^ PRTTVrj-RTOTVr 1ST .T. <vN 
 
 Division.. 
 
 Section ..y.*^l. (L+. . I. . 
 
 Shelf Number. 
 
- 
 
 
THE ELEMENTS OF 
 
 BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION 
 
 OR 
 
 AN EXPOSITION 
 
 OF THE LAWS BY WHICH THE SCRIPTURES ARE CAPABLE 
 OF BEING CORRECTLY INTERPRETED ; 
 
 TOGETHER WITH AN ANALYSIS OF THE 
 
 RATIONALISTIC AND MYSTIC MODES 
 
 OF INTERPRETING THEM. 
 
 ADAPTED TO COMMON USE, AND DESIGNED AS AN AUXILIARY 
 TO THE CRITICAL STUDY OF THE BIBLE. 
 
 BY LEICESTER A. SAWYER, A. M. 
 
 " Whoso rearfeth let him underhand."— Jesus Christ. 
 
 NEW HAVEN : 
 PUBLISHED BY A. K. MALTBY", 
 
 SOLD BY D. APPLETON & CO. AND LEAVITT, LORD & CO. NEW YORK 
 HENRY PERKINS, PHILADELPHIA ; AND BY WILLIAM PIERCE 
 AND PERKINS & MARVIN, BOSTON. 
 
 1836. 
 
Entered according to the Act of Congress, in the year 1836, by 
 
 Leicester A. Sawyer, A. M. 
 
 in the Clerk's office of the Dictrict Court of Connecticut. 
 
 rilLS9 OF P. B. WIIITMORE. 
 
CO] 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 PRELD1INARY ESSAYS. 
 
 Page 
 
 Sec. 1. Introductory and general remarks, . 5 
 
 2. The necessity of the right exercise of the men- 
 
 tal faculties, in the interpretation of the 
 Bible, ..... 10 
 
 3. Rules for the right exercise of judgment, in 
 
 Biblical Interpretation, . . . l.j 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 THE RULES OR LAWS OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Sec. 1. Language considered as a symbol of thought, 21 
 
 2. The interpretation of language, particularly 
 
 that of the Bible, . . . . 24 
 
 3. Words considered as the elements of language, 30 
 
 4. General principles relating to the meaning of 
 
 single words, .... 32 
 
 5. Rules for determining the literal meaning of 
 
 single words, .... 50 
 
 6. Rules for determining when words are used in 
 
 a tropical or figurative sense, . . 82 
 
IV CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 
 7. Rules for determining the sense of tropical 
 
 or figurative words, ... 87 
 
 8. Rules for determining the signification of alle- 
 
 gories, ..... 93 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 SUBSIDIARY AND PARTICULAR LAWS OF BIBLICAL IN- 
 TERPRETATION. 
 
 Sec. 1. The interpretation of the Scriptural system of 
 
 doctrines, . . . . 100 
 
 2. General principles relating to the material 
 
 types and symbols of the Bible, . 117 
 
 3. Rules for determining the signification of ma- 
 
 terial types and symbols, . . 124 
 
 4. General principles relating to the prophecies, 136 
 
 5. Rules for determining the signification of the 
 
 prophecies, . 142 
 
 G. The interpretation of the Bible considered as 
 
 a translation. .... 153 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 ERRONEOUS MODES OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 
 Sec. 1. The Rationalistic mode of Biblical Interpre- 
 tation, ..... 1(31 
 2. The Mystic mode of Biblical Interpretation, 171 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 
 
 Seg. 1. Introductory and general remarks. 
 
 1. Jgnorance of the principles and rules of Inter- 
 pretation, is one of the greatest obstacles in the way 
 of obtaining a correct knowledge of the Bible. Lan- 
 guage is a medium of communication between man 
 and his fellow man. Through this medium the 
 thoughts, desires and determinations of one mind are 
 made known to another. God has made communi- 
 cations of truth to the world, both by the natural 
 objects of perception, and by the instrumentality of 
 human language. He did not form a new language 
 to be the medium of communication between himself 
 and his creatures, but made use of that already form- 
 ed and in use by them. Neither did he construct this 
 language anew to make it answer his purpose ; he 
 took it just as it was, and used it just as he found it, 
 for the benevolent purpose of instructing his creatures 
 in the way of life and salvation. In the earlier ages 
 of the world he found the Hebrew in use, and he then 
 made his communications in that. In later times, the 
 Hebrew being less generally understood, and the 
 
 2 
 
6 PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 
 
 Greek more generally known, he made his communi- 
 cations in Greek. Having made his communications 
 once, he leaves them to be studied and interpreted by 
 his subjects ; to be studied in the same manner in 
 which we study other writings, and to be interpret- 
 ed by the same rules. 
 
 Those who are not acquainted with the original 
 languages, may still have the benefit of this blessed 
 volume translated into their vernacular tongues, by 
 learned and pious men. Translations are made into 
 almost all modern languages, which are extensively 
 used, and many of them are made with the greatest 
 possible care, and by men equally distinguished for 
 their learning and piety. Our common translation 
 was not only made with the greatest care, by men of 
 distinguished learning and piety ; but it has received 
 the approbation of a long list of worthies of all ortho- 
 dox denominations of Christians. 
 
 2. But in whatever method divine truth is ap- 
 proached, and by whatever medium it is brought 
 within our reach, we ought to be mainly anxious to 
 drink of its healing waters. Whether we read the 
 Sacred Scriptures in their original or in our own ver- 
 nacular tongue, we ought to be careful to understand 
 them aright. 
 
 The truths of the Bible can do us good only as far 
 as we understand and apply them. Just as far as we 
 misunderstand the Bible, and mistake its meaning, 
 we lose the benefits which it is designed to convey, 
 and subject ourselves to the evils it was intended to 
 correct. 
 
 While a right understanding of the Bible is ad- 
 
PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 7 
 
 mitted by all candid and intelligent students of it, to 
 be of incalculable benefit and of inestimable value ; 
 and while so many loose, erroneous, and contradic- 
 tory views are entertained on the subject of its com- 
 munications, it is truly surprising that the theory of 
 Biblical Interpretation has not been more generally a 
 subject of investigation and inquiry. 
 
 Other branches of knowledge have received at 
 least a share of public attention ; this has by the mul- 
 titude been almost entirely overlooked and neglect- 
 ed. Indeed it is hardly known by many a fierce re- 
 ligious disputant and wrangler in our land, that there 
 is any such science as that of Biblical Interpretation. 
 
 But though neglected by the common people, be- 
 lievers and unbelievers, the most accurate Biblical 
 scholars have devoted to it a large share of their at- 
 tention. In the seats of learning, and by the most 
 successful cultivators of Biblical knowledge, it has 
 been studied with constantly increasing interest and 
 benefit, both to themselves and the world with whom 
 they communicate. 
 
 Lectures and other scientific instructions are given 
 on this subjeet in our best Theological Seminaries, 
 and theablestexpounders of God's word are devoting 
 themselves to this study with singular assiduity and 
 zeal. 
 
 3. A concise and elemontary treatise on the sub- 
 ject of Biblical Interpretation, briefly explaining its 
 fundamental principles and rules, and presenting 
 them to view in their mutual relations and depend- 
 encies, has long been needed. This need has been 
 felt and expressed, by at least a respectable portion 
 
8 PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 
 
 of the Christian public. There is nothing of the kind 
 in circulation at present in this country. Prof. 
 Stuart's translation of Ernesti, is not of a popular 
 character, and is not adapted to interest and instruct 
 the general reader, though deeply interesting to the 
 accurate Classical and Biblical scholar. 
 
 4. In the present elementary treatise an endeavor 
 has been made to exhibit the fundamental principles 
 and rules of Biblical Interpretation, in such a man- 
 ner, as to place them within the reach and compre- 
 hension of every intelligent reader of the English 
 language. These rules are accompanied with such 
 illustrations and examples, as will sufficiently evince 
 their truth and show their application. The system 
 of Interpretation exhibited in the following pages, is 
 substantially the same as that of Ernesti. Technical 
 expressions however are generally avoided, as being 
 not adapted to instruct the great body of the Chris- 
 tian community for whose benefit this manual is more 
 particularly designed. 
 
 5. In applying the following rules of Interpreta- 
 tion to the Bible, it is to be remembered, that the holy 
 word of God is to be approached with the profound- 
 est reverence. Rash and hasty judgments are not 
 for a moment to be tolerated in relation to those vi- 
 tally important subjects, which the Bible unfolds to 
 our view. Here, if any where, when examining this 
 blessed book if ever, we are to proceed with delibera- 
 tion, and judge with candor and caution. How much 
 is lost by a neglect to do this, no tongue can tell, and 
 no pen describe. Much of the error in faith and 
 practice, with which the world is flooded, may be 
 
PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 9 
 
 traced to this prolific source ; men leap to their con- 
 clusions on religious subjects, before they well un- 
 derstand the premises ; and those conclusions are 
 such as suit their own misguided fancy, whether they 
 can be deduced from the word of God by fair means 
 or foul. 
 
 Many undertake the study of the Bible with their 
 ultimate conclusions all predetermined. They look 
 into it, not to hear what God is pleased to say, for the 
 purpose of deterring them from sin, and exciting them 
 to seek holiness and heaven ; but to see what they 
 can find, to establish themselves in this and that fa- 
 vorite opinion. That such persons should make much 
 progress in sound scriptural knowledge is not to be 
 expected. They do not labor to correct their errors 
 and enlarge their views, a work which cannot be ac- 
 complished without labor. They only strive to con- 
 firm themselves in their preconceived opinions : in 
 that they generally succeed, no matter how absurd 
 those opinions may be. 
 
 6. Let the work of Biblical Interpretation be un- 
 dertaken with honesty and humility. Human opin- 
 ions are an empty sound, and even learning is a 
 vain show when arrayed against the truths of the 
 Bible. 
 
 Truth will stand ; it is destined to a glorious and 
 universal triumph. It will bless and comfort all 
 those who hold it in righteousness. It has outlived 
 the scoffs of the most heaven-daring infidels. The 
 mists of scepticism cannot conceal and essentially 
 darken it, the storms of persecution have been una- 
 ble to sweep it away. Woe to the man who lifts up 
 2* 
 
10 PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 
 
 his puny hand against Divine truth. In doing this, 
 he rebels against God, and treasures up wrath against 
 the day of wrath, to be poured out upon his guilty 
 soul. 
 
 Joy to that man who is on the side of truth. Truth 
 will be on his side. If he has taken the part of truth 
 against an angry and unbelieving world, truth will 
 take his part against all that may threaten to disturb 
 his peace and destroy his soul. By God's truth he 
 shall be sanctified, and being sanctified shall enjoy a 
 blissful eternity with Him, whose words are truth, 
 whose favor is life, whose loving-kindness is better 
 than life. 
 
 The work of Biblical Interpretation is easy to the 
 candid, attentive and prayerful inquirer. By such, the 
 principles and leading rules of this interesting science, 
 will be readily apprehended. To the captious and 
 caviling, they will be more difficult of acquisition ; 
 but some knowledge on this subject may be obtain- 
 ed even by them, if they will consent patiently to ex- 
 amine it, in the exercise of their good common sense, 
 to see if these things are so. 
 
 Sec. 2. The necessity of a right exercise of 
 the mental faculties in the interpreta- 
 tion of the bible. 
 
 1. The Bible is addressed to mankind as rational 
 beings, and is evidently designed to be a manual of 
 instruction, not to a few privileged individuals only, 
 but to the human race. It consists of a collection of 
 Divinely inspired writings, the productions of differ- 
 ent persons, living indifferent ages of the world, and 
 
PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 11 
 
 using different languages and modes of speech. Ev- 
 ery part of it bears manifest marks of having been 
 designed to convey information which was deemed 
 of serious and high importance. 
 
 This singular book, exceeding all others in the 
 importance and variety of its communications, con- 
 taining the most ancient and well authenticated his- 
 tory ; the most remarkable and undoubted prophe- 
 cy ; the purest morality ; and the only rational sys- 
 tem of religious worship ; is given us by God as the 
 only authoritative rule of faith and practice. 
 
 To its pages we are referred for information re- 
 specting our duties and destiny. A competent 
 knowledge of its disclosures, and a due conformity 
 to its precepts, are indispensably necessary to the 
 promotion of our highest temporal or spiritual good. 
 They are an indispensable pre-requisite to our final 
 and eternal salvation. Whatever may be the final 
 allotment of a conscientious heathen, who lives in 
 unavoidable ignorance of this blessed volume, there 
 can be no doubt that those who being in possession 
 of it, fail of obtaining a competent knowledge of its 
 saving truths, will certainly perish in their ignorance. 
 
 Faith is insisted on in the Bible, as a fundamental 
 duty ; but we cannot believe any further than we 
 understand the true meaning of the Divine communi- 
 cations. 
 
 The fact therefore that we are required to believe 
 what God has communicated in the Bible, for our in- 
 struction, proves that we are required to understand 
 those instructions correctly. For how is it possible 
 for us to believe what we do not understand ? 
 
12 PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 
 
 In being required to exercise faith in the Divine 
 communications, we are of course required to attain 
 the amount and degree of knowledge, which is re- 
 quisite to the intelligent performance of this exercise. 
 When that degree and amount of knowledge is un- 
 attainable, the exercise of a corresponding faith is 
 impossible. 
 
 It is obvious therefore, that we are not at liberty 
 to misunderstand or incorrectly interpret the Bible. 
 We are under an indispensable obligation to inter- 
 pret the word of God correctly. The misunder- 
 standing of it in respect to any of its fundamental 
 truths, is not only a misfortune, but a sin ; and one 
 which God has declared he will severely punish. 
 
 The fact that we are under obligation to obtain a 
 correct understanding of the Bible, so far at least as 
 to attain the exercise of saving faith, and the practice 
 of evangelical obedience, must be obvious to every 
 candid and enlightened inquirer. 
 
 2. From this truth the following equally important 
 truths, may be clearly deduced. 
 
 (1.) That the Bible has a determinate sense. 
 
 (2.) That we are competent, with such aids as are 
 within our reach, to ascertain that sense with cer- 
 tainty. 
 
 If the Bible had no determinate sense, it could not 
 be our duty to understand it as having one. So also 
 if we were incompetent, with such aids as may be 
 obtained, to as certain the true sense of the Sacred 
 Scriptures, no matter how clear and obvious that 
 sense might be to higher intelligences, it could not 
 be our duty to acquire it ; neither could that at- 
 
PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 13 
 
 tainment with any propriety be made in any way 
 conditional to our salvation. 
 
 The position which is often assumed by the igno- 
 rant and unbelieving, that the Bible has no determin- 
 ate sense; or that its true meaning, if it has one, is 
 utterly unattainable by the human mind, is seen to 
 be entirely false and ruinous. It is equally at vari- 
 ance with the Sacred Scriptures and with reason it- 
 self. 
 
 3. The fact that the Bible is intelligible, is a pleas- 
 ing and important one. But it does not authorize 
 the belief that the Divine communications can be un- 
 derstood without attention and effort. The reverse 
 is obvious. Experience and observation abundant- 
 ly testify, that a careless and inattentive perusal of 
 the Sacred Scriptures, is exceedingly liable to mis- 
 lead the mind in respect to many most important re- 
 ligious truths. 
 
 Amidst the conflicting opinions that prevail in re- 
 lation to many important religious subjects, it is ob- 
 vious that many are wrong. Many intelligent per- 
 sons do fail entirely of understanding aright some of 
 the most important developments of the Divine will. 
 
 But to what is this failure to be attributed ? Not 
 to any imperfection in the Inspired Oracles of God ; 
 not to any want of adaptation in them to the limited 
 capacities of the human mind ; but to the perverted 
 and negligent use of those capacities, in the investi- 
 gation of divine truth. 
 
 A negligent and perverted use of the human facul- 
 ties, is therefore a principal cause of damnable error. 
 In the Interpretation of the Bible, the mind must be 
 
14 PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 
 
 vigorously and correctly exercised in order to bring 
 us to a correct result. If we have fallen into serious 
 errors in this department of human knowledge, we 
 may take the blame of those errors to ourselves. It 
 will be in vain to charge them upon any other being. • 
 
 God has not in any of his dispensations encoura- 
 ged either indolence or negligence. Least of all has 
 he done this in the dispensation of truth, whether re- 
 lating to human science or religion. 
 
 While the sluggish exercise of the mental faculties 
 in the investigation of Divine truth generally fails of 
 securing the attainment of much useful knowledge ; 
 the diligent and careful exercise of the same, is at- 
 tended with a rich reward and crowned with unlook- 
 ed for success. In the Interpretation of the Bible, 
 we find work for our highest mental faculties, and 
 that which requires their most effective exercise. 
 Memory, Judgment, and even Imagination are sum- 
 moned to put forth their mightiest efforts in this 
 work. It is indispensably necessary to our greatest 
 success, that they should all do their part. 
 
 Imagination however, is to be exercised with great 
 caution in this field, as in most others, and only 
 within its legitimate domains. The unlicensed 
 range often given to this faculty in the Interpreta- 
 tion of the Bible, leads to the most disastrous, and 
 even fatal results. It is the parent of extravagance 
 and enthusiasm, and the author of immense injuries 
 to the cause of truth and piely. 
 
preliminary essays. 15 
 
 Sec. 3. Rules for the right exercise of judg- 
 ment IN BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 
 
 1. We ought never to form a judgment till we 
 have duly considered the evidences which relate to 
 the case under consideration. The guide of Judg- 
 ment is evidence. To determine the most trifling 
 matter without a perfect knowledge of the evidence 
 relating to it, as far as that knowledge can be ob- 
 tained, is to prejudge the case, and to surrender the 
 interests of truth to the guidance of conjecture. Our 
 conjecture may be right; but it is far more likely to 
 be wrong, inasmuch as the chances for error are far 
 the most numerous. 
 
 The formation of judgments in the Interpretation 
 of the Scriptures without a due knowledge and con- 
 sideration of the evidences relating to each several 
 case, is one of the most fruitful sources of error. No 
 degree of energy or aculeness of our natural facul- 
 ties of judgment, can compensate for the want of ev- 
 idences in the formation of our religious opinions and 
 belief. 
 
 Powerful and improved natural faculties qualify 
 us to use evidences to the greatest advantage and 
 with the greatest success, but they do not qualify us 
 to judge without evidence, or with that which is im- 
 perfect and indecisive, any more than strong and 
 acute powers of vision enable us to see without 
 light, or to see clearly by the aid only of a few scat- 
 tered rays of that element. 
 
 Persons may be ever so well acquainted with the 
 principles and rules of Interpretation, so far as lan- 
 guage is concerned, and yet by forming their judg- 
 
16 PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 
 
 merits hastily and without due knowledge and con- 
 sideration of the evidence relating to the case, fall in- 
 to the grossest errors. 
 
 In this way many important portions of the word 
 of God are daily misinterpreted, which are neverthe- 
 less capable of being fully and perfectly understood. 
 Judgment is only the interpreter of evidence. It is 
 the eye which sees that truth only on which the light 
 of evidence is thrown ; and with a clearness and cer- 
 tainty proportioned to the clearness and force of the 
 evidence by which it is determined. 
 
 A cautious consideration of evidence and a rigid 
 adherence to it, in the Interpretation of the Bible, is 
 the more important, because when erroneous opin- 
 ions are once formed, it is extremely difficult to dis- 
 lodge them. The same light that would have put 
 us in possession of the truth before an erroneous 
 opinion was imbibed, will seldom be sufficient to ef- 
 fect the correction of that opinion. When a case 
 has been prejudged, and the mind has settled down 
 in erroneous views of it, months and years of labori- 
 ous study may be utterly ineffective as to the discov- 
 ery of truth, which, previous to the adoption of the 
 error in question, might have been ascertained in a 
 day, perhaps in an hour. The strongest intellect is 
 almost as much the dupe of error when once embra- 
 ced, as the weakest. The mighty in intellect are 
 bound as strongly with the cords of this captivity as 
 the feeble ; and seldom effect their escape when once 
 fully enthralled in delusion. 
 
 2. We should give their due weight and influence 
 to all the items of evidence which relate to each sev- 
 
PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 17 
 
 eral case of Interpretation. This rule follows natur- 
 ally the admission of (he former. Different modes 
 of Interpretation suggest themselves in connexion 
 with different items of evidence by which they are 
 supported. The sources of evidence ought to be as- 
 certained and examined, and the items furnished by 
 each particular source, carefully considered and com- 
 pared. Our final judgment ought to be the r< suit 
 of this extended investigation. Nothing less than 
 this, can be satisfactory or safe. 
 fc This rule, like the former, is often violated. It is 
 not uncommon for persons to fix on a particular 
 item, or class of evidences, to the entire neglect of 
 others in favor of a different opinion, and which are 
 entitled to an equal amount of influence in the deter- 
 mination of our judgments. Decisions thus obtain- 
 ed are necessarily partial and erroneous. 
 
 Whenever the evidences in relation to the true im- 
 port of a passage of Scripture are contradictory, 
 they must be compared; and that which preponder- 
 ates must determine our belief. Such cases are not 
 uncommon. They do not occur from any defect or 
 imperfection in the Inspired Oracles, but from the 
 limited nature of the human understanding ; and the 
 necessarily limited materials from a consideration of 
 which, our judgments must be formed. 
 
 3. We ought to investigate the Scriptures, es- 
 pecially those parts which admit of different modes 
 of Interpretation, and the true meaning of which is 
 a matter of controversy, dispassionately and im- 
 partially. 
 
 There is no sufficient reason for our being strong- 
 3 
 
18 PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 
 
 ly interested in favor of any mode of Interpretation ; 
 or strongly prejudiced against it, till we have before 
 our minds he i vidence of its truth and correctness, 
 or the contrary. The same principle is universally 
 acknowledged to be valid in relation to the investiga- 
 tion of other subjects. We ought to preserve our 
 minds as far as possible unbiassed in favor of any 
 opinions or against them, till we have obtained deci- 
 sive evidence of their correctness or incorrectness. 
 
 Feeling is no criterion by which to judge of truth. 
 The moment it becomes excited, it presents an ob- 
 struction to the exercise of impartial judgment, which 
 no art or power of man may be able to remove or over- 
 come. V\ hile feelings of attachment or aversion are 
 un xcited, the understanding may be informed, and 
 the judgment influenced by the full force of evidence. 
 But as soon as feelings of aversion are once aroused 
 against the truth, an effect that may easily be pro- 
 duced by incorrect associations, every avenue to the 
 judgment is effectually closed against evidences, by 
 which that truth is ascertained. 
 
 It is not intended by these remarks to discourage 
 the exercise of excited feelings. They ought to be 
 indulged and cherished in their proper place, but not 
 to the prejudice of truth. A court of justice has no 
 right to hear and adjudge causes under the influence 
 of excitement. In the investigation of the Sacred Or- 
 acles, the same disturbing cause ought to be careful- 
 ly avoided, and for equally, and if possible, still more 
 obvious and weighty reasons. The indiscretion con- 
 tended against, is exceedingly common and perni- 
 cious. The most grave investigations, those involv- 
 
PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 19 
 
 ing the eternal welfare of individuals, families, or 
 communities, are frequently prosecuted under the 
 highest excitement of party feeling. It is unneces- 
 ry to say, that in such circumstances, truth is put in 
 imminent peril. Let truth be first dispassionately 
 and impartially investigated, and then, and not till 
 then, let feelings of love or hatred, of attachment or 
 aversion, be excited or indulged. Then it will be 
 right and safe to indulge such feelings as truth is 
 adapted to awaken. 
 
 4. We ought to investigate every different pas- 
 sage of Scripture, and every different subject by it- 
 self. Valuable knowledge is gained by attending to 
 one thing at a time. When we look at one object 
 with our natural eyes, we are able to see it clearly 
 and distinctly ; but when we attempt to embrace a 
 number of objects in our view, we do not gain a dis- 
 tinct perception of any of them. The same principle 
 applies to our intellectual vision. We cannot view 
 distinctly different truths at once. Moral and reli- 
 gious investigations are frequently embarrassed by 
 several different subjects being blended confusedly 
 together in the same inquiry ; whereas every differ- 
 ent subject ought to be discriminated from all others, 
 and examined by itself. 
 
 It is one of the devices of sophistry and of deceiv- 
 ers, to produce a confusion of ideas by blending sub- 
 jects that ought to be viewed separately, and as sep- 
 arate. But this method of procedure finds no place 
 in the theory of rational investigation, whether of re- 
 ligious subjects, or of any other. The principle in- 
 sisted on in this paragraph, is one of universal appli- 
 
20 PRELIMINARY ESSAYS. 
 
 cation. It applies equally to science, business, and 
 religion ; and in every application of it, is found to 
 be of fundamental importance. It cannot in any 
 case be neglected with safety. The man who disre- 
 gards it, must suffer the penalty due to a violation of 
 one of the leading principles of successful exertion 
 in any department of effort. 
 
 The foregoing rules relative to the right exercise 
 of the mind in Biblical Interpretation, are all impor- 
 ant to be known and observed. The neglect of them 
 leads certainly and unavoidably to error, with all its 
 ruinous consequences. We cannot reasonably ex- 
 pect to form right judgments, unless we exercise our 
 minds on the subject in hand, in a proper manner. 
 And we have abundant occasion for gratitude and 
 joy, that in the right exercise of our mental faculties 
 we cannot fail of obtaining whatever knowledge is 
 essential to our present or future felicity. So far as 
 the right exercise of judgment and other mental fac- 
 ulties will lead us to correct results in the business of 
 Biblical Interpretation, we ought to attain such re- 
 sults. We cannot reasonably ask that truth should 
 be attainable in the careless or otherwise incorrect 
 exercise of our mental faculties. And yet unreason- 
 able as it is, that demand is sometimes impiously and 
 audaciously made ; and not a few have turned away 
 in disgust from the study of the Bible, because they 
 could not arrive at satisfactory conclusions, without 
 an enlightened, deliberate, and vigorous exercise of 
 their mental faculties on the communications it con- 
 tains. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 THE RULES OR LAWS OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Sec. 1. Language considered as a symbol of 
 
 THOUGHT. 
 
 1. Oral Language is the expression of our ideas by 
 articulate sounds, which are used as the signs of 
 those ideas. In oral language a single sound, or a 
 number of sounds pronounced continuously, repre- 
 sent a single idea. Instead of having a different 
 sound to represent every idea, human languages have 
 but a few different sounds, and represent all their 
 numerous and diversified ideas, by different combi- 
 nations of these. One or more single sounds form 
 a word ; one or more words form a sentence ; one 
 or more sentences a paragraph or discourse. 
 
 2. The connexion between words and ideas is most- 
 ly arbitrary and conventional. Different nations use 
 very different sounds and combinations of sound, in 
 the communication of their ideas. It is in this, that 
 the diversity of human languages chiefly consists. 
 These languages are made up in part of different el- 
 ementary sounds ; and those sounds which are the 
 same in all, are differently combined with others ; 
 and applied, both in their elementary and combined 
 
 state, to denote different ideas and objects. Those 
 
 3* 
 
22 THE RULES OR LAWS OP 
 
 sounds that are naturally expressive of the idea* 
 which they denote, are exceedingly few, and com- 
 paratively unimportant. They consist mostly of in- 
 terjections. Besides these, there is a remote corres- 
 pondence between many combinations of sound in 
 every language, and the sense which they convey, 
 that contributes much both to the perspicuity and 
 force of language. 
 
 3. Written, is a symbolical representation of oral 
 language, and of ideas. Its object is first, to repre- 
 sent oral language to the eye ; and secondly, to re- 
 present by letters lo the mind, the ideas of which 
 oral language is an appropriate vocal symbol. 
 
 A syllable in writing, which consists of one or 
 more letters, corresponds to a sound in speech, and 
 different combinations of syllables, to different com- 
 binations of sounds. The object of representing ideas 
 to the mind, is often attained through the medium 
 of letters, when the sounds are not represented at all. 
 We may know the meaning of words, that we do 
 not know how to pronounce. 
 
 The deaf and dumb are taught to read, but they 
 know nothing of pronunciation, or of any articulate 
 sounds whatever. Letters are not to them the marks 
 of sounds at all; but the elements or component 
 parts of written words merely, and those words the 
 direct representatives of ideas. 
 
 Written language is therefore of a twofold nature : 
 a symbolical representation of oral language ; and 
 a symbolical representation of ideas. Every word 
 written represents (1,) a word spoken ; (2,) the idea of 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 23 
 
 which the word spoken is the symbol. Written lan- 
 guage is as much the symbol of ideas, as that which 
 is spoken, and represents them as directly to the 
 mind. The correspondence between it and oral lan- 
 guage is not necessary ; for we might speak one lan- 
 guage and write another. But it is convenient ; and 
 in consequence of its convenience, has generally pre- 
 vailed. 
 
 Written, being founded upon oral language, is 
 constructed on the same principles, and corresponds 
 to it, word for word, and syllable for sound. It 
 is therefore to be interpreted by the same rules. 
 Whether written or spoken, it is a symbolical re- 
 presentation of thought, and substantially the same 
 thing. 
 
 4. Speech and writing have each their peculiar ad- 
 vantages and disadvantages, as symbolical represen- 
 tations of thought. The words may be the same ; 
 but in writing, they are permanent ; in speech, tran- 
 sient. A written communication admits of a more 
 thorough investigation ; a spoken one produces the 
 deepest immediate impression. 
 
 Repeated perusal, and accurate investigation of 
 the force of words and phrases, are the principal 
 means of interpreting a written discourse. Tone, em- 
 phasis and gesture contribute to illustrate and ex- 
 plain a spoken one. Both are sufficiently perspicu- 
 ous to the attentive and diligent inquirer. Both are 
 too obscure to be correctly understood in their high- 
 er applications, by the inattentive and negligent. 
 
 5. Language considered as a product of the human 
 
24 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 mind, is one of its noblest products. It is not the 
 creation of an individual, or of an hour; but it is the 
 work of a vast multitude, and of ages. 
 
 It is a vast repository of thoughts and feelings, 
 many of which are of the highest order and of the 
 greatest value. It is a repository of circulating 
 thoughts, and the medium by which they are kept 
 in a constant state of progress from mind to mind, 
 and from age to age. 
 
 Not the least interesting of the properties of writ- 
 ten language is that whereby it is furnished with in- 
 ternal evidence of its true meaning. Every lan- 
 guage is its own interpreter, and almost exclusively 
 so, to those who are acquainted with its elements. 
 The right interpretation of language, generally goes 
 far towards proving itself. All language when used 
 with intelligence and propriety, has a true meaning ; 
 and is adapted to convey that meaning to all who 
 are duly acquainted with it. 
 
 It is only in the hands of the ignorant and unskill- 
 ful, that this medium for the communication of know- 
 ledge can become a dead and unmeaning combina- 
 tion either of letters or sounds. 
 
 Sec. 2. The interpretation of language, 
 particularly that of the bible. 
 
 1. The word Interpret, in its most usual sense 
 signifies, to explain the meaning of words to one 
 who does not understand them. It may be accom- 
 plished either by expressing the sense of those words 
 by others that are better understood in the same 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 25 
 
 language, or by translating them into a different lan- 
 guage. 
 
 Interpretation properly means the act of interpret- 
 ing. Both imply an understanding of what is to be 
 explained. The theory or science of Interpretation 
 is, properly speaking, the theory or science of lan- 
 guage, considered as a medium for the communica- 
 tion of ideas. It embraces the principles and rules, 
 according to which, language is constructed ; and by 
 which it is to be understood and explained. 
 
 Were there no fixed principles of language, there 
 could be no certain rules of Interpretation. Were 
 these principles incapable of being accurately deter- 
 mined, the rules of Interpretation would be equally 
 incapable of development. 
 
 But language has of necessity fixed principles of 
 construction, that are capable of being perfectly as- 
 certained ; and these, and these only constitute the 
 basis of an intelligent and intelligible use of it. By 
 these only is it rendered significant of ideas, and by 
 these only, can it be understood or explained. 
 
