tvte. ^4/Uyht^dY^. yc<r.^Mf

A KEY TO THE BIBLE

KEY TO THE BIBLE:

AN EXPOSITION

\uUx^, %%xmB, anir iinual f afos

SACRED INTERPRETATION.

DAVID DOBIE.

'* AJl flcriptara is given by inspiration of God ; and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correc
tion, for instruction in righteousneaa, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly famished onto
all good works, "—S Timothy, iii. 16.

NEW YORK;

C, SCEIBNEE, 311 & 319 BEOADWAY.
1856.

Entsrkd according to Act of Congress, in the year 1866, by
CHARLES SCRIBNER,
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.

W. II. TIMSOS, STJtKEOIYFJiK. OBO. ROSSKLL A CO., PKI.NTSfiS.

PEEFAOE.

The want of such a treatise as is here presented to the Christian
public, we have reason to believe, has been widely felt. The every
day reader of the Bible has sought for such a work, that, through its
aid, he might become his own commentator, and possess within him
self the means of understanding'- the difficult passages. The Bible-
class teacher has desired it, as a reliable assistance in the work of
interpretation ; hoping that, with such a book, he might answer
objections with greater readiness, and impress more permanently on
the minds of his scholars, the important lessons of the word of God.
The student for the ministry has inquired for it, fully persuaded that
such a work must be to him one of the most useful of aU works, in
the prosecution of his studies, and in preparing himself for the active
duties of the pulpit. The pastor, engaged in the daily business of
expounding the Scriptures, has searched for it for his own profit,
and as a safe and useful book to put into the hands of the younger
members of his flock, and even into the hands of those who, through
ignorance or opposition, are disposed to urge objections against the
Bible. He has felt that such a book was better than a commentary
for such purposes : more direct, more comprehensive, less occupied
with details, and affording the very best means to honest inquirers

VI PEEFACE.
of satisfying themselves of the truth, and divine origin of the
Scriptures. There is certainly a scarcity of such books. It was during a
search for such a help to the understanding of some of the more
difficult passages, that the thought of its composition was at first
suggested ; and this thought, nourished by the kind words of a
widely-distinguished friend and teacher of the science, has here
found its expression. Since the design of its publication became
known, we are encouraged to believe it wiU be received by not a,
few as a welcome assistance in the work of interpreting the Sacred
Volume. The book might have been made more scholastic in its plan and
style, and more replete with sentences of Greek and Hebrew, but
this would have defeated our design. It would have been repulsive
to a great majority of those whom we desire to reach and benefit.
The total value of such a book lies in its fitness to meet and satisfy
popular wants.
It were a poor consolation to us, if this volume were adapted only
to the tastes of the recluse, rather than the Sabbath-school teacher
and the common reader of the Bible. There are already by far too
many dry and learned text-books even in this department of sacred
literature. It is quite time the science of Biblical interpretation,
instead of retreating into theological halls, should come forth into
the world, and make itself intelligible to the masses. It is none
of our business to petrify exegesis. We would rather breathe into
it the breath of life, and make it a living reahty — a familiar and
beloved science. Much rather would we write for all mankind than
for any one class, however influential. What are the few to the
many f That our pages may enlighten and interest all classes has
been our honest desire.
We have written for all who read the Bible, and written that they
may understand. For, " IJnderstandest thou what thou readest?" is
the main question with every man who handles the Word of God.

PEEFACE. Vn
To read without understanding is surely labor without profit. But
the necessity of right rules, and the relation they bear to a right
comprehension of the Scriptures is not always reaUzed nor admitted.
Men read, and think they understand, when, in truth, they are but
perverting the word of God.
Indeed, there is no book in existence which receives at the hands
of its readers such various usage. Every man treats it in accord
ance with his character. There are those who never allow them
selves to be anxious in respect to its meaning. Others view it
simply as a text-book of their peculiar ideas, or of aU contradictory
and conflicting opinions. Some have no just conceptions of its
unity; to them, it is a revelation in chaos, "without form, and
void." Others regard it as any other human composition, which
might be very much improved by the correcting hand of modern
philosophy. ISTot a few flee to some favorite commentary, there to
sacrifice the right of private judgment for the poor privilege of
accepting the opinions of others, without knowing the grounds on
which they rest. Many despair of any effective system of principles,
under the belief that the Scriptures must needs be for ever involved
in mystery, never to be explained. Others adopt an imperfect sys
tem, through the force of some fundamental error, or the influence
of their religious leaders. And there are many who depend on the
mere perusal of the Bible, saying, if its meaning cannot be ascer
tained in this natural and easy way, it cannot be ascertained at all.
But there is an unreasonableness on the face of aU this. The
best, if not also, the only method of ascertaining the sense of the
Bible, is to follow a wise, and well-considered system of rules, such as
common sense, in its final and just decisions, will justify. Even
profound theologians, with all respect we write it, might reap no
small advantage from adopting such a system. Says a writer in the
Bibliotheca Sacra, for 1851, p. 218 : " We have only to look into the
writings of Pres. Edwards to see how much his acute and profound
intellect would have been aided by better principles of interpreta-

\111 PEEFACE.
tion." But if this is true of the greatest theologian, that this, or
any other country has produced, since the days of Paul, how much
more is it true of all his inferiors ?
A book, from any source, that shall prove a real and reliable aid
to the true interpretation of the Bible, having the marks of a cool
and impartial judgment, and breathing the air of a calm independ
ence, will be welcomed by all who interest themselves in the pro
gress of the Gospel, in the enlightenment and salvation of the
human race. In whatever measure we may have succeeded in the
production of such a book, it may not be for us to say ; but our
hopes respecting the science itself, are kindred with those of its first
patron and father in this country, the excellent Stuart. He says :
" The hope may be rationally indulged, that at some future day,
hermeneutics will be a science as definite, and as well discriminated
as most other sciences, which have been long taught as complete."
Our grateful acknowledgments are due to the Rev. Edward
Robinson, D.D., of Union Theological Seminary, New York, for his
review of the general plan, and his cheerful approbation of the
axioms, and general laws laid down in the work. To the Rev. H. D.
Kitchel, of Detroit, our obligations are also many ; both for his
reading the MSS. with a brother's and a, critic's eye, and for the
genial words whereby he inspired us with the necessary courage to
give our labors to the press.
Plattsburgh, May^ 1856.

THE CONTENTS.

PAGB
Preface, .......... 5—8
I. On the Importance of a Right Interpretation, .... 18—19
II. The Special Design of this Treatise, ..... 20—26
m. On the History and Progress of Interpretation — Clemens— TertulUan
— Origen — Augustine — The Chains — Nicholas de Lyra — Luther —
Calvin — Kant-^Paulus — Semler — Westminster Assembly— Henry
Doddridge — Brown — Moses Stuart — Robinson— Gibbs — Alexander
— Barnes,. ........ 27 — i4
IV. Argument for Inspiration stated, ...... 45—58
V. Axioms prellminaiy to Interpretation, ..... 54 — 67
VI. What is the Basis of all Right Rules in this Science? — Common Sense, 68 — 73
vn. General Rules, with illustrations, . , . . . 74—163
I. The literal or obvious meaning is generally the true meaning,
1. Except where it asserts a known impossibility. 2. Where it is
evidently contrary to reason. 8. Where it contradicts any pre
cept. 4. Where an express limitation is expressed, . . 75 — 83
II. Figurative language must be distinguished from its opposite,
and interpreted according to its nature, . . . 82—83
m. No inferences to be drawn from any text, till its meaning has
been ascertained, ....... 88 — 90
IV. No interpretation correct if it be at variance with the analogy
of the Faith,  90—96

X CONTENTS. TAOS
V. No interpretation correct wliich is at variance with the known
nature of things, ...... 96—100
VI. If, in any passage, a doctrine elsewhere taught be omitted, the
passage must be interpreted in harmony with the omission, , 100 — 104
VII. No passage is to be explained contrary to the context, nor
apart from the context, ...... 104 — 108
VIII. Our interpretation is not sound if it be opposed to the gene
ral design of the wi'iter, ..,,.. 109 — 115
IX. Of two possible meanings, that which best agrees with the
design of tlie writer and the analogy of the Faith, is to be pre
ferred,  116—119
X. No interpretation is correct which violates the grammar or
idioms of the original languages of the Bible, . . . 119'— 124
XI. Comparisons not to be pressed beyond the nature of the
subject, ........ 124—128
Rule of all words respecting human character, . . 128 — 134
Rule of verbs asserting the influence of one moral agent on
another, . . . , \ , . 132—134
The Parables, ,..,,.. 134—137
The Types  187—139
The Poetry of the Bible,  189—144
XTT. No interpretation correct which bases any doctrine on a
mere phrase, ....... 144 — 150
Xni. When any doctrine is stated, or event described in different
passages, the briefer is always to be explained by the more
extended statement, ...... 150  153
XIV. No interpretation is sound which violates the express defini
tions given in Scripture, .,,.,. 153  164
Vm. A Fundamental Principle enforced, , . . , , 165  170
IX. On the authority of Lexicons and of Etymology in Interpretation, 171—175
X, On the Study of the Prophecies and their Interpretation, . . 176
1. They can be understood, ...... iqq  1S4
2. They have but one meaning to convey, .... 184  189
8. Investigate the prophecies fulfilled, .... 189  193
4, TheBibletherightsourceoflawa of prophetical interpretation, 193—196
5. Read contemporaneous history, . . . , . 197  199
6. Compare parallel prophecies, • • . . . 199  201
On the calculations respecting the end of the world, , , "201—208

CONTENTS .

XI

XI, On the alleged contradictions of the Bible, . • • . 209
1. Those in facts and doctrines, . . , , , 211 — 219
2. Those between Prophecy and its fulfillment, . . . 219—222
2. Those against Morality, ...... 222—229
4. Those against Science — Astronomy and Geology, , . 229—246
XII. On the origin of difficulties in Interpretation, . . . 249 — 259
XIII. On the Moral Power of the Bible. 1. It sets forth the right law of
conduct, 2. It presents the true view of man's present moral
condition. 3. It gives just views of God's character. 4. It reveals
the only remedy for sin. 5. It is the word of God, . . 260—278
Appendix. I, On Maxims,  280—288
II. What is it to prove a doctrine from the Scriptures? . 289 — 295
III. Other systems noticed. 1. Dr. John Brown. 2. Samuel
Davidson. 8. G. J, Planck. 4. B. B. Edwards. 5. Prof.
A. Norton. 6. Professor McLelland, . . . 296-310
IV. Thoughts on the present state of hermeneutical instruction, 311 — 322

KEY TO THE BIBLE

CHAPTEE I.

ON THE IMPOETAlirCE OF A EIGHT IHTEEPBETATION OF
THE SOEIPTUEES.
EvEET age claims and exercises the privilege of
writing its own books on all subjects, and especially
its books on morals and religion. This privilege is
essential to progress and to the full enjoyment of the
truth in its best and most useful forms. When men
cease to think for themselves, they soon sink into
spiritual bondage, and descend from the position of
honor and moral worth, to which the exercise of their
just rights would naturally elevate them.
The only sure method of preventing this evil
result, is to think and believe for ourselves, responsi
ble to none, but God the Judge of all. The past has

14 mTEEPEETATIOir.
no authority to bind the present age to the reception
of its opinions ; the present age best comports itself
under its responsibilities, and renders truest rever
ence to the past, when it receives, its creed on the
ground of sober investigation and satisfactory convic
tion alone.
It is a vain expectation, therefore, which finds a
place in some minds, that the books of the past, on
religion and the Bible, should satisfy the people of
this generation. To attain an enlightened satisfac
tion in our religious belief, we must investigate;
and to investigate thoroughly and usefully, we must
think for ourselves, in sincere and true independence.
Every man is born to this responsibility ; and happy
are we in the conviction, that true religion, and its
only true source, the Bible, can receive no harm
from the legitimate exercise of human reason in its
proper sphere. The free and wise use of reason is, to
men, the infallible condition of all saving faith, and
of all right acquaintance with the will of God ; and
to attain that acquaintance, is, in a high sense, the
main business of every man in this life. We know
of no business so noble in itself, or so worthy of the
attention of all mankind. It is one of those duties
which throw both a solemnity and a nobility around
all the incidents and issues of man's life from first to
last. To know the will of God, is next only in gran-

ITS IMPOETANCE. 15
deur of privilege, and in true fitness to the happi
ness of th^ soul, to the cheerful and hearty perform
ance of that will.
But for man to know the will of God, in its
broadest and grandest sense, it is necessary that he
should sea/rch the Scriptures ; and every man to
whom this matter is submitted, confesses to this
necessity. The surest way to know the wiU of God
is to make sure of the sense of the Bible.
No man, therefore, need marvel that there has
been so much written respecting the meaning of the
Bible, and the principles by which it is to be ascer
tained. In the Bible are settled all the profoundest
problems of the soul. Here are solved all the urgent
inquiries of our finite and restless nature. Here is
garnered up that wisdom which is from Heaven,
which alone becomes the immortal mind, and
imparts to it that sublime peace, so essential to its
progress and to its comfort in prospect of eternity.
To the Bible, above all other sources, must the
Mends of God and truth look for a final refutation
of those errors, whereby Christianity, in every age,
has been corrupted. In all religious controversies,
in the controversy between the Jew and the Chris
tian, between the Protestant and the Papist, between
those who hold to regeneration in baptism, the sav
ing grace of sacraments, the supremacy of bishops,

16 INTEEPEBTATION.
the simple humanity of Christ, the salvation of aU
men, the return of the Jews to Palestine, the per
sonal appearance and reign of our Lord for a thou
sand years at Jerusalem, and those who deny these
doctrines, a sound and irrefragable interpretation of
the Bible, conducted in the legitimate use of reason,
is the last court of appeal. " This is the Judge that
ends the strife." This is the one mighty instrument
by which error is to be overthrown ; and the victory
cannot be doubtful, for God is on the side of his
Word. Any one who will refiect upon the matter, cannot
fail to perceive the importance of our subject. It is
by a right interpretation of its contents that the
Bible becomes to us, in eifect, what it professes to
be, the infallible Word of God. To ascertain the
precise sense intended by the Spirit of God, neither
adding thereto, nor subtracting therefrom, is the only
sure way of possessing the Bible. Its claims, as
inspired and supreme, the momentous topics on
which it treats, our absolute need of it as a directory
of hfe, indispensable in a very high degree to the
salvation of the soul, are facts of themselves suffi
cient to show how important it is that we find and
adopt its true sense only.
The foundation of theological seminaries — ^the
required qualifications of their professors — ^the im-

ITS IMPOETAKTCE. 17
mense sums laid out in their endowment — the
princely libraries gathered for their use, show clearly
what the Christian world thinks of the importance
of a Bible rightly interpreted.
So indeed does the establishment of the Christian
ministry, because mainly for this express purpose it
is ordained and educated. The work of the ministry
is first to ascertain, then to enforce the meaning of
the Scriptures. It was during our own personal
struggles after the sense of certain texts, that the
importance of this whole subject, and the need of
such a treatise as this, for the first time revealed
itself. On more careful investigation, we found that
the meaning of the text did not sustain the sermon,
and therefore the sermon was in fact of no authority.
To the minister of the Gospel, above all men, the
right interpretation of the Bible is a matter of the
greatest importance. It is only when his sermon is
wedded -to his text, by a clear and irresistible inter
pretation, that he speaks in the name of his Master ;
and when he thus speaks, he will be heard and
reverenced as an ambassador of Christ, a veritable
teacher of the Word of God.
Besides, a misinterpreted Bible is the stronghold
of all error — of Judaism as well as of Popery. The
Talmud on which the Jews rely for their creed, is
merely a collection of misinterpretations of Moses

18 mTEEPEETATION.
and the prophets. Nor is there any general conver
sion of the Jews to be expected until they are per
suaded to abandon the Talmud and take the Bible of
their fathers in its stead. The same thing is true of
Popery in all its forms. A perverted Bible, in the
hands of a selfish priesthood, is the right arm of the
Greek and Roman churches ; and if, as the friends
of the Gospel, we would secure them to the true
faith, we must ply them on every hand with the
Word of God. But in this work it will not be suffi
cient to quote Scripture; we must interpret Scrip
ture ; and that, too, on principles, which their rekson
will compel them to accept ; then we may hope to
enlighten and reclaim them, but not till then.
It gives all the force of a divine affirmation to the
importance which we attach to a right interpreta
tion of the Bible, when we refer to the example of
our Lord Jesus Christ. He addressed himself
throughout his whole eventful ministry to this very
undertaking. The Scribes and Pharisees had made
the Word of no eifect through their traditions — that
is, through their false interpretations. Hence our
Lord attacked and subverted the entire system of
Pharasaic exegesis. He exposed their errors and
vindicated the true sense of the Scripture on every
fitting occasion. The apostles imbibed the spirit of
their divine Master, and carried it out in all theii

ITS IMPOETANCE. 19
labors and writings, until the volume of Eevelation
was closed.
Finally, history confirms all that we have said of
the importance, of a right interpretation.. The Bible,
read and understood in its own meaning, in all climes
and ages, is the sure forerunner of undefiled religion,
the fruitful germ of all greatness and growth, in indi
viduals and in nations. The Bible, the divine book,
not on the shelf as an ornament, not in morocco and
gold clasps merely, with a cross on the outside to be
admired — ^but revealed and written on the hearts of
men by the Holy Spirit, and received as an infallible
standard of faith and morals — this, has always proved
the true reformer. Under its influence, every faculty
of man, and every virtue of the soil on which he
treads, has ripened rapidly to maturity. A rightly
interpreted Bible is the only pure fountain of saving
knowledge and healthful civilization in this sinful
and wretched world.
A firm faith in these sentiments has inspired us
throughout in the composition of this work, of the
special design of which we now proceed more par
ticularly to speak.

20 INTEEPEETATION.

CHAPTEE II.
THE SPECIAL DESIGN OF THIS TEEATISE.
To ascertain the true sense of the Bible has always
been a matter of the profoundest interest to all
devout minds. Hence books on the subject, ex
pounding the principles of interpretation, and show
ing how the difficult passages of Scripture are to be
explained, have always been desired. The want of
such books has been felt by the learned and the
unlearned, by enemies as well as by friends of
the Sacred Yolume; and the common method of
meeting it has been by commentaries in full on the
books of the Bible.
But such commentaries, almost without exception,
have been too elaborate, and too wearisome, to be
thoroughly read ; and they very often fail to explain
the difficulties which the reader wishes to have
explained. It is no part of their design to state, with
any clearness, the principles on which their exposi-

DESIGN OF THIS TEEATISE. 21
tions proceed ; and yet there is not one in twenty of
common readers but wishes to know those principles.
Hence although commentaries are extensively pur
chased, they do not prove wholly satisfactory in the
interpretation of the Bible.
The special design of this book is to place the
principles of interpretation in the reader's own hands,
that he may employ them in the formation of his
views of what the Bible means ; if he acquires the
principles, he can interpret, and form his ovni creed
and commentary, in the free exercise of his own
judgment. That there are principles by which all our inter
pretations should be governed, will not be denied;
although it is well understood there are objections
urged in high places against all attempts at reducing
them to a system. It is said, men interpret as they
read, without waiting for any formal system of rules.
But if this is even so, it is no proof that men inter
pret correctly. A correct system of logic is no hin
drance to correct thinking. Even so in the case
before us. If there be fundamental principles of
interpretation, and no one denies it, and if they can be
expressed and classified, the expression and classifi
cation of them must be a real assistance to every
student of the Sacred Yolume. The want of such a
system, and the inconsistent methods of interpreta-

22 INTEEPEETATION.
tion to which it leads, has wrought no good to
religion. It has given birth to the proverb, as mis
chievous as it is untrue :
"In the Bible every man his opinion seeks ;
In the Bible everv man his opinion finds."
This is a libel on the Bible. Let sound and true
principles be adopted, and this proverb will perish.
The Bible can be interpreted consistently with itself,
and in such a manner as to commend itself to the
good sense and enlightened faith of all men. It is
not the text-book of every error with which this
world is infested. It can be correctly intei-preted,
so as to give unity and perspicuity to its doctrines,
just as truly as the ocean can be traversed by
the help of the compass, through all its gulfs, bays,
and straits.
It is absurd to oppose the reduction of interpreta
tion to a science with its fixed rules. In the very
nature of a revelation, and indeed of every commu
nication from one intelligent being to another, there
must be things requiring explanation ; but he to
whom the communication is made must have the
key to its meaning, or else it is given to him in vain.
His knowledge of language, of the subject, of the
author, of himself, and of things without him, will
come to his aid. He will avail himself of the laws

DESIGN OF THIS' TEEATISE. 23
of correct thinking ; and these are precisely the laws
which, when classified, will serve all the purposes of
a rational and right system of Biblical interpretation.
Our design is to collect these laws, and illustrate
their application in the actual work of finding the
true sense of the Scriptm-es.
But we do not think it necessary to foUow the
method of some who have treated this subject in all
its details. They have laid down rules for all the
separate departments of Scriptures ; for the parables,
the promises, and the types, &c., until we have felt
oppressed with the idea that the whole subject is
entangled in an endless mass of particulars, never to
be mastered. Even for professed students we would
not adopt this method. It throws an air of difficulty
over a subject, which in truth is of more easy com
prehension than many of the sciences, the approach
to which has never been hedged up with any such
obstructions. We have not attempted, therefore, any exhausting
system of particulars ; our aim has been to deal with
the subject in a clear yet comprehensive manner,
laying dovm only those general principles which
solve rationally and satisfactorily the main difficul
ties in the way of the inquirer. The wonderful
unanimity of the great mass of common readers of
the Bible, in respect to its meaning, shows that by

24: INTEEPEETATION.
far the greater part of the Bible admits of no mis
understanding, and calls for no laborious apparatus
of interpretation. We do not say the Bible contains
no difficulties, nor that its interpretation is a work
requiring no profound attention. What we object
to is the air of repulsiveness and immensity so unne
cessarily cast upon the subject. Let the student
have the ordinary encouragement held out to those
who attempt the acquisition of other sciences. Let
him not be plunged into a wilderness of particulars.
If he must have helps to interpretation, let them be
such as he needs, such as he can readily use. A
traveller asking the way to a certain place, does not
require a minute description of every object on the
line of his journey. It is enough that you call his
attention to the most obvious objects : thus directed,
he will find his way without further trouble.
Most frankly, therefore, is the confession here
made, that this is no exhausting system of herme
neutics. Those who have a taste for such works will
find it gratified in Emesti, Home, and Davidson;
invaluable books if you wish to pursue the subject
into all its details. We must walk in another path,
less scholastic, leading through an opener country ;
content, if we may conduct the humblest inquirers
to an understanding of the Bible, by such means
only as shall neither weary their minds Avith particu-

DESIGN OF THIS TEEATISE. 25
lars, nor divert them from the work of an indepen
dent interpretation of the Holy Scriptures.
A correct and comprehensive system of principles
must be a very welcome assistance to all readers and
students of the Sacred Volume ; and such a system it
has been our aim to construct. K the principles
here recorded are ip. themselves correct, their appli
cation, such as we have made it, we hope is also cor
rect. On this point there may be a difference of
opinion. Some may adopt the principles, and object
to the use we have made of them. B"ut we are not
greatly moved at the thought. Our eye is single.
Truth is our aim ; and if the principles we have laid
down in this volume be founded in sound common
sense, the illustrations will answer for themselves.
Let the truth be spoken at all hazards. All sects
and parties are probably somewhat in the wrong, as
respects the meaning of the Bible ; but the principles
of intei-pretation, like the principles of mathematics,
are independent of all schools and parties ; and by
their impartial, legitimate application, must all par
ties be reproved if they have adopted errors worthy
of reproof. We subject ourselves to the same laws,
and await the issue without fear.
To every honest inquirer, then, is this treatise
commended. If it serve the purpose designed by
the author, it will be a key to the Bible, and an easy
2

26 INTEEPEETATION.
and convenient help in the solution of many of the
perplexities which, as trials of our faith and pa
tience, God has suffered to gather around His
Word. May the blessing of Him in whose fear it
has been written, go with the book in aU its fortunes,
and it shall not be sent forth in vain.

ITS HISTOET. 27

CHAPTEE in.
ON THE HISTOET AND PEOGEESS OF INTEEPEETATION.
The interpretation of the Bible has had a history
and a progress very similar to that of every other
science. The time has been when its laws were but
very imperfectly understood; and when principles
were advanced and followed, which in our day
would be regarded as unsound in the highest degree.
Evidence of this meets us at the very threshold of
this history. Among many of the discoveries that
give you pain in regard to the early condition of
Christianity, there is none more painful than this,
that almost contemporaneously with the apostles
themselves, there appears a disposition to pervert
the plainest portions of the Bible. Instead of taking
the obvious sense, the leading early writers, whose
works have come down to us, seem to labor with all
their ingenuity to invent a meaning as far as possible
from it.

28 INTEEPEETA'nON.
To go no fm-ther back than A. D. 200, Clemens
Alexandrinus gives the following rules for the inter
pretation of the Bible: 1. All Scripture has an
allegorical sense. 2. The laws of Moses have a
fourfold meaning. 3. Every law of Moses foretells
something future. 4. The Scriptures conceal their
meaning, that we may the more diligently study
them ; and that men may be convinced that they did
not foreknow the coming of the Messiah. 5. The
literal sense of Scripture produces only elementary
faith, while the allegorical leads to the most sublime
wisdom. 6. Tradition is an indispensable light in
interpretation. Such were the laws of exegesis adopted and
applied by this eminent Christian teacher ; and yet
not one of them deserves to be styled a law of inter
pretation. In his Stromata, or Miscellanies, may be
found abundant illustrations of the en-ors to which
they led. Clemens was an ardent disciple of Plato,
and the philosophy of that mystical but eloquent
Greek controlled all his views of the Word of God.
After Clemens came Irseneus and Tertullian, who
are properly ranked together, because they adopted
the same principles, and labored to refute the same
great errors of the Gnostics. The Gnostics were the
Eationalists of those early centuries. Thsy opposed
their reason to the explicit dicta of the Scriptures,

ITS HISTORY. 2.)
and carried the allegorizing merhoJ uf Clemens to
such a length, that in the opinion of Irseneus, Tertul
lian, and others, the whole fabric of Christianity was
in danger of being subverted. To counteract the
mischief, these fathers insisted chiefly on one princi
ple, which seemed indeed their only principle for all
the purposes of interpretation. This they styled
"regula fldei," the rule of faith, the creed of the
Gh-wroh. Tertullian gave all his vigor to the estab
lishment of this vicio'us dogma. He was by far the
most eloquent of all the Latin fathers, and his writ
ings, on fire now with true fervor, can be read to
this day profitably, for their literary merits alone.
Though he adheres to the literal sense as supreme,
he is willing to renounce reason altogether, and
believe all the more firmly whatever it declared in
credible. From him we have this pithy sentence :
" A fault in interpretation is not of less magnitude
than a fault in the life." But his influence, on the
whole, was very decidedly opposed to the simplicity
and purity of the Gospel. A corrupt traditionary
faith was put in the place of the inspired Word
of God.
In the third century, Origen, laborious, acute, and
a great admirer of Plato, was the centre of Biblical
learning. He adopted Plato's idea, that man consists
of three elements, body, soul, and spirit ; and on this

30 INTEEPEETATION.
theory he maintained that Scripture must have a
three-fold sense. Consequently, the grand feature
of his system, was the setting aside of the obvious
meaning as nearly always worthless. And hence
the absurdities of this learned father are all but
incredible. Notwithstanding his system held a long
and mighty sway ; and while tracing its history, we
have again and again reached the conviction, that it
became one of those wide-spread and potent causes,
which, working in harmony with the depraved pas
sions of men, finally produced the great apostasy of
Eome. The entire Bible was perverted. In the hands
of Origen and his disciples, it became an overflowing
fountain of foolish conceits, having no power over
the hearts of men. The uncircumcised philosophy
of Plato and Aristotle, was preferred to the teachings
of Paul and John. The light of God's Word was
quenched in a heathen effort to make it consistent
with heathen reasoning. The Bible was no longer in
its own sovereignty, the all-sufficient standard of
faith and practice. There was authority only in the
teachings of those who controlled the Church. Tra
dition — and such tradition, as forced a three-fold
sense on the Bible — was the rule of interpretation,
and the law of all doctrine. See Mosheim's Com. vol.
n. p. 172-189. Origen did indeed sometimes con
travene his own false principles ; but his errors pre-

ITS HISTOET. _ 31
vailed, and their reign was a reign of death to the
simplicity, and power of the sacred Scriptures.
Next after Origen, Augustine is the first great
name that offers itself to our attention. He was the
great man of his age, and in exegesis, the greatest
that had yet appeared in the Chi-istian Church. In
his work on Christian doctrine, he has laid down
better rules than any preceding writer, though they
are exceedingly defective, and in his actual interpre
tations, egregiously violated. The common method of
turning every passage into allegory, held dominion
over his otherwise noble and independent mind. Wit
ness his interpretation (Evan, quaest. lib. 2, qusest 19),
of Luke X. 30, the parable of the good Samaritan. He
says the man is Adam, in the human race ; Jericho
is the moon ; the robbers are Satan and his angels ;
the inn is the Church, &c. Many other examples
could be given, but let this suffice.
In his treatise on Christian doctrine, above men
tioned, he specifies the following as rules of interpre
tation. 1. The nature of the passage is carefully to
be ascertained, whether it is literal, or figurative.
2. Obscure places are to be interpreted by the more
intelligible. 3. Nothing hinders the same passage
to be understood in more senses than one. 4. A
knowledge of tropes is necessary. 5. Human reason
is not to be trusted.

iKTTT.BrKeTATtO.V.

