Gnome; or, Quotation
Gnome; or, Quotation
Gn-mee. Greek, , knowledge, understanding; also a means of knowing. From (gnnai), 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 of general acceptance, but without quoting the authors name.
In Pro 1:2, they are called words of understanding. The Scriptures, as Bengel remarks, are so full of the best things, that these constitute, as it were, certain continued sentiments openly set forth in the form of gnomes.
When these are applied to a certain person, time, or place; or to individual cases; or are clothed with circumstantial particulars, the figure is called NOEMA, (no-ee-ma), (plural, NOEMATA), i.e., sense, thought, that which is thought, from , to perceive.
When the authors name is given, the figure is called CHREIA, , chree-a, use, usage, or usance, (from , chraomai, to use).
For the Greek name of the figure Gnome the Latins substituted SENTENTIA (sen-ten-ti-a), sentiment, or a sententious saying; a philosophic aphorism, maxim, or axiom, which is quoted on account of its application to the subject in hand.
These are exactly what are referred to in Ecc 12:11.
The words of the wise
Are as goads;
And as tent-pegs well fixed are
[The words] of the masters of assemblies.* [Note: See under Ellipsis, page 74.]
A Gnome, however, differs from a Proverb in this: that every Proverb is a Gnome, but every Gnome is not necessarily a Proverb. A Gnome is, properly speaking, a quotation: and therefore this figure opens up the whole question of the Quotations from the Old Testament in the New.
This is a large subject, many volumes having been written upon it, both in ancient and in recent times.
It is also a difficult subject, owing to certain phenomena which lie upon its surface.
It is a fact that there are variations between the quotations and the Text quoted from.
Sometimes they agree with the Septuagint translation, and differ from the Hebrew, and vice versa; and sometimes they differ from both.
Sometimes they are direct quotations; at other times they are composite quotations of several passages joined in one; while others are mere allusions.
Consequently it is difficult for anyone to make a list or table of such quotations which shall agree with those made by others.
The general fact seems to be that there are 189 separate passages quoted* [Note: If it is merely a reference or allusion, as distinct from a quotation, then there are many more, of course. The Lord Jesus Himself referred to 22 out of our 39 Old Testament books.
In Matthew there are references to 88 passages in 10 Old Testament books. In Mark to 37 passages in 10 books. In Luke to 58 passages in 8 books. In John to 40 passages in 6 books.
Deuteronomy and Isaiah, the two books most assailed by the Higher Critics, are referred to more often than any other Old Testament books. While Revelation contains no less than 244 references to 25 Old Testament books.
In Romans there are 74 references. Corinthians, 54. Galatians, 16. Ephesians, 10. Hebrews, 85.
In all, out of 260 chapters in the New Testament, there are 832 quotations, or references, or allusions to the Old Testament Scriptures.
Every Old Testament book is referred to with the exception of Ezra, Neh. Est., and Canticles.
The Apocryphal books are not referred to at all.] in the New Testament, according to Spearmans reckoning: [Note: Letters to a friend. Edinburgh, 1759.] i.e., counting a passage only once, though it may be quoted several times. Including the whole, there are, according to Bishop Wetenhalls method, 244: of which 147 agree with the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , and 97 differ from it.
Reckoning according to Spearman, we find, out of the 189 passages quoted, 105 that agree with the Septuagint, 21 that differ from it, 45 that differ from both it and the Hebrew, and 18 neutral.
These may be exhibited in the following table:-
No. of Quotations in Acc. [Note: cc. The Accusative Case.] to LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] Differ from LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] Differ from both.
Matt.3825481
Mark31-2-
Luke5–32
John113251
Acts191117-
Rom.51304512
1 Cor.11425-
2 Cor.84112
Gal.431–
Eph.2-11-
Hebrews221534-
1 Peter76–1
Jude11—
Rev.7223-
———-
189105214419
It will thus be seen that by far the larger number of quotations correspond with the Septuagint translation.
Now, 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 Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost (2Pe 1:21).
Our studies will certainly be incomplete if we do not observe the manner in which the Holy Spirit quotes in the New Testament those Scriptures which He had before inspired in the Old. Notice, then, the following examples:-
Mar 12:36.-David himself said by the Holy Ghost. This was the introduction to a quotation from Psa 110:1.
Mat 15:4.-Referring to Exo 20:12, our Lord says, God commanded, saying, etc.
Heb 3:7.-Referring to Psa 95:7-11. Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith, not as David saith, or as the Psalmist saith.
Heb 9:8.-Referring to Exo 25:1-40 -xl. (concerning the Tabernacle and its teaching), The Holy Ghost this signifying, etc.
Heb 10:15.-Quoting Jer 31:33-34, Whereof the Holy Ghost is a witness to us.
Act 1:16.-Peter, quoting Psa 41:9 (10), says, This Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of David, spake before concerning Judas. Observe, that while David spake, the words were not his, but the words of the Holy Ghost.
