combine the participial sense of, kaari, with its similarity to the same form when rendered as a lion, and became hence the cause, not the consequence, of the double reading as in the manuscripts above mentioned. But it is not proper to enter further into a statement, in this place, of the argument on this point. The general consent of the ancient versions must, with its strong corroborating testimony, be admitted here as of more weight than the Masoretic text; or, if we fall back upon the latter, we still urge that the participial form and sense above given of the word as it now stands must be considered as encumbered with less difficulty than the modern Jewish rendering, and the only one which meets fully both the metaphor involved and the grammatical connections of the passage. Our English version, therefore, is to be accepted. Here, then, is a wonderful precognition of the death of the cross-clearly a supernatural revelation. The description finds no literal fulfillment in the history of David, for although the teeth of the "dogs" and the "lions," to which he compares his enemies, and the sharp death-weapons which his persecutors bore, evidently suggested the general imagery, yet the precise enunciation of this single point transcends all that facts or imagination could suggest, either in the history of David or any other person. Neither could the criminal procedure of those times, either among the Jews or any other nation, supply an example answerable to this description, for no death known in law or custom in David's time, or ever known in the world, except crucifixion, combined the particulars here stated, especially the "piercing of the hands and feet." The literal fulfilment was realized only in Christ when nailed to the cross, and pierced by the soldier's spear. Zechariah (xii, 10) is the only other prophet who has specifically foretold this particular in the Saviour's sufferings: "They shall look on me whom they have pierced;" concerning which it may be observed, that 7, dakar, pierced, pierced through, every-where else in the Old Testament, means a literal piercing or thrusting through with a weapon, except Lam. iv, 9, where it figuratively denotes the piercing pains of hunger. John (xix, 37) quotes this passage from Zechariah as being fulfilled in the piercing of the body of Jesus by the nails and spear of the soldiers in the crucifixion, and again quotes it, Rev. i, 7. By these wounds in the hands, feet, and side of Jesus, exhibited to the inspection of the Apostles after the resurrection, he proved to them the identity of that body which had been crucified. Luke xxiv, 39, 40; John xx, 27. These wounds, the world over, would prove a crucifixion, but no other form of criminal execution known among the nations. Ver. 17. I may tell all my bones] I count all my bones. This obtrusion of the bones was partly the effect of wasting sufferings, and partly, as Bishop Mant expresses it, "of the distending of the flesh and skin by the posture of the body on the cross." They look and stare upon me] That is, my enemies do this. The use of two words so nearly synonymous (and ) look and stare, is for intensity, and denotes close watching. It was the custom to watch the cross while life remained in the vic tim, to prevent the surreption of the body. The usual guard of soldiers is mentioned by John, (xix, 23.) In the case of Jesus they had cause to fear a popular outbreak in order to rescue the body, and hence the closer watch. Naturally enough, and with minute historic accuracy, Matthew records, "And sitting down they watched hiin there." "The Centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus." Matt. xxvii, 36-54. See ver. 14., rahah, may also be taken in the sense of to enjoy; and Mudge says, when it is constructed with, as in this text, "it has always the signification of feasting the eyes, regaling the sight, with the misery of another;" and renders it, "They see, they indulge their sight on me." Cf. the phrase, "Seen my desire on mine enemies," Heb., "Looked on mine enemies." Psalms liv, 7; lix, 10; xcii, 11; and cxviii, 7. Ver. 19. They part my garments among them] It was customary to give the garments of the criminal to the soldiers or executioners. But nothing of this kind ever actually transpired with David. His garments were never divided among his persecutors, nor did they ever cast lots for them. But he here describes himself as one already stripped for execution, whose clothes are even now distributed among his executioners. Of Jesus only was this literally true. Under the eye of Jesus, the soldiers, in brutal indifference to his sufferings, sit down beneath the cross, and literally, though unconsciously, fulfill this wonderful prophecy. Matt. xxvii, 35; Mark xv, 24; John xix, 23, 24. Cast lots for my vesture] This is an additional and more minute circumstance in the description. Not only the casting of lots, but even the particular part of the raiment for which the lot was cast, is designated. The 5, leboosh, here denotes the tunic or under garment, worn next the skin; as 7, beged, in the previous member of the verse, denotes the outer garment, the mantle or cloak, which, being simply a quadrangular piece of cloth, could be easily divided; but the tunic, answering in fashion somewhat to a man's shirt, could not be divided without destroying its value. In exact agreement with the Hebrew prophet, John (xix, 23) specifies the tunic (xiTWV) as the part of the Saviour's raiment for which the soldiers cast lots; but Matthew and Mark speak only in general terms, Matt. xxvii, 35; Mark xv, 24, using, iuareov, himation, in the generic plural to denote garments, raiment, without