L'hio series of maxims, for they have not the form
of laws of exegesis, shows that science had occupied
the thoughts of this prince among theologians. But
on referring to his actual intei-pretations, we do not
find him obeying his own principles ; and the convic
tion is ever growing upon us, that had he elaborated
a more rational system of principles, he would have
been a more consistent expounder of the Bible, and
a more judicious teacher of its doctrines. A man
of limited education, of high natural endowments,
and unquenchable enthusiasm, he was often more
ready to make the Scriptiu-es bend to his philosophy,
or to the creed of the Church, than meekly to inquire
on sound principles for the meaning of the Scriptm-es.
But in this respect he was like all the Fathers. They
all stumbled at one stumbling stone, the neglect of
the plain and obvious sense of the Bible, and the
abuse of the reason with, which God had endowed
them. We cannot mention all the names of those, who,
in those early centuries, after Augustine, appeared
as interpreters of the Scriptures; neither is it neces
sary ; for they walk in one well-beaten path. With
unvarying uniformity, they laid great stress on tra
dition as essential to the right understanding of the
Bible. But in the course of time, very naturally, it
came to pass, that men began to be desirous of know-

ITS HISTOET. 33
ing with greater precision the limits of this tradition,
and the exact amount of its teachings. Accordingly,
a record of its teachings was made and published ;
and by a singular felicity, this collection of opinions
was styled Catenae, the chains ; because, as it was
alleged, it contained a continuous chain of doctrine
' and belief, from the apostles downward.
But now, that tradition was written, it was main
tained that "the chains," were preferable to the
Scriptures, because while the Scriptures were diffi
cult to be understood, " the chains " were easy. To
this sentiment, the position was also added, that the
Scriptures could be understood only by the priests;
and for reasons not difficult for us to understand, even
at this distance of time, the priests piously recom
mended " the chains " in place of the Bible. The
consequences could' not be doubtful. The Bible
was totally shorn of its power, and robbed of all the
honor that belonged to it. It was all but quenched
out. From all the investigations we have been able to
make of the writings and influence of the Fathers,
as they have been called, we have no hesitation in
saying, that the principles they adopted in the expo
sition of the Bible, were such as common sen^e cannot
justify, and such therefore as led them headlong into
the grossest errors. They possessed, but they, at the
2*

31 INTEEPEETATION.
same time grievously perverted, the Holy Oracles ;
and this fact, melancholy, as it is undisputed, only
shows with what vigilance we should watch over our
principles of Biblical interpretation. Had the early
Fathers proved faithful to their trust, and adhered
honestly to the dictates of common sense, in the
great work of explaining and defending the Word of
God, how different had been the history of the
Church, and the world! A departm-e once made
from the simplicity of the Bible, in the direction of
priestly power and mysticism, how sudden and dread
ful were the aberrations from the safe paths of pure
and undefiled religion ! What horrible ages of dark
ness were entailed upon the Church, and upon man
kind, by the agency of the leading teachers of religion !
ages whose darkness and miseries have not passed
away to this day.
From Augustine to the fourteenth century there .
is a wide and dreary waste in Biblical learning.
- Not a treatise of any real value, through all that
long period of a thousand years, offers itself to our
attention. The human mind was bound fast in " the
chains " of tradition. The Fathers were supposed to
have exhausted all Bibhcal knowledge, and woe to
the man who dared to say they had not. The Bible
was an unknown book ; its study was wholly neg-
I'jcted. The highest intellectual effort of Biblical

ITS HISTOET. 35
Students was making " chains " out of " chains,"
traditions out of traditions. It was the hour of dark
ness. Satan held a jubilee.
The first name that gives promise of a better day,
is that of Nicholas de Lyra, 1340 ; of whom Luther
said: " If Lyra had not harped,
Lather had not danced."
Lyra was a good Hebrew scholar — a rare attain
ment in those days ; and gave all his vigor to the study
and illustration of the Bible. His greatest work was
a commentary on the whole Scriptures, and in the
prologues prefixed, we meet with some of the
soundest views ever advanced in respect to the
science of interpretation. But "the chains" l\ad
even fallen upon him. " I protest," he said, " that I
intend nothing, either in the way of assertion or
determination, except in reference to points clearly
settled by Scripture, or the authority of the Church.
All beside must be taken as written scholastically
and by the way of exercise ; for I submit all I have
said, and am to say, to the correction of our holy
mother the Church."
These were the last dying notes of the old hymn
of spiritual servility. Luther arose and struck the
first effectual blow for liberty. He gave the Bible
to his country in their mother tongue, and the science

36 INTEEPEETATION.
of interpretation began. As we have just said, De
Lyra pointed to the sound and reliable principles of
the science, and Luther's admiration of them gave
promise of the correctness of his own. On Gen. i.
9, he says of Lyra: "Ego Lyranum ideo amo, ef
inter optimos pono, quod ubique dihgenter detinet
et persequitur historiam, quanquam patrum se vinci
patitur." " I love Lyra, and place him among the
very best interpreters; because, though he permits
himself to be led away by the Fathers, he always
diligently retains and follows the historical sense."
Luther, for the first time, introduced the idea of a
direct appeal to the Bible, rightly interpreted, as the
standard of sound doctrine. The Fathers and the
chains were both disowned ; to the law and the testi
mony, if they spake not according to these, it was
because there was no truth in them. It was full
time that the Bible should be heard on its own
behalf. The appeal, therefore, was to the Word of
God impartially explained. In this lay the gei-m of
that mighty revolution, which, having its origin in
the depths of Germany, and its life in the Scrip
tures, is destined to enlighten the whole world, and
enthrone the Bible in the hearts of all nations. The
reformers had the advantage of their opponents, in
the mere quoting of the Scriptures. The advocates
of the Church could not stand before them. With

ITS HISTOET. 37
heai-ts renewed by the Holy Spirit, the common
people understood the Word of God, and verified the
saying of the Great Teacher: "If thine eye be
single, thy whole body shall be full of light."
But the book, which deserves the first place among
those of this famous period, in which the science of
exegesis was well set forth, though not strictly a trea
tise on interpretation, was the justly-celebrated
" Institute's " of John Calvin. This great work made
its mark upon the hterature of the age and of the
world ; because it was a well-reasoned statement of
Christian doctrine, drawn by correct logic from the
BMe. It laid the immovable platform of Protes
tantism on the firm basis of the Bible, where it will
ever remain. On the whole, Calvin was one of the
wisest interpreters of the Scriptures that had as yet
appeared, -from the days of the apostles.
The science, however, was not yet perfected. In
the seventeenth century the idea was still predomi
nant that the Bible was replete with allegory.
'Every passage of Scripture looks every way, and
all the meaning that can be found in it, is in it to be
regarded as the mind of God." This theory greatly
prevailed in England, and over all the continent of
Europe. Among other evidences, witness John
Bunyan's " Solomon's Temple Spiritualized."
In Germany, the birth-place of the Eeformation,

38 INTEEPEETATION.
there now arose a succession of writers on Biblical
science, in learning, industry, and boldness, far sur
passing their predecessors. Some were friends, some
enemies of the Bible ; but never before was the
critical and exegetical study of the Scriptures so
ardently pm-sued ; with what results is yet to be seen.
The leaders, and the prominent points of their sys
tems, we here briefly mention.
First is Emmanuel Kant, a professor of meta
physics. His grand principle was to educe from the
Bible only such sentiments as are conformable to
pure morality. "Pure reason" was the test of
Scripture. Whatever did not agree with that test
was rejected, and consequently the fact of inspiration
was speedily ignored. The Bible came to have no
more authority than any other human composition.
It is due to Kant, nevertheless, to say that he did not
avow these as the legitimate consequences of his
theory. After him came Eichhorn and Paulus, holding
only another phase of his mischievous dogma. They
taught that the miracles of Scripture were to be
received only when they could not be referred to
probable causes. But probable causes were always
plenty, and consequently not a miracle was left ere
long to bear witness for the truth. For a time this
was quite a popular theory.

ITS HISTOET. 39
Semler next propounded his method. He started
with the proposition that Christ and his disciples
were truly benevolent persons ; but in view of the
superstitions of the age, they accommodated their
teachings to the ignorance around them. They
knew the truth, but did not reveal it, for fear of
offending men, and diiving them from instruction
altogether. The Bible, therefore, was only a pious
imposition on the credulity of the world. What a
view to take of the Word of God !
Thus there arose in the heart of Christendom what
has been falsely called Eationalism, a system in
which the Bible was treated with all manner of
abuse and insult, under the name of reason and
learning. In opposition to this Eationalism, another
class of mistaken interpreters stood forth — the Pie
tists. They occupied the other extreme, decrying
reason wholly, and depending on the special impulses
of the Spirit for the discovery of the true meaning of
Scripture. Learning and reason were not helps in
their view, but hindrances. It was to be expected
that this party should soon run into the wildest
enthusiasm : the Bible was neglected by them, quite
as much as it was perverted by their opponents.
In 1643, the Westminster Assembly in England
did good service to the cause of sound interpretation,
by their Confession of Faith, which, with some few

40 INTEEPEETATION.
exceptions, is perhaps the most correct and consis
tent system of evangelical doctrine in the world. It
proceeds throughout on the ground that the Bible
is supreme in authority, and its contents to be inter
preted in dependence on the Spirit of God, on princi
ples of sound common sense. The process by which
their celebrated confession was made, was a process
purely of interpretation, because at every step the
question with that learned assembly was, What saith
the Scripture ?
The next great step in the history of om- science
was the Commentary of Matthew Henry, who
brought a sanctified and childlike mind to his work.
Then came Philip Doddridge, the Melanchthon of
England, with polished pen, unfolding the meaning
of the Holy Scriptures. In Scotland, a few years
later, John Brown sent forth the self-interpreting
Bible, which holds its place among books to this
day. He was a self-taught and sagacious expounder
of the Bible, and did much to revive a true and
independent exposition of the Scriptures. He pub
lished a series of rules, which will be found in the
appendix to this treatise ; they convey some idea of
the condition of this science in his day.
Many names now crowd upon us, but we forbear.
The rebellion against the Fathers was bearing fruit.
The Bible was fast regaining its supremacy, despite

1T8 BISTORT. 41
the effoiTS of Rome ; and the pride of that hierarchv
was rebuked, for the common people not only read,
but understood the Sacred Oracles without the aid of
"the chains." Not that past systems had yet wholly
lost their power. Plato, Augustine, Calvin, the
mighty minds of former ages, were not so easily van
quished. The Fathers had yet a wide dominion.
Systems of erroneous philosophy, by nature, subtle as
the air we breathe, are all but immortal ; perhaps
they never altogether die. As we approach, how
ever, our own times, there is more hberty, more sim
plicity, more progress in the direction of a sound
interpretation. In this country, powerful revivals of religion, long
and keen controversies. Sabbath-school instruction,
and the spirit of missions, have had a wonderful
effect. Improvements in natural science also, the
defeat of infidelity in Europe, and the successful
refutation of its objections against the Scriptures,
have all served to throw new light on our science.
The names of those who have labored directly for its
advancement here, are few in number, but of proved
energy and worth. First, stands that of Moses Stu
art; a man of sincere heart, great enthusiasm, and
indomitable perseverance. He was the father of the
science in this country, and led the way in its study,
with such zeal, that even Germany confessed itself

42 INTEEPEETATION.
interested. The cautious mind of New England was
alarmed, and Old England, even when it could not
agree, was willing to applaud. His conclusions are
not always so confidently to be rehed on as
those of others, who have come after him ; but as a
student of the original languages, and an indepen
dent expounder of the 'Sacred Oracles, he has had, as
yet, few superiors. Safer guides to the arcana of
the Scriptures have arisen; but none so ardent, or
so chivabous, as he. The greater part of the helps
to Biblical study, in this country, are the creation of
his hand. To him, therefore, belongs the double
honor of advancing this sacred science, beyond all
former precedent, on this continent, and of producing
in great measure, the very facilities by which it has
been so successfully prosecuted.
Next in time and honor stands Edward Eobinson ;
a riper scholar, gifted with more sagacity, and more
of that comprehensive erudition, so essential to the
Biblical interpreter. His labors have been chiefly
in the department of sacred geography and lexico
graphy, and to every student of the Sacred Scriptures,
they are beyond all price. The principles on which
he has compiled his "Lexicon of the New Testament,"
and by which he was governed also, in his edition of
" Gesenius' Hebrew Lexicon," are in themselves good
evidence of the great progress made in the science

ITS HISTOET. 43
of Scriptural exegesis. They embrace the entire-
subject of exposition and bear the impress of sound,
enlightened reason, against which there is no suc
cessful opposition.
Our hmits do not permit us to speak of the labors
of Gibbs, Alexander, Hodge, Sears, Conant, and
others, who have contributed nobly to the advance
ment of this science. It is a field that admits of
many laborers ; and all these as critics and scholars,
have deserved well of the friends of the Bible.
Finally, as worthy of being numbered with the
first three, we now record the name of a Presby
terian pastor, who, amid the labors of a city ministry,
has earned for his country the proud distinction of
having given to the world, the most clear, satisfac
tory, and practical expositions of many of the sacred
books that have ever been written. Simphcity and
directness are his characteristics. He is the fairest,
the most impartial, and the most instructive of all
commentators. Pledged to no master, a slave to no
school, but using a cool and sound judgment, he has
developed the meaning of the inspired writers, in a
popular maimer, with more success than any other
writer of his day. The Notes of Albert Barnes,
though not written for scholars, have done noble
service in the department of Biblical interpretation.
Never again will " the chains " fetter the free expo-

t+ f^"TRt^PKT;TATIO^.
sitioii ot' ihe Word of (.io'J. 1 li'"}' are brok>Mi asun
der for ever. Henceforth the Bible must be
interpreted on sound and self-evident principles,
such as are consistent with immutable truth. The
true point of approach to the sense of Scripture
is not through the question, " What saith the Church,
or the creed?" but through the question, "What
saith, and what meaneth the Word of God ?" The
grand characteristic of Barnes, which in due time
win become the characteristic of the age, con
sists in seizing the object of the inspired penmen,
and in giving a calm, rational, and self-consistent
explication of their doctrines, on principles which
commend themselves to the common sense of men.
It is on this ground that the Bible will survive and
retain its hold on the human mind, and fill the earth
with the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters fill
the sea.

THE BIBLE INSPIEED. 45 *

CHAPTEE IV.
AEGHMENT FOE THE tNSPIEATION OF THE BIBLE STATED.
It is not absolutely essential in a treatise on the prin
ciples of interpretation, that we should enter elabo
rately into the proof of the fact that the Scriptures
are inspired. In such a treatise, that fact may pro
perly be taken for granted. Yet it may serve a very
important purpose, at least, to state the argument for
inspiration, by way of laying the foundation of some
of those maxims, on which the whole process of inter
pretation is based. If it be a fact, that the Bible
is inspired of God, it certainly must behoove us to
keep the fact constantly in view, as affecting our
decisions at every step. To lose sight of it or to deny
it, must compel us to err fundamentally.
Here let us first define what is meant by the inspi
ration of the Bible. In asserting that the Bible is
inspired, we mean to assert the presence and watch
ful superintendence of the Divine Spirit, in the

46 INTEEPEETATION.
minds of the writers, to such a degree as best to
secure the statement of truth, of truth in many
instances, which lay beyond the discovery of the
human mind. The writers of the Scriptures wrote
as they were moved by the Spirit of God.
That such inspiration was possible no man can
reasonably deny. No higher power is required in
the case, than in the creation and support of the
human mind in the free exercise of its powers.
That such inspiration was necessary to the existence
and authority of such a book as the Bible, is evident
from the nature of the doctrines it contains ; the com
parative ignorance of the writers in respect to natural
science ; and the importance of its standing forth in
all generations, not as the production of men, but as
the authoritative Word of God. Without such inspi
ration it had lacked certainty, dignity, and power.
It would have occupied no higher place than the
Koran, and possessed no higher adaptation to the
wants of the universal human mind. It would not
have been the word of God. But as it is, whether we
read its histories, or its descriptions of God, of nature,
and of man ; or its laws of morals, its plan of salva
tion, and its means of renewing the soul in the pure
image of God ; or its deep mysteries of blessedness
yet to be developed in the coming cycles of eternity,
we can neither deny, nor cease to feel its heavenly

THE BIBLE INSPIEBD. 47
origin. The inspiration and presence of the Al
mighty goes with it ; and such was His sovereign,
all-wise decree. Hence neither the comparative
ignorance of the writers, nor the treacherousness of
memory, nor imperfections of the understanding,
availed to defeat the divine purpose. The inspira
tion of the Spirit is the strength of the Bible. But
for this, it never could have survived, as it has done,
on the rough seas of time ; long ere this it had been
destroyed in the desperate madness of men. God is
in the Bible, and therefore its noblest triumphs are
yet to come, in the histories of that millenium, so
near at hand.
The argument, by which the fact of inspiration is
conclusively established, is brief.
First is the consideration, that known things are
everywhere spoken of in the Scriptures, just as we
know them. The visible kingdom of natture is there
reflected as in a mirror. The evidence for the attri
butes and character of God is there as correctly
detailed, as in the material world. The word and the
works are in most singular harmony. So also in
respect to the character of man. Everything is set
forth concerning the human heart, just as it works
itself out in the every-day experience and business
of life. There is no denying the correctness of the
record, without at the same time denying the every
day history of the world.

48 INTEEPEETATION.
Next is the fact, that the moral code of the Bible
is such as proves it divine ; it is so perfect, so admira
ble in its effects on the soul, so completely beyond
the inventive powers of mere men, that it were a
miracle more difficult to be accounted for than
inspiration itself, were such a code found in a book
of mere human origin. By whom, if not by the
Spirit of God, could such an instrument as the moral
law have been produced? In that golden law, so
peculiarly the Bible's own, and so charmingly inter
woven into the texture of its every page, in that law
so august, so level to man's capacities, so worthy of
Heaven, we cannot but behold the sure symbol of
-divinity. Not to be omitted, is the wonderful harmony
throughout the Book in respect to scientific truth.
The writers, though profoundly ignorant, in a major
ity of instances, of all the natm*al sciences, have
never in any case contradicted them. Here is cer
tainly the finger of God. Has not every other book
pretending to be a revelation, disproved its own pre
tences, in this very particular ?
Then fm-ther, the wi-iters living thousands of years
apart, under very different degrees of light, with very
diverse endowments as men, have not in any instance
set themselves in opposition to each other. Is this
true of any other class of religious writers ? Is it
true of the poets, the philosophers, historians, or of

THE BIBLE INSPIEED. 49
any of the admirers of the exact sciences, who say,
" figures cannot lie "? But it is true of the writers
of the Bible, and they wrote history, and poetry, and
philosophy, and natural theology, and theories of civil
and moral government, like other men; with this
difference, that while other men never have agreed,
the VTTiters of the Bible have never failed to agree.
The reason of this fact, is the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit. It is evidence to the same point, that not one of the
writers of the Bible allows himself to be carried
away with the belief of the common superstitions of
the world. Superstition is the opposite of religion ;
hence, from first to last, the penmen of the Bible,
being friends of religion, and under the superinten
dence of God, have not shown a trace of faith in any
of the prevalent fooleries of witchcraft, and consul- »
tation of spirits. How did this come to pass, but
from the fact that God was with them of a truth ?
Once more. The writers of the Bible have agreed
in publishing, with perfect harmony, many doctrines
in their very nature, beyond the capacity of the
unassisted human mind to have originated ; ' such as
the creation of the world, the immortality of the
soul, the resurrection of the body, the atonement of
Christ, the regeneration of the heart by the Spirit,
the penalty of the moral law, and the three-fold dis-
3

60 INTEEPEETATION.
tinctions in the Godhead. It was not in the power
of the human mind to have thought out these doc
trines , nor was it possible, without the intervention
of the Spirit, that so many wi'iters should have
spoken so uniformly in harmony respecting these
doctrines, especially when speaking at such distances
of time, and under such very diverse conditions of
life. Then further, it is to be noted, that in confirmation
of these truths, signs, and wonders, and miracles
were performed, such as God only can perform, and
such as were never performed but in support of these
same truths. Of these miracles, there can be no
doubt, for they changed the history of the world,
having been wrought in presence of thousands, with
that express object in view. Among these miracles,
we include prophecy, and confidently make our
appeal to it, as to an irresistible demonstration of the
presence of God with the writers of the Bible. Des
perate, and frequent were the efforts of men to over
throw both the prophet and his vision ; but sent of
God, and speaking as he was moved by the Holy
Spirit, he stood calmly at his post, until the time of
the fulfillment came; then men saw and believed
that God was with him.
Another proof of inspiration, is the pecuUar and
admirable effect of the Bible, on the mental, moral

THE BIBLE INSPIEED. 51
and social, as well as intellectual condition of men.
In this dark, sinful, and miserable world, it is at all
times, and in every place, as an angel of God. The
Bible is man's best friend — his best guide through
life, his faithful attendant and comforter at the solemn
hour of death. It is the enlightener of nations ; the
source of all human progress ; the fountain of light,
and joy, and hope to the world. There is no clearer
evidence than this, that it is from God. It is the
only true and great Eeformer of the hearts and hves
of men.
Finally, let us hear the testimony of the writers
themselves. They are competent to testify on this
point until their veracity is impeached. In 2 Pet.
i. 28, one thus bears witness : " The Prophecy came
not in old time by the will of man ; but holy men
spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." In
Luke i. 70, another testifies : " As he spake by the
mouth of His holy prophets, which have been since
the world began." In Heb. i. 1, a third declares the
inspiration both of the Old Testament, and the New,
as follows : " God, who at sundry times, and in divers
manners, spake in time past unto the Fathers by the
prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by
his Son." And in 2 Tim. iii. 16, the same writer,
with more explicitness still, has said : " All Scripture
is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for

62 INTEEPEETATION.
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect,
thoroughly- furnished unto all good works;" words
these, worthy of being written in gold, and placed
as a frontispiece to every copy of the Bible sent forth
into the world.
By this testimony of the writers, we are conducted
to the same conclusion, in which we felt constrained
to rest after a survey of the truth, purity, peculiarity,
sublimity, and harmony of the Scriptures. Thus by
their own merits, and by miracles, and by the exphcit
testimony of the writers, the Scriptures are proved, not
the work of mere men but of the Holy spirit of God.
We have often felt that this whole question of
inspiration might be settled by an appeal to a single
book, the Eevelation of John. It was composed in
all probability, in his ninety-sixth, or ninety-seventh
year. He made no pretensions to learning ; his life
was spent in the most humble circumstances, far
from the walks of learning. Was it possible for such
an aged man, in such a situation, to have written
such a book by the energy of his own mind?
Examine its contents ; its plan, its awful subhmity
of diction, its consistency, amid such intricacy, its
grandeur of conception, its predictions stretching
down through all time, fulfilling and being fulfilled
with such wonderful accuracy — do this, with your eye

THE BIBLE INSPIEED. 53
on the history of the Church and of the world since
the day the book was written, and on the character
of the man, standing as he did on the verge of his
hundredth year — and say, did not John write as he
was moved by the Spirit of God ? If John so wrote,
so wrote they all. Ex uno disee omnes.

54 INTEEPEETATION.

CHAPTEE Y.
AXIOMS OF BIBLICAL INTEEPEETATION.
EvEET science has its Axioms, or first principles,
deemed worthy of being laid deep at its very basis ;
and as we claim for Biblical interpretation the dig
nity of a science, it is but proper that first of all, we
should lay down some of those preliminary and fun
damental facts on which it rests. That we should
both determine what these axioms are, and record
them, is as essential to consistency, as to correctness
in the great work before us.
AXIOM. I.
The Bible was written under the special inspira
tion of the Holy Spirit.
If it should be objected that this is not of the nature
of a self-evident position, we reply, it is a position
fuUy proved, and therefore in the very nature of the

ITS AXIOMS. 65
case, it is the foTindation principle of this science.
The fact of inspiration is connected with every sen
tence of the Bible, and hence we record it properly
as our first axiom. It must be disproved before it
can be displaced. AXIOM n.
In aU its communications the Bible has one mean
ing to convey, and no more.
It was the denial of this axiom which led the
Fathers into so many perversions of the Scriptures.
Much of the error in Germany at this day, is tracea
ble to the same source. It is common there for
preachers to explain their text in its grammatical,
historical, and doctrinal sense ; as though the Scrip
ture had not one, but three meanings, all distinct,
and aU true ! And to the same mistake it is owing
that many insist upon, what they call, the double
sense of prophecy. But beyond all doubt, the law
imposed by our Lord on His disciples, " Let your yea
be yea, and your nay, nay ; for whatsoever is more
than these cometh of evil," is the law of every in
spired communication to man. There can be no
violation of this precept on the part of the SpiriJ of
God.

56 INTEEPEETATION.

AXIOM m.

As one necessary condition of a revelation was
that it should be made in human language ; there
fore the Bible being so given, can be understood by
all for whom it was intended. It is an intelligible
book, and open to all the world.
AXIOM IV.
Although the words in which the Bible is written
be such only as men use in the daily intercourse of
Hfe, yet none the less are they such as God aptly
chose, as the all-sufiicient vehicles of His truth, and
will, to men.
The choice of words we regard as a very impor
tant part of a revelation; and those who call in
question the fitness or sufficiency of the words, know
not what they do. A wrong word conveys a wrong
meaning ; but the best words were selected, as it is
written, Ps. xii. 6, "The words of the Lord are
pure words ; as silver tried in the furnace of
earth, purified seven times;" and 1 Cor. ii. 13,
"Which things also we speak, not in the words
which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy
Spirit teacheth."

ITS AXIOMS. 57
AXIOM V.
There is a strict doctrinal agreement among all the
writers of the Bible, secured by the inspiring guid
ance of the Spirit. Mistakes of copiers and interpo
lations are of course excepted, if such there be. It
is probable there are such mistakes, but they must
be proved, before they can be admitted, to invah-
date our maxim. AXIOM VT.
The doctrinal agreement between the writers of
the Bible, is in the sense, and not in the mere words
employed. The reason is obvious. Words are simply signs
of ideas, and, from the frequency and caprice of their
use, they often express ideas the very opposite of
those for which they usually stand. It is very com
mon for men to say in words the very opposite of
what they intend. Our axiom is that the sacred
writers agree in sense, though not in words.
AXIOM vn.
As every writer of the Bible is in harmony as
respects his meaning, with the others ; so, is he always
in harmony with himself.

58 INTEEPEETATION. AXIOM vm.
Between the statements of the Bible, and the facts
of natural science, and the history of the world,
there must be an essential agreement, whether there
exists the evidence to prove it or not. Time devours
documents ; and much of the history of the world
never was written. But the fact of this agreement
is deduced from the primary axiom, affirming inspi
ration. The Spirit of all truth could not fail to
guide the writers free from all errors respecting
natural science and the history of the world. It is
high consolation that there is not one such error in
an the Bible. AXIOM IX.
The Bible is not to be interpreted by any creed or
confession of faith.
Creeds and confessions of faith show merely how
their authors interpret the Bible. On what princi
ple then can such interpretations be made the cri
terion of the sense of Scripture. They may be right,
they may be wrong; but they cannot bring the
Bible to their bar, and set up the claim, that at their
bidding it must teach this or that.
It is the master of all creeds, the sovereign of

ITS AXIOMS. 69
all confessions of faith, in whose presence they must
all bow and do reverence. It is very customary to
quote the church formula, and say the Bible teaches
so; but in every instance, those who fall into this
error, proclaim only how great their ignorance is of
the Word of &od.

AXIOM X.
While the Bible has one meaning in every passage
and no more, it does not follow that the words
employed by the sacred writers have always one
meaning and no more. •
Yet it is a settled theory with some, that certain
leading words in Scripture have but one meaning,
and only one. On what evidence they found this
position we cannot so much as imagine. The appeal
must be made to the Bible itself; for this position
is not by any means self-evident. There are those,
whose separate communion is upheld and justified
simply on the ground that the word " baptize " has
only one meaning, and no more. But on turning to
the Bible, we find that (1) in Mark vii. 4, it is used
to mean the washing of hands ; (2) in 1 Cor. x. 2, it
is used to signify consecration to the leadership of
Moses ; (3) in Luke iii. 16, it is used to signify the
abundant outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and the

60 INTEEPEETATION.
infliction of the wrath of God ; two very different
and opposite meanings in one sentence ! See also
Mat. iii. 11, Acts xi. 16, 1 Cor. xii. 13. (4) In Luke
xii. 60, our Lord employed the word to signify the
peculiar sufferings then in store for himself as the
sacrifice for sin. So also in Mat. xx. 22-3, and in
Mark x. 38. Where then is the one only meaning
of the word ? It cannot be found.
Indeed, as all the world knows, there is no such
thing in existence as a word with only one meaning.
Just as well might it be pretended that every word
has but one use, and no more ; for the use to which
a word is put gives it its meaning, and men do not
hesitate to put every word to a thousand uses. Ex
amples are on every page of the Scriptures; and
yet there is harmony of sense and doctrine there.
The vision of Ezekiel, i. 4-25, is a beautiful illus
tration of this point. There is the most wonder
ful complexity and variety among the living crea
tures, and, at the same time, the most complete
unity of purpose. " And they went every one straight
forward ; whither the Spirit was to go they went ;
and they turned not when they went." The words
of the Scripture have many meanings ; because they
have many uses ; but they express always the one
sense of the Spirit ; they go straight forward, turn
ing neither to the right nor to the left ; whither the

ITS AXIOMS. 61
Spirit goeth, they go. To speak the mind of the
Holy Spirit is their only mission.
AXIOM XI.
The interpretation which the Bible has given of its
own meaning is in every case to be adopted.
The words e. g. Mat. xvi. 19, " And I will give
unto thee the keys of the Eingdom of Heaven,"
receive their best interpretation by the simple his
torical statement in Acts, where an account is given
of the apostle's success " in opening the door of faith
unto the Gentiles," Acts xii. 47, and xv. 7. The
Saviour's explanation of the parables are also illus
trations in point ; as likewise the various definitions
given of the prophetic symbols in the prophets.
The Bible is an extended commentary on itself.
To explain its own meaning is one of the great
objects which it aims to secure. Hence of all the
books ever written in explanation of the Bible, the
best, beyond any doubt, is the Bible itself. This is
the explanation of the fact, that those who read it
most without note or comment, carefully comparing
parallel passages, are proverbially the best instructed
in its doctrines, and stand firmest in the faith of its
awful mysteries.