Act 3:18.-Peter, referring to the Old Testament prophecies of Christ, says, Those things, which God before had showed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.
Act 28:25.-Paul, quoting Isa 6:9, exclaims, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Isaiah the prophet unto our fathers.
Old Testament passages are introduced in various ways:
1. (gegraptai), it standeth written. Mat 4:4-10. Luk 4:4; Luk 4:8. Rom 1:17; Rom 3:4; Rom 3:10; Rom 10:15. 1Co 1:19; 1Co 1:31. 1Pe 1:16, etc.
2. (legei gar hee graphee), for the Scripture saith. Rom 9:17 (Exo 9:16). Rom 10:11 (Isa 28:16). 1Ti 5:18 (Deu 25:4).
3. (ho nomos) The Law. Joh 15:25, from Psa 35:19; Psa 69:4 (5), emphasizes the fact that the Sacred Writings of the Old Covenant, viewed as a whole, constituted the Law of Israel. The pronoun their shows this. Joh 10:34 (from Psa 82:6) is written in Exo 21:6; Exo 22:8-9 (7, 8). And 1Co 14:21 (from Isa 28:11-12) has a reference to Deu 28:49. Thus the reference is carried back, not only to the passage quoted, but to the one still earlier, in which it had its origin.
In the New Testament eight men are specified as the agents employed by the Holy Spirit: Moses, 13 times; David 7; Elijah, once; Isa 12:1-6; Joel, once; Hosea, once; Jeremiah, twice; Daniel, once.
In Matthew an agent is named 13 times (Jeremiah, Isaiah, Moses, David, and Daniel).
In Mar 7:1-37 (Moses, Isaiah, David, Daniel).
In Luk 6:1-49 (Moses, Isaiah, David).
In Joh 4:1-54 (Isaiah, Moses).
In Act 10:1-48 (David, Joel, Moses, Isaiah).
In Rom 10:1-21 (David, Hosea, Isaiah, Moses, Elijah).
In 1 Cor., (Moses) once.
In Heb 3:1-19 (David, Moses).
In Rev., (Moses) once.
Thus, 14 passages are ascribed to the agency of Moses; 8 to that of David; 13 of Isa 2:1-22 of Hos 2:1-23 of Jer 1:1-19 of Dan 1:1-21 of Joe 1:1-20 of Elijah.
These 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.
In making a quotation from the Old Testament in the New, surely the Holy Spirit is at 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.
This is the case with the quotations in the Bible, and this one consideration explains all the so-called difficulties connected with the subject.
Our 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.
In 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.
In 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 in his chapter on Gnomes.* [Note: Which Keach translates almost verbatim, without any acknowledgment.]
I.As to their INTERNAL form (i.e., the sense as distinct from the words).
1.Where the sense originally intended is preserved.
2.Where the sense is modified.
3.Where the sense is accommodated (accommodatio)
II.As to their EXTERNAL form (i.e., the words as distinct from the sense).
1.Where the words quoted are the same as the Hebrew or the Septuagint.
2.Where the words are varied as to omission, position, oraddition.
3.Where words are changed:
a.by a reading:
b.by an inference:
c.in number:
d.in person:
e.in mood or tense.
4.Where several citations are amalgamated (composite quotations).
5.Where the quotations are made from books other than the Bible.
We will now consider these forms of Quotation in order:-
I. As to their Internal form, i.e., the sense as distinct from the words
In the consideration of Quotations, care must be taken to note what is said to be spoken, and what is said to be written. Some prophecies were written and never spoken; some were spoken by the Prophet and afterwards written down in his prophecies; others were spoken and never written down at all, and when, therefore, a passage is quoted as having been spoken, we may or may not find it written down in the Old Testament Scriptures. But when it is said to have been written, then we shall find it surely written down in the Scriptures of truth.
Surely there is all the difference in the world between (to rheethen), that which was spoken, and (ho gegraptai), that which standeth written.
There is a further consideration which will help us when the quotations are prophecies. Prophecy is the utterance of the Lord-Jehovah: He Who was and is and is to come. His words, therefore, may often have a past, present and future reference.
Prophecy frequently has all three: (1) the reference to the events at the time of its utterance; (2) a subsequent reference to some great crisis; and (3) a final consummation, which shall fulfil and exhaust it.
When a prophecy is said, therefore, to be fulfilled, that exhausts it. In other cases, where that final fulfilment is still future, the quotation is general-as it is written, or some such indefinite reference.
The 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.
For example, with regard to the prophecy in Dan 11:1-45 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 fulfilment; but neither contains the whole truth embodied in the fulness of the prophetic record.
An example of this may be seen in the very first recorded fulfilment of prophecy in the New Testament (Mat 1:23 below). We there see how the same Holy Spirit who first inspired that prophecy afterwards Himself interprets and applies it.
1. Where the sense originally intended by the Holy Spirit is preserved, though the words may vary
Mat 1:23.-Behold a virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel.