specifying any one part, which is not unfrequent, as Matt. xxiv, 18; xxvi, 65; Mark xv, 20, etc. Ver. 19. But be thou not far from me, O Lord] The absence of Jehovah is still lamented and deprecated, as in verses 1, 11. The adversative sense of 1, ve, (but,) here well indicates that this absence, this divine withdrawal, is the cause of all his distress, which can find no relief till God shall return. Luther, before appearing at the diet of Worms, cries out in private agony of prayer, "O Lord, why dost thou tarry? My God, where art thou? Come! come!" O my strength] The noun is in apposition with Jehovah in the preceding member. He appropriates to God the title which best suits his helplessness. Ver. 20. Deliver my soul from the sword] Rescue me from instant destruction. My darling] Literally, my only one. As if he would say, that which is dearest to me, my all; that is, my life, my soul, as in the previous member, to which it is here parallel. Ver. 21. From the lion's mouth] Wicked rulers, whose power is used to devour, not protect, the innocent. See Prov. xxviii, 15; Jer. 1, 17. The suppliant is as one upon whom the lion had already opened his mouth. For thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.] "That is, hearing thou hast delivered me, the cause being put for the effect." Bythner. The same Hebraistic form occurs, and is applied to Christ, Heb. v, 7, εloaкоvolεiç dπо Tñs evλaßeías, he was heard from the fear, or, from his fear; that is, heard favorably, and hence delivered from the object of his dread. The Septuagint reads, "Save me from the lion's mouth; and my low estate, or humiliated condition, (TATTEíνWOIV,) from the horns of the unicorns." Cf. the word Luke i, 48. This lowest point of Christ's suffering was called his humiliation. Acts viii, 33. "If any ask how this may be applied to Christ, whom the Father delivered not from death, I answer, that he was more mightily delivered than if the danger had been prevented, even so much as it is more to rise from death, than to be healed of a sore sickness. Wherefore death prevented not Christ's rising again from bearing witness at length that he was heard." Calvin. The sufferer has now reached the vertex of his agony. He stands before the open mouth of the lion, and the threatening horns of the gaping wild bulls, (unicorns.) Instant death, or instant rescue, must follow. Nature can hold out no longer, and the imagination even stands breathless in suspense, watching the issue. At this point ends the first division of the Psalm. The destiny of the sufferer is decided. The absent Jehovah reveals himself. The hidden arm is "made bare," the withdrawn presence is restored. The next utterance of the Psalmist is the key-note of victory and gratitude, of brotherly confidence and fellowship. From the mouth of the lion he exclaims, "I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the congregation (Church, Heb. ii, 12) will I praise thee." Ver. 22. Bishop Horsley would terminate the first strophe with unicorns, and begin the second with, Thou hast heard me ; thus Save me from the mouth of the lion, -Thou hast answered me! I will declare thy name, etc. The transition is beautiful and highly impassioned. The remainder of the Psalm is taken up with descriptions of the deliverance and triumph of Christ, the joy which this event shall occasion to all the earth, the wonderful spread of the Gospel among the nations, (ver. 27-29,) and the establishment of the true Church throughout all generations, (ver. 30-31.) We have not space for the remainder of this incomparable Psalm, on which it is not our object to write a general comment, but only to call attention to its wonderful agonistic utterances, on which our proposed argument depends. ART. VII.-INSPIRATION OF ALL SCRIPTURE. Πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος καὶ ὠφέλιμος πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς ἔλεγχον, πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν, πρὸς παιδείαν τὴν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ. 2 Tim. iii, 16. THE common rendering of this passage has been much disputed, and it is a grave question whether it can be textually or grammatically defended. An orí, it is said, is understood. By this is meant, not a defective reading, or failure in the text, but an understood grammatical or idiomatic ellipsis. But is this substantive verb to be regarded as connected with θεόπνευστος, or with ὠφέλιμος ? lf with the former, it will give the common translation, (other difficulties being overlooked,) namely, "all Scripture is inspired," etc. If orí is to be understood with woλuos, then it would mean, "all inspired Scripture is also profitable," etc. Oεóпvεvσтоs becomes, in this latter case, an attributive, and ¿péλiuos a predicative adjective; or, in other words, the first belongs to the subject of the sentence. So Alford takes it, and Theodoret among the early commentators, together with some who are most eminent among the modern. The view is strongly favored by the nature and usage of the words. As connected with θεόπνευστος, such an ellipsis of ἐστί would be a very unusual thing. There is, on the other hand, a Greek idiom that almost always omits the copula orí in the case of certain adjectives, which, from their frequent use in such connections, are regarded as having a verbal or predicative force rendering its expression unnecessary. They are such words as “ ἕτοιμος, φροῦδος, αἴτιος, ῥᾴδιος, δυνατός, ἀγαθός,” etc.: it (is) ready, it (is) easy, it (is) possible, it (is) good, etc. The list may not be reducible to any precise or definite number, and péλuos may not be found among them expressly mentioned |