 2. All language however, is not equally perfect in 
 its construction, and even when perfect is not equally 
 perspicuous. Some important and correct combina- 
 tions of words, are of more difficult interpretation 
 than others; either from the nature of the subjects; 
 from the infrequent use of some one or more of 
 the words which they contain ; from complexity of 
 construction ; or from other causes. 
 
 If the words of which a discourse consists, sustain 
 in their different positions in respect to each other, 
 a known relation to any principle or rule of Inter- 
 
26 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 pretation, their meaning can be determined by the 
 application of that rule. If not, their meaning can 
 not be determined by any means whatever. Such 
 cases sometimes occur in human productions. But 
 their occurrence is seldom, and particularly so in 
 respect to the Bible. 
 
 3. Cases are more frequent in which the relation of 
 some word or phrase to a known rule of Interpre- 
 tation is not wholly unknown, but indefinite and am- 
 biguous. When this occurs we may approximate 
 to a definite and precise interpretation, but can ne- 
 ver attain it. Ambiguous symbols can never give a 
 determinate sense. It is not the legitimate province 
 of interpretation to put upon language a sense any 
 more determinate, than it really conveys. That 
 which is precise and definite, ought to be interpreted 
 in a precise and definite manner. That which is in- 
 definite and ambiguous, ought to be interpreted as 
 such. Where different meanings are possible, and 
 we are not in possession of any known or ascertain- 
 able relation whereby to determine which is intend- 
 ed, we ought not to assume the responsibility of de- 
 ciding. Our decision in such a case must of course 
 be arbitrary and conjectural. It can make no part 
 of our certain knowledge, and therefore can be of 
 no real use to us. 
 
 The utmost that the interpreter can do, is to as- 
 certain and apply the appropriate rules of Interpre- 
 tation ; determine the true result ; and report it ac- 
 curately. In the performance of this work there is 
 a wide field for the exercise of skill and diligence. 
 
 4. The rules of Interpretation are numerous. The 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 27 
 
 relations by which the meaning of words are indica- 
 ted, are of great variety and extent. To understand 
 all those rules and relations, is a matter which re- 
 quires patient investigation and extensive research. 
 This is particularly the case in reference to the Bi- 
 ble. The lowest degree of information may be suf- 
 ficient for the right understanding of some parts of it ; 
 but the field which it opens in this department of 
 study, is almost immeasurable. 
 
 The most obvious of the rules of Interpretation, 
 are those which are of the most extensive applica- 
 tion, and of the greatest importance. But they do 
 not comprehend the whole ; neither are they suffi- 
 cient for the right and certain direction of our judg- 
 ments in every case ; far from it. Sometimes the 
 meaning of a word is indicated by one relation and 
 one rule, and sometimes by another ; sometimes by 
 a rule of common and easy application, such as is 
 obvious to every eye, and easy to every mind ; and 
 sometimes by one that is of an opposite character in 
 these respects ; such as presents itself only to the 
 eye of discriminating and improved judgment ; and 
 such as minute attention and perseverance alone can 
 supply or improve. 
 
 5. In most cases the meaning of words is not indi- 
 cated by a single rule, but by several ; each inde- 
 pendent and decisive. The application of any one 
 however, that it is clear and unambiguous, is suffi- 
 cient. In cases of the joint application of several, 
 they mutually confirm the result in which they agree. 
 
 6. A knowledge of the theory of Interpretation is co- 
 extensive with that of the theory of language, con- 
 
28 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 sidered as a medium for the communication of 
 thought. Some degree of it is universal. The per- 
 fection of it is exceedingly rare. 
 
 .The art of expressing our ideas by the use of 
 words, and of interpreting correctly the expressions 
 of others, is one, to the attainment of which, the ear- 
 liest efforts of the human mind are universally di- 
 rected. The first lessons of childhood have refer- 
 ence to this attainment ; and our first valuable acqui- 
 sitions of knowledge relate to the meaning and use 
 of words. All prosecute this attainment in some 
 way, and to some extent in subsequent life, although 
 few do it systematically and thoroughly. Many un- 
 derstand Interpretation as an art, who know little of 
 it as a demonstrative science, comprehending a com- 
 plete system of established principles and rules. 
 
 A scientific knowledge of this branch of learning 
 is important to all reading men ; and particularly so 
 in respect to the two greatest departments of human 
 knowledge, Law and Religion. The extent and va- 
 riety of matter comprehended under these titles, the 
 precision and accuracy of their developments of 
 principle, and the nice discriminations both of prin- 
 ciple and character, with which they abound, render 
 an accurate and comprehensive knowledge of the 
 laws of Interpretation of the highest consequence to 
 the interpreter of either. Every man therefore, who 
 wishes to be his own interpreter of the Bible, ought 
 to acquaint himself thoroughly with these laws. 
 
 7. The laws of Interpretation are general and par- 
 ticular. Its general laws are such as are founded 
 in the nature or language generally, and are conse- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 29 
 
 quently of universal application. They apply equal- 
 ly to prose and poetry, to expositions of religion and 
 of law, to those which are inspired and uninspired. 
 
 Its particular laws are founded on the pecul- 
 iar properties of the communication to which they 
 relate ; and serve to modify, but not to suspend or 
 supercede those which are general. 
 
 All the laws of interpretation, both general and 
 particular, must either be self evident, or capable of 
 satisfactory and decisive proof. As far as they are 
 known, they serve as indications of the meaning of 
 words, sentences and discourses, in all the cases to 
 which they apply. Beyond the extent to which they 
 apply, we have no means of knowledge on this sub- 
 ject. 
 
 The Bible embraces every diversity of style and 
 composition, and therefore requires a most extensive 
 acquaintance with the laws of interpretation, in or- 
 der to its being rightly interpreted. 
 
 It has both in respect to its character as a whole, 
 and in respect to several of its parts, many striking 
 peculiarities, that essentially modify its meaning, and 
 distinguish it from all other works. It cannot be in- 
 terpreted and interpreted aright, except by the ap- 
 plication of all those general and particular laws of 
 Interpretation which legitimately apply to the expo- 
 sition of it- 
 
 A statement and illustration of these general and 
 particular laws of Interpretation, as far as they are 
 necessary to a right understanding and exposition of 
 the Holy Scriptures, is the appropriate object of 
 Biblical Interpretation, considered as a science. That 
 4 
 
30 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 object it is the design of the author, humbly and 
 faithfully to prosecute in the following pages. 
 
 Sec. 3. Words considered as the elements 
 
 OF LANGUAGE. 
 
 1. Words, so far as the indications of thought are 
 concerned, are the elements of language. They 
 consist of one or more syllables or sounds, which are 
 used by common consent as signs of our ideas. 
 
 The general properties of words considered as el- 
 ementary parts of language, fall within the province 
 of the grammarian. The same is true in regard to 
 their mutual relations. Both however, ought to be 
 well understood by the interpreter. Such know- 
 ledge is requisite in order that we may appreciate 
 their relative importance ; and also to indicate with 
 accuracy and precision, their mutual influence in 
 modifying the meaning of each other. 
 
 A sentence is a combination of words expressing 
 a complete sense. Every sentence must contain a 
 subject or thing spoken of; and an attribute or thing 
 affirmed or denied of that subject. A sentence con- 
 taining one member only, is simple ; one containing 
 two or more members, is complex. A combination 
 of sentences constitutes a paragraph, and a combina- 
 tions of paragraphs, a discourse. 
 
 A sentence, paragraph, or discourse, is a complex 
 symbol of thought, that can be understood only by 
 an investigation of its elements, in the particular 
 combination in which they occur. Those elements 
 are words mutually connected by the various ties of 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 31 
 
 grammatical association, and relationship. The in- 
 terpretation of language, therefore, is but the inter- 
 pretation of words which compose it, standing as 
 they do, in the various relations which they sustain, 
 as its component parts. 
 
 2. The elements of things are apt to be overlooked, 
 or superficially examined. This is true in respect to 
 words, the elements of language. We do not read- 
 ily perceive the numerous and important agencies of 
 a single word in facilitating the communication of 
 thought. We often allow delicate and interesting 
 shades of meaning to pass unnoticed, and thus fail 
 of receiving the full impression of what is expressed. 
 
 The first step in the business of interpretation is 
 to ascertain the meaning of single words. The ex- 
 planation of words is prerequisite to the explana- 
 tion of sentences and discourses. Every word that 
 enters into the texture of a sentence or paragraph, 
 ought to be accurately investigated and understood. 
 
 A general and vague impression in respect to the 
 meaning of words is not sufficient. Our knowledge 
 on this subject, ought to be certain and accurate. An 
 erroneous impression in respect to the meaning of a 
 single word, always obscures, more or less, the 
 meaning of the sentence to which it belongs, and not 
 unfrequently that of whole paragraphs and dis- 
 courses. 
 
 3. The office of words, in their being made the me- 
 dium of Divine communication to man, is immensely 
 important. The words of the Bible rightly interpret- 
 ed, express the sublime doctrines of religion and mo- 
 
32 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 rality. Rightly interpreted, they teach that wisdom 
 which is from above, and are able to make us wise 
 unto salvation. Any considerable mistake in regard 
 to their true meaning, is liable to prove fatal ; and 
 will certainly be injurious. 
 
 Negligence in ascertaining the meaning of words, 
 is the cause of many pernicious errors, and is itself 
 highly pernicious and criminal. Multitudes are guilty 
 of it, in respect to the Bible, even to a greater de- 
 gree than they are in respect to other important doc- 
 uments, which it concerns them rightly to under- 
 stand. 
 
 It concerns every man to understand the Bible, 
 and to avoid perverting, in any instance, its divine 
 communications. But there are multitudes who 
 voluntarily and presumptuously neglect their duty, 
 and act contrary to their true interest, in relation to 
 this matter. 
 
 Sec. 4. General principles relating to the 
 meaning of single words. 
 
 The general principles relating to the meaning of 
 single words, are simple but important. They ought 
 to be clearly perceived and constantly borne in mind 
 while engaged in the Interpretation of the Sacred 
 writings. They are among the most elementary 
 and fundamental principles of human language. 
 
 1. Every word has some meaning, either of itself 
 or else as qualifying the meaning of other words, or 
 exhibiting their mutual relations and dependences. 
 Nouns denote the names of things, verbs express 
 some action, being, or state of being; articles, adjec- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 33 
 
 tives, and adverbs qualify the meaning of nouns, 
 verbs, &,c. ; conjunctions and prepositions exhibit 
 the connection and relation of words, phrases, and 
 sentences. 
 
 Nouns are the only class of words, out of the nine 
 of which languages generally consist, that are the 
 names of things ; and consequently nouns and pro- 
 nouns are the only classes of words that are used to 
 denote objects of thought, or subjects of discourse. 
 Verbs are indispensable to the expression of action, 
 being, or a state of being. But the other classes of 
 words are as truly significant as these. They have 
 their appropriate orifices in facilitating the communi- 
 cation of ideas, each of which is essential to the per- 
 fection of language. The communication of ideas 
 through this medium, is effected by the joint signifl- 
 cancy and force of all the different classes of words, 
 each performing its particular part, according to its 
 nature and position, in the accomplishment of this 
 object. The noun cannot say to the adjective and 
 preposition, 1 have no need of you ; nor the adjec- 
 tive or preposition to the noun, we have no need of 
 thee ; for all are necessary to one another, in order to 
 their accomplishing the high purposes (o which they 
 are respectively devoted, and in which they have a 
 mutual participation. 
 
 The assertion that every word has some meaning, 
 is true of language generally ; but it is emphatically 
 true of the Bible. A word that has no meaning, is 
 of course, useless. It can do no good. Such words, 
 if there were any, would be an incumbrance to any 
 work in which they might be found. They would 
 
 4 
 
34 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 be an incumbrance to the Bible, occupying space in 
 its pages, and diverting the attention of its readers to 
 no good purpose. Indeed they would be an anom- 
 aly which it would be difficult satisfactorily to ac- 
 count for. 
 
 2. Most words have more than one meaning. Any 
 person who has not observed this fact, will be readi- 
 ly convinced of it by turning over the pages of a dic- 
 tionary, and noticing the various definitions almost 
 universally assigned to words in common use. The 
 fact moreover, is abundantly verified in the observa- 
 tion and experience of every intelligent person. 
 
 Thus the word heat denotes, (1,) caloric, a sub- 
 stance which exists in the natural world, and enters 
 into the composition of natural bodies. 
 
 (2.) The sensation produced when an additional 
 or unusual quantity of this substance passes into any 
 part of the human body. 
 
 (3.) Animal excitement, impassioned feeling. 
 
 These significations, it will be observed, are en- 
 tirely different from each other, and yet they are all 
 among the established and common meanings of a 
 single word, and that a word in common and con- 
 stant use. 
 
 So the word, spirit, denotes, (1.) wind, breath. 
 
 (2.) Animal excitement, ardor ; as when we say 
 of soldiers, they fought with great spirit. 
 
 (3.) The soul of man, or of some other sentient be- 
 ing ; an incorporeal, thinking subsistence, such as 
 inhabits and actuates the human body ; as when 
 we speak of the spirit of man going upward, at 
 death, and the spirit of a beast going downward to 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 35 
 
 the earth ; and when we speak of God and angels, 
 as being spirits. 
 
 (4.) The Holy Spirit. The third person of the 
 adorable Trinity. 
 
 (5.) Temper, disposition ; as when we say of a 
 man, that he showed a good spirit, or a bad spirit ; 
 meaning, evidently, that he showed a good or bad 
 disposition or temper. Several other definitions of 
 this word might be given, but these are sufficient to 
 illustrate the principle under consideration. 
 
 Plurality of meanings belonging to the same word, 
 are characteristic of all languages, both ancient and 
 modern. 
 
 These meanings may be entirely different and un- 
 connected by any intimate relation, as is strikingly 
 the case with the verb, let, meaning both to permit 
 and to hinder ; or as is more usually the case, the 
 different meanings of the same word may, many or 
 all of them, sustain some general relation to each 
 other, such as similarity, either of nature or effect ; 
 relation of the cause to the effect, or of the effect to 
 the cause ; of contiguity, &c. In many cases, how- 
 ever, the several different meanings of a word are 
 only different modifications of the same general idea, 
 and yet modifications of that idea, so distinct and 
 different, that one cannot be substituted for another, 
 without introducing the utmost confusion, and lead- 
 ing to most palpable errors. 
 
 The fact that many words have different mean- 
 ings, all of undoubted authority, deserves to be par- 
 ticularly considered. Obvious as this fact is, it is 
 sometimes forgotten, to the greatest detriment of the 
 
36 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 cause of truth. Having ascertained that a particu- 
 lar word in some connexions and in relation to some 
 subjects, has a particular meaning, many understand 
 it in the same sense in connexions, and in relation to 
 subjects entirely different, without a moments inqui- 
 ry or hesitation. 
 
 They regard the fact of its meaning one thing, in 
 one case, satisfactory evidence, that it has the same 
 meaning in a case entirely different. That fact, how- 
 ever, is no proof at all of the supposition founded 
 upon it. That the same word may have different 
 meanings, is one of the clearest and most obvious 
 truths in this, or any other science ; and if so, such 
 words must have one meaning in one connexion, 
 and a different meaning in other and different ones. 
 
 We might conceive of a language so copious that 
 no single word in it should have two or more mean- 
 ings. But it would be a mere conception. The re- 
 ality has never been attained. Neither is it practi- 
 cable to attain it. The plan which has been univer- 
 sally adopted, is altogether preferable to this imagin- 
 ary one, in being at once sufficiently perspicuous, 
 and much easier of acquisition than the other, even 
 if it were carried into effect, could possibly be. 
 
 Language being constituted as it is, every inter- 
 preter of the Bible ought to familiarize himself with 
 the different meanings of w T ords ; and especially 
 should he do this, in respect to those which are par- 
 ticularly important, on occount of their being en- 
 trusted with the conveyance of the great doctrines 
 of revealed religion. Without this extensive know- 
 ledge of the different meanings of words, we shall 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 37 
 
 be in danger of applying to the explanation of them, 
 the meaning or meanings we are familiar with, when 
 a different, and to us, unknown one, is intended and 
 indicated. 
 
 3. Words cannot have a plurality of significations 
 at the same time and in a given position. They 
 may be repeated in different senses even in the same 
 sentence ; but each single use of them will be in a 
 single sense. We have a striking illustration of this 
 in Matt. x. 39 ; where our Savior makes the follow- 
 ing declaration : " He that findeth his life shall lose 
 it, and he that loseth his life for my sake, shall find 
 it." Here twice in the same sentence is the word 
 life, and its equivalent, the pronoun it, used in two 
 different senses. It denotes (1.) temporal life; and 
 (2.) spiritual and eternal life ; and in the subsequent 
 clause, it is repeated in the same senses. In neither 
 case does this word have two meanings ; nor does 
 its single meaning, in either case, comprehend that 
 which it has in the other. 
 
 As a further illustration of the fact that words do 
 not possess a plurality of meanings in single instan- 
 ces of the use of them, we may refer to John iv. 24. 
 " God is a spirit." The word spirit has different es- 
 tablished meanings, some of which we have already 
 noticed. The question however now is, not what it 
 means in other positions, but what it means here; 
 and whether it has but one meaning, or more. Does 
 it mean breath ? No. Does it mean animal excite- 
 ment? No. Does it mean the Holy Spirit, in dis- 
 tinction from the other persons of the Trinity ? No. 
 Does it mean temper or disposition ? No. It has not 
 
38 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 one of these meanings, any more than it has the 
 meaning or meanings of an entirely different word. 
 Does it mean that God is an incorporeal, sentient, 
 thinking, or in other words, spiritual being; the op- 
 posite of sensual ? This is obviously its true and on- 
 ly meaning in the present case. In this sense, one 
 of the established senses of this word, it is here used, 
 and not in either of the others. The other meanings 
 of -this word, though many of them frequent and ob- 
 vious in other connexions, are inadmissible here. 
 The attempt to introduce them would produce con- 
 fusion and difficulty, rather than increase the real 
 and instructive significancy of the passage. 
 
 In the figurative use of words, there is no real de- 
 viation from the principle of single senses. Words 
 have not a figurative and literal signification at the 
 same time. The moment any word receives a figu- 
 rative sense, its literal one is entirely superseded. 
 For example, in the expressions, fiery indignation, 
 melting tenderness, burning love ; the words fiery, 
 melting, and burning, do not denote those natural 
 changes which in their literal senses they always 
 signify; but simply qualities of the several subjects 
 to which in these phrases, they are applied ; quali- 
 ties at once immaterial and invisible. 
 
 So in the sentence, God is a sun and a shield to 
 those who walk uprightly. The words sun and 
 shield are not used to denote the natural objects of 
 which they are the appropriate names, but to repre- 
 sent the Almighty in his peculiar relations to the pi- 
 ous, as their benefactor and protector. This tropical 
 or figurative representation, is made by an allusion 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 39 
 
 to the usual and literal signification of the words so 
 used ; and there is in such cases an implied compar- 
 ison between the object, being, or action, usually in- 
 dicated by such words, and those which they figura- 
 tively represent. 
 
 The same is true in respect to the allegory. The 
 words which constitute an allegory, are used in a 
 single sense, as truly as those which constitute any 
 other class of narratives. The signification of an al- 
 legory, as such, is not in single words ; but in the 
 objects and relations which those words indicate, be- 
 ing applied collectively to denote different and anal- 
 ogous ones. 
 
 The use of words to express a plurality of senses 
 at the same time, would be contrary to the general 
 practice of mankind, except in the case of enigmas, 
 the design of which is not to instruct but to puzzle. 
 
 Historians, philosophers, moralists, and poets, 
 use words invariably in single senses. No reader 
 of history, philosophy, ethics, or poetry, thinks of 
 putting a double or treble sense upon the words of 
 authors, in those different departments of literature. 
 The interpreter who should endeavor to do this, 
 would excite general disgust and derision. 
 
 The correctness of the principle now under con- 
 sideration, may be established by an appeal to every 
 man's observation and experience. How are we 
 accustomed to use words ourselves ? How are oth- 
 ers of our acquaintance accustomed to use them? 
 In a single, or plurality of senses ? In single senses, 
 undoubtedly and universally. An exception besides 
 that of enigmas, cannot be found. How do all the 
 
40 THE RULES OR LA.WS OF 
 
 English historians, scholars, poets, and ministers of 
 the gospel use words? In single, or plurality of sen- 
 ses ? In single senses, most certainly and without ex- 
 ception. How do other modern and ancient nations 
 use words in this respect? Uniformly in single sen- 
 ses. There is no exception in ancient or modern 
 times, unless it is found in the Bible. Is there any 
 exception to this rule in the Bible ? Is there any in 
 the Bible history ? No. Is there any in the precept- 
 ive parts of the Bible ? No. Is there any in the an- 
 nouncement and exposition of its doctrines ? Not 
 any. So far there is no difference of opinion among 
 the great body of intelligent and candid interpreters. 
 To the questions here propounded they all answer 
 no. 
 
 If there are cases in the Bible in which words are 
 used in a plurality of senses, they are not sufficiently 
 numerous to make that usage the general rule, even 
 for the Bible. P'or in its history, in its preceptive 
 communications, and in its announcements of doc- 
 trine, this usage does not obtain ; and these compre- 
 hend altogether the greater part of the Sacred vol- 
 ume. 
 
 So general is the rule both in the inspired and in 
 uninspired writings, that the contrary can never be 
 admitted without specific and decisive evidence in its 
 favor. And then if admitted at all, it must be as an 
 exception, not as a rule. 
 
 Not only is this rule general. It is important and 
 necessary to the clearness and certainty of language. 
 Any deviation from it, in the intercourse of society, 
 or in any department of the literature of the world, 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 41 
 
 would be attended with most serious disadvantages. 
 We should be obliged in using language constructed 
 on this principle of manifold senses ; or in reading 
 such language intelligently, as used by others, to keep 
 along two or more distinct trains of thought in our 
 minds, according to the number of significations our 
 words possessed. But this we could never do. 
 Words used in single senses have meaning enough, 
 when rightly arranged, to occupy our most fixed and 
 our entire attention. Had they ten thousand mean- 
 ings more, those meanings would be superfluous. 
 One sense is enough for a word in one place, in or- 
 der to its fulfilling, in the most perfect manner, the 
 conditions which the highest perfection of human 
 language requires. 
 
 A language constructed on the principle of mani- 
 fold senses, however it might suit the capacities of 
 other conceivable beings, would be unfit for the use 
 of men. It would be perfectly unwieldly to our lim- 
 ited faculties. We could not use it at all ; or at 
 least, not to advantage. The use of it would require 
 the exercise of more intellect than we have to ex- 
 pend, and of a higher nature than God has given us. 
 
 4. The usual and established meaning of words is 
 variable. It is different in respect to many words, at 
 different periods in the history of the same language. 
 A particular signification may be given a word at 
 one period, on the ground of general usage, that can- 
 not at another, either later or earlier. No one can 
 read a page of the older English writers without 
 finding instances of this fact. 
 
 Words are permanent symbols of thought, but 
 
42 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 having no natural and necessary connexion between 
 them and the ideas they are used to express, they 
 are necessarily liable to a change in respect to usage^ 
 A language in common use is constantly fluctuating 
 in respect to the meaning of some of its words. It 
 is never exactly stationary, and cannot be. 
 
 Some words are constantly assuming new signifi- 
 cations, and some are constantly laying aside old 
 and established ones. Some are becoming more 
 definite and limited in their signification, and some 
 more general and indefinite. 
 
 These changes, though constantly going on, occuf 
 by a process so gradual and imperceptible, as to be 
 hardly noticed. We seldom observe the process in 
 respect to a particular word, until it is nearly com- 
 pleted ; but we are often compelled to acknowledge 
 it when done. 
 
 A knowledge of the variation in the meaning of 
 many words, in different chronological periods, is 
 particularly important to the student of the English 
 Bible. This Bible is one of the noblest specimens of 
 the English language, and one of its most ample re- 
 positories of standard literature. It comes clown to 
 us, venerable with the weight of years, as well as 
 with the dignity of Divinely inspired truth. Its age 
 however, increases in some respects, the difficulties 
 of its interpretation. This is not the fact in regard 
 to its general texture, but it is obviously so in re- 
 spect to many single words ; and that it is so, is by 
 no means strange, considering how greatly the lan- 
 guage in common use, differs from that of 1611, the 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 43 
 
 period when our common English Bible was first 
 published. 
 
 The cause of wonder in respect to this subject is, 
 not that so great and general a variation has taken 
 place, in regard to the usual meaning of those words 
 which the Bible contains, but that the instances of 
 this kind are comparatively so few and so unimport- 
 ant; that amid the manifest and numerous changes 
 of so many years, so little obscurity has been cast 
 over the sacred volume by these changes. These 
 variations, however, though unimportant in respect 
 to the great mass of the sacred writings, are not so 
 in themselves, or in respect to the particular words 
 to which they relate, and the particular passages in 
 which they occur. 
 
 5. The true meaning of words when correctly and 
 judiciously used, is always capable of being ascer- 
 tained by a due consideration of existing evidence. 
 A writer who introduces words into his discourse 
 which are not capable of being correctly explained 
 by a recurrence to existing evidence, and who does 
 not himself, in some way, indicate unequivocally 
 their true meaning, violates one of the fundamental 
 laws of language. 
 
 In determining the meaning of words, therefore, 
 we are always authorized to proceed on the assump- 
 tion, that indications of their true sense exist some- 
 where, unless they have been lost. Such indications 
 must have existed either external to the particular 
 discourse in which any word in question occurs, or 
 else within it. They are therefore to be sought both 
 externally and internally. 
 
I 
 
 44 THE RULE8 OR LAWS OF 
 
 6. Many words are capable of being used in ar- 
 bitrary senses, different from any that appropriately 
 belong to them, which are generally termed their 
 tropical or figurative meanings. The words so used 
 are denominated tropes, or figures of speech. Any 
 word is made a trope or figure of speech, by being 
 used in a tropical or figurative sense. When this 
 tropical sense becomes a common one, as is some- 
 times the case, the word ceases to be a trope, though 
 expressing a sense which was once tropical. 
 
 The tropical significations of words are numerous 
 and various. They are capable of being multiplied 
 and varied to an indefinite extent ; and when used 
 with propriety, are also as capable of being ascer- 
 tained with accuracy as any other meanings of which 
 words are susceptible. Whatever ideas they are in- 
 telligently and correctly used to express, they are 
 capable of expressing. If the ideas they are used to 
 express are well defined, they will express them as 
 such ; if vague and indefinite, they will of course, 
 make a corresponding indefinite impression. Lan- 
 guage cannot legitimately convey what was never 
 committed to it. The ideas it communicates, must 
 be no other than those it has received. Such as it 
 receives, such it gives to all who are capable of ap- 
 preciating its unambiguous signs. This is as true of 
 tropical or figurative language, as of that which is 
 most strictly literal. 
 
 In all tropical expressions, the literal meaning of 
 the tropical word is an index to its tropical sense. 
 A knowledge of its literal meaning is necessary in 
 order to our understanding its tropical one, but does 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 45 
 
 not constitute any part of it. Its tropical meaning 
 is one distinct and peculiar, over and above its ordi- 
 nary one, though in part indicated by it. 
 
 The tropical or figurative use of words is almost 
 universal. In admitting of this arbitrary designation 
 to express ideas and qualities entirely different from 
 any which belong to their established significations, 
 the variety, extent, power, and beauty of language 
 are increased beyond what could otherwise be at- 
 tained. 
 
 The literal meanings of words are fixed by mutu- 
 al agreement and custom. We are obliged to take 
 them as they are. Their figurative meanings, how- 
 ever are matters of individual fabrication. We may 
 make and vary them to any extent that our imagin- 
 ations allow. In this fabrication we have a field for 
 the highest efforts of genius and taste ; a field on 
 which many golden harvests have been reaped, and 
 one whose capacity of production is still undimin- 
 ished. 
 
 Those tropical modes of expression which occa- 
 sion most difficulty to interpreters generally, and to 
 Biblical interpreters in particular, are the metaphor, 
 allegory, and metonymy. Others are important, 
 particularly personification, which is of frequent oc- 
 currence in the Bible, and also hyperbole, irony, &c. 
 but they seldom occasion any serious difficulty in 
 the department of Interpretation. 
 
 Metaphors. A metaphor is a figure of speech in 
 which one or more words are used out of their ordi- 
 nary sense, to express a different, but similar or anal- 
 ogous meaning. 
 
 5* 
 
46 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 Metaphors are not simple comparisons or simili- 
 tudes. For in a simple comparison, every word is 
 used in its proper and ordinary sense, and applied to 
 its appropriate object. But in metaphorical expres- 
 sions, this is not the case. For example, God is a 
 consuming jive. Christians are the light of the world. 
 Christ is the good shepherd, and the pious are the 
 sheep of his care. In these sentences, the words 
 marked by italics as metaphorical, are not used in 
 their ordinary and proper significations ; but in dif- 
 ferent and similar or analogous ones. The depart- 
 ure from the ordinary sense 01* these words, in the 
 above examples, is total and obvious. God is not 
 literally a consuming fire ; nor Christians light ; nor 
 Christ a shepherd ; nor his followers sheep. These 
 declarations however, are not false, or unmeaning, or 
 even obscure. Every word of which they consist, 
 has a true and specific sense, which is indicated with 
 sufficient clearness to candid and attentive readers. 
 Fire denotes those qualities and operations of God, 
 that are analogous to literal fire ; light, those quali- 
 ties and operations of the pious, which are analogous 
 to light ; good shepherd, the relation and character 
 of Christ, as our moral teacher, governor, and pro- 
 tector ; and sheep, those of Christians, as being the 
 subjects of Divine teaching, government, and pro- 
 tection. 
 
 Metaphors are founded on analogy or similitude. 
 The literal meanings of words bear a strict analogy 
 to their metaphorical ones. It is impossible to put 
 a metaphorical sense upon any word, that shall not 
 be analogous to one of its literal meanings. A per- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 47 
 
 ception of resemblance between different ideas, sug- 
 gests the application of the appropriate symbol of 
 one of them, to denote another. A perception of 
 this related idea is as necessary in the interpretation 
 of metaphorical language, as it is in its construction. 
 That related idea however, though obtained by re- 
 curring to the literal sense of the metaphorical word, 
 is no part of its meaning, considered as a metaphor, 
 or symbol of thought metaphorically expressed. 
 
 The true meaning of a metaphorical expression, 
 is not the literal meaning of the words so used, but 
 the figurative or tropical sense they are designed in 
 each particular connexion to express. 
 
 Allegories. An allegory is a continued metaphor, 
 and differs from that figure in being of greater length. 
 A metaphor consists of single words and phrases ; 
 but an allegory of single sentences and paragraphs ; 
 or even of an entire discourse. 
 
 The metaphor is founded on resemblance. The 
 same is true in respect to the allegory. In an alle- 
 gory, one thing is expressed, or one series of facts is 
 described, with a view to illustrate some related sub- 
 ject or series of facts. The narrative of the prodigal 
 son; Luke xv. 11 — 32: That of the marriage of the 
 king's son ; Matt. xxii. 2 — 13 : That of letting out 
 the vineyard ; Matt. xxi. 33 — 41 : That of the sower 
 and seed ; Matt. xiii. 3 — 8 : and the parables of the 
 New Testament generally are of this class. 
 
 The significancy of an allegory depends upon a 
 manifest resemblance between the allegorical state- 
 ment, literally interpreted, and the thing signified by 
 it. In proportion as that resemblance is obvious and 
 
48 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 striking, will the allegory be both intelligible and im- 
 pressive. 
 
 Allegories are made use of to express a sense over 
 and above the proper sense of the narrative of which 
 they consist, and entirely distinct from it ; a sense 
 of which the literal one is an index or symbol. 
 
