.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Instead of \u201cbe ruler,\u201d we have \u201cbe shepherd of \u201d (A.V. rule, margin feed).
\nThis explanation brings in the next verse but one in Micah (\u201cHe shall stand and shall feed.\u201d)<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nFinally, the words of the prophet, \u201cunto me,\u201d are omitted, because the emphasis is now on the fact rather than the purpose (though both were true); and hence the reason is given in the word \u201cfor\u201d and the fact is added in the words, \u201cmy people.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nActs 7:43<\/a> \u2014 Here the citation differs both from the Hebrew and LXX (Amos 5: 25-27<\/a>) in words; but, by Divine inference other facts and truths are referred to.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nInstead of using the Hebrew name \u201cChiun,\u201d in Amos 5:26, the Greek equivalent, \u201cRemphan,\u201d is used.* *Just as \u201cEthiopia\u201d is used for the Hebrew \u201cKoosh’\u201d; \u201cEgypt\u201d
\nfor \u201cMizraim\u201d, \u201cSyria\u201d and \u201cMesopotania\u201d for the Hebrew \u201cAram\u201d.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nInstead of saying \u201cthe figures which ye made for yourselves,\u201d the object for which they were made is given by Him, who knew their hearts\u2014\u201cfigures which ye made to worship them\u201d thus bringing out and emphasizing their idolatry.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nInstead of saying \u201cbeyond Damascus,\u201d Stephen says: \u201cbeyond Babylon\u201d But this is no \u201cscribal error\u201d or \u201cinadvertence\u201d as critics assert.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nEven the stoutest defenders of verbal inspiration read both Amos and Acts, as though they both \u201creferred to the Babylonian exile\u201d and do not appear to notice that it says \u201cbeyond\u201d Babylon.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe fact is that it is \u201cthe house of Israel\u201d as distinct from Judah that is spoken of in
\nActs 7:42, and in Amos; and, while Judah was taken away to Babylon, Israel was taken \u201cbeyond\u201d Babylon. Amos speaking before either captivity (about 780 b.c.) says : \u201cbeyond Damascus\u201d; or, beyond where Damascus will go captive. See Amos 1:5<\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn other words, in the Old Testament the Holy Spirit alludes to the country, and refers to Assyria and says \u201cbeyond Damascus\u201d; while speaking by Stephen, in the light of all the past history, He alludes to the fact that Israel was removed farther than Judah, for while Judah was taken away to Babylon, Israel was removed \u201cbeyond\u201d it.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 9:27<\/a> \u2014 \u201cThough the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea\u201d. In Isa. 10:22<\/a> it is, \u201cThough thy People Israel be as the sand of the sea,\u201d etc<\/em>. Here, by way of inference, the same people are mentioned in other words.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 9:29<\/a> is referred to as a difference in reading, \u201cExcept the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed\u201d (\u03c3\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1\u03bc\u03b1, sperma<\/em>). In Isa. 1:9<\/a> it is \u201cExcept the Lord of hosts had left unto us a remnant (\ufb2b\u05b8\u05e8\u05b4\u05d9\u05d3, sareed), but sareed means the same thing exactly, though the words differ. The seed that is left will form the remnant, and the \u201cremnant\u201d that is left will consist of the \u201cseed.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 9:33<\/a> \u2014 \u201cWhosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed\u201d This, in Isa. 28:16<\/a>, is \u201cHe that believeth shall not make haste.\u201d The Hebrew (\u05d7\ufb35\ufb2a, ch\u016bsh<\/i>), means to flee, flee away, hence, of the feelings, to be excited.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 9:33 is the Divine inference from this, for he who really believes has no need for fleeing or for excitement; but can patiently wait for and expect the fulfillment of the Divine promises. Hence, he will have no ground for that shame which causes others to run away.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nEph. 4:8<\/a> \u2014 This is supposed to be a case where there is a difference of reading. The English is: \u201cand gave gifts unto men.\u201d But the Hebrew of Psa. 68:18<\/a> (19) is: \u201cThou hast received gifts for men.