Late Prof, of Sacred Literature in the Theol. Sem. at Andover.
THIRD EDITION, CORRECTED AND ENLARGED.
ANDOVER:
PUBLISHED BY WARREN F. DRAPER, 1854.
Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1833, by MOSES STUART,
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of
Massachusetts.
ADVERTISEMENT
WHATEVER fears may
have been entertained respecting the application of the principles of
criticism to the Sacred Text, and whatever doubts may have led some to
decry the cultivation of that species of knowledge which has for its
object the grammatical and philological interpretation of that text,
it is now almost universally admitted, that such operations are
indispensable to the attainment of a solid and satisfactory
acquaintance with its contents. The peculiar exigencies of the times
call for a more than ordinary attention to such subjects, and a richer
stock of materials specially adapted to facilitate their study. For,
with all the progress which has been made in matters of general
Biblical research, and all the diligence which has been applied to the
exposition of the Scriptures, the want of strictly philological and
exegetical commentary has been severely felt, both by divines and
theological students, and by a very considerable portion of
intelligent and well-educated Christians, whose habits of reading
bring them into constant contact with difficulties which only such
commentary can remove.
To
engage in labours of this description, few were better qualified than
Professor Stuart. Intimately acquainted with the minutiae of Hebrew
and Greek Grammar; familiar with the diversities which characterize
the style of the Sacred Writers; trained by long study of the laws of
Biblical exegesis to a matured and refined tact in seizing the point,
the bearing, the various shades and ramifications of meaning which are
couched under the sacred phraseology; versed in the theological
learning of Germany; imbued with a sincere love of Divine truth, and a
profound reverence for its dictates; and, withal, endowed with a manly
and richly cultivated intellect―his talents and acquirements
peculiarly fitted him for translating and commenting upon the Epistle
to the Hebrews :―a task replete with difficulties, but which he has
here performed with so much credit to himself, and so much advantage
to the church of God.
The ordeal to which this important portion of Scripture has been
subjected by the wild and extravagant hypotheses of some of the
master-spirits of Germany, rendered it a matter of imperious necessity
that it should be submitted to a fresh and full investigation. This,
the perusal of the introductory part of the volume will prove that the
author has successfully done. Questions respecting style, authorship,
and interpretation, which men of such celebrity as Eichhorn, Bertholdt,
De Wette, and others, were considered to have completely set at rest,
have received the most patient and rigid consideration; and, in most
instances triumphantly, in all more or less satisfactorily, the very
reverse of their conclusions has been shewn to be in accordance with
the real facts of the case.
The very favourable reception which the former edition of the work has
met with in this country, and the continued and increasing demand
which there has been for copies since it was exhausted, have induced
the present publishers to bring out a new and correct impression. May
the Divine blessing accompany its more extended circulation, that a
more general taste for the close and accurate study of the Sacred
Oracles may be created, and a more intimate acquaintance with this
important Epistle promoted!
E. HENDERSON.
LONDON, September 24, 1833.
PREFACE
_____________________________
THE origin of the
following work must be ascribed to the duties which my present
occupation calls upon me to perform. As the time spent in the study of
the Scriptures, at this seminary, has not allowed me to lecture upon
all the Epistles of Paul, it has been my custom to select those which
appeared to be the most difficult, and, in some respects, the most
instructive and important. These are, the epistles to the Romans and
the Hebrews. In respect to the latter epistle, many serious exegetical
difficulties occur, to remove which much time and extensive study are
necessary. But the greatest difficulty of all arises from the fact,
that this epistle is anonymous, and that the Pauline origin of it has
been more or less doubted or disputed, ever since the latter part of
the second century, if not still earlier. This subject I have
deemed to be very interesting and important; and I have endeavoured,
while discharging my duty of lecturing upon the epistle, to throw what
light I could upon the dark places of its literature.