 An examination of either of the New Testament 
 allegories above referred to, will abundantly confirm 
 this statement. That of the prodigal son, for in- 
 stance, was not designed to teach us the particular 
 series of facts, which make up the narrative. Those 
 facts have undoubtedly occurred in numberless in- 
 stances. A knowledge of them is capable of being 
 obtained from the legitimate sources of such inform- 
 ation. Our Savior's design in this narrative, howev- 
 er, was to communicate by means of this, a higher 
 series of facts, in relation to man, considered as a 
 sinner. Agreeably to this intention, the father rep- 
 resents God, and the sons, the rational and moral 
 creatures of God. The word father, is not a meta- 
 phor ; but it is a part of the allegory ; and has an 
 allegorical sense, precisely the same as if it was a 
 metaphor, used to denote God. The same is true 
 of the word son ; of his departure, dissipation, mis- 
 ery, repentance, and return to his father's house. 
 All these transactions are the symbols of other and 
 higher transactions, which have a corresponding 
 character ; and which relate to the dealings of God 
 with sinners, and to their conduct in respect to him. 
 
 The words which constitute this allegory, have 
 their appropriate literal or metaphorical significa- 
 tions, subordinate to their allegorical one. But these 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION, 49 
 
 are not their true and full import in the present case. 
 They are only indications of it. Their allegorical 
 sense is that which they are principally designed to 
 express, and with this their true and ultimate signifi- 
 cancy in the present case, begins and terminates. 
 
 Metonymy. Metonymy embraces a class of trop- 
 ical words that are analogous to metaphors. They 
 are founded on some relation which one object bears 
 to another, in virtue of which, the name of the for- 
 mer may be used to denote the latter; or that of the 
 latter to denote the former. To this class belong 
 those modes of expression in which the name of a 
 cause is used to denote the effect ; or that of an ef- 
 fect to denote the cause ; the name of a whole to de- 
 note a part, or that of a part to denote a whole ; 
 that of a container to denote the thing contained ; 
 or that of the thing contained to denote the contain- 
 er, &c. 
 
 For example, to bear sins, means to bear the con- 
 sequences or punishment of sins. Drinking of this 
 cup, means drinking of what this cup contains. Then 
 went out all Judea, and Jerusalem, and all the re- 
 gion round about Jordan, and were baptized, means 
 there went out many of the people of those places, 
 &c. 
 
 The metonymical use of words is never author- 
 ized except in such circumstances, that their true 
 meaning will be obvious to careful and attentive 
 readers. The same is true in respect to all other 
 tropical modes of speech ; of which there are sev- 
 eral. 
 
 Personification. Personification is a figure of 
 
50 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 speech, which consists in ascribing life and action 
 to inanimate objects. As, hear, O earth ! The deep 
 lifted up its voice. The mountains trembled. 
 
 Hyperbole. Hyperbole consists in magnifying an 
 object beyond its proper bounds ; not with a view to 
 deceive, but to secure a proper degree of attention, 
 and to make a suitable and just impression on the 
 mind of the reader or hearer. 
 
 Instances of both are frequent in the Bible, as they 
 are in every species of impassioned and animated 
 discourse. They are capable of accurate interpre- 
 tation, according to their respective characters, and 
 the connexions in which they occur. 
 
 Sec. 5. Rules for determining the literal 
 meaning of single words. 
 
 Literal, in its application to the meaning of words, 
 signifies not tropical or figurative. It comprehends 
 all those significations which appropriately belong 
 to words as the established and conventional sym- 
 bols of thought. 
 
 It is in their literal sense that words are generally 
 used, it is by the use of words in this sense, that 
 all accurate and precise information and instruction 
 are conveyed, both in respect to science, politics, and 
 religion. 
 
 The investigation of the literal meaning of words, 
 is therefore one of the most important branches of 
 the study of language. Our determinations in re- 
 spect to this subject, have relation to the greater part 
 of the Bible, and to those portions of Bible truth, 
 which God has seen fit to present in the most accu- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 51 
 
 rate and determinate mode of which language is 
 susceptible. 
 
 The accuracy and precision of language, when 
 used in its literal sense, entitles it to an investigation 
 of a corresponding character. Besides, the inter- 
 pretation of tropical language depends entirely on 
 the literal meaning of the words so used. The liter- 
 al meaning of all the words of the Bible, and the dif- 
 ferent senses in which some of them are used in dif- 
 ferent connexions, are the appropriate objects of in- 
 quiry to every reader of that blessed volume. They 
 are objects of inquiry that, have been too much neg- 
 lected ; and consequently imperfectly understood, 
 and often incorrectly explained. 
 
 Great attainments are possible in this department 
 of sacred learning. It is one which every man has 
 an interest in prosecuting, and which may be pros- 
 ecuted successfully by every man. It is not to be 
 supposed that every man can possibly know all that 
 is capable of being known, respecting the literal 
 meaning of all the words of the Bible ; but that eve- 
 ry man may learn much that is important, and in- 
 deed, that which will be sufficient for the full securi- 
 ty of his immortal interests, is a matter of demonstra- 
 tive certainty ; and one that will be generally con- 
 ceded. 
 
 Some knowledge of the literal meaning of the 
 words of the Bible, is in the possession of every one 
 who knows any thing about the English language, 
 or any other in which the Sacred Oracles are treasur- 
 ed up, either as origina documents or faithful trans- 
 lations. But the knowledge of most on this subject 
 
52 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 is confessedly imperfect, to a fault. And this igno- 
 ranee is the more injurious in consequence of its be- 
 ing indulged to a great extent unconsciously. 
 
 Those who have examined particularly the sources 
 of information respecting this subject, are compara- 
 tively few. The views of the multitude in relation 
 to it, are inaccurate and undefined ; and rather the 
 result of casual association, than of profound investi- 
 gation and judicious study. The object of the pres- 
 ent section is to exhibit the principles which indicate 
 the true sense of words, and to direct the unexperi- 
 enced and doubtful inquirer after truth, to the sources 
 of correct and certain information on this subject. 
 We may sometimes recur to the sources of know- 
 ledge without obtaining the information we desire. 
 But the cases in which we do this for the purpose 
 of determining the meaning of words without suc- 
 cess, are few and comparatively unimportant. 
 
 We are constantly engaged in determining the 
 literal meaning of words, in the ordinary inter- 
 course of society, as well as in the interpretation 
 of the Sacred Oracles. How do we accomplish 
 this work? What are the principles and rules by 
 which we are governed in all correct decisions on 
 this subject? Answer. The ordinary and unequivo- 
 cal indications of the meaning of words, are com- 
 prehended under the following heads. 
 
 1. General and particular usage. 
 
 2. Logical definitions. 
 
 3. The nature of the subject. 
 
 4. The obvious purpose and design of the dis- 
 course. 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 53 
 
 5. The position of words in the sentence where 
 they occur. 
 
 6. The context. 
 
 7. Examples. 
 
 8. Comparisons. 
 
 9. Antitheses. 
 
 10. Parallel passages. 
 
 All these are important. They constitute a key 
 to the right exposition of words and sentences. 
 Without some knowledge of them, language gener- 
 ally, and particularly that of the Bible, would be in- 
 explicable. By the dextrous and skilful use of 
 them, this complex and diversified symbol of thought 
 is made to yield up its treasures at the bidding not 
 of a few master spirits only, but of the human race. 
 They are the ultimate and almost only sources of 
 information on the subject in question, and deserve 
 to be prayerfully and attentively considered. 
 
 1. General and particular usage. General usage 
 denotes that use of words in which people generally 
 agree. It is not necessary however, that this agree- 
 ment should be universal. It may admit of occa- 
 sional exceptions, both in respect to individuals, and 
 in application to particular subjects. It may have 
 reference to a single meaning, or to several mean- 
 ings of which a word is susceptible. 
 
 As far as general usage in respect to particular 
 
 words is known, it is a certain rule of interpretation. 
 
 In the absence of proof to the contrary, every word 
 
 is to be interpreted in that signification, or in one of 
 
 those several significations, which are sanctioned by 
 
 general usage. Where the general use of a word is 
 6 
 
54 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 not fixed, or not known, we are obliged to have re- 
 course to other principles for determining its signifi- 
 cation. When that use is fixed and known, it may 
 be departed from, but never without evident reason ; 
 and not unless the fact is indubitably indicated by 
 evidence. 
 
 Particular usage is that in which a writer or speak- 
 er departs from the fixed and known acceptation, in 
 which a word is used, and establishes a different 
 usage, not sanctioned by that of others generally. It 
 is not necessary that an individual should be alone in 
 attaching a peculiar meaning to a word, in order 
 that his usage should be entitled to the appellation 
 of particular. If he is in a decided minority, this 
 will be the case. 
 
 Whenever a particular usage is established in the 
 case of an individual or class of persons, in respect 
 to a word, that word, in their communications, is to 
 be interpreted according to that particular usage, 
 and not according to the more general usage of oth- 
 ers. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, that 
 usage is always to be observed. Like general usage, 
 when not superceded by this, it may be departed 
 from, but never without manifest reason and neces- 
 sity. 
 
 The reason of this rule in respect to general and 
 particular usage, is obvious. General usage is the 
 highest authority in respect to the true meaning of 
 words. Those who use language, seek their infor- 
 mation in respect to the meaning of words, from this 
 source. To this standard, as far as they have ascer- 
 tained it, they naturally endeavor to conform. They 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 55 
 
 have an interest in doing so. An unnecessary devi- 
 ation from common usage, in respect to the signifi- 
 cation of words, renders our communications ob- 
 scure and incorrect. No intelligent writer practices 
 it, without what he supposes to be a good reason 
 for doing so; and in that case, he finds it necessary 
 to indicate clearly, by definition or otherwise, what 
 his peculiar usage is. 
 
 In relation to general and particular usage, the sa- 
 cred writers are to be placed at least on an eqality 
 with others. They are entitled to more than this, 
 inasmuch as their inspiration secured them from er- 
 rors in this respect, into which others are liable to 
 fall. Uninspired writers may be inaccurate, and 
 through their inaccuracy, deceptive or unintelligible ; 
 but this can never have been the case with those 
 who were guided by the Spirit of inspiration. 
 
 A frequent reference to approved dictionaries, 
 with a view to ascertain the different meanings which 
 general usage has accorded to words, is highly ne- 
 cessary to qualify us for the business of Biblical In- 
 terpretation. This is a department of study too 
 much neglected by ordinary readers of the Bible. A 
 constant prosecution of it, would greatly increase 
 their ability to interpret the Bible correctly ; and 
 would greatly improve their apprehensions of its 
 meaning generally. It would utterly dissipate the 
 obscurity which to the view of multitudes, hangs 
 like a thick cloud over many of the most interesting 
 disclosures of Divine truth. 
 
 Habits of careful and extensive reading, have a sim- 
 ilar effect, in increasing our knowledge of the proper 
 
56 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 and generally accredited signification of words ; and 
 contribute to increase our qualifications for the busi- 
 ness of interpreting the Bible or any other book. 
 
 2. Logical definitions. Writers may define their 
 words either by the use of others in connexion with 
 them, as synonymous, or by specifying the proper- 
 ties of the object or action to which they are applied. 
 In many cases the definition of words by synony- 
 mous terms, is the most concise, and at the same 
 time sufficiently clear. When this mode of defining 
 words is not practicable, the same object may be at- 
 tained by the more protracted method of specifying 
 the leading properties or attributes of the object or 
 action referred to. Sometimes a partial definition 
 is sufficient to put the reader in full possession of 
 the author's meaning, when the entire want of any 
 thing of the kind, would have left his assertion either 
 equivocal or obscure. 
 
 Every judicious writer defines his terms either 
 perfectly or in part, wherever he supposes it neces- 
 sary for the information of the readers for whom his 
 communication is designed. 
 
 This course has been pursued by the inspired wri- 
 ters, as well as by others. Many of their words, 
 they have either perfectly or in part defined. The 
 meaning of those words therefore, is to be determin- 
 ed by their own direct exposition of it. Not a single 
 inspired definition, whether designed to be complete 
 or partial, can be neglected with safety. The least 
 deviation from them, in cases to which they legiti- 
 mately apply, is a deviation from certain and inspir- 
 ed truth. 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 57 
 
 The practice of introducing logical definitions 
 wherever they are necessary, is suggested by com- 
 mon sense, and sanctioned by common usage. It is 
 the practice of the writers of every age and country, 
 and of every class, from the lowest and most illiter- 
 ate, to those of the greatest refinement and learning. 
 
 An adherence to these definitions therefore, when 
 they are introduced, is but acting in conformity with 
 one of the first principles of verbal communication. 
 It is as necessary to the right interpretation of the 
 Sacred Scriptures as it is to that of any other class 
 of writings. 
 
 Under the head of logical definitions, may be com- 
 prehended the mention of all those circumstances 
 and relations which possess a definitive character. 
 These are numerous, and the mention of them is 
 frequent, both in the Scriptures and in human pro- 
 ductions. The timely and appropriate introduction 
 of them, contributes essentially to promote the per- 
 spicuity both of written and oral language, but par- 
 ticularly of the former. 
 
 Of these, the circumstances of time, place and or- 
 der, are important ; and the relation of cause and ef- 
 fect, antecedence and consequence. 
 
 The relations of similarity and contrast, are not 
 included under this head, being deemed worthy of a 
 separate place among the rules of Interpretation. 
 The range however, within which this rule is de- 
 signed to apply, is by no means limited, or the cases 
 unimportant. 
 
 3. The nature of the subject. The subject of eve- 
 ry sentence, is that to which the sentence chiefly re- 
 6* 
 
58 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 lates. The subject of a paragraph or discourse, is 
 that to which the paragraph or discourse chiefly re- 
 lates. The subject of a discourse may be termed a 
 general one, and that of a paragraph or sentence 
 subordinate. 
 
 These subjects are often fully or partially known, 
 and in such cases, afford essential aid in determining 
 the meaning of words relating to them. When they 
 are known, and as far as they are known, they 
 ought to be constantly kept in view, in determining 
 the signification of single words. 
 
 A due consideration of them is necessary to the 
 right understanding of some words, in every dis- 
 course however simple, and in almost every para- 
 graph. 
 
 This rule, though understood theoretically by few r 
 is practically understood, to some extent, by all. 
 We learn to apply it in some cases almost as soon as 
 we learn the use of language. We apply it in ex- 
 planation of the meaning of many words, from our 
 early childhood, and continue to do so through all 
 our later years. Without the application of it in 
 any instance, the ordinary intercourse of society 
 could not be successfully carried on, or the ordinary 
 productions of genius and erudition understood. 
 
 There are three cases in which a regard to the sub- 
 ject treated of, is necessary. 
 
 (I.) When the word whose meaning we wish to 
 determine has several different and well established 
 significations. Many of the most important words, 
 both of common and occasional use, are of this de- 
 scription, and afford frequent occasion for the appli- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 59 
 
 cation of the rule under consideration. It is often 
 impossible in the interpretation of these words, to 
 determine which of their several meanings is intend- 
 ed, in any other way. The neglect to apply this 
 rule in such cases, anil the careless application of it, 
 have been a fruitful source of error. 
 
 (2.) When a word has a single and definite signifi- 
 cation, which we have not the direct means of as- 
 certaining with certainty, from the general sources 
 of information, or in regard to which, those whom 
 we deem high authorities, differ in opinion. These 
 words are generally of the class last mentioned ; 
 that is, having a plurality of significations, but at the 
 same time are assigned by particular usage to ex- 
 press a particular and controverted meaning, in par- 
 ticular connexions, and in relation to particular sub- 
 jects. 
 
 The question in this case is not. whether a partic- 
 ular established meaning is the true one, in a partic- 
 ular class of passages ; but whether a particular 
 controverted meaning can be established as the true 
 one. In the prosecution of such inquiries, which are 
 not unfrequent in the study of the Scriptures, a com- 
 petent and accurate knowledge of the subject, and 
 a due regard to it, are of the utmost importance. 
 
 (3.) When a word is used in a tropical or figura- 
 tive sense, to express an idea which is not included 
 among its established meanings. In all such cases, 
 which are of frequent occurrence, a regard to the 
 known nature of the subject is indispensable, and 
 generally decisive of the meaning intended. 
 
 The subject referred to may be either the leading 
 
60 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 subject of a discourse, or the subordinate one of a 
 paragraph or sentence. A word may be used in di- 
 rect relation to either, and is to be explained by that 
 to which it directly relates ; but always in conform- 
 ity with the nature of the leading and general sub- 
 ject. 
 
 Our knowledge of the nature of the subject, in any 
 particular case, depends of course very much on our 
 previous acquirements. Different persons possess 
 different degrees of it, in relation to the same case. 
 All however, possess some degree of such knowledge 
 in reference to many of the subjects treated of in the 
 Scriptures, and in other works. 
 
 There are many exhibitions of truth, both in the 
 Bible and in human productions, which ignorant per- 
 sons are not competent to understand. They cannot 
 be understood without previous knowledge of those 
 truths that are more simple and elementary, and 
 which serve to elucidate them. If persons will not 
 take the pains requisite to obtain this previous know- 
 ledge, they must expect to be shut out from a per- 
 ception of the higher mysteries, both of science and 
 religion. 
 
 There is a natural order to be observed in the at- 
 tainment of knowledge, both human and divine. 
 We must first learn that which is simple. We may 
 then enter with success on the investigation of that 
 which is complicated, and comparatively obscure. 
 
 The attainment of a knowledge of letters, precedes 
 that of words, sentences, and discourses. The read- 
 er is first put to reading that which is simple and ea- 
 sy ; and afterwards that which is more difficult and 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 61 
 
 obscure. So in every science. The elements are 
 first studied, and afterwards their complex applica- 
 tions and relations. 
 
 This principle is too much overlooked by the would- 
 be interpreters of the Bible. Many who can hardly 
 interpret the simplest of our municipal laws, or of 
 those legal instruments which are the charters of 
 our personal rights and privileges, have the arro- 
 gance not only to sit in judgment on the deepest 
 mysteries of religion ; but confidently to oppose their 
 superficial, contradictory, and absurd interpretations 
 of Divine truth, against the almost unanimous ver- 
 dict of the Christian world. 
 
 But what ! says the objector. Am I not to think 
 for myself? Has not every man a right to be his own 
 interpreter of the Sacred Oracles ? Most certainly. 
 But you are to think according to the dictates of 
 reason and judgment. And if you presume to in- 
 terpret the Sacred Oracles, which you are bound to 
 do according to your ability, for yourself; you are to 
 do it according to the established laws of language, 
 and the known dictates of reason. 
 
 One of those laws undoubtedly is, that the known 
 nature of the subject contributes to determine the 
 signification of many of the words relating to it ; and 
 that as far as knowledge of that subject can be ob- 
 tained from other sources, such knowledge is often 
 indispensably necessary to the right understanding 
 of particular exhibitions of truth respecting it. 
 
 There is that in the Bible which the most simple and 
 ignorant can understand ; and there is that among 
 the sublime and recondite disclosures of this volume, 
 
62 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 which the most simple and ignorant cannot fully un- 
 derstand, and are not competent to interpret. They 
 must correct gross ignorance by the patient investi- 
 gation of that which is simple and easy, before they 
 can possibly grasp that which is in its nature, or in 
 the circumstances and mode of its exhibition, compli- 
 cated and obscure. 
 
 They must ascertain something of the nature of 
 religious subjects from those Biblical expositions of 
 them, which are simple and elementary, before they 
 can possibly interpret aright, such as are abstruse 
 and complicated. 
 
 A mistake in regard to the nature of the subject 
 treated of, in substituting for it something else, or in 
 misapprehending its characteristic features, is the 
 cause of multiplied subordinate and fundamental er- 
 rors, in determining the meaning of words. Such 
 mistakes are often the result of prejudice and negli- 
 gence, where there is otherwise no want of previ- 
 ous and elementary knowledge on the subjects ex- 
 hibited. 
 
 4. The obvious design and purpose of a discourse. 
 By the design and purpose of a discourse, is meant 
 the end which the author had in view in writing it ; 
 or the particular impression, or conviction which, 
 considered as a whole, it is adapted to make on the 
 mind of an unbiased reader. 
 
 This design may be simple, or complex ; manifest, 
 or obscure ; according to the nature of the discourse, 
 and the circumstances in which it is constructed. 
 Sometimes it is explicitly asserted ; sometimes indi- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 63 
 
 cated by circumstantial evidence ; and often by the 
 internal structure of the discourse and the context. 
 
 When the design of a discourse is obvious, no 
 matter by what means it is made so, it affords valu- 
 able aid for determining, with precision, the meaning 
 of many words which it contains. Writers often 
 use words that would be otherwise indeterminate 
 or obscure, in reliance on the manifest design of 
 their discourse, to indicate the sense they attach to 
 them. Such indication of the sense intended, is suf- 
 ficient in thousands of cases, when correct interpre- 
 tation would be greatly embarrassed, if not rendered 
 impossible, without it. 
 
 The purpose and design of a discourse, when man- 
 ifest, is one of the principal means of rendering the 
 signification of those words which have different 
 established senses, as well as those whose significa- 
 tions are in their nature indefinite, expressive of a 
 definite and certain sense. Much of the perspicui- 
 ty and precision of language, are owing to this prin- 
 ciple ; and in the absence of it, or through ignorance 
 of it, would be unavoidably and irrecoverably lost. 
 
 The known design and purpose of the discourse 
 is often useful in giving clearness and sufficiency to 
 other indications of the true sense of important 
 words. When that sense is made probable by other 
 evidence, confirmation derived from this source, is 
 often decisive ; converting what would otherwise be 
 probability, into certainty. When we should oth- 
 erwise hesitate between different interpretations, 
 both sustained by some degree of probable evidence, 
 the design and purpose of the discourse not unfre- 
 
64 THE RULES OR LAWS CF 
 
 quently turns the scale, and makes the ground of 
 correct judgment substantial and obvious. 
 
 The rule that words ought to be interpreted in ac- 
 cordance with the manifest design and purpose of the 
 discourse, ought to be applied to all the cases where 
 it is truly applicable. These are numerous. But it 
 ought to be used with especial caution. Much con- 
 sideration is often requisite, to determine what the 
 design and purpose of a discourse is, even where that 
 point is capable of being fully ascertained. Having 
 settled that point correctly, we ought to be particu- 
 larly strict and thorough, in determining its bearing 
 on the interpretation of single words. We ought 
 not to decide that a word is required to be interpret- 
 ed in a particular sense, in preference to some other 
 possible one, on this ground, unless the reason for 
 such an inference is obvious and decisive. 
 
 The rule under consideration is useful in enabling 
 us to detect erroneous interpretations, as well as to 
 establish and confirm those which are right. 
 
 Whatever difficulty there may often be in deter- 
 mining whether the agreement of a particular signifi- 
 cation of a word, with the design and purpose of a 
 discourse or paragraph, affords decisive evidence or 
 not, in its favor ; there can be no doubt that in re- 
 spect to the Bible, any interpretation in regard to 
 which there is a manifest disagreement of this kind, 
 must be erroneous. 
 
 5. The position of words in a sentence ; or what is 
 the same thing, their grammatical relations. Words 
 which belong to the same sentence, contribute essen- 
 tially to illustrate and explain each other. This is 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION'. 65 
 
 particularly true of those which are grammatically 
 related in respect to qualification, concord, or gov- 
 ernment. The adjective and adverb limit the signifi- 
 cation of the words which they qualify, and assist in 
 expressing the different modifications of the same 
 general idea, both in respect to the more delicate 
 shades of meaning, and in respect to such as are 
 palpable and obvious. The nominative helps to de- 
 termine the signification of the verb, and is often de- 
 cisive in this respect ; and the verb, in turn, some- 
 times illustrates the true meaning of the nominative, 
 where it is not fully indicated by other means ; and 
 also that of other related words, particularly the ob- 
 ject on which its action, when it is active, termin- 
 ates. 
 
 Almost every word in a sentence, in addition to 
 its own separate meaning, helps to fix and indicate 
 the meaning of one or more related words. We 
 avail ourselves of aid from this source, unconscious- 
 ly, and almost incessantly. We could not easily 
 maintain the ordinary intercourse of society without 
 it. Many modes of expression, that are now per- 
 spicuous and unequivocal, would become of an op- 
 posite character, if it were not for this principle. 
 
 The study of a foreign or ancient language, affords 
 impressive evidence of the reality and value of the 
 principle stated in this paragraph. Every one who 
 has in riper years commenced the study of a lan- 
 guage, knows what perhaps he had failed to observe 
 in respect to his vernacular tongue, that he can make 
 no considerable progress in determining the mean- 
 7 
 
t)b THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 ing of single words, till he has ascertained with pre- 
 cision their grammatical relations. 
 
 6. The context. Any portion of Scripture is de- 
 nominated a text. Those parts of the Sacred Ora- 
 cles which are contiguous to any text, and which 
 belong to the same discourse, are called its context, 
 or adjoining text. The context includes those pas- 
 sages that immediately precede, and those that im- 
 mediately follow the text to which they relate. 
 
 Such is the mutual connexion between the contig- 
 uous parts of a well constructed discourse, that a 
 consideration of one is often necessary to a right un- 
 derstanding of another. That which precedes, pre- 
 pares the way for that which follows ; and that 
 which follows illustrates and defines that which pre- 
 cedes. Thoughts occur in train to the mind of a 
 writer. One suggests another, and the expression 
 of one often renders that of a related one necessary 
 to its full development. The train of thought is de- 
 noted by the context. This is often sufficient of it- 
 self, to indicate the sense of important, and otherwise 
 ambiguous words. 
 
 The context, or train of thought, or series of the 
 discourse, are forms of expression which relate to 
 the same subject, and amount substantially to the 
 same thing. The extent to which they illustrate the 
 meaning of single words, is truly surprising to one 
 that has not paid particular attention to this depart- 
 ment of the laws of Interpretation. They are refer- 
 red to incessantly in all our reading, both of the 
 Scriptures and of human productions. Some parts 
 of almost every discourse would be utterly unintelli- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 67 
 
 gible, if it were not for the light reflected from this 
 quarter. A complex and unusual construction of 
 words in a sentence, and the use of words that are 
 indefinite in their nature, or unusual and inperfectly 
 understood, are often illustrated by the context, when 
 other sources of evidence fail. 
 
 So habitual is the use we make of this rule, in all 
 our reading, both of the Scriptures and of human 
 productions, that we are hardly sensible of it. In 
 most cases of difficulty, we do it naturally, and al- 
 most unconsciously ; and usually with perfect facili- 
 ty and complete success. 
 
 And yet, as is too often the case in respect to all 
 the other rules of Interpretation, so in respect to this, 
 we sometimes hurry to a conclusion, or give up an 
 inquiry in discouragement, without making that ef- 
 fectual use of it, which might be made. 
 
 7. Examples. An example is a particular instance 
 illustrating a word, a general rule, precept, or pro- 
 position of any kind. An instance of the exercise of 
 faith in the case of Abraham, or of any other true 
 believer, is an example of faith. An instance of 
 prayer, is an example of prayer ; one of love is an 
 example of love ; and so in respect to other princi- 
 ples and precepts, that might be mentioned or refer- 
 red to indefinitely. 
 
 The formal introduction of examples, for the pur- 
 pose of illustration, is exceedingly common and high- 
 ly useful. They are often also introduced informal- 
 ly, and serve to illustrate the true meaning of words, 
 in subordination to other, and even higher designs. 
 
 Writers on the sciences and arts, find it necessary 
 
68 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 to make frequent and almost constant use of exam- 
 ples, for the purpose of expressing their ideas with 
 clearness. Without the aid derived from this mode 
 of illustration, their instructions would, in manj' 
 cases where they are now obvious, be exceedingly 
 difficult of apprehension, if not utterly unintelligible. 
 Our expositions of human science and art, are full 
 of examples illustrative of the meaning of proposi- 
 tions and principles, or what amounts to the same 
 thing, of the meaning of words- A man that should 
 endeavor to investigate and interpret them, without 
 attending at all, or even closely, to those examples, 
 would find himself engaged in a Herculean task. 
 Such folly however, in respect to works on human 
 science, is seldom indulged to any considerable ex- 
 tent. It very soon corrects itself, and convicts its 
 subject of his error. 
 
 Religion affords the theater on which human folly 
 has effected its most extravagant developments. 
 Here the ridiculous has raved in the stolen garb of 
 sublimity ; and errors that would have ensured con- 
 tempt and scorn in any other relation, have been 
 stumbled upon by deceivers and the deceived, as the 
 very stepping stones to earthly distinction and heav- 
 enly glory. 
 
 The Bible is an exposition of religious science. It 
 abounds with examples illustrative of the meaning 
 of its principal words. The interpreter is as much 
 required to notice these examples, and adhere to 
 them, as the student of human science is, to avail 
 himself of the similar illustrations with which that 
 is furnished. 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 69 
 
 The examples of the Christian duties and virtues, 
 which shine forth from every part of the Bible, af- 
 ford the most important aid in determining, with pre- 
 cision, the meaning of the numerous terms by which 
 those subjects of inspired truth are severally indica- 
 cated. The same is true of many sins which the 
 Scriptures prohibit. What they are is indicated by 
 examples, as effectually as in any other way ; and 
 example sometimes places in the clearest light par- 
 ticular prohibitions that would be altogether obscure 
 without this illustration. 
 
 Those interpretations of the preceptive portions of 
 the Bible, which are not in conformity with its ex- 
 amples, must of course be wrong. Such interpreta- 
 tions are not uncommon with that numerous class 
 of persons, who wish to restrict and soften down the 
 Bible system to as near a conformity as possible, 
 with the usages and dictates of unhumbled and un- 
 sanctified nature. 
 
 8. Comparisons. A comparison is an assertion, 
 in which one object or attribute is represented as hav- 
 ing some resemblance or analogy to another. It 
 consists of the enunciation of two different ideas, ei- 
 ther simple or complex, with an express indication 
 of some analogy or resemblance between them. 
 
 That class of comparisons which is designed to 
 improve our conceptions of the object, or ideas com- 
 pared, is most particularly useful in promoting the 
 perspicuity of language, and facilitating its interpre- 
 tation. The very design of this numerous class 
 of comparisons, renders it necessary, that the idea 
 or object to which another is compared, should be 
 
70 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 one that is easily or generally understood by those 
 for whom the communication is designed. There 
 are many cases in which the method of illustrating 
 the meaning of our words by comparisons, is supe- 
 rior to any other. It is therefore in common use 
 with every class of writers, both sacred and profane. 
 And in making use of comparisons, where they 
 occur, to illustrate the meaning of the words which 
 enter into them, we are only acting in conformity 
 with the very design and purpose of their introduc- 
 tion. The neglect to do this, is an obvious and 
 criminal neglect of one of the sources of informa- 
 tion on this subject, which, wherever it exists, sheds 
 a clear and certain light on the path of correct inter- 
 pretation. 
 
 9. Antitheses. An antithesis is an assertion in 
 which one object or attribute is placed in opposition 
 to another of the same kind, for the purpose of pre- 
 senting one or both of them vividly and forcibly to 
 the mind. The design of the antithesis is to pro- 
 mote clearness and force of expression. This de- 
 sign, when used judiciously, it effectually accomplish- 
 es. Many statements both of fact and of doctrine, 
 which would be sufficiently explicit and perspicuous, 
 to be understood when stated singly, are made still 
 more so when expressed antithetically. 
 
 Antithetical expressions are frequent in the Sacred 
 Scriptures, and contribute to promote and establish 
 the correct interpretation of their doctrines. 
 
 The ideas antithetically expressed, are indicated 
 by the natural meaning and force of the words which 
 compose the respective members of the antithesis ; 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 71 
 
 and are still further evinced by the light of contrast 
 which is reflected from each to the other. The prin- 
 ciple by which we ought to interpret antitheses, is 
 that of their construction, namely ; that the two 
 parts express corresponding and directly opposite 
 ideas of the same generic kind. By a careful observ- 
 ance of this principle, when one branch of the antith- 
 esis is definite and the other is indefinite, in itself 
 considered, the former may afford essential aid in 
 determining the signification of the latter. So that 
 if either branch of an antithesis is clear, we may de- 
 rive from it effectual aid in determining the sense of 
 the corresponding and opposite branch. 
 