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn the Psalm we have the prophecy \u201cthat Jah Elohim might dwell among them\u201d; while in the Epistle we have the fulfillment in the gifts received being \u201cactually\u201d given, and the Lord God dwelling in the midst of His People by the Holy Spirit. But apart from this it ought to be noted that the Hebrew \u05dc\u05b8\u05e7\u05b7\u05d7 (lakach<\/i>) has the double and beautiful sense of first receiving and then giving: i.e., receive and give what is received. Hence it is often rendered \u201cto fetch.\u201d See Gen. 18:5<\/a>; 27:13<\/a>; 42:16<\/a>. Ex. 27:20<\/a> \u201cbring.\u201d Lev. 24:2<\/a> \u201cbring.\u201d 2 Kings 2:20<\/a> \u201cbring.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nWe ought, however, to note that in the Psalm we have \u05d1\u05b8\u05d0\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05dd (baadam<\/i>) with the article: i.e<\/i>., in the man. So that we may render it: \u201cThou didst receive gifts in human nature\u201d: i.e<\/em>., as \u201cthe Son of man\u201d
\n(compare Matt. 28:18<\/a>. John 13:3<\/a>). He did give gifts to men.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n(c) In number.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 4:7<\/a> \u2014 \u201cThou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.\u201d In Deut. 6:16<\/a> it is: \u201cYe shall not tempt.\u201d If the command is given to all in general, then surely it applies to each individual in particular: and so the Lord applied it in reply to the Tempter.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 4:7<\/a> \u2014 \u201cBlessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven.\u201d In Psa. 32:1<\/a> it is in the singular number: \u201cBlessed is he,\u201d etc<\/em>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nBut this is not a direct quotation. It is introduced by the words: \u201cDavid also describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputed righteousness without works [saying] Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nBut in the Hebrew the word \u201cman\u201d (\u05d0\u05b8\u05d3\u05b8\u05dd) does not occur until verse 2. In verse 1 it is literally \u201cO the happinesses of the forgiven of transgression: the covered of sin,\u201d And this singular may be used of a forgiven People collectively, and be Divinely expanded according to its sense: \u201cBlessed are they.\u201d In both places the plural is meant, the singular being put for it in the former case only by Synecdoche<\/em> (q.v<\/em>.).<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 10:15<\/a> \u2014 \u201cHow beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of peace.\u201d<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn Isa. 52:7<\/a> the Heb. is \u201cthe feet of him,\u201d the singular being put by Synecdoche for the plural, just as \u201cthe feet\u201d are put (the part for the whole) for the person who preaches.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span> (d) In person. Examples of this may be found under Heterosis of Person. See above, where one person is put for another.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span> (e) In mood and tense. Examples of this may be found under Heterosis<\/i> of the Verb. See above. One illustration may be given in Matt. 13:14, 15<\/a>, where (in the quotation of Isa. 6:10) the indicative mood is put by Heterosis for the imperative.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

.<\/span> 4. Where several citations are amalgamated.
\n\u00a0…..\u2026..Composite quotations.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nSometimes a number of separate sentences are drawn from different passages and presented as one connected passage. This is a common use, practiced generally in all literature. Dr. Franklin Johnson* gives some interesting examples from various authors.
\n* The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old<\/a> considered in the light of general literature, pp. 92-102<\/a>.<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nPlato, in his Ion (p. 538<\/a>), quotes two lines from Homer pieced together by Plato himself, the first from Iliad xi.<\/a>, line 638; and the second, line 630, col. 629.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nXenophon (Memorabilia, bk. I., ch. 2, sec. 58<\/a>) quotes connectedly as one passage,
\ntwo passages from Homer (Iliad ii.<\/a>, 188 sqq. and 198 sqq.)<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nLucian, in his Charon<\/a> (sec. 22), runs five lines together from Homer. But Jacobitz \u2020 shows that they are brought together from different passages: viz<\/em>.: Iliad ix.<\/a> 319, 320, and Odyssey x.<\/a> 521 ; xi.<\/a> 539.