62 INTEEPEETATION.

AXIOM xn.
Omission is not misstatement; narration is not
approval of the events narrated ; additional testi
mony is not of necessity contradictory testimony.
These simple maxims are of no small value. In
relating the same events, the same particulars are
not always noted, but this does not convict the
writers of falsehood, or of error in any sense. . Tes
timony in part does not vitiate the whole, when the
writer's object does not require him to narrate the
whole. In recording the sins of good men, there is
no approbation intended toward these- sins ; but the
contrary. Attention to these simple positions will
preclude many objections, and reheve many alleged
difficulties. AXIOM yrrr.
We are not to judge of events in the Bible exclu
sively by the standard of our own times.
The manners, the social and political hfe of the
people, their customs, must all be considered. The
Bible is best understood in the light of its own home.
Nor are we to neglect profane history, when its help
can be obtained. So likewise the geography, the
natural history of the country, and the idioms of
the languages in which the Bible was first written,

rrs AXIOMS. 63
are worthy of attention. It is not meant that a per
son must read and make himself master of all that
has been written on these various topics, before he
can ascertain the meaning of the Scriptures ; only let
him not neglect the aid offered him from these
sources. The researches of Dr. Edward Eobinson
in Palestine, we note as a book of vast utility under
this head. AXIOM XIV.
We must not come with a faith, but to obtain a
faith from the Scriptures.
While the use of reason is indispensable in the
interpretation of the Bible, we are carefully to dis
tinguish between its right use, and its claiming an
authority superior to inspiration. The Bible and all
its mysteries is put unconditionally into our hands to
be interpreted; yet its relation to us can never
change. It is always the Word of God ; and our
duty is evermore to approach it, in the spirit of Him
who said : " Speak, Lord, for thy servant heareth."
Allowing man his place next the angels in intelli
gence, even then there is an infinite distance between
him and the Bible ; even then, he has not reached
that eminence from which he can overlook its sources
of knowledge. " Who hath directed, the Spirit of

64 INTEEPEETATION.
the Lord, or being His counsellor hath taught
Him ?"
Were we called on to say, after all our researches
into this subject, what error men are most prone to
commit, in respect to the Bible, we would answer
without hesitation, it is the error of bringing with
them a faith to the Bible, to which they demand
that the Bible shall conform.
The true ground on which to stand is, that when
we admit the Bible to be a revelation from God, we
admit it with all its appropriate characteristics ; one of
which is, its indisputable superiority over the powers
of the human mind, both as respects the discovery
of the truth, and the right method of stating the
truth. When we receive the Bible in this manner
we honor it, and are taught of God ; when we insist
that our faith and philosophy shall lord it over reve
lation and tell the Bible both what to say, and how
to say it, we dishonor the Author of the Bible, and
are taught of ourselves. AXIOM XV.
Theories, or doctrines that have no foundation in
the Bible, are to have no influence or authority in
its interpretation.
The Bible is complete in itself; having authority

ITS AXIOMS. 65
sufficient for its doctrines, and evidence within itself,
not to be questioned, substantiating all its claims.
It is a circle ; a boundary, in nature, beyond which
no human mind can go, without a new revelation
from God. Hence all theories and doctrines of mere
human invention have no weight whatever in decid
ing the meaning of the Bible. Because to grant
them any decisive control in such a matter, would
be to subject the wiU of God to the will of man,
and the wisdom of God to the wisdom of man;
the Omniscient to the ignorant, the wise to the
foolish. We find an illustration of our axiom, in regard
to the theory of some respecting the human race.
They hold that there is a plurality, not a unity of
races ; that mankind did not descend from one man.
Their doctrine is extra the Bible; and we cannot
allow it any place, or influence, or authority what
ever, in the interpretation of the Word of God,
which it so palpably contradicts. There is war
between their theory and the Bible, and there is no
possibility of an honorable peace between them-
The whole drfft of the Bible, and several of its
direct assertions, are decisive that the human family
came from one common head — in Adam. Come
what may, therefore, of opposing theories, they may
not sway us one iota in our interpretations.

66 INTEEPEETATION.

AXIOM XVI.

While the Bible is infallible and capable of being
understood, its infalhbility does not pass over to its
interpreters. They may err ; the Bible never errs.
AXIOM xvn.
Those who possess the state of heart enjoined in
the Word of God, are most likely to succeed in its
interpretation. Because in that case, there is a kin
dred state of mind existing between the interpreter
and the thing interpreted.
In human experience, a native best comprehends
the language of a native, a friend best comprehends
the language of a friend. Many young converts tell
how the Bible suddenly becomes to them a new
book. " If any man will do his will, he shall know
of the doctrine :" Jno. vii. 17.
The above Axioms are set down as primary prin
ciples, worthy of being kept constantly in view, in
aU our interpretations. To enter on the business of
unfolding the sense of the Scriptures, without regard
to such principles, is to proceed to sea without a
compass. On the firm, and every way safe basis which they

nS AXIOMS.

afford, we now advance to the statement of those
general laws, or ultimate decisions of common sense,
by which our investigations' into the meaning of the
Sacred Scriptures are strictly to be governed.

68 INTEEPEETATION.

CHAPTEE ATE.
THE BASIS OF ALL EIGHT EULES IN THIS SCIENCE.
Befoee we proceed to lay down any rules for the
interpretation of the Scriptures, it is necessary first
of all, to define clearly what we mean by a rule, and
what is the true basis or ultimate principle of aU
right rules. We shall then proceed intelhgently,
having a criterion before us of all our decisions, and
a test whereby all differences of interpretation may
be reconcUed, or shown to be erroneous.
What is a rule ? We answer, a rule in this science,
is a principle, or law by which we are to be governed
in determining the meaning of the Scriptm-es, to
which indeed, m certain cases, there may be vahd
exceptions, but which, nevertheless, is of final
authority, when no valid exceptions hold. Excep
tions are not incidental to all rules. They have force
only where the rule is simply an approximation to
the truth. But the instances in which this occurs are

BASIS OF ITS . LAWS. 69
not many, and the only reason why there are any at
all, is that usage, in language, is capricious ; it pro
ceeds on no fixed principles. Hence, there are pro
positions, or principles which are merely general,
and not universal, and in these cases there are excep
tions, but where the principle is universal, there no
exceptions hold.
What then is the basis of aU right rules, or princi
ples of interpretation?
To this point our attention is called in 2 Pet. i.
20. There it is said: "No prophecy is of any
priyate interpretation," and the reason assigned is,
that prophecy is given from God. On this is built
the conclusion, that we must take heed to our princi
ples of interpretation ; they must be, not the narrow
convictions of an individual, but such as become
writings given from God, for the edification and
guidance of all men ; such, therefore, as spring from
the universal convictions of the common sense of
men, and fitted to stand the test of reason ; for if
they bear not that test, they must be unworthy to be
applied to a book designed for the use and under
standing of mankind. From this passage, therefore,
we infer clearly the only proper basis of all correct
rules of Biblical interpretation : they must violate
no universal decision of common sense ; or, in other
words, a rule of interpretation, to be correct, mast be

70 INTEEPEETATION.
based on the just, and generally accepted decisions
of the human mind.
Whatever may be said of this basis, so far as we
can judge, there is no other, on which we can depend.
If we abjure the innate common sense of men, what
have we to put in its place ? There has been a great
outcry against human reasoH, as though it is hot worthy
to be the basis of any religious decisions. We admit
reason cannot correct revelation, it cannot refute it,
nor add any new truth to the catalogue of its pecu
liar doctrines. But there is a province in which it
can act, and in which it is supreme. It can judge
of right and wrong, of truth and error, of the Word
of God, and of that to which the Word of God
stands opposed ; and its own integrity, in the proper
exercise of its powers, is the only guarantee for all its
just conclusions.
Common sense, therefore, we lay down, as the basis
of all correct principles, or rules of interpretation.
To show how this basis applies to our subject, we
affirm it a right decision of the human mind, that an
inspired writer can make himself understood. If
then any rule is proposed for the interpretation of the
Scriptures, adverse to this decision, it is not to be
entertained ; because in its application, it could only
lead to error. Or, if it should be advanced as a
principle, that an inspired writer cannot express his

BASIS OF ITS LAWS. 71
whole meaning, this also we would reject, because,
if there be any difficulties in the nature of language,
or in the nature of the subject, or in the capacities
of those to whom the revelation is given, such as
operate positively to hinder the full expression of the
writer's meaning, then this strikes directly at the
possibility of a revelation, and it cannot be enter
tained for a moment. It is here that the author of
the book " God in Christ," has greatly gone out of
the way. In his long and elaborate introduction, he
is anxious to establish the dogma of the insufficiency
of language, even in the hands of the Holy Spirit, as
a vehicle of truth, and this chiefly in reference to the
important doctrine of the supreme divinity of Christ.
But granting him his point, we submit, on the strength
of his own favorite dogma, whether, in consistency,
he ought not, in illustration of his own doctrine, to
leave writing on the nature of language, and of
Christ, entirely alone ? For surely, if an inspired
writer, with all the aid of the Spirit of God, cannot
make his meaning clear and intelhgible, a fortiori
an uninspired writer must give up all such efforts in
despair — ^unless indeed, a man not inspired has alto
gether the advantage over one who enjoys the help
of the Holy Spirit 1
Once more ; it is a correct decision of common
sense that an inspired writer must have but one self-

( M INTEEPEETATION.
consistent, and intended meaning to convey. Any
other conclusion would be unworthy of revelation.
If then any rule is proposed, implying a double
meaning in the Scriptures, or as many meanings as
the language would by any means bear, it is not to
be adopted. The universal expectation of men,
founded on their ideas of the veracity of God, is, that
in revealing His will. He will speak sincerely and
directly the thing He means, and no more.
Finally, it is another just decision of common
sense, that the sacred writers under the guidance of
the Spirit of God, must write in harmony with the
actual nature of things ; for to write in a contrary
manner would not be to write the truth. It is abso
lutely certain therefore, on this ground, that the
Bible does always speak consistently with the true
nature of all the objects of which it treats. And
hence, if any law of exegesis be proposed, which in
its fair application must lead to a sense contrary to
the nature of the objects spoken of, that law or rule
is unsound and must not be adopted. Indeed, all
laws or rules of interpretation must proceed on the
ground that inspired writers will speak of all things
according to their nature, and not otherwise.
These remarks will show to some extent, what the
standard of correctness is, which we have here set
up. Eules to be correct, and worthy of adoption,

BASIS OF rrs laws. Tc-
must be founded on the just decisions of the human
mind. They must commend themselves to the hon
est convictions of men. Like definitions in Mathe
matics, they must carry with them the understand
ing, and as it were, compel the assent of the mind,
at the first glance.
Keeping these principles strictly in view, we now
proceed to the work of interpretation, and lay down
the general rules of the science, with examples of
the manner in which we apply them, in ascertaining
the true sense of the Sacred Scriptures.
Thou, 0 Spirit, that dost prefer
Before all temples, the upright heart, and pure,
Instruct me, for thou knowest ;
— what in me is dark
Illumine ; what is low, raise, and support,
That to the height of this great argument
I may assert eternal Providence
And justify the ways of God to man!

74 INTEEPEETATION.

CHAPTEE YH.
GENEEAL eules FOE THE INTEEPEETATION OF SCEIPTUEE.
A EULB of interpretation, according to our defini
tion, is a principle by which we are to be governed
in our efforts to ascertain the meaning of the Scrip
tures. It is founded on the just decisions of com
mon sense, and except where limited by some inci
dental circumstance, arising from the nature of the
proposition, it is authoritative and final on every
judgment we may form relative to the sense of the
Sacred Yolume. I. FIEST GENEEAL EULE.
The first rule we lay down therefore is, that the
hteral or obvious meaning of Scripture is generally
the true meaning.
By the hteral meaning, here, we do not intend the
meaning of the letter strictly, as opposed to that
which is figurative ; but the plain and obvious sense

GENEEAL EtTLES. 75
of the words in their ordinary signification. Our
rule proceeds on the ground that the Bible was
written for the whole world, and that therefore to
meet the universal expectation of men, its meaning
lies for the most part transparent and clear on the
surface, before the eyes of aU who seek after it with
an honest mind. It was a famUiar saying of Luther,
" the literal meaning of the Scripture is the whole
foundation of faith ; the only thing that stands its
ground in distress and temptation." The power of
this maxim he fully proved in the great Eeforma
tion. The meaning, then, which lies plainly on the sur
face, and is contained in the letter of the Scripture,
in its ordinary signification, is generally the true
meaning. But in this instance our rule is only an approxima
tion to the truth, and is hmited by the following
exceptions : FIEST EXCEPTION.
Where the literal meaning asserts that which
involves a known impossibility, it must be given
up. By a known impossibiUty, we mean a position
such as the following: a doctrine can both be true

76 INTEEPEETATION.
and false; two objects can occupy the same place, at
the same moment ; a moral being can be guilty of
sin, before the exercise of his moral faculties ; a moral
being can act before he exists.
But it cannot be conceived possible that the Spirit
of God slioidd in any case design to assert such posi
tions as these. Hence this exception to our first
general rule, becomes itself a rule of interpretation,
and we apply it in all the passages which seem to
assert a known impossibility, like any of those above.
For example, Ps. Iviii. 3, " The wicked are estranged
from the womb ; they go astray, as soon as they be
born, speaking hes." The meaning of the letter here
is, that the wicked go astray, or sin, the same mo
ment in which they are born ; and that in the same
moment, they both walk and speak lies ! It is simply
incredible that such can be the intended sense of this
passage. Jer. xii. 13, "They have sown wheat, but shall
reap thorns." Did the prophet mean just so ?
1 Cor. XV. 22, " For as in Adam all die, even so in
Christ shall all be made alive." These words, " as
in Adam aU die," cannot be intended to say that all
men existed in Adam ; nor that they all sinned in
his person; nor that they all died, when he died.
These are known impossibihties. One person cannot
be all mankind ; all mankind cannot be one person ;

GENEEAL EULES. 77
men cannot exist before they exist ; they cannot die
before they live ; they cannot sin before they act.
Amost every page of the Bible will furnish ex
amples of our exception ; and that candor, which is
the proof of a sane mind, will not fail to see that to
insist on the meaning of the mere letter, in such
cases, is the most certain method of bringing the
Bible into contempt. SECOND EXCEPTION.
When the meaning of the mere letter is evidently
contrary to reason, it is not the true meaning.
This exception, though logically involved in the
first, we prefer to state separately in these terms ; for
the sake of giving a wider application to the prin
ciple on which it is based, and because we wish here
to restore to its true use a canon of interpretation,
the perversion of which has led to many great errors.
It is well known that in Germany, under the phrase
" pure reason," it was attempted, simply by way of
interpretation, to get rid of Christianity altogether.
And some of the most plausible and mischievous of
all attacks on religion have been made under pre
tence that its doctrines are repugnant to reason. All
such attacks we wish to forestall. Our chief weapon
for the defence of religion,.and of the Bible, its text-

78 INTEEPEETATION.
book, is our reason, rationally used. And on this
ground we feel sure that the Spirit of God, speaking
in the Scriptures, does not in any instance intend to
assert for truth what is evidently contrary to the
decisions of human reason rightly employed. It
may indeed be that things beyond the comprehen
sion of reason are asserted, and facts announced,
such as are properly inscrutable to the mind of man.
But to assert things which reason cannot compre
hend in their modes, is not equivalent to asserting
things contrary to the innate dictates of reason. It
is one thing to reveal what reason does not and can
not know of itself, and it is quite another thing, pal
pably to contradict decisions, which reason cannot
but make, in the legitimate use of its powers.
The former Scripture has often done ; the latter,
never. In illustration of our exception, we refer to passages
such as the following : Heb. xu. 29, " For our God is
a consuming fire." By the mere letter, this asserts the
ancient doctrine of the Persians, that God is hterally
the principle of fire ; but any such interpretation
would be at war with common sense. So also, Jer.
xxiii. 24, " Do I not fill heaven and earth, saith the
Lord." Here the mere letter is Pantheism; but
nothing could be more opposite to reason. Jno. vi.
63, " Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and

GENEEAL EULES. 79
drink His blood, ye have no hfe in yoti." The letter
of the passage must surely be given up, as contrary
to all reason. Phil. ii. 12, " For it is God that
worketh in you both to will and to do of His good
pleasure." If we interpret these words, so as to make
the divine agency exclude and wholly absorb the
agency of the believer, our interpretation would
be contrary to reason, and wrong; it would deny
the identity and activity of the human mind, and
contradict just what the passage in its true sense
means to affirm. It is not God who " willeth and
doeth," but who worketh or produces the willing and
the doing in the mind of the wUler and the doer.
THIED EXCEPTION.
When the literal meaning contradicts any positive
precept of Scripture, it must be abandoned.
The basis of this exception is the principle that
the Bible is self-consistent in all its teachings,
through the inspiration of the Spirit.
For- example. Mat. xviii. 9, " If thine eye offend
thee, pluck it out," &c. If a strictly literal inter
pretation were insisted on here, it would be at vari
ance with the sixth commandment. So alsoEph. iv.
26, " Be ye angry and sin not." One of the posi
tive precepts of the Gospel forbids all anger. How
then are we to interpret the first clause of the above

80 INTEEPEETATION.
passage consistently with the above precept ? The
feeling of the mind described by the word " anger "
is complex, and consists of a perception of some
wrong suffered, and of a desire to be revenged.
The flrst feeling — the perception of the injury suf
fered — is a right feeling, and ought to be diligently
cultivated, because it is needful to keep ahve in our
minds the distinction between right and wrong in
conduct. But the second feeling, a desire for
revenge, is expressly forbidden. Hence we inter
pret the above passage thus : when you receive an
injury be not insensible thereto ; take fuU cognizance
of it, as a wrong — "be ye angry;" but there let
your feelings rest; "sin not," cherish no wish for
revenge. For it is written, " Yengeance is mine, I
will repay, saith the Lord." This meaning violates
no precept, and is the sense of the passage. Prov.
xxiii. 2, " Put a knife to thy throat, if thou be a man
given to appetite." This is not an exhortation to
suicide, but a warning against gluttony.
FOUETH EXCEPTION.
The literal meaning is not the true meaning,
when there is an express limitation of it elsewhere
affirmed. Such is the nature of all writing, that hmitations
of previous statements would seem to be as necessary

GENEEAL EULES. 81
as words themselves. Every writer makes use of
them to set his meaning in its proper light ; and the
more direct and simple his manner of writing, the
greater need of just snch explanations of the sense.
Thus of all writers of the Bible, John is the most
simj^le and direct in his style, yet none of them
seems to be under such constant necessity to qualify
his language. For example, John i. 11, 12 ; " He came
unto his own, and his own received him not." From
this it would seem that not a solitary Jew believed in
Christ. But in the next sentence, is the needful lim
itation, "But as many as received him." &c. A
very slight examination of John's writings will
supply many more illustrations ; see also Judges ix. 5.
Mat. xxvi. 60. John i. 8, with iii. 9. In 1 Chron.
xxiii. 13 ; it is said the priesthood is established " for
ever." But in Jer. xxxi. 31-4. and Heb. 8th and 9th
chapters, the continuance of the priesthood, and of
the whole old dispensation is limited to "the set
time," when that dispensation should be done away.
Our interpretations, to be correct, must never lose
sight of this principle.
With these four exceptions, for which there is cer
tainly good ground, and which, in their operation,
become rules not to be overlooked, we re-affirm our
great first law of Biblical exegesis, viz., the literal,
or obvious meaning of any passage is generally to

82 INTEEPEETATION.
be taken as the true meaning. In setthig this forth
as the first and fundamental law of interpretation,
we go directly contrary to the whole body of early
interpreters. In their view, it was a dishonor to the
Bible to represent its meaning as lying patent on the
surface. The more deep and hidden the sense, the
more worthy it was of their faith, the more truly did
it prove itself the Word of God ! But the evidence
is all too abundant, that this love of a deep and
hidden sense wrought no good, but incalculable mis
chief It was one of the sources of the great apos
tasy. In its essence, it is a mere conceit, unworthy
of the Sacred Yolume.
It is a striking fact, in this connection, that many
in modern times, have made the literal sense, especi
ally in the prophetic writings, one of the most fruit
ful sources of error. In their view, all prophecies
are to be fulfilled in the very letter of the prediction.
There never was a more shaUow, or false view taken,
. either of the nature, or fulfillment of prophecy. Let
any one attempt the application of this principle to
the flrst prophecy in the Bible, and he wiU find out
its inherent incorrectness. SECOND GENEEAL EULE.
The rule which properly follows that given above,

GENEEAL EULES. 83
is one naturally growing out of it ; viz. : Figurative
langauge must be carefully distinguished from
its opposite, and interpreted 'according to its
nature. The opposite of figurative language, is the lan
guage of the mere letter, in which there is no attempt
at illustration, or comparison ; and the principle of
our rule is, that whatever is hteral must be inter
preted according to the rule aheady specified, and
whatever is figurative, must be interpreted in consis
tency with the laws of figurative language. What
these laws are, is more particularly pointed out, in
the remarks on the parables and poetry of the Bible,
under Eule XL The point which we wish here more
especiaUy to settle, is, that to secure correct interpre
tation, figurative language is not to be confounded
with its opposite, but receive its explanation, on prin
ciples such as its nature justifies.
For illustration, we refer to the first six verses of
the 20th chapter of Eevelation. From these verses,
it is well known, an attempt is made, and has long
been made, to show that at the beginning of the
millenium, there will be a literal and personal
appearance of the Lord Jesus Christ, a resurrection
of aU the saints aheady in the grave, and the contin
uance of their reign with our Lord, at Jerusalem, for
a thousand years.

84 INTEEPEETATION.
But beyond all rational doubt, this is a palpable
mistake, arising out of a neglect of our present rule.
The whole passage is a figurative prediction, accord
ing to the genius of the entire book, of real events
yet to occur in the history of the Gospel. But instead
of interpreting the passage on this principle, the
nature of the language has been overlooked, and
that which is purely figurative, or symbolical, has
been regarded as purely literal. Especially has this
been done with verses 4, 5, 6 ; while it has been
fully conceded, by those who have persisted in this
error, that verses 1, 2, 3, respecting the descent of
the angel, the binding of the dragon and his impri
sonment for a thousand years, are not literal, but
figurative.' This admission is fatal to their whole
theory. For the whole passage should be inter
preted on the same principle throughout. It is
wholly a figurative description, and therefore does
not admit of a hteral interpretation. Hence, there
will be no hteral appearance of our Lord, no hteral
resurrection of the saints, no literal reign of a thou
sand years at Jerusalem ; but simply, results in the
history of the Gospel, which may not improperly be
compared to such events. This is aU that this cele
brated passage intends to affirm.
It is a violation of our present rule, also, which
leads to a belief in the return of the Jews, as a

GENEEAL EULES. 86
nation, to Judea. There are many passages from the
prophets quoted to sustain that behef, and at present
it is quite a popular behef among a certain class of
writers. There can be no doubt, however, as to its ori
gin. In Ezek. xxxvi. 26, to the end, it is said : " Ye .
shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers ;"
" I wiU also cause you to dwell in the cities, and the
desolate lands shall be tilled," and all such language,
it is contended, is prophetic of events yet to be lite
rally fulfiUed ; therefore, it follows, that the Jews will
be restored to their own land, and to the glory of an
independent nation. The passages quoted most fre
quently, are Is. Ix. 1-22. Jer. xxiu. 1-8. xxxi. 28-34.
Ezek. xxxvii. Dan. xii. 1. Zech. viu. 12, chapters 12,
13, 14.
But we have never been able to understand the
above, and kindred passages, in this light. A thou
sand objections occur to prevent us from forming any
such judgment of the sense of these prophecies.
One is, that Ezekiel's prophecy was actuaUy fulfiUed
in the return from the captivity. The natural chro
nology of the prophecy is to this effect ; hence,
there is no warrant for applying it to any other
future events. The others are parallel prophecies,
and have the same explanation.
But if this whole prophecy of Ezekiel is yet to be
literally fulfilled, and an actual return to take place.

86 INTEEPEETATION.
then be it noted that, according to Chap, xxxvii. 24,
which is a continuance of the same prophecy, and
subject to the same principles of interpretation,
David is to be their King ! And yet more, accord
ing to ver. 36, there are to be " heathen left round
about," which does not at all comport with our ideas
of the millenium ; and further, if the literal sense is
to be insisted on, then when the Jews return, they
return simply as Jews, and remain as such, in the
practice of all the ancient rites of their ancient reli
gion, to the end of the world, so far as the text of
this prophecy is concerned. The letter, therefore,
of these prophecies is fatal to the very sentiments it
is brought to sustain.
Our object here does not permit us to refer to the
general argument from the evident design of the
Gospel, as contrary to aU such notions, as the restora
tion of the Jewish nation; but, beyond a doubt,
-Jerusalem has served its purpose, and the peculiar
people have served their purpose, and the land is not
theirs any more, seeing the glory has departed, and
the law is supplanted by a more glorious dispensation ;
and every land is now a holy land, and every place
a Jerusalem, and every believer a son of Abraham ;
and Jesus, David's Lord, is King in Zion for ever
more ; so that the next return of the Jews will be a
spiritual return to the God of their Fathers, and to the

GENEEAL EULES. 87
faith of Christ, 9,nd to a spiritual worship, estabhshed,
not in the earthly courts of a temple made with
hands, but in the heart, by the renewing influences
of the Sprit of God.
Eom. vi. 4, " Therefore we are buried with him
by baptism into death," &c. These words furnish
another illustration of our canon. It is contended
by some that Paul means to say baptism is a symbol
of the burial of Christ, and that therefore it must
be performed by immersion, or a literal iurial of
the whole person in the water. But if the strictly
hteral sense of the word " buried " is to be insisted
on, then for the same reason we insist that when
Paul says in the next verse, " for if we have been
planted together in the likeness of his death," he
means that we must in some way be put into the
ground, or liteTsllj plmited like trees. What absur
dity is this ! Neither in the one case, nor in the
other, is the language here to be taken literally.
The meaning of the apostle is seen in his object.
He is insisting on holiness of life in Christians.
One of his arguments is taken from the fact of their
baptism ; he says, " they were buried with Christ in
baptism;" not intending to describe the mode but
the fact of their baptism, and to affirm that thereby
they were consecrated to Christ and pledged to his
service. On this fact he insists, saying — that as

8 8 INTEEPEETATION.
Christ, being once dead and bmied, was raised up
to life again by the power of God, so they, being
baptized, should be holy, and walk in newness of
life. The words "buried" and "planted" are there
fore used figuratively, and must so be understood;
and consequently they have nothing to do with the
mode of baptism.
Our rule is one that cannot be dispensed with. If
figurative language is confounded with literal lan
guage, it is impossible to interpret the Bible con
sistently with truth, or with itself. Augustine saw
this when he laid it down as a necessary principle
of exegesis, that the literal and the figurative must
be carefully distinguished, the one from the other.
THIED GENEEAL EULE.
A third general rule of correct interpretation is,
that deductions, or inferences are not to be drawn
from any text or passage, until its meaning has been
ascertained. This principle is more frequently violated than
almost any other in the science ; and in these viola
tions are deeply imbedded many of the most hurtful
errors with which religion is infested. Thus Mat.-
xvi. 28, is quoted, " Thou art Peter, and upon this
rock I will build my Church," and immediately the

GENEEAL EULES. 89
deduction is Tiia,de,'uhi Petrus ibi ecclesia! The
Chm'ch of Eome is the true Church, and can never
fail. So Mat. xxviii. 18, " All power is given unto
'me in heaven, and in earth," and forthwith, the suc
cessors of Peter are infallible ; they have all power
over doctrine and all ordinances, over kings and all
governments, to bind, and to loose, to set up and pull
down at their pleasure !
Cardinal Wolsey has left us an example of the
manner in which our rule was transgressed in his
day. " Touch not mine anointed, and do my pro
phets no harm," Ps. cv. 15 : "See," said the Cardinal,
"To try a priest for any crime, is to violate God's
law !"
A missionary in Syria, has furnished the following
specimens, gathered from actual observation among
the people around him. " In Daniel, God is called
' the ancient of days ;' hence, it is proper to picture
Him as an old man, and then worship the picture.
The angel said to Mary : ' Blessed art thou among
women;' hence, we ought to worship the virgin!
Christ breathed upon his apostles, and said, ' Eeceive
ye the Holy Spirit ;' hence, every priest is inspired
in all his official acts ! ' Wisdom hath hewn out her
seven pillars,' therefore, the man who does not
believe in the seven sacraments, is an infidel, and
wUl certainly perish !"

90 INTEEPEETATION.
This is Syrian interpretation ; and nothing is more
common in our own country. Can there be any
greater violence done to the Word of God ? Is not
this what the Scripture itself calls wresting the
Word of life ? The proper remedy is our rule.
First, let the meaning of Scripture be ascertained ;
and on that meaning, in a fair and impartial manner,
build your inferences ; the sense first, then aU legiti
mate conclusions in their order. The opposite
method is a stealthy, dishonest attempt to shield our
errors under cover of the Word of God.