 A knowledge of this principle is useful for the con- 
 firmation of many important conclusions, respecting 
 the meaning of Scripture expressions, derived from 
 other sources. There is hardly a material error that 
 may not be controlled by it, and hardly a Bible-truth 
 to which it does not afford confirmation. A careful 
 study and intelligent application of the principles re- 
 lating to antitheses greatly facilitate both the discov- 
 ery of truth and the detection of error. 
 
 For example, Mark xvi. 16 ; " He that believeth 
 and is baptized, shall be saved ; but he that believeth 
 not shall be damned." This passage is evidently an 
 antithesis, a direct opposition of meaning existing 
 between its members. Believers are a class of per- 
 sons the very opposite of unbelievers, in respect to 
 the exercise of faith. Being saved, is the opposite 
 of being damned. All this is too obvious to admit of 
 a reasonable doubt. It is perceived intuitively and in- 
 stantly, the moment a man, familiar with the Ian- 
 
72 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 guage of the Scriptures, fixes his attention upon the 
 passage. The antithetical relation of the phrases, 
 " shall be saved," and " shall be damned," proves, 
 aside from any evidence derived from other sources, 
 that they are not of similar but of opposite import. 
 The subjects of these two sentences, are men of op- 
 posite characters, in respect to faith ; the predicates 
 denote opposite states of being, which result from 
 these opposite characters, and correspond to them. 
 Being damned, therefore, as used in this passage, is 
 the reverse of being saved by faith. If being saved 
 by faith in Christ, denotes a transient and trivial ben- 
 efit ; being damned for unbelief in respect to him, 
 may denote for aught that appears in this passage, 
 a transient and trivial inconvenience or injury. But 
 if, as it is undoubtedly the fact, salvation by faith in 
 Christ, comprehends our future and eternal felicity 
 in heaven ; then as certainly, does damnation com- 
 prehend the reverse of this, our future and eternal 
 misery ; the misery of hell. This conclusion is le- 
 gitimate and inevitable, because what is affirmed in 
 one member of the antithesis, cannot, without ab- 
 surdity, be comprehended in the affirmation of the 
 other. Salvation and damnation are not only differ- 
 ent, but opposite states of being. 
 
 An examination of Matt. xxv. 46, will lead to a 
 similar result. " These shall go away into everlast- 
 ing punishment, but the righteous into life eternal. " 
 In this passage, these, referring to the wicked, is 
 placed in direct contrast with, the righteous, as de- 
 noting persons of an opposite character. This is in 
 conformity with the usage of the sacred writers gen- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 73 
 
 erally. So also, eternal life, the portion of the right- 
 eous, is placed in contrast with eternal or everlast- 
 ing death, the allotment of the wicked. The words 
 translated eternal and everlasting, are the same in 
 the original, and were injudiciously varied, in the 
 translation in common use, merely for the sake of 
 euphony or agreeable sound. The life eternal, and 
 everlasting and eternal punishment, are opposed to 
 each other, as contemporaneous states of being. If 
 the former therefore, denotes as it must do, the end- 
 less felicity of heaven, the latter can designate noth- 
 ing less than the contemporaneous and equally end- 
 less miseries of hell. 
 
 10. Parallel passages. The occurrence of the 
 same word in two different passages of Scripture, 
 does not necessarily constitute them parallel. As 
 most words have several different significations, they 
 may of course, be used in different connexions, to 
 designate ideas entirely different. Neither does the 
 use of any particular word in. the same sense, in dif- 
 ferent passages of Scripture, constitute them neces- 
 sarily parallel. This may occur and the subjects be 
 entirely different. 
 
 Parallel passages are those which relate to the 
 same subject, and express a similar sense. No oth- 
 ers are properly of this class. All that possess this 
 relative character, whether their phraseology is sim- 
 ilar or diverse, are comprehended under this denom- 
 ination. Great diversity of expression may exist in 
 passages that are truly parallel. 
 
 Parallelisms may be historical, doctrinal, or pro- 
 phetical. In whatever department of the Sacred 
 
74 THE RILES OR LAWS OF 
 
 Oracles they occur, they merit particular attention, 
 and are of high importance to the interpreter. They 
 are useful in the study of Biblical history ; but in 
 that of the prophecies, and of Scripture doctrine, 
 they are all important. We can do nothing to effect 
 without them. 
 
 If any person wishes to understand correctly the 
 Christian system of religion, he must diligently com- 
 pare the several different passages in which the same 
 doctrine is taught. Those doctrines cannot be ac- 
 curately ascertained in any other way. No man 
 can prayerfully and candidly study them in this way, 
 without benefit. 
 
 The comparison of parallel passages is important, 
 in the interpretation of any work, whether ancient 
 or modern ; in our native dialect, or in foreign 
 tongues. But it is most important in respect to an- 
 cient works, and those originally written in foreign 
 languages, because they are most likely to be ob- 
 scure. It is most important of all, in the interpreta- 
 tion of the Bible, because that is the most ancient 
 work in existence, in respect to some of its parts ; 
 because it was originally written in ancient and for- 
 eign languages ; because many of its communica- 
 tions are such as we know nothing at all about, ex- 
 cept what we learn from this source ; because of its 
 considerable magnitude ; and because many of its 
 different portions were given for the express purpose 
 of explaining other remote portions of the same ; 
 and of correcting errors respecting them, into which 
 persons had already fallen or were liable to fall. 
 
 Parallel passages when compared, reflect light on 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 75 
 
 each other in various ways. That which is wanting 
 to a perfect understanding of the assertion in one, is 
 found in another ; and that which is wanting to a per- 
 fect understanding of the latter, is found in the for- 
 mer ; and so on. So that it may often happen, that 
 two passages would both be incorrectly interpreted, 
 if considered alone, and both be fully and correctly 
 understood, if compared together. 
 
 The sentiment that is to us, in our peculiar cir- 
 cumstances, expressed obscurely in one passage, 
 may often by the light of another, relating evidently 
 to the same subject, be made in the highest degree 
 perspicuous. 
 
 Parallel passages are useful in explaining each 
 other by reason of something being contained in 
 one which is supplementary to the other. The lat- 
 ter, in consequence of that supplement, is either 
 more definite than the former, or else by reason of 
 this additional element, contributes in some other 
 way to render the other more definite. 
 
 The difference may consist in the use of different 
 terms to denote the same idea, in the substitution 
 of a literal for a figurative expression, or of a figura- 
 tive for a literal one ; in an additional qualifying 
 word, or phrase, or sentence ; in having a relation 
 to a different subordinate or leading subject ; in be- 
 ing made the ground of a peculiar inference, or the 
 subject matter of a peculiar argument. It is in con- 
 sequence only, of some difference of this kind, that 
 parallel passages mutually illustrate each other. 
 
 This difference therefore, ought in each case to be 
 carefully observed, and its relation to what is com- 
 
76 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 mon to the passages compared, accurately deter- 
 mined. The first object of comparing parallel pas- 
 sages, is to see wherein they agree, and wherein 
 they differ. Having ascertained their agreement 
 and differences, we apply what is peculiar in the 
 former, to explain the latter, and what is peculiar in 
 the latter, to explain the former. 
 
 In comparing parallel passages, the plain must in 
 every case be allowed to explain the obscure ; and 
 never the contrary. The error is sometimes com- 
 mitted, of explaining, in an arbitrary manner, an ob- 
 scure passage, and of wresting those parallel ones 
 which are more plain, from their obvious import, in 
 order to make them correspond with it, thus errone- 
 ously interpreted. 
 
 As far as the meaning of words can be fully deter- 
 mined by other kinds of evidence, that of parallel 
 passages is unnecessary. To resort to supposed or 
 real parallelisms, for the purpose of wresting words 
 from their plain and obvious import, is unreasonable 
 and impious in the extreme. But it is an impiety 
 not unfrequently committed. It is the favorite de- 
 vice of false teachers, and one by which thousands 
 have been deceived. It is a device which is in suc- 
 cessful operation at the present time ; and by which 
 not a few are involved in the most absurd and fatal 
 errors. 
 
 Great accuracy and caution are requisite in every 
 department of Biblical Interpretation. Conjectural 
 and hasty conclusions ought never to be admitted. 
 But in respect to the comparison of parallel passa- 
 ges, and the inferences we draw from such compar- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 77 
 
 isons, we ought to be peculiarly cautious, not to de- 
 ceive ourselves by arbitrary and conjectural modes 
 of procedure. 
 
 In making use of parallelisms to ascertain the 
 meaning of words, we ought (1.) to ascertain that 
 supposed parallelisms are real. Nothing but deci- 
 cive evidence ought to satisfy us on this point. All 
 those supposed parallelisms which are not supported 
 by such evidence, ought to be rejected. Mere prob- 
 ability is not sufficient for the purposes of interpre- 
 tation,^however strong that probability may be. 
 
 (2.) We ought to ascertain to what extent the 
 passages compared are parallel ; in other words 
 what ideas common to both, are alike obvious in 
 both, or at least sufficiently so. It is in having some 
 obvious ideas in common, that parallelism consists ; 
 and the parallelism thus constituted is greater or less, 
 according to the relative importance and number of 
 those common ideas. 
 
 (3.) We ought to ascertain with precision, what 
 is peculiar to each of the parallel passages compar- 
 ed, and whether this peculiarity is in any way defin- 
 itive of their precise meaning ; also, what there is in 
 one which can be in any way supplementary to the 
 other, or explanatory of it. 
 
 (4.) We ought to determine the bearing of what- 
 ever is peculiar in each, on the other passage ; in 
 what respect it makes the meaning of any single 
 word, and of the whole, either more obvious or more 
 determinate. Continued and patient attention is re- 
 quisite in order to our successful accomplishment of 
 this object. 
 
 8 
 
78 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 (5.) We ought to compare as many passages as 
 possible, relating to every doubtful or difficult sub- 
 ject. The concentrated and continued light of ma- 
 ny passages, is clearer and stronger than that of only 
 a few. And the true signification of any important 
 word or phrase in Scripture, is that which will be 
 sustained by an examination of every parallel pas- 
 sage, where the subject to which it relates is pre- 
 sented to view, or in any way explained. If we have 
 adopted an interpretation that will not abide the 
 test of an extended comparison of this kind, we may 
 rest assured that we have deceived ourselves. 
 
 The leading controversies which have been carri- 
 ed on against the orthodox branches of the Christian 
 church, have been powerfully sustained by a per- 
 verted use of this mode of reasoning, and of this 
 source of argument. Many have deceived them- 
 selves and others, by assuming the existence of par- 
 allelism where it does not exist, and thus reason- 
 ing in the determination of the meaning of words, 
 upon premises that are incorrect, and that might, if 
 thoroughly examined, be found to rest on inconclu- 
 sive arguments. 
 
 For example ; it is necessary to compare exten- 
 sively, parallel passages, in order to elicit and estab- 
 lish the Scripture doctrine of the general judgment ; 
 or in other words to determine the precise and full 
 meaning of the Scripture language on this subject. 
 This comparison, if thoroughly and faithfully prose- 
 cuted, is decisively indicative of the truth. But by 
 a mistake in determining passages to be of this class 
 which are not so, an erroneous conclusion respecting 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 79 
 
 the Bible doctrine of the final judgment, becomes ea- 
 sy and almost unavoidable. Passages are often de- 
 cided to be parallel by superficial inquirers on ac- 
 count of mere similarity of expression, when evi- 
 dence of a similarity of object and design is entirely 
 wanting. In this way those passages which teach 
 the doctrine of the final judgment, are decided to be 
 parallel with those which relate to the infliction of 
 only temporal judgments, and are explained by them 
 in a manner which does the utmost violence to the 
 established principles of human language, reflects 
 the highest discredit upon the Bible itself, and inflicts 
 the greatest injury upon the cause of practical and 
 experimental religion. 
 
 The doctrine of the final judgment cannot be le- 
 gitimately explained away. 
 
 The same error has been committed in the inter- 
 pretation of those portions of the Scriptures, which 
 relate to the future punishment of the wicked. No 
 class of texts are more explicit than these. They 
 are also numerous ; and embrace a great variety of 
 expression, both in respect to the literal and figura- 
 tive announcement of the doctrine which they obvi- 
 ously teach. But by classing them as parallel with 
 other passages relating only to the infliction of tem- 
 poral punishments, and explaining them according 
 to this classification, many have succeeded in blind- 
 ing their own minds to the truth, and in deceiving 
 others. Unhappy success ! Melancholy perversion 
 both of language and reason ! 
 
 In both of the above cases, obvious and destructive 
 error has been the result of assuming the existence 
 
OU THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 of parallelism, without decisive evidence of its exist- 
 ence ; a mistake that is wholly unnecessary, though 
 not by any means uncommon. This erroneous judg- 
 ment being once formed and established, may of- 
 ten lead us to the most forced and unnatural con- 
 structions of language, and plunge us into the most 
 revolting absurdities, without opening our eyes to 
 see the fallacy which lies at the foundation of our 
 reasoning. 
 
 By a judicious comparison of parallel passages 
 we make the different parts of the Bible explain each 
 other, and the Holy Spirit his own interpreter. We 
 obtain access to sources of evidence which are the 
 most clear and convincing. 
 
 The use of parallel passages in detecting errone- 
 ous interpretations, may be still further illustrated, by 
 the application of the rule under consideration to 
 those passages of Scripture which are made the ba- 
 sis of the doctrine of Christian perfection. 
 
 The controversy respecting Christian perfection, 
 is one that must be settled by determining the mean- 
 ing of the words and phrases supposed to teach that 
 sentiment. 
 
 The doctrine in question is one which relates to 
 Christian character. What is the Bible doctrine 
 respecting Christian character ? John says, 1 John, 
 v. 1, and 18, " Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the 
 Christ, is born of God ; That whosoever is born 
 of God sinneth not ;" so also 1 John, iii. 9 ; making 
 abstinence from sin, a characteristic of all true be- 
 lievers and Christians. If these passages stood alone, 
 and were not modified either by parallel passages, or 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 81 
 
 by known truths from any other source, we might in- 
 terpret them of sinless perfection, or entire abstinence 
 from sin, of any kind or degree. But this is not the 
 case. Their signification is limited and modified, both 
 by parallel passages relating to Christian character, 
 which represent it as imperfect ; and also by observ- 
 ation and experience, the observation and experi- 
 ence of the worthiest, most intelligent, and best of 
 men ; and of those who afford the strongest evidence 
 of having experienced a change of heart. 
 
 Of the parallel passages which may be referred 
 to, for the purpose of determining in what sense the 
 phrase " sinneth not," in 1 John, v. 18, is to be un- 
 derstood, the following are obvious and decisive. 
 Phil. iii. 12. " Not as though I had already attain- 
 ed, either were already perfect ;" also, verses 13, 
 14, and 15, of the same. Job, xl. 4, xlii. 6, "Be- 
 hold I am vile ; I abhor myself, and repent in dust 
 and ashes ;" compared with Job, i. 1, xlii. 7, "That 
 man was perfect and upright. Ye have not spoken 
 of me the thing which is right, as my servant Job 
 hath." 
 
 If Paul was not yet absolutely perfect, after hav- 
 ing been forty years in the service of Christ, not 
 merely as an ordinary Christian, but as a wise master 
 builder ; if Job, though declared to be a perfect and 
 upright man, could say with truth, " Behold, I am 
 vile ; I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes; 11 
 then the abstinence from sin denoted by " sinneth 
 not, 11 as descriptive of a regenerate state, is not ab- 
 solute, but relative. The regenerate are all right- 
 eous ; they practice entire abstinence from all known 
 8* 
 
8^ THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 sin. But they are not all absolutely perfect, as the 
 Scriptures and experience strongly testify. 
 
 Sec. 6. Rules for determining when words 
 are used in a tropical or figurative sense. 
 
 Tropical or figurative language is common to ev- 
 ery department of literature, and contributes essen- 
 tially to beauty and force of expression, as well as 
 to variety. Some writers however, use it sparingly, 
 and others with the greatest freedom. It is the life 
 of poetry, and one of the indispensable elements of 
 powerful and impassioned oratory. The literal use 
 of words is not sufficiently expressive, to serve as a 
 medium for the communication of deep and excited 
 feeling. The mind naturally gives them higher sen- 
 ses, to suit the degree and nature of its excitement, 
 and by this means infuses into discourse, a degree of 
 ardor and energy, which it would otherwise be to- 
 tally incapable of expressing. 
 
 The words of the Bible are designed to be ex- 
 pressive of feeling, in all its varieties. Many por- 
 tions of the Sacred Oracles were written under the 
 greatest possible excitement, and are themselves of 
 the most exciting character. It was therefore ne- 
 cessary that the most powerful modes of speech 
 should be adopted in those writings. This we find 
 to have been done with the happiest effect. The 
 Bible is the greatest and noblest repository of figu- 
 rative language that the world contains. The inter- 
 preter of it therefore, ought to be well acquainted 
 with all the leading principles and rules which relate 
 to figurative modes of speech. As a prerequisite to 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 8S 
 
 the interpretation of a passage, it is sometimes ne- 
 cessary to determine whether any part is figurative 
 or not ; and how far it is to be considered as sustain- 
 ing this character. This problem is sometimes a 
 matter of considerable difficulty. The following 
 rules may be of service in determining it. 
 
 1. Necessity. In the interpretation of language, the 
 literal meaning of words ought never to be departed 
 from, without evident reason and necessity. To ex- 
 plain words in a tropical or figurative sense, because 
 they are sometimes, or even frequently used so, is in 
 any case entirely unauthorized. It is an entire depart- 
 ure from the established principles of language, and 
 a. gross perversion of reason. 
 
 No intelligent writer departs from the literal sig- 
 nification of words, without giving unequivocal in- 
 dications of the fact. In the absence of decisive ev- 
 idence, that a word is used in a tropical or figurative 
 sense, we have no right to suppose this is the case ; 
 but have reason to believe the contrary. 
 
 The fact that a word will admit of being interpret- 
 ed fig uratively, and yet express in our apprehension, 
 a consistent sense, is not a sufficient reason for in- 
 terpreting it so. It ought not to admit of a different 
 interpretation, without doing evident violence to the 
 context, in order to establish its claim to a tropical 
 or figurative sense. 
 
 Such is always the case with words that are real- 
 ly figurative. They cannot, without inconsistency, 
 be interpreted in their literal senses. Those senses 
 therefore, ought not to be forced upon them. 
 
 2. Incongruity. What constitutes a necessity for 
 
84 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 departing, in our interpretation of language, from 
 the literal and established meaning of words, and ex- 
 plaining them in tropical significations, is a manifest 
 incongruity between the subject and attribute, or 
 the apparent subject, and what is asserted respect- 
 ing I he real one. 
 
 This occurs wherever words which are the appro- 
 priate and known symbols of one class of objects 
 and relations, are applied to denote those of another. 
 For example ; Christ is the true vine ; the living 
 bread ; the lamb of God. Here the names of inan- 
 imate objects are applied to designate Christ, an an- 
 imate one. Considered in respect to their literal 
 senses, there is a manifest incongruity between the 
 words which enter into these assertions ; but inter- 
 preted figuratively, their meaning is plain and con- 
 sistent. 
 
 In accordance with this rule, whenever words ap- 
 propriated to corporeal objects, are applied to incor- 
 poreal ones, or those appropriated to animate objects, 
 are applied to inanimate, or those appropriated to ra- 
 tional objects, are applied to irrational, &c. or the 
 contrary, of these several cases, and of others like 
 them ; the words so applied, are always to be under- 
 stood as tropical. The Lord is my rock, my fortress ; 
 burning wrath, fiery indignation, raging tempest, 
 roaring ocean, smiling spring, are examples to which 
 this rule manifestly applies, and by which, as by a 
 multitude of analogous ones, to be met with on all 
 sides, it is fully illustrated. 
 
 The faithful and judicious application of this rule 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 85 
 
 would correct many hurtful errors, in the interpreta- 
 tion of the tropical language of the Bible. 
 
 3. A definitive clause. When the tropical sense of 
 a word or phrase, is not indicated by other means, 
 this is often done by the use of a definitive clause, 
 showing both that the literal sense is not intended, 
 and making a tropical interpretation necessary. The 
 Bible abounds in examples of this kind ; of which, 
 yoke of bondage ; being dead in sin ; being born of 
 the Spirit, are a specimen. In each of these cases, 
 the explanatory clause requires the word to which it 
 relates, to be interpreted, not in a literal, but in a 
 tropical sense. 
 
 4. Literal disagreement of parallel passages. The 
 Bible presents to our consideration many subjects 
 that are entirely removed from the sphere of human 
 observation, and also from that of the senses. Our 
 knowledge of the nature and attributes of those sub- 
 jects, must depend entirely upon an interpretation of 
 the language by which they are described. When 
 such a subject is set forth by the use of terms of 
 entirely and manifestly different and incongruous 
 meanings, we may conclude with certainty, that 
 some of those terms are to be interpreted in tropical 
 senses. This rule is applicable to those Scripture 
 representations, which have respect to the change 
 that takes place in the human soul, on our becoming 
 pious. It is expressed in Scripture by terms of dif- 
 ferent and incongruous import. Being born again ; 
 being born of water, and of the Spirit ; being crea- 
 ted anew ; being sanctified ; becoming united to 
 
86 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 Christ; repenting and being converted ; are some of 
 the terms by which this change is indicated. 
 
 The application of them to denote the same thing, 
 cannot be justified on any other supposition than 
 that some of them are used in tropical senses. They 
 cannot be harmoniously explained on any other 
 principle. On this principle the explanation of them 
 is easy end natural, and their signification both con- 
 sistent and obvious. 
 
 5. Literal agreement of parallel passages. In those 
 cases where the same words, or those of similar im- 
 port are in different parallel passages uniformly 
 used to designate the same subject, and are other- 
 wise unexplained, we may confidently infer that they 
 ought to be interpreted literally. Those passages 
 of Scripture which relate to the future and eternal 
 punishment of the wicked, are of this class. That 
 part of the Divine procedure is represented by vari- 
 ous terms and modes of expression, all of which un- 
 equivocally denote suffering, from which we infer, 
 with confidence, that real suffering is intended, and 
 that literal punishment will be inflicted on all the 
 finally impenitent. 
 
 The doctrine of the resurrection of the body, 
 stands on a similar foundation. It is referred to in 
 various passages of Scripture, and by various modes 
 of expression, all of which indicate the same thing, 
 and agree in expressing substantially the same liter- 
 al sense. Thus the resurrection of the dead ; of the 
 body ; being quickened or made alive, &,c. are ex- 
 pressions in constant Scriptural use, in reference to 
 a future and important event, which, we conclude 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION 87 
 
 from this uniformity of expression in relation to it, 
 can be nothing less than a literal resurrection of the 
 bodies of all the dead. 
 
 This rule is an important barrier, operating in con- 
 junction with other principles of language, to check 
 the undue extention of tropical interpretations. In 
 reference to subjects concerning which we have 
 opportunities of accurate information from other 
 sources, there is not much room for an undue ex- 
 tension of tropical interpretations. The subject it- 
 self, in such cases, contributes to define the language 
 used respecting it. But where there are no other 
 sources of satisfactory information, a principle of this 
 kind is necessary to facilitate correct decisions re- 
 specting the mode of interpretation proper to be 
 adopted. 
 
 Sec 7. Rules for determining the sense of 
 tropical or figurative words. 
 
 Tropical language is constructed on the same prin- 
 ciples as that which is strictly literal. Consequent- 
 ly the methods of determining the sense of tropical 
 words, are substantially the same as those which 
 have been pointed out. We have not one set of 
 rules for determining the literal sense of words, and 
 another entirely different, for the determination 
 of their tropical senses ; but we have, for the most 
 part, what is far better, one set of rules applicable 
 to the determination of the sense of words in both 
 cases. 
 
 The peculiar difficulties however, which some- 
 times attend the application of these rules to tropic- 
 
88 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 al language, and the frequent errors that are com- 
 mitted in this department of Interpretation, seem to 
 indicate the propriety of a few remarks, particularly 
 on this subject, with a view to facilitate the applica- 
 tion of principles which have been for the most part 
 already explained. 
 
 1. The peculiar character of the tropical express- 
 ions. The different classes of tropical words, ought 
 to be interpreted according to their respective char- 
 acters. Metaphors ought to be interpreted as met- 
 aphors, in a metaphorical sense ; allegories, as alle- 
 gories, in an allegorical sense; hyperbole and irony, 
 with due consideration of the nature of those modes 
 of speech. Each of these classes of words have a 
 true sense, that is indicated by the nature of the class 
 to which it belongs. 
 
 In order to the due observance of this rule, it is 
 necessary carefully to distinguish figurative language 
 from that which is literal, and also the different class- 
 es of figurative expressions from each other Such 
 discrimination is not always necessary, but it is al- 
 ways useful in promoting clearness and accuracy of 
 perception, and is sometimes indispensable to the 
 correct interpretation of figurative language. 
 
 2. Established and known usage. Established 
 usage, both general and particular, is a certain rule 
 by which to determine the meaning of tropical 
 words. Where this is known, and in the absence of 
 internal evidence to the contrary, it is always to be 
 observed. General usage is the first and highest rule. 
 When that is uniform, and not modified or contra- 
 dicted by a known particular usage, or by internal 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 89 
 
 t 
 
 evidence, it is a clear and certain indication of the 
 sense intended. When a known particular usage 
 supervenes, as belonging uniformly to the subject 
 treated of, or to the author whose treatise we are in- 
 vestigating, that takes the place of general usage, 
 and is equally decisive of the sense intended. 
 
 General usage in respect to the tropical sense of 
 words, is remarkably uniform with all good writers. 
 It is capable of being accurately known to an extent 
 which, to the superficial inquirer, is altogether in- 
 credible. Being known, it sheds a degree of light 
 on this department of Interpretation, which renders 
 it generally perspicuous and satisfactory to the dili- 
 gent and attentive inquirer. 
 
 The sacred writers, though distinguished by sev- 
 eral important and obvious peculiarities, still have 
 many equally important and known points of resem- 
 blance to others, in respect to the use of tropical lan- 
 guage. Besides, they are peculiarly harmonious in 
 this respect, among themselves. The later writers 
 having in every case an intimate acquaintance with 
 the writings of those who preceded them, adopted the 
 same modes of expression, and, to a great extent, 
 the same peculiarities of style. This circumstance 
 contributes essentially to the perspicuity of the Sa- 
 cred Oracles generally, but particularly so in respect 
 to those parts of the Bible that are of a tropical or 
 figurative character. 
 
 The same words are generally used in the same 
 tropical senses, by different sacred writers, from the 
 earliest to the latest. Each successive sacred wri- 
 9 
 
90 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 ter seems in this respect to approbate the usages of 
 his predecessors, and conform to them. 
 
 The same word not unfrequently has different 
 tropical significations, equally well established, and 
 of frequent occurrence in the language of the same 
 writer, as well as in that of different writers. 
 
 Light, for example, is frequently used metaphoric- 
 ally by the sacred writers, to denote, (1,) happiness 
 and prosperity ; (2,) glory and honor ; (3,) truth ; 
 (4,) knowledge ; (5,) piety and virtue. 
 
 Darkness is a Scriptural metaphor, which denotes, 
 (1,) misery, adversity ; (2.) ignorance, error ; (3,) sin, 
 impurity. 
 
 Fire is a Scriptural metaphor, which denotes, (1,) 
 holiness, justice ; (2,) the author or cause of purifi- 
 cation, of moral renovation and improvement of 
 character ; (3,) the author or cause of misery or ad- 
 versity ; (4.) misery or adversity however produced ; 
 (5,) the miseries of hell. 
 
 When a word has different established metaphor- 
 ical significations, it often requires careful attention 
 and study, to determine which is intended. Serious 
 mistakes in this department, of Interpretation, are of 
 frequent occurrence. In all such cases, other prin- 
 ciples besides general usage, must be referred to, for 
 a decision respecting the true meaning expressed in 
 each particular case. 
 
 3. Other subsidiary and general principles of trop- 
 ical Interpretation. Where the general meaning of 
 a metaphor or other tropical word is unknown, or 
 where the same expression has more than one es- 
 tablished meaning, its signification in any particular 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 91 
 
 case, must be defined by some other of the known 
 principles of language. Such explanation is required 
 of every good writer ; and is seldom sought in vain, 
 by the attentive and intelligent reader. These sub- 
 sidiary principles of Interpretation comprehend (1,) 
 logical definitions by the use of synonymous terms, 
 or otherwise ; (2,) the known nature of the subject 
 treated of; (3,) the obvious purpose and design of 
 the writer ; (4,) the position of the tropical express- 
 ion in the sentence or paragraph ; (5,) the context ; 
 (6,) examples of the thing signified ; (7,) compari- 
 sons by which the sense is illustrated ; (8,) antithet- 
 ical clauses ; (9,) parallel passages. 
 
 All these are of occasional, and some of them of 
 frequent use, in the interpretation of the tropical lan- 
 guage of the Holy Scriptures. 
 
 The known nature of the subject to which the 
 tropical word relates, the context, and a comparison 
 of parallel passages, ought never to be neglected, in 
 determining the sense of tropical words. They ex- 
 ert a principal, and almost universal agency, in 
 making language generally, and this no less than 
 other modes of speech, of a determinate character. 
 Precision and accuracy cannot be given to our ex- 
 pressions by any other means, to the exclusion of 
 these. They are the universal auxiliaries of the in- 
 terpreter, and indications of the true sense of words 
 that accompany human discourse, in all its varieties, 
 and through all its windings. 
 
 4. A substitution of equivalent literal, for figurative 
 expressions. We often suppose ourselves to be in 
 possession of the true sense of tropical expressions, 
 
92 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 when this is not the case. The endeavor therefore, 
 to substitute equivalent literal expressions, in the 
 place of those which are figurative, is useful in sev- 
 eral respects ; (1,) as a means of indicating to our- 
 selves how far we attach any definite sense to the 
 expression in question ; (2,) as a means of facilitating 
 the comparison of the sense in which we understand 
 a given figurative expression, with what we know 
 of any established usage in respect to the case ; the 
 known nature of the subject, the obvious purpose 
 and design of the writer, or whatever other principle 
 may legitimately apply. 
 
 The following attempts to convert figurative into 
 literal expressions of similar import, may serve the 
 purpose of illustrating this rule, and of indicating to 
 those who are unexperienced in this exercise, some- 
 thing of its importance. 
 
 " I am the vine, ye are the branches.'" John xv. 
 5 ; literally, I am related to you as the vine is rela- 
 ted to its branches ; that is, by an intimate and vital 
 relation. 
 
 "This is the condemnation, that light is come 
 into the world, and men loved darkness rather than 
 light, because their deeds were evil." Here are sev- 
 eral tropical expressions blended together. Con- 
 demnation denotes by metonymy, the cause of con- 
 demnation. Light is used metaphorically, to denote 
 religious knowledge or instruction. Darkness is al- 
 so a metaphor, the antithesis of light, and signifying 
 the opposite ; namely, corrupt religious sentiment or 
 belief, ignorance and error. 
 
 Translated into literal expressions, as here explain- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 93 
 
 ed, the passage would read ; This is the cause of con- 
 demnation, that religious knowledge is come into the 
 world, and men loved error rather than knowledge, 
 because their deeds were evil. 
 
 In substitutions of this kind, it will generally be 
 found difficult to equal the energy and expressive- 
 ness of the figurative representation. Figurative 
 language, whenever correctly used, is more express- 
 ive than any literal expressions of the same signifi- 
 cation. Its superiority is often strikingly evinced 
 by an endeavor to form literal expressions equally 
 significant of the same ideas. But though there are 
 many cases in which the sense of tropical express- 
 ions cannot be fully indicated by any corresponding 
 literal announcement of the same, there may, in ev- 
 ery case that is correctly and perfectly understood, 
 be a substitution, that shall be sufficiently exact, to 
 verify the interpretation. 
 
 Sec 8. Rules for determining the significa- 
 tion OF ALLEGORIES. 
 