This prophecy was spoken by Isaiah to Ahaz (Isa 7:13-14), 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 the mouth, did not understand, but which the Lord really intended. The words differ from both the Heb. and the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , but the sense is the same.
It never had or could have a proper fulfilment, 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 Emmanuel; 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 fulfilment in the days of Ahaz, because a real virgin did not conceive and bring forth a real Emmanuel.
This 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 fulfilment at the time.* [Note: See Number in Scripture (page 63) by the same author and publisher.]
Mat 2:6.-Quoted from Mic 5:2 (1). The words differ from the Heb. and LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , but the sense originally intended is preserved.
Mat 11:10.-(Mar 1:2, etc.). Quoted from Mal 3:1. Here the words differ from the Heb. and the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , though the original sense intended is preserved.
Mat 12:17, etc.-Quoted from Isa 42:1-4. The words differ from the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , but the original sense is preserved.
Mat 13:14-15.-(Mar 4:12. Luk 8:10. Joh 12:40. Act 28:26-27). Quoted from Isa 6:9-10, agreeing with the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Mat 21:5.-(Joh 12:14-15). Quoted from Isa 62:11 and Zec 9:9, agreeing with LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Mat 21:16.-Have ye never read, Psa 8:2 (3), Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected (or prepared) praise, which agrees with the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Mat 21:42.-(Mar 12:10. Act 4:11. 1Pe 2:7). Quoted from Psa 118:22-23 (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
Mat 22:44.-(Mar 12:36. Luk 20:42-43. Act 2:34-35. 1Co 15:25. Heb 1:13). Quoted from Psa 110:1 (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
Mat 26:31.-Quoted from Zec 13:7. Though the words differ both from the Heb. and the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , the sense originally intended is preserved.
Mat 27:35.-(Joh 19:24). Quoted from Psa 22:18 (19) (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
Luk 4:18; Luk 4:21.-Quoted from Isa 61:1-2. The words differ both from the Heb. and LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , though the original intention is preserved.
Joh 19:37.-Quoted from Zec 12:10. The words differ from the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , but the sense is the same.
Act 3:22-23.-Quoted from Deu 18:15-19 (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
Act 13:33.-Quoted from Psa 2:7 (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
Act 15:16-17.-Quoted from Amo 9:11-12. The words differ from the Heb. and LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , though the sense is preserved.
Rom 14:11.-Quoted from Isa 45:23. The words differ both from the Heb. and the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , but the original sense is preserved.
Rom 15:3.-Quoted from Psa 69:9 (10) (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
Rom 15:12.-Quoted from Isa 11:1; Isa 11:10 (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
Eph 4:8.-Quoted from Psa 68:18 (19). Here the original sense is preserved, though the words differ both from the Heb. and the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Heb 1:8-9.-Quoted from Psa 45:6-7 (7, 8), etc. (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
Heb 1:10-13.-Quoted from Psa 102:25 (26), etc. (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
Heb 5:6; Heb 7:17.-Quoted from Psa 110:4.
Heb 10:5-6.-Quoted from Psa 40:6-9 (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ). Here the words differ from the Hebrew (see below page 793), though the original intention and scope of the words is preserved.
1Pe 2:6.-Quoted from Isa 28:16 (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ).
2. Where the original sense is modified in the quotation or reference
Mat 12:40.-Where, in the reference to Jon 1:17 (2:1), the words are used with a new and different application.
Joh 3:14-15, where the words respecting the brazen serpent, though not directly quoted, are modified in their new application.
Joh 19:36.-A bone of him shall not be broken. Quoted from Exo 12:46, where we have the words, Neither shall ye break a bone thereof. That another Scripture saith 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. (See 1Co 5:7).
Eph 5:31-32.-Where, in the reference to Gen 2:23-24, the words are used with a new application.
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.
Mat 2:15.-Out of Egypt have I called my son, which agrees with the Hebrew of Hos 11:1, and not with the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , which has have I sent for his (i.e., Israels) children.
Mat 2:17-18.-From Jer 31:15 : but differs both from the Heb. and the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] (38:15). The sense of each is given, but is accommodated to the new circumstances.
Mat 8:17.-Quoted from Isa 53:4, but differing from the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , 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 passion and death (as shown in 1Pe 2:24-25), the same Spirit uses them in Matthew, and accommodates them to other circumstances, viz., to Christs healing people of their bodily sicknesses (Mat 8:16). But this only shows the wonderful fulness of the Divine words.
Mat 13:35.-Quoted from Psa 78:2 : 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: here they are accommodated by Christ, the Speaker, to the present circumstances. The words are said to be fulfilled, because, though the agent or speaker knew not of this ultimate use of the words, the Holy Spirit, Who spake by him, foreknew it. The words are said to be spoken by the prophet, and so they were (see Psa 78:1-2), though they were afterwards written down.
The actual words differ both from the Heb. and the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , as well as from the sense which is accommodated to them.
