58. TRUTH FROM REMOTER CONTEXT: ACTS II. 16

They not only say this with great assurance; but they lay it down as an article of faith; and are ready to ex-communicate any who do not believe it.

But this is only the Tradition of the Brethren; not even the Tradition of the Fathers though it just as surely makes void the Word of God.

There can be no mistake about Joel's word "after-ward." The Holy Spirit by Peter interprets it as of "the last days." The Hebrew is not the simple אַחַר (āchar), after (Gen. v. 4), but it is this, compounded with בֵּן (kēn), so, or thus (Gen. i. 7), referring always to what follows. It is אַחֲרֵי־בֵּן (āchārey-kēn), after that (Gen. vi. 4; vii. 14; xxiii. 19; xli. 30. 1 Sam. ix. 13, etc., etc.).

It is thus perfectly certain that the word "this" in Acts ii. 16 refers to what follows, and not to what precedes: to the yet future events prophesied by Joel, and not to the events then taking place at Jerusalem.

The word "this" is an emphatic pronoun. But there is no similarly emphatic pronoun for the word "that." It is simply the article with the perfect passive participle:— "This (that follows) is what has been said by the prophet Joel." Not "this" (which has happened); for, in that case, what could be the "this"? This apparent drunkenness? There was no "this," preceding. It would be these events: these phenomena; these Pentecostal scenes. But it is Singular, "this," agreeing with the Scripture about to be quoted from Joel.

The word "this" could not, and cannot, refer to these Pentecostal scenes; for no gift of tongues was spoken of by Joel.

It could not refer to the pouring-out foretold by Joel, because here, this pouring-out was only on the Apostles; whereas Joel speaks of it being poured upon "all flesh." There is not a word said in Acts ii. about any of their "sons and daughters" prophesying; or of their "old men" dreaming dreams; or of their "young men" seeing visions; or of their "servants and handmaids" receiving spiritual gifts.

In fact there is in Acts ii. no fulfilment at all of Joel's prophecy, either implied or expressed.

¹ In these and all similar references to the meaning of a word in the Original we give the First Occurrence of it. See Canon V., Part II.

There is nothing beyond the argument that the charge of drunkenness could no more be brought against these present Pentecostal scenes than against those yet future scenes connected with the blessings to be bestowed upon Israel, prophesied of by Joel, as what should take place "afterward": i.e., after all those temporal blessings have been bestowed on Israel's Land and on Israel's People.

20. 1 Cor. xi. 10. "Power on her head."—"For this cause ought the woman to have power (see margin) on her head because of the angels."

"Power" is put by Metonymy for the vail which was the symbol of being under her husband's power.

For this we have to go to the very remote context of Gen. vi. 1, 4, where we learn by comparing 2 Pet. ii. 4 and Jude 6 the reason for this injunction. (See Canon I., pp. 192, 193 above, and notes on "angel" and "spirit," pp. 191, 219.)

21. Gal. iii. 15—17. The four hundred, and the four hundred and thirty years.—The subject of these verses is the "promise" or unconditional Covenant which God made with Abraham.

This was four hundred and thirty years before the giving of the Law (Exod. xii. 40).

When the four hundred years are mentioned they are reckoned from Abraham's "seed," which was Isaac, who was not born till thirty years later (Gen. xv. 13' and Acts vii. 6).

22. Gal. iii. 20. "God is one."—"Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one."

Verse 10, compared with the remoter contexts of Acts vii. 53. Deut. xxxiii. 2. Ps. lxviii. 17. Heb. ii. 2, shows that the Law was given by a mediator.

Now where there is a mediator there must be two parties to a covenant.

But in Gen. xv. there was only one party; and that was God. When Abraham was about to take part in making the Covenant according to the custom (Jer. xxxiv. 18, 19), God put him to sleep (Gen. xv. 12), and passed between the pieces Himself, alone (v. 17). He was "one;" one party,

¹ See above, under Parentheses, p. 38.

TRUTH FROM REMOTER CONTEXT: HEB. XII. 17 alone in the "promise." That Covenant is not only prior to the Law as to time, but was superior to it because it was unconditional.

23. Heb. xii. 17. "No place of repentance."—"For ye know how, afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no way to change his [father's] mind (see margin) though he sought it carefully with tears."

To what does the pronoun "it" refer? What was "it" that Esau sought so carefully?

The context (and especially the remoter context of Gen. xxvii. 34, 36, 38) clearly shows that it was the "blessing" which he sought.

V. THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF WORDS, EXPRESSIONS, AND UTTERANCES ARE GENERALLY ESSENTIAL TO THEIR INTERPRETATION.

This is a law we have long since noticed, and have never yet found it to fail. The first occurrence of a Word, or an Expression, or an Utterance is the key to its subsequent usage and meaning; or at least a guide as to the essential point connected with it.

We propose to consider this Law as illustrated in these three classes:-i. Words. ii. Expressions. iii. Utterances.

i. WORDS.

1. Prophet.—The first occurrence of the word Prophet is in Gen. xx. 7, and is used by God to Abimelech king of Gerar, of Abraham—

"Now therefore restore the man his wife; for he is a prophet and he shall pray for thee."

This first occurrence of the word shows that it is used in a very different sense from that in which we use it to-day.

Of course, even apart from this, our present usage is of no account in determining the Biblical usage.

We use it of one whose sole mission is to foretell future events.

But, here, it is used in connection with Abraham, who foretold nothing; and of whose prophecies, as such, we have neither mention, allusion, or record.

The only thing associated with the prophet, in Abraham, here, is prayer!

This first occurrence, therefore, speaks to us if we have ears to hear; and, being so contrary to our current usage, tells us to search further and see what it teaches us in connection with its other occurrences.

We soon learn from Exod. vii. 1 that the same God calls Aaron, Moses's "prophet." This takes us a step