 The application of allegories to purposes of in- 
 struction and argument, has been extensively prac- 
 ticed both by the sacred writers and by others. Sev- 
 eral beautiful allegories occur in the Old Testament. 
 In the discourses of our Savior they abound. The 
 allegories of the Bible are of unparalleled beauty and 
 excellence. They contribute much to enhance the 
 value of the Sacred Oracles, and to increase the en- 
 ergy and beauty of those portions of Scripture in 
 which they occur, and of those exhibitions of truth 
 to which they belong. 
 
 9* 
 
94 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 Allegorical illustrations are peculiarly adapted to 
 encounter prejudice and perverse opposition of feel- 
 ing, and are generally resorted to for that purpose 
 in the Scriptures. 
 
 Our Savior discoursed much to his numerous and 
 miscellaneous auditors, in parables. The reason of 
 his doing this, was, that the perceptions of the peo- 
 ple were so dull, and their prejudices against evan- 
 gelical truth, and their perverseness of heart so great, 
 that they could not have been so effectually reached 
 and instructed, in any other way. He did not speak 
 in parables for the purpose of concealing the truth 
 from his hearers, but for that of making his revela- 
 tion of it effectual, in the highest possible degree. 
 This mode of instruction is adapted to the weakest 
 capacities. It is peculiarly suited to the ignorant, 
 the stupid, and unreasonable. 
 
 For the considerate, discerning, and unprejudiced, 
 it is not particularly necessary. They are prepared 
 to receive instruction by the more direct and simple 
 modes of presentation ; and in dealing with them, 
 such modes have been adopted by God, as they 
 generally are by men. 
 
 Allegories, however, are not without their uses to 
 all. This is particularly true of those contained in 
 the Bible. They are adapted to attract the attention 
 and inform the mind of the wayfaring man, though 
 a fool, and also to administer to the improvement of 
 the purest, loftiest, and most cultivated minds. 
 
 The general rules for determining the sense of 
 words, apply equally to allegorical representations. 
 In its internal structure, an allegory does not differ 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 95 
 
 essentially from any other narrative ; and its literal 
 sense is to be determined by the same rules as that 
 of any other species of narratives. But the facts 
 which constitute an allegorical representation, have 
 a higher and analogical meaning, which is the ap- 
 propriate signification of the allegory, as such. Ev- 
 ery word in the allegory may be rightly interpreted, 
 and not a glimpse of this be obtained. 
 
 1. In the interpretation of allegories, the first thing 
 to be done, is to ascertain the purpose or design with 
 which they were spoken. A knowledge of the pur- 
 pose and design of any discourse, is often of great 
 use in assisting our apprehension of its true sense. 
 But it is particularly important in the interpretation 
 of allegories. Any further than we can ascertain 
 the design of an allegory, it is impossible that we 
 should understand it. 
 
 The design of the allegories of the Bible, is gener- 
 ally indicated unequivocally in the context. Some- 
 times it is directly asserted, and sometimes evinced 
 by indirect and circumstantial evidence. 
 
 To interpret an allegory without any regard to 
 its design as indicated in the context, and inconsist- 
 ently with that design, is to act in a most arbitrary 
 manner. Such interpretations are utterly fanciful, 
 and universally erroneous. A Scripture allegory 
 sustains a relation to some subject pointed out in the 
 context, or by other means, similar to that of an ar- 
 gument to a proposition, which it is designed to 
 prove or enforce. The two are joined together by 
 a tie that cannot be sundered, in our apprehensions, 
 without producing obscurity. Such is the relation 
 
96 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 of a Scripture allegory to some particular subject, 
 which it is designed to illustrate, that it must be con- 
 templated in its relation to that subject, in order to be 
 understood. 
 
 2. The different and prominent parts of an allego- 
 ry ought to be explained in accordance with the 
 main design. In most cases the Scripture allegories 
 are introduced to illustrate a subject in some particu- 
 lar aspect, or in reference to some particular point. 
 The illustration of that point is the main design, and 
 the whole allegory is constructed with a view to the 
 most successful accomplishment of that object. For 
 example ; the parable of the prodigal son, and some 
 others, were spoken to silence the clamors of the 
 scribes and Pharisees against Christ, because he re- 
 ceived the company of sinners, and associated con- 
 descendingly and kindly with them. Luke xv. 1. 2. 
 The direct object of it was to illustrate the conde- 
 scension and kindness of God in respect to all that 
 repent of their sins, and engage heartily in the per- 
 formance of their religious duties. 
 
 The parable of the good Samaritan, Luke x. 30— 
 35, was spoken to illustrate the duty of universal 
 kindness and well doing. The prominent parts of 
 both these parables ought to be interpreted in cor- 
 respondence with the purposes they were respect- 
 ively designed to answer. The same is equally true 
 of all allegorical representations. Considered in re- 
 spect to the main design for which they are intro- 
 duced, every allegory ought to be interpreted as a 
 whole, and not merely as a collection of independ- 
 ent illustrations. 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. D7 
 
 3. As the allegory is Founded on resemblance, a 
 perception of those qualities which are common both 
 to the subject of the narrative, considered as a nar- 
 rative, and to that designed to be illustrated by it, is 
 necessary to a right understanding of the allegory. 
 
 In determining the points of resemblance in an al- 
 legory, we have need of great caution, not to multi- 
 ply them too much ; nor to diminish them too much ; 
 nor to substitute erroneous ones in the place of those 
 which are true and real. No two objects, even of 
 the some class, resemble each other in every partic- 
 ular. Still less is this the fact, in respect to objects 
 of different classes. Material and temporal objects 
 and relations, have some points of resemblance to 
 those which are spiritual and eternal. These points 
 may be obvious and striking. They often are. But 
 the resemblance is in no case perfect. While there 
 may be ten points of agreement, and ten qualities in 
 common between a particular temporal and spiritual 
 object, there are perhaps as many more, in which 
 they disagree, and by which they differ from each 
 other. 
 
 The subject and circumstances of an allegory are 
 justly supposed to have some things in common with 
 the related subject and circumstances intended to be 
 illustrated by it. These common properties consti- 
 tute resemblance. What they are, we ought to as- 
 certain with as much precision as possible. 
 
 Multiplying supposed points of resemblance, in 
 cases of this kind, is a common fault, and is general- 
 ly and correctly termed, pressing the analogy too 
 far. 
 
98 THE RULES OR LAWS OF 
 
 4. The foregoing rules for the interpretation of al- 
 legories, may be illustrated by the following exam- 
 ple. Luke xviii. 2 — 8. 
 
 " There was in a city, a judge which feared not 
 God, neither regarded man. And there was a 
 widow in that city, and she came unto him, saying, 
 avenge me of mine adversary. And he would not, for 
 a while, but afterward he said within himself, though 
 I fear not God, nor regard man, yet because this 
 widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her 
 continual coming, she weary me. And the Lord 
 said, hear what the unjust judge saith. And shall 
 not God avenge his own elect that cry day and night 
 to him, though he bear long with them? I tell you 
 he will avenge them speedily." 
 
 (1.) As to the design or purpose of this parable. 
 
 This is explicitly asserted in the context ; " That 
 men ought always to pray, and not to faint.' 1 
 
 (2.) As to the relation of the prominent parts of 
 the allegorical narrative to the main design. 
 
 The poor widow, asking redress of a judge or gov- 
 ernor, represents a sinner asking favors of God. 
 Both are alike helpless, needy and dependent. 
 
 The success of the widow's importunity, repre- 
 sents that of sinners in importunate prayer to God. 
 It is manifestly designed to encourage men to be 
 both importunate and believing, in their cries to God 
 for mercy and protection. 
 
 The fact that the judge was unjust, neither fear- 
 ing God nor regarding man, renders the case pecul- 
 iarly strong and encouraging. If being of such a 
 character, he could be induced to yield to the impor- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 99 
 
 tunity of a feeble and defenseless widow, whom he 
 cared nothing about, how much more will a just and 
 gracious God, who cherishes a tender and fatherly 
 care of all his creatures, listen to the unceasing crie3 
 of his own children, and grant all their reasonable 
 requests. 
 
 (3.) This parable is an instance in which the anal- 
 ogy between the allegorical narration, and the things 
 represented by it, holds only to a manifestly limited 
 extent. The design of the parable, and the nature 
 of the subject illustrated by it, indicate with sufficient 
 clearness, what the points of resemblance are. The 
 judge represents God, in respect to authority and 
 power, but not in respect to personal character. His 
 yielding to the importunity of the widow, corresponds 
 to God's yielding to the importunate cries of his chil- 
 dren, in respect to the bestowment of the thing de- 
 sired, but not in respect to the reason of its bestow- 
 ment. The judge complied with the widow's re- 
 quest to avoid trouble, God answers the prayers of 
 bis children to do them good. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 SUBSIDIARY AND PARTICULAR LAWS OF BIBLICAL Iff- 
 
 terpretation. 
 
 Sec. 1. The interpretation of the scrip- 
 tural SYSTEM OF DOCTRINES. 
 
 The word doctrine is derived from a word which 
 signifies to teach ; and denotes whatever is commu- 
 nicated as an article of faith. In its most compre- 
 hensive sense, it embraces both truth and error, and 
 is nearly synonymous with opinion. Thus we speak 
 of the doctrines of Plato, of Aristotle, of Confucius, 
 and of Mohammed, as well as of the doctrines of 
 Christ, and of true religion. 
 
 This word however, is generally used in a more 
 restricted sense, to denote the Biblical system of re- 
 ligious and moral truth. In this sense the word doc- 
 trine is synonymous with religious belief, or religious 
 sentiment ; and is discriminated from historical or 
 prophetical announcements, considered merely as 
 such. Whatever is taught in the Bible, on religious 
 and moral subjects, properly belongs to its doctrines. 
 To exhibit and enforce these, is the great object for 
 which the Bible was given. From these, it derives 
 its principal value ; and by means of them, works 
 those mighty transformations of character, by which 
 sinners are converted, and prepared for heaven. 
 The religious doctrines of the Bible comprehend 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 101 
 
 all those sentiments and opinions which are there 
 inculcated, respecting the subject of religion ; a vast 
 collection of revealed truth. Biblical Interpretation 
 embraces of course, the investigation of all those pas- 
 sages, in which religious truth is contained. A right 
 interpretation of those passages is all that we want 
 to put us in possession of the doctrines they commu- 
 nicate. Correct interpretation therefore, is the ave- 
 nue to correct religious doctrine. 
 
 No man studies the Bible in a right manner, who 
 does not study it with a special view to ascertain its 
 doctrines. If we understand the doctrines of the 
 Bible, we understand the Bible ; otherwise not. Ev- 
 ery new doctrine we learn is a substantial and valu- 
 able addition to our Biblical knowledge. All have 
 something to learn in this department of truth. The 
 field of Scripture doctrine is of almost unlimited ex- 
 tent. It has never yet been fully explored by any 
 human mind. It probably never will be in this 
 world. 
 
 The only proper method of determining what the 
 doctrines of the Bible are, is by interpretation. They 
 cannot be guessed out. Human invention is not 
 adequate to the task of discovering them by the dim 
 light of natural reason. By the laws of Interpreta- 
 tion they can be determined with accuracy and pre- 
 cision. Let these laws, as far as they have already 
 been explained, be faithfully applied, and the great 
 body of Christian doctrine will be clearly developed. 
 As the subject of doctrinal interpretation however, 
 is one of peculiar interest, and in some respects of 
 peculiar difficulty, it may not be unprofitable to illus- 
 10 
 
102 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 trate the following additional principles of Doctrinal 
 Interpretation. 
 
 1. Observation and experience. As far as the 
 Scriptures relate to subjects which come within the 
 sphere of our personal observation, we ought to 
 study those subjects directly in connexion with the 
 Scripture doctrines which relate to them. We ought 
 to study facts as they present themselves to our per- 
 sonal observation, in connexion with the inspired ex- 
 positions of them. 
 
 The doctrines of the Bible concerning human de- 
 pravity, regeneration by the Holy-Spirit, the progres- 
 sive sanctification of believers, &c. are of this class. 
 They are all matters of experience and observation. 
 The material facts in respect to each of them, be- 
 long to real life, as truly as they do to the doctrinal 
 announcements of the Scriptures. 
 
 The doctrinal views communicated in the Bible, 
 were intended to be understood and explained ac- 
 cording to all the obvious facts to be met with in hu- 
 man observation and experience, relating to the 
 same subjects. 
 
 In giving us the light of revelation, God never de- 
 signed to supercede that of human observation and 
 experience. His instructions are supplementary to 
 those of perception and reason. Observation and 
 enlightened reason are necessary to an understand- 
 ing of all the higher doctrines of Divine revelation, 
 relating to their appropriate objects. 
 
 Facts that come within the sphere of human ob- 
 servation, are the natural interpreters of all inspired 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 103 
 
 communications, to the subjects of which they re- 
 late. 
 
 Many Scripture doctrines relate so directly to 
 those states of mind which are matters of human 
 consciousness, that they cannot be fully understood 
 without becoming matters of experience. This oc- 
 curs in conformity with a general principle of human 
 language. 
 
 All the elements of human knowledge, have their 
 appropriate channels of access to the mind, and are 
 incapable of being attained by any other means. 
 Colors must be viewed by the eye, sound appreciated 
 by the ear, and all the elementary feelings and states 
 of mind, ascertained by consciousness. Consequent- 
 ly those Scripture doctrines which relate to the ob- 
 jects of human consciousness, must be interpreted 
 experimentally, in order to be interpreted aright. 
 
 A blind man may as well theorize about colors, 
 or a deaf man respecting sound, as any man inter- 
 pret the Scripture expositions relative to peculiar 
 elementary states of mind, who has not experienced 
 in some degree, the .same. The attempt to deter- 
 mine accurately the subjects of human conscious- 
 ness, without the aid of experience in respect to 
 them is utterly puerile and absurd. 
 
 The interpreter of those portions of Scripture, 
 which relate to experimental religion, must be ac- 
 quainted experimentally with his subject, in order to 
 understand it. The necessity of piety in the inter- 
 preter, in order to his understanding aright, many 
 parts, of the Scriptures, is asserted in John vii. 17, 
 where Christ, after having declared that his doctrine 
 
104 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 is from God, proceeds to say that, If any man will 
 do God's will, he shall know of the doctrine wheth- 
 er it be Divine or not. To the same import is John 
 viii. 47. " He that is of God, heareth God's words ; 
 ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of 
 God." Also 1 Cor. ii. 14, 15. " The natural man 
 receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God ; for 
 they are foolishness unto him ; neither can he know 
 them, for they are spiritually discerned. But he that 
 is spiritual judgeth all things ; yet he himself is judg- 
 ed of no man.'" That is, his character is fully under- 
 stood by no man who is not pious, and consequently 
 not spiritual. 
 
 2. The agency of the Holy Spirit. Intimately con- 
 nected with observation and experience, is the agen- 
 cy of the Holy Spirit, in promoting the development 
 of Scripture doctrine. Holy men of old spake, in 
 the communication of Divine truth, as they were 
 moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter i. 21. " All 
 Scripture is given by inspiration of God ;" 2 Tim. 
 iii. 16 ; and is on this account chiefly profitable for 
 doctrine. The doctrines of the Bible being commu- 
 nicated under the influence and direction of the Ho- 
 ly Ghost, it is not strange that a similar Divine 
 agency should be necessary to a right understanding 
 of many of them. 
 
 This is undoubtedly the fact ; and is in full accord- 
 ance with the dictates of enlightened reason, as well 
 as supported by the clearest Scripture evidence. In 
 human productions, there must be to some extent a 
 common sympathy between the writer and reader, 
 in order that the former may be fully understood and 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 105 
 
 duly appreciated. It is therefore not strange or 
 anomalous, that the same is true in respect to the 
 productions of the inspired writers. 
 ; Christ promised the Holy Ghost to his disciples, 
 to teach them all things. John xiv. 26. He de- 
 clared that this invisible and Divine agent, should 
 "reprove the world of sin, of righteousness, and of 
 judgment.'" 
 
 Paul says, Romans viii. 14, " As many as are led 
 by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. 11 Al- 
 so 1 Cor. ii. 12,, " We have received the Spirit which 
 is of God, that we might know the things that are 
 freely given to us of God. 11 In the last quotation, 
 the reception of the Spirit by the Corinthian Chris- 
 tians, is represented expressly as being in order to a 
 more extensive knowledge than they could other- 
 wise attain. On the same principle, John says to 
 Christians generally, 1 John ii. 20, 27, " Ye have an 
 unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. 
 The same anointing teacheth you of all things, and 
 is truth. 11 Other Scripture testimonies, of similar 
 import, might be adduced, but these are sufficient, 
 and establish beyond reasonable controversy, the 
 fact in question ; that the special agency of the Holy 
 Spirit is necessary to a competent knowledge of 
 Scripture doctrine. 
 
 The method by which the agency of the Spirit 
 conduces to a right understanding of his own writ- 
 ten word, has been an object of much prayerful in- 
 quiry with the pious, and the subject of some errone- 
 ous impressions among the uninformed. This is not 
 
 effected by the instrumentality of dreams and vis- 
 10* 
 
106 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 ions, or by direct supernatural inspiration, of any 
 kind. It results from that convicting and sanctify- 
 ing influence, whereby the appropriate and specific 
 fruits of the Spirit are produced within us. These 
 fruits are enumerated in Gal. v. 22, 23. " The fruit 
 of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, gen- 
 tleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance. 1 ' 
 The Spirit therefore, does not communicate Divine 
 truth by a special revelation, but by rendering us 
 spiritual ; by endowing us with His graces, and pro- 
 moting our experience of those states of mind, to 
 which many Scriptural doctrines relate. In this 
 method, He does operate effectually to promote our 
 knowledge of Scripture doctrine. Without these 
 operations many degrees of doctrinal knowledge 
 would be utterly unattainable, that are now acquir- 
 ed by the pious with great facility, and to great ad- 
 vantage. 
 
 The agency of the Holy Spirit in promoting doc- 
 trinal knowledge, renders prayer for His illuminating 
 influences, a peculiarly important accompaniment of 
 all correct study of Scripture doctrine. We can do 
 nothing to effect without it. 
 
 3. Abstinence from known sin. Sin contributes to 
 blunt our moral and religious sensibilities. It im- 
 pairs our capacities of religious and moral percep- 
 tion. 
 
 The effect of sin in impairing our capacities for 
 the successful investigation of moral and religious 
 subjects, is strikingly exemplified in the case of the 
 drunkard and sensualist. The vices of these persons 
 manifestly obscure their intellectual and moral vis- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 107 
 
 ion. Much that is plain to others, is totally conceal- 
 ed from them ; or else is apprehended with the great- 
 est, difficulty, and in a most imperfect manner. 
 
 To teach the ignorant drunkard and sensualist, 
 yet continuing in their vices, the pure morality of 
 the gospel, and give them a minute and accurate 
 knowledge of it, is impossible. We might as easily 
 teach the blind to see, and the deaf to hear. The 
 great degree of incapacity for the apprehension of 
 moral and religious truth, which characterizes the 
 obdurate drunkard and sensualist, is the natural re- 
 sult of continuance in these sins. Individual acts of 
 immorality, do not always produce an appreciable 
 effect of this kind ; but a continued repetition of such 
 acts is attended with a hardening and deadening ef- 
 fect on the mind, that is obvious to every observer. 
 In this disastrous effect, we recognize the result of 
 combined influence, the influence of many individual 
 acts of sin. Each of these acts, we have reason to 
 believe, contributed its share, often imperceptible, to 
 the aggregate of moral injury in which all result ; 
 an aggregate which no reasonable person can con- 
 template without horror. 
 
 Impiety, even in the absence of gross immoralities, 
 as well as in connexion with them, exerts a power- 
 ful influence in excluding the light of religious truth 
 from our minds. Selfishness, pride, envy, injustice, 
 and every other state of mind, in which we deviate 
 from the pure precepts of our holy religion, exert 
 a manifest and appalling influence of this kind. If 
 we indulge any of them, or of their kindred deprav- 
 ities, we do it at the expense of being thus hardened 
 
108 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 and blinded, in addition to incurring all their other 
 attendant and consequent evils. 
 
 The obstacles to the attainment of accurate doc- 
 trinal knowledge, presented by immorality and im- 
 piety, are utterly insuperable. No man can fully 
 overcome them, without ceasing to be either immor- 
 al or irreligious. 
 
 They render even honest inquiry often fruitless and 
 unavailing; and in respect to the multitude who are 
 not disposed to be even honest in their pursuit of 
 doctrinal knowledge, they are the cause of numer- 
 ous errors, the most absurd and pernicious. 
 
 The immorality and impiety of the ungodly, are 
 the greatest obstacles to be encountered in their re- 
 ligious instruction by others. While these principles 
 continue to maintain an ascendancy in the human 
 heart, they set argument and persuasion at defiance. 
 Not till they are expelled, will truth be able effectu- 
 ally to enter and take entire possession of the soul. 
 The expulsion of these will be followed by the ad- 
 mission of new and unexpected light on religious 
 subjects. Those therefore, who wish to be illumin- 
 ated with the light of religious doctrine, must re- 
 nounce those deeds of darkness and depravity which 
 impede such illumination. 
 
 4. Doctrinal passages of an obvious and certain 
 import. Some Scripture doctrines are revealed with 
 the utmost clearness and precision. They are ob- 
 vious to every enlightened and candid reader of the 
 Bible. All such ought to be received with the ut- 
 most confidence, and other passages relating to the 
 same subjects, that are ambiguous or obscure, ought 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 109 
 
 to be interpreted in conformity with these ; not in- 
 consistently with them. 
 
 This rule is founded on the obvious principles of 
 human language. We never express ourselves 
 clearly and strongly, without wishing to be under- 
 stood according to the proper and obvious meaning 
 of our words. Whenever we use expressions that 
 are ambiguous or obscure, in connexion with those 
 that are plain and obvious ; we expect the plain to 
 be interpreted, and believed, and made use of, if need 
 be, in the exposition of what is not plain ; never the 
 contrary. Besides, whenever a subject has once 
 been fully explained, it may be presumed to be un- 
 derstood. Acting on this presumption, we do not 
 use language in respect to such a subject, with so 
 much precision ; neither do we, in all cases, make 
 choice of expressions so easily understood, as would 
 otherwise be necessary. The obscure is to a cer- 
 tain extent made obvious by the plain, and as far as 
 this is the case, answers perfectly all the purposes of 
 language. 
 
 The application of this rule, in the doctrinal inter- 
 pretation of the Bible, is of the highest, importance. 
 The rule is indispensably necessary. The refusal to 
 make use of it, can be the result only of great igno- 
 rance, or else of great perverseness. Manifest vio- 
 lations of it, are not acts of legitimate interpretation, 
 but injurious perversions of Divine truth. 
 
 For example ; the doctrine of the necessity of 
 faith in Christ, exercised in this life, in order to the 
 attainment of salvation, is clearly stated, and the 
 statement of it in the most unequivocal terms, often 
 
110 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 repeated in the New Testament. " He that believ- 
 eth and is baptized, " we are told, " shall be saved ; 
 and he that believeth not, shall be damned.' 1 Other 
 passages of like, and like obvious import, are numer- 
 ous in the New Testament. This salvation by faith 
 is required to be published to every creature, and 
 all, every where, are commanded lo repent and em- 
 brace the gospel. 
 
 In other places we are told, that Christ tasted 
 death for every man, that God is the Savior of all 
 men, especially of those that believe, 1 Tim. iv. 10. &c. 
 These latter passages are manifestly ambiguous pr 
 indefinite. They assert the general fact, that Christ 
 died for all men. But in what sense he died for them 
 all, they do not specify. Considered irrespective of 
 other passages of Scripture relating to this subject, 
 it would be impossible to determine with certainty, 
 whether he died to save all men unconditionally and 
 absolutely, or to place them in circumstances in 
 which they can all obtain salvation by complying 
 with specific and reasonable conditions. 
 
 The Scripture doctrine of the necessity of faith to 
 the attainment of salvation, shows indubitably, that 
 the former is not intended in this case, but obviously 
 the latter. 
 
 5. Ecclesiastical history. History is one of the 
 most extensive and valuable fields of human know- 
 ledge. The historical portions of the Bible, reflect 
 much light on its doctrinal ones. The doctrinal his- 
 tory of the church, since the canon of Scripture was 
 completed, forms one of the most interesting depart- 
 ments of religious investigation and inquiry. It de- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION, 111 
 
 " ' "fl 
 
 f* 
 
 serves to be studied by every one who has the means 
 of prosecuting this study. These means are abun- 
 dant, and cheap enough to be placed, to some extent, 
 within the reach of all intelligent readers of the En- 
 glish language. Perfect ignorance in respect to this 
 subject, is probably not uncommon with intelligent 
 persons, but it is unnecessary. 
 
 In all the more important controversies respecting 
 doctrinal interpretation, a recurrence to ecclesiastic- 
 al history, is of use. It is not often necessary to es- 
 tablish any of the fundamental articles of the Chris- 
 tian faith. They may all be ascertained and estab- 
 lished by more direct means. But it is useful for 
 the confirmation even of these; and for the more 
 perfect elucidation of some doctrinal subjects of 
 much interest, that would be otherwise obscure. 
 
 Many subjects that are imperfectly explained in 
 the Bible, were doubtless more fully expounded in 
 the oral instructions of the apostles and of other in- 
 spired teachers. Some Scriptural modes of express- 
 ion that are obscure or ambiguous now, were for- 
 merly free from either obscurity or ambiguity. In 
 regard to all such subjects and modes of expression, 
 the evidence of ecclesiastical history, when clear and 
 explicit, is of great importance. 
 
 We know that the primitive Christian churches 
 were instructed in the true doctrines of the Christian 
 religion, and that they received those doctrines as 
 articles of a common faith. We cannot reasonably 
 suppose that any considerable portion of those 
 churches planted by the apostles, became essential- 
 ly corrupt, in respect to Christian doctrine, immedi- 
 
112 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 ately after the voice of inspiration had ceased. The 
 truth which had been taught with such demonstra- 
 tion of the Spirit, and with power, could not be lost 
 at once, by the great body of the Christian world. 
 Errors might be expected gradually to creep in, and 
 impair the symmetry, and deface the beauty of the 
 Christian system ; but the substantial elements and 
 leading outlines of Divine truth, would long retain 
 their hold, and maintain their high standing in the 
 favor of the people of God. 
 
 From a knowledge of the sentiments and usages 
 of the early Christian churches, we may derive 
 valuable assistance, in determining some of the sen- 
 timents and usages of the apostles, which are not 
 definitely and expressly asserted in the New Testa- 
 ment. 
 
 Facts however ascertained, are a safe rule of in- 
 terpretation, in respect to language which relates to 
 them. They are not to be denied, or softened down, 
 and explained away, for the purpose of making them 
 consistent with language ; but language is to be so 
 interpreted as to make it correspond to facts, and 
 consistent with them. When correctly used, it is 
 capable of such interpretation. Agreeably to this 
 principle, historical facts indicate unequivocally, the 
 right method of interpreting some parts of the Bible, 
 which might, in the neglect of these, be peculiarly 
 liable to be either unnoticed or misapprehended. 
 The historical facts relative to the observance of the 
 Christian Sabbath, in the ages immediately subse- 
 quent to that of the apostles, are of this description. 
 Independently of the Bible, we learn from authentic 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 113 
 
 history, that the first clay of the week was observed 
 by the primitive Christians, as a Sabbath, a day of 
 religious worship. 
 
 The churches planted in different countries and by 
 different apostles, concurred in this observance. It 
 is utterly improbable, that they would have done so, 
 had not the institution in question been one of the 
 primary institutions of the Christian church, and a 
 matter of express apostolic precept. From the fact, 
 therefore, of the general observance of the Christian 
 Sabbath, in the early ages of the church, we infer 
 with confidence, that it must have been enjoined by 
 the apostles. This fact being ascertained, contrib- 
 utes to illustrate some passages of Scripture, that 
 would otherwise be liable to misapprehension, or 
 the full meaning of which, would be liable to be 
 overlooked. The first day of the week is mention- 
 ed in the New Testament, as a day of religious wor- 
 ship ; Acts ii. 1. xx. 7; John xx. 19, 26; 1 Cor. 
 xvi. 1,2; Rev. i. 10. Benevolent contributions were 
 extensively enjoined by Paul, to be taken up, or set 
 apart on that day. It is called the Lord's day, in 
 distinction from all others. But in the interpretation 
 of Rev. i. 10, where the term Lord's day occurs, the 
 question immediately arises, in what sense can the 
 first day of the week, or any day, be peculiarly the 
 Lord's day ; for in a general sense, all days are his. 
 It can be the Lord's day in no other sense, as far as 
 we can see, than as a day of religious worship, a 
 sabbath. We might arrive safely and confidently at 
 a right conclusion, in respect to the Christian sab- 
 bath, without any aid from ecclesiastical history. But 
 11 
 
114 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 by this additional light, we are happily confirmed 
 and strengthened in our belief, that this is an institu- 
 tion of apostolic origin, and of Divine authority. 
 Multitudes whose study of the Scriptures has not 
 been sufficiently thorough to give them the full force 
 of the Scriptural argument, standing alone, are put 
 in full and easy possession of the truth, by means of 
 the historical light thrown on this subject from other 
 sources. 
 
 The propriety of resorting to ecclesiastical histo- 
 ry, for a discovery and confirmation of the doctrinal 
 system of the New Testament, is obvious to all en- 
 lightened minds. This course is generally pursued 
 in the interpretation of human productions, which 
 have come down to us from antiquity ; and it is ca- 
 pable of being pursued both in respect to them, and 
 in respect to the Bible, with the happiest results. 
 
 By resorting to ecclesiastical history for informa- 
 tion in respect to Christian doctrine, we do not as- 
 sume that the Bible is unnecessarily obscure, or de- 
 fective in the extent of its information. We claim 
 for it the greatest possible perfection in every re- 
 spect. But perfect and complete as its disclosures 
 are, they are subject to the laws of language ; and 
 are liable through ignorance, inattention, and preju- 
 dice, to be misunderstood and perverted. It does 
 undoubtedly sometimes happen, that the light of his- 
 tory if clearly perceived, is calculated to save us 
 fom doctrinal errors, when we should otherwise fall 
 into them. If this source of information on doctrin- 
 al subjects was more thoroughly and generally inves- 
 tigated, its salutary contributions in the promotion 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 115 
 
 of the cause of truth, would doubtless be greatly in- 
 creased. 
 
 To assume, as some have inconsiderately done, 
 that a knowledge of ecclesiastical history can be of 
 use in facilitating the successful study of Biblical doc- 
 trine, is to contradict reason and experience. All 
 the sources of information, on religious subjects, are 
 useful. By the diligent improvement of all, the 
 greatest amount of knowledge may be attained. 
 Our methods of study are often defective. We may 
 approach the truth by one means of information, 
 without success, when by taking advantage of an- 
 other, we should be sure of being rewarded for our 
 pains, with substantial additions to our knowledge. 
 
 Articles of faith may be capable of being fully es- 
 tablished by Scriptural evidence alone, and yet not 
 be so established to our minds. Cases of this kind 
 are numerous and important ; and where they re- 
 late to subjects on which the light of ecclesiastical 
 history is shed, they ought to be studied in that 
 light. 
 
 AH truth is consistent with itself. No fact, or se- 
 ries of facts in history, when rightly and fully under- 
 stood, can be incompatible with any doctrinal truth. 
 Even where history can afford us no assistance in 
 decyphering the doctrines Scripture, it can, if prop 
 erly used, do us no injury. As far as it speaks at 
 all, its voice is in harmony with that of the Spirit. 
 
 In bringing ecclesiastical history to our aid, in 
 Biblical Interpretation, we ought to satisfy ourselves 
 on valid grounds, that the facts which we assume as 
 historical, are real. The facts which we make use 
 
116 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 of as aids in doctrinal interpretation, ought to be 
 well authenticated and supported. Any others will 
 certainly be delusive. 
 
