never means /3i/3\os in the NT, much less the entirety of tQv iepQi' ypaix/jLaruiv, but some particular passage.' Hitherto it has been thought enough to meet such assertions with a mere expression of dissent : Christiaan Sepp, for example (De Leer des NT over dc HS des OV, 1849, p. 69), meets this one with equal brevity and point by the simple statement : ' Passages like Jn 10^' prove the con- trary. ' Of late, however, under the influence of a comment of Bishop Lightfoot's on Gal 3'-^ which has become famous, Schulthess' doctrine has be- come almost traditional in a justly influential school of British exegesis (cf. Westcott on Jn 2-^ 10=« ; Hort on 1 P 2« ; Swete on Mk 12i» ; Page on Ac 1^" ; Knowling on Ac 8^^ ; Plummer on Lk 4^i). The attempt to carry this doctrine through, how- ever, appears to involve a violence of exegesis which breaks down of itself. Of the 30 instances in which the singular ypa(pr] occurs, about a score seem intractable to the proposed interpretation (Jn 222 738. 42 10^5 1712 1928 209, Ac 8^-, Ro 43 9" W^ IP, Gal 38- 22 450, 1 Ti 518, Ja 4^, 1 P 2^, 2 P po [cf Cremer, sub voc, who omits Jn 17^^ 20^ ; E. Hiihn, Die alttest. Citate, etc., 1900, p. 276, who adds Jn 1318 192^- 38, Ja 28 ; and Vaughan on Ro 4», Meyer on Jn 10^^, Weiss on Jn 10^^, Kiibel on 2 P r-o. Abbott on Eph 48, Beet on Ro 9", Mayor on 2 P 3i«; EBi 4329; Franke, Das AT boi Johannes, 48 ; E. Haupt, Die alttest. Citate in den vier Evang. 201]). In some of these passages it would seem quite impossible to refer ypcKp-q to a particular passage of Scripture. No particular passage is suggested, for example, in Jn 222 or in Gal 322, and it is sought and conjecturally supplied by the commentators only under the pressure of the theory. The reference of Jn 20® is quite as broad as that of Lk 24'*^. In Jn 10^^ the argument depends on the wide reference to Scripture as a whole, which forms its major premise. The per- sonification of Scripture in such passages as Ja 4' and Gal 38 carries with it the same implication. And the anarthrous use of ypa(p-q in 1 P 2**, 2 P P*, 2 Ti 3^®, is explicable only on the presupposition that ypatpT) had acquired the value of a proper name. Perhaps the two passages, 1 P 2* and 2 P 12", are fairly adapted to stand as the tests of the possibility of carrying through the reference of ypacprj in the singular to particular passages : and the artificial explanations which are given of these passages by the advocates of that theory (cf. Zahn, Einleitung, etc., ii. 108 ; Hort on 1 P 2*) may stand for its sufficient refutation. There seems no reason why we should fail to recognize that the employ- ment of ypa(pri in the NT so far follows its profane usage, in which it is prevailingly applied to entire documents and carries with it a general implica- tion of completeness, that in its more common re- ference it designates the OT to which it is applied in its completeness as a unitary whole (cf. Franke, op. cit. p. 48). It remains only to add that the same implication is present in the designation of the OT as ai ypaipal, which, as has already been pointed out, does not suggest that the OT is a collection of ' treatises,' but is merely a variant of 71 ypa(f>r) in accordance with good Greek usage, employed interchangeably with it at the dictation of nothing more recondite than literary habit. Whether ai ypa(pai is used, then, or i] yparpr), or the anarthrous ypacp-q, in each case alike the OT is thought of as a single document set over against all other documents by reason of its unique Divinity and indefectible authority, by which it is constituted in every passage and declaration the final arbiter of belief and practice.
9. It is an outgrowth of this conception of the OT that it is habitually adduced forJ the ordinary purposes of instruction or debate by such simple formulas as ' it is said,' ' it is written,' with the
SCRIPTURE
SEA OF GALILEE
587
inijjlication that what is thus said or written is of Divine and linal authority. Both of these usages are illustrated in a variety of forms, and with all possible high implications, not only in the NT at large, but also in the Gospels, — and not only in the comments of the Evangelists, but also in the re- ported sayings of our Lord. We are concerned here only with the formula, 'It is written,' in which the consciousness of the written form — the documentary character — of the authority appealed to finds expression. In its most common form, this formula is the simple y^ypawrai, used either absolutely, or, with none of its authoritative im- plication thereby evacuated, with more or less clear intimation of the place where the cited Avords are to be found written. By its side occurs also the resolved formula yeypafxfj.^vov ^arlv (peculiar to Jn. ; cf. Plummer on Lk 4'"), or some similar formula, with the same implications. These modes of expression have analogies in profane Greek, especially in legislative usages ; but their use with reference to the Divine Scriptures, as it involves the adduction of an authority which rises im- measurably above all legislative authority, is also freighted with a significance to which the profane usage affords no key. In the Gos2)els, yiypavTai occurs exclusively in Mt. and Mk., and predomin- ately in Lk., but only once in Jn.; most commonly in reports of our Lord's sayings. In the latter part of Lk. , on the other hand, the authoritative citation of the OT is accomplished by the use of the participle yeypan/mevov, while in Jn. the place of yiypa.wTa.1. (8^'' only) is definitely taken by the re- solved formula yeypapLfievov iffriv. The significance of these formulas is perhaps most manifest where they stand alone as the bare adduction of authority without indication of any kind whence the cita- tion is derived (so yiypairraL, Mt i-i-s-^-i" [1P»] 2p3 [26-^] 26-^S Mk 7« O^-- ^^ U" u^^. 27^ lj- 44. s. 10 727 1946 201; 2237 ; yeypaixpLivov iffriv, Jn 2" 6^^ 121^ ['«]). The adjunction of an indication of the place where the citation may be found does not, however, really affect the authoritativeness of its adduction. This adjunction is rare in Mt. and Mk. (Mt 2^, Mk P only), more frequent in Lk. {2^^ S* 10^" IS^i 24«-^6) and Jn. (6^^ 8" 10^^ 15-«) ; and by its infre- quency it emphasizes the absence of all necessity for such identification. When a NT writer says, ' It is written,' there can arise no doubt where what he thus adduces as possessing absolute authority over the thought and consciences of men is to be found written. The simple adduc- tion in this solemn and decisive manner of a M'ritten authority, carries with it the implication that the appeal is made to the indefectible authority of the Scriptures of God, which in all their parts and in every one of their declarations are clothed with the authority of God Himself.