Experience, however, has taught me, that lectures could communicate to
students but a very limited and incompetent view of the disputed
ground, in regard to the origin of the epistle to the Hebrews. The
exceedingly numerous quotations, and appeals to writers ancient and
modern, which it was necessary to make, and the almost endless
references to the Scriptures, which apposite illustration and argument
required, rendered it impossible that a mere lecturer should
communicate, or his hearer acquire and retain, any thing like an
adequate view of the whole subject.
What was true of the literary introduction to the epistle, was also
found to be true in respect to many of the most important exegetical
difficulties connected with the interpretation of it. The young
student, by the mere repetition or delivery of any lecture upon them,
(however particular or plain it might be in the view of an experienced
interpreter,) was not able to acquire such a knowledge as would avail
thoroughly to free him from his embarrassments, or to render him
capable of explaining such matters to others.
The knowledge of these facts, resulting from repeated experience,
first led me to the design of publishing, in extenso, on the
epistle to the Hebrews. The repeated solicitations which have been
made, that I would engage in this undertaking, might, perhaps,
constitute some apology for embarking in it, if such an apology were
necessary. But the time has come, when, in our country, no apology is
necessary for an effort to promote the knowledge of the holy
Scriptures, or to cast any light upon them. There is an apprehension,
at present, somewhat extensive and continually increasing, that no
age, nor any body of men pertaining to it, have done all which
the human faculties, with the blessing of God, are capable of
accomplishing. Christians, in this country, are coming more and more
to believe, that as the church advances nearer to that state, in which
"the knowledge of the Lord shall fill the earth as the waters cover
the seas," a better understanding of the Scriptures may be confidently
hoped for and expected. It cannot be rationally supposed, that this
will be communicated by a miraculous interposition. It must result
from candid, patient, long-continued, and radical investigation of the
language and idiom of the sacred writers. Interpretations a priori
have long enough had their sway in the church; and it is very
manifest, that a more judicious and truly Protestant mode of thinking
and reasoning, in respect to the interpretation of the Scriptures, has
commenced, and bids fair to be extensively adopted.
Whether the following sheets will contribute to aid this great object,
must be left to the readers of them to decide. I can only say, that I
have aimed at the accomplishment of this end, and that, if I have
failed in respect to it, one great design of my undertaking and
labours is defeated.
Probably some of my readers may think, that the introductory
dissertations are more extended than was necessary, and that they are
too minute and circumstantial. My only reply to this is, that an
acquaintance with what has of late years been done, and with what is
now doing, to shake the credit of our epistle, and to eject it from
the canon of sacred writings to which appeal can be made in proof of
Scripture doctrine, would of itself be an ample apology for all the
pains I have taken, and all the minuteness of examination into which I
have gone. Should it be said, that the German writers, whom I have
opposed, are as yet unknown in this country, and that it was
inexpedient to make them known; the allegation would only show how
little acquainted the person who makes it is, with the actual state of
our present knowledge, and with the relations in which we stand to the
German authors. Our youth are every day resorting to Germany for
education; our colleges are filling up with professors who have been
educated there; the language of Germany is becoming an object of
classical study in our public seminaries of learning; and in a
multitude of ways, through the medium of translations as well as by
the knowledge of the German language, is the literature of Germany
producing an influence upon our own.
In
this state of things, the attacks made upon the Pauline origin, or
upon the canonical credit, of the epistle to the Hebrews, cannot be
kept back from the knowledge of our intelligent and industrious
students. It is better, therefore, to meet the whole matter with an
open face, fairly to examine it, and either to yield to the force of
arguments suggested by the critics of the old world, or to combat them
in such a way as effectually to defend the positions which we take.
Christian candour and impartiality demand this. The day of
authority in the church is passed by; it is to be hoped, that the
day of sound reason and of argument is to follow. It is
better to convince men by an appeal to their understandings and their
hearts, than it is to terrify them by holding the rod of authority
over them, or to deter them from speaking out their convictions by
arguments ad invidiam.
These are the never-failing resource of minds, which are conscious
of possessing no better means than such, of convincing others, and
which naturally resort to those which are most within their reach.
