Historical criticism has now come to the fore. The allegorical interpretation is discred ited, it is to be hoped, finally and permanently. A vaster knowledge is at the service of the exegete than has been possible in any preceding age. The battles of the giants would seem to have ended for the time at least, and much of the smoke of conflict has cleared away. What ought the 20th century exegesis to be? It ought to be capable of the production of both popular and critical work. It ought to meet the demand for edification on the part of the most humble and unlearned; and at the same time it ought to be proficient in the most exhaustive scholarship. It has at its disposal the accumulated wealth of material collected in the preceding centuries; and it may profit by the defects as well as the excellences of the masters who have gone before. Biblical knowl edge was never more profound or more preva lent than now. The original text has been determined within approximate accuracy. The Bible has been freed from multiplied errors of manuscript transcription and restored to some thing like its original form and revelation. The original languages are better understood. The study of ancient inscriptions and frag ments of newly discovered papyri have thrown a flood of light upon many new points. Modern travel and exploration and excavation in the Orient have taught us many things concerning the manners and customs of the ancient times. The marvelous advance made in the last cen tury along the lines of scientific investigation and metaphysical research and literary criticism has had its beneficial influence upon the inter pretation of the Bible. The exegete of to-day has an unprecedented equipment, and his task is comparatively clear. To-day, "the great body of evangelical expositors are united on the fundamental principles of interpretation. They agree that a proper commentary on the Bible or on any part of it should clearly set forth the true meaning of the words and the train of thought intended by the sacred writer; and it should point out the grammatico-historical sense of every passage, giving careful atten tion to the context, scope, and plan" (Terry, (Biblical Hermeneutics,' p. 738). The great
exegetical works of the present are character ized by directness, accuracy, learning, independ ence of research, a careful consideration of the context and all the light that historical and lit eracy criticism can throw upon the theme. There is a better conception of the nature of inspiration and more freedom in the exercise of the critical faculties of the commentator. Rationalism has come to its rights, together with a recognition of the due restraint laid upon the student of a divine revelation. Having escaped from the tradition of an absolutely inerrant text and a form of revelation infalli bly fixed for all time, the exegete of to-day is freer to turn from the letter that killeth to the spirit that maketh alive. The tendency of the times seems to be away from the dominance of the Latin and the Reformation theology to the purer exegesis of the primitive faith. With the broader spirit of the Greek fathers and the better critical apparatus of the present day the promise of work in this field was never brighter than now.
Bibliography.— Rosenmiiller, (Historia in terpretationis liborum sacrorum in ccclesia
(5 vols., 1795-1814) ; Meyer, G. W., (Geschichte der Schrifterklarung) (5
1802-08); Ernesti, (Institutio Interpretis Now Testamenti' (5th ed., 1809) ; Marsh, 'Lectures on the Criticism and Interpretation of the Bible) (1842) ; Lucke,