Page:Jewish Encyclopedia Volume 1.pdf/459

411 THE

411 accountof ination

of

<-iimiKipation of rt'iisoii from tlic dompassion. 'I'lif Gnostics dcvclopid this

tlic

thi-iMc with tlic modilication tliat tlicy dctcctid this coutiict between mind ami matter, between reason Testament in place of the and sense, in the ditfercnt tenihncy was conspicuous anionfr Old. the older apoloirists of Christianity, who allegorized away the Old Testamiiit. but rcirarded the as

New

A

18) as a type of the erection and consecration of the Mosaic tabernacle, just as the Midrash docs ("Niceidiori Catena." ad lornin). Bini.iofiKAPiiv: A siiraraU! presentation of Alledfirlcal Interpretiitloii has not yei U-en written, ami therefun' reference imisi lie made to works treating of STii)ttire int«*n>retation in general Itiiseniiiueller, HMtirin Inti niritritifnix Lihrnnim

Sdcniniin.

New

absolutely historical.

who

one of them, Jewish e.xeiresis

Testament

iiassjiires is

I

lion lUi^hly

ish,

I

I

thus a triumph for Jewish Alexandrianism in lliedevelopmeiil of llii' Church, but Paleslinian allegorism likewisi' celebrated

iisown victory

Antiochian iheChureliof Anlioch. The

in

basic prin

cipleof Jewish typohigy." Miiiimh iiluit nhiiini If till II ill)" (Ihe lives of Ihe Patriarchs pnligured the livesof Iheirde.sceMdanls). became the moiio of the Anlioch .school. Aphnuites makes diligent use of Ibis typology, ami his sucen. x.wiii

School.

I

ion

New

Jew-

Palestinian as well as Alixandrian. Thus he says Xoali was saved by wood and water, showinij that C'hristiansare delivered from sin likewise by the <Toss and liy baptism (/.r. 13H). In elfect he transforms the whole Old Testament into a lypolojr.V of Jesus ami Chrislianity. so that Tryphon very pertinently remarks that liod's wind was holy indeed, bill that .luslin's interpretations were very arbitrary. AVilli the irrailual develojiment of the t'alliolic Cliurcli out of Jewish jiriniitive Christianity and Oreek (inosticism. the altitudeof the Cliurcli toward the Old Testament was moilitied too, as is shown by Clement of Alexandria, or more slroiifrly yet by his disciple Oriiren. The former is lie lirst Church father to revert to I'hilo's nu'lliods of alle^rorism. distiiiguishiii!.' between the body iliteral word) and spirit lie tinds (AUciTorical Inlerprelalioti) of Scripture, allcfjorical meaniiii; in both |iro|ilielical and legislative portions; he adopts I'hilo's alle,i;orical rules and many of liisindividual interpretations. Nordoes lie fail to originale some expositions himself. Thus the unclean aiiunals which chew the cud. but are of undivided hoof, are the Jews: hen-ties are those of divided hoof but wliochew not the cud; while those who |iossess neither characteristic are the liealhi'iis ("Slromatii." v. 52, vii. Kill). Oriiri'u's inlimacy with Pali'Stinians jirevcnted him from fallini; into such ixairjrenitioiis of the Alexandrian tendency as marked liis teacher Clement, ami evi-n a certain deirree of liistorical appreciation of the Old Testament becomes evident. But the conllict in Oriircn. so apparent in liisChrisfoloL'y, between speculative (Snoslicism and the lusliirical coiice]ili(in of Scripliire. pre veil led any lie. loo. nil ional and consistent view of .Scripture, niusi be made responsible for the .gross exa.LT.geralions of Christ ian allegorists lasting down tomoilern times: Hilary. Ambrose. Jerome, and Auguslineall borrowed their allegorizing nielbod from Origeii, who likewise oriirinatcd the iloclrine of Ihe threefold meaning of Scripture, Ibe lihral. moral, anil mystical The follnwiiig may ('I)e Principiis." iv. s, II. 1-1). serve as specimens of his maiiniT: The narnilive of Rebecca at the well is to leach us llial we must daily resort to the well of Script un- in order to tind Jesus. Pharaoh slew the toy -children and preserved Ihe pirlsalive. to show that lie who follows pleasure kills liis rational si'use (masculine) and preserves Ihe finiinine (the sensual passions). Origeirsallegorism was