FOUETH GENEEAL EULB.
No interpretation of any passage is to be enter
tained, which goes contrary to the Analogy of the
Faith. To this it is usually objected, that every interpre
ter makes his own analogy of the faith, and this is
nothing but every man becoming his own standard
of interpretation. But in reply we aver, there is a
harmony of doctrine existing between the writers
of the Bible, by virtue of their inspiration, and our
rule is, this harmony must not be violated. There can
be no valid objection against such a canon. Yet if
it may appear less open to objection, let it be stated
in this form: No interpretation is correct, which

GENEEAL EULES. 91
makes a sacred writer contradict himself, or the well-
ascertained sentiments of any of the rest.
All that we wish to secure, is the unity of doctrine
wliich inheres in the Inspired Oracles ; and our rule
is as necessary as it is valuable for that object. It
is capable of many illustrations. Take 1 Cor. iii. 16 :
" If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer
loss ; but he himself shall be saved, so as by fire."
The modern doctrine of purgatory, i. e. sin is purged
by hteral fire, is derived from this text. Not to insist
on the meaning of these words as determined by their
connection, we bring this modern doctrine of purga
tory, side by side with the grand system of doctrines,
concerning which there never has been any dispute ;
and the conclusion to which we come is, that any
such interpretation of the passage must be false,
because it goes contrary to the doctrines of the new
birth, the doctrine of justification by faith, the
merits of Christ's atonement, the unfform doctrine
of the Bible, respecting the souls of the departed,
and to many facts, recorded both in the Old Testa
ment and in the New.
This is not to say that one text of Scripture is not
authority sufficient for the establishment of a doc
trine ; it is simply saying that one text cannot con
tradict the whole manifest drift of the Bible. There
is a harmony among the sacred writers not to be dis-

92 INTEEPEETATION.
turbed. Then if we examine the meaning of the
above passage in its connection, we shall be satisfied
that the doctrine of sui being pm-ged out of the soul
after death by material fire, is not authorized at all
in any sense, in these words of the apostle.
Another passage we select, which from early times
has been grossly misinterpreted, in violation of our
rule. It is Gen. v. 3 : " And Adam lived an hun
dred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own
likeness, after his image, and called his name Seth."
The common interpretation has been that Seth was
begotten a sinner, purely because Adam his father
had sinned. Thus Calvin says: "In saying that
Adam begat a son in his own hkeness, Moses refers
in part to the first origin of our nature ; at the same
time its corruption and pollution are to be noticed,
which having been contracted by Adam through
the Fall, flowed down to all his posterity. Therefore
Seth according to the flesh was born a sinner."
There is first the assumption that corruption of
nature was originated in Adam ; and then the
inference, that it flowed down to all his posterity ;
and therefore Seth was born a sinner, because he
was born in the likeness of Adam.
The interpretation of EosenmuUer is different.
He says, " More correctly do they hold, who think
it is simply to be understood humanity, in which

GENEEAl' EULES. 93
Seth was like his father, without respect to charac
ter." To this we do not greatly object, although we
do not think it is the sense of the passage as intended
by Moses ; but the view given by Calvin violates
the entire analogy of the Bible, in regard to the
maimer in which men become sinners. That analogy
is clearly as foUows : this life is a state of probation,
in which aU have a fan* chance of obedience, in
which every man's character is according to his
works ; and of his works every man must give an
account in the day of judgment. Such is the gene
ral drift of the Bible on the point involved in this
interpretation. If it be said, that the words " hke
ness " and " image " imply sameness in moral cha
racter, we reply there is no evidence of any such
fact, neither in the word itself, nor in its usage ; but
very much to the opposite, James iii. 9, says men
are made " in the similitude of God." Are they
made like him in moral character ? In Eom. viii. 3,
it is said, " sending his son in the likeness of sinful
flesh." Was our Lord then bom a sinner ? Not at
all. If Seth was a sinner bom, by the law that hke
begets like, we have yet to learn it. There is no
such law in regard to moral character. If there
were, it would disprove aU distinction between man
and the brutes ; free agency would be a delusion ;
this hfe would be a state of condemnation, in which

94 INTEEPEETATION.
aU the principles of natural justice would be violated
by a law of nature ; immortal souls would be doomed
to endless woe, not for their conduct, but for their
nature, not for their sins, but for their being born of
sinners. And if this be aU just so, then common
sense is outraged ; and let no teacher of the Gospel
henceforth mock his fellow men with arguments on
probation and destiny ; what probation can there be,
where aU are condemned before the trial begins ?
This is not to say that men do not inherit from
Adam constitutional propensities, as distinct from
moral propensities. We suppose and believe they
do. But in no sense do these constitutional propen
sities, thus inherited, necessitate the commission of
sin ; nor is there any evidence in the Scriptures
that they are ever charged upon man as sinful. K
they were resisted, as they should be, they would
contribute to the stability of obedience in the soul.
" Blessed is the man that endureth temptation, for
when he has overcome, he shall receive a crown of
life." James i. 12.
The true meaning of the above passage, as seen
in its connection, is a record of Seth's name in the
genealogy of the Church. Next to his father, he
bore the image of a man of God, and thus continued
the hue of the faithful. Cain was living when Seth
was born, but his name is not given, nor is it said

GENEEAL EULES. 95
that he was born in the image of his father. The
reason is obvious. He was a wicked man, while
Seth was a righteous man, hke his father Adam,
after his repentance and submission to God.
The foUowing texts are capable of the same per
version as that above. 1 Sam. ii. 25 : " Notwith
standing they hearkened not to the voice of their
father, because the Lord would slay them." Prov.
xvi. 4 : " The Lord hath made aU things for Himself ;
yea, even the wicked for the day of evil." Exod.
xi 10:. "The Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart, so
that he would not let Israel go out of the land."
Is. xlv. 7 : "I make peace and create evil. 1 the
Lord do aU these things." Jno. xii. 3T-40 : " But
though he had done so many miracles before them,
yet they beUeved not on him ; that the saying of
Esaias the prophet might be fulfiUed, which he
spake ; Lord, who hath believed our report ? and to
whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Therefore they could not believe, because that
Esaias said again. He hath blinded their eyes and
hardened their heart ; that they should not see with
their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be
converted, and I should heal them."
Any interp^^etation of these and kindred texts, of
which there are many more in the Scriptures, so as
to make them teach the doctrine that God is the

96 INTEEPEETATION.
primary and efficient cause of sin, or that He gives it
being in men, by a law of their nature, or, that he is
in any degree desirous of its existence, must be
false ; the analogy of the faith, the whole drift of the
Bible forbids it. The Bible will not tolerate the
idea that God is the author of sin, either directly or
indirectly. He is angry with the wicked every day.
In Him, and in all His ways towards men, there is no
iniquity at aU. By His righteous decree, the wages
of sin is eternal death. Our interpretations, there
fore, must have respect to the analogy of the faith.
If thQy are contrary thereto, they are wrong.
FIFTH GENEEAL EULE.
No interpretation is correct which is contrary to
the known natm-e of things.
The ultimate principle on which we rest this canon,
is the fact that the Bible, as an inspired book, from
which error is excluded, contains nothing opposed to
the known nature of things. We do not mean that
the Bible contains nothing, but what mamj knows to
be the nature of things ; for if it contained nothing
but what man knows in respect to the nature of
things, it would be no revelation ; it would be sim
ply a record of what man knows. But we mean,
that as an inspired volume, the Bible everywhere

GENEEAL EULES. 97
speaks consistently with things so far as they are
known by man, in their natures, and not otherwise ;
while at the same time, it reveals many things, for
ever out of the reach of the powers of man to dis
cover. But many fall into error on this point. They
accept the above rule, and when they meet with a
text, for example, affirming the divinity of Christ,
they say, this cannot be ; because we know all about
His nature, and no interpretation is correct which
runs contrary to the known nature of things. Their
error is obvious. They take for granted what they
ought to prove. They ought to prove that they
know all that is true of the nature of Christ.
Instead of this, they presume that nothing can be
true of Him, but what they know! Yea, that the
Holy Spirit did not mean what the plain and obvious
sense of the language must mean, if any dependence
whatever is to be placed on its teachings, when it
declares that Christ is God over all, blessed for ever
more. It must be confessed there are some things about
whose nature man can and does know somewhat;
and if he does not know aU that is true of them,
yet he does know much that is ; and of course he
can know when the things he does know are contra
dicted. For example, he can know respecting his

98 INTEEPEETATION.
own nature, that he is a free agent ; he is conscious
of it, He can also knoAy that his nature does not
embrace the attribute of Omniscience; for a like
reason, he is conscious of it. He can also know that
his conscience does not accuse him of sins, which he
never committed. But as this knowledge of his free
agency, and of his not being omniscient, and of his
conscience not accusing him of other men's sins, is
strictly infaUible, our position is that the Bible in no
case contradicts it. In other words, the meaning of
the Bible will be always consistent with the known
nature of things in all cases in which that nature is
known by men.
For illustration, we take Eom. v. 19, " For as by
one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so
by the obedience of one shall many be made
righteous." If now this be so interpreted as to
mean that men are made sinners, merely by the sin
of Adam, without their knowledge or consent, we
interpose our rule. Such a sense is contrary to the
known nature of man, as a free agent. That nature
is such that he cannot be made a sinner, but by his
own personal and voluntary choice. Besides, the
terms of justification through the merits of Christ are
such, that no man can partake of its benefits save by
a personal and voluntary faith in him. If, therefore,
men are not made righteous through Christ, except

GENEEAL EULES. 99
on condition of their voluntary faith, neither, in all
fairness, are they made sinners through Adam, except
on condition of their breaking the di"vine law,
through the free choice of then- own wills. What
ever meaning, therefore, may be affixed to the pas
sage, it must be one that shall consist with the
natm-e of man, and with the nature of sin ; for it is
a primary principle, that the Scriptui-es everywhere
speak in harmony with the nature of the objects
of which they treat. This is a case where the maxim
clearly apphes : ea est accijnenda interpretatio quoe
vitio caret — the least objectionable interpretation is
always to be taken.
Again, 2 Cor. v. 21, " For he hath made him to be
sin for us, who knew no sin." Here would be a
positive contradiction to aU the known nature of
things, if it were held that Paul meant hterally to
say, our Lord was made sin. How inconceivable !
We know that this phrase — the known nature of
things — is scouted at as wholly unsafe in the work
of exegesis ; but sure are we, the thing it represents
does exist and cannot be dispensed with, neither in
religion nor in science. We carry it with us, as
the mariner his compass. "V^e silently appeal to it
at every step. If the Bible reveals aught beyond
the sphere of this knowledge, that we accept on
faith, it is a revelation from God. But we have yet

100 INTEEPEETATION.
to discover one instance in which the Bible directly
contradicts om- knowledge of the nature of things.
In some instances it transcends our knowledge ; but
in no instance does it contradict our knowledge.
Our rule involves a vital principle, which enters
into all right explanations of the Word of God.
SIXTH GENEEAL EULE.
When any doctrine elsewhere clearly taught, is
omitted in any passage, that passage is to be inter
preted in harmony with the doctrine omitted.
The occasional omission of an important doctrine
in the course of an argument, is easily accounted for
by a well-known process of the mind. The legal
maxim expresses it thus, "it is impossible to think
of everything, to foresee everything, to express
everything." The mind will not stop to compress
every idea connected with the subject into every
sentence. This is common in aU communications
both oral and written, for an opposite course would
be intolerable; the sense would be buried under a
mass of words, enough to baffle all human patience.
But although a doctrine is thus omitted, it is not
therefore to be ignored.
Eom. ix. 16, " So then it is not of him that wiUeth,
nor of him that ranneth, but of God that showeth

GENEEAL EULES. 101
mercy." Here is no mention of repentance, or of
faith, or obedience on the part of the sinner. They
are rather represented as of no account, in the
matter of salvation. Are we then to interpret the
apostle as meaning that God has mercy on men
whether they repent, or not ? By no means.
1 Tim. ii. 6, " There is one God, and one Mediator
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." In
this passage is affirmed the unity of God, the media-
torship, and humanity of Christ. But if it be
quoted to prove Christ is simply a man, we interpose
the insuperable objection of our rule. The divinity
of Christ is elsewhere clearly and abundantly taught,
and the sense of the above passage is to be deter
mined accordingly. It teaches the humanity of
Christ, but it does not disprove his divinity. Just as
in the sentence, "'man is mortal," there is a doctrine
omitted, and the meaning of the sentence is to be
decided in harmony therewith. That sentence does
not disprove the immortahty of the soul. Neither
did Paul intend to deny, in the above passage, the
supreme divinity of Christ. In the previous parts
of the epistle, he had affirmed that Christ is God, no
less than four times. A writer who has done the
hke in speaking of the soul, might well be under
stood not to deny its immortahty, even though he
should once or twice use the words, " man is mortal."

102 ¦ INTEEPEETATION.
But it is a favorite method with some, to select aU
the texts, asserting the humanity of our Lord, and on
these to build a denial of his divinity. As weU
might we collect from Scripture all those texts which
assert that man has a body, and on these construct
the doctrine, that the Bible teaches materiahsm, or
that man has no soul. In Eph. v. 23, it is said,
Christ is " the Saviour of the body." Are we to
understand that he merely saves the body, and leaves
the soul to perish? And yet this is the peculiar
method of many, who reject the testimony of the
Scriptures concerning Christ !
In the exposition of Acts xiii. 48, there has been
a very grave violation of our present rule. "As
many as were ordained unto eternal Iffe, behoved."
It is argued from this, that there is no pre-ordaining,
or election of the individual to efernal hfe, until the
moment of his conversion ; that the ordaining and
behoving, are strictly contemporaneous. This is one
of the dogmas of Arminianism, versus Calvinism;
and the question which decides the superiority and
truth of one of these systems over the other may be
narrowed down to the one precise interrogation :
Does the Bible anywhere teach the pre-ordination of
the behever to eternal hfe, anterior to the time of
his new-birth ? Calvinism says. Yes ; Ai-minianism
says. No. We then turn to Eph. i. 4-6, and find the

GENEEAL EULES. 103
question solved in favor of Calvinism ; " According
as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of
the world." Unless, the force of these words can be
disproved, or the veracity, of the inspired apostle
impeached, Arminianism, on this point, is left with
out a plea. The express declaration t)f the Bible is
against it.
The common interpretations of John iii. 6, afford
another instance in which the principle of our rule is
violated. " That which is bom of the flesh is flesh, and
that which is bom of the Spirit, is spirit." These words
are commonly supposed to teach that all men are
sinners, because bom of sinful parents, sinners with
out any thought or action of their own. But the
first objection to this, is, that it compels us, in respect
to the second clause, to adopt the sentiment, that
every converted person is converted by the Spirit,
without any thought or choice on his part ; a senti
ment which is certainly false ; and if this is false,
the other must be so, for the same reason. But fur
ther, although there is no mention in the first clause
of free agency, or of any of the attributes of man's
nature, we are not therefore to suppose, that all these
attributes are denied. Our Lord certainly did not
mean to deny man's free agency, when he used these
words ; they are therefore to be interpreted in con
sistency with man's nature; for the facts, man's

104 INTEEPEETATION.
nature, his free will, his intelligent mind, and his
innate conscience, constituting his accountabihty,
are interwoven into every page of the Bible. These
words qf our Lord, affirm simply the universal sin
fulness of man ; " Tliat which is born of the flesh is
flesh ;" and the fact, that when man is changed from
sin to holiness, it is by the agency of the Divine
Spirit, "That which is born of the Spirit is spirit."
This is the true limit of their meaning. A writer
using the words, " AU that are born in Ai-abia, are
Mahometans," would not mean, surely, that aU the
Arabians are born with the doctrines of Mahomet in
their minds and hearts by nature ; if he did intend
to assert any such thing, who would believe him ?
Neither the above text, nor any other in the Bible,
means to deny the fact that men sin by the choice
of their wills ; and if that fact is omitted, it becomes
us, as fair and honest interpreters, to interpret the
words of our Lord consistently with the omission.
He is the wisest and best friend of the Bible, who
allows it always to speak for itself, and in harmony
with itself. SEVENTH GENEEAL EULE.
No passage is to be interpreted separately from
the context, nor in such a way as to contradict the
context.

GENEEAL EULES. 106
The primary principle on which this rule is based,
is the fact that every writer depends on his whole
communication, and not on any one part of it, to
convey his meaning. One sentence plucked rudely
from its place in an argument, it matters not from
what writer, may thus be made to express a senti
ment which the writer deliberately means to con
demn ; and yet this is the manner in which many
have presumed to interpret the Word of God.
1 Cor. XV. 22 : " For as in Adam all die, so in
Christ shaU all be made alive." From these words
what contradictory sentiments we have heard as
serted ! the salvation of all men, and the legal iden
tity of the human race with our first parent. " There
are the words, deny them if you can ; and if you do,
you deny the Word of God. Do not all men die ?
And did not death come by Adam ? What then
does the Apostle say of Christ and salvation ? does
he not affirm salvation to be as extensive as death?"
thus reasoned one in behalf of the shaUow sentiment
of universal salvation. "In this text it is affirmed
that all men die in Adam. But if so, here is the
legal and moral oneness of Adam and all his off
spring. If all died in hun, then aU lived and acted
in him ; his sin was our sin, his guilt our guilt, his
death our death ! Adam and his posterity are but
one person :" thus reasoned one, thinking, no

106 INTEEPEETATION.
doubt, that Paul had taught these things before him.
Alas ! for such errors, they are more easily exposed
than cured.
By the context we perceive how absurd are these
perversions. Paul is proving the resurrection of our
Lord, as a demonstration of the resurrection of aU
men. After citing the testimony of witnesses of our
Lord's resurrection, he proceeds to an argument dis
tinct from that of testimony ; viz., the design of God
in regard to the matter. He says : " For since by
man came death, by man also (i.e., so God designed
it should be), came the resurrection of the dead.
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall aU
.be made ahve." That is, as death came by Adam,
so the resurrection" from the dead will come by
Christ ; as in the arrangement of God, man brought
in death, so, by the same arrangement, man would
bring in the resurrection. Here is not the faintest
trace of universal salvation, nor of mankind's moral
oneness with Adam. The apostle was writing of
the resurrection ; and to that point he confines him
self. His affirmation is that as death came by
Adam, so hfe from the dead would come by Christ.
Such is the precise meaning of his words, neither
more nor less.
The same perversion has overtaken Job xiv. 4 :
" Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?

GENEEAL EULES. 107
Not one." This is usually made to signify that sin
ners beget sinners, that it is impossible for children
to differ in moral character from their parents, that
by the mere fact of birth, they are transgressors of
the law, and heirs of eternal death. If all this was
really intended by these words, it is strange that it
should have been expressed so ambiguously. Be
sides, if this be the meaning of the words, it cer
tainly contradicts Ezek. xviii. 4, as well as the fact
of om- Saviour's birth.
But a glance at the context will show us the true
meaning. Job is replying to the charge of his
friends. They said, he was a self-righteous and
impenitent man. In answer, he proceeds to confess
his sinfulness, and asks his Judge : " Dost Thou open
Thine eyes upon such a one and bringest me into
judgment with Thee." Then follows the passage in
question, in ans i7er to the inquiry he had just made :
" Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean ?
Not one." We know it is argued, that he refers to
the human race in the first verse : " Man that is
born of a woman is of few days and full of trouble,"
and therefore he refers to the race also, in this verse.
We deny the conclusion. In this verse, the refer
ence is to himself, because it is an answer to the
question immediately preceding it : " Dost Thou
open Thine eyes on.such an one ?" &c., and it affirms

108 INTEEPEETATION.
simply his own personal sinfulness. It is as though
he had placed himself in the presence of his Judge,
and with deep convictions of his depravity, he had
said : " Can I pretend, as my friends allege, that I
am righteous ? I who am a sinner ! No ! Who,
that is guilty can be proved innocent ? Can a holy
person be found, in one that is unholy as I am ?"
Such is the natural and legitimate force of the lan
guage. It is pertinent and true. But the common
interpretation seems wholly out of place. It involves
the absurdity that sin is a property of nature, and
that men cannot be anything but sinners, by the
very accident and necessity of their birth. All that
Job intended to say, was that seeing he was a sinful
man, he could not be regarded in any other light,
in the presence of his Judge. He was confessing, not
an accident, nor a constitutional element of universal
human nature, but the fact that he had sinned and
come short of the glory of God.
Is there a natural tendency in the mind of man ito
fatalism? or, to the ancient dogma of the Mani-
cheans, who held sin to be a physical and substan
tial principle in man ?
Let every one, who would interpret the Sacred
Scriptures correctly, see to it how he studies the
context, and observes the rule, never to explain
any text apart from the argument in which it occurs.

GENEEAL EULES. 109
EIGHTH GENEEAL EULE.
No interpretation is correct, if it run opposite to
the general design of the writer.
This rule gives a wider application to the last, and
its necessity is seen in two respects ; first, the imme
diate context may not always clearly show the
design of the writer ; second, the general design of
a writer, to a very great extent, controls his meaning.
On the latter point, it may be useful to consider the
* words of John Locke: "I saw clearly," says he,
"after I began to reflect upon it, that if any one
should now write a letter to me, as long as St. Paul's
epistle to the Eomans, concerning such a matter as
that is, in a style as foreign and expressions as
dubious as this seems to be, if I should di-nde it
into fifteen or sixteen chapters, and read one of them
to-day, and another to-morrow, it was ten to one that
I should never come to a full and clear comprehen
sion of it. The way to understand the mind of him
who wrote it, every one would agree, would be to
read the whole letter through from one end to the
other, all at once, to see what was the main subject
and tendency of it ; or if it had several parts and
purposes in it, not dejiendent one of another, to dis
cover what these different matters were, and where
the author concluded one and began another."

110 DITEEPEETATION.
Thus cautiously and patiently would Locke pro
ceed in ascertaining the main design of a writer, as
an essential preliminary to the understanding of his
meaning. O, that all interpreters of the Scriptures
had his modesty !
For illustration of our rule we take Eom. v. 14,
" Nevertheless death reigned, from Adam to Moses,
even over those that had not sinned after the simili
tude of Adam's transgression." Some maintain that
Paul refers here to infants dying before they sin.
But this does not agree at aU with the design of his^
general argument, and for that reason, it cannot be
his meaning.
He is comparing the effects of sin through Adam,
with the effects of grace through Christ, and this
comparison occurs in a very extended argument,
based upon the fact that all men have sinned, his
main design being to prove that all men needed the
salvation offered by Christ, on accoimt of their hav
ing sinned. He admits that where no law is there
is no transgression, and by fair inference no need of
any salvation. But says an objector, "There was
no law from Adam to Moses for two thousand years
and more, hence there could be no sin, and no need
of salvation, and therefore your main position, that
aU men need salvation, is disproved." It is in Paul's
reply to this objection, that the passage above

GENEEAL EULES. Ill
referred to occurs. He .asserts there was sin from
Adam to Moses, and the proof of the fact was that
death reigned over men aU that time. He appeals to
the universality of death to prove that they all had
sinned and were in need of salvation ; this was what
his argument required. It would not have served
his purpose to have asserted the fact of death and
the need of salvation on the part of infants from
Adam to Moses. During that time, death reigned
over all, both old and young ; and the apostle main
tains that all were in need of salvation, because all
had sinned. Therefore he does not mean infants,
but all men living from Adam to Moses, without
respect to age ; for they were all under the govern
ment of God, and subject to his law, though they
had no oral law such as Adam had.
Jas. ii. 14, " Ye see then how that by works a man
is justified, and not by faith only." This is another
passage affording an iUustration of our rule, and it
has a history both curious and instructive.
Luther, it is weU known, after a season of deep
mental excitement and distress, at length found
peace in the doctrine of justification by faith in
Christ. This doctrine very, naturally became the
joy- of his heart. He knew no language too strong
in which to state and defend it. Conceive his alarm
when he read these words in James ! They seemed

112 INTEEPEETATION.
to contradict not only his whole experience, but the
entire Gospel also. There were the words, and how
were they to be explained ? His enemies could
quote them in triumph, to sustain their doctrine of
good works; and what could he say in reply?
Without seeking to explain their true meaning by
an appeal to the evident design of the apostle, he
rushed upon the extreme measure, never thought of
before, of denying the inspiration of James' epistle,
and refusing it a place in the Bible. This was dis
posing of the difficulty at too dear a rate, and though
it embarrassed the reformation exceedingly, he
maintained his opinion almost to the day of his
death. On the other hand, Luther's enemies in the Council
of Trent were no wiser than he. They took this
same passage to confute the Eeformation ; and they
based on it the following doctrine and anathema:
"Whosoever shall affirm that the righteous ought
not to expect and hope for everlasting life from
God for their good works, let him be accursed.
Whosoever shall affirm that the good works of a
justified man are, in such sense, the gifts of God,
that they are not his worthy merits, and that he
really does not deserve increase of grace and eternal
life, let him be accursed." Acts. Sess. lY.
There never was a more manifest error on both

GENEEAL EULES. 113
sides. Both equally failed to discover the design of
the apostle in the argument where the passage
occurs. As the most passing glance will show, his
object was to warn converted Jews of the danger of
trusting to their mere professions of faith. He would
have them understand, that obedience went along
with faith ; and that the man who was satisfied with
merely saying he beheved, to the neglect of holy
living, was like a body without a spirit. In all this
James has no reference to the question, on what
ground is a man justified? It was Paul's design to
answer that question. James had another point,
wholly distinct, before his thoughts. He- meant to
enforce practical piety, and maintained that a man,
who said he had faith in Christ, and lived the mean
while in sin, was a dead man ; his professed faith
would not save him; not because sinners are not
saved by faith, but because his alleged faith, unac
companied with obedience, was no faith at all. In
this sense the above passage is to be understood;
and so understood, it does not contradict, it confirms
the doctrine of Paul.
By our rule we are enabled to interpret correctly
the 7th Chapter of the Eomans, respecting which
there has been such interminable contention. It
turns wholly upon the general design of the -writer.
That design undoubtedly was to show the effect of

114 INTEEPEETATION.
the law upon the human heart, and not specificaUy
upon the converted heart. Hence he is led, as a
matter of course, to speak of the heart of man and
its workings, simply as such. He, therefore, uses
language which applies both to the believer and the
unbeliever, and to neither exclusively. This is the
true key to the sense of the chapter.
Our rule also most satisfactorily explains that
much controverted passage, 1 Cor. xv. 29, " Else
what shall they do who are baptized for the dead."
The apostle's object is to establish the doctrine of the
resurrection. This verse contains one of his argu
ments; an argument ex concessis, from the conces
sions of those to whom he was writing. They
believed in, and practised^ the ordinance of baptism ;
and baptism was administered on the ground of the
truth that there was a resurrection. Hence the
apostle's question: "What shall they do who are
baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not?" Or,
what will they do in reference to the doctrine of the
resurrection, who are baptized in the belief of it?
Will they repudiate their own belief, and renounce
their baptism? The phrase "for the dead," is used
simply for another — " for the resurrection," the main
word in the argument. Thus viewed, there is no
obscurity in the passage, and the verse succeeding is
an argument precisely of a hke nature : " And why

GENEEAL EULES. . 116
stand we in jeopardy every hour;" i. e., if there be
no resurrection.
So also in respect to Heb. vii. 1-3, where Christ
is said to be " without father, without mother," &c.
Paul's main design in this chapter is to assert the priest
hood of Christ according to the prophecy of the 110th
Psalm. He admits he was not a priest after the order
of Levi ; but after the order of Melchizedek ; and con
sequently he had no genealogy from Levi ; he was
of the tribe of Judah ; neither his reputed father,
nor mother, were numbered among the Levites;
there was no specified age at which he was to enter
upon his priesthood ; and none at which he was to
lay down his office, as was the custom in the order
of Levi. Christ was a priest forever after the
order of the Eing of Salem, the venerable Mel
chizedek. 1 Pet. iii. 18-20 is explained also by the prin
ciple of our present rule. It is not necessary that
we should descend any further to particulars. To
seize the general design of the writer, is one of
the most sure and satisfactory methods of ascertain
ing his meaning ; and no interpretation is correct
which runs opposite thereto.