Our religion seeks no concealment; it fears no assault's. If it will
not stand the test of sober reason and of argument, it will not long
have place in the world among enlightened men. Those who shrink from
such tests, and declaim against the use of our reason, show their want
of confidence in the cause which they profess to espouse. If they did
but know it, they are already half won over to the ranks of doubters
or of unbelievers.
On
the subjects of interpretation, one may well say, "Drink deep, or
taste not." A half-illuminated interpreter doubts every thing, and
sees nothing clearly. Would God, the rising generation of those who
are devoted to the study of the Divine word, might feel deeply
penetrated with the truth of this! It would be an event highly
auspicious to the cause of truth in the world.
In
the new translation of the Epistle to the Hebrews which is here
furnished, it has been my object to give a more exact view of the
features of the original Greek, than is presented by our common
English version. Of all the tasks which an interpreter performs, this
is the most difficult. To make some kind of translation, is indeed a
very easy thing; to follow on in the tracks of some other interpreter,
is equally easy. But to translate, so as to make an author, who has
composed in another language, altogether intelligible, and yet
preserve all the shades, and colouring, and nice transitions, and (so
far as may be) even the idioms themselves of the original, is the very
highest and most difficult work which an interpreter is ever called to
perform. A translation, faithfully presenting the original, is in
itself a commentary. It is the sum of all an interpreter's labours,
exhibited in the briefest manner possible. Hence the little success
that has attended most of the versions which have been made of the
Scriptures. Their authors have either abridged or paraphrased the
original; more commonly the latter. Neither is admissible, in a
translation truly faithful. Whether I have shunned the one and the
other, must be left to the judgment of the reader.
I
much prefer the Saxon English for a version of the Bible. I have
accordingly chosen it whenever I could, and have purposely avoided
substituting Latinizing English in its room, unless a regard to the
meaning of the original compelled me to do it.
It
is proper to advertise the reader, that in the translation I have
purposely avoided the usual division into chapters and verses, which
is exhibited in our common editions of the Scriptures. I have done
this, because the sense is sometimes disturbed by it, and the reader
is unwarily led to associate things together in a manner which the
writer of the epistle never intended.
The words or phrases which are supplied in the translation, and which
are not expressed in the original Greek, I have uniformly included in
brackets, so that the reader may at once see the extent of the liberty
that has been taken in order to render the version more explicit.
For the sake of accommodation, the designation of the chapters and
verses is made upon the margin; and the larger pauses mark the end of
a verse, when they occur in a line that is opposite to any number
designating a verse.
I
have, in most cases, repeated the greater part of the translation, in
printing the commentary or notes upon the original. This has been done
merely to save the reader the trouble of turning continually back to
the version, which is often tedious, and always inconvenient. But I
have not been careful always to repeat verbatim, in the notes, the
words of the translation, as they stand at the commencement of the
volume. In fact, the reader may regard the version at the head of the
volume, and that contained among the notes, as two different versions.
They were, for the most part, made at different times, and in a
measure independently of each other. The former is that on which I
have bestowed most pains as to diction. The latter is merely designed
to facilitate the labours of the student.
The translation is followed by a continuous commentary upon the whole
epistle. When difficulties demanded special and extended
investigation, I have thrown the result of such investigation into
Excursus at the end. There, subjects of difficulty can be treated,
and studied, with more convenience and more fully, than if intermixed
with the usual series of exegetical notes.
I
have consulted commentaries both ancient and modern, while composing
the exegetical part of the work. Chrysostom, Theodoret, and
Theophylact, are the ancient interpreters, who may be read with much
interest, and with some profit. I owe to them not a few hints, which I
regard as valuable. From more recent critics I have derived very
considerable aid, which I would gratefully acknowledge. After all, I
have examined other writers, rather for the sake of correcting or
enlarging my own impressions, than for the sake of abridging or
condensing their works. My uniform method of study has been, to
exhaust the resources of my own mind before I applied to others for
help. But I have neither despised nor neglected this help; nor have I,
in any case, followed the opinion of any critic, unless I was
satisfied with the reasons which he gives for it. Critics of very
different sentiments and views, I have consulted. Impartial
investigation demanded this; and I should be but ill satisfied, in
respect to the discharge of my own duty, if I had not done it.
