And the principal occasion of the apostle’s writing the epistle to the Galatians, was, that he might establish some among them, in the faith of the gospel, who were so much disposed to turn aside from him that called them, and embrace another scheme of religion that was subversive of it; as he observes, in chap. i. 6. where, by this other gospel, which he dissuades them from turning aside unto, we are to understand those doctrines that they had imbibed from those false teachers who endeavour either to re-establish the observation of the ceremonial law, or to put them upon seeking righteousness and life, from their observing the precepts of the moral law, which tended to overthrow the doctrine of justification by Christ’s righteousness; which is a subject often insisted on by the apostle, both in this and his other epistles.
This method of enquiring into the occasion of what is mentioned in particular paragraphs of scripture, will often give light to some things contained therein. Thus we read, in Matt. xxi. 23-27. that the chief priests and elders ask our Saviour this question, By what authority dost thou these things? which, had it proceeded from an humble mind, desirous to be convinced by his reply to it; or, had he not often, in their hearing, asserted the authority by which he did those things, he would, doubtless, have told them, that he received a commission to do them from the Father; and, that every miracle which he wrought, was, as it were, a confirming seal annexed to it. But our Saviour, knowing the design of the question, and the character of the persons that asked it, he does not think fit to make any reply to it, rather chusing to put them to silence, by proposing another question to them, which he knew they would not be forward to answer, relating to the baptism of John, viz. whether it was from heaven, or of men. And this was certainly the best method he could have taken; for he dealt with them as cavillers, who were to be put to silence, and made ashamed at the same time.
(4.) In order to our understanding the sense of scripture, we must, so far as it is possible, compare the phrases, or modes of expression, as well as the subject insisted on, with what occurs in other parallel places. Thus, in several of the historical parts of scripture, we have the same history, or, at least, many things tending to illustrate it; as the history of the reign of the kings of Judah and Israel, is the principal subject of the book of Kings and Chronicles; one of which often refers to, as well as explains the other, and, by comparing them together, we shall find, that one gives light to the other. Thus it is said, in 2 Kings xii. 2. that Jehoash did that which was right, in the sight of the Lord all his days, wherein Jehoiada the priest instructed him; by which it is intimated, that, after the death of Jehoiada, he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord; but this is not particularly mentioned in this chapter, which principally insists on that part of his reign which was commendable. But if we compare it with 2 Chron. xxiv. we have an account of his reign after the death of Jehoiada, how he set up idolatry, ver. 17, 18. being instigated hereunto by his princes that flattered, or, as it is expressed, made obeisance unto him, and disregarded the prophets sent to testify against these practices; and how he stoned Zachariah in the court of the house of the Lord, for his faithful reproof and prophetic intimation of the consequence of the idolatry, in which he shewed the greatest ingratitude, and forgetfulness of the good things that had been done for him by his father, who set him on his throne. We have an account of the time when the Syrians came up against him, and how they overcame him with a small company of men; and, that the Lord delivered a very great host into their hand, because they had forsaken the Lord God of their fathers, ver. 23, 24.
Again, in the book of Kings, we have but a short history of the reign of Azariah, otherwise called Uzziah, and of his being smitten by the Lord, so that he was a leper until the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house, 2 Kings xv. 1-5. but in 2 Chron. xxvi. there is a larger account of him, as successful in war, and of the honour and riches that he gained thereby; and also we have a particular account of the reason of the Lord’s smiting him with leprosy, namely, for his invading a branch of the priest’s office.
Again, in the history of the reign of Manasseh, in 2 Kings xxi. we have only an account of the vile and abominable part thereof; whereas, in 2 Chron. xxxiii. we have not only an account of his wickedness, but of his repentance, together with the affliction that occasioned it, ver. 12-19.
