"pretatur exprimat, et linguam qua interpretatur non "violet aut negligat, -hic posteriori illa solicitudine vix

66

66

opus videatur, Hebræo idiomate sponte et statim cum stylo Novi Testamenti conspirante.”

J. H. BOECLER. Diss. de Ling. Nov. Test. original. §§ 6.

8.9.43.

"Certum est, singularem quendam, et ab aliis scripto"ribus Græcis differentem, non linguam nec dialectum, sed "colorem dictionis stylique, in libris novi fœderis exstare, "cui nihil unquam similius aut proprius eo nomine acce"dens reperitur, quam Græca lxx interpretum versio "Veteris Testamenti."

66

FABRICIUS, Bibl. Græc. vol. iii. p. 224.

Though the two testaments are written in different "languages, the same idiom prevails in both; and, in the "historical part at least, nearly the same character of "style." CAMPBELL, Prelim. Dissert. vol. i. p. 2.

"Every man who has read the Greek Testament, knows "that it contains a variety of Hebrew words, such as

66

αμην, αλληλούια, but single words are trifles in compa"rison with sentences. The whole arrangement of the "periods is regulated according to the Hebrew verses,

66

(not those in Hebrew poetry, but such as are found in "the historical books, and are always closed with Silluk cum "Soph Pasuk,) which are constructed in a manner directly "opposite to the roundness of the Grecian language."

MICHAELIS Intr. vol. i. p. 123.

"Sed hæc, ut arbitror, vestigia ling. Hebr. sunt in singulis verbis formulisque dicendi animadversa. Quid ❝ vero? An etiam in habitu et velut forma totius ora❝tionis aliquid ejusmodi animadvertitur? Sæpe miratus "sum, viros doctissimos, cum de stylo N. T. ut vocant, "in utramque partem dissererent, hanc partem, quantum ego quidem repererim, non attigisse, solis verbis et phrasibus expendendis voluisse contineri."

66

ERNESTI. De Vestig. Ling. Hebr. in Ling. Gr. ad finem.

Had Boecler been acquainted with the nature of the Hebrew parallelism, it is not improbable, that he would have sought and found it in the New Testament. That Ernesti, Michaelis, and Campbell, stopped short where they did, is somewhat extraordinary. Michaelis, especially, seems to have been on the very brink of discovering a poetical conformation of verses in the New Testament: as appears from his very denial of the fact; for why deny it, if the supposition had not been present to his mind?

(7) A poetical manner observable in the New Testament.] "Besides a peculiarity of style from the perpetual recur"rence of Jewish phraseology, the New Testament has, "in common with the Old, the leading features of the "oriental style of instruction,-short aphoristic sen"tences, and frequent use of allegory and parable. In ❝each, extreme simplicity of phrase is joined throughout, "to extreme boldness and pomp of imagery; and both are rendered the more striking by their proximity. This "is frequently seen in the most familiar discourses re"corded of Christ by the evangelists. Even in the Sermon "on the Mount, the subject and the simile are often "united in a manner which the nations of the West have 66 never employed out of poetry."

66

BUTLER, Hora Biblica, p. 27. ed. 1799,

(8) Critics have, in a few instances, observed the parallelism in the New Testament.] It has been already noticed, that Mr. Horne, in his late biblical work, has cited S. Luke i. 52, 53., as an example of parallelism. It may be added, that Mr. Wakefield, in his "New Translation of S. Mat"thew's Gospel," has distributed, and described, as Hebraic parallelisms, the following passages: "S. Matt. vi. 25. vii. 6. xx. 25-27. xxiv. 29. and S. Luke i. 35. Mr. Farrer, in his Bampton Lecture Sermons, reduces the Beatitudes, S. Matt. v. 3, &c. to Hebrew poetry. And Ammon, in his notes on Ernesti Interp. Nov. Test., has the following observation: "Synonymia occurrens in

"phrasibus adpellatur exergasia, et apud scriptores V.T. "poeticus parallelismus, cujus leges cognoscere debet "hymnorum Lucæ et Apocalypseos interpres. Vid. "Schleusner. Diss. de parallelismo membrorum egregio 66 egregio interpretationis subsidio. Lips. 1781. 4to." Ernesti, p. 43. Schleusner's work, here cited, I have been unable to procure; but, for reasons mentioned, Sect. III. note (3), I fear that its tendency may be injurious: from Ammon's manner of reference, I presume, however, that Schleusner recognises the parallelism, at least in the songs of S. Luke, and the Apocalyptic hymns. It should not be omitted, that Ammon, when designating the writers with whom those of the New Testament should be compared, for the purpose of determining their claims to purity of style, says, that the Apocalypse should be compared with Pindar and Eschylus; and the hymns of the New Testament, with the choruses of the tragedians. I find, that Dr. A. Clarke, on S. Luke, i. 46. describes the address of the angel to Zacharias, in the same chapter, ver. 13-17; that to the Virgin, ver. 30—33; and Elizabeth's answer to Mary, ver. 42-45, as all delivered in poetry, and all easily reducible to that hemistichal form, in which the Hebrew poetry of the Old Testament is found in many MSS.

With the passages referred to in this note, I was altogether unacquainted, till after I had reduced, for my private satisfaction, the whole Sermon on the Mount, and several other portions of the New Testament, to the form of Hebrew parallelism: and, as I was far less anxious to find myself original than just, I rejoiced at meeting such authorities, at least partially in my favour.

96

SECTION VI.

WHEN Bishop Lowth was desirous to establish an identity of form and character, in the composition of the books universally esteemed poetical, and in that of the prophetical writings, especially the writings of Isaiah, he proceeded in the following manner: he produced various examples of parallelism from books of Scripture undeniably poetical; he then adduced correspondent examples from Isaiah, and from the other prophets; and, himself satisfied by this experimental evidence, he left the complete similarity of construction so exhibited, to work its own effect upon the reader's mind. In the present undertaking, I see no reason for departing from a precedent at once so judicious and successful. I have already brought forward sufficient examples of parallelism from the Old Testament it remains, that I should match them with suitable examples from the New. An additional link, however, in the chain of evidence, and that link a strong one, is afforded by a circumstance, in which the evangelists and apostles differ materially from their inspired predecessors: the prophets, however they might occasionally imitate and enlarge upon passages in preceding books of Scripture, and however they might, in language, in imagery, and even in the substance of their predictions, yet more frequently resemble each

other, were by no means in the habit of direct quotation: not so the writers of the New Testament; for obvious reasons, their quotations are numerous, and often scrupulously exact; insomuch, that, in the opinion of the ablest judges *, the citations in the New Testament are, in several places, more expressive of the original Hebrew, than the corresponding passages in the Alexandrine, and other versions. Now, in cases of quotation from poetical parts of the Old Testament, it appears to me, after careful examination, that not only the sense is faithfully rendered, but the parallelism is beautifully preserved, by the New Testament writers: no trifling evidence, that they were skilled in Hebrew poetry; and no unreasonable ground of expectation, that, on fit occasions, their own original composition should afford good examples of poetical construction.

To the subject of New Testament quotation from the poetical parts of the Hebrew Scriptures, I propose devoting this, and the two succeeding Sections; that subject naturally distributing itself into three divisions: 1. Simple and direct quotations of single passages; 2. Quotations of a more complex kind: when fragments are combined, from different parts of the poetical Scriptures, and wrought up into one connected whole; 3. Quotations mingled with original matter: when one or more passages, derived from the Hebrew Scriptures, are

Particularly Surenhusius, Bios Karaλλays, and Dr. H. Owen, in his "Modes of quotation used by the evangelical writers, &c."

H