Christ was making known concerning that Kingdom certain things which would happen on its rejection. These things were not the subject of Old Testament prophecy, but had been kept secret, and are therefore called the mysteries of (or secrets concerning) the kingdom.
Mat 15:8-9.-Quoted from Isa 29:13, according to the Septuagint, but accommodated to different circumstances from those to which the words referred when first spoken.
Mat 27:9-10.-Then 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 potters field, as the Lord appointed me.
In the margin the reference given is Zec 11:12-13 : 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.
As no such passage is found in Jeremiah, the difficulty is supposed to be very great. As an example of misapplied ingenuity, we give the various attempts which have been made by way of evading the difficulty:
1. It was a mistake of Matthews memory. This was Augustines opinion, followed by Alford, who says: The citation is not from Jeremiah, and is probably quoted from memory and unprecisely.
2. The reading, Jeremiah is spurious. (Rupert von Deutz and others).
3. It occurs in a work of Jeremiahs which has been lost. (Origen and others).
4. It was in Jeremiah, but the Jews have expunged it. (Eusebius).
5. That, Because Jeremiah, in the Talmud, and some MSS., commences the latter prophets, his name is put for the whole body of their writings which would include Jeremiah. (Lightfoot, Adam Clark, Scrivener, and others).
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 the prophets who were merely channels and not the sources of Divine Truth.
Concerning this Alford says: I put it to any faithful Christian to say, whether of the two presents the greater obstacle to his faith, the solution given above (see No. 1 above), or that given in Wordsworths note.
7. Others again think Matthews mistake arose from the Jewish tradition Zechariam habuisse spiritum Jeremi (Zechariah had the spirit of Jeremiah).
Need we say, with regard to these seven, that
1. Is improbable: inasmuch as he quotes Zechariah elsewhere (21:5, 26:31).
2. Is devoid of MS. authority, which is essential in a case of this kind. Origen and Eusebius suspect it, but only conjecturally.
3. This, too, is only a conjecture.
4. So with this.
5. This has more weight, but is unlikely and unsatisfactory: so evidently a make-shift.
6. We admire Wordsworths faith in the accuracy of the Bible more than Alfords free handling of the Word: but it is, after all, a wild conjecture.
7. The same is the case with this.
Now these are just the sort of explanations which do more harm than 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 defences of its friends!
If it be a quotation from Zechariah, it can be so only by accommodation, or by composition (see below page 797, composite quotations), in which case it combines four different quotations:-
(a) They took the thirty pieces of silver, which is derived from the narrative, with special reference to Zechariah;
(b) The price of him that was valued, also after Zechariah.
(c) Whom they bought of the children of Israel (A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] marg. [Note: arg. Margin.] ) as Joseph was bought and sold. After Gen 37:1-36 :
(d) And gave them for the potters field, the narrative of the text, with a special reference to Zechariah.
(e) As the Lord appointed me, which is from Jer 32:6; Jer 32:8, and connects the transaction in Matthew with that in Jer 32:1-44 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 Lords faithfulness.
But in reality, all these so-called explanations are utterly beside the point, and are not only unnecessary, but absolutely worthless. The mention of them here would be a waste of paper and printers 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.
There is not a word about the prophecy being written in Jeremiah at all. It says (to rheethen) that which was SPOKEN: but these clever critics practically take the trouble to exchange these two words, and put in two others (ho gegraptai), or (een gegrammenon), that which is written. And then, having made the assertion that it was written in Jeremiah, they have to show cause why it cannot be found there.
Some prophecies were written and never (so far as we know) spoken at all; others were both spoken and written; while some were spoken and never written.
It says: That which was SPOKEN by Jeremiah the prophet. Surely it is neither suspicion nor conjecture, nor unprecise to maintain that it was thus spoken. Who can prove that it was not spoken by Jeremiah?
True, Zechariah may have written down similar words, though not referring to the same circumstances; but it ought never to have occurred to anyone to say that Mat 27:9-10 was quoted from what is written by Zechariah, when it positively states that it was spoken by Jeremiah.
Act 13:40-41.-Quoted from Hab 1:5, according to the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , but accommodated to another set of circumstances, and to the Romans rather than to the Chaldeans.
Rom 9:27-28.-Quoted from Isa 10:22-23, nearly according to the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Rom 9:29.-Quoted Isa 1:9, according to the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Rom 10:6-8.-Where what the Scripture (or, rather, the righteousness which is of faith) saith (Deu 30:12-14) is accommodated to different circumstances-verses 6 and 8 agreeing with the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , and verse 7 differing from it.
1Co 1:19-20.-Quoted from Isa 29:14; Isa 33:18, and differing from the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , as well as accommodated to other circumstances.
1Co 10:6; 1Co 10:11.-These things happened unto them for ensamples. Where the events cited are used and accommodated to our sins and infirmities.
Rev 1:7.-An allusion to Zec 12:10.