 Tradition is too uncertain to be worthy of the 
 least confidence as a rule of judgment, in relation to 
 this matter. It has never proved a safe depository 
 for truth, or a safe channel for its continued trans- 
 mission during any long period of time. 
 
 The degree of influence which particular historic- 
 al facts ought to have, in determining our doctrinal 
 opinions, depends entirely on the relation of those 
 facts to the opinions in question ; and upon the rela- 
 tion of those opinions to known Scriptural evidence 
 on the same subjects. 
 
 The more direct and immediate the relation of a 
 particular fact is, to a doctrinal opinion, the greater 
 influence it ought to exert in favor of that opinion. 
 The more direct and immediate the relation of a doc- 
 trinal opinion is, to known Scriptural evidence, 
 the less amount of external evidence, of any kind, 
 will be requisite, to establish it. In proportion as 
 there is more evidence from either one of these 
 sources, less will be requisite from the other, to es- 
 tablish a point in question. 
 
 6. Systematic theology. The statement of the dif- 
 ferent religious doctrines of the Bible, in their natur- 
 al order and connexions, constitutes a system of re- 
 ligious doctrine, or of Biblical theology. The study 
 of these doctrines in their mutual relations to each 
 other, is essential to the attainment of any profound 
 and extensive knowledge of them. The careful study 
 of well written systems of Divinity, contributes es- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 117 
 
 sentially to promote the correct doctrinal interpre- 
 tation of the Bible. The systematic statement of 
 religious doctrines, facilitates our perfect apprehen- 
 sion of them, as exhibited in the Scriptures. 
 
 Few have ever become eminent for their attain- 
 ments in this department of religious knowledge, 
 who have not availed themselves of the works of 
 writers on systematic theology. These works ought 
 not to be studied as depositories of certain truth, or 
 ultimate sources of information on religious doctrine, 
 but solely as helps to a more perfect understanding 
 of the doctrinal passages of the Bible. 
 
 Sec. 2. General principles relating to the 
 material types and symbols of the bible. 
 
 1. Ordinary discourse consists of words which are 
 used directly as the signs of things. In allegorical 
 discourses, words are used to represent supposed ob- 
 jects and events, which are themselves the signs of 
 analogous ones. There is yet another kind of dis- 
 course, and another modification of language, in 
 which words are used as the signs of real or suppo- 
 sed objects and events, which objects and events are 
 themselves the signs of similar or analogous ones. 
 These symbolical objects and events are frequently 
 to be met with in the Bible. The right interpreta- 
 tion of them, is often a matter of no small difficulty, 
 and of no inconsiderable importance. 
 
 All language is symbolical ; but the words type 
 
 and symbol are generally used in a particular and 
 
 restricted sense, to denote objects and transactions, 
 
 which are themselves the designed representations 
 
 11* 
 
118 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 of other and different objects, and of higher and dif- 
 ferent transactions. 
 
 In this sense the sacrifices of the former dispen- 
 sation were types of Christ; and circumcision a 
 symbol of regeneration. ]n the same sense, bap- 
 tism and the Lord's supper are symbolical institu- 
 tions. The lamb, or other animal offered in sacri- 
 fice, represented Christ suffering for sin. The bread 
 and wine of the Lord's supper, represent the body 
 and blood of Christ, taxed with suffering on our 
 account, and becoming efficacious in the procure- 
 ment of pardon and eternal life. 
 
 All Scriptural types and symbols have some mean- 
 ing, either as material representations of co-existing 
 objects, or else of past or future objects or events. 
 Used to denote such representations, these words 
 are nearly synonymous, and are applied indiscrimin- 
 ately to many of the same things. The word type, 
 however, is most generally applied to denote a ma- 
 terial representation of something to come, and sym- 
 bol of something past. According to this usage, 
 sacrifices are denominated types, and the bread and 
 wine of the Lord's supper, symbols. The lamb of- 
 fered in sacrifice, was a type of Christ, and the bread 
 and wine of the Lord's supper, are symbolical repre- 
 sentations of him. 
 
 2. The Scriptural types and symbols are either sim- 
 ple or complex. A material representation of any 
 single object, is a simple type or symbol. Where 
 more than a single object is represented, the type or 
 symbol of such representation is complex. The el- 
 ements of all the Scrpture types and symbols, are 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 119 
 
 simple. In their combinations they are usually ex- 
 hibited as complex, and require a careful analysis in 
 order to their right explanation. 
 
 These modes of communication may further be 
 considered as historical, prophetical, or moral. Each 
 simple element is of one or the other of these char- 
 acters. In their complex state, two or more of these 
 characteristics are generally united. The same 
 complex type is partly historical and partly of a mor- 
 al nature; or partly prophetical and moral, &c. or 
 else, as is sometimes the fact, it may combine the his- 
 torical, prophetical, and moral, in one complex, em- 
 blematical representation. For example ; contem- 
 plate an analysis of the Sabbath. 
 
 (1) The Sabbath, considered in respect to its week- 
 ly recurrence, and holy rest, is a symbol of a past 
 event, the completion of the work of creation ; 
 
 (2.) Considered in respect to its observance on the 
 first day of the week, it is commemorative of another 
 past event, the resurrection of Christ ; 
 
 (3.) Considered in respect to its holy and religious 
 services and pleasures, it is a type of a future sab- 
 batism, the employments and pleasures of heaven. 
 
 . Circumcision. (1.) Circumcision, considered as 
 the appointed seal of God's covenant with his peo- 
 ple, was a token, a remembrancer, of that covenant ; 
 a means of keeping it in mind, and of preserving a 
 knowledge of it. 
 
 (2.) In another respect it was the emblem of mor- 
 al purification, and represented the work of the Ho- 
 ly Spirit, in regeneration and sanctification. 
 
 (3.) As an act of subjection and a sign of allegi- 
 
120 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 ance to God, and of professed submission to his au- 
 thority, it was expressive of an obligation to keep 
 the whole law. See Gal. v. 3. 
 
 Many of the institutions of religion, under the for- 
 mer dispensation, were of a symbolical character. 
 This was the case with the Sabbath, sacrifices, and 
 circumcision. The Sabbath, the Lord's supper, and 
 baptism, are symbolical now. 
 
 The symbolical objects which occur in the Scrip- 
 tures, aside from the institutions of religion, are nu- 
 merous ; of which the following may serve as speci- 
 mens : The mystical river of Ezekiel, xlvii. ; the 
 great image decribed in Dan. ii. ; the stone cut out 
 of the mountain without hands, which grew, and be- 
 came itself a mountain, Dan. ii. ; the tree described 
 in Dan. iv. ; the four beasts described in Dan. vii. 
 
 Many other prophetic symbols might be added to 
 this list ; but these are probably sufficient to answer 
 the purpose of illustration. 
 
 3. The Scriptural types and symbols are found- 
 ed on the same principle as metaphors and allegories, 
 that of resemblance or analogy ; but they do not at- 
 tain their end by the same means. Metaphors and 
 allegories are figures of words and paragraphs ; 
 symbols and types are figures of things, which words 
 literally designate. The symbolical language of the 
 Scriptures, corresponds to the hieroglyphics or sym- 
 bolical and emblematical language of the ancients; 
 in which a representation of one object, was used 
 extensively to denote a similar or analogous one, of 
 a higher order. Thus, an eye was the hieroglyphic- 
 al symbol of knowledge ; a circle, of eternity ; a vi- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 121 
 
 per, of ingratitude ; an ant of wisdom ; the sun, of 
 God. 
 
 There must be some resemblance or analogy be- 
 tween objects, or in order to lay a foundation for the 
 symbolical use of them. This analogy does not, 
 however, constitute them symbols. They are made 
 symbols, as different combinations of letters are 
 made words, and as words are made metaphors ; by 
 receiving an express designation to that office, and 
 by being actually used in a symbolical sense. 
 
 4. In the Bible all those objects ought to be con- 
 sidered symbols, which God has made use of, as such, 
 and no others. In the investigation of the Scripture 
 symbols, therefore, we are not at liberty to multiply 
 these modes of instruction, according to any fancied 
 or real adaptation of one object to represent another, 
 but simply according to Divine appointment, and 
 known Scripture usage. 
 
 We ought not to consider the metaphorical lan- 
 guage of the Bible as indicating that the objects from 
 which it is taken, possess a symbolical character. 
 Some of the Scriptural metaphors are taken from 
 symbolical objects and transactions ; but in regard 
 to the great majority of them, this is not the fact. 
 The objects from which most of the metaphorical 
 language of the Scriptures is derived, have no fixed 
 Scriptural meaning, as Divinely appointed symbols ; 
 and cannot, with propriety, have such meanings as- 
 signed them by the inlerpreter. 
 
 In the relation and use of tropical expressions, the 
 inspired writers seem to have taken the same liber- 
 ties, and acted on the same principles as other men. 
 
122 PARTICULAR LAWS OP 
 
 They describe the futue by figurative representations 
 drawn from the present and past, as they were to 
 some extent compelled to do, if they described it at 
 all. Invisible realities, they often set forth by meta- 
 phors, drawn from visible objects. But in either case, 
 their language does not imply the existence of any 
 other relation between the objects compared, than 
 that of general analogy or resemblance ; a relation 
 which is at the foundation of all metaphorical or al- 
 legorical representations whatever. 
 
 A disposition to magnify every Scriptural object 
 into a type or symbol ; like that to exalt every word 
 into a metaphor, has no adequate foundation, either 
 in Scripture or reason. Under pretext of making 
 the Scriptures more significant and instructive, it of- 
 ten diverts us from their plain and obvious meaning 
 into an idle search after some higher symbolical 
 sense, which they were never designed to convey. 
 
 The field of Scriptural symbolical imagery is ex- 
 tensive ; but still it has its limits. Those limits are 
 capable of being determined with considerable accu- 
 racy. Every Biblical interpreter ought, as far as he 
 can, to determine and observe them. 
 
 5. The symbolical use of objects, is as much an ar- 
 bitrary procedure, to be decided on according to evi- 
 dence, as that of words. In the absence of evidence 
 that a word is used in a particular way, we have no 
 reason to conclude that it is so used. The same is 
 true in respect to objects and transactions. This ev- 
 idence may be somewhat diverse in kind, but it must 
 be evidence. Nothing less will answer the condi- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 123 
 
 tions of the case. To interpret objects as symbols, 
 on mere conjecture, is utterly erroneous. 
 
 Nothing short of testimony to the fact, or decisive 
 circumstantial evidence of it, can be a valid ground 
 for considering any Scriptural object or transaction, 
 symbolical. The propriety of this rule arises from 
 the very nature of the case. A material symbol im- 
 plies the arbitrary designation of one object to repre- 
 sent another. The connexion between a type and 
 antitype, is therefore arbitrary, and must be explain- 
 ed in order to be understood. It cannot be deter- 
 mined except by an explanation of some kind. This 
 may be direct or indirect, but it must comprise an 
 unequivocal indication of the fact in question, before 
 that fact can be admitted. 
 
 To proceed a step in the recognition of types and 
 symbols, without being guided by evidence, is to be- 
 come the inventors of symbolical and typical signifi- 
 cations, rather than the interpreters of them, as in- 
 vented and used by others. 
 
 The Scriptural symbols are a part of the Divine 
 communications, and as such, must have been de- 
 signed to express a particular sense. But how can 
 we determine the sense of a symbolical communica- 
 tion, any further than we have decisive evidence 
 that the objects composing it are symbolical? All 
 the Scriptural symbols are accompanied with mani- 
 fest and unequivocal indications of their symbolical 
 character, or not. If they are, these indications can 
 be ascertained and appreciated. If not, God has so 
 far departed from the established and otherwise uni- 
 versal principles of language, in this part of his word, 
 
124 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 as to render some portions of it incapable of being" 
 certainly and fully understood, without further reve- 
 lation, definitive of its hidden sense ; a supposition 
 unsustained by any substantial evidence, and incon- 
 sistent with the doctrine of the perfection of the Ho- 
 ly Scriptures, as a rule of faith and practice. 
 
 Sec. 3. Rules for determining the signifi- 
 cation OF MATERIAL TYPES AND SYMBOLS. 
 
 A knowledge of the nature of material types and 
 symbols is necessary as a prerequisite to understand- 
 ing them. The interpretation of this part of the Di- 
 vine communications, is attended with some difficul- 
 ty, and requires particular attention, and persevering 
 study ; but it may, to a considerable extent, be ac- 
 complished by every sensible person. No man uses 
 any symbol of thought, as a medium for the commu- 
 nication of what he deems important truth, without 
 either supposing that it is already understood, or ca- 
 pable of being determined, or else explaining it. 
 
 In the use of any medium of communication, we 
 are justly required to explain what is not indicated 
 with sufficient clearness, in some other way. On 
 this principle, the presumption is irresistible, that ev- 
 ery portion of the Divine communications is intelli- 
 gible by some means ; that indications of the sense 
 of all the symbols of the Bible, both material and 
 verbal, may be found somewhere, and to a great ex- 
 tent, in the Bible itself. 
 
 All the symbols of the Bible are not equally defin- 
 ite and precise in their signification, but they all ex- 
 press an appropriate sense, which is capable of being 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 125 
 
 determined by a reference to the legitimate sources 
 of information. 
 
 1. The nature of the symbolical object. Objects 
 are used as the symbols of other objects in conse- 
 quence of some resemblance or analogy which they 
 bear to one another. A knowledge of these similar 
 or analogous properties in the symbolical object, is 
 as necessary to an understanding of the thing signi- 
 fied, as that of the corresponding properties in a 
 metaphor, is to an understanding of its metaphorical 
 sense. The first thing to be done therefore, in the 
 interpretation of material symbols, is to ascertain and 
 consider the nature of the symbolical object or trans- 
 action. In ignorance of this, a true apprehension of 
 the things signified, is impossible. 
 
 For example ; in determining the proper signifi- 
 cancy of the sacrifices, we ought to ascertain what 
 the sacrificial victims and services were. An under- 
 standing of these is attainable by a resort to the ap- 
 propriate sources of information respecting them. 
 The sacrificial victims and services, properly under- 
 stood, are the indications of that high symbolical 
 sense, with which they are invested by God. 
 
 The same is true of all the material symbols. They 
 may consist of objects that are animate or inanim- 
 ate, simple or complex. Whatever those objects are, 
 they ought to be carefully considered, and their true 
 nature accurately determined. A neglect to do this, 
 has been the occasion of serious and palpable errors 
 in symbolical interpretation. A due knowledge and 
 consideration of symbolical imagery, is particularly 
 12 
 
126 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 important in the interpretation of those symbols 
 which belong to prophetic vision. 
 
 2. Each essential element of complex and heteroge- 
 neous symbols. When symbols are of a complex 
 and heterogeneous character, each of the complex 
 and heterogeneous elements ought to be taken into 
 the account, in determining their signification. The 
 lion with eagle's wings ; the leopard with four wings 
 of a fowl, and four heads ; Dan. vii. 4, 6. The drag- 
 on with seven heads and ten horns ; Rev, xii. 3, and 
 the nameless beast, with the same complement both 
 of heads and horns ; Rev. xiii. 1, 2, are instances of 
 heterogeneous symbolical imagery. The omission 
 of any single element of a heterogeneous symbol, 
 may essentially vitiate our estimate of its meaning, 
 and all our reasonings respecting it. 
 
 3. The leading features of a symbol. No one ob- 
 ject can be made a true representative of another, 
 in all respects. The resemblance or analogy of one 
 object or transaction to another, is in all cases par- 
 tial, extending only to such properties and relations 
 as they possess in common. 
 
 In order that one object may serve as a fit type or 
 symbol of another, it must possess some prominent 
 and obvious points of resemblance or analogy to it. 
 If the points of resemblance are not in any degree 
 prominent and obvious, the symbol will be propor- 
 tionably inexpressive and obscure. In proportion 
 as they are prominent and obvious, will the symbol 
 be both expressive and intelligible. In the study of 
 symbols therefore, it is necessary to investigate ac- 
 curately, the points of resemblance between the sym- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 127 
 
 bolical object or transaction, and the thing signified 
 by it. These will generally be the leading and 
 prominent features and characteristics of the sym- 
 bolical object. 
 
 4. Accompanying explanations. A knowledge and 
 consideration of a symbolical object ; and an inves- 
 tigation of its leading features, do not necessarily 
 suggest its true and full import. For example ; we 
 may be sufficiently acquainted with the character 
 and habits of the horse, or lion, or leopard, or drag- 
 on, and not understand at all, what these animals are 
 used to represent in prophetic vision. In order to 
 make these modes of communication significant, 
 there is often some accompanying indication of their 
 true import. In some cases the accompanying ex- 
 planations are as full and complete as words can ex- 
 press. In some cases they are less explicit, with- 
 out being essentially less satisfactory or necessary. 
 
 Wherever accompanying explanations occur, they 
 ought to receive the most minute and careful atten- 
 tion. Their aid is of indispensable necessity to the 
 right interpretation of symbols. The symbolical in- 
 stitutions of the Bible are accompanied with import- 
 ant explanations of this kind. The same is true in 
 respect to most of the prophetic symbols, especially 
 those which belong to the books of Daniel, Zechari- 
 ah, and that of Revelation. 
 
 5. Collateral information. When there is no ac- 
 companying explanation of a Scriptural type or sym- 
 bol, or one that is indefinite and indecisive, our next 
 resort is to collateral information contained in other 
 oarts of the Bible. This may be either direct or in- 
 
128 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 direct. It is direct when it consists of a formal ex- 
 planation of the symbol. Of this character is the 
 explanation of circumcision, contained in Rom. iv. 
 11, where that rite is declared to have been a sign 
 and seal of the righteousness of faith ; or in other 
 words, of justification by faith ; also in Rom. ii. !28, 
 29, where the same is declared not to be merely out- 
 ward in the flesh, but inward, denoting a work of 
 grace on the heart and spirit, the praise of which is 
 not of men but of God. 
 
 Of the same direct specific character, are the ex- 
 planations of the ancient sacrifices, contained in Heb. 
 x. where they are represented as having been a 
 shadow of good things then future, and as adumbra- 
 ting the greater and more excellent sacrifice of Christ, 
 by which he hath perfected for ever, all them that 
 believe. 
 
 The collateral information of the Scriptures, on 
 this subject, is indirect when it does not comprehend 
 a formal explanation of the symbol, but the state- 
 ment of a fact or principle, from which such inform- 
 ation may be inferred. Such statements sometimes 
 occur in the context to which the symbols they illus- 
 trate belong, and sometimes in remote portions of 
 the sacred volume. Of this character is the decla- 
 ration of God, addressed to the serpent, Gen. iii. 15. 
 "I will put enmity between thee and the woman, 
 and between thy seed and her seed. It shall bruise 
 thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. 1 ' This pas- 
 sage evidently refers to the Savior of the human race, 
 who was to be a descendant of the woman, and by 
 whom Satan was to be vanquished, and his captives 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 129 
 
 delivered. The bruising of his heel, indicates the 
 temporary sufferings he should endure in achieving 
 the conquest referred to, and in procuring the re- 
 demption of sinners. This anticipated conquest, as 
 far as appears from the Bible, was the only ground 
 of hope to ancient believers. It raised their expec- 
 tation of the destruction of their destroyer, and of 
 their happy deliverance from the dominion of Satan, 
 and the curse brought upon them by sin. Thus in- 
 terpreted, the passage in question contains a distinct 
 intimation of the advent and work of the Redeemer, 
 as our atoning priest. If the sacrifices had not been 
 otherwise explained, this would probably have been 
 sufficient to indicate their true symbolical import. 
 
 Those who read and pondered this mysterious an- 
 nunciation, must have regarded the sacrifices which 
 were offered for sin, as emblematic representations, 
 and types of that mighty Deliverer, by whom the 
 head of the serpent was to be crushed at the expense 
 of his own temporary and personal sufferings. Since 
 it was impossible that their offerings should have 
 been supposed by the pious, to possess any direct 
 efficacy in procuring the remission of sins, they must 
 have been understood from the beginning, to be typ- 
 ical of the expiatory sufferings and death of the Re- 
 deemer. In this sense they were subsequently ex- 
 plained by the apostle Paul, not as mysteries which 
 till then had been unrevealed, but as great religious 
 truths, which had, to some extent, shed their light 
 on every successive generation of believers. We 
 indeed have other evidence of the symbolical char- 
 acter and signification of sacrifices, but that of the 
 12* 
 
130 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 passage adverted to, was sufficient to indicate strong- 
 ly the facts in respect to this subject. 
 
 6. The nature of the subject. As in respect to 
 words, so in respect to material symbols, the nature 
 of the subject when otherwise declared, contributes 
 essentially to indicate the sense intended to be con- 
 veyed. Material symbols, as well as literal ones, 
 ought to be interpreted according to the known na- 
 ture of the subject to which they refer. This rule 
 applies equally to symbolical religious rites, and to 
 all other symbolical representations, which belong 
 to the Bible, The known nature of the subject is, 
 in many cases, a principal means of indicating the 
 sense of symbolical communications. In this re- 
 spect, it performs the same office in symbolical lan- 
 guage that it does in all other modes of speech, 
 whether literal or figurative. 
 
 7. Synonymous symbols. The same object is some- 
 times represented by different symbols. This is true 
 in some instances, of states and empires. Some of 
 the different symbols of the book of Daniel and of 
 Revelation, are synonymous. For example ; the 
 image, Dan. ii. 31 — 45, is to a great extent synony- 
 mous with that of the four beasts, Dan. vii. 1 — 14. 
 Baptism is, to a great extent, synonymous with cir- 
 cumcision. Symbols are often in part synonymous, 
 when they are not entirely so. The extent to which 
 this is the case, ought to be carefully determined. 
 How far different symbolical representations are sy- 
 nonymous, is a preliminary inquiry of great import- 
 ance, in reference to many important parts of the 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 131 
 
 Bible. As far as different symbols are ascertained 
 to be synonymous, they illustrate each other. 
 
 8. Similar or analogous symbolical imagery. Ma- 
 ny of the material symbols of the Bible have a man- 
 ifest resemblance and analogy to each other, as well 
 as to the objects they respectively represent. This 
 is the fact in respect to animals which occur in pro- 
 phetic visions. The full signification of some of these 
 symbolical animals, and other objects, is clearly re- 
 vealed. In the interpretation of others, which are 
 not so fully explained, much assistance may be often 
 derived from comparing them with similar or analo- 
 gous ones that are. Animal may be compared with 
 animal, and circumstance with circumstance, to ad- 
 vantage. Much caution however, is requisite in 
 comparisons of this kind ; and no reliance ought to 
 be placed on such resemblances and analogies, as 
 are remote or doubtful. Very little weight is due 
 to arguments derived from this source, when unsus- 
 tained by other kinds of evidence. Supported by 
 other evidence, analogies of this kind may contrib- 
 ute to establish many important conclusions. 
 
 9. Symbols considered in respect to chronology. 
 Material symbols represent things in many of their 
 most important relations and changes. But they do 
 not designate the element of time, with any degree 
 of perspicuity and precision. They often represent 
 objects and events without any relation to the peri- 
 od to which they belong, or through which they ex- 
 tend. In respect to symbolical representations, 
 therefore, the element of time ought always to be 
 supplied, when wanting, from other sources of in- 
 
132 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 formation. Chronological questions, in respect to 
 the objects and events adumbrated by many of the 
 prophetical symbols, are among the most complica- 
 ted and difficult, that arise in the interpretation of 
 the Scriptures. In determining these, we ought al- 
 ways to consider the nature of the symbol, of the 
 subject symbolically represented, and the chronolo- 
 gical notices that may occur respecting that subject, 
 either in the context, or in other parts of the Scrip- 
 tures. 
 
 For example ; in Dan. vii. 4. the Babylonian em- 
 pire under Nebuchadnezzar, is represented by a lion 
 having eagle's wings. The transformations which 
 this symbolical animal underwent, in being made to 
 stand up like a man, and in receiving a human spirit, 
 instead of that appropriately belonging to the lion, 
 denote subsequent changes in that empire, without 
 marking in the least, the precise period of their oc- 
 currence. 
 
 The fact that this animal came out of the sea, pre- 
 vious to either of the three others, mentioned as 
 forming a part of the same prophetic vision, indicates 
 the priority of the Babylonian empire, in point of 
 time, to either of those symbolically represented by 
 the other animals. But neither the precise time of 
 the commencement of this empire, or of its continu- 
 ance, is noted by the symbol. Whether that empire 
 had yet arisen, or if arisen, how long it had continu- 
 ed at the time of the vision, are matters to be deter- 
 mined by recurring to other sources of information. 
 
 Jn Rev. xii. 1 — 4, we have an account of the ap- 
 pearance of a symbolical woman, clothed with the 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 133 
 
 sun, having the moon under her feet, and on her 
 head a crown of twelve stars, an expressive and 
 manifest emblem of the church of God. As a part 
 of the same mystical imagery, we meet with a great 
 red dragon, having seven crowned heads and ten 
 horns, and with his tail casting down from their or- 
 bits a third part of the stars of heaven ; an equally 
 expressive and obvious emblem of an anti-Christian, 
 hostile power, organized and arrayed against the 
 church. The contemporary appearance of these 
 symbolical objects, indicates the co-existence of the 
 church and of the opposing power, represented by 
 the dragon ; but does not give the least intimation 
 of the period when this co-existence commenced, or 
 during which it was to continue. All information 
 respecting these objects, which involves the element 
 of time, must be obtained from considering the na- 
 ture of the objects thus represented, and from the 
 other sources of knowledge respecting them. 
 
 Some chronological information is necessary to 
 explain the nature of the events shadowed forth in 
 this vision, and seems to be presumed to be attaina- 
 ble, to as great an extent as may be necessary for 
 this purpose. 
 
 The careful study of the chronology of events, 
 which are symbolically shadowed forth, is of great 
 importance to a right understanding of symbolical 
 imagery. Errors in respect to chronology, lead to 
 many other errors in reference to this class of sub- 
 jects. 
 
 The precise determination of the chronology of 
 some events, symbolically announced in prophecy, 
 
134 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 is exceedingly difficult, and perhaps impossible. The 
 same is true in regard to the determination of the 
 precise nature of many events thus indicated. These 
 portions of the inspired records ought to be studied 
 with deep humility and continued attention. A has- 
 ty or superficial investigation of them, is sure to be- 
 wilder and mislead. 
 
 The binding and confinement of Satan for a thou- 
 sand years, Rev. xx. 1 — 6, and other contemporane- 
 ous events, are of such absorbing interest however 
 interpreted, as to awaken a spirit of earnest and 
 prayerful inquiry into their precise import and chro- 
 nology, in every successive age of the church. The 
 church universally has manifested a degree of soli- 
 citude to know what is meant by these symbols, and 
 when these predictions will be accomplished. Few 
 questions are agitated with deeper interest, at the 
 present time, than those which relate lo the precise 
 nature and period of the millennium, here shadowed 
 forth. 
 
 These questions however, cannot be satisfactorily 
 and correctly answered, without determining the 
 position of this prophecy in respect to the series of 
 prophetic announcements ; ascertaining and compar- 
 ing synonymous prophecies, if there are any which 
 are manifestly so ; and also those which are in any 
 way nearly or remotely related to these, so as to be 
 definitive of their import, or indicative of their chro- 
 nological relations. 
 
 A mistake in respect to the position of this pro- 
 phecy, in the chronological series of prophetic an- 
 nouncements, or in respect to the determination of 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 135 
 
 synonymous or otherwise related predictions, may 
 lead to utterly erroneous conclusions respecting the 
 whole subject. 
 
 10. Conclusion. By an application of the princi- 
 ples and rules stated, and to some extent, illustrated 
 in the foregoing pages, much of the symbolical and 
 typical imagery of the Bible may be satisfactorily un- 
 derstood and explained. Without some knowledge of. 
 them, this part of Divine revelation, is mostly a seal- 
 ed book. It presents a confused mass of images, 
 and shadowy representations, but the pearl of sub- 
 stantial and satisfactory knowledge, is effectually 
 concealed ; and the substance by which these shad- 
 ows are cast, entirely hid. 
 
 The moment we apply the legitimate rules of In- 
 terpretation, the chaotic mass of symbolical imagery 
 begins to be reduced to order, and we are enabled to 
 trace in it, the manifest indications of Divine intelli- 
 gence and wisdom. Nothing can present a more 
 uninviting aspect than the symbolical imagery of the 
 Bible, to one that is entirely unacquainted with the 
 principles and rules, by an application of which, its 
 mysteries are in a measure, at least, unfolded. It is 
 like Greek or Hebrew, to one acquainted merely 
 with the characters in which those languages are 
 written, but ignorant both of the meaning of the 
 words, and of their principles of construction. On 
 this ground even honest Christians are sometimes 
 confounded, and almost ready to stumble into unbe- 
 lief and infidelity. But let a few rays of the sun 
 light of knowledge be poured in upon the scene, and 
 it becomes bright with unnumbered hues of heavenly 
 
136 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 lustre, and celestial radiance. We are at once in- 
 ducted into one of the most beautiful and splendid 
 apartments of the temple of Scriptural knowledge ; 
 and discover in the very symbols which were before 
 an occasion of difficulty, and rock of offence, the 
 most delightful and convincing proofs of the divinity 
 of our holy religion. 
 
 Sec 4. General principles relating to the 
 prophecies. 
 
 1. A prophecy is a prediction or declaration of 
 something to come. A considerable part of the Bi- 
 ble is of a prophetic character. Predictions of fu- 
 ture events occur in the books of Moses, in the suc- 
 ceeding historical books, in the books of the proph- 
 ets, properly so called, in the gospels and epistles of 
 the New Testament ; and are brought to a splendid 
 and glorious conclusion in the book of Revelation. 
 They consist either of verbal communications, re- 
 ceived directly from God, or from some divinely au- 
 thorized messenger ; or else of supernatural views, 
 excited in the mind or the prophet by the silent ope- 
 ration of the Holy Spirit ; or else of visions and 
 dreams, produced by the same Divine influence. 
 
 2. Prophecy corresponds to history. It is like 
 that, a description of events. It differs from history 
 in being written before the events referred to, have 
 taken place, and before they are capable of being as- 
 certained by the ordinary sources of information. It 
 is generally less definite and particular than histor- 
 ical narratives ; but like history, it is expected in all 
 cases to give a faithful and true delineation of the 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 137 
 
 events referred to, and one that shall distinguish 
 them from all others. 
 
 In many cases the language of prophecy is as ex- 
 plicit and distinguishing as any part of the Scriptures, 
 or as language can be. Many of the prophecies are 
 of obvious import, and require but an ordinary de- 
 gree of attention to be correctly and fully understood. 
 Many that would otherwise be difficult and perhaps 
 unintelligible to us, are explained, either in the con- 
 text to which they belong, or in other parts of the 
 Bible. Many however, are left obscure, and require 
 to be diligently and perseveringly studied, in order 
 to be understood. 
 
 3. The peculiar obscurity of the prophecies, arises 
 in most cases from the following circumstances. 
 
 (1.) The entire want of chronological notices, or 
 else the use of but hw, and those mostly of an inde- 
 finite character. 
 
 (2.) The free and extensive use of tropical or fig- 
 urative language, with less means of distinguishing 
 what is figurative, and less facilities for determining 
 the precise signification of figurative expressions, 
 than are enjoyed in other departments of Interpre- 
 tation. 
 
 (3.) The use of a great variety of material types 
 and symbols, many of which are not accompanied 
 with any explicit declaration of their proper and true 
 meaning. 
 
 Frequent and explicit chronological notices, con- 
 tribute much to the perspicuity of history. The in- 
 frequency and indefiniteness of these, in many of 
 
 the prophecies, occasion the same obscurity in this 
 13 
 
138 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 part of the Divine communications, which they 
 would occasion in history if admitted there. 
 