116 ¦ INTEEPEETATION.
NINTH GENEEAL EULE.
Of one or more possible senses, which a text may
reasonably bear, that is to be preferred which best
agrees with the design of the writer and the general
harmony of the faith. ,
This rule provides for a case which not unfre-
quently occm-s, where the words of a passage may
fairly have two slightly different shades of meaning.
In such a case that sense is to be taken which best
agrees with the main design of the argument and
the general harmony of aU inspired truth.
Thus in respect to the clause " and their works do
follow them," Eev. xiv. 13. If the meaning should
be held to be, that the works of the pious dead fol
low them to eternity as the ground of their accept
ance and happiness there, and for aught that appears
in the language, such might be the meaning, we
must then fall back on the beai-ing which such a
sense would have on other doctrines of the Christian
faith, and on the question, does such a sentiment
agree with the design of the. writer ? A sentiment
drawn from any passage, or a meaning ascribed to
any passage, must not only be reasonably contained
therein ; it must be essentially true in itself, and in
that case it will agree with the design of the writer
and with the analogy of the faith. But the above

GENEEAL EULES. 117
sentiment is not avowed by any sacred writer, and it
is directly opposed to the doctrine of salvation by
the merits of Jesus Christ. Hence it is not the
meaning of the above words. The works of the
righteous do indeed follow them into eternity and
undergo the scrutiny of omniscience there, and
receive the approbation of God ; but it is not for
these good works that they are saved. They are
saved by grace, through faith ; and that not in view
of what they have done ; their salvation is the gift
of God, and not of works, lest they should boast.
Mat. xvi. 18, " And I say unto thee, that thou art
Peter ; and upon this rock I will build my Church,
and the gates of heU shall not prevail against it."
There are, at least three distinct shades of meaning,
which these words may reasonably bear. . (1) Upon
such confessions as this, that thou hast made of my
Messiahship, I will build my Church; or (2) upon
this tmth that I am the Messiah, I will build my
Church ; or (3) by means of thee, Peter, a man of
firm and resolute will, will I lay the foundation of
the Church, as a distinct community in the world.
The two first are both consistent with aU Scriptural
doctrines, and many considerations may be urged in
their favor. But the last is in harmony with actual
historical facts, recorded in Acts ii. 14-36, and chapter
10th, where, by Peter's instrumentality, the Church,

118 INTEEPEETATION.
composed both of Jews and Gentiles, was established
as a distinct body in the world. And such an
announcement from the lips of our Lord, in the cir
cumstances, was both apjDropriate and significant.
It was just such an announcement as he was wont to
make frequently of what the disciples were to endure
and accomplish ; and we therefore prefer this last
meaning. The words of our Lord, when recalled by
Peter, in the times of stern conflict, through which
he passed, would administer an unspeakable solace,
not only to Peter's heart, but to the hearts of aU the
disciples. But there is not one syUable in this text,
to justify the wild, foolish, and wicked pretences of
Popish supremacy. What has the modern Babylon,
the oppressor of God's people, the exterminator of
the Gospel, to do with these words, spoken by Him,
whom that city of abominations loves to crucify
afresh ?
James v. 20, " He that converteth the sinner from
the error of his ways, shall save a soul from death,
and shaU hide a multitude of sins." There are two
distinct shades of meaning, which this text will bear.
(1) The soul saved, and the multitude of sins that
are hid, may refer to the person who reclaims his
erring brother, or (2) they may refer to the brother
reclaimed. If then we adopt the first, the sentiment
of the apostle would be, that he, who reclaimed a

GENEEAL EULES. 119
brother from sin, would save thereby his own soul,
and hide the multitude of his own sins. Is this his
meaning? As our rule directs, we must consider
the design of the writer, and the harmony of the
sentiment, with the general system of truth. With
respect to the first, it does not appear that the
writer meant to say — ^if a Christian reclaims his
erring brother, he would save his own soul, and hide
his own sins. The impression we receive is, that his
language refers to the person who is reclaimed ; and
that he holds it ®ut as a motive to action, in the work
of reclaiming him. As respects the harmony of the
sentiment, -with the analogy of the faith, there is no
doubt it is wholly at variance with it. We are
saved by faith in Christ, not by acts of kindness done
to erring brethren. Hence, we conclude, the mean
ing of the passage is, he who reclaims a backshder
is the means of saving the backslider's soul, and of
hiding his sins. This is consistent with the design
of the writer, and with the general harmony of the
faith. TENTH GENEEAL EULE.
No interpretation is correct, which violates the
grammar, or the idioms of the language in which
the Scriptures were at first written.

120 INTEEPEETATION.
All translations of the Bible are liable to mislead
us, in respect both to the grammar, and the idioms
of the original language in which it was com
posed. The English translation, although beyond all
question, the most perfect translation ever made, is
not free from errors of this description; some, perhaps,
unavoidable, others, the effect of a faulty interpreta
tion ; for every translator is of necessity, an interpre
ter, in a very high and important sense.
An illustration of the application of our rule is
found in Dan. iii. 25. There the King of Babylon
is made to say : " The fourth is like the Son of God."
But this is not justified by the original. The Hebrew
noun for " son," is without the article ; and the sen
tence should therefore read : " The fourth is like a
son of God," or, is like a divine being. Often do
readers of the English Bible wonder how the hea
then king of Babylon could have had any know
ledge of the Son of God, so as to identify his
appearance in the fiery furnace ; but the fact is, he
had no such knowledge ; and his language properly
rendered, conveys simply the idea, that the person
whom he saw, was in his judgment a di-vine being,
and not a man like the other three.
Another passage which our rule enables us rightly
to interpret, is Eph. ii. 8, " By grace are ye saved,
through faith ; and that not of yourselves, it is the

GENEEAL EULES. 121
gift of God." It has been contended that Paul here '
meant to say, faith is the gift of God, and in such a
sense too, that it is not the act of the believer at all.
But the original Greek forbids such an interpreta
tion. For Paul uses a pronoun in the neuter gender,
when he says, " it is the gift ;" whereas, had he
intended to refer to " faith," he must have used a
pronoun in the feminine gender, to agree with it.
His meaning, as seen by the original, is, that salva
tion by grace, is the gift of God.
Eom. viii. 7-: " The carnal mind is enmity against
God." These words are often used, in the sense that
the powers and faculties wherewith men are en
dowed, the very constituents of the mind itself, are
depraved and sinful, apart from their actions. Those
who insist on this sense, are in need of it, to sustain
a certain theory; and Scripture was competent to
have asserted the doctrine, had it been true. But it
is not here that this assertion is made. The original
is : " the minding, or pursuit of carnal things " is
enmity against God ; the proper Greek word for
" mind " is not in the sentence. Hence it is not the
mind itself that is enmity against God, but the pur
suits, desires, and works of the mind.
The Douay translation has violated, in a great
number of instances, the original language of the
Bible. Thus, in Exod. xxxiv. 29, it says : " Moses
6

122 INTEEPEETATION.
knew not that his face was horned from the conver
sation of the Lord." This ludicrous mistake is
copied from the Yulgate, the author of which did
not, or could not, distinguish between the Hebrew
word for horn, " Keren," and the word " Karan," he
shone. Also in Heb. xi. 21, there is a very gross
violation of the original. It is a marvel that learned
men, such as many of the Eomauists are, should
ever have suffered such a willful perversion of the
Scriptures to go out into the world. The Greek is
'em TO dupov Tqq pdfidov avTov — " upon the top of his
staff;" being an old man, Jacob worshipped, as he
blessed the sons of Joseph, on the top of his staff.
He did not bow himself to the ground, as the usual
custom was. The Douay translation has it : " He
adored the top of his rod .'"
Under this rule falls Acts iii. 19, 20. The fault
¦with the translation consists in its making the apostle
say what plainly does not harmonize with his design.
He is preaching immediate repentance, and of course
gives reasons for the duty. The particles iVwf av
should have been translated, "since," or "seeing
that," as the design of the argument clearly demands.
"Eepent — since, the times of refreshing are come
from the presence of God, and since he has sent
Jesus," &c. ; this was the meaning of the apostle
in his preaching, without any doubt.

GENEEAL EULES. 123
Ps. X. 3 : " For the wicked boasteth of his heart's
desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the Lord
abhorreth." Here is another instance where our
rule holds ; for there is no authority for the word
" whom " in the original. It is " He abhors the
Lord," and is another item in the character of the
wicked man.
Acts xii. 4 : " Intending after Easter to bring him
forth," is a translation for which there is positively
no apology. None of the apostles ever heard of
" Easter." The word in Greek is " Passover."
Acts ii. 27 : " Because thou wilt not leave my
soul in Hell ;" the use of the word " Hell," in this
instance, conveys more than the original. With us,
it means the world of torment, as opposed to Heaven ;
but the Greeks had a word which signified simply
the world of spirits, as opposed to this world, a word
which did not convey the idea of misery or of hap
piness with it. It is the word Hades ; and this is the
word used in the original of this passage. It should
have been : "Because thou wilt not leave my soul
in the state of the dead, or in the world of spirits."
Not that there is no place, revealed in Scripture,
such as our word Hell properly designates ; but that
in this instance our translators made use of too
strong a word for the original.
The importance of our rule may be seen, if in

124 INTEEPEETATION.
nothing else, in the value of a thorough knowledge
of the languages, in which the Scriptures were at
first composed. AU honest interpreters will give it
its due share of importance. Those who have not
such a knowledge of the original languages, may be
expected to speak with modesty respecting the
meaning of passages, whose sense is either doubtful,
or obscure. ELEVENTH GENEEAL EULE.
Comparisons drawn from the social or material
world, for the purpose of iUustration, are not to be
interpreted, as applying in every particular to the
subject which they are intended to explain ; nor is
any doctrine to be founded on such comparisons.
The philosophy of this rule enters into aU sound
interpretation, and is more extensively connected
with the true understanding of the Scriptures, than
any other principle in this whole science. It lies in
the fact that the world of matter, from which com
parisons are taken, is so immeasurably removed in
nature, from the world of spirit, that the two never
can be blended into one. Matter is not Mind ; and
though the laws by which matter is governed may
illustrate the certainty and force, with which the
laws of mind operate, yet these laws are not identi-

GENEEAL EULES. 125
cal and never can be. They are as diverse as the
things themselves out of which they spring, or to
govern which they are enacted by sovereign wis
dom. A wicked man, for example, may love his
sins, as invariably as the stone unsupported faUs to
the earth ; and the strength of his love for his sins,
may not inaptly be compared to that law which
always brings the stone to the ground. But there
is a vast difference between the powers of a wicked
man to abstain from, or repent of his sins, and the
powers of a stone to remain unsupported in the air.
The difference is so vast, there neither is, nor can be
any proper comparison in the case ; it is the differ
ence between a power wholly competent to follow its
own choice, and a power competent only of acting
in one way and without choice, without the possi
bility of ever moving in any other direction than
that in which it is moved. The laws of mind, and the
laws of matter are thus infinitely and eternally distinct.
The Bible written for the whole world, in a style
pecuhar and inteUigible to the whdle world, em
ploys comparisons with great frequency, and in aU
their various forms. Hence the importance of look
ing weU to our principles of exegesis, in all cases
where these comparisons occur ; and especiaUy
where they are employed to iUustrate states of mind
or of moral character in man.

126 INTEEPEETATION.
Eom. ix. 21 : " Hath not God power over the clay
of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honor,
and another unto dishonor." If this text should be
interpreted so as to mean, that, as the potter makes
one vessel for this purpose, and another for that, so
God creates one man, and destines him for heaven,
and another, and destines him for hell, precisely and
absolutely on the same principles as the potter his
vessels, we would solemnly protest against it. The
comparison is not to be carried to the unreasonable
length of saying that man is purely a piece of clay
in the hands of his Creator. To make it apply in
every respect to the subject which it Ulustrates,
would destroy the eternal distinctions between mind
and matter, and between the moral law, and the
laws of brute force, by which the material world is
governed. Eph. u. 1 : " And you hath he quickened, who
were dead in tresspasses and sins." This is the lan
guage of comparison, and the comparison is between
those who had been unconverted sinners, and the
dead ; and some have carried it so far, as to affirm
the meaning of the apostle to be, that the uncon
verted ca/n no more repent, nor believe, nor think a
good thought of themselves, than a dead person,
nailed up in his coffin, can of himself rise to hfe ;
that the entire want of power is as real in the

GENEEAL EULES. 127
one case as in the other, and that Paul meant in
this language to say so.
But how immeasurably does this fall short of the
apostle's meaning ! He tells plainly what he meant
by being " dead in sin." It was not the absence of
all power to do good, in men, that he thought of
affirming; it was simply the fact that whUe they
were unconverted, they had been insensible to the
duties of religion ; in this lay the similarity of their
moral character, to the condition of the dead. He
says, " In time past, they had walked according to
the course of this world, fulfilling the desires of the
flesh." Here was their ability to do evil affirmed ;
and the power to do good is implied in the same
terms. Comparisons are not to be pressed beyond
the nature of things. They are points of likeness,
wherein one thing partially resembles another, and
nothing more. No writer ever uses them as inde
pendent proofs of his doctrine. Indeed, all moral
truth stands on its own basis, not needing any other.
The truth, that an unconverted man is uninfluenced
by the law of God, so as not to be governed b}'' it,
as truly as a dead man is uninfluenced by the things
of this world, rests for its proof, not on any point of
similarity between his condition and that of a dead
man, but on the fact that he is led away by his sins, so
as to disregard the law of God altogether. This state of

128 INTEEPEETATION.
mind is spiritual death ; i. e., it is a state of hardness
and insensibility, in which the soul takes no pleasure
in the will of God ; and out of this state every con
verted man is quickened by the Sphit of God,
at his new birth. Such is the meaning of the
apostle. Jer. xiii. 23, " Can the Ethiopian change his skin,
or the leopard his spots ? then may ye also do good
that are accustomed to do evil." Here there is a
comparison strictly of the same nature as the last.
It lies between the Ethiopian's power to change his
color, or that of the leopard to change his spots, and the
power of a man accustomed to do evil, to change his
habit of sin, and do good. But we would greatly err
were we to insist on a perfect and absolute similarity
in aU respects in the two cases. The difficulty in the
way of a sinner is the force of a long-cherished
habit ; that in the way of the African and the leopard,
is a natural impossibility, arising from a law beyond
their control. Will any sane man say, these two
things are in every sense the same ?
MEMOEANDUM.
It is under this rule touching comparisons, that
we place the explanation of a certain large class of
words, descriptive of man's character, and the states

GENEEAL EULES. '129
of his heart, in view of the moral law. Some of
these words are the foUowing : abominable, adulter
ous, backsliding, blind, corrupt, ca/rnal, croolced,
defiled, dead, earthy, evil, fallen, feeble, filthy, fleshly,
flesh, hardened, iniquity, lusts, natural, naked,
polluted, sinful, tra/nsgressing, unclean, ungodly,
wicked. The words depramed, depravity, are not used in
the Scriptures, are of a Latin origin, and faU under
the same law as the above.
First as adjectives, then as nouns, or names of the
states described by the adjectives, these words, when
applied to human conduct and character, always
imply a comparison, expressed or understood. Thus
in reference, for instance, to the word " corrupt," we
say, the heart of man is corrupt; but we do not
mean that the heart is hterally corrupt, hke a carcass
in a state of decay or putrefaction. In such a case,
such a meaning would simply be absurd. All these
words applied to man's heart and its affections imply
a comparison, which, in respect to the word corrupt,
may be expressed thus: as a material body, in a
state of decay, is offensive, and fit only to be removed
from our presence ; so, a, human heart, that loves to
sin, and sets its affections on things prohibited, is
offensive to God, and fit only to be removed out of
His sight. In aU this we do not refer to the facul-

130 INTEEPEETATION.
ties, or heart of man as such ; but to his voluntary
conduct, as a moral being in view of the moral law.
The offensiveness and corruption which attaches to
his heart is his voluntary choice of sin, his wiUful
disobedience of the law of God. Whenever the
heart of man is thus set on sin, such is human lan
guage, that, in describing the fact, we are under a
necessity of employing a class of words, which, in
their primary signification, describe physical or
material states ; and hence arises the imphed com
parison of which we have spoken. Never must this
fact be forgotten ; nor do we know of a more preg
nant and necessary caution to urge on all who inter
pret the Word of God.
In Gen. vi. 11, it is said, "The earth also was
corrupt before God." This does not mean that men's
faculties of mind and heart were in themselves bad ;
for the faculties of the soul, as such, are neither
good nor bad ; there is no moral standard for them.
The only standard of goodness and badness in the
universe, is the moral law, and that has respect, not
to faculties in themselves, but to the exercise of
faculties ; to actions, only. It is the voluntary em
ployment of man's faculties against God which con
stitutes the corruption, pollution, depravity, sinful
ness, vileness, and uncleanness of his heart. If he
never sinned by breaking the law, he would never

GENEEAL EULES. 131
sin at all. So that when the words above quoted
are apphed to his character, it is not in a direct and
primary sense, but implying merely a comparison,
as above described, to material objects ; and the
words must be interpreted accordingly..
The word "natural" is used just once in the Bible,
to describe character in man ; 1 Cor. ii. 14 ; and a
very common error is to suppose that it means man
simply as a creature ; whereas it means man as fol
lowing his own chosen ways — ^man freely doing
wrong, and unwiUing to subject himself to the wiU
of God. Hence, a "natural man," in the sense of
Scripture, is simply a sinning man, an active agent,
resisting the will of God, and not a creature passively
existing, -with sin in it, as one of its created ele
ments. The comparison implied in this word, may
be thus expressed : as nature is distinct from its
author, having accidents and properties of its own,
separate from those of its creator ; so a natural man,
in Scripture language, is a man who follows his own
will as a rule of conduct; aims at his own ends,
separate from those enjoined on him by his Creator —
" he receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God."
We know of no single word which is so much
abused in reference to human conduct, as this.
The above law apphes to the opposite class of
words, also; words describing good character in

132 INTEEPEETATION.
man : e. g. alive, clean, holy, godly, pure, righteous,
sanctified, steadfast, spiritual, straight, strong, &c.
In all these there is a reference to some physical
state, forming the point of comparison, between that
state, and the state of the heart as compared with
the divine law, the standard of right and wrong. If
this fact be not constantly recognized, om- intei-pre-
tations cannot be according to truth, nor according
to the mind of the Spirit.
The same law of interpretation holds true, of aU
those verbs which describe the infiuence of one
moral being over another. Thus it is said, God
" hardened Pharaoh's heart," and " the heart of His
people, Israel ;" and of several kings it is said, they
"made Jsrael to sin," and "poUuted the land." In
Eom. 5 19, Paid has these words : " For as by one
man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by
the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."
One principle governs, in all such forms of expres
sion. God did not harden Pharaoh's heart, as men
harden iron or steel, by heating it red hot, and then
plunging it into cold water. God used various expe
dients, to secure the consent of Pharaoh to his
reasonable requirements. Pharaoh resisted all these
expedients, and hardened his heart against God, and
grew from time to time more determined in his pur
pose not to let Israel go. But now for the point of

GENEEAL EULES. 133
comparison ; as, by certain means iron is hardened,
so by the meang made use of to gain the consent of
Pharaoh, his heart was rendered only more resolute
in refusing ; and thus it was hardened, by the force
of his own will.
So of polluting the land, and making Israel to sin.
Here the making to sin, is not the effect of physical
power, as when a founder, out of ore makes iron, or
a shipbuilder, out of timber makes a ship, or a
potter, out of clay makes vessels, some to honor, and
some to dishonor. In these cases, the making is the
result of physical force on material objects. But
man is not a material object, and he cannot be made
a sinner in any such way, nor by 4ny such means.
So that when the language is used of him, it is used
by way of comparison, or analogy only. Many —
all — were made sinners by the disobedience of
Adam ; many were made sinners by the kings of
Israel, building altai-s, and setting up idols in the
groves, and the land was polluted by them ;
Mahomet made many Mahometans ; Confucius made
many idolaters, and the Pope of Eome, many apos
tates from the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Biit how
made them ? by the voluntary choice, the free con
sent, and unimpaired freedom of their own wills.'
This last item, is for evermore to be kept in mind, as
a grand decision, and infallible, of common sense, to

134 INTEEPEETATION.
infiuence all our interpretations of all such language
as the above, in the Word of God. To introduce
any other principles into our expositions of the
Scriptures, is to pervert all common sense, and put
into the mouths of infidels, objections to the whole
subject of inspiration and religion, which it is utterly
impossible for us to remove.
THE PAEABLES.
The Parables, one of the most instructive depart
ments of Scripture, come under the above law of
interpretation. Their chief object being to illustrate
the fundamental and practical doctrines of religion,
errorists have made the most strenuous efforts to per
vert them. Even professed friends of religion, have
not not been free from the guilt of turning the Para
bles wholly aside from then- proper object. The
early, as well as the later Fathers, are replete with
such perversions. We give only one instance of a
modern eiTorist, showing the inherent folly of such
men, and the miserable foundations on which they
build their opinions. It is in reference to the Para
ble of the rich man, and Lazarus. According to this
interpreter, whose name we mention not, the rich
man means, "the high priest under the law;" the
beggar means, " the Gentiles ;" the beggar's death

GENEEAL EULES. 135
means, " the close of the Levitical dispensation ;" the
lifting up of the rich man's eyes in hell, means, " a
conviction of the condemning power of the law ;" his
desire to have his brethren warned, is, " the desire of
Gentile converts, to carry the Gospel to apostate
Jews;" the gulph is, "the time appointed for the
blindness of Israel ;" the five brethren are, " that
part of Israel, broken off through unbelief!" What
can mortal man say of such absurdities?
An elaborate treatise on the Parables has been
published by Prof. Trench, a name of some power
in hterature. But even he is not free from the
errors so palpable in the above abstract, and it is
the great error into which so many fall, when inter
preting these interesting compositions. Thus he
makes the parable of the good Samaritan teach the
mission and example of Christ ; the traveUer is
" human nature, or, Adam, the head of the race,"
who leaves the heavenly city and faUs into the
power of Satan, and is all but killed. Christ now
finds him and restores him. The wine is the blood
which Christ shed ; and the oil is the anointing of the
Holy Spirit ! the binding up is the sacraments of
the Church ! This is a link of " the chains ;" for he
quotes largely from the early Fathers, and is carried
away on the flowery stream of their rhetoric with
great pleasure. He objects to the maxim : " every

136 INTEEPEETATION.
comparison must halt somewhere ;" but his objec
tion is merely the word, why ? The answer is very
ob-vious ; because in the very nature of things, spirit
and matter, between which the comparison is made,
are not identical, and never can be in all respects
alike. Besides all such perversions of the Parables are in
face of the fact, that the design of the Parable is
usually specified ; so that we have no alternative,
but to take it as an Ulustration of the particular
topic which it was designed to enforce. Indeed,
everything depends on our seizing the design of the
Parable. We have no authority to say it was meant
for any other purpose than that intended by its
Author. And here it is no small consolation to
reflect, that the great mass of plain people, who
receive the Bible as the Word of God, find but little
difficulty in comprehending the precise point aimed
at in these Scriptures. The common mind is not
inferior in this respect to the educated mind ; for the
reason that the peculiar language of the Parable is
actuaUy more familiar in the humbler walks of life,
than in the halls of learning ; the cottage resounds
more frequently than the college, with the bold and
striking comparison, with the Parable and its clear,
shining sense, understood by all, not excepting the
children. Hence it is not among common readers

GENEEAL EULES. 137
of the Bible that the Parables are so frequently per
verted ; it is among those who must make every
thing out of the Parables that they can, for their
own purposes.
With the general rule given above, we must pro
ceed only on such principles as apply to the inter
pretation of Scripture in general ; taking heed not to
found any doctrine on the Parables, as its ultimate
ground. Not that the Parable is without its doctrine ;
but that the Parable is in no case the first revelation,
or statement of a doctrine ; it is merely the illustra
tion of a doctrine ; a doctrine put in drapery, and
the drapery is not intended to be used for any other
purpose. It is a violation of this common sense principle,
that leads some to find in the Parable of the fig tree.
Matt. xxiv. 32-4, the restoration of the Jews as a
nation to Palestine ! see Cummings on " ITie End."
And this is one of the most unfounded errors into
which men faU in reference to the interpretation of
the Parables. THE TTPES OF SCEIPTUEE.
We cannot allow the opportunity to pass without
saying in reference to what are called " Types," that
we have no sympathy whatever with those who are

138 INTEEPEETATION.
so zealous in finding types in the Old Testament,
corresponding to all persons, things, and places in
the New. It is a principle not to be violated, that
we are not to find any types, but those which the
Bible itself has specified. Yet we are told by grave
interpreters that Adam, Noah, Joseph, Moses,
Joshua, David, and others, were all and severally
types of our Lord ; that the wanderings of Israel
were types of the experience of the Church, &c.
But this is wholly without any Scriptural authority,
and is not to be countenanced. The example of
Paul in Galatians iv., is no excuse for such fanciful
notions ; for there he simply takes a passage of his
tory to illustrate his point ; and this all may do, for
the like reason, that it is a very instructive mode of
impressing the truth on the mind. But Paul does
not say, that any part of the history to which he
refers, was designed to be a type of what he was
inculcating. This is the error of which we complain
as wholly unauthorized. There are types in Scrip
ture ; but we are not to add to them ; neither are
we to press them beyond reason. They are in
nature parables, and come under the same exegetical
laws. Their use is accounted for by the temporary
and introductory nature of the first dispensation, in
which God wisely prepared the way, in the minds
of His people, for the fuU and more glorious mani-

GENEEAL EULES. 139
festation of Himself and His truth in the perfect
economy of the Gospel. Let it be a law, therefore,
not to regard anything in Scripture as a type of
another, except those things which the Bible has
declared such.

THE POETET OF THE BIBLE.
The interpretation of the poetry of the Scriptures
is largely to be placed under the same principles as
the Parables ; for the good reason that comparisons,
or figm-es taken from the material world, constitute
the great staple of poetry. The usual hcense, or
intensity of expression also, common to poetry, of
itself requires great aUowance, in order to secure
correct exegesis. This intensity of language consti
tutes one of the gravest difficulties in the way of the
translator, who finds it peculiarly perplexing in the
poetical portions of Scripture ; and hence it cannot
but prove a very serious obstacle in the way of the
interpreter. The greater the need of caution. The
letter must not be pressed, especially it must not be
pressed, in reference to doctrinal statements, when
they occur in these compositions. And it is just in
reference to this very point that interpreters are
most singularly at fault.
A few passages eminently requiring caution we
here quote :

140 INTEEPEETATION.
Ps. Iviii. 3-5. The -wicked are estranged from the -womb ;
They go astray as soon as born, speaking lies ;
Their poison is like the poison of a serpent ;
They are like the deaf adder, that stoppeth her
ear.
That -will not listen to the voice of charmers,
Charm they never so -wisely.
Ps. xxii. 9. Thou art he that took me out of the womb;
Thou didst make me hope, on my mother's
breasts.
Ps. h. 6, 7. Behold I was shapen in iniquity,
And in sin did my mother conceive me.
Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean ;
"Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
Job xxxi. 19. For from my youth, he was bro-ught up -with me.
As -with a Father ;
And I have guided the -widow from my mother's
womb.
xiv. S, 4. And dost thou open thine eyes npon such an
one,
And bringest me into judgment with thee ?
Who can bring a clean thing
Out of an unclean ? Not one !
XV. 14. What is man, that he should be clean ?
And he born of woman, that he should bo
righteous ?
xvii. 14. I have said to corruption, thou art my Father,
To the worm, thou art my mother, and my sister.
Rom. iii. 12. They are all gone out of the way ;
They are together become unprofitable ;
There is none good, no not one.
Their throat is an open sepulchre ;

GENEEAL EULES. 141
With their tongue they have used deceit;
The poison of asps is under their lips.
Such quotations might be greatly multiplied, but
we intentionally limit ourselves to these, as a speci
men of one class of texts, most strangely and widely
perverted. They are made the proof texts respect
ing man's character, without any allowance for the
nature of the composition, or of the subject matter
of which they treat ; the naked letter is insisted on,
as though everything was meant which the letter
affirms. But the most ilhterate person must see
that language such as the above, is not the language
of sober statement, but of highly -wrought poetic
emotion, and for that reason it requires very cautious
interpretation. Instead of caution, however, theolo
gians — the last men in the world who ought to be
guilty of such indiscretion — have insisted on the let
ter to the uttermost. They regard such passages as
the absolute dicta of the severest and most precise
systematic theology. They make no allowance for
the poetic nature of the composition ; they demand
that these intense stanzas of
Thoughts that breathe
And words that burn,
must be interpreted and regarded as maxims in

1 42 INTEEPEETATION.
religion, to which, as to a line drawn with mathe
matical exactness, all our ideas must rigidly conform.
What would be thought of the sanity of a writer
who should insist on interpreting modern poetry on
this principle. Try this dead letter system on Shak-
speare, Young, or Milton ; or, on many of the sub-
limest portions of the Bible itself, which have no
reference to human character, and see how it would
confound aU sense.
For instance try it on the following :
Ps. Ix. 8. Moab is my washpot ;
Over Edom wiU I cast my shoe ;
Philistia triumph thou, because of me !
Ps. xxii. 6. But I am a worm, and no man ;
A reproach of men, and despised of the people.
Hab. iii. 3-6. God came down from Teman,
And the holy one from Paran.
And His brightness was as the light.
He had horns coming out of His head ;
And there was the hiding of His power.
Before Him went the pestilence.
And burning coals, went forth at His feet.
He stood and measured the eartli ;
He beheld, and drove asunder the nations ;
And the everlasting mountains were scattered.
The perpetual hills did bow ;
His ways are everlasting 1
Ps. Ixxviii. 65. Then the Lord awaked as one out of sleep, and
like a mighty man that shouteth by reason of wine.

GENEEAL EULES. 143
Let the naked letter be insisted on in such pas
sages, and why not, if in the other ; and what
absurdity would be the result! Why is it never
attempted ? When we find, as in the 61st and 68th
Psalms, passages respecting the moral character of
man, does truth and propriety demand that we
should abandon all common sense, and insist on aU
the strictness and sternness of the letter, without
regard to consequences, even though it should lead
us to assert that God shapes men transgressors of His
law in the first moments of their existence, and
dooms them to wrath before they are born ? Does
truth require this? Does reverence for the Scrip
tures require it? In our view, reverence for the
Bible, and truth, and common sense, aU require the
very opposite.
We do not say, that poetry of necessity exagge
rates even doctruial statements. The inspired poetry
of the Bible contains much doctrine, clearly and
fairly stated in the very best and most impressive
forms. But let due aUowance be made for the inten
sity of poetry, especially when describing the char
acter of man, or the ways and attributes of God.
Never let the nature of the subject be forgotten ; for
thus only can we honor the Word of God, and gain
the meaning it was designed to impart.
With these precautions, as worthy of constant
remembrance, we proceed to interpret the poetry of

144 INTEEPEETATION.
the Bible on the same general principles as other
portions of the Scriptures.
TWELFTH GENEEAL EULE.
No interpretation is correct when it bases any doc
trine on a mere phrase.
The reason we assign for this rule is that a phrase
is used simply to characterize, or qualify a doctrine,
never solely to contain it. A phrase is a mere frac
tion of a sentence, and is necessarily relative and
imperfect. No writer ever intends to found any
sentiment on such a narrow basis ; it would be like
an effort to conceal his sentiments under cover of an
adverb, or an adjective.
A writer on Leviticus has furnished a notable
specimen of this error, against which our rule is
meant to protect us. On Levit. xii. 2, he comments
thus : " The woman is made unclean by the birth of
a child. Why is this ? Because the child is bom a
sinner, an heir of hell. She that bare him is there
fore held unclean." The vicious circle in this logic
is broad and distinct ; we wonder it did not catch
the eye of the commentator. But the basis of his
comment more immediately concerns us. It is the
phrase " she shall be unclean," on which he buUds
the doctrine that the child is " a sinner, an heir of
hell;" and because of the child's character, he

GENEEAL EULES. 146
concludes the mother is as bad as the child, "she
shall be unclean." But in the Levitical law, this
phrase had no such signification. It meant simply
that the person to whom it applied, was for a speci
fied time, deprived of certain public religious privi
leges. See Num. xix. passvm. Yet our author, for
reasons known only to himself, heads his comment
on this passage with the words "original sin," as
though that doctrine were taught us in these words
— " she shaU be unclean seven days !" And having
found that doctrine in this phrase, he concludes with
the remark, " Adam's imputed guilt rests on aU his
posterity." Truly, Moses did not know the deep
significancy of this simple statement, that a mother,
after the birth of a child, was for seven days to
remain at home, and not to appear in any pubhc
religious service. See Bonar on Leviticus, p.
328, 9, Carter's edition. There is not much evi
dence from this commentai-y that our science is
advancing. The Church of Eome gives us another instance of
the same error, in regard to the phrase "private
interpretation," 2 Peter, i. 20. On this they Test
their doctrine against the use of the Scriptures by
the common people. But look at the phrase in its
connection. The apostle is speaking of prophecy
and not of Scripture in general, and the reason he
7

146 INTEEPEETATION.
assigns why prophecy is of no private interpretation,
or fulfillment, is because it is given not from man,
but from God. On this account its interpretation is
not to be governed by the caprice of any man, but
according to the will of God ; and, therefore, he says,
" Ye do well to take heed thereto, as unto a light
shining in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the
day-star arise in your hearts." Hence, instead of
denying the interpretation, or reading of the Scrip
tures by the people, the apostle solemnly inculcates
the duty of their giving good heed thereto, . as
essentiaUy connected with the salvation of their
souls. No doubt the Church of Eome exhibits great
adroitness in explaining the Bible. There is one
specimen, as showing their competency, which we
cannot refuse to quote. It occurs in Corpus Jv/ris
Canoniois, their book of canon law ; in the chapter
respecting lay trustees of church property, say they,
" This is prohibited in the law of Moses, who says,
'thou shalt not plough with an ox and an ass to
gether ;' that is, they shall not have laymen as trus
tees of church property ! " This is competency to
interpret the Bible ! They have not, however, solved
one difficulty — ^which of the two animals represents
the priest ?
The phi-ase, " blot me out of thy book," Exod.