Rev 1:17.-An allusion to Isa 41:4; Isa 44:6, but differing from the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Rev 11:4.-Quoted from Zec 4:14, differing both from the Heb. and the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , and accommodated to different circumstances.
II. As to their External form (i.e., the words, as distinct from the sense)
1. Where the words are from the Hebrew, or from the Septuagint
Mat 2:15, from Hos 11:1; Mat 2:6, from Mic 5:2 (1); Mat 12:18-21, from Isa 42:1-4. These and other passages are from the Hebrew and not from the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Luk 4:18 quoted from the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] of Isa 61:1-2. 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.
The Spirit of the Lord (Heb., Adonai Jehovah) is upon me because he (Heb., Jehovah) hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind. Thus far we have the words of the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] The last sentence the recovering of sight to the blind, not being in the Hebrew Text* [Note: See Ginsburgs Hebrew Bible, which gives two readings.] ; while the last sentence in the Hebrew is not in the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] But the two words in the Hebrew contain both senses. (pahkach) means simply to open. Spoken once of the ears (Isa 42:20); and often of the eyes (2Ki 4:35; 2Ki 6:17; 2Ki 6:20; 2Ki 19:16. Dan 9:18. Job 27:19. Pro 20:13. Jer 32:19. Isa 42:7). Hence the first of the two words means to open the eyes of: and 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 -the 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 the doors of the eyes (, aphappayim) (Psa 132:4. Pro 6:4. Job 16:16, etc.). Hence the term to open applies equally to the eyes and to prison doors.
2. Where the words are varied by omission, addition, or transposition
Mat 4:10 and Luk 4:8.-Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, from Deu 6:13; Deu 10:20; and then the Lord added His own Divine conclusion from this: And Him only shalt thou serve.
The Heb. and the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] have fear: but the fear of God includes the worship of God; and as worship was the matter in question (see Mat 4:9), the (phobeetheesee), thou shalt fear, of the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] is changed by the Lord to (proskuneeseis), thou shalt worship.
Mat 4:15-16, from Isa 9:1-2 (8:23; 9:1). Here, the quotation differs both from the Hebrew and from the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] But this is partly an accommodation; because in Isaiah (LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ) it is prophecy, while in the Gospel it is fulfilment that is in question.
Mat 5:31, from Deu 24:1 : but here it is not given as an exact quotation. It introduces the words by the simple formula: It hath been said, implying that those who thus said, put their own meaning on what the Law said.
Mat 12:18-21, from Isa 42:1-4. Here, the Gospel differs from the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] , scarcely a word being the same till we come to the last clause. It differs, too, from the Hebrew in the last clause, because it records the act of fulfilment, and not merely the words of the prophecy. The words, therefore take the form of a Divine comment or re-statement.
Mat 19:5.-And they twain ( , hoi duo). These words are added to the usual text of Gen 2:24 : and yet the sense is the same, for only of two were these words spoken. The quotation agrees with the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Mat 22:24.-From Deu 25:5-6. But here it is the Sadducees, who do not quote, but merely give the substance of the matter under the loose formula Moses said.
Rom 11:3-4.-From 1Ki 19:10; 1Ki 19:14; 1Ki 19:18. Here neither the Heb. nor the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] is followed, but the facts are recorded; while the destruction of the altars and the killing of the prophets are transposed.
1Co 2:9.-From Isa 64:4 (3). It is clear from this that the formula, As it is written, 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 neither have entered into the heart of man, thus varying both from the Heb. and the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Moreover, He employs the general sentiment in a particular case. For what is said in the abstract, and universally, in Isaiah, is here put in contrast to some particular things which are revealed. See verse 10.
1Co 14:21.-From Isa 28:11-12. Here the quotation differs both from the Heb. and the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] : and is accommodated to the new circumstances by the omission of the middle passage, which was not relevant.
1Pe 1:24-25.-From Isa 40:6-8. Here the words are not introduced by any formula as a quotation. Isa 40:1-31 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.
3. Where the words are changed by a reading, or an inference; or in number, person, mood, or tense
We all constantly thus quote the Scriptures: and, in adapting them by application to some special circumstance, we depart from the original interpretation as to the special circumstances connected with them, and do not hesitate to change a tense, or number, or person, etc.
It is no less authoritative, as Scripture, nor does it alter the word of God.
(a) By a different reading
Heb 10:5 (7).-A body hast thou prepared me.
These words are like the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] of Psa 40:6 (39:6), and differ from the Hebrew, which is, Mine ears hast thou opened.
But this is not given as a quotation. It does not say, as it is written; but it gives the words which he saith, when he cometh into the world. What he then said in the accomplishment of a prophecy must certainly differ from the form in which the event was foretold and written centuries before.
What 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 fulfilment of the prophecy.
It consists of four lines arranged alternately:-
aSacrifice and offering thou didst not desire;
bMine ears hast thou opened:
aBurnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required;
bThen said I, Lo, I come to do thy will, O my God.