(In I'hilo: slei/tneii. I'liiln

liitiim. York, isstl; Schiiiledl, SlmUcii lth,i- II: litiiimn>>hilim,ijliif. Vienna, ISllM: H. S. Hlrsehfeld. Ilahuliiaehc >;j-<i;cx<-,lS40; idem. IhrdcMclcrhUsli ii .sV/im7(<»i/.-(i j/i/ny, 1M7 : Hacher. i<i7ii (i.r. (/i.M- ilrr Jlhlimhiii Iti li'jimi.-iiliil'iKi'IjIuii, slnisbuiT.', Is'.C': idem. Die /{il.i (f.n ./r.M in Winter and Wfinsche, Die JUiliKvUe Literiiliir. H. ^it-.if.i : idem. Die ttilielereiitMi Miyrx Miiimnui'n, Strasbun?, IsiW; idem,

cum Try phone." 113,840). whose own alleirori/ation of Old

(' l)ialoj;is

Gnosticism, but

iv. Ix'Ipsie, 1T95.

Ah-j-itiulriiu, Jeniu IHT.'i, and the list of refen-iires on p. lti2; Diestel, (iiwli. A. 7". Jena. ISilil; Karrar. //i.sfoi //of liil.rpre-

.Justin .Martyr is

ridicules the artiticialities of

Allegorical Interpretation Allegory in the Old Testament

JEAVISH ENX'YCLOPEDIA

IjKxiyi'w liihliiiur iliiim le Ziilinr. in Itev. Et. Juivei'. xxii.
 * £Mtl. 21!>-2S9; idem. Ddf Merkimrt D-iiD in drr JHi/wc/icii

JiihelexetieKe. in Stade's Zw. IiaMn)j)ite:ih, lir. Kanlzsa, ls.">5: Kaufmann, in Xuiiz-Julxlgchrift. pp. 143-l,"il: idem, in many pas.saKesof his work. Die Siniie. Leipsic, 1»!«. L.

G.

ALLEGORY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT Allegory

a suslaiiied directly of one



m-

uaniition. treating subject, but intended as an exposition of another, the latter having a more spiritual nature than the former, yet bearing some perceiilible resemblance to it. It is a comparison belween IwodilTerent groupsof ideas on the basis of somi-thing pos.sessed in common. It has for its purpose Ihe illustration or inculcation of a higher truth. In the Old Testament, allegory with its kindred didactic forms is comprised under the Hokmah is

di -.criiitinii

(Wisdom), lilemlure under the two terms mashal

Xto and Dan.

'A:

/(('(/((/(

m'n

viii. 23).

(Kzek. xvii. 2: compare .xiv.

Mux/nil.

now

specitically

maxim,

or gnome, primarily denoted a com]>arison or simile. Under this older meaning, it was generally rendered in the Septua.ginl t>y rrt^)a.}r./;/( parable). Originally, it was doubtless didactic in purpose, and derived a maxim for the conduct of life from the comparison of two apparently dissimilar objects. Later it wa.s applied to any sententious or pointed sjiyiiig, and even toobscure proplielic utterances, since these, too, aiiind to instruct and usually employed comparison (Num. xxiii. 7. IS; xxiv. 3; comiiare Isa. xiv. 4; Micali. ii. 4: Ilab. ii. (i). lliduli. properly a riddle, is used ill a wider sense for ligurativeand significant siieech (Judges, xiv. 14; I Kings, x. 1; compare Ps. xlix. 5; Ixxviii. 2). is somewhat difflcult to define the difference ween allegory, jiarable. and fable. The parable and Ihe fable may be considered s])ecies of the alle-

It

liel

gory, for. like it. they represent their subject in an in a complete tigiiralive narration or descriplion. The characteristic mark of the fable is that il employs for the vehicle of its expression the -such as rea.sou improbable, even the inipossibli

image or

—

and speech

in

animals and


 * ilanls

— and thai

its les-

son is contined to practical worldly exi>edieiicy. Il derives a truth, to be applied to one sphere of llioiight. by displaying that truth as manifest in a An example is ditTerenl but comparable sphere. fiirnishi'd by the moreelaborate of the two fables in Ihe Old Ti-stainent. that Fable. of the trees choosing a king. The valuable olive-tree, the tig tree, and the vine ri'fiise to be king over the trees, liut the worthless bramble accepts (.Iiiilges, ix. H-10). The Irulli derived is to lie applii'd to .Vbimelech and Ihe men of Shechem who cjioose him king. Like the bramble. .Miiiuelech is worthless, and would servi' only to set "lire to the other trei'S." thai is. wcnild bring onlv disaster to The si'cond fable (II Kings, the men of .S|ie<liem. xiv. !t-l(h is more like a proverb. King .Vmaziah of Juihih challenges King Jehoash of Israel, and