 The difficulty of distinguishing many of the pro- 
 phetic tropes or figures of speech, from literal ex- 
 pressions, arises in part from our not being able to 
 compare and identify the description with the event, 
 as we uniformly do in historical narratives. Words 
 and phrases used in respect to a known event, are 
 rendered definite by the event, when they would 
 otherwise be of an opposite character. This cause 
 of obscurity operates in respect to all those prophe- 
 cies which are not known to be accomplished, and 
 which are not illustrated by the actual occurrences 
 they decribe. It ceases as soon as prophecies are 
 known to be accomplished. 
 
 This cause of obscurity arises from the very na- 
 ture of prophecy, as a description or intimation of 
 future events. It is impossible for words to convey 
 as definite conceptions in respect to many events 
 while future, as they may do in respect to the same, 
 when past. If there were no other causes of obscu- 
 rity, this of itself would be sufficient to render the 
 interpretation of many prophecies which are yet un- 
 fulfilled, a matter of peculiar difficulty. 
 
 God however, has undoubtedly important reasons, 
 aside from the principles or imperfections of lan- 
 guage, for shedding some degree of obscurity over 
 this part of his word. 
 
 Were these developments made in every case so 
 clear that they could not be easily misunderstood, 
 they would probably often prove a serious obsta- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 139 
 
 de to their own fulfilment, and to the accomplish- 
 ment of the Divine purposes* 
 
 The extensive use of tropical or symbolical lan- 
 guage, even at the expense of perspicuity and pre- 
 cision, is on this principle fully authorized and in- 
 deed loudly demanded. 
 
 Tropical and symbolical representations shadow 
 forth the events of futurity with sufficient precision 
 to answer the purposes for which prophecy is given ; 
 but not to impede their own fulfilment. We have 
 therefore, in the very structure of the prophetic 
 Scriptures, as well as in their supernatural announce- 
 ments of truth, the indications of that Divine wis- 
 dom, under the guidance of which, every part of the 
 Bible was written. 
 
 The figurative character of the prophecies, and 
 the general terms in which many of them are ex- 
 pressed, render a careful discrimination of figurative 
 from literal expressions, highly important, and in 
 some cases difficult. 
 
 The general principles of language, however, ap- 
 ply equally to the determination of all questions 
 relative to the tropical use of words in the prophe- 
 cies, and in every other part of the Scriptures. 
 These principles, if duly regarded, will in most cases 
 lead to correct and certain conclusions. They sel- 
 dom lead to error, if truly followed. If we fall into 
 errors on this subject, it will be in spite of them, not 
 in conformity with their direction. 
 
 Cherishing due respect for these principles, we 
 shall never depart from the literal interpretation of 
 words, without evident reason and necessity, in the 
 
140 PARTICULAR LAWS Ot 
 
 prophecies, any more than in other portions of the 
 Bible. But when manifest indications of a figura- 
 tive or tropical sense exist, we should interpret the 
 words to which they relate accordingly. 
 
 These indications are literal incongruity or incor- 
 rectness; definitive clauses and circumstances re- 
 quiring a figurative interpretation of the words to 
 which they relate ; a literal disagreement of parallel 
 predictions ; a manifest allusion to earlier occurren- 
 ces, either in Jewish or general history ; to existing 
 objects and institutions, and to distinguished individ- 
 uals. 
 
 Most of these principles have been sufficiently il- 
 lustrated. The use of figurative expressions taken 
 from past occurrences, from existing objects and in- 
 stitutions, and from distinguished persons, is common 
 to every class of writers, particularly poets and ora- 
 tors. It is not strange therefore, that they should be of 
 frequent occurrence in the prophecies of the Bible, 
 many of which are written in poetry of the most im- 
 passioned character. 
 
 The Hebrew writers understood too well the pro- 
 lific sources of powerful and heart stirring imagery, 
 which were furnished them in the stupendous events 
 of their national history; in their religious institu- 
 tions ; and also in distinguished individuals that 
 adorned their annals ; not to draw from these sour- 
 ces for the improvement of their poetry and elo- 
 quence. 
 
 Under the fervor of the highest poetic excitement, 
 and the still higher influences of inspiration, we find 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 141 
 
 them using the most sublime and varied imagery, 
 with the most powerful effect. They unite the 
 greatest boldness and vigor of conception, with the 
 greatest refinement and delicacy of taste. Some of 
 their highest poetic efforts, and some of their noblest 
 productions were put # forth under the influence of 
 the Spirit of prophecy. Those productions ought to 
 be interpreted in the bold and impassioned spirit in 
 which they were written, in order to be interpreted 
 aright. 
 
 Under an overpowering sense of coming events, 
 they made use of the most sublime imagery at their 
 command, for the purpose of embodying and setting 
 forth their strong conceptions. If Zion is to be de- 
 livered from her low estate ; they talk of the de- 
 struction of the Egyptian sea, and the drying up of 
 rivers, that men may go over dry shod. Isa. xi. 15, 
 16. To describe the Divine protection of the saints 
 in future years ; they speak of the creation of the 
 cloud of smoke by day, and the fire by night, on all 
 their dwellings, and around all their assemblies. Isa. 
 iv. 5. The future piety of the church, is set forth 
 under the figure of a continual sacrifice, whereby 
 the priests and Levites shall be constantly employ- 
 ed. Jer. xxxiii. 18. A distinguished prophet, they 
 call Elijah, Mai. iv. 5, and our blessed Lord, they 
 designate by the appellation of David, and represent 
 him like that honored prince, both as a faithful shep- 
 herd and mighty king. Ezek. xxxiv. 23, 24 ; xxxvii. 
 
 24, 25 ; Hosea iii. 5. 
 
 13* 
 
142 particular laws of 
 
 Sec. 5. Rules for determining the signifi- 
 cation OF THE PROPHECIES. 
 
 1. All the usual principles and rules for determin- 
 ing the signification of words and other symbols, are 
 applicable to the prophecies. A faithful applica- 
 tion of them all, is of indispensable necessity to the 
 right interpretation of this part of the Scriptures. 
 
 2. The position of any particular prophecy in re- 
 spect to the time and circumstances of its delivery, 
 often contributes to illustrate its true meaning. This 
 is the fact in respect to every species of discourse, 
 but it is emphatically so in respect to the prophecies. 
 The first step therefore to be taken, in the interpre- 
 tation of a prophetic discourse, is to determine, if 
 possible, the time when it was delivered, and the cir- 
 cumstances of the prophet and people at that time. 
 In some cases these are expressly declared ; as in 
 Isa. vi. 1. "In the year that king Uzziah died, I 
 saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, " &c. This 
 is an explicit declaration of the time of the prophet- 
 ic vision which follows. The circumstances of the 
 people at that time, to whom the prophecy was ad- 
 dressed, are described with sufficient clearness in 
 other parts of the Old Testament. 
 
 In the succeeding chapter we have another dis- 
 course, represented as being delivered in the time of 
 Ahaz, and of course more than sixteen years later 
 than the preceding ; since the reign of Jotham, which 
 continued sixteen years, must have intervened. 
 
 In some cases when the date of a prophetical dis- 
 course is not expressly given, it may be inferred 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 143 
 
 from an inspection of the context, or of the discourse 
 itself. It may be indicated by some expression re- 
 ferring to contemporary objects or events, the dates 
 of which are capable of being nearly or accurately 
 ascertained. 
 
 This is the case with the prophecy contained in 
 the first chapter of Isaiah. In the 6th and 7th verses 
 of this chapter, the land of Judah is described as be- 
 ing desolated by enemies, and the condition of the 
 people as being one of extreme depression and dis- 
 tress. By turning to the books of Kings and Chron- 
 icles, we find that the description above referred to, 
 cannot have indicated the state of things in the pros- 
 perous reign of Uzziah, or in that of Jotham; but 
 that it accords perfectly with the state of that coun- 
 try in the disastrous reign of Ahaz. Hence we infer 
 with considerable confidence, that the prophecy con- 
 tained in this chapter, was delivered in the reign of 
 Ahaz, and in view of the disastrous consequences of 
 that prevailing impiety, for which he was, in common 
 with many others, distinguished, more than sixteen 
 years later than the 6th chapter of the same book. 
 
 Too much attention cannot be given to the subject 
 of determining as accurately as possible, the dates of 
 prophetical discourses ; preparatory to interpreting 
 them. In making these determinations, it ought to 
 be borne in mind, that the different prophetical books 
 of the Old Testament are not arranged in their pro- 
 per chronological order. Jonah prophesied much 
 earlier than Isaiah, though his book is considerably 
 the latest in the sacred volume. The prophetic 
 books are arranged not in chronological order, but 
 
144 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 in that of their comparative magnitudes. The lar- 
 ger books are placed first, and the smaller, last. 
 
 A similar arrangement was adopted in regard to 
 the epistles of the New Testament. The longer 
 epistles are, for the most part, placed before the 
 shorter, in the order of their comparative lengths. 
 The epistle to the Hebrews and the book of Revela- 
 tion, are for particular reasons made exceptions to 
 this general rule. 
 
 The different parts of the same book, do not, in 
 all cases, stand in their proper chronological order. 
 A probable instance of this has been given in respect 
 to the first chapter of Isaiah, which, in the order of 
 time, is later than the sixth. Another instance of 
 this kind occurs in Ezek. xxix. 17 — 21. This proph- 
 ecy is dated the twenty-seventh year of the captivi- 
 ty of Jehoichin, at which time Ezekiel became a cap- 
 tive, while that which commences in Ezek. xxxi. 
 1, is declared to have been communicated in the elev- 
 enth, making a difference of sixteen years. 
 
 This irregularity probably arose from the fact, 
 that the different prophetical discourses composing 
 a book, were first published separately, and not till 
 after the deaths of the writers, collected into one vol- 
 ume. When they were collected and put together 
 in the same volume, there was no very thorough ex- 
 amination of their chronological relations, in conse- 
 quence of which some were placed out of their pro- 
 per chronological positions. 
 
 3. All the parts of a prophetical discourse, taken 
 together, mutually illustrate each other. They ought 
 therefore, to be studied in their mutual relations to 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION 145 
 
 each other as constituent parts of the same discourse, 
 and not as separate discourses. A course, the op- 
 posite of this is often pursued. Many persons study 
 the Bible by chapters, and endeavor to interpret ev- 
 ery chapter by itself. If the beginning of every 
 chapter was the beginning of a discourse, and the 
 termination of it the termination of the same, the 
 method of studying the Bible by chapters, would be 
 correct. But the division of chapters does not bear 
 any correspondence to the division of subjects and 
 discourses. We ought therefore, in our study of the 
 Bible, especially the prophetic parts of it, to ascer- 
 tain the real divisions in respect to subjects, and dis- 
 courses, and to investigate every discourse by itself. 
 Some prophetic discourses occupy but part of a chap- 
 ter ; and some occupy several chapters. If sufficient 
 pains is taken to ascertain the natural divisions of 
 this kind, they will generally be discovered, and will 
 contribute essentially to facilitate the interpretation 
 of difficult words and paragraphs. 
 
 4. The leading subject of a prophetical discourse, 
 contributes to define many assertions which have 
 relation to it. 
 
 For example ; in Matt. xxv. 31 — 46 ; the leading 
 subject of the discourse is the general judgment. 
 All the elements of that scene are present, and stand 
 out with a degree of prominence, which renders it 
 difficult to be mistaken in respect to that subject. 
 After becoming fully convinced from an examina- 
 tion of this passage, and of the context, that the gen- 
 eral judgment is the real subject to which it relates ; 
 
146 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 we are authorized to explain the different parts of it 
 accordingly. 
 
 A knowledge of the leading subject treated of, 
 makes the explanation of every subordinate part 
 of the discourse easy, where, without any assist- 
 ance from this source, many important phrases 
 would be difficult, if not inexplicable. The same 
 words may have very different meanings, according 
 to the nature of the subject to which they are ap- 
 plied ; and the connexions in which they stand. 
 
 5. Events which are mentioned continuously, 
 ought to be carefully distinguished from each other. 
 Events may be continuous, as represented on the 
 chart of prophecy, when in fulfilment, they are sep- 
 arated by the lapse of centuries. Where events are 
 clearly predicted, the precise times of their accom- 
 plishment are often concealed. They are often 
 grouped together in prophecy, as well as in other 
 kinds of discourse, in consequence of some general 
 relation of resemblance or contrast, when in point 
 of time they are widely separated from each other. 
 
 We are not therefore, to infer, because events are 
 described or referred to in immediate succession, 
 or make a part of the same discourse, that their oc- 
 currence will be either contemporaneous or contig- 
 uous. The reverse is often true. For example ; 
 the sufferings of the Redeemer, and the feeble begin- 
 nings of his kingdom, are often predicted in connex- 
 ion with the triumphant and universal establishment 
 of his spiritual reign, while they are separated by 
 the lapse of many centuries. 
 
 Inattention to this fact, has occasioned frequent 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 147 
 
 and serious errors in prophetical interpretation, both 
 in ancient and modern times. 
 
 The 24th chapter of Matthew, sufficiently difficult 
 at best, has been rendered unnecessarily so, by a neg- 
 lect of the principle stated in this paragraph. The 
 subjects treated of in the discourse commencing in 
 that chapter, are mentioned explicitly in the second 
 and third verses, and are the following, namely ; 
 the destruction of Jerusalem, the future coming, or 
 second advent of Christ, and the end of the world ; 
 events entirely distinct, though treated of continu- 
 ously in the prophetical discourse which relates to 
 them. 
 
 Matt. xxiv. 4 — 28, commencing the discourse of 
 our Lord in answer to these questions, evidently re- 
 lates to the first exclusively, the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem. Matthew xxiv. 29 — 31, treats of the second 
 advent of Christ, and of accompanying and prece- 
 ding events. This passage is as follows : " Immedi- 
 ately after the tribulation of those days, shall the sun 
 be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, 
 and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers 
 of the heavens shall be shaken. And then shall ap- 
 pear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven ; and then 
 shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall 
 see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven, 
 with power and great glory. And he shall send his 
 angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they 
 shall gather together his elect from the four winds, 
 from one end of heaven to the other." 
 
 Having given a brief but vivid and forcible de- 
 scription of these two events, the destruction of Je- 
 
148 PARTICULAR LAWS OP 
 
 rusalem, and his second advent, the Redeemer pro- 
 ceeds to remark on the former, in Matt. xxiv. 32 — 
 35, under the appellation of these things, and says : 
 This generation shall not pass away, till all these 
 things, the things relating to the first mentioned 
 event, shall be fulfilled. The 36th and following 
 verses, refer to the latter event, the second advent of 
 Christ, under the appellation of that day. But of 
 that day and that hour, that is, the day and hour, or 
 in other words, the precise time of the second ad- 
 vent, knoweth no man ; no, not the angels of hea- 
 ven, but my Pother only. Here is a manifest an- 
 tithesis between these things of the 33d verse, being 
 known and near, and that day, of the 36th verse, be- 
 ing unknown to man or angel. The subjects there- 
 fore of the^e verses must be different, and can 
 be no other than those which have been specified. 
 The same thing is not both known and unknown, 
 revealed and un revealed. 
 
 The appellation that day, is applied to denote the 
 period of the second advent, in 2 Tim. iv. 8 ; " Hence- 
 forth there is laid up for me a crown of righteous- 
 ness, which the Lord, the righteous judge shall give 
 me at that day." What particular day the apostle 
 means, he does not here specify. He uses the phrase, 
 that day, as one which was too well understood to 
 need explanation ; and can mean nothing else by it, 
 than the day of the Lord, which will come as a thief 
 in the night to the wicked, and in which the heavens 
 shall pass away, and the earth be destroyed. 2 Pet. 
 iii. 10, 12. 
 
 6. The prophecies considered as embracing one 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 149 
 
 connected and continuous chain of events, contribute 
 to illustrate each other. They ought therefore to 
 be studied together, in order to be most perfectly un- 
 derstood. All interpretations of them, in which their 
 relations to each other are not duly regarded, are 
 manifestly wrong. When we have ascertained the 
 place of a particular prediction in the chain of pro- 
 phetic announcements, we have gained an important 
 point in the determination of its precise signification. 
 
 Almost every part of the prophetic writings has 
 some relation to other parts of the same. In order 
 to understand one such part well, we must contem- 
 plate it in connexion with other parts of the same to 
 which it is related. In order to understand well, a 
 part of a prophetical book, we ought to study the 
 whole, and in order to understand one book, we 
 ought to study others, especially those which relate 
 to the same period of time, and the same or similar 
 events. 
 
 7. Every prophecy ought to be interpreted as 
 having one true meaning, and only one ; and as cor- 
 responding in this respect to history. The meaning 
 of a single prediction may be very comprehensive, 
 embracing under a general designation, a great vari- 
 ety of particulars ; and those extending over a great 
 length of time. But they constitute a single consist- 
 ent sense, not a variety of independent senses. 
 
 Many of the predictions of the Bible are of this 
 general character, and receive a gradual and pro- 
 gressive fulfilment, which it requires centuries to 
 
 complete. 
 
 14 
 
150 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 Of this general character, is the remarkable pre- 
 diction of Noah, Gen. ix. 25 — 27. " And he said, 
 cursed be Canaan, a servant of servants shall he be 
 to his brethren. And he said, blessed be the Lord 
 God of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant. 
 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the 
 tents of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant. 1 ' 
 
 The names of these several patriarchs, are used 
 by metonymy, to denote their descendants. The 
 prophecy therefore relates to the fortunes of the hu- 
 man race. It has no limitation in respect to time ; 
 it may therefore be taken in its most general sense, 
 as extending indefinitely into the future. 
 
 The general condition of these great portions of 
 the human family, has in every successive generation 
 borne a remarkable correspondence to these early 
 predictions ; and shown them to be of extensive im- 
 port, as from the very terms in which they are ex- 
 pressed, we might suppose them to be. The pro- 
 tracted series of events which correspond to these 
 early intimations of the Divine purposes, constitutes 
 one comprehensive but single accomplishment of the 
 same. 
 
 Many of the Scripture prophecies which relate to 
 the rise and fall of kingdoms, are of this general de- 
 scription ; many of those which relate to the triumph- 
 ant establishment and universal prevalence of the 
 kingdom of Christ, are of the same character. The 
 numerous subordinate events which constitute the ful- 
 filment of the prophecies here referred to, are partly 
 simultaneous and partly successive. But they do 
 not authorize the adoption of any other modes of in- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 151 
 
 terpretation than those which apply to other depart- 
 ments of human language. Therefore they ought 
 to be interpreted in conformity with the principles 
 which apply to the interpretation of language gene- 
 rally ; and which have been explained in the forego- 
 ing pages. 
 
 8. The history of the period, and of the events to 
 which prophecies relate, contribute essentially to il- 
 lustrate their true meaning. Predictions derive illus- 
 tration from the history of the times and events to 
 which they refer, on the principle that a general de- 
 scription is illustrated by a more definite one. The 
 prophecies are mostly general. History is more 
 particular and precise in its disclosures. The latter 
 therefore, affords essential aid in giving precision and 
 accuracy to our understanding of the former. 
 
 The Bible contains a complete history of the ful- 
 filment of many of its prophecies. This is the fact 
 in regard to many which relate to the Jewish, and 
 to other nations of ancient times ; and also to 
 Christ, and the church. 
 
 Later ecclesiastical and general history contribute 
 still further to illustrate the prophetic announce- 
 ments of the Bible, and ought to be made use of for 
 this purpose. History is one of the most important 
 keys to the correct understanding of the prophecies ; 
 and if studied in connexion with them, can hardly fail 
 of affording valuable aid in determining their proper 
 and true sense, to a greater extent than is attainable 
 by any other means. 
 
 9. All those interpretations of the prophecies in 
 which the events supposed to be predicted, do not 
 
152 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 correspond to the prediction, must be erroneous. In- 
 terpretations of this objectionable character, are by- 
 no means uncommon. They are often resorted to 
 for the purpose of supporting an erroneous theory ; 
 and so far as prophecy is concerned, may often be 
 detected by the manifest want of correspondence be- 
 tween the prediction, and the events supposed to be 
 indicated. 
 
 This rule is at once obvious and highly useful. 
 An application of it, shows the incorrectness of those 
 interpretations which wrest some portions of the 24th 
 and 25th of Matthew, from their obvious import, 
 and apply them entirely to the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem, and other preceding and contemporaneous 
 events. 
 
 The prophetic account of the advent of Christ, 
 contained in those chapters, and of the general judg- 
 ment, in which all nations are to be concerned, and 
 their destinies of happiness or misery decided upon ; 
 has nothing properly corresponding with it, in the 
 destruction of Jerusalem, or in any preceding or con- 
 temporaneous events. There was no visible advent 
 of Christ at the destruction of Jerusalem, or on the 
 day of pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was mi- 
 raculously poured out. There was no general judg- 
 ment at those times, in which all nations were con- 
 cerned ; no public reception of the righteous into 
 glory, or banishment of the wicked into a state of 
 misery and despair. All things continued as they 
 were. The righteous were still liable to insult and 
 injury, and the wicked often prosperous and insolent. 
 The saints were no more in possession of the king- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 153 
 
 dom prepared for them from the foundation of the 
 world, than they ever had been ; neither were the 
 wicked essentially more obnoxious to punishment 
 than before. 
 
 For these and other similar reasons, therefore, we 
 may safely and confidently conclude, that all the pre- 
 dictions contained in these chapters did not receive 
 their accomplishment at the time, or in the period 
 referred to. 
 
 All prophecy must have a proper fulfilment; but 
 the events connected with the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem, or belonging to that period of the world, do not 
 constitute, in any degree, a proper fulfilment of the 
 prophecies in question. They cannot therefore, be 
 the events referred to by those predictions. 
 
 Sec. 6. The interpretation of the bible con- 
 sidered AS A TRANSLATION. 
 
 The rules or laws of Interpretation which have 
 been laid down and illustrated in the foregoing pages, 
 apply equally to the Scriptures in any language, 
 whether ancient or modern. They apply to the 
 original Hebrew and Greek, and to all the different 
 translations of the same. No translations however, 
 can equal the originals in accuracy and precision. 
 The original Scriptures are the production of God ; 
 translations are the work of men ; and though ma- 
 ny of them have been executed with the greatest 
 fidelity, they are not absolutely perfect. 
 
 To assume that every word, and phrase, and sen- 
 tence, in so large and difficult a work as the Bible, 
 has been translated with perfect accuracy and pre- 
 
 14* 
 
154 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 cision, so as to answer fully all the purposes of the 
 original, is to indulge a degree of extravagance on 
 this subject, that is nearly unparalleled in other de- 
 partments of the exercise of reason, and utterly un- 
 authorized and inexcusable. It is to be presumed 
 that some words and phrases, and even sentences, 
 in the best translations of the Bible, will fail to ex- 
 press the precise and full import of the original. 
 
 The English reader wishes to know, and needs in 
 many cases to be informed, how he can determine 
 the correctness of the translation in common use, in 
 any particular and important doctrinal passages. The 
 difficulties in which this subject is involved, have 
 probably discouraged some from even seriously at- 
 tempting to settle their belief in regard to Biblical 
 doctrines of fundamental importance. They have 
 furnished a plausible excuse for skepticism and er- 
 ror, to such as love darkness rather than light, be- 
 cause their deeds are evil. 
 
 But honest and earnest inquirers after truth, need 
 not fall into despair or discouragement, though una- 
 ble to explore the depths of ancient learning. Truth 
 may be ascertained, as far as it is necessary to the 
 attainment of savii g faith and Christian practice. 
 The following principles are obvious and important 
 in their relation to the Scriptures considered as a 
 translation. 
 
 1. Where there is a known difference between a 
 part of the translation and the original, the latter 
 ought always to be preferred and followed. Such 
 differences necessarily exist, and some of them are 
 indicated to the common reader by the most decisive 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 155 
 
 evidence. Where they do exist, we ought to use 
 our endeavors to ascertain them, and form our judg- 
 ments accordingly. 
 
 To exalt any translation above the original, when 
 a discrepancy is perceived, is an instance of extreme 
 folly, and of manifest prejudice. 
 
 2. Every part of the translation should be presum- 
 ed to be right, till we find evidence that it is wrong. 
 To suspect the correctness of every part of a trans- 
 lation, because it is inevitable from the nature of the 
 case, that some parts should be imperfect, is unrea- 
 sonable and erroneous. To set aside a passage of 
 Scripture, or explain away its obvious meaning, on 
 the ground of a merely supposed inaccuracy in the 
 translation, is to act in a manner utterly arbitrary 
 and unreasonable, as well as delusive. 
 
 3. In all cases where the correctness of the trans- 
 lation is called in question, we ought to decide that 
 question according to evidence. Conjectural decis- 
 ions on such a subject, as on all others, are entirely 
 unwarranted. The sources of evidence on this sub- 
 ject are various. The following are particularly wor- 
 thy of consideration: (1.) the testimony of learned 
 men ; (2.) a consideration of their arguments in re- 
 lation to any case in hand ; (3.) other passages in 
 which the same original word may be known to be 
 used ; (4.) the known nature of the subject ; (5.) the 
 context, <fec. 
 
 A translation which is supported by these differ- 
 ent sources of evidence, must be right ; one which 
 is manifestly disproved by any one of them, is there- 
 by shown to be wrong. 
 
156 PARTICULAR LAWS OP 
 
 4. The general agreement of commentators and 
 other learned men, in regard to the correctness of a 
 translation, may be safely relied on as indicating the 
 truth. If several different commentators or other 
 learned men, professing to have satisfactory and cer- 
 tain knowledge of the subject, decide that a partic- 
 ular passage of Scripture is correctly translated, or 
 otherwise ; in the absence of any counter testimony, 
 we have strong reason to confide in their decision. 
 Such an agreement of opinion cannot exist without 
 reason. The probable reason of it is, convincing 
 evidence. 
 
 This rule lays a foundation for confidence in the gen- 
 eral correctness of our common English translation 
 of the Bible. Commentators and other learned men 
 of every respectable denomination of Christians, 
 and many who have not been the adherents of any 
 particular sect, have generally acquiesced in this de- 
 cision. They have given in their united testimony 
 for the instruction and encouragement of all those, 
 who are incompetent to ascend to the higher sources 
 of evidence, and see for themselves. This agreement 
 is extensive, embracing persons of very different the- 
 ological opinions. It is general with those of the 
 different classes to which it extends. The cases of 
 dissent from it, are few and unimportant. They are 
 not of sufficient number and dignity to impair the 
 well founded confidence which arises from the gene- 
 ral agreement of the wise and good ; an agreement at 
 once particular, cordial and extensive. 
 
 5. A translation that does not make any consist- 
 ent sense, must be wrong. In our common English 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 157 
 
 Bible, examples of this are rare ; but they are nu- 
 merous in the controversial works of some, who 
 with little knowledge and less honesty, have endeav- 
 ored to translate the sacred volume so as lo leave 
 its offensive doctrines behind. 
 
 To maintain that any translation is correct, which 
 does not express a consistent sense, is a high im- 
 peachment of the inspired writings. It is as much 
 as to say, that God has inspired men to write non- 
 sense ; or else that the sacred writers were not in- 
 spired at all by God. All Scripture is given by in- 
 spiration of God, and being thus given, is profitable 
 for doctrine. In order to be of this character, it 
 must in the original express a real and consistent 
 sense, and in every correct translation it, must of 
 course, have a corresponding signification. 
 
 6. In cases where the correctness of a translation, is 
 both advocated and opposed by learned Biblical 
 scholars, common readers, if they think it important 
 to decide where the truth lies, ought to examine 
 thoroughly the different sources of evidence which 
 are accessible to them, and compare the amount and 
 validity of the evidences on one side, with those of 
 the opposing evidences on the other. In this way 
 they may often arrive at certain and correct conclu^ 
 sions, while others more learned than themselves, 
 may be disquieting their minds in vain with doubts 
 and difficulties, and disturbing others with unprofita* 
 ble controversy. The sources of information which 
 are accessible to all intelligent persons, in respect to 
 the true sense of the Bible in the original languages, 
 
158 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 are sufficient to prevent any great deception, or im- 
 position in regard to its sense, from being exten- 
 sively practiced. Individuals are found, who are 
 bad enough to make this nefarious attempt. Through 
 the credulity and voluntary ignorance of some, they 
 have succeeded to a limited extent. Rut they can 
 never take the keys of knowledge out of the hands 
 of an intelligent and inquisitive community, or cut 
 off any great number of individuals from a percep- 
 tion of the truth. They may cut off from the multi- 
 tude some of the rays of correct Scriptural know- 
 ledge, but they cannot blot out or greatly darken 
 the everlasting sun of the moral heavens, the Bible. 
 
 In regard to ail those items of Scriptural know- 
 ledge which depend upon learned testimony, and in 
 respect to which the testimony of learned men is dis- 
 cordant, we ought to proceed according to the same 
 rules by which we are governed in harmonizing dis- 
 cordant testimony on other subjects. Self-contra- 
 diction, manifestations of prejudice, ignorance, ab- 
 surdity, are as indubitable indications of error, in the 
 court of theological inquiry, as at any human judg- 
 ment seat. 
 
 The opposing evidence of the few must yield to 
 that of the many ; and that of those who are mani- 
 festly under the influence of prejudice, or of selfish 
 or ambitious desire, or any other bias, to the higher 
 testimony of the unprejudiced and uncorrupted. 
 Those matters of testimony which are sustained by 
 the general consent of the wise and good, cannot be 
 rendered doubtful by the counter testimony of the 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 159 
 
 few. Certainly not, when those few give manifest 
 indications either of incompetency or dishonesty. 
 
 7. When other sources of information are inac- 
 cessible or unsatisfactory, the inquirer who is un- 
 skilled in the ancient languages, ought to consult a 
 competent clergyman, of any respectable branch of 
 the Christian church, on the matter in question. He 
 will seldom do this without benefit, if not with com- 
 plete satisfaction. 
 
 Most clergymen have opportunities and means of 
 information on religious subjects, which but few 
 others enjoy. It is expected therefore, that with or- 
 dinary natural powers, and suitable diligence in their 
 high vocation, they will attain a superior degree of 
 skill and knowledge, in respect to Divine truth. 
 The benefits of this may be enjoyed by every can- 
 did and anxious inquirer, to his very great advan- 
 tage and comfort. Valuable knowledge may be ob- 
 tained in this and other ways, if men will take the 
 pains requisite to attain it. 
 
 It is not proposed that any man's private opinions 
 should be adopted, as a rule of faith, or of interpre- 
 tation, by the unlearned. To pursue such a course, 
 would be to renounce the liberal exercise of judg- 
 ment, and to surrender ourselves up to any guidance 
 which may happen to arrest us. But it is recom- 
 mended that those whose information on religious 
 subjects is necessarily limited, should avail them- 
 selves of the more extensive and accurate know- 
 ledge of others. This they may easily do ; and by 
 doing it be greatly benefitted. 
 
160 PARTICULAR LAWS OF 
 
 Men's knowledge and opinions are very different 
 things. We may avail ourselves of their know- 
 ledge on important subjects, and make use of it in 
 correcting our own opinions, without embracing 
 theirs. This we ought to do, as far as their opin- 
 ions are unsupported by intelligible and decisive ev- 
 idence. 
 
 The laws of biblical interpretation, as 
 they have been developed in this and the preceding 
 chapters, are not mere matters of opinion, or of ab- 
 stract speculation. For the most part, if not entire- 
 ly, they are matters of absolute and certain know- 
 ledge. They lay the foundation of an art, the art 
 of Interpretation ; which is indispensable to any use 
 of language, and some practical knowledge of which, 
 is universal. They constitute the elements of a sci- 
 ence, which is undoubtedly destined to exert an im- 
 portant agency in dispersing the clouds of ignorance, 
 in pouring the unobstructed light of Divine truth on 
 the sou!, and in diffusing it through the world. This 
 science deserves to be studied. It claims the pa- 
 tient and continued attention of every one who as- 
 pires to the character of an enlightened Christian. 
 It ought to be studied in its elements, as a distinct 
 subject of investigation and inquiry, in order to be 
 duly understood and appreciated. In the foregoing 
 pages these elements, it is believed, have been truly 
 and intelligibly stated. As far as this is the case, 
 and no farther, let them be received with favor, and 
 embraced with confidence. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 ERRONEOUS MODES OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Sec. 1. The rationalistic mode of biblical 
 interpretation. 
 