GENEEAL EULES. 147
xxxii. 32, has been made a test of Christian charac
ter ; so that they who could not say, they were will
ing to be eternally damned, have been regarded as
destitute of that submission, which is the evidence
of the new birth. But plainly, it had no such force
as used by Moses. He meant to say — " forget me,
take no account of me, in respect to anything pro
posed concerning the future destiny of thy people ;
pass me by, regard me as not written in thy book ;"
without any reference to eternal woe.
The phrases, " the Lord is at hand ;" " the Judge
is at the door," in early times, were perverted so as
to teach the immediate appearance of our Lord. So
the phrases, " into the water," and " up out of the
water," are supposed to teach the doctrine of
immersion ; with what force may be seen by com
paring them with Jos. iv. 18, where there was
certainly no immersion.
The father of sacred exegesis in this country, Moses
Stuart, has given a striking illustration of the conse
quence of neglecting our rule. The phrase " things
which must shortly come to pass," Eev. i. 1, led him to
believe that the Book of Eevelation was fulfilled
before the destruction of Jerusalem, about 40 years
after our Lord's ascension. The true force of this
phrase, is that the things would shortly begin to be
fulfilled ; but how long they would continue fulfill-

148 INTEEPEETATION.
ing, is not said. The whole drift of the Book shows
that they would continue to be fulfilled to the end
of the world, — Stuart, on Apoc. u. vol. p. 472.
But if any illustration remains to be noticed, it is
that of the phrase " by nature," Eph. ii. 3. On this
single expression, which the context fully explains,
is built a whole system of theology, of a certain
name. It is the one solid hinge, on which that sys
tem turns. An advocate of the system, a young pro
fessor of some promise, has attempted to show from
this single phrase, " that sin is a nature," and " that
nature is guilt." He says, however, expressly, that
sin is " self-acted," a thing done by the sinner ; and
that it is done " deep beyond the sphere of conscious
ness, in its first acts ;" and yet he labors ingeniously
to show, that it is not so much an act, nor a series of
acts, as a " nature." What this means, we profess
no abihty to understand ; but it verily does appear
to us, that if sin be " self-acted," and " a nature "
too, here is a wonderful mystery. Paul never saw
BO deep into the matter. Every sinner acts his sins,
and they are "a nature!" Does not every sinner
then, act — or create — his nature ? and, is not every
nature self-acted, and sinful ? and yet, what of that ?
what advance has been made towards a solution of
the great difficulty, for which this theory was
invented? none at all. Much more rational is the

GENEEAL EULES. 149
apostle's own version of the matter. Writing to
those who had been sinners, but were then converted
by the Spirit of God, he reminds them that they had
been transgressors like other men, and therefore
imder the wrath of God. His language is, "and
were by nature the children of wrath, even as
others." He did not mean to utter any intense
metaphysical theology, such as vegetates in theologi
cal class-rooms, and duU magazines, and reviews;
he did not say, by the mere accident of birth, they
were heirs of eternal perdition, before ever they had
acted at aU ; but simply, that foUowing the constitu
tional desires of their nature, hke other men, they
had disobeyed God, and on that account, were under
the sentence of His wrath. Such is Paul's meaning,
lying patent on the face of his words. And what he
thus declares, the Bible everywhere confirms, in
reference to all that sin. The statement commends
itself to common sense. Dr. Eobinson, sub voce,
(fvaei, gives precisely this view. He says, "by
nature," is the native mode of thinking, feehng,
acting, as unenlightened by the influence of Divine
truth." As strictly equivalent in sense, he quotes
the same phrase as used by Paul, Eom. ii. 14, of the
GentUes, " who do by nature, the things contained in
the law." Here then is not the shadow of a founda
tion, for the idea that men are sinners by creation,

160 INTEEPEETATION.
or by the fact of their descent simply from sinful
parents, or by creating their own nature. Men are
sinners voluntarily, by the free exercise of their wills,
in the natural way ; thus they are the children of
wrath ; and such is the true force of the phrase, " by
natm-e." But surely, we need hardly repeat it, such
a narrow foundation as this phrase, " by nature," is
all too narrow, for any such system of doctrine as
that to which we have referred. K sin is by nature,
it is not by wiU ; otherwise, wiU is no longer -will,
human responsibihty is more a pretence than a
reality, and sin more a calamity than a crime. But
in face of aU these theories, this we know, that
every sinner is "without excuse before God; and
this proves sin to be tnfaUibly, and always, a product
of the will.

THIETEENTH GENEEAL EULE.
"When any doctrine is stated, or event described
in different passages, the briefer statement is always
to be interpreted consistently with the more ex
tended. The soundness as weU as necessity of this rule wUl
be admitted on all hands ; and it hardly needs an
iUustration. Yet there are instances not a few, in
which its application is required.

GENEEAL EULES. 151
Thus in respect to the statement of the apostle,
Eom. V. 12, " Wherefore as by one man sin entered
into the world, and death by sin, and so death
passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." This
is one of the briefest statements on the great topics
of death and sin, and the depravity of the hnman
race, that can possibly be made. It is so brief that
almost any shade of sentiment on these topics may
find shelter under it. But for that reason, we must
the more cautiously proceed with its interpretation,
that the harmony existing between it and every
other Scripture on the same point, may by all means
be preserved. It were surely rashness not to be
defended, to conclude from these words that as sin
came into the world by one man, therefore all men
are sinners without any choice of their own, or that
all men actually existed in the one man, acted in him,
and died in him, as some interpreters have supposed.
Compare with this statement of Paul, the elaborate
explanation of human accountability, and human
guilt, by Ezekiel in his 18th chapter.
Again ; Ps. xxxiii. 9, " He spake and it was
done. He commanded and it stood fast ;" and Exod.
XX. 11, " For in six days the Lord made heaven
and earth, and the sea, and -all that is in them, and
rested the seventh day." These are passages from

152 INTEEPEETATION.
which it might be supposed that this world and all
its inhabitants were the work of an instant of time,
or at least of six literal days. But the language of
both passages is to be interpreted in harmony with
the more extended account of creation in Genesis.
In the fuller statement, the creation of the heavens
and the earth was not the work of six days, nor of
an instant ; no specific time is there given in which
these events occurred. Of course this is not to say
but Omnipotence could have accomplished even
such a work in a moment. The question in this
case is not one of power, but of record ; and the
record must be treated, not with violence, but with
fairness. The creation of the heavens and the earth
was in " the beginning ;" and it was the work of
God ; but how long it was between the first act of
creation, and the setting in order the present econo
my, how long the earth after its creation was " with
out form and void," and how long the Spirit moved
on the face of the deep," we know not. Our present
economy, the peopling and arranging of our present
world, was the work of six days as Moses relates.
At least this is just the view we have felt compelled
to take of the matter. But then, this is not to say
that the solid globe and all upon it, and the heavens
also, and all their starry hosts of worlds, and their

GENEEAL EULES. 153
inhabitants, were all spoken into being in the pre
cise space of sis days. This is what Moses and
David surely did not mean to assert.
There is a brevity of expression, a swiftness of
thought, a condensation of words, which is not
exphcable, save with caution and patience. He is
the best interpreter who most religiously keeps this
in mind, and who gives to Scripture the privilege
of uttering its whole testimony in its own way.
FOUETEENTH GENEEAL EULE.
No interpretation is to be entertained as sound,
which violates the explicit definitions of Scrip-'
ture. In definitions consists the certainty of all science,
and the harmony of all Christian doctrine. Those
of Scripture are permanent way-marks in the path
of the interpreter, which, if he neglects, he will
surely wander into error. As marking the boun
daries of doctrine,' they are, of course, everywhere
the same, in aU the sacred writers, running through
the entire system of inspired truth, and holding the
consistency of the whole compactly together. There
is no book of exact science in which there is greater
precision and clearness of definitions, than in the
Bible. Our canon is a fundamental one ; wherever

154 INTEEPEETATION.
there is a definition, our interpretations must be
consistent with it.
For example, it has been attempted to maintain
that the six days in Genesis are six periods of inde
finite extent ; and the origin of the attempt has
been through the discoveries of geology. If the
six days are regarded as six periods, the Bible and
geology, it is argued, can be reconciled. The ques
tion, we submit, is not, were there six periods of
indefinite length, before the constitution of the
present world ? but, did the sacred writer intend to
speak of six such days, as that word most usually
represents ? We do not deny the existence of six
periods, such as geology requires ; but we think
there is good reason for believing that Moses meant
six usual days, in his account of the setting in order
of our present world. Witness his definition of the
word " day," in the fourth commandment. " Six
days shalt thou labor and do aU thy work ; but the
seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God,"
&c. ; " for in six days the Lord made heaven and
earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested
the seventh day."
This is a precise and intelligible definition of what
a day is. We say not that it defines the amoimt of
work done ; we say not that aU creation was hterally
spoken into being just in six days; but we do say

GENEEAL EULES. 156
that here we get the idea definitely imparted of the
length of a day, as it is used in the account of the
arranging and peopling of our present world. The
setting in order of our present globe, and the creat
ing its inhabitants, is not equivalent, as we under
stand it, to the creation of the whole universe ; but
it is affirmed definitely, that it was accomplished in
six days of ordinary time ; and hence, however long
the world may have existed before these six days, its
present order was the work of that precise period, if
language is to be understood in its ordinary significa
tion ; if not, we know not what to say. Philosophy
and science may do much ; but this they cannot do —
they cannot overtm-n one of the definitions of Scrip
ture. From Acts ii. 22, "A man approved of God,"
and Gal. iv. 4, " Made of a woman," and Jno. xiv.
28, "My Father is greater than I," it has been
attempted to prove Christ to be no more than a man.
But we intei-pose the principle of our rule. A defi
nition of Christ's nature and attributes has been
given, and all these and similar passages must be
explained accordingly. The definition to which we
refer is in Jno. i. 1, 2, 3, PhU. ii. 6-11, Heb. i. 1-14 ;
and a more precise and designedly guarded defini
tion it is impossible to frame, and it must influence
the entire record concerning Christ. To interpret

156 INTEEPEETATION.
any passage concerning Him, so as to contradict these
definitions, would be a wresting of Scripture, a vio
lation of its inspiration. How can it be that the
Scriptures are inspired, if they contradict their own
positive definitions ? The passages above referred to
teach the humanity of Christ, it is true; but our
position is that a definition of the nature and attri
butes of our Lord has been given, such as forbids us
to hmit His nature and attributes to those of mere
humanity. Ps. Ii. 6, " Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and
in sin did my mother conceive me." If these words
be interpreted so as to convey the idea that there is
corruption or depravity adhering to man's nature, as
one of its attributes, innate, hereditary, and causative
by necessity of all sin, apart from voluntary choice on
the part of the sinner, then this is a contradiction of
definitions of sin found in various Scriptures, and is
not to be entertained. These definitions give us the
only true and allowable conceptions of sin ; and from
these there must be no departure.
It is remarkable with what clearness the Scriptures
define sin. Thus our Lord: Mark vii. 20, "That
which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.
For from -within, out of the heart of man, proceed
evil thoughts," &c. And yet more expressly in ver.
15, "There is nothing from without a man, that

GENEEAL EULES. 167
entering into him can defile him; but the things
which come out of him, those are they that defile
the man." Sin is something that has its origin in
evil thought, in the man's own heart, by the man's
own agency, and of which he is the sole author. To
the same effect precisely is 1 Jno. iii. 4, " Sin is the
transgression of the law;" sin is something which
the transgressor performs. So likewise James i. 15,
" But every man is tempted when he is drawn away
of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath
conceived, it bringeth forth sin ; and sin, when it is
finished, bringeth forth death." The strictest phi
losophy of the schools could not exceed the precision
and sharpness of this definition. All the sin with
which any man is chargeable originates an himself,
and is acted by himself.
In this definition there is a very general agreement
among theologians. The Westminster theologians
say, " Sin is any want of conformity unto, or trans
gression of, the law of God." Their " want of con
formity " does not in fact add any new idea to that
of transgression. And of original sin itself, they
say it is " transgression." Chalmers quotes Jno. iii.
19, V. 40, and vii. 17, to show that whenever guilt is
charged on any act or disposition, the will of man
has always to do with it. Coleridge says, " A state,
or act, that has not its origin in the will, may be

158 INTEEPEETATION.
calamity, deformity, disease, or mischief, but sin it
cannot be." McCosh, p. 340, says, "Sin consists
essentially in the will refusing to submit itself to the
law of God." Webster says, " Sin is the voluntary
departure of a moral agent from a known rule of
rectitude, or duty, prescribed by God." This, then,
in perfect harmony with the definition of the Scrip
tures, may be set down as the true and only universal
conception of the human mind as to what sin is.
Our rule binds us stringently, in all our interpreta
tions of Scripture, to keep within the definitions
which it gives. The force of this principle Augus
tine certainly felt, when, in the course of his argu
ment with Pelagius, after attempting to define what
is meant by original depravity in man, he finally
says, "It is nothing substantial, but is a quality of
the affections, a weakness." He shrunk from saying
it was positively and truly a sin. Common sense
thus demands just what the Bible declares, that sin
is an act of voluntary disobedience to the will of
God ; not a quality created in the nature ; something
acted, not a shadow. If it is regarded as a quality,
it cannot be charged on men ; and the divine govern
ment is not clear concerning it. Here the words of
the great theologian, John Howe, rush to our recol
lection: Yol. L p. 117, 118, "The notion of the
goodness of God, methinks, should stick so close to

GENEEAL EULES. 159
our minds, and create such a sense in our souls, as
should be infinitely dearer to us than all our senses
and po\^ers. And that we should rather choose to
have our sight, hearing, motive power, or what not
besides, disputed, or even torn away from us, than
ever suffer ourselves to be disputed into a belief that
the holy and good God should irresistibly determine
the wiU of men to, and punish the same thing. * *
For I would appeal to the quick, refined sense of any
sober and pious mind, after serious, inward consulta
tion with itself; being closely urged, with the horror
of so black a conception of God, that he should be
supposed irresistibly to determine the wiU of a man
to the hatred of his own most blessed self, and then
to exact severest punishment for the offence done,
what relief it would now be to it, to be told in reply
that man is, under the law and God above it. A
defence that doubles the force of the assault. What 1
God make a law, and necessitate the violation of it !
and yet also punish that violation ! And this be
thought a sufficient salvo, that Himself is not subject
to any law ! Will a quick-scented, tender spirit,
wounded by so insufferable indignity, offered to a
holy God, be any whit eased, or relieved by the thin
sophistry of only a collusive ambiguity in the word
law ? * * Or, what relief is there in that dream
of the supposed possibility of God's making a rea

160 INTEEPEETATION. *
sonable creatm-e with an innocent aversion to Him
self? For what can be supposed more repugnant, or
what more impertinent ? If innocent, ho-wT were it
punishable? A law ready made in the case, how
can it be innocent ?"
It is the notion of the goodness of God that for
bids us from travelling out of the record of his Word,
on the subject of sin. It compels us to dismiss all
theories opposed to its definitions, and content our
selves with the facts of the case. The simple facts
in the case, with the Bible's definition before us, are
sufficient to explain the nature of sin, and the mys
tery of its universality. What are the facts ? (1) We
have a free agent, in every man li-ving. (2) We have
a holy law, level to the powers of every man. (3) As
constituting sin, we have, last of all, in every case in
which sin occurs, the free choice of the man's wiU^
contrary to the will of God, and this choice once
made, fixes upon the maker the charge of sin ; not
because of his nature, but because, with a nature
such as God was pleased to give him, he freely
transgressed the will of God. Tliis is the mystery of
sin. An active, free, conscious will, transgressing
the law, as Adam did, as the angels did, is enough
to account for all the sins, of all the men, and all the
angels that ever lived, and sinned, since the days of
eternity. See Barnes on James, p. 31.

GENEEAL EULES. 161
It has long forced itself on our minds, that the
current views on this whole subject have been much
influenced, if not actually determined, by the con
troversies and opinions of the Eeformers. Dogmas
have a tradition, and a history; we think it is so in
this case. The Eeformers were under the necessity
of debating the great question, a/re works meritori
ous ? The Eomauists said. Yes ; the Eeformers not
only answered. No; they laid down the position,
that since the FaU, man ca/nnot obey the la/u) of Ood
at all. If this could be maintained, it settled the
question respecting the merit of works. Man could
merit nothing, if he could do nothing. Melancthon
was so resolute as to make the effort to lodge the
doctrine in metaphysics. Said he : " Since whatever
happens, happens by necessity, agreeably to the
Divine foreknowledge, it is plain that our wiU has
no hberty whatever." Loc. Comm. p. 35. No lib
erty to love God, or do His will ! and that by the
predetermined decree of God Himself! How comes
that ? No matter if the victory is only gained over
these Eomauists. But was this not buying victory
at too dear a rate ? In our view, it is by a principle
of law that the Eomauists are to be refuted, in
respect to the question of works. " He that offends
in one point, is guilty of aU;" he that has sinned.

162 INTEEPEETATION.
deserves, and can deserve, nothing but punishment.
The sinner is therefore shut up to the faith of Christ,
and to salvation as a free gift, not of works, lest any
man should boast.
Of the two theories, then, that regard sin, one, as
a necessary product of nature, the other, as an act
of the will, we decidedly prefer the latter; it is
more consistent with Scripture, with the doctrine of
accountability, and the decisions of conscience.
David did not mean to contradict this theory. He
gave utterance to the words in Ps. Ii. 6, in a state of
deep mental agitation. Witness the verse preceding,
where he declares he had sinned against God only.
Was this literally so ? Had he not sinned against
his friend, and the wife of his bosom, and against
the whole kingdom, and his own conscience ?
Certainly he had. But how then wiU you dispose of
his words? By pleading the state of his mind.
That gave an exaggerated tone to his language ; it
was the language of deep emotion, of highly-excited
penitence, and sorrow. No wonder then at his
words. No wonder that he says, he was " shaped in
iniquity, and conceived in sin." "He wist not what
he said." There was no language too strong, or too
strange, to express his sense of his conduct. He was
wUhng to say he was a sinner from the moment of

GENEEAL EULES. 163
his conception. Witness how emotion, in its highest
states, will express itself, even in a cool, theological
argument. Gal. iv. 19, " My little children, of whom I
travail in birth again, until Christ be formed in you."
Has it ever entered into any sane mind to interpret
these words on the same principles of strict literal
ism, that have been applied to the language of
David ? No, verily ! But we must pervert the
whole Scripture, if we bind down our interpretations
to the cold letter in such passages. Let us rather
preserve our common sense.
There is one significant fact we note. There is not
an instance in ail the Bible where ,sin is predicated
of any faculty, disposition, propensity, or attribute
of man's natm-e, by itself, as such ; it is always predi
cated of some person as exercising the faculty, or
disposition. There is always a free moral agent, held
accountable for the thing — sin. This is one element
of the Bible's definition not to be ignored. Thus
writes the venerable Eichards (tract on Atonement),
" sin, guilt, ill-desert are, in the very nature of things,
fersonair Magee, as quoted by Eichards, says :
" Guilt and punishment cannot be conceived, but
with reference to consciousness which cannot be
transferred:" p. 12.
Dr. Woods says. Letters to Unit. p. 44, " Every
attempt to prove that God ever imputes to man any

164 INTEEPEETATION.
sinful disposition, or act which is not strictly his own,
has faUed of success."
We therefore reiterate our canon, that no interpre
tation is correct, which violates the definitions of
Scripture. It is a law never to be forgotten or
transgressed.

THE BIBLE SUPEEME. 165

CHAPTEE Ym.
A FUNDAMENTAL PEINCIPLE ENFOEOED.
Although in view of what has been written, every
principle essential to a consistent system of Bibhcal
intei-pretation seems to be embraced, there is yet
another worthy of a separate notice, at this particu
lar stage of our labors, and which, because of its
great importance and evident bearing on the whole
subject, may well receive an extended illustration
and defence at our hands.
It is this : as respects aU knowledge in the depart
ment of religion and morals, the Bible is a source of
information beyond which no human mind can
advance, unassisted of God, whUe in this world.
There is a constant and perhaps a constitutional
tendency in the human mind to travel into the
regions of the mysterious and the unknown ; or,
which amounts to the same thing, into regions alto
gether beyond those which the Bible has revealed.

166 INTEEPEETATION.
Men are not disposed to content themselves within
the limits assigned them by Divine wisdom. They
venture, they know not why, into regions, where no
inspired writer ever dared to set his foot. But it
need hardly be said, aU such wanderings have
proved only vanity and vexation of spirit. There
are good reasons why God has set bounds, saying,
to the adventurous mind of man, as he did of old
to the sea, "Thus far shalt thou come, but no
fm-ther." Of this we might mention many notable exam
ples ; but, one or two must suffice. One is in
reference to what has been called " the conflict of
ages," or, the accounting for the universality of sin
in our world. Not content with tracing it to Adam,
a recent writer, following the example of two or
three before him, undertakes to prove that it is
traceable to the pre-existence and sins of men, in a
world before the present ; in that previous world
mankind all lived and sinned ; and for their sins,
they are here involved in sin and chastisement I
This is all extra — the Bible ; it is a series of ideas
which the Bible has nowhere expressed. And yet
a desire to have the Bible on his side, has led this
writer to a vigorous effort to find at least one text
to support him. He undertakes to interpret Eom.
V. 12, so as to favor his theory : " Wherefore as by

THE BIBLE SUPEEME. 167
one man sin entered into the world, and death by
sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all
have sinned." Some will have it, as a deduction,
from the last clause of this verse, that all men
existed, acted, sinned and died in the one person,
Adam ; but this writer wiU make a stranger deduc
tion stUl, viz. : that these words prove that all men
existed, acted, sinned, and fell before Adam was
created ! There is not much to choose between the
two theories ; one is pre-existence since Adam, the
other pre-existence before Adam. But these words
of Paul are fatal to the position that men sinned in
a previous world. For, as they read, man was in
the world before sin was in it, because sin did not
exist, until man produced it. Being innocent, he
was tempted, and yielded ; and for the first time, sin
was in the world. This was after his creation, con
sequently neither man, nor man's sins, existed in a
previous state. This is the field of man's first being,
and man's first sins ; imless, indeed, we travel
beyond the hmits of the Bible, and when once beyond
these limits, the unknown is aU before us, hke the
wide, wide sea !
Another example of this same tendency is fur
nished by the Eomauists, in their dogma of the
immaculate conception. Of this dogma, there is
positively, on their own admission, not a syllable of

168 INTEEPEETATION.
proof in the Bible. Yet in the year A.D. 1864,
what do we see — ^the whole hierarchy of the Popish
chm-ch, assembled to assert that the Mother of our
Lord was conceived and bom without taint of sin !
Doctrinally, there may be no objections to this
dogma ; because, for anything that appears, aU men
may have been conceived and born without taint, of
sin. Sin is the transgression of the law, and attaches
only to those who have committed it. The error
hes in their declaring the dogma as matter of faith
for the first time, and especially in reference to that
one individual, thus claiming for it the apparent
authority of the Scriptures. On this point, as on
the whole subject of man's character, the Scriptures
are true to the great principle of going no further in
theory than the facts allow. The facts in the case
are, that no creature is a sinner until he sins ; that
no taint of sin, no appearance of guilt belongs to any
creature until it is contracted by actual conduct.
And in this we desire most steadfastly to rest.
Because the Bible rests here, and it is the criterion
of all religious and moral truth, the hmit of all
human knowledge on these subjects. This is our
stand-point, and as Luther said, " We cannot move
from it ; may God help us!" Our principle is, when
we have reached the meaning of the Bible, we have
reached the furthest hmit of knowledge. To pre-

THE BIBLE SUPEEME. 169
tend we can go further is a vain pretence. The
Bible is the ultima ratio of aU doctrine. Beyond
its teachings there is nothing certain. Only grant
that the human mind can rise higher than the Bible,
into the regions of truth, and what next ? The next
position wiU be, that the Bible is defective. Against
this we enter a solemn protest. Once more we
adopt the sentiment of the great reformer : " I have
a book " — said Luther — " which is my creed ; that
is my Bible ; there I rest, and wish nothing
beyond." The mischief attending the neglect of our funda
mental principle is not merely an occasional error,
it is the necessary perversion of the Scriptures to
which it leads. Those who go beyond its revela
tions, are somehow usually very deshous to gain its
support to their vagaries. This is the fact with him
who argues for the pre-existence of the race ; and it is
notoriously the fact with the Eomauists, who are
constantly perverting Scriptui-e to favor their pecu
har doctrines. The consequence of all such efforts
is a confirmed habit, ever strengthening, of misin
terpreting the Scriptures, until the integrity of reve
lation is wholly destroyed.
But our fundamental principle puts an end to all
this. " To the law and to the testimony ; if they
speak not according to these, it is because there is

170 INTEEPEETATION.
no truth in them." The Bible in its unapproachable
majesty and completeness is worthy of the undisputed
dominion and reverence of the human mind. It is
the voice of the Eternal and all- wise God.

LEXICONS AND ETTMOLOGT. 171

CHAPTEE IX.
ON THE AUTHOEITT OF LEXICONS, AND ETTMOLOGY IN
THE WOEK OF INTEEPEETATION.
The connection of this topic with the science of
Interpretation is so close, that we cannot pass it by.
Students especiaUy are in danger of regarding their
lexicons as infallible, and of supposing that if they
trace a word to its root, they thus arrive at a mean
ing which cannot be disputed. In this they may
find themselves deceived.
What is the measure of authority to be conceded
to lexicons ? is a question every independent mind
wiU not faU to raise and answer for itself.
We would say, then, in reply, the measure of
authority to be conceded to lexicons of the Old and
New Testaments, is the measure of their accuracy in
their definitions, and no more. While we say this,
it is with unfeigned pleasure we here express our
conviction, that in no department of sacred litera
ture has there been such admirable progress made.

