2. VerbaL — ^This takes place when a passage or ex- pression used by one writer is cited by another, and applied with some modification of the meaning to some- thing diflferent trcm that to which it was originally applied. Such aco<Mnmodations are common in all languages. Writers and speakers lay hold of the ut- terances of others for the sake of giving to their own tteas a more graceful and a more forcible clothing than they feel themselves able to give tliem, or for the purpose of procuring for them acceptance, by uttering them in words which some great writer has already made familiar and precious to the general mind. Sometimes this is done almost unconsdonsly. "Wher- ever," sa3rs Michaelis, **a book is the object of our dsily reading and study, it cannot be otherwise than that passages of it should f^uentiy flow into our pen in writing; sometimes accompanied with a conscious recollection of the place where we have read them, at other times without our possessing any such conscious- ness. Thus the lawyer speaks with the carpu$ juris and the laws, the scholar with the Latin authors, and tiie preacher witii tiie Bible" (BSnleit. i, 228). Our own literature is full of exemplifications of this, as is too well known to need iUustrative proof. In the writings of Paul we find him making use in this way of passages fh>m the classics (Acts xvii, 19 ; 1 Cor. xy, 84; Tit i, 12), all of which are of course applied by him to Christian subjects only by accommodstion. We need not be surprised, then, to find the later Bib- lical writers quoting in this way from the earlier, es- pecially the N.-T. writers, fhmi the great classic of their nation, the Upd ypdfifuiTa of the former dispen- sation. As instances may be adduced, Rom. x, 18 ftrom Psa. xix,4, and Rom. xii, 20 fhmi Prov. xxv, 21, 22. See also Matt, ii, 15, 18, with Calvin's notes thereon. '*They have done this," sa3rs Michaelis, *'in many places where it is not perceived by the gen- eimlity of readers of the N. T., because such are too littie acquainted with the Septuagint."
8. i2fteforica/L— This takes place when truth is pre- sented, not in a direct and literal form, but through the medium of symbol, figure, or apologue. Thus, in the prophetical writings of Scripture, we have lan- guage used which cannot be interpreted literally, but which, taken symbolically, conveys a just statement of important trutii, e. g. Isa. iv, 5; xinrii, 1 ; xxxiv, 4; Joel ii, 28-81; Zech. iv, 2, 10, etc. Many in- stances occur in Scripture where truth is presented in the form of parable, and where the truth taught is to be obtained only by extracting fh>m the story the spiritual, or moral, or practical lesson it is designed to enfbrce. In all the sacred books there are instances constantiy occurring of words and statements which are designed to convey, under tiie vehicle of figure, a truth analogous to, but not really what they literally express. (See Knobel,iVopAefi«iiiii<d8rire5rtler,§ nO -88; Smith, Summary View and Eaplanation of the Writings qfthe Prophets, Prel. Obss. p. 1-22 ; Glasaius, PhU. Sao. L v, p. 689 sq., ed. 1711 ; Lowth, De Sac, Peesi Eeb^j pL loc. ; Davidson, Soared Hermeneuiics, ch.ix.)
CONDESCENSION
462
CONDICr
4. Logical — In arguing with an opponent it is some- times advantageous to take him on his own groand, or to argne from principles which he admits, for the purpose of shutting him up to a conclusion which he cannot reftise*, if he would retain the premises. It does not follow from this that his ground is admitted to be the right one, or that assent is given to his prin- ciples ; the argument is simply one ad hommemj and may or may not be also ad veritatem. When it is not, that is, when its purpose is merely to shut the mouth of an opponent by a logical inference from his own principles, there is a case of logical accommodation.
5. Doctrinal. — This takes place when opinions are advanced or statements made merely to gratify the prejudices or gain the fkvor of those to whom they are addressed, without regard to their inherent soundness or trnthfUness. If, for instance, the N.-T. writers were found introducing some passage of the 0. T. as a prediction which had found its fulfilment in some fact in the history of Jesus Christ or his Church, merely for the purpose of overcomhig Jewish prejudices, and leading those who venerated the 0. T. to receive more readily the message of Christianity ; or if they were found not only clothing their ideas in language boiV rowed from tiie Mosaic ceremonial, but asserting a correspondence of meaning between that ceremonial and the &ct or doctrines they announced when no such really existed, thereby warping truth for the sake of subduing prejudice, they would ftonish speci- mens of this species of accommodation.
In both respects, a charge to this effect has been brought against them. It has been alleged that when they say of any event they record that in it was fol- filled such and such a statement of the O. T., or that the event occurred that such and such a statement might be ftifilled, they did so merely in accommoda- tion to Jewish feeling and prejudices. A fitter place will be found elsewhere for considering the im^xnt of the formulas tW trhipioOy, ron itrXfipwOti^ and the like. See Quotation. At present it will suffice to observe that it may be admitted that these formuUe are occasionally used where there can have been no intention on the part of the writer to intimate that in the event to which they relate there was the fulfil- ment of a prediction; as, for instance, where some gnome or moral maxim contained in the O. T. is said to be fulfilled by something recorded in the N. T., or some general statement is justified by a particular in- stance (comp. Matt xii, 85 ; John xv, 25 ; Rom. i, 17 ; Jam. ii, 23 ; 2 Pet ii, 22, etc.). It may be admitted, also, that there are cases*where a passage in the 0. T. is said to be ftilfilled in some event recorded in the N., when all that is intended is that tk^tknilarify or pared- Idism exists between the two, as is the case, according to the opinion of most, at least, in Matt ii, 17, 18. But, whilst these admissions throw the omtt probandi on those who, in any special instance, maintain that there is in it an actual fblfihnent of an ancient prediction, it would be preposterous from them to foreclose the ques- tion, and maintain that in no case is the N.-T. passage to be understood as affirming the fulfilment in fkct of an ancient prediction recorded in the Old. Because 9ome accommodations of the kind specified are admits ted, it would be folly to conclude that nothing but ac- commodation characterizes such quotations. If this position were laid down, it would not be easy to de- fend the N.-T. writers, nay, our Lord himself, from the charge of insincerity and duplicity.