Moreover, when we read the prophetic writings, we must, for our better understanding them, compare them with the particular history of the reign of those kings, in whose time they prophesied, and the state of the church at that time, their alliances or wars with neighbouring princes, and the sins that they were guilty of, which gave occasion to their being sometimes insulted, and overcome by them, till their ruin was completed in being carried captive into Babylon. Thus when we read Isa. vii. which gives an account of Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah, the son of Remaliah, against Ahaz, and contains a prediction of their miscarriage in this attempt; and also, that the king of Asyria should be hired to assist Ahaz, but should, instead thereof, deal deceitfully with him, so that he should deprive Judah of their ornaments, and impoverish, instead of being helpful to them. This we have a farther explication of in the history of Ahaz’s reign, in 2 Kings xvi. and 2 Chron. xxviii.[[38]]
Again, we ought to compare the account of Sennacherib’s invading Judah, and the blasphemous insult of Rabshakeh sent for that purpose, together with his defeat, and the remarkable hand of God that brought this about, as an encouragement of Hezekiah’s piety, in the xxxvith and xxxviith chapters of Isaiah, with the historal account of the same thing, in 2 Kings xviii. and xix. and 2 Chron. xxxii.
Again, we must compare the Psalms of David with his life, or the state of the church, which is particularly referred to in some of them; which may be very much illustrated from other scriptures, that have relation to the same dispensations of providence, or contain an historical account thereof. As for those psalms that were penned on particular occasions, mentioned in the respective titles prefixed to them, these will be better understood if we compare the subject-matter thereof with the history they refer to. Moreover, we shall often find, that when the same thing is mentioned in different places of scripture, there is something added in one, which farther illustrates what is contained in the other. Thus, in the account we have of the life of Joseph, in Gen. xxxix. 20. it is said, that he was put into the prison, the place where the king’s prisoners were bound; and, in chap. xli. 14. that he was kept in the dungeon, which is the worst part of the prison. But the Psalmist speaking of the same matter, in Psal. cv. 18. adds, that his feet were hurt with fetters, and he was laid in iron; which contains a farther illustration of the history of his troubles.
Again, when we read in Numb. xi. 31, 32. of God’s feeding Israel, upon their murmuring in the desert, for want of flesh, with quails in great abundance; this is mentioned elsewhere, in Psal. lxxviii. 27. in which we have an account, that these quails were a sort of feathered fowl, which could not have been so well understood by the sense of the Hebrew word, which we render quails[[39]]. We have also an account, in Exod. xvii. 6. of God’s supplying them with water out of the rock in Horeb; and if we compare this with Psal. cv. 41. we shall find that this water issued from thence in so large a stream, that it was like a river. And the apostle Paul gives farther light to it, when he says, speaking in a figurative way, that the rock followed them, 1 Cor. x. 4. that is, the water that ran from it like a river, did not flow in a right line; but, by a continued miracle, changed its course, as they altered their stations, in their various removes from place to place in the wilderness. And he also adds, that God designed this to be a type of Christ.
I might also observe, that there were many things in the life of David, after his expulsion from Saul’s court, that would argue him an usurper; inasmuch as he did not barely fly to secure his life, which he might lawfully do, as a private person; but he raised a small army; and accordingly it is said, in 2 Sam. xxii. 2. that every one that was ‘in distress, or in debt, or discontented, gathered themselves unto him; and he became a captain over him; and there were with him about four hundred men.’ And Jonathan, who was heir apparent to the crown, is forced to capitulate with, and take an oath of him, that he would grant him his life, as concluding, that he would be king after his father’s death, 1 Sam. xx. 14, 15. compared with the 42. and Saul’s jealousy hereof, which was attended with rage, amounting to a kind of destraction, was not altogether without ground; as he intimates to him, when he tells him, ‘Behold, I know well that thou shalt surely be king,’ chap. xxiv. 20. and accordingly, in the following verses, he makes him ‘swear to him, that he would not cut off his seed after him, or destroy his name out of his father’s house.’ Now this could hardly be justified, if we did not consider what we read in another part of scripture, that, before that time, God had taken away the kingdom from Saul, and anointed David to be king in his stead, in 1 Sam. xvi. 13. though he had not the actual possession of it till after Saul’s death.