172 INTEEPEETATION.
as in lexicography. In the hands of Dr. Edward
Eobinson, it has attained the ripe condition of a
science, the principles of which are definitely settled.
What Webster has done for English, Eobinson has
done for the Hebrew of the Old, and the Greek of
the New Testament.
The older lexicons, common twenty-five years ago,
were defective, because compiled on principles incon
sistent with a natural and logical definition of words.
In lexicons worthy of being used in the work of
exegesis, the primary sense of the word is first
given, with quotations of passages in which it occurs.
Then foUow the secondary, or metaphorical significa
tions, with proof passages, as before, clearly showing
that the primary sense of the words has been
changed. In such lexicons, the governing principle
is that of correct reasoning and the known nature of
the subject, proceeding from a strictly physical, to a
spiritual, or moral signification. If these defini
tions are correct, if they represent fairly the use
of words, they have authority ; otherwise they have
none. Lexicons cannot create new meanings and impose
them on words; their office is to unfold truthfully
the meaning which words have aheady received at
the hands of usage. In their nature, therefore, they
are nothing more nor less than abbreviated com-

LEXICONS AND ETTMOLOGT. 173
mentaries on the Scriptures ; records of results ; and
these results are simply interpretations or decisions,
on the part of the lexicographer, of the meaning of
Scriptm-e, as he views it ; and hence they are neither
final nor infalhble. Every definition is to be tested,
as we test the meaning of the Bible itself. The
appeal is to the Scriptures, and to those rules of
ascertaining its sense, to which all men must submit,
because they are fundamental and independent.
Hence we are led to remark of lexicons, as before
we have done of commentaries, that the best lexicon
of the Bible is, beyond all dispute, just the Bible
itself, rightly interpreted.
In respect to etymology, this is often appealed to
as a very important help in arriving at the true sense
of Scripture; and it must be admitted that the
source whence a word is derived, often throws sur
prising light on an obscure passage ; and this assist
ance ought to be furnished by every good lexicon.
In many instances the root of a word is all but indis
pensable. Yet we are by no means to suppose it
infallible ; for through the capriciousness of usage, it
is often of no value whatever. Usage may almost
be said to control etymology. In all languages this
is true. For example, in English the word " villain "
in its root means merely a viUager, without reference
to character. Now it is applied to a man of bad

174 INTEEPEETA'nON.
character only. So in hundreds of instances ; so
that usage may be said to set all roots at defi
ance. And yet the primary derivation of words is some
times the only effectual method of settling the sense
of a disputed passage. Thus the elements of the
Greek w^ord for "repent," Mat. iv. 17, show beyond
the shadow of a doubt, that our Lord did not mean
" do penance," but " change your minds, and lead a
new life." The derivation of " deacon," 1 Tim. 3-8,
and wherever it occurs, proves it does not signify a
candidate for the pulpit, but " a steward of the
poor." Acts viii. 33, " In his humiliation his judg
ment was taken away ;" here the original word for
"judgment" shows it was not his mind, but his just
sentence that was denied him. Acts xv. 41, "And
he went through Syria and Celicia confirming the
churches ;" the word for " confirming " used also in
Acts xiv. 22, and xviii. 23, proves that apostolic con
firmation was not that confirmation now practised in
Eomanist and Episcopal Churches. There is no
word for Episcopal confirmation in the Scriptures,
for the good reason, that the thing itself was not
practised or known in apostolic and Scriptural times.
The apostles confirmed the churches, not candidates
for admission to the churches; and their confirma
tion was not the laying on of hands, but the preach-

LEXICONS AND ETTMOLOGY. 175
ing of the doctrines of the Gospel, whereby the
minds of the saints were confirmed in the faith of
Christ. The original for "ordained," in Acts xiv. 23,
proves beyond question, that the-elders were chosen
or appointed by vote of the churches, in open meet
ing assembled, and not by the laying on of a bishop's
hands. This choice by the church is what the word
expresses. The Greek for " carriages," Acts xxi. 16, wUl at
once explain, that it was not their vehicles that the
apostles took up, but their baggage and such things
as were needful for a foot journey over the moun
tains to Jerusalem.
These and many more iUustrations that might be
given, will show what is the value of etymology, in
this science. " Wisely used, it is a most important
help, which every student wUl more appreciate, the
more he gives it his attention.

176 INTEEPEETATION.

CHAPTEE X.
ON THE STUDT OF THE PEOPHECIES AND THEDB
INTEEPEETATION.
As we have ah-eady said, it was not our intention
to enter into all the details of this science, nor to
attempt the exhibition of a series of rules for all the
separate departments of Scripture. What we did
intend to present, was a comprehensive system of
general principles, which, when honestly apphed,
might guide sincere inquirers to an understanduig of
the main difficulties of the Word of God ; such a
system, it is hoped, we have supphed. We do not
say it is complete ; we hope it is sound and reliable,
so far as it goes. Dr. Davidson, of England, has
pointed out very clearly, the characteristics which
all rules of interpretation should possess. He says :
" Our rules should approach, as nearly as possible, to
the nature of axioms. All reasoning proceeds on
certain data, that must be taken for granted, as self-
evident, or such as the human mind is at once dis-

THE PEOPHECIES. 177
posed to receive. This holds good in mathematics
it is the case in mental philosophy ; it is true of aU
sciences. Canons of interpretation should, therefore,
nearly correspond to axioms, and be equally obvious
to the perception of aU. They ought not to be the
result of speculation, or the far-fetched deductions
of reason. Eather should they be axioms . lying at
the foundation of religious truth. If there be much
room to question their reahty, they wiU never serve
important and valuable purposes. The stamp and
impress of common sense, must be on their fore
heads." Sac. Her. p. 613. See also Barnes on Gal.
p. 373.
These sentiments harmonize entirely with our
whole design in the present work ; they lay bare the
foimdation of the system here presented. We sin
cerely hope common sense is impressed on every
i-ule and axiom we have here laid down. If the
series of i-ules be incomplete, if some of the series
be open to objection, and it would be a marvel if
neither supposition were true ; yet so far as the main
difficulties and demands of the science are concerned,
we confidently insist that the axioms and rules laid
down, are such as cannot be proved inappropriate,
or unworthy of the position assigned them. They are
such as apply in aU good faith, to the Sacred Scrip-

178 INTEEPEETATION.
tures, as one grand, self-consistent revelation of the
wiU of God.
And while, therefore, we regard the Bible as one
Book, to be interpreted . according to these rules, in
all the variety of its departments, of poetry, and of
prose, of history, and parable, and plain didactic dis
course ; still there are one or two of these depart
ments which seem to demand some special interpre
tation. One of these is prophecy ; and many con
siderations at once present themselves, showing that
as a special portion of the Word of God, it requires
special attention, both in its study, and in its
explanation. A very large proportion of the Bible consists of
prophecy, and prophecy is occupied with themes of
immense and constantly increasing importance to
the Church, and the world. A certain, natural, and
we might say, most useful, obscurity hangs over it.
It is one of the great sources of evidence, in the
argument for the Divine origin of the Bible. There
is very great diversity of opinion in regard to many
of its most important disclosures. Its language is
highly figurative, and susceptible of a very great
latitude in its explication. For these reasons, it
seems every way appropriate, and necessary, that
we attempt to lay down some general principles,

THE PEOPHECIES. 179
expressly to regu. ate our study of prophecy, and our
efforts at its explanation. Not that we give any
countenance to the favorite notion of some, that
every distinct species of composition needs a special
system of rules ; not that we would not place pro
phecy, in the main, under the general principles
applicable to all Scripture. But as one of the most
prominent and interesting departments of the Bible,
it may be well to give it more than a general con
sideration, and to note some of the special maxims,
which, by nature, apply to it. All the more impres
sively does this whole subject commend itself to our
serious regards, inasmuch as there is a remarkable
and revived tendency, in some of the leading writers
and preachers of the day, to advance unsound and
startling views, as derived from prophecy, of the
future history of the Gospel, and of the world. At
this moment, it would seem as though the wildest
notions of the tenth century, concerning the personal
coming of Christ, and the end of the wicked, were
again to become current. Is Christ about to come
in person, to reign in Jerusalem, in the year 1865 ?
Are all the pious dead to be raised, and reign with
our Lord in Palestine, for a thousand years ? Are
aU the impenitent, hving at om- Lord's coming, to be
hterally and instantaneously destroyed by fire ? Are
they to remain in the grave a thousand years, and

180 INTEEPEETATION.
then rise and assault the city of the saints ? And
are there indeed two resurrection days — one at the
coming of Christ, and the other one thousand years
after ? Is the beginning of these things so near at
hand, only ten years distant, from this day ? And
are they clearly taught in the prophets of the Old
and New Testaments ? Many answer these questions
in the affirmative ; and if these events are at hand,
surely it behooves us to give all diligence to the
important work of studying this grand department
of the Sacred Scriptures. We therefore proceed, to
lay down some general principles to govern us in our
work. I. — One of the first principles we specify, in
regard to the study and interpretation of the prophe
cies, is that they can be understood.
And we insist on this all the more strenuously,
since it has been reiterated -with such apparent sin
cerity, that the prophecies are dark and uninteUigible.
If this were so, it would prove the greater part of
the Bible to be unintelhgible ; a conclusion in which
no intelligent mind can rest. The greater part of the
Bible consists of prophecy, and this not as a matter
of chance, but as a wise and well-ordered purpose of
Divine goodness. It was decreed so to be, to satisfy
a felt want in the human soul. For through all time

THE PEOPHECIES. 181
and under aU dispensations, man needs satisfactory
proof of the special interposition of God in the affahs
of this world. It is not necessary that we should show
why this is so. The want certainly exists. To sat
isfy it in early ages, miracles were performed ; and,
in these days, prophecy, a miracle constantly perform-
ming, is designed to satisfy it still. Owing to the
natm-e of man, and to the subjective effects of sin
upon his heart, man is whoUy dependent on the evi
dence that may be afforded him from time to time,
of the divine attributes, and of the divine government
over him. Without that evidence, he lapses into athe
ism and is miserable. In his best estate, surrounded,
as he is, with a strongly sensuous nature, man wUl
continue to ask, as did Gideon of old, for some sign
that God is with him. And therefore it has been
practically said to him, that he may have such a sign
until the end of time, if he will but study the pro
phecies. In these Scriptures he cannot fail to see the
finger of God. How wonderful and convincing is the
demonstration here given, from the earliest time to
the present hour, of the existence, power, -wisdom,
hohness and sovereignty of God ! If such, then, be
the design of prophecy, how does it appear that it is
uninteUigible ?
To evade the force of this question, it is said pro
phecy cannot be fuUy understood till the time of its

182 INTEEPEETATION.
fulfillment. But this is only an evasion. If prophe
cy cannot be understood till it is actually fulfilled,
we ask how, in such a case, can it be properly
prophecy at all, in any just sense of the word. To
be prophecy, it must be intelligible, from the first mo
ment of its utterance ; that is, it must be understood
that something is foretold; and some idea of the
time, manner of its fulfillment, and of the object of
its prediction, must be imparted ; for aU these items
enter into the very nature of a prophecy. We grant
all the details of any one prophecy may not be fully
understood until after its accomplishment ; but that
prophecy cannot be understood, as a general propo
sition, we do not gi-ant ; for thus we would ignore the
inspiration of the Scriptures.
In reference to this point, we submit a question,
which must have, suggested itself to every one that
has ever read the prophecies of the Bible. It is this :
who were they to whom prophecy was at first ad
dressed ? Were* they the scholars of the world, the
men of deep research and immense erudition, of
whom we hear in modern times, as possessing aU the
competency to master this grand department of sacred
interpretation ? To limit this inquiry still more, who
were the men to whom the last and most difficult book
of prophecy was addressed? Whoever they were, be it
remembered, it was sent to them without note or com-

THE PEOPHECIES. 183
ment. The Eevelation was sent to the plain, un
lettered people of Ephesus and Smyrna, who had
been not long converted from the gross superstitions
of heathenism. But this book, though confessedly so
difficult, was designed to be the great telescope of
the Christian Church, by help of which she was to
penetrate distant ages, and trace the wonder-working
hand of God, down to the era of the grand consumma
tion. And it was put into the possession of these
plain, unlettered converts, at Ephesus and Smyrna,
without one word of distrust of their capacity to read
and understand it. Yea, a blessing is pronounced on
those who do read and understand it. How, then,
does this fact bear on the point before us ? In our
judgment it settles the question, that the prophecies
can be understood.
It is in the firm faith, therefore, of this position,
that we would have every reader and student of
prophecy to proceed. The prophecies can be made
to subserve the noblest purposes of comforting, con
firming and enlightening the mind in the principles
of pure and undefiled religion. And this result is to
be reached by their correct interpretation. The
same spirit that speaks in all the precepts, speaks
also in aU the prophecies, so as to be " profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in

184

INTEEPEETATION.

righteousness, that theTnan of God may be perfect
thoroughly furnished unto all good works."
H. — A second general principle to be adopted is,
that like all other portions of Sacred Scripture, the
prophecies have but one meaning to convey.
It has been, and now is, one of the most fertile
sources of error, respecting many of the prophecies,
that they have been supposed to contain, and design
edly to teach, two distinct meanings, under one and the
same form of words ; that they foreteU two events,
where the language clearly foretells only one. But
there cannot be anything more unfounded. It is in
consistent with some of the fundamental maxims of a
sound interpretation; which maxims, if we once
abandon, aU hope of a correct interpretation must
be given up.
We say the prophecies have one intended mean
ing, and one fulfillment, and no more. But in lay
ing down this position, we do not forget that they
may have many re-illustrations, in the same manner
as the proverbs. The meaning of every proverb is
single, not double ; one, and not many. But not-
¦withstanding, every proverb may have its one mean
ing reaffirmed thousands of times. So it is with
the prophecies. Take for instance Is. vi. 9, " And

THE PEOPHECIES. 185
he said, go and teU this people, hear ye indeed, but
understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive
not." Here, then, was a prediction of the con
tinued obstinacy and unbehef of the Jews in the
times of Isaiah ; and it was a prediction fulfiUed in
his times. But in Jno. xii. 37, we find our Lord
applying it to the people of His day, who refused to
believe or obey Him ; and He styles the then state
of the Jews, a fulfillment of this very prediction.
Again, in Acts xxviu. 26, Paul makes stiU another
apphcation of it to the people of his time, in Eome.
Here there would be a triple sense in the above pro
phecy, if we admitted the principle against which
we contend. But surely Isaiah did not in this case
predict all these three events ; nor did he have before
his eye more than one, and that one ti-anspired in
his own hfetime.
On what principle, then, it may be asked, was the
prophecy apphed to the nation, in the other two
instances ? We answer, there was a similarity in the
circumstances, by which the application was justi
fied. In each case, the messenger of God was
resisted, and his message treated with contempt.
The historic events, therefore, resembled each other ;
as in the days of Isaiah, when his message was
rejected, and the people hardened themselves in im
penitence, so it was in the days of our Lord and oi

186 INTEEPEETATION.
Paul. They to whom the Word of God came,
refused to hear it, and hardened themselves in their
sins. But there was nothing in all this to justify
the idea of a double sense in the prophecy. That
prophecy may be re-fulfilled ; i.e., re-exemplified a
thousand times, and yet its meaning is primarily and
unchangeably one.
This is the key to the phrase, so often occurring
in Matthew ; " That it might be fulfilled which was
spoken by the prophet." Its force in many instances
is equivalent to, "Thus again was verified what the
prophet of old predicted." There are indeed in
stances in Matthew and in the other evangelists,
where the above phrase is applied to positive predic
tions of the events recorded ; but these instances are
few, and can be easily distinguished from those of
the other class.
Under this head come the Messianic Psalms ; or
at least some of the Psalms generally considered as
prophetic of the Messiah. In our view, the meaning
of many of these Psalms was exhausted in their fii-st
and intended fulfillment ; but in the person, character,
and office of our Lord, they had a more glorious illus
tration ; and therefore, what was originally apphcable
to David, or Solomon, became again more illustri
ously true of the Messiah. Of this it were easy to
point out several examples ; while on the other hand,

THE PEOPHECIES. 187
there are other Psalms, where the prophecy is pm-ely
Messianic ; pointing to Christ from the first, and
having all its meaning fulfilled in Him. Of course
a sound discretion alone will guide us to a knowledge
of these Psalms. It is perhaps impossible to decide
in every case the precise limit within which the
meaning of such Psalms is to be applied to the
Eedeemer. The tendency has been to apply more
of the Psalms generaUy to Him, than was ever in
tended, in our opinion, by the Holy Spirit. Indeed
it was laid down as a canon of interpretation, that
all the Scripture that could be applied to Him, m,ust
be applied to Him ; and from this false principle,
many interpreters have not escaped to this day.
The distinction which we have raised between the
primary and designed sense of prophecy, and the
many re-illustrations which it has in history, must
never be forgotten. It relieves the whole difficulty
in which this vexed question of the double sense has
been involved ; and saves us from adopting a senti
ment which would reduce a large portion of the
Bible to a level with the oracles of Greece and
Eome. Prophecy was intended as a sign from God,
of the authority and truth of His Word. As such,
therefore, its meaning is simple, determinate, and
intelhgible. It is not double. In every particular,
it conforms to the character and law of Him who

138 INTEEPEETATION.
gave it. It is not yea and nay ; but yea, yea ; and
nay, nay. "With open face," says Moses Stuart,
" we ask, where is the proof that either prophecy,
or any other part of the Old Testament, or of the
New, conveys a double sense? Where is the
authority for deciding what the occult sense is, or
must be ? Where is the defence for trampling upon
all the laws of interpretation, applicable to all other
books, when we come to expound the Scriptures?
In the name of all that is grave, serious, rational,
intellectual, respectful to God's eternal truth, or in
telligible in propounding the way of salvation to
men, I protest against such an abuse of reason, of
the Holy Scriptures, and of all the established prin
ciples of language." — Hints on Prop., p. 40.
We think no candid reader will reject these senti
ments. On no other ground can the veracity and
authority of the Scriptures be maintained. There
are no difficulties yet discovered, great enough to
compel us to depart from these sentiments for one
instant. We do not here undertake to say there are no
difficulties or obscurjjiies connected with this subject.
But we do undertake to hold on to the oneness and
simplicity of sense in all the teachings of the Holy
Scriptures, whether prophetic or didactic, or historic.
This is a fundamental principle, necessary to the
unity, dignity, intelligibility, and Divine origin of the

THE PEOPHECIES. 189
Bible. Let the mBaning of the prophecy be ascer
tained, and let the event it predicts be determined,
and there let us rest. If there be one, or one thou
sand other events, in which aU the principal features
of the prophecy re-appear, as in the multitudinous
affairs of human life, there must often occur trans
actions similar almost in every respect to others
going before ; let not the simplicity of the Scripture
be sacrificed on that account. There is nothing new
under the sun. But the sense of prophecy, hke the
sense of the precepts, is one, and its fulfillment one.
The " Westminster -Confession " has these weighty
sentiments on this point : Chap. I., Sect. 9, " Tlie
infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture, is the
Scripture itself ; and therefore when there is a ques
tion about the true and full sense of any Scripture
(which is not manifold but one), it must be searched
and known by other places that speak more
clearly." TTT. — A third general direction for the student and
interpreter of prophecy is, that he investigate first,
the prophecies already fulfiUed ; the better wUl he
understand those yet in process of fulfillment.
This we insist on, as a very important preliminary
to this difficult department of Scriptural interpreta
tion. To rush at once on the unfulfiUed prophecies.

190 INTEEPEETATION.
the most profoundly difficult portions of the Bible
without any understanding of the symbohc language
peculiar to the prophets, and without having studied
the manner of the prophets, in those instances in
which their predictions have been actually fulfilled —
what could more certainly lead to error? In all
sciences, the first step is to acquire the elements.
So it ought to be here ; for the fulfilled prophecies
are in fact, the elements of prophetic interpretation ;
and therefore necessary first of all, to be carefully
studied. It is a very easy matter to be a blunderer in this
department. We have seen a sect spring into exis
tence, from the ill-guided haste of a very obscure,
and unlearned person, who, without a moment's con
sideration, rushed upon the interpretation of Daniel
and John, as though he had fully studied prophecy in
all its departments. Questions which the wisest and
most erudite of students had hesitated to answer
with a humble caution, he presumed to settle with
the most absolute certainty. Where the difficulties
of the subject should have led him to speak with
modesty, there he was confident. The result was
the most signal failure of all his predictions, and the
insanity of many of his followers. Indeed, the high
way of history is strewed with the wreck of those
who have perished in such delusions. In every

THE PEOPHECIES. 191
country, and in every age, there have been those,
who, disregarding the maxims of sound sense, have
boldly advanced to conclusions, at variance with aU
reason, with the most obvious teachings of the Word
of God ; untU it has passed into a proverb, that the
study of prophecy, if it does not find a man insane,
generaUy leaves him so.
But nothing could be more unwarranted. The
study of the prophecies, is the study of the inspired
Word of God. Let it be conducted -with prayer, and
sound common sense, and the result wiU be comfort,
increase in knowledge, and in aU the graces of the
Christian character.
The point on which we now insist, is that fulfilled
prophecy be first studied as a preparatory labor, for
the purpose of acquiring skUl, the meaning of sym
bols, the spirit of the prophets, and the pecuharities
of their style. The reasonableness of such a course
wiU be admitted at once.
And connected with this general direction, is the
careful separation of the fulfiUed, from the unfulfiUed
prophecies. No error can be more serious than that
of confounding these separate divisions of Scripture.
Alas ! how often it is committed ! For example, the
prophecies of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and others, foretell
ing the retm-n of the Jews from Babylon, are made
to predict events yet to come, in these last ages of

192 INTEEPEETATION.
the world, even the return of all the Jews to Pales
tine, the rebuilding of Jerusalem, the personal com
ing of Christ, to reign over the whole world, as its
sole monarch, for a thousand years ! These interpre
ters, with immense show of learning, insist upon what
they style " a strictly literal sense" in the prophe
cies. They will hear of no figurative, or spiritual
interpretation. It must be ad literam, or it is false.
And they have zeal and importance in various ways
to be a very influential party in the literary world,
although there is one fact rather ominous — they
are not generally men in living sympathy with
the active and missionary masses in the Church.
They are either literary men, or popular preachers
of a certain type, whose affinities are more with the
study and the lamp, than with the busy, practical
world. This fact may account somewhat for their
opinions. There is such a thing as looking at the
sun, until we become blind. So there may be a
morbid attention to a favorite topic, until the mind
loses somewhat of its just balance, and cannot
discern its own errors. Yet some of these men have
been, and are now, the noblest specimens of earnest
ness, and evangelical devotion to the Gospel. It was
of a chieftain of this class, that the renowned Dr.
Chalmers, after hstening to his discourse on some
prophetic theme, remarked, with a significant shrug

THE PEOPHECIES. 193
of the shoulders, " the man has a prodigious imagi
nation!" From the experience of the past, we have
come to suspect this class of interpreters of that
same capacity. But " a prodigious imagination " is
not the best quahfication for the interpreter of the
prophets. A strict and cautious judgment is of
more real value ; and it is required at every step, in
the separation of the two great divisions of the ful
fiUed, and the unfulfiUed predictions.
It wQl be understood that by a fulfilled prophecy
we mean one that is actually completed, such as the
coming of Christ, to die for the sins of the world, or
the return of the Jews from the captivity. There
are also prophecies in the process of fulfillment, and
others stUl whose accomplishment has not yet com
menced. These are aU to be carefully, and con
stantly distinguished from those wholly fulfilled.
lY. A fourth principle to guide us in the inter
pretation of the prophets is, that the Bible itself is
the proper source of the laws apnlicable to this
department of the Sacred Yolume.
We have often heard the idea advanced that the
key of many of the prophecies is to be discovered
among the hieroglyphics of Egypt, or of Nineveh, or
among the ancient ruins of the East. But our behef
is that this lost key is to be found in the Bible itself.

194

INTEEPEETATION.

This follows from the fundamental maxim that the
Bible can make plain its own meaning, independent
of all extrinsic considerations. Beyond all doubt it
contains the only true and safe principles of pro
phetic interpretation. To ascertain these principles,
we believe the process is this : from the record
carefully ascertain the contents of the prophecy ;
note the symbols employed, if any, and their signifi
cation as given in the Scriptures ; and finally make
«ure of the time, or age, in which the event, or
events, are to take place. On all these points the
Bible is our only reliable source of information.
Because prophecy having been designed to be
understood, everything needful to its being under
stood has been provided by Divine wisdom in the
record. An honest purpose, a prayerful heart, a
discreet 'and cool judgment and an open Bible, are
all that we need to ensure a wise and useful inter
pretation of these deep mysteries.
Our position above defined does not exclude the
use of general history. Indeed, after the close of
Eevelation, history is the only source within our
reach, from which we can ascertain the fulfillment
of many of the prophecies. Here we cannot but
caU attention to the admirable use made by Barnes,
in his " Notes on Eevelation," of the " History of the
Decline and FaU of the Eoman Empire." His quo-

THE PEOPHECIES. 195
tations from Gibbon, as iUustrating the predictions
of John, are very striking. They could not fail to
throw a very singular hght on that wonderful book.
For granting, as we must, that the book of Eevela
tion is a comprehensive prediction of the leading
events in history, from the promulgation of the
Gospel, to the end of the world, it follows, of course,
that history must be in fact, nothing more or less
than the fulfilling of that mysterious book. But
this is true of aU history. It is the fulfillment of the
prophecies, and therefore must be diligently con
sulted in the interpretation of them.
And here has been one great som-ce of error, in
the misapphcation of history ; sometimes through a
too precipitate desire of finding a fulfillment, and
more frequently, perhaps, through a failure to ascer
tain the chronology of the prophecy, i. e., the time,
or age of the world, in which the completion of the
prediction chronologically falls. This last point is to
be ascertained by a careful attention to the events
predicted, the time from which the prediction begins,
and the date of its intended end — most essential par
ticulars these to the interpreter.
The prophets, as a general fact, keep strictly in
their view, the order of time, in which the events
foretold, will take place ; and to mistake that order
of time is almost infallible method of going astray.

196

INTEEPEETATION.

There is also a similarity of events and their causes
in different and distant ages of the world, which
makes it easy to fall into error. Wars, ambition,
intrigues, - pride, revolutions, vice, are everywhere
alike, as are the sources whence they spring. But
it ought to be borne in mind, that prophecy has not
foretold every outburst of vice, nor yet every revo
lution, or apostasy from the faith of Christ. To
ascertain what it has foretold, we must keep our eye
on the periods within which it has confined its pre
dictions. Events predicted to occur in the first
century, we must look for in the first century ; and
should events every way similar occur in the nine
teenth, and apparently from the same causes, yet we
would wrest the Scripture wholly from its design,
did we insist on applying the prophecy to events for
which it never was intended.
Every prophecy has its time and expires with it.
So also, if a prophecy respect a particular country,
or region, the fulfillment must be sought for in that
region and in no other. But in respect to all these
particulars the Bible is the only competent autho
rity, and hence it is in the Bible that we are to seek
for all the elements of a sound and safe interpreta
tion of the prophecies. It has the key of its own
mysteries.

THE PEOPHECIES. 197
Y. Another step of essential importance is the
perusal of the contemporaneous history of the pro
phets, in the historical books.
These books ought to be read and thoroughly
studied, as the very best possible preparation for the
work of interpreting the prophets. They develop
the events out of which the mission of the prophets
had its rise ; they detail both the occasion of the
prediction, and the time of its fulfillment. There we
learn that the prophets were raised up for the emer
gencies in which they hved ; that they had a special
errand to fulfill, and that they actuaUy fulfilled it.
Their messages therefore, and the visions of futurity
vouchsafed to them, had an adaptation very close
and specific to the work on which they came.
They were not sent to prophecy of the distant
future, only as that future gave courage and hope
to the people immediately before them, who heard
their utterances, and for whose special benefit they
were sent of God. It is a common error of the
present day, as it has been of past times, to regard
the prophets, not as speaking and writing for the
men of their own day, and of events passing imme
diately before them ; but as writing and speaking
indefinitely and always of the ages to come. ITiis
error is the parent of many others. There is not a
prophet on the inspired roll, but who had his special.

193 INTEEPEETATION.
en-and to the men of his own generation ; and if the
distant future and its events were revealed to him,
it was simply as a motive to repentance, or as a
cause of hope and joy, to those whom he imme
diately addressed. Hence every book of prophecy,
in the Old Testament, as well as in the New, has its
special adaptation to its own times. There is no
understanding of these books, therefore, without
making ourselves famihar with the history of the
particular crisis in which they were written. The
vices that prevailed, the errors of doctrine, the dan
gers that threatened the nation, the condition and
designs of the kingdoms around them, the maturity
of the Divine purposes at the time in which the
prophets hved, all these gave a certain coloring to
the labors, and sentiments, and visions of these mes
sengers of God ; so that to neglect the contempora
neous history of the prophets is the most certain
way to misunderstand them altogether.
We subjoin a table of the order in which the
prophets hved, and of the times during which they
prophesied, so that the corresponding histories in
Kings and Chronicles may be read along with their
writings.

THE PEOPHECIES.

199

KraOS OF JUDAH.

KISaS or ISRAEL.

1

Jonah

B. C. 8S6-T84

Jehu
2
Amos
" 810—785
Uzziah
Jeroboam II.
3
Hosea
" 810—725
Uzziah, Jotham, &c.
"
4
Isaiah
" 810-698
" "
6
Joel
" 810—660
Manassah
6
Micah
" 758—690
Jotham,* Ahaz, &c.
Pekah and Ho
r
Nahum
" 720—698
Hezekiah
sea
8
Zephauiah
" 640—609
Josiah
9
Jeremiah
" 628—686
(t
10
Habalilcuk
" 612—598
Jehoiakim
11
Daniel
" 606—534
The Capti-rity
12
Obadiah
" 688—583
13
Ezekiel
" 595—636
Part of the Oapliivity
14
Haggai
" 520—618
After the return
15
Zeohariah
" " "
u u
16
Malachi
" 436—397
"
YI. Another step in this work, is the careful com
parison of parallel prophecies.
By parallel prophecies we mean the writings of dif
ferent prophets, foretelhng the same events. Like
the evangelists, the prophets often traverse the same
ground, not as copying each other, but as inde
pendent witnesses for the truth ; and, therefore, ac
cording to a former position, they are the best guides
to the right understanding of their communications.
Placed side by side, these parallel prophecies cannot
fail to throw a strong mutual light on each other.
What is doubtful or obscure in one, may be plain
and obvious in another : where one is brief, another
may be full and satisfactory: where one presents
only some dark symbol of an event, his successor
may lead you at once to the event predicted without
the intervention of a symbol.
200

INTEEPEETATION.