The interpretations which I have adopted and defended, are the result
of long-continued and often-repeated labour and study. This, however,
does not of itself enhance their value to the reader. They must stand
by their own internal value, if they do stand, and not by the length
of time during which they have been coming into existence.
I
have not made it an object to transcribe other commentators, and
continually to refer to them. It is a mode of commentary to which I
have a dislike; particularly so, when it is carried to the excess to
which many interpreters have carried it. I have therefore retreated as
far from it as my views of usefulness and propriety would permit me to
do. The reader will have, at least, one advantage from this. He will
not be compelled, merely agere actum, to read over what he had
read before.
To
say, that critical commentaries on the Scriptures, of the
higher kind, are wanting in the English language, would be only to
repeat what every biblical student has long felt and confessed. The
time has come, when this evil ought, if possible, to be redressed.
Whether the attempt to assist in this great work, which I have made in
the following sheets, can be justly regarded as a successful one, is
not for the writer to judge.
It
will be understood, of course, that the work is designed for students
in theology, and for those who engage in a truly critical study of the
Scriptures. With commentaries designed for the edification of
Christian readers at large, I believe the English world is better
supplied than any other part of Christendom. Henry, Patrick, Guise,
Orton, Doddridge, Brown, Clark, Scott, and others, have published
works of this nature. It is not my design to occupy the ground which
they have already occupied. The reader of my work must not expect
sermonizing commentary, but an attempt at philological and critical
interpretation. Cuique suum. I bless God for raising up such
commentators as those just mentioned, for Christians at large; but the
professed interpreters of his word need other aid, and that
very different from what their works afford, in order to attain a
fundamentally critical knowledge of the original Scriptures.
In
regard to the Excursus, different opinions will not improbably
be entertained respecting them. The expediency of them, their length,
and the correctness of some of the positions which they advance, may
all be called in question. In matters so difficult and delicate, and
which have so long been the theme of controversy, it cannot be
expected that there will be, at once, an entire and universal
agreement of opinion. The writer of these sheets does not venture to
flatter himself with the expectation, that all will adopt his views.
Of one thing, however, he is very confident; and this is, that he
claims no authority of any kind over the opinions of others. But he
thinks it proper to express his sincere desire, that those who may
differ from him as to some of the opinions advanced in the Excursus,
or in the body of the work, would thoroughly examine the subjects in
respect to which they may think him erroneous, before they pass
sentence of condemnation. It is not too much, moreover, to request,
that they would assign their reasons why they differ from him. In this
way, differences of opinion may ultimately aid in the discovery of
truth, with respect to dark and difficult subjects, and so prove to be
of real utility to the church.
Subjects of high and awful interest in religion should not be treated
with obtrusive confidence, nor with presumption. I shall most
thankfully accept any better light than I now have, let it come from
what quarter it may. Being a Protestant, and nullius addictus
jurare
in verba magistri, I deem it not unreasonable to expect, that
where I may be in the wrong, I may be convinced by argument,
not silenced by authority. Appeals should ever be made, by
Protestants, to the understanding, not ad invidiam, nor to current or
popular prejudice.
With these explanations of my views and feelings, I submit the work to
the friends of exegetical study, not without much solicitude as to the
opinion which the wise and the good may entertain respecting it; but
still, with some expectation, that it may serve to aid such as are
aiming to attain a critical knowledge of the Scriptures, or, at least,
excite some to efforts which shall end in the production of better
Commentaries on the Scriptures than are yet before the public.
The responsibility of publishing a work like the present, is very
great. It is one from which I should shrink, if, on the whole, I could
come to the conclusion, that duty permitted me to decline it. As
my conviction now is, I must venture to commit it to God, and to the
Christian public, hoping that it may contribute, in some measure, to
advance the knowledge of a very interesting portion of his Holy Word.
