Most Biblical interpreters, as we might infer front the principle of dogmatical and allegorical in terpretation, have declared the general hermeneu tical principles to be insufficient for explaining the Bible, and required for this purpose especial her meneutical rules, because the Bible, they said, which had been written under the direct guidance of the Holy Ghost, could not be measured by the common rules which are applicable only to the lower sphere of merely human thoughts and com positions. Therefore, from the most ancient times, peculiar hermenentical rules, meeting the exigency of Biblical interpretation, have been set forth, which deviated from the rules of general hermeneu tics. Thus Biblical hermeneutics were changed into an art of uncierstanding the Bible according to a certain ecclesiastical system in vogue at a certain period.
The advocates of grammatical interpretation have opposed these Biblical hermeneutics, as proceeding upon merely arbitrary suppositions. Sometimes they merely limited its assertions, and sometimes they rejected it altogether. In the latter case they said that the principles of general hermeneutics ought to he applicable to the Holy Scriptures also. Against the above-mentioned train of argument cited from Origen, on which thc demand of parti cular Biblical hermeneutics essentially rests, the following argument might, with greater justice, be opposed : if God deemed it requisite to reveal hi,: will to mankind by means of intelligible books, he must, in choosing this medium, have intended that the contents of these books should be discovered according, to those general laws which are con. ducivc to the right understanding of documents in general. If this were not the case God would have chosen insufficient and even contradictory means inadequate to the purpose he had in view.
The interpretation, which, in spite of all eccle siastical opposition, ought to be adopted as being the only true one, strictly adheres to the demands of general hermeneutics, to which it adds those particular hermeneutical rules which meet the requi sites of particular cases. This has, in modern times, been styled the HISTORICO-GRAMMATICAL mode of interpretation. This appellation has been chosen because the epithet grammatical seems to be too narrow and too much restricted to thc mere verbal sense. It might be more correct to style it simply the HISTORICAL interpretation, since the word HISTORICAL comprehends everything that is requisite to be known about the language, the turn of mind, the individuality, etc., of an author in order rightly to understand his book.
In accordance with the various notions concern ing Biblical interpretation which we have stated, there have been produced Biblical hermeneutics of very different kinds ; for instance, in the earlier period we might mention that of the Donatist Ticonius, who wrote about the 4th century his Reptla ad investigandam et invenienclanz gcntianz Scripturarum Septem ; Augustinus, De Doctrizza Christiana, lib. i. 3 ; Isidorus Hispalen
sis, Sentent. 419, seq. ; Santis Pagnini (who died in 1541), Isagoga ad Illysticos S'ac2-ze Scripturze Sensus, libri octodecim, Colon. is4o ; Sixti Senen sis (who died 1599), Bibliotheca Sancta, Vcnetiis 1566. Of this work, which has been. frequently reprinted, there belongs to our present subject only Liber tertiza Artem exponendi Sancta Scripta Catha licis Expositoribus aptissimis Regzzlis et Exemplis ostendens. At a later period the Roman Catholics added to these the works of Bellarmine, Martianay, Calmet, Jahn, and Arigler.
On the part of the Lutherans were added by Matt. Flacius, Claris Scrip/11ra Sacra., Basilex 1537, and often reprinted in two volumes ; by Johann Gerhard, Tractatus de Legitima Scripturce Sacra Interpretatione, Jenx 610 ; by Solomon Glassius, Philologice Sacra, libri quinque, Jeme 1623, and often reprinted ; by Jacob Rambach, Inslitutiozzes fiernzenentica Sacra, Jerue 1723.
On the part of the Calvinists there were fur nished by J. Alph. Turretinus, De Scriptura Sacra interprelatione Tractatzes Bipartitus, Dortrecht 1723, and often reprinted. In the English Church were produced by Herbert Marsh Lectures on the Criticisnz and Interpretation of the Bible, Cambridge S2S.
Since the middle of the last century it has been usual to treat on the O. T. hermeneutics and on those of the N. T. in separate works. For in stance, G. W. Meyer, Verszech einer .Hermeneutik des Allen Testamentes, Lubeck 1799; J. H. Pareau, Institutio Interpretis Veteris Testanzenti, Trajecti 1822, translated into English by Dr. 1'. Forbes, Edin. '835-40, 2 vOiS. ; j. A. Ernesti, Institzttio Bzlezprelis Novi Testamenti, Lipsice 1761, ed. sta, curante Ammon, 1809, translated into English by Terrot, Edinburgh, 1S33 ; Morns, Super Hermenezdica Novi Testanzentiacroascsacadentica, ed. Eichstaedt, Lipsi 1797-1802, in tvvo vols., but not completed; K. A. G. Kell, Lehrbzzch der Hermenezzlih des Neuen Testamentes, nach Gruna'seitzen der gram matisch-historischeez Interpretation, Leipzig iSro ; the same work in Latin, Lipsi ISI1 ; Liicke, Grundriss der N. T. Hermeneutik, Gott. 1817 ; T. T. Conybeare, The Banzpon Lectutrs for the veari824, being an attempt to trace the History and to ascertain the limits of the secona'ary ana' spiritual Interpretation of Scripture, Oxford 1824 ; Schleier macher, Hermeneutik una' Kritzk nzit besonderer Beziehung ant das Neue Testament, herausgegeben von Lucke, Berlin IS38 ; H. Nik. Klausen, Her meneutik des Neuen Testantentcs, aus dem Danis chen, Leipzig 184i ; Chr. Gottlieb Wilke, Die Hertneneutik des Neuen Testamentes systematisch dawestellt, Leipzig 1S43 ; Davidson, Sacred Her meneutics developed atm' applied ; including a Ifis tory of Biblical Interpretation fivm the earliest of the Fathers to the Reformathm, Edin. 1343 ; Fair bairn, Hermeneutical Manual or 'tetrad. to the Exeget. Study of the N. T., Edin. 1858. — K. A. C.