\n\u2020 Lucian i., p. 39.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nPlutarch<\/a>, in his treatise on Progress in Virtue, treats two separate lines of Homer as a single sentence, viz., Odyssey vi. 187<\/a> and xxiv. 402<\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nCicero, in De Oratore, book II., sec. 80, quotes from the Andria of Terence, making up in two lines parts of Terence’s lines 117, 128 and 129.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nPhilo, in his treatise, Who is the heir of divine things? sec. 5, quotes, as one address of Moses, parts of two, viz., Num. 11:13 and 22. but both refer to the same matter.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn the same treatise (sec. 46) he runs together parts of Gen. 18:14 and 17:19.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nConybeare and Howson (Life and Epistles of St. Paul, vol. I., p. 54<\/a>) quote, as one passage, parts of
\nPsa. 122:4<\/a>; 68:27<\/a> (28); 122:5<\/a>, 2, 6, 7; and 68:35<\/a> (36). And these are not accompanied by any references or explanation.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRuskin, in his Modern Painters, vol. V., p. 140<\/a>, (146) quotes as one passage:
\n\u201cHow I love thy law! It is my meditation all the day. Thy testimonies are my delight and my counsellors; sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.\u201d All these four sentences are from the Psalms. The first two are from Psa. 119:97<\/a>, 24<\/a> and 19:10<\/a>(11). All these composite quotations are made up of sentences that relate to the same subject. And this is always true of those which we find in the Scriptures. Not so when man quotes the Scriptures in this manner. When he thus strings texts together it is a very different matter; and, though sometimes harmless, it is often dangerous, and is a practice greatly to be deprecated. By a system, which may be called text-garbling, he is able to support his own theories and views. We recently saw two texts (quotations) thus connected in order to support Fasting, though they relate to totally distinct subjects: \u201cThe Lord Jesus fasted forty days and forty nights. Do this in remembrance of Me.\u201d This is a flagrant example, but less likely to harm than many others which are less glaring and more specious.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nQuite different are those examples in which the Holy Spirit Himself takes His own words and thus links them together, making one subject of them, even though that subject cannot be discerned by us in the separate passages.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe following are examples: \u2014<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMatt. 21:5<\/a> \u2014 \u201cTell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy king cometh unto thee,\u201d etc<\/em>. This is a composite quotation, the first sentence, \u201cTell ye,\u201d etc<\/em>., being taken from
\nIsa. 62:11<\/a>, and the latter contracted from Zech. 9:9<\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn Matt. 21:13<\/a> (Mark 11:17<\/a>, and Luke 19:46<\/a>), the Lord exclaimed:
\n\u201cIt is written. My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves.\u201d The first half of this is from Isa. 56:7<\/a>, and the second slightly altered from Jer. 7:11<\/a> In both passages (which agree with the LXX) the subject is the same; viz<\/em>., the Temple, and the right use of it.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nMark 1:2, 3<\/a> \u2014 \u201cAs it is written in the prophets, Behold,\u201d etc<\/i>.
\nThe prophets quoted are Mal. 3:1<\/a>, and Isa. 40:3<\/a>. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nLuke 1:16, 17<\/a> is from Mal. 4:5, 6<\/a> (3:23, 24*) and 3:1<\/a>.
