Scripture and still needs further information, he should turn to the
passages of Scripture as Ex. 12:1–21; Lev. 23:4–14; Num. 28:16 ff.; Deut. 16:1–8. According to the prophecy of the angel to Manoah, Samson was destined to be a nazarite (Judg. 13:5). But what was a nazarite? The answer to that question is found in Num. 6. Zephaniah pronounces judgment on those "that swear by Malcham." 1 Kings 11:5, 7, 33 speak of him as the god of the Ammonites, and Lev. 18:21 and 20:2–5 point to the fact that he was served with human sacrifices. In the New Testament we meet with the party of the Sadducees, and the question arises, What characterized them? The following passages give at least a partial answer to that query: Matt. 22:23; Mark 12:18; Luke 20:27; Acts 23:8. The Samaritans are repeatedly named also, and again we ask, Who were they? The study of such passages as 2 Kings 17:24–41; Ezra 4, and Nehemiah 4 enlighten us.
2. EXTERNAL. If the expositor has exhausted the resources of Scripture and still needs further information, he should turn to the profane sources at his command.
a. The inscriptions. These are undoubtedly very important. They disclose to the world the history of comparatively unknown periods, and often serve to correct erroneous historical accounts. Hence it would be unwarranted for the interpreter to disregard the information which they convey.
(1) For the Old Testament. The cuneiform inscriptions are of the greatest importance: the accounts of the creation and the flood, the Tel-el-Amarna Tablets, the Code of Hammurabi, and the inscriptions of the great Assyrian and Babylonian kings. Yet they should not be regarded as absolutely reliable from a historical point of view. For example, it is generally admitted at present that the accounts of the kings are exaggerated and aim at the aggranizement or glorification of these monarchs rather than at historical truth. The works of H. Winckler and E. Schrader contain valuable collections of these inscriptions as they bear on the contents of the Old Testament. The following works in the English language are also valuable: Barton,
Archaeology and the Bible: Naville, Archaeology and the Old Testament: Price, The Monuments and the Old Testament: Bliss, The Development of the Palestine Exploration; Kenyon, The Bible and Archaeology; Noordtzij, Gods Woord en der Feuwen Getuigenis; Van Deursem, Het Land van den Bijbel; Baarslag, De Bijbelsche Geschiedenis in de Omlijsting van het Oosten.
(2) For the New Testament. Here the inscriptions on the Egyptian papyri and ostraca, and those found in Asia Minor are of primary significance. The former, however, have linquistic rather than historical value, though they are not devoid of historical interest; while the latter bear on the history more than on the language of the New Testament. The following are some of the most important works that are easily accessible: Deissmann. Light from the Ancient East; ibid., Biblical Studies; Ramsay's works, especially, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament; Cobern, The New Archaeological Discoveries and their Bearing upon the New Testament; Kenyon, The Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts.
b. Other historical writings. Among these, the works of Josephus, viz., his Antiquities of the Jews, and Jewish War, deserve the place of honor. The first ten books of his Antiquities contain very little that is not also contained in the Old Testament. The real value of his greatest work begins with the 11th book. From that book on, the author refers to many sources that are not accessible now, such as Berosus, Nicholas of Damascus, Alexander Polyhistor, Menander, and others. Naturally, the value of this part of his work depends largely on the sources which he employed. It is evident that he used them more or less critically, but it is not absolutely certain that his evaluation of them is correct. Josephus is often accused of subjectivity and of historical inaccuracy. Yet it would seem that, on the whole, his work is perfectly reliable, though it must be admitted that in the apologetic part of his work he flatters the Jews somewhat. His Jewish War is regarded as a reliable and very valuable work. The only objection to it is that the numbers are often exaggerated, and
that the heroic deeds and the magnanimity of the Romans receive undue praise.
The History of Herodotus is valuable for the study of the Persian period. But even according to the testimony of his most moderate critics, he is not always reliable, and must be used with caution.
Furthermore, the Talmud and the writings of the Rabbis may serve to elucidate the historical portion of the Bible. Lightfoot gathered an important collection of Jewish sayings that bear on the contents of Scripture, in his Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae.
It is possible that the expositor, in studying these sources, will occasionally find that they apparently conflict with the Bible. In such cases, he should not hastily conclude that Scripture is mistaken, but must always bear in mind that, while there may be error of transcription, the Bible is the infallible Word of God. It may be that our extra-biblical sources are not reliable at the point in question, or that they merely conflict with an erroneous interpretation of a Scriptural passage. Therefore, whenever he encounters cases of apparent conflict, he will have to investigate the veracity of these profane sources; and if this is found to be above reasonable doubt, he may have to revise his exegetical views, but it is also possible that he may meet with an insoluble difficulty; that an apparently reliable source conflicts, not with his interpretation of the Bible, but, as far as he can see, with the Bible itself. In such cases there is only one legitimate course, viz., to cling faithfully to the statement of the Bible, and to wait patiently for additional light. It is not at all impossible, as the cases of Sargon and Belshazzar prove, that a seemingly reliable source may in the end prove untrustworthy.
EXERCISE: Explain the following passages historically, i. e., in the light of geographical, political, or religious circumstances, or from the point of view of the object of a book, the environment of the author, his age or frame of mind: Gen. 23:3–16; Deut. 32:11; 1 Sam. 15:2, 3; 2 Sam. 21:1–6; 2 Kings 17:4; Ezra 7:21; Neh. 2:10, 19; Esther
3:8; Ps. 2:6; 9:14; 11:1; 22:16; 29:3–9; 63:1; 99:1; 125:1, 2; Prov. 29:23; Cant. 4:16; Isa. 3:16; 20:1; Hosea 7:11; 10:5; Joel 1:9; 2:20, 23; Micah 3:5–8; Matt. 1:19; 5:20; 23:37, 38; Luke 2:1–3; 13:1 John 1:21; 1 Cor. 10:21; Gal. 3:3; Col. 2:16–18; 2 Tim. 4:6–8.
LITERATURE: Davidson, Sacred Hermeneutics, pp. 320–333; Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, pp. 129–140; Lutz, Biblische Hermeneutik, pp. 228–274; Immer, Hermeneutics, pp. 259–330.
VII. Theological Interpretation
A. Name
Many writers on Hermeneutics are of the opinion that the grammatical and historical interpretation meet all the requirements for the proper interpretation of the Bible. They have no eye for the special theological character of this discipline. There are others, however, who are conscious of the necessity of recognizing a third element in the interpretation of Scripture. Kuyper emphasizes the necessity of recognizing the mystical factor in the interpretation of Scripture (Theol. Enc. III, p. 101 vv.), and Bavinck insists that the Bible be read theologically (Dogm. I, p. 471). Klausen and Landerer speaks of theological, and Cellerier and Sikkel, of a scriptural interpretation. They all agree in the desire to do justice to the special theological element of the Bible, and refuse to place it on a level with other books.
Scripture contains a great deal that does not find its explanation in history, nor in the secondary authors, but only in God as the Auctor primarius. Purely historical and psychological considerations will not account for the following facts: (1) that the Bible is the Word of God; (2) that it constitutes an organic whole, of which each individual