Here in a and a we have sacrifices; while in b and b we have obedience.
This is another statement of the truth in 1Sa 15:22 :
aTo obey
bIs better than sacrifice,
aAnd to hearken
bThan the fat of rams.
Here, again, we have obedience and sacrifice set in contrast. And that is exactly what we have in Heb 10:5, except that the obedience is differently expressed.
In Psa 40:6, the symbol is the opening or boring of the ears, which is in harmony with Isa 50:5; Isa 48:8; and an allusion to Exo 19:5; Exo 21:5-6; and Deu 15:16-17; while the contrast is in harmony with 1Sa 15:22 and Jer 7:22. The boring of the ears signifies the voluntary acceptance of bond-service, and the promise to perform it. But in Heb 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, A body hast thou prepared me in which to obey, and by that perfect obedience unto death to do that which is better than sacrifice. The great delight (1Sa 15:22) of the Father is expressed in Mat 3:17, as well as foretold in Isa 42:1.
Heb 11:21.-This is not a quotation; but, as it is generally treated as such, and as being in discrepancy with Gen 47:31, we refer the reader to Hysteresis (q.v. [Note: Which see.] ).
(b) By an inference
Mat 2:6.-Here we have several changes by way of inference and explanation, bringing out more of the meaning of the words in the prophet. Mic 5:2 (1) reads (R.V. [Note: The Revised Version, 1881.] ): But thou Bethlehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall One come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel.
In Mat 2:6 we have land of Judah instead of Ephrathah, which was its ancient name (see Gen 35:16-19; Gen 48:7), as being better understood by Herod.
Instead of the positive art little, we have the negative, art in no wise least, because, though little in the time of Micah, yet now, after the birth of the Messiah (Mat 1:1-25), it could no longer be so called, in view of the event which had given the city true greatness.
Instead of thousands, we have the Metonymy (q.v. [Note: Which see.] ), properly translated princes, because Messiah was the Prince of princes.
Instead of be ruler, we have be shepherd of (A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] rule, margin feed). This explanation brings in the next verse but one in Micah (He shall stand and shall feed.)
Finally, the words of the prophet, unto me, 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 for, and the fact is added in the words, my people.
Act 7:43.-Here the citation differs both from the Hebrew and LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] (Amo 5:25-27) in words; but, by Divine inference other facts and truths are referred to.
Instead of using the Hebrew name Chiun, in Amo 5:26, the Greek equivalent, Remphan, is used.* [Note: Just as Ethiopia is used for the Hebrew Koosh; Egypt for Mizraim; Syria and Mesopotania for the Hebrew Aram.]
Instead of saying the figures which ye made for yourselves, the object for which they were made is given by Him, who knew their hearts-figures which ye made to worship them, thus bringing out and emphasising their idolatry.
Instead of saying beyond Damascus, Stephen says: beyond Babylon. But this is no scribal error, or inadvertence, as critics assert.
Even the stoutest defenders of verbal inspiration read both Amos and Acts, as though they both referred to the Babylonian exile, and do not appear to notice that it says beyond Babylon.
The fact is that it is the house of Israel as distinct from Judah that is spoken of in Act 7:42, and in Amos; and, while Judah was taken away to Babylon, Israel was taken beyond Babylon. Amos speaking before either captivity (about 780 b.c.) says: beyond Damascus; or, beyond where Damascus will go captive. See Amo 1:5.
In other words, in the Old Testament the Holy Spirit alludes to the country, and refers to Assyria, and says beyond Damascus; 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 beyond it.
Rom 9:27.-Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea (so LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ). In Isa 10:22 it is, Though thy People Israel be as the sand of the sea, etc. Here, by way of inference, the same people are mentioned in other words.
Rom 9:29 is referred to as a difference in reading. Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed (, sperma). In Isa 1:9 it is Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a remnant (, sareed), but sareed means the same thing exactly, though the words differ. The seed that is left will form the remnant, and the remnant that is left will consist of the seed.
Rom 9:33.-Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. This, in Isa 28:16, is He that believeth shall not make haste.
The Hebrew (, chsh), means to flee, flee away, hence, of the feelings, to be excited. Rom 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 fulfilment of the Divine promises. Hence, he will have no ground for that shame which causes others to run away.
Eph 4:8.-This is supposed to be a case where there is a difference of reading. The English is: and gave gifts unto men. But the Hebrew of Psa 68:18 (19) is: Thou hast received gifts for men.
In the Psalm we have the prophecy that Jah Elohim might dwell among them; while in the Epistle we have the fulfilment in the gifts received being actually 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 (lakach) 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 to fetch. See Gen 18:5; Gen 27:13; Gen 42:16. Exo 27:20 bring. Lev 24:2 bring. 2Ki 2:20 bring.
We ought, however, to note that in the Psalm we have (baadam) with the article: i.e., in the man. So that we may render it: Thou didst receive gifts in human nature: i.e., as the Son of man (compare Mat 28:18. Joh 13:3). He did give gifts to men.