\n*The Masoretic Text for Malachi has 3 chapters, hence, 3:18+5(6)= 3:23(3:24). <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nActs 1:20<\/a> is made up from Psa. 69:25<\/a> (26), and 109:8<\/a>, and differs both from the Heb. and the LXX. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 3:10-18<\/a> is a long quotation made up of the following passages, which all refer
\nto the same subject. They are composed of two classes, the general and the particular; verses 10-12 are taken from Ecc. 7:20<\/a>, Psa. 14:2, 3<\/a>, and 53:2, 3<\/a> (3, 4), which speak generally of the universality of sin; while the second kind, verses 13-18, taken from Psa. 5:9<\/a> (10). <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIsa. 59:7, 8<\/a>, and Psa. 36:1<\/a> (2) proves the same thing; being the manifestations of sin in particular cases. Thus two methods of proof by induction are employed: and yet some, \u201cforgetting their logic<\/a>\u201d (as Dr. Franklin Johnson<\/a> says), see a difficulty in this simple method of proof which is common to all writers of all ages, and of various languages. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIt should be noted that in these cases the reasoning is always correctly from the general to the particular; and not, as is so often the case with man, from the particular to the general: which is false in logic and fatal as to the argument. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 9:33<\/a> is made up from Isa. 28:16<\/a> and 8:14<\/a>. Varied both from the Heb. and the LXX. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 11:8<\/a> is made up from Isa. 29:10<\/a> and Deut. 29:4<\/a>. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nRom. 11:26, 27<\/a> is made up from Isa. 59:20, 21<\/a> and 27:9<\/a>, and agreeing with the LXX. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1 Cor. 15:54, 55<\/a> is made up from Isa. 25:8<\/a>, and Hos. 13:14<\/a>, and varied both from the Heb. and the LXX. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n2 Cor. 6:16<\/a> is made up from Lev. 26:11, 12<\/a> and Ezek. 37:27<\/a>, and is varied from the LXX. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nGal. 3:8<\/a> is made up from Gen. 12:3<\/a> and 18:18<\/a>. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nHeb. 9:19, 20<\/a> is made up from Ex. 24:6, 7, 8<\/a>, and Num. 19:6<\/a>. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1 Pet. 2:7<\/a> is made up from Psa. 118:22<\/a> and Isa. 8:14<\/a>. Objectors have made a difficulty of these composite quotations, as though the Holy Spirit, the Author of the words as well as of the Word, may not repeat, vary, or combine His words in any way He pleases: and as though He were to be denied the right claimed and practiced by writers in all ages. So far from seeing a difficulty in this, we may learn many important lessons from these variations, which are nothing less than Divine Comments on the Divine Word by the Divine Author. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n5. Where quotations are from secular works, or books other than the Bible. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nSometimes the Holy Spirit quotes words from secular and human writings, and either thus endorses the truth of the statement, or uses it against those who believed it and accepted it as truth. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nNot all, however, that are generally considered as quotations are really so. For example: \u201cAs Jannes and Jambres<\/a> withstood Moses\u201d (2 Tim. 3:8<\/a>) is said to be a quotation from the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel upon Ex. 7:11<\/a>. But the Holy Spirit may give this independently, as a fact, quite apart from the Targum altogether; while many believe the Targum to be of a later date. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nSo, too, the prophecy of Enoch in Jude 14, 15<\/a> may just as well be the foundation on which the so-called \u201cBook of Enoch\u201d was afterwards made up, as a quotation made from that book. We certainly prefer to believe that the book of Enoch was originated from Jude 14, 15; and, taking this as the starting point, other prophecies were concocted and added by some old and unknown writer. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe same applies to Jude 9 concerning the controversy between Michael and the Devil about the body of Moses. This Scriptural statement was the original centre round which numberless fancies and fictions subsequently gathered, and from which the traditions started. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nOn the other hand, there are three certain undoubted quotations from secular writings. We will give them all. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe first is: \u2014
\nActs 17:28<\/a> \u2014 \u201cFor in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said,: \u201bFor we are also his offspring\u2019 (\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd, tou gar kai genos esmen<\/em>):\u201d This is an exact quotation from ARATUS, a native of Tarsus; who, being a poet, had been requested by ANTIGONUS GONATAS, son of DEMETRIUS, and King of Macedonia (273-239 b.c), to put into poetry an astronomical work of EUDOXUS (an astronomer of Cnidus, 403- 350 B.C.), called Phainomena<\/a><\/em>. This he did about 270 b.c., and he called his work Diosemeia (i.e., the Divine signs), being a description and explanation of the signs of the Zodiac, and the Constellations, as the Greeks then understood, or rather misunderstood, them.*
\nThe poem opens with praise of God (Zeus or Jupiter), and these words occur in the fifth line: \u2014
\n\u2026……<\/span>\u201cFrom Zeus we lead the strain; He whom mankind
\n\u2026…….<\/span>Ne’er leave unhymned; of Zeus all public ways,
\n\u2026…….<\/span>All haunts of men, are full; and full the sea,
\n\u2026…….<\/span>And harbours; and of Zeus all stand in need.