The greatest care, of course, will be required in
making out the list of the paraUel prophecies. The
parallelism must be clearly established. A mere
resemblance to the language employed will not
suffice. AU the various particulars in each prophecy
must be compared, such as time, place, and object;
and the agreement must be evident. Thus, no one
can institute a comparison between the seventh
chapter of Daniel and the seventeenth of Eevelation,
without being convinced that they are predictions of
the same general events. The symbols are similar ;
the language also, and the results are so entirely alike,
that we cannot doubt but they describe the same
historic occurrences.
This faithful comparison of parall-el passages was a
work, which, according to the title of his book. Dr.
Keith should have accomplished. He styles it " The
Harmony of Prophecy." But owing to a vicious
neglect of the chronology of the prophecies, and a sys
tem of interpretation destitute of all appearance of
consistency, he has only confounded all harmony.
The reader of that work must think the prophets
hopelessly at variance with each other ; and instead
of admiring the unity of their predictions, he must
feel wearied and grieved with their inexplicable per
plexities. Such books do incredible injury to the
cause of Biblical investigation. The impression they

THE PEOPHECIES. 201
convey is, that the whole subject is incoherent and
incapable of comprehension; and this unspeakably
precious and instructive portion of the Word of God,
is, therefore, often regarded as repulsive and barren
in the highest degree, even to many who regard it
worthy of all faith.
The number of prophecies unfulfilled, that are
paraUel prophecies, is not great ; the student, there
fore, may enter upon this labor, reheved from the
fear that the undertaking is likely to be very arduous.
Any common reader of the Bible may accomplish it
with no other help than the common references to
parallel texts ; and the e:^ort will weU repay his
attention. ON THE CALCULATIONS EESPECTING THE END OF THE
WOELD.
All readers of the Bible know that there have
been, at various times, very strenuous efforts made,
from certain passages in Daniel and John, to calculate
the precise year in which the present world is to
end. The history of these efforts, from the days of
the apostles until now, would fill many large volumes;
but whether a recital of all the miserable failures
that have been made, would prevent the repetition
of such efforts in time to come, is very doubtful.
9*

202

INTEEPEETATION.

Only a few years ago, the year and the day were
confidently fixed when the trumpet should sound,
and the voice of the Son of God be heard calhng the
world to judgment. It is only as yesterday that the
eloquent Irving, with saintly and joyous countenance,
was wont to stand for hours together on his balcony,
looking towards the east, momentarily expecting to
see the glorious white throne, and the retinue of
attending angels, and the ever-blessed Eedeemer
coming in the glory of the Father, to judge the living
and the dead. And now another prophet has risen
up, and by him we are confidently assured, from a
devout and prayerful stijdy of the prophets, that the
second coming of Christ, and the end of the present
system, will probably take place in 1865. The data
of this and all other similar calculations are found in
Dan. xii. 11, compared with Eev. xii. 6, and xiii. 18,
and Eev. xx. 4.
But by a cursory inspection of these passages, it
will be seen that any calculation of the year when
this world shall end, must be very, if not purely,
arbitrary, inasmuch as there is no direct reference
to that event in these passages whatever. All that
the Bible justifies us in believing respecting the ter
mination of this present world is, that there is a
certain grand moral result to be reached in the his
tory of our race, a general dispersion of the igno-

THE PEOPHECIES. 203
ranee of men, and a triumph over the wickedness
that reigns in the earth ; and that after an extended
period of peace and holiness, very suddenly and un
expectedly, the angel of God -will summon both the
hving and the dead to judgment. Then -will come
the end; the dissolution of this present system, in
liquid fire, and the final retribution of the last day,
dispensed in righteousness, by our Lord Jesus
Christ. We cannot follow this topic in all its details ; but
in the briefest manner, we shall put on record some
general remarks for the guidance of the reader:
1. The data from which calculations are made
respecting the dissolution of this world, are not clear.
They are capable of very different applications.
That they furnish any very reliable grounds, there
fore, for accurately fixing the year and day of this
world's destruction, is more than doubtful.
2. But that there will be a time in the future,
when this world in all its families, shaU be arrested
by the voice of the angel of God, proclaiming, that
time shall be no more, is certain — certain, as any
future event can be. God has so decreed, both the
event, and the agency by which it is to be accom-
phshed, and has given the world due warning of it
in the infallible Oracles of His will.
3. The coming of such a day has been the unin-

204 INTEEPEETATION.
terrupted belief of aU the pious in every age of the
world, since the beginning. It is implied in the
very nature of that system of moral government,
which God has estabhshed over man; that system
cannot be perfected without the positive occurrence
of just such a day.
4. The great epochs of the world's history, and
the moral changes to take place in it, the triumph
of the Gospel and the overthrow of Satan's kingdom,
as introductory to the scenes and issues of the last
day, have been clearly marked out in the prophets,
both of the Old and the New Testaments. The order
of these great events can be distinctly and satisfac
torily traced, perhaps not to the point of absolute
certainty as to the year of their commencement, or
their close, but certainly as far as respects the fact
and order of their occurrence. And this is enough
to justify the devout and earnest study of the
subject, by all who desire to know the fortunes
awaiting our world in the fiight of future
years. 6. All calculations of the times in which these
great events are to transpire, should be made in a
cautious and modest spirit, as fully aware of the
difficulties of the subject, and of the many failures
that have aheady been made in respect to them in
past ages. Many have outlived the year and the day.

THE PEOPHECIES. 205
which they had confidently foretold as the last day
of the world.
6. It is expressly said in Mat. xxiv. 36, " Of that
day — i.e. the day of final judgment — and of that
hour, knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven,
but my Father only." This declaration from our
Saviour's lips, makes it certain that the prophets
have not revealed the day of judgment, in any such
manner as to enable us to fix, with any certainty, the
year of its occurrence. Our Lord gives us to un
derstand, not simply that men and angels do not
know when it shall be, but that they cannot by any
means find it out. The data, then, in the prophets
cannot furnish us with any infalhble discoveries on
the subject. As we have already said, the great
eras of our world's history they have clearly foretold,
in their order and issues ; but, if the words of our
Lord are true, we cannot find out from any source,
and of course not from the prophets, the precise
year when this world shaU end.
7. It follows, therefore, that aU such calculations
as those to which we refer are to be viewed with
suspicion. They are not worthy of our confidence,
because they rest on no reliable data. Neither do
they add any new motives to the obligations of a
holy hfe. The duties of repentance towards God
and of faith in Christ, and of a holy life, are not

206 INTEEPEETATION.
dependent on any such events, and never, in the
Bible, are they urged upon men's hearts on any such
grounds. This is one of the strongest considerations,
going to show that such calculations ought never to
be made. Acts i. 7, "It is not for you to know
the times or seasons which the Father" has put in
His own power."
These general principles and directions wiU render
the study of the prophets, we are confident, both
easy and attractive ; and none that pursue this study
will ever regret the time or labor it may cost them.
It is an exercise akin to the highest pleasures of
science. It imparts a comfort to the soul every way
peculiar; for as we follow the wonderful footsteps
of the prophet, far down into distant ages, we still
see a holy God on the throne, sin disappearing, and
holiness becoming more and more the glory of
the universe. We are carried forward to scenes
grand and impressive, in which righteousness and
truth are ever in the ascendant. The problem of
this world's history is solved ; solved amid the
anthems of the redeemed, and the praises of infinite
love. The Gospel is triumphant, and Satan is put to
shame. Christ is God, and the human heart yields
to him its steady, its pure affections. We live and
rejoice with the good. We anticipate the joys of a

THE PEOPHECIES. 207
converted world. Our acquaintanceship with the
generations to come is made a thing of present
enjoyment. A heavy burden is taken from our
hearts ; for, the " hon of the tribe of Judah " has
opened the mysterious book of the providence of
God, and we feel how good it is, that God has re
vealed the future. There is no study that so cer
tainly hfts us above the gloomy depressions incident
to this brief life, as the study of the prophets, the
humble, dUigent, prayerful tracing on the inspired
map, the progress of man, the tide of nations, and
the success of the Gospel of Salvation.
All other forms of miracle have ceased; but in
the prophecies we have a continually unfolding mir
acle, to cease only with the end of time. God has
thus wisely ordained that the evidence of his exis
tence and sovereignty over the affairs of men, should
always be within reach of the devout and the pray
erful. This evidence, in this form, was given even
to our first parents, almost immediately after they
sinned. Prophecy lifted up the veil of the future
before* their eyes, as an antidote to their fears. And
ever since that hour, it has been like the bow in the
cloud, to a suffering, desponding, afflicted Church.
It is the pledge of her victory, the Divine signal that
God is with her.
ShaU the prophecies then be neglected? ShaU

208 INTEEPEETATION.
they be cast aside as unprofitable ? Shall we say, as
did Adam Clarke, with an air of profound wisdom,
of the Book of Eevelation : "I do not understand
the Book," intending thereby to insinuate that it
cannot be understood, and on this plea excuse our
selves from its study ? No. Let us rather consider
the object of prophecy, and the confidence God has
placed in us, in committing it so unreservedly to our
interpretation. This whole department of Sacred
Scripture is for our benefit ; and all we need, for its
successful interpretation, is an honest purpose, and a
prayerful heart, with the blessing of God. "If any
man lack -wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth
to all men hberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall
be given him." Jas. i. 6.

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 209

CHAPTEE XI.
ON THE ALLEGED COlirrEADICTIONS OF THE BIBLE.
The subject of this chapter does not seem, at the
first glance, properly to belong to the particular
design of this treatise ; yet, for various reasons, it is
very desirable that it should be noticed. In enter
ing upon it, somewhat in detail, we shall be contri
buting directly to the science of a sound Biblical
interpretation. Our attention wiU be occupied with
matters of fact, rather than the general principles,
by which the sense of Scripture is ascertained ; but
these principles shall not by any means be lost sight
of. In the solution of many of the most plausible
contradictions, alleged to exist in the Bible, sound
first principles of exegesis, are our only hope.
Where these fail us, the case is desperate.
That the writers of the Bible do, in appearance,
conflict in some of their statements, both with them
selves, and with each other, is not to be denied.
Hence, the friends of revelation should hold them-

210 INTEEPEETATION.
selves prepared to explain these apparent contradic
tions, and defend the Bible, if it can be defended,
from so grave a charge. When every other species
of attack has failed, the enemies of the Bible have
made this theh last resort. They have said the
Bible, by its contradictions, has disproved itself; and
the daring and diligence of these men have been
worthy of a better cause. Their success, however,
has never repaid them for theh pains ; they have
found it vastly more easy to bring charges than to
prove them ; and their gravest charges have very
often come to nothing in their own hands. Some
new discovery, or some new improvement in science,
has defeated their strongest attempts to put the Bible
in the wrong ; and this has so frequently come to
pass, that in these days, only one here and there is
found courageous enough to make an attack, how
ever feeble. The Bible, with all its weak points, is
stronger than its foes. Its real dangers, in our day,
seem to arise from its ill-advised friends, who make
an indiscreet defence of its doctrines, supposing there
is no way so sure to uphold its Divine character,
as by proving its irreconcilable opposition to aU
human science.
Adopting, then, a very general classification of the
aUeged contradictions in the Bible, we arrange them
into the four foUowing classes :

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 211
I. Those which are said to occur in statements of
facts and doctrines.
II. Those between prophecy, and its fulfillment.
HI. Those against the principles of morality.
lY. Those at variance with the nature of things,
or with the natural sciences, astronomy, and geology.
We propose to notice these alleged contradictions
somewhat in detail, mainly for the purpose of show
ing how all such charges may be disposed of, and
the consistency and truth of the Bible -vindicated.
We make no pretensions of traversing the whole
field, nor of repelling every supposed instance of
contradiction. Such an attempt might occupy many
such volumes as this ; and would be regarded as a
work too elaborate to be read.
I. ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS IN FACTS AND DOCTEINES.
Before proceeding, it may be proper to observe
that errors in the text of Scripture are, of course,
to be excepted in this discussion. Such errors
there may be, in the Bible. It would be nothing
short of a miracle if there were not. That there
are such errors in the historical books, there can
be no doubt ; and that there are some in the
doctrinal books is a point proved. They occurred
probably in the process of transcription ; from the

212 INTEEPEETATION.
great similarity of many of the Hebrew letters ;
from the oversight of the copiers ; and from the zeal
of ardent friends. But this admission militates just
nothing against the veracity of the Bible. It is all
that we are willing to grant, after the most thorough
and impartial investigation ; and the whole amount
of it is, that one writer says, there were so many
men in a certain army, and so many slain in a cer
tain battle, and another says something different;
or some unimportant word repeating a truth already
asserted has been added from the margin ; but in all
cases the original writer was right, and as the case
now stands, no palpable contradiction can be proved.
Call to mind the history of the Bible, and if you are
a competent judge of the purity of its original text,
you will not be greatly moved at a few trivial mis
takes such as have been now described. There is
no book in existence, so old, with so few variations
in its text. It therefore defies the inspection of the
world. Indeed, infidels turn away in haste from
any attempt to prove it corrupt. This they have
learned to do from experience.
The efforts of critics on the text of the Bible are
thus correctly set forth by a modern writer ; —
" As to the Old Testament, the indefatigable
investigations and the four folios of Father Houbi-
gant, the thirty years' labor of John Henry Michse-

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 213
hs ; above all, the great critical Bible, and the ten
years' study of the famous Kennicott (upon his five
hundred and eighty-one Hebrew MSS.), and finally,
the collection of the six hundred and eighty MSS. of
Prof. Eossi ; as to the New Testament, the not less
gigantic investigations of MiU, Bengel, Wetstein,
and Griesbach (into the three hundred and thirty-
five MSS. of the Gospels alone), the later researches
of Nolan, Matthei, Lawrence, and Hug ; above all,
those of Scholz (-with his six hundred and seventy-
four MSS. of the Gospels, his two himdi-ed MSS. of
the Acts, his two hundred and fifty-six MSS. of Paul's
Epistles, his ninety-three MSS. of the Apocalypse,
without counting his fifty-three Lectionaria) ; all
these prodigious labors have estabhshed, in a man
ner so con-vincing, the astonishing preservation of the
text, although copied so many thousand times (in
Hebrew, during thirty-three centuries, and in Greek
during eighteen centuries), that the hopes of the
enemies of religion from this quarter have been
overthrown ; and that, as Michsehs remarks, ' they
have thenceforward ceased to hope anything from
these critical researches, at first earnestly recom
mended by them, because from them they expected
discoveries which no one has made.' "
To proceed then with the subject of this chapter :
it is alleged that Gen. xxu. 1, " God did tempt

214

INTEEPEETATION.

Abraham," contradicts Jas. i. 13, " God cannot be
tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."
We admit that, as far as words go, the contradiction
is very striking. But a contradiction in words is not
of necessity a contradiction in sense. The former is
harmless; the latter is not proved. The circum
stances in which the two statements were made,
show very clearly that in sense they do not differ.
Moses says — " God tempted Abraham ;" and the
history shows what he means. He means that
Abraham's faith was put to the test ; but to consti
tute a temptation, in the bad sense of the word,
reference must be had to the motive by which it is
dictated. God did not design to lead the patriarch
into sin ; Moses did not design to say that he did.
James is treating of the origin of sin, and he traces
it very correctly to the " lust " or will of the sinner
himself. In the course of his argument, he says
God is not to be charged with the origin of sin, " for
God cannot be tempted -with evil, neither tempteth
he any man ;" i. e., he does not intentionaUy set
motives before men, for the purpose of leading them
into sin. " But every man is tempted," says James,
" when he is drawn away of his own lust and
enticed." Thus the meaning of Moses is actually in
harmony with that of James ; God proved Abra
ham's faith, and every man is tempted when he is

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 215
drawn away of his own lust and enticed." The con
tradiction is only in sound, and arises from the use
of the word " tempt " by both writers, in a shghtly
modified sense, easily discovered from the circum
stances of the case.
Of the same nature is a supposed contradiction
between 2 Sam. xxiv. 1, " The Lord moved David
to number Israel and Judah," and 1 Chron. xxi. 1,
" Satan stood up and provoked David to number
Israel." In reply we remark, this is only one of a
great many instances in which various causes are
said to meet in the production of the same events.
Thus God is said to have hardened the heart of
Pharaoh, and Pharaoh is said to have hardened his
own heart ; the priests are said to have bought the
potter's field with the thirty pieces of sUver, and
Judas is said to have bought the field : Solomon is
said to have built the Temple, and yet he only hired
Hiram to buUd: God is said to have dehvered
Lot from Sodom, and yet Lot escaped in the use of
his own feet : Paul is said to have begotten, or con
verted the Corinthians, and yet the Spirit of God
alone converts the soul. Now the simple and satis
factory explanation of all these seeming contradic
tions is — the writers at the moment had not their
thoughts directed to the same causes, as immediately
preceding, or giving birth to the events narrated.

216 INTEEPEETATION.
Every effect, or event, has many antecedent causes,
either more or less remote; and sometimes one is
specified, and sometimes another. But, it is in vain
to say there is any contradiction in such cases. Let
those who bring the charge, define what a confra-
diction is, and then let them establish an instance, if
they can, in which any such thing occurs, in aU the
inspired Yolume.
The words of our Saviour, Jno. v. 37, "Ye have
neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His
shape," are regarded as opposed to Jno. xiv. 9, and
Deut. iv. 12, " He that hath seen me hath seen my
Father ;" " Ye heard the voice of the words." But
as before, all depends on the meaning of the separ
ate texts ; and that is to be ascertained by the con
text, the object of the writer, and the nature of the
subject on which he is speaking. In the first, the
context shows that our Lord charges the people with
resisting the manifestation of the will of God. He
does this in peculiar language ; but his hearers no
doubt perfectly understood him. He says they had
neither seen nor heard God. This was literally true ;
it was not in a hteral sense, however, that he wished
to be understood. He was charging them with diso
bedience ; and it is this fact he intends to bring home
to them, when he says, " Ye have neither heard His
voice, nor seen His shape." They had been a diso-

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 217
bedient, blind people, under all dispensations, they
had disregarded the means which God had taken to
sanctify and save them. But when it is said, " He
that hath seen me, hath seen my Father," the
meaning is not in the words ; it turns, as before, on
the fact of their disobedience. He that obeys me,
obeys my Father, is the sentiment enforced. There
is, therefore, no contradiction here.
A similar instance is said to occur in Jno. v. 31,
" If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true,"
compared with Jno. viu. 14, " Though I bear witness
of myself, yet my witness is true." The Jews them
selves, who heard our Lord on both occasions, charged
Him with inconsistency. But unjustly. In the fii-st
He means to say, that if He alone bore testimony to
His Messiahship, then His claims must needs be false ;
for whoever might be the real Messiah, would cer
tainly have other witnesses of the fact beside him
self. In the second passage. He designs to say, though
He did alone bear witness of His claims, yet they
were true. ' There is no contradiction in these state
ments. If a man could bring no evidence but his
own word for his honesty, that alone would not
prove it ; yet a man might be strictly honest, though
he himself should affirm it. This is aU that our
Lord meant to say. The language of our Lord,
Mat. V. 84, is said to be at variance with Heb. vi. 16.
10

218 INTEEPEETATION.
In the latter passage, Paul says : " An oath for con
firmation is to them an end of all strife," as though
he gave his sanction to oaths. Granting that he
does sanction oaths, there is no contradiction between
him and our Lord ; for the latter does not refer to
anything but profane swearing, or taking the name
of God in vain. His language is, "Swear not at
all." But this does not forbid the appeal to God in
a court of justice.
Once more : 1 Jno. ii. 20, " But ye have an unc
tion from the Holy One, and ye know all things," is
supposed to contradict Mat. xxiv. 36, in which it is
affirmed, that no man knows the day of judgment.
But when John says, " Ye know aU things," his mean
ing is to be gathered from the connection. He
means simply to say that they were fully acquainted
with the character of Christ and the doctrines of the
Gospel. He did not surely mean to assert that they
were Omniscient.
Finally, it has often been alleged that the different
accounts of the resurrection of Christ are contradic
tory. But, in reply, we aver in one sentence, that
all such pretences are wholly without foundation.
Our twelfth preliminary axiom forestalls all such
allegations. Omission is not misstatement ; and addi
tional testimony is not of necessity conflicting testi
mony.

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 219
The above instances may serve as a specimen of
aUeged contradictions under our first head. That of
Paul and James has been reconciled under our 8th
general rule.

n. ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS BETWEEN PEOPHECIES AND
THEIE FULFILLMENT.
Of these there are but few brought forward. For
our enemies here have found rather a barren field.
But they must needs quote Jonah iii. 4, " Yet forty
days, and Nineveh shall be destroyed." But the
condition of this threatening was, that if the city
repented within the forty days, it should not be des
troyed. Nineveh did repent ; it was spared, and the
prophecy was fulfilled. It would also have been
fulfiUed, if the people had remained impenitent, and
the city had been destroyed.
Another instance is said to be in respect to our
Lord's remaining in the grave. The fact is admitted
that in the prophecy three days and three nights are
specified ; and that our Lord was in the grave only
one whole day, and parts of two. He was laid in
the sepxdchre towards evening of the first. He re
mained there all the second ; and arose early on the
morning of the third. In the common usage of the
country, however, this was understood to be three

220 INTEEPEETATION.
days. Hence the prophecy was fulfilled in the
estimation of the generation to whom it was
given. Jer. xxxiii. 20, is supposed to be an example. It
reads : " If ye can break my covenant of the day,
and my covenant of the night, and that there should
not be day and night in their season ; then may also
my covenant be broken with David my servant, that
he should not have a son to reign upon his throne."
What has become of this prophecy? asks our ob
jector. Where is the king on the throne these 1800
years? We reply, Jesus, of the seed of David
according to the flesh, is the King of Israel, and he
is on the throne for ever, and shall reign for ever and
ever. If, by way of a rejoinder, it be said that Jeremiah
did not intend to foretell the kingship of Christ, we
might grant the fact; and yet our position would
remain immovable. For it does not belong essen
tially to the nature of a prophecy, that the prophet
himself fully understood all that his words imply.
Daniel states expressly that he understood not the
vision of the ram and the goat ; and a special mes
senger was sent to cause him to understand the
things which were about to befall his people in the
latter days. In the last vision, he says : " I heard,
but I understood not." It is enough that the pro-

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 221
phecy is inteUigible as a Divine prediction, and be
fuUy reahzed and made complete in the events of
history. Such is the fact with the prophecy above
mentioned. To its every letter it has been fulfiUed
in Jesus Christ.
As we have already said, this has proved rather a
barren field for objectors. Every successive charge
has led to a renewed investigation, and that to a new
victory on the part of the Bible. The exact fulfill
ment of the prophecies has been very much hke the
miracles of Moses in Egypt. Those seeking to dis
prove the Divine mission of the Bible, have very
frequently felt constrained to cry out : " this is the
finger of God?" The prophecy once pronounced,
has remained on the imperishable record, till in due
time, the event has proclaimed the manifest inter
position of God. Whether for a day, or a month, or
a year, or a thousand years, it has calmly waited its
issue. No accident has prevented the result; no
conspiracy of men, nor mahce of devUs, has sufficed
to defeat it. At the set time, it has been fulfilled
with an evident certainty, which belongs only to the
Divine purposes. Prophecy, as an argument in
behalf of the Bible, may be compared to one of the
great Pyramids. It cannot be removed by the
efforts of an ant. Its mighty structure wiU not
come down, at the bidding of him, who merely dis-

222 INTEEPEETATION.
lodges, as he thinks, a brick here and there from the
outer wall. It shall stand tUl the last trumpet shake
the world, and call the universe to judgment.

m. ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS OF THE PEINCIPLES
OF MOEALITT.
Of this class, the enemies of the Bible, in their
own estimation, have discovered a very great num
ber ; the command to sacrifice Isaac ; the command
given to borrow from the Egyptians ; the extirpation
of the Canaanites ; the vow of Jephthah ; the treat
ment of the Ammonites by David, and David's
wicked conduct in the case of Uriah, and many
others. The command to offer Isaac, was given merely as
a test of character, and as such, involved no contra
diction to the principles of morality. God as Crea
tor, and Proprietor of all, was competent to give
such a command, for such a purpose, as truly as He
is competent to send an earthquake, or a famine, or
a pestilence, to take away human hfe, without injus
tice to men. Of the same nature was the command
to exterminate the Canaanites; and therefore, the
same general reply is given. It were easy, indeed,
to show that, instead of confiicting with the principles
of good morals, it was a purely benevolent measure.

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 223
It was a command to destroy a horde of robbers, a
, hopelessly depraved and wicked people; and the
sword of Israel was as truly a friend to mankind, in
that tragedy, as the sword of the magistrate, when
unsheathed to defend society against social evil, or
the arm of the invader.
The Jews were instructed by Moses to ask rai
ment and jewels from the Egyptians, which they
never returned. The Egyptians lent to the Jews
what they asked. But equity decides that aU they
thus received was in effect but a poor compensation
for the long years of bondage unrequited, spent
under their oppressors.
The case of Jephthah's daughter will not give the
objector any great advantage. It cannot be proved
that he sacrificed his daughter ; and if it could be so
proved, there is no evidence that the Bible approves
of any such sacrifices.
Exod. XX. 6, is quoted as one instance in which
there is a palpable contradiction of some other
Scriptures, and of the principles of justice. The pas
sages contradicted are, Jer. xxxi. 30, and Ezek. xviii.
20. The words in Exodus are : " for I the Lord thy
God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the
fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth
generations of them that hate me." This visiting the
sins of the fathers upon the children is declared

224 INTEEPEETATION.
unjust, and contrary to other Scriptures, which assert
that the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father. ,
But the whole objection arises in a mistake. The
visitation is upon those who hate God, and not on
the innocent, consequently, instead of contradicting
the above Scriptures, it is in fact, only another asser
tion of the principle which they contain, viz. : " the
soul that sinneth, it shall die," or every soul shaU
bear his own iniquity.
The treatment of the Ammonites by David, men
tioned in 1 Chron. xx. 3, be it noted, is not in any
sense justified in the narrative. If he were therefore
really guilty of inhumanity, his fault is not to be
charged on the Bible. But it is a matter of doubt,
whether, in this instance, our English translation has
faithfully rendered the original. The Hebrew would
justify the statement that the captives were put
simply to the sawing of timber, and the drudgery
of the brick-kilns, and the labors of the field.
Criielty was not a trait of David's character.
As respects the conduct of David towards Uriah,
it is recorded, even in the public annals of his life,
accompanied with the reproof of a special messen
ger, and with the judgment of God threatened upon
his household. It is not therefore approved, but
pointedly condemned, and consequently, no objection
on this score, can he against the Bible.

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 225
Many of the Psalms of David have been denounced
as totally inconsistent with benevolence. But some
of these very denunciations violate the law of morals
they would enforce on the Psalmist. If the general
benevolence of David's heart be called in question,
we have a word to say in its defence. Look at his
conduct towards Saul for forty years; Saul being,
during all these forty years, his mortal enemy. Can
the world produce another such instance of magna
nimity towards an enemy ? Saul was several times
in David's power; David spared him, and in all
these forty years, uttered not a syllable of revenge
towards the man, who thirsted for his life. Is not
this proof of k benevolent heart ? Look at his sen
timents recorded in his Psalms, without the faintest
tinge of anything of the nature of misanthropy. In
the particular Psalms referred to, there is not a syl
lable but what is implied or expressed in the wishes
and prayers of every good man, that the laws of
God, and of the State, may be maintained, and the
wicked punished. Is there any offence done against
morality, in wishing that the thief, the adulterer, the
murderer, and the man-stealer, may be brought to
condign punishment ? Is it a violation of the law
of benevolence to express such wishes in Sacred
song ? What then shall be said of many of the most
popular poems on liberty, and patriotism? Must
10*

226 INTEEPEETATION.
these also be condemned? But David's Psalms are
of the same character, in principle, with the best of
these patriotic compositions ; having this additional
circumstance in their favor, that they are dictated by
Divine benevolence, and without the least mixtm-e
of ill-will, or inhumanity towards any living being.
This is true of the judge, who, for the public good,
condemns the criminal to death. How much more,
is it true of the man of God, who speaks as he is
moved by the Spirit, when he prays that the wicked
may not escape the sentence of the law ?
It has been objected that both true and false pro
phets have been sent forth, under the Divine sanc
tion ; and that miracles have been recorded, as
wrought both by the friends and the enemies of the
Bible. In respect to the latter charge, we reply,
while the record, for instance, of miracles wrought
by the magicians of Egypt is admitted, we do not
admit the fact that miracles were -wrought by these
astrologers. The artlessness of the record might
lead us to suppose that miracles were wrought, but
nothing more is intended by it, than to convey the
fact that the magicians attempted to work miracles ;
and in some way prevailed for a time on Pharaoh to
beUeve that they did. The character of God and
the nature of the case, require us to believe that
none but true miracles were wrought. This is.

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 227
nevertheless, certain, there was a point beyond which
the jugglery of the magicians did not succeed ; but
if they failed in one case they must have failed in
all. Did Moses, or any other heaven-sent ambassa
dor fail in any instance ? Never.
In respect to false prophets, reference is made to
1 Kings, xxii. 23, ." Now, therefore, the Lord hath
put a lying spirit in the mouth of aU these thy pro
phets." But this is just the old and often-answered
objection, that God hardened Pharaoh's heart. God
is said to do just what the false prophets do; in
what sense this is said, it is quite easy for us to
understand. The people and the false prophets per
verted the means which God was employing for their
sanctification ; for this He gave them up to the de
sires of their own hearts, just as He did the king of
Egypt. In this sense He gave them a lying sphit.
In a hke sense He " creates all things for Himself,
yea, even the wicked for the day of evil." That is,
all things are created for the glory of God, and they
wUl of course subserve that purpose ; yea, even the
wicked themselves will subserve that purpose. But
this is not to say that God is the author of evil ; or,
that He takes any pleasure in sin ; or, prefers the aid
of false prophets and wicked men, in the govern
ment of the world.
Another objection has been that various passages

2-;8 INTEEPEETATION.
speak of God as repenting, while' others represent
Him as of one mind and incapable of repentance.
Thus, Gen. yi. 6, " It repented the Lord that He had
made man on the earth." And Num. xxiii. 19,
" God is not man that He should he ; neither the son
of man that He should repent."
This difficulty, if difficulty it be, involves the
question, whether God, as an uncreated and eternal
being, has feehugs and emotions such as men have ?
It is enough for our purpose that the language of
the Bible represents Him as possessed of like emo
tions with men, such as grief, joy, disappointment,
compassion, and repentance, or change of mind. In
other words, He is not absolutely emotionless and
without feelings ; yet, at the same time, when feel
ings and emotions are ascribed to Him, it must be in
harmony with His infinite and glorious perfections.
The passage in Genesis describes a fact in the Divine
mind ; God was grieved -with the wickedness of men.
Who can deny it ? What, then, is the meaning of