 Some of the truths of revealed religion are so 
 strongly sustained by the general observation and 
 experience of mankind, that they cannot be called 
 in question even by unbelievers. The most violent 
 opposers of all that is peculiar and superhuman in 
 the Christian system, admit these obvious truths on 
 other grounds than the Divine authority and inspira- 
 tion of the Scriptures, and are willing to acknow- 
 ledge them as a part of common, but not of inspired 
 truth. 
 
 Other parts of the Christian system are of a more 
 spiritual and less obvious character. Some of them 
 relate to objects and events which are entirely be- 
 yond the sphere of human observation, and of un- 
 assisted reason ; and are altogether different from 
 what many would naturally expect to find in an in- 
 spired system of religious truth. 
 
 Every man feels the utmost confidence in those 
 
 conclusions which are the fruit of his own careful 
 
 and accurate observation, or of his own sound and 
 
 legitimate reasoning from certain premises. Every 
 
 man therefore, possesses a degree of knowledge 
 
 15 
 
162 ERRONEOUS MODES OF 
 
 which he regards as certain ; and much of which is 
 truly of this character. Some religious and moral 
 truths belong to this class, and are perceived with 
 the utmost clearness, even by infidels. 
 
 But while all men believe, with a confidence that 
 cannot be shaken, their own personal observations, 
 and their own legitimate deductions of reason, there 
 are many who have no faith in the Bible. If they 
 think they believe it, they are mistaken, and deceive 
 themselves by erroneous conceptions of what faith is. 
 That part of the Bible which corresponds with 
 their observation and experience, and which har- 
 monizes with their reasouings, they do indeed be- 
 lieve; not because it is the Bible, but truth evi- 
 denced to them by other means. Beyond this, their 
 faith does not extend. 
 
 Where such persons assume the office of Biblical 
 interpreters, it is evidently with great hazard to the 
 interests of evangelical truth. Even if they exercise 
 this office with the greatest honesty, they will be li- 
 able to lean constantly to their own understandings, 
 and explain that which lies beyond the sphere of 
 their personal experience and observation, not by 
 the established and legitimate principles of language, 
 but by their own preconceived and limited views; 
 and often by their own unfounded conjectures. 
 
 A man who deals with the Bible as an uninspired 
 production, and yields to its authority only so far as 
 sustained by what he conceives to be the dictates of 
 enlightened reason ; and either denies or explains 
 away all those parts of it which are not of this char- 
 acter; is termed a Rationalist. His highest rule of 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 163 
 
 faith, is reason. Beyond where unassisted reason 
 can lead, he does not go in his theological opinions. 
 
 This class of interpreters understand and explain 
 some of parts of the Bible correctly. But whenever 
 they come to a communication which legitimately 
 expresses a sense that their unassisted reason can- 
 not or does not verify, they stumble. They do not 
 admit such senses to be correct, and feel themselves 
 authorized to adopt some modes of interpretation, 
 however forced or unnatural, which will relieve 
 them from the embarrassment in question. 
 
 The distinguishing principle and fundamental er- 
 ror therefore, of the Rationalists, and of their sys- 
 tem of interpretation, is the following, namely : That 
 the Bible cannot legitimately express a sense which 
 the reason and experience of the interpreter do not 
 verify. This principle is not openly avowed by ma- 
 ny in this country. Perhaps most who adopt it, are 
 not fully aware themselves of being under its influ- 
 ence. But the number who are generally or par- 
 tially under its influence, is by no means small, and 
 the errors which arise and are sustained by this 
 means, are not few or harmless. They are both nu- 
 merous and hurtful in the highest degrees. 
 
 Under the influence of this principle, men find* on- 
 ly such meanings in the Bible as are verified by their 
 experience and reason. More than this, they sup- 
 pose it cannot express, and more than this they do 
 not allow it in any case to signify. 
 
 Jn pursuance of this plan, therefore, different per- 
 sons find sentiments and facts utterly diverse from 
 each other, in the same passages ; and all fail to per- 
 
164 ERRONEOUS MODES OF 
 
 ceive many sublime exhibitions of truth, which are 
 developed with the utmost clearness by correct modes 
 of interpretation. 
 
 Where the correct interpreter finds a demon, the 
 Rationalist finds only a disease, which human weak- 
 ness and prejudice have in former ages ascribed to 
 supposed demoniacal influence. Where the correct 
 interpreter finds a Devil, an apostate evil spirit, the 
 active and powerful enemy both of God and man ; 
 the Rationalist finds only an evil principle in the hu- 
 man heart, and that, in the view of many, but a 
 slight and unimportant affair. Where the former 
 finds a revelation respecting hell, a place of endless 
 and intolerable anguish, both 10 fallen spirits and the 
 finally impenitent from among men ; the latter re- 
 cognizes only a temporal infl ction of the Divine 
 wrath, described by a figurative allusion to the vale 
 of Hinnom. Where the former finds indubitable 
 evidence of a stupendous miracle, indicating the di- 
 rect agency of the Almighty, and confirming the au- 
 thority and words of his servants ; the latter often 
 sees only a singular and fortunate concurrence of 
 ordinary events, tending strongly to impress the 
 minds of beholders, but affording no decisive evidence 
 of the direct and special interposition of God. 
 
 This method of interpretation is not improperly 
 denominated the Rationalistic. It is founded on a 
 mistaken view of the legitimate provinces of rea- 
 son and revelation ; or rather on a virtual denial of 
 any supernatural revelation at all. 
 
 The Rationalists are the more dangerous, because 
 they profess to establish their sentiments, whatever 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 165 
 
 they are, by the Bible, when their fundamental prin- 
 ciple of interpretation is utterly erroneous, and one 
 that cannot be allowed the least influence in deter- 
 mining our apprehensions in respect to the Divine 
 communications, without leading to error. 
 
 The principle that words cannot legitimately ex- 
 press a sense which the experience and reason of 
 the interpreter do not verify, is not pretended to be 
 applicable to the ordinary productions of men. Not 
 only are men known to express in their communica- 
 tions, ideas which cannot be thus verified ; but also 
 such as are absolutely false. With this fact before 
 us, we are compelled to interpret their communica- 
 tions by the obvious and established laws of lan- 
 guage, whatever may be the relation of what they 
 assert to our experience and reason, or to truth it- 
 self. The contrariety of an assertion in the produc- 
 tions of men, to any opinions or even knowledge of 
 ours, is not a sufficient reason for putting on that as- 
 sertion any construction, or interpreting it in any 
 sense not authorized by the established and obvious 
 principles of language. This principle is generally 
 acknowledged in respect to the productions of men, 
 and it is equally true and important in respect to the 
 Bible. 
 
 The Rationalistic mode of interpretation is shown 
 to be erroneous by the following considerations, 
 namely : 
 
 (1.) It is inconsistent with the nature and design 
 of the Bible, as a supernatural communication of Di- 
 vine truth. 
 
 (2.) It implies an undue extension of the province 
 15* 
 
166 ERRONEOUS MODES OF 
 
 of reason and experience, in this department of hu- 
 man knowledge. 
 
 (3.) It introduces a rule for interpreting the higher 
 and more difficult portions of the Bible, which is ut- 
 terly unsettled and contradictory, the preconceived 
 opinions of men. 
 
 1. It is inconsistent with the nature and design of 
 the Bible, as a supernatural communication of Di- 
 vine truth. The Bible is in its very nature a rule of 
 faith of the highest order. It is an independent 
 source of knowledge, by which God has undertaken 
 to correct the errors and supply the deficiencies of 
 reason and experience. It is of itself alone, an inde- 
 pendent witness, of a character so high, and so enti- 
 tled to confidence, that it does not need the confirm- 
 ation of collateral evidence to make its declarations 
 certain, however strange, and singular, and surpri- 
 sing some of them may appear. 
 
 The assumption therefore, that the Bible cannot, 
 in any part of it, express a credible sense in which 
 it is not confirmed by the experience and reason of 
 the interpreter, is inconsistent with its nature and de- 
 sign, and consequently erroneous. Such an assump- 
 tion places the Bible on the low footing of a fallible 
 witness, whose testimony is good for nothing when 
 standing alone, but is rendered valid by the agreeing 
 testimony of another. The testimony of the Bible 
 is not to be compared to that of a single witness in 
 court, which requires other collateral evidence to 
 make it decisive ; but rather to that of a multitude 
 of witnesses, so great and so disinterested, so intelli- 
 gent and harmonious, and of such unquestionable 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 167 
 
 veracity, as to establish, beyond contradiction or 
 cavil, the most surprising and unaccountable facts. 
 This view of the Bible, admitting it to be a source 
 of knowledge independent of all others, and sufficient 
 for the establishment of any position to which its ev- 
 idence is clearly afforded, is firmly based on the doc- 
 trine of its Divine authority and inspiration. It is 
 fatal therefore, to any system of Interpretation or of 
 doctrine, incompatible with it. 
 
 2. The Rationalistic mode of interpretation im- 
 plies an undue extention of the province of reason 
 and experience, in this department of human know- 
 ledge. Reason, considered as a faculty of the mind, 
 denotes that power by which we infer one truth from 
 another. All that knowledge which is the result of 
 comparison and inference, is gained solely by the 
 exercise of this faculty. Reason therefore, is one of 
 the original sources of human knowledge. It is not 
 however, a primary one. Perception, conscious- 
 ness and testimony, are of a more fundamental char- 
 acter, and supply reason itself with materials which 
 are indispensable to its successful exercise. Reason 
 has its appropriate sphere, within which it is the sole 
 umpire of truth. Jn this sphere its legitimate and 
 unbiased decisions are certain, and in many cases 
 alone. 
 
 The appropriate sphere of reason is extended. It 
 embraces all the truths of perception, consciousness, 
 and testimony, as the means of ascent to those which 
 are still higher and less accessible. But its concur- 
 ing testimony is not necessary for the establishment 
 of these elementary truths. They are introduced to 
 
168 ERRONEOUS MODES OP 
 
 the mind by their appropriate channels, and estab- 
 lished without the aid of reason, by their respective 
 sources of evidence. Those of perception are intro- 
 duced and established by perception ; those of con- 
 sciousness, by consciousness ; and those of testimo- 
 ny, by testimony. 
 
 These different means of knowledge, legitimately 
 and rightly used, cannot contradict each other, be- 
 cause truth is not contradictory. If it were, they 
 could and would. Whenever they are so used as to 
 become contradictory, we have evidence in that fact 
 that they are used improperly ; and are admonished 
 at once to examine the modes in which contradicto- 
 ry results have been attained, with a view to ascer- 
 tain and correct those results, by correcting the er- 
 roneous mental process which produced them. 
 
 The Bible occupies the department of testimony. 
 Within the limits of that department, and interpret- 
 ed according to the legitimate principles and laws 
 of language, its indications of truth are incontrovert- 
 ible and certain. To reject any of them, or explain 
 them away, in violation of the established principles 
 and laws of language, because they have not the 
 concurring support of the reason or experience of 
 the interpreter, is to extend reason and experience 
 beyond their proper limits, to the prejudice of anoth- 
 er equally certain and decisive means of informa- 
 tion. On this ground therefore, the Rationalistic 
 mode of Interpretation is shown to be erroneous, 
 and ought to be rejected and discountenanced. 
 
 3. The Rationalistic mode of interpretation intro- 
 duces a rule for the explanation of the more difficult 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 169 
 
 and important portions of the Bible, which is utterly 
 unsettled and contradictory ; the preconceived and 
 uncertain opinions of men. It not oniy limits the 
 disclosures of Divine truth to the sphere of merely 
 human knowledge, by which much of the Bible is 
 wrested from its obvious import, but assigns to pre- 
 conceived opinion and plausible conjecture, in re- 
 gard to religious subjects, an authority, which it de- 
 nies to the most explicit declarations of the word of 
 God. 
 
 Knowledge, from whatever source derived, con- 
 tributes to promote the correct interpretation of the 
 Scriptures. All interpretations which represent the 
 Bible as contradictory to our certain knowledge, 
 must be wrong. God does not teach one thing by 
 the objects of perception, consciousness, and reason, 
 and the opposite by direct revelation. But he does 
 communicate by the joint use of all the different 
 modes of instruction, different parts of one great 
 harmonious system of truth. Every part of this 
 system, rightly understood, is in agreement with ev- 
 ery other. Accurate and certain knowledge derived 
 from any one source of information, contributes es- 
 sentially to facilitate the acquisition of related truths 
 derived from others. Indications of truth, both in 
 the Bible and elsewhere, which would otherwise be 
 obscure, are often rendered perspicuous by means 
 of related knowledge, derived from other sources. 
 On the same principle, the perceptions of one sense 
 contribute to render those of another determinate 
 and satisfactory. The perceptions of touch often 
 correct those of sight, when they would otherwise 
 
170 ERRONEOUS MODES OF 
 
 be indefinite or erroneous ; and those of sight, the 
 kindred perceptions of hearing, &c. 
 
 The certainty of knowledge is generally increas- 
 ed when the same truth is demonstrated by different 
 and independent sources of evidence. But the un- 
 certain and conjectural conclusions, derived from 
 one source of information, may not be allowed in 
 any way to limit or modify, much less to contradict, 
 the unequivocal indications of truth, by any other 
 means. 
 
 The opinions which are derive* 1 from the ordina- 
 ry sources of information, in respect to religious sub- 
 jects, are obviously vague and conjectural. Unless 
 we are allowed to go to the Bible as a depository of 
 certain knowledge, capable of making wise the ig- 
 norant, and of establishing to the conviction of every 
 well regulated mind, truths which are utterly unat- 
 tainable by other means, our possession of this vol- 
 ume seems, so far as faith is concerned, to be of ve- 
 ry little consequence or utility. 
 
 Different interpreters entering upon the study of 
 it, with different degrees of human knowledge, and 
 with different preconceived opinions on many of the 
 subjects to which it relates, will find in it different 
 and contradictory senses, according to their previous 
 knowledge and opinions. 
 
 But what authority have we for applying an un- 
 certain rule of interpretation to the explanation of 
 the inspired records? Have we Scriptural authority 
 for it ? None. Has this rule any adequate founda- 
 tion in reason ? None. What could have induced 
 our benevolent Creator to give us any inspired com- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 171 
 
 munieations at all, unless he constructed them ac- 
 cording to definite and certain rules ? 
 
 But if these communications are capable of being 
 interpreted by certain and definite rules, that in 
 question is not one of them, for it is manifestly and 
 necessarily indefinite and uncertain. 
 
 Much of the error that has prevailed in former 
 times, and which continues at this moment to re- 
 ceive the confidence of misguided multitudes, has 
 arisen from a Rationalistic principle of interpreta- 
 tion. Many who are not Rationalists, some who 
 are hopefully pious, through neglect to inform them- 
 selves on this subject, have allowed the supposed dic- 
 tates of perception and reason to come in unauthor- 
 ized and prevailing collision with the responses of 
 the Holy Spirit; and by applying erroneous human 
 opinions to the interpretation of some parts of the 
 Bible, have greatly erred from the simplicity and 
 and purity of the gospel faith, and greatly impeded 
 the progress and triumphs of truth and piety, over 
 human ignorance and perverseness. 
 
 Sec 2. The mystical mode of biblical inter- 
 pretation. 
 
 The word Mystical denotes (1.) obscure, hid ; (2.) 
 remote from human observation; (3.) of a mysteri- 
 ous allegorical, or emblematical import. As appli- 
 ed in the title of this section, it is used to designate 
 a mode of Interpretation, in which the obvious and 
 natural import of words and phrases, is superceded 
 by less obvious and allegorical or emblematical sig- 
 
17S ERRONEOUS MODES OF 
 
 nifications, not indicated by the manifest and estab- 
 lished laws of language. 
 
 Many who are generally correct in respect to their 
 modes of Biblical Interpretation occasionally err by 
 adopting some modification of that now to be con- 
 sidered. Some adopt it in a few instances, and some 
 in many, who discard it in other cases. A few in 
 almost every successive age of the church, have 
 adopted it generally in their study and exposition 
 of the Bible ; and have received extensively the 
 denomination of Mystics. Multitudes, however, 
 are occasionally, and in some degree mystical in 
 their interpretations, who are not properly Mystics ; 
 and many perhaps are properly Mystics, who are 
 not conscious of it themselves, and have never been 
 so considered and denominated by others. 
 
 The Mystical mode of interpretation is in most 
 respects the very opposite of the Rationalistic. The 
 latter falls below the true sense of those portions of 
 the Bible to which it is applied ; the former rises 
 above, and goes beyond it. The latter is erroneous 
 in consequence of too great an extension of the office 
 and authority of reason ; the former by the introduc- 
 tion of a different, foreign, and often opposing ele- 
 ment, equally impertinent and delusive. 
 
 Rationalistic interpretation is the natural offspring 
 and ally of infidelity ; mystic bears a correspond- 
 ing relation to enthusiasm, fanaticism, and super- 
 stition. Both have greatly impeded the diffusion of 
 the truth, and retarded the progress and establish- 
 ment of the Christian religion, in ancient and modern 
 times. Both however, in some of their applications 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 173 
 
 are often found in an unnatural and disastrous alli- 
 ance with genuine, humble, and sober piety. 
 
 The principal varieties of Mystic Interpretation 
 may be included under the following heads, namely ; 
 (1.) the allegorical ; (2.) the doctrinal ; (3.) the sen- 
 timental ; (4.) the speculative and philosophical. 
 
 These modes of Interpretation possess consid- 
 erable and obvious diversity of character, but they 
 have a general resemblance or analogy to each 
 other, in consequence of which, they are here class- 
 ed under the same generic head, and admit of being 
 refuted by the same general course of argument. 
 
 1. The allegorical. This variety of Mystical in- 
 terpretation consists in putting an allegorical con- 
 struction on parts of the Bible which are not of an 
 allegorical nature. It was practiced to some extent 
 among the Jews previous to the Christian era. In- 
 stances of it occur in Josephus and Philo, Jewish 
 writers who lived near the time of Christ. It was 
 early adopted by some of the leading writers of the 
 Christian church, and extensively disseminated by 
 their means. Origen went further into allegorical 
 expositions of this kind, than any who preceded him ; 
 and by reason of his extensive learning, superior 
 genius, and indefatigable industry in the exposition 
 of the Scriptures, exerted a powerful and extensive 
 influence in favor of his peculiar sentiments on this 
 as on other subjects. 
 
 Having embraced the Platonic idea, that this 
 
 world is strictly and universally emblematical of that 
 
 which is invisible, and that the objects and events of 
 
 one correspond to those of the other, he was natu- 
 
 16 
 
174 ERRONEOUS MODES OP 
 
 rally induced to search for symbolical descriptions of 
 invisible realities, in the historical narratives of earth- 
 ly objects, which occur in the Bible generally. 
 
 He attributed to the Scriptures generally, a double 
 or treble sense ; one, that which is indicated by the 
 ordinary laws of Interpretation ; the others, conceal- 
 ed symbolical or figurative ones, to be developed by 
 higher principles. 
 
 Emmanuel Swedenborg has more recently revi- 
 ved and remodeled the Mystic system of Interpre- 
 tation adopted by the ancients, and has gained some 
 adherents to the belief, that the Scriptures have 
 three independent and collateral senses, the literal, 
 spiritual, and celestial. 
 
 The Mystical mode of Interpretation, as embra- 
 ced by Origen and Swedenborg, is founded on the 
 assumption that there is such a correspondence be- 
 tween material and spiritual, terrestrial and celestial 
 objects and events, as to make the former correct 
 and adequate types or symbols of the latter. 
 
 This supposed resemblance is called the doctrine 
 of correspondences. To the extent however, which 
 is assumed by these interpreters, that doctrine is 
 without any foundation in Scripture or reason. The 
 Bible does not assert it ; neither is it clearly implied 
 in any thing which the Bible contains. The figura- 
 tive language and material symbols of the Bible are 
 authorized by the principle of general analogies, and 
 do not require an assumption so extravagant as that 
 in question, to justify the use of them. 
 
 Earth resembles heaven ; body, mind ; the sun, 
 God ; and light, knowledge, &c. just as far as these 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 175 
 
 respective objects possess common properties and 
 relations, and no farther. The same may be said of 
 all other objects which are referred to in the figura- 
 tive or symbolical communications of the Bible. 
 
 The allegorical systems of Origen and Sweden- 
 borg, fall to the ground for the want of any decisive 
 evidence to sustain them. They are ingenious and 
 facinating ; but they are not built on the rock, and 
 cannot withstand the trial of sober and enlightened 
 scrutiny. 
 
 The principle, than which none is more obvious 
 and important, that we may not in any case impose 
 allegorical or symbolical senses on the Scriptures, 
 any more than on other communications, without 
 clear and manifest indications of such usage, binds 
 us indissolubly to the true theory on this subject. 
 Faithfully applied and carried out, it restrains us 
 from any unauthorized interpretations of the kind 
 which have now been specified. 
 
 Slight deviations however, into the track of mys- 
 tycal allegory, through a neglect of this principle, 
 are not uncommon in many of the best writers ; 
 and are often indulged by the ignorant with the most 
 injurious and unlicensed freedom. 
 
 2. The doctrinal. Those may not improperly be 
 termed doctrinal Mystics, who deviate from the right 
 understanding and exposition of the Scriptures, by 
 giving an undue prominence to some of their doc- 
 trines, and making an unauthorized use of them in 
 Biblical Interpretation. Some are not satisfied with 
 finding particular doctrines occupying their appro- 
 priate places in the Bible. They wish to find them 
 
176 ERRONEOUS MODES OF 
 
 in every part of it ; and are unwilling to acknow- 
 ledge the existence of other doctrines, revealed with 
 equal clearness, because of some supposed discre- 
 pancy between them and their favorite doctrinal 
 opinions. Errors from this source are almost innu- 
 merable. Many excellent and intelligent persons 
 are not altogether free from them. Mystics of the 
 worst character have achieved their greatest victo- 
 ries over the truth, in this field. It is a moral acel- 
 dama, a field of blood, where the mighty have fallen 
 with the temporary fall of truth, which they have 
 struggled hard, and for a time successfully, to over- 
 come. 
 
 Almost every class of fanatics and enthusiasts 
 have distinguished themselves in this field of errone- 
 ous interpretation. It is characteristic of the enthu- 
 siast to look at one real or supposed truth, or class 
 of truths, till he loses the capacity of seeing or ap- 
 preciating others. It is impossible for such a one 
 rightly to interpret the Bible. Its truths are various. 
 They require to be looked upon with a sound and 
 steady eye, and to be analyzed with a calm and 
 steady hand. They cannot be seen with clearness 
 in their due proportions and relations, under any 
 other conditions. 
 
 3. The sentimental. Those may be denominated 
 sentimental Mystics, who suffer themselves to be 
 controlled in the interpretation of the Bible by their 
 own supposed supernatural impressions in regard to 
 it. A misunderstanding of the Scripture doctrine 
 respecting Divine influence and illumination, has 
 greatly contributed to delusions of this kind. An 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 177 
 
 inexplicable impression is with many a sufficient 
 reason for unhesitating confidence* 
 
 Such persons would do well to consider that we 
 are required not to believe every spirit, but to try 
 the spirits, whether they be of God. 1 John iv. 1. 
 Our impressions are not infallible, even in our holi- 
 est states of mind. They need to be brought to the 
 test of Scripture, and their character impartially de- 
 termined at that tribunal, before they can be worthy 
 to be cherished with confidence, or to be regarded 
 as of the least authority, in determining our religious 
 belief respecting other matters. 
 
 4. The speculative and philosophical. A specula- 
 tive or philosophical Mystic, is one who suffers his 
 speculative and philosophical opinions to exert an 
 undue influence in determining his apprehensions 
 of Bible truth. Many of the ancient Mystics were 
 of this class. Their interpretations of the Bible were 
 rendered utterly erroneous, by an erroneous philo- 
 sophy. Had their philosophical speculations been 
 correct, or had they strenuously preserved their 
 minds from being unduly biased in their interpreta- 
 tions of the Bible, by those speculations, they might 
 have avoided many hurtful errors into which they 
 fell, and have apprehended with clearness many glo- 
 rious truths, to which they never attained. 
 
 The reign of false philosophy has been long and 
 disastrous. No man can be in any degree acquaint- 
 ed with its history, without receiving painful convic- 
 tion of its prevalence, both over the dictates of hu- 
 man reason, and the unambiguous testimony of the 
 word of God. 
 
 16* 
 
178 ERRONEOUS MODES OP 
 
 Would that the history of its unhappy prevalence 
 was exclusively that of the past. But this is far 
 from being the case. False philosophy, in its more 
 refined and deceptive varieties, still sways a power- 
 ful scepter, and occupies a strongly guarded throne. 
 It exerts an influence with thousands, to darken that 
 which is even luminous in the Bible, and perplex 
 that which is obscure. 
 
 The Mystical mode of interpretation, as exhibited 
 in this article, is like the beast of the Apocalypse, 
 having many heads and more horns ; and like him 
 too, is the fierce antagonist of her, whose sun-clad 
 form and starry crown, betoken her the joy of the 
 earth and the favorite of heaven. 
 
 (I.) In all its varieties, it is inconsistent with the 
 established principles and laws of language, and 
 leads to manifest violations of them. On this ground 
 therefore, it ought to be rejected. 
 
 (2.) It is not authorized by the Bible itself. There 
 is no passage in the sacred volume which directs us 
 to explain it by any other than the natural and obvi- 
 ous principles of language. Among those principles 
 the mystical element is not to be found. 
 
 The origin and history of this mode of interpreta- 
 tion, are against it. It cannot be traced to the schools 
 of the prophets, or to the communications of the Bi- 
 ble. The later inspired writers often quote from the 
 productions of their inspired predecessors, and com- 
 ment upon the words thus introduced ; but they do 
 not, in all their expositions of earlier Scripture, de- 
 velope any other mode of interpretation, than that 
 which is based on the common and established prin- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION. 179 
 
 ciples of human language. Much less do they en- 
 roll among their laws of interpretation either of the 
 Mystic principles which have been exhibited in the 
 present section. These principles are not establish- 
 ed by any Scriptural precept, or any Divinely au- 
 thorized example. Authentic history has traced 
 them to the instructions of Jewish Rabbis', who 
 made void the law of God by their puerile and ab- 
 surd traditions; and to the schools of heathen phi- 
 losophy, whose very light was the refined darkness 
 of Paganism ; but it has been unable to discover for 
 them a nobler and less suspicious genealogy. Christ 
 was not a Mystic. The apostles adhered to the es- 
 tablished and universal principles of Interpretation, 
 both in relating the inimitable discourses of our Lord, 
 and in commenting upon them ; in their history of 
 the origin and early progress of the Christian church ; 
 and in their expositions of its institutions and doc- 
 trines. From the course which is thus indicated by 
 Scriptural example, with no Scriptural precept for 
 our guide, we may not innocently or safely depart. 
 The Mystic mode of interpretation, involving a de- 
 parture from that course so fully authorized both by 
 Scripture and reason, is manifestly erroneous, and 
 the adoption of it proves injurious to the interests 
 both of truth and piety. 
 
 If God had intended that the Bible should be in- 
 terpreted in mystical senses, or in any other not in- 
 dicated by the known principles of language, he 
 doubtless would have given unequivocal evidence of 
 this fact. But he has not done so. We therefore 
 
180 ERRONEOUS MODES OP 
 
 conclude with confidence, that he had no intention of 
 this kind. 
 
 (3.) The Mystical mode of interpretation is inju- 
 rious to the interests of religion, in leading persons 
 to neglect and undervalue the plain and obvious 
 sense of many parts of the Bible. In the Bible, in- 
 terpreted according to the established principles and 
 laws of language, are treasured up the unquestiona- 
 ble doctrines and duties of the Christian religion. 
 No valuable additions can be made to these, by mys- 
 tical interpretations. Not a valuable doctrine, not 
 an obvious and important duty, can be discovered 
 by mystical interpretations, which cannot be fully 
 demonstrated by other means. All the doctrines and 
 duties which are needful for the promotion of per- 
 sonal holiness, are fully developed by the other and 
 unquestionable modes of Biblical Interpretation. If 
 the study of these doctrines, and the practice of 
 these duties are properly attended to and prosecu- 
 ted, religion will prosper. If they are neglected, it 
 will inevitably decline. In leading to an undervalu- 
 ation and neglect of them, Mystical interpretation 
 has proved exceedingly injurious, and brought forth 
 the manifest fruits of delusion, sin- and death. In- 
 asmuch as a tree is known by its fruits, that mode 
 of interpretation which leads inevitably to the rejec- 
 tion of certain truth, and to the neglect of manifest 
 duty, must be wrong. 
 
 With correct modes of interpretation, persons may 
 fall into error, in respect to difficult words and par- 
 agraphs. But their errors will be occasional and 
 vincible. Under the guidance of erroneous princi- 
 
BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION*. 181 
 
 pies, however, like those which have been specified 
 in this chapter, erroneous interpretations are greatly 
 multiplied. They occur not only in respect to pas- 
 sages which are really obscure and difficult, but in 
 respect to those which would otherwise be of the 
 plainest and most obvious import. 
 
 Right modes of interpretation may, through inat- 
 tention or ignorance, conduct to error ; but those 
 which are fundamentally wrong, are the more fatal 
 to the interests of truth, the more faithfully and in- 
 telligently they are applied. They are often used 
 with surprising skill, and operate with tremenduous 
 effect, both in obscuring the vision of those who use 
 them, and in deceiving others. If a man has fallen 
 into doctrinal errors by means of a Rationalistic or 
 Mystic mode of interpretation, it is generally in vain 
 to endeavor to correct them, till he is made sensible 
 of the fallacy of those principles by which he is mis- 
 led. While that fallacy is unperceived, he builds 
 with confidence on his sandy foundation ; and 
 not till it is swept away, can he be forced to aban- 
 don the often well wrought but misplaced fabric of 
 his souTs regard. 
 
 Then he sees his error, not by discovering the im- 
 perfection and inconclusiveness of the argument 
 which betrayed him into it. That argument perhaps 
 was perfect. But by discovering the incorrectness 
 of the assumption on which the fatal argument was 
 founded. The moment he makes that discovery, 
 all that before was perplexed, becomes plain, and 
 the errors which appeared invincible, are instantly 
 detected and renounced. 
 
182 ERRONEOUS MODES OF, &C. 
 
 Let every man therefore, prove his own work, 
 and examine thoroughly the principles and rules of 
 interpretation which he adopts, and his mode of ap- 
 plying them to the sacred writings. An error in re- 
 spect to either, may lead to numberless related and 
 consequent errors, of the most injurious nature. 
 
 NOTES. 
 
 1. For a confirmation of the foregoing statements in respect to Ori- 
 gen, and for a more particular account of his character and modes of 
 interpretation, the reader is referred to Murdock's translation of Mos- 
 heim, Vol. I. pages 198, 216—217, 219—221. 
 
 2 .Within the last year or two, several important contributions have 
 been made to that department of Biblical literature to which the pre- 
 sent work appertains. But none have come to the knowledge of the 
 author, which accomplish the design he has had in view, and to which 
 his efforts have been humbly but earnestly directed in the preceding 
 investigation, namely : That of furnishing a complete manual of this 
 interesting science, adapted to the existing state of knowledge and 
 opinion on this subject, and designed for common as well as scientific 
 and theological use. If the principles of this work are correct, they 
 are of paramount importance to all men, and ought to be the object of 
 general inquiry and investigation, with those of every age and condi- 
 tion in life. 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 iHpwiiiSiiisfti 
 
 *»V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 S*t^^t^Z'F^\ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 GAYLORD 
 
 
 
 PRINTED IN U.S.A. 
 
BS476 .S27 
 
 The elements of Biblical interpretation, 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 00006 3729 
 
 
 mm