\n\u2026…….<\/span>We are his offspring; and he, ever good to man,
\n\u2026…….<\/span>Gives favouring signs, and rouses us to toil, etc<\/i>., etc<\/i>. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Similar words, \u1f10\u03ba \u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c3\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd (ek sou gar genos esmen<\/i>) are used by KLEANTHES (Hymn in Fou. 5), who was born at Assos in Troas about 300 b.c.
\nAlso in The Golden Verses of Pythagoras.
\n* See The Witness of the Stars<\/a><\/em>, by the same author and publisher. Download<\/a> <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn Acts 17:28, the word \u201cpoets,\u201d being in the plural, may refer to both of them, while the article in both cases refers to Zeus, or Jupiter. The statement of the quotation was believed by the Greeks, and it is used here as an argumentum ad hominem. For it could never be that Zeus is really Jehovah, or that Jehovah is the \u201cfather\u201d of everyone. The \u201cuniversal fatherhood of God\u201d\u2014the Devil’s lie\u2014was the belief of the heathen, as well as of most modern \u201cChristian\u201d teachers. But both are wrong: for God is \u201cthe Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,\u201d and of those only who are \u201cin Christ.\u201d It is to \u201cas many as received Him, to them [and to none other] gave He authority to be called the sons of God\u201d (John 1:12<\/a>). <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\n1 Cor. 15:33<\/a> \u2014 \u201c Evil communications (or companionships) corrupt good manners.\u201d \u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u1f24\u03b8\u03b7 \u03c7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b8 \u1f41\u03bc\u03b9\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03b9 \u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03af (phtheirousin eethee chreesth\u2019 homiliai kakai<\/em>).
\nThe words occur in this form, according to Jerome,\u2020 in the Thais of Menander.
\nDr. Burton thinks Menander may have quoted it from Euripides. Meyer quotes Plato (Rep. viii. 550b).
\n\u2020 In his Epistle to the Orator Magnus. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThese various opinions show that the words were current as a common place quotation (Par\u0153mia, q.v<\/i>..), and are quoted as such here. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nTit. 1:12<\/a> \u2014 \u201cOne of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, \u2018 The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies \u2019 (i.e<\/i>., liars, evil wild-beasts, gluttons, lazy). This involves another figure called Oxymoron (q.v<\/em>.). Jerome\u2021 says that the poet was Epimenides, and that the words occur in his work called de Oraculis (i.e<\/i>., of Oracles), whence he is called a \u201cprophet,\u201d either by way of irony, or because of the title of his work. Callimachus (a poet of Cyrene) makes use of these words in a hymn to Jupiter, and satirizes the Cretans for their boast that Jupiter was buried in Crete, whereas he maintains
\n(of course) that Jove was immortal. It was from this that Ovid said \u201bNec fingunt omnia Cretes\u2019
\n(The Cretans do not always lie*).
\n\u2021 Com. in loco.
\n*See Ovid, A. iii. 10, 19. Eliicott refers to Ovid, de A. A., i. 298. This says \u201cquamvis sit mendax, Creta negare potest.\u201d. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nThe origin of all this was that the Cretans had a certain sepulchre with this epitaph: \u201cHere lies one whom they call Jupiter.\u201d <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nBecause of this, the \u201cPoet\u201d charges them with a lie, saying: \u201cthe Cretans are alway liars, evil beasts, slow-bellies; therefore (O Jupiter) they have built a Sepulchre for you. But thou hast not died, . . . thou always livest,\u201d etc<\/i>. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nBut it has been pointed out (by Archbishop Whately, we believe), that if the Cretans are always liars, this was said by a Cretan, therefore he must have been a liar, and what he said could not be true! But all this reasoning is set at rest by the Holy Ghost, who says: \u201cThis testimony is true!\u201d <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nIn Acts 17:22, 23<\/a>, we have not, indeed, a quotation, but a reference to a matter on which contemporary and later writers give confirmatory and interesting evidence. \u201cI perceive that in all things ye are unusually religious. For, as I passed by and carefully observed your objects of worship, I found an altar also with this inscription; \u1f08\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03b8\u03b5\u1ff7 (Agnost\u014d the\u014d<\/em>) \u2018 to an unknown God.\u2019 Whom therefore, not knowing, ye reverence, him I make known to you.\u201d <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nJerome\u2020 says (speaking of St. Paul); \u201cHe learned of the true David to snatch the sword from the enemy’s hand, and cut off his head with his own weapon.\u201d
\n\u2020 Epist. ad Magnum Oratorem Romamim. Vol. III. Operum, f. 148. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nLudovicus Vives says\u2021 that \u201cin the Attic fields there were very many altars dedicated to unknown Gods,\u201d and that \u201cPausanias in his Attics, speaks of The Altars of Unknown Gods, which altars were the invention of Epimenides, the Cretan. For, when Attica was visited with a sore plague, they consulted the Delphian Oracle, whose answer was reported to be: That they must offer sacrifices, but named not the god to whom they should be offered. Epimenides, who was then at Athens, commanded\u00a7 that they should send the beasts intended for the sacrifice through the fields, and that the sacrificers should follow the beasts with this direction: that, wherever they should stand, there they must be sacrificed to the unknown god, in order to pacify his wrath. From that time, therefore, to the time of Diogenes Laertius these altars were visited.\u201d*
\n\u2021 De Civit, Dei. Book VII., cap. 17. \u00a7 Hence called \u2018 a prophet \u2019 in Tit. 1:12.
\nSee The Man of God, by the same author and publisher.
\n* For further information on this subject, see Sixtus Senensis, book 2, Biblioth Tit. Ar\u0153 Athenensis Inscriptio. also Wolfius, Vol. I., Lectionum Memorabilium, p. 4, v. 20, etc<\/i>. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nCol. 2:21<\/a> \u2014 \u201c Touch not; taste not; handle not.\u201d
\nThese ordinances of men were probably prescribed in these words, and are referred to as well known. We know them also today; for man is the same, and human nature is not changed. <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n


\nFrom \u201cFigures Of Speech Used In The Bible\u201d by E. W. Bullinger, (Public Domain) pages 778-803. Adapted for website compatibility.
\nSee original at link. \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Stream<\/a> \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Download<\/a>.
\n
\n.<\/span>figuresofspeechinthebible.net \u00a9 2013-2022. All rights reserved. Material in public domain may be freely copied and distributed without charge for educational, non-commercial purposes. This website, and those referenced by this site as sources of public domain material, are to be referenced. Material that is not in public domain, and indicated as such, is the property of its rightful owner(s), and\/or originator.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

GNOME; or, QUOTATION. Gn\u014d’-mee. Greek, \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03bc\u03b7, knowledge, understanding: also a means of knowing. From \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9, (gn\u014dnai), to know. Hence, the term Gnome is given to the citation of brief, sententious, profitable sayings expressive of a universal maxim or sentiment which appertains to human affairs, cited as well-known, or as being […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":355,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-3747","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3747","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=3747"}],"version-history":[{"count":10,"href":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3747\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":15429,"href":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/3747\/revisions\/15429"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/355"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/figuresofspeechinthebible.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=3747"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}