(c) In number
Mat 4:7.-Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. In Deu 6:16 it is: Ye shall not tempt. 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.
Rom 4:7.-Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven. In Psa 32:1 it is in the singular number: Blessed is he, etc.
But this is not a direct quotation. It is introduced by the words: David 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.
But in the Hebrew the word man () does not occur until verse 2. In verse 1 it is literally O the happinesses of the forgiven of transgression: the covered of sin. And this singular may be used of a forgiven People collectively, and be Divinely expanded according to its sense: Blessed are they.
In both places the plural is meant, the singular being put for it in the former case only by Synecdoche (q.v. [Note: Which see.] ).
Rom 10:15.-How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the Gospel of peace.
In Isa 52:7 the Heb. is the feet of him, the singular being put by Synecdoche for the plural, just as the feet are put (the part for the whole) for the person who preaches.
(d) In person
Examples of this may be found under Heterosis of Person. See above, where one person is put for another.
(e) In mood and tense
Examples of this may be found under Heterosis of the Verb. See above.
One illustration may be given in Mat 13:14-15, where (in the quotation of Isa 6:10) the indicative mood is put by Heterosis for the imperative.
4. Where several citations are amalgamated. Composite quotations
Sometimes a number of separate sentences are drawn from different passages and presented as one connected passage.
This is a common use practised generally in all literature. Dr. Franklin Johnson* [Note: The Quotations of the New Testament from the Old considered in the light of general literature, pp. 92-102.] gives some interesting examples from various authors.
Plato, in his Ion (p. 538), quotes two lines from Homer pieced together by Plato himself, the first from Iliad xi., line 638; and the second, line 630, col. 629.
Xenophon (Memorabilia, bk. I., ch. 2, sec. 58) quotes connectedly as one passage, two passages from Homer (Iliad ii., 188 sqq. [Note: qq. Following.] and 198 sqq. [Note: qq. Following.]
Lucian, in his Charon (sec. 22), runs five lines together from Homer. But Jacobitz [Note: Lucian i., p. 39.] shows that they are brought together from different passages: viz.: Iliad ix. 319, 320, and Odyssey x. 521; xi. 539.
Plutarch, in his treatise on Progress in Virtue, treats two separate lines of Homer as a single sentence, viz., Odyssey vi. 187 and xxiv. 402.
Cicero, in De Oratore, book II., sec. 80, quotes from the Andria of Terence, making up in two lines parts of Terences lines 117, 128 and 129.
Philo, 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; Num 22:1-41, but both refer to the same matter.
In the same treatise (sec. 46) he runs together parts of Gen 18:14; Gen 17:19.
Conybeare and Howson (Life and Epistles of St. Paul, vol. I., p. 54) quote, as one passage, parts of Psa 122:4; Psa 68:27 (28); 122:5, 2, 6, 7; and 68:35 (36). And these are not accompanied by any references or explanation.
Ruskin, in his Modern Painters, vol. V., p. 146, quotes as one passage: How 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. All these four sentences are from the Psalms. The first two are from Psa 119:97; Psa 119:24; Psa 19:10 (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: The Lord Jesus fasted forty days and forty nights. Do this in remembrance of Me. This is a flagrant example, but less likely to harm than many others which are less glaring and more specious.
Quite 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.
The following are examples:-
Mat 21:5.-Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy king cometh unto thee, etc.
This is a composite quotation, the first sentence, Tell ye, etc., being taken from Isa 62:11, and the latter contracted from Zec 9:9.
In Mat 21:13 (Mar 11:17, and Luk 19:46), the Lord exclaimed: It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves. The first half of this is from Isa 56:7, and the second slightly altered from Jer 7:11. In both passages (which agree with the LXX [Note: XX The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).] ) the subject is the same; viz., the Temple, and the right use of it.
Mar 1:2-3.-As it is written in the prophets, Behold, etc.
The prophets quoted are Mal 3:1, and Isa 40:3.
Luk 1:16-17 is from Mal 4:5-6 (3:23, 24) and 3:1.
Act 1:20 is made up from Psa 69:25 (26), and 109:8, and differs both from the Heb. and the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Rom 3:10-18 is a long quotation made up of the following passages, which all refer to the same subject. They are composed of two classes, the general and the particular; verses 10-12 are taken from Ecc 7:20. Psa 14:2-3; Psa 53:2-3 (3, 4), which speak generally of the universality of sin; while the second kind, verses 13-18, taken from Psa 5:9 (10). Isa 59:7-8, and Psa 36:1 (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, forgetting their logic (as Dr. Franklin Johnson says), see a difficulty in this simple method of proof which is common to all writers of all ages, and of various languages.
It 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.
Rom 9:33 is made up from Isa 28:16; Isa 8:14. Varied both from the Heb. and the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Rom 11:8 is made up from Isa 29:10 and Deu 29:4.
Rom 11:26-27 is made up from Isa 59:20-21; Isa 27:9, and agreeing with the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
1Co 15:54-55 is made up from Isa 25:8, and Hos 13:14, and varied both from the Heb. and the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
2Co 6:16 is made up from Lev 26:11-12 and Eze 37:27, and is varied from the LXX. [Note: XX. The Septuagint Version (325 b.c.).]
Gal 3:8 is made up from Gen 12:3; Gen 18:18.
Heb 9:19-20 is made up from Exo 24:6-8, and Num 19:6.
1Pe 2:7 is made up from Psa 118:22 and Isa 8:14.
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 practised 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.
5. Where quotations are front secular works, or books other than the Bible
Sometimes 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.
Not all, however, that are generally considered as quotations are really so. For example: As Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses (2Ti 3:8) is said to be a quotation from the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel upon Exo 7:11. 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.
So, too, the prophecy of Enoch in Jud 1:14-15 may just as well be the foundation on which the so-called Book of Enoch was afterwards made up, as a quotation made from that book. We certainly prefer to believe that the book of Enoch was originated from Jud 1:14-15; and, taking this as the starting point, other prophecies were concocted and added by some old and unknown writer.
The same applies to Jud 1:9 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.
On the other hand, there are three certain undoubted quotationsfrom secular writings. We will give them all.
The first is:-
Act 17:28.-For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring ( , tou gar kai genos esmen). 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. 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.* [Note: See The Witness of the Stars, by the same author and publisher.] The poem opens with praise of God (Zeus or Jupiter), and these words occur in the fifth line:-
From Zeus we lead the strain; He whom mankind
Neer leave unhymned; of Zeus all public ways,
All haunts of men, are full; and full the sea,
And harbours; and of Zeus all stand in need.
We are his off spring; and he, ever good to man,
Gives favouring signs, and rouses us to toil, etc., etc.
Similar words, (ek sou gar genos esmen) are used by Kleanthes (Hymn in Jov. 5), who was born at Assos in Troas about 300 b.c. Also in The Golden Verses of Pythagoras.
In Act 17:28, the word poets, 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 father of everyone. The universal fatherhood of God-the Devils lie-was the belief of the heathen, as well as of most modern Christian teachers. But both are wrong: for God is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and of those only who are in Christ. It is to as many as received Him, to them [and to none other] gave He authority to be called the sons of God (Joh 1:12).
1Co 15:33.-Evil communications (or companionships) corrupt good manners.
(phtheirousin eethee chreesth homiliai kakai). The words occur in this form, according to Jerome, [Note: In his Epistle to the Orator Magnus.] in the Thais of Menander. Dr. Burton thinks Menander may have quoted it from Euripides. Meyer quotes Plato (Rep. 8:550B).
These various opinions show that the words were current as a common place quotation (Parmia, q.v. [Note: Which see.] ), and are quoted as such here.
Tit 1:12.-One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies (i.e., liars, evil wild-beasts, gluttons, lazy). This involves another figure called Oxymoron (q.v. [Note: Which see.] ). Jerome [Note: Com. in loco.] says that the poet was Epimenides, and that the words occur in his work called de Oraculis (i.e., of Oracles), whence he is called a prophet, 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 (of course) that Jove was immortal. It was from this that Ovid said Nec fingunt omnia Cretes (The Cretans do not always lie* [Note: See Ovid, A. iii. 10, 19. Ellicott refers to Ovid, de A. A., i. 298. This says quamvis sit mendax, Creta negare potest.] ).
The origin of all this was that the Cretans had a certain sepulchre with this epitaph: Here lies one whom they call Jupiter.
Because of this, the Poet charges them with a lie, saying: the 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, etc.
But 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: This testimony is true!
In Act 17:22-23, we have not, indeed, a quotation, but a reference to a matter on which contemporary and later writers give confirmatory and interesting evidence. I 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; (Agnost the) to an unknown God. Whom therefore, not knowing, ye reverence, him I make known to you.
Jerome [Note: Epist. ad Magnum Oratorem Romanum. Vol. III. Operum, f. 148.] says (speaking of St. Paul); He learned of the true David to snatch the sword from the enemys hand, and cut off his head with his own weapon.
Ludovicus Vives says [Note: De Civit, Dei. Book VII., cap. 17.] that in the Attic fields there were very many altars dedicated to unknown Gods, and that Pausanias 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 [Note: Hence called a prophet in Tit 1:12. See The Man of God, by the same author and publisher.] 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.* [Note: For further information on this subject, see Sixtus Senensis, book 2, Biblioth Tit. Ar Athenensis Inscriptio. Also Wolfius, Vol. I., Lectionum Memorabilium, p. 4, 5:20, etc.]
Col 2:21.-Touch not; taste not; handle not. These ordinances of men were probably prescribed in these words, and are referred to as well known. We know them also to-day; for man is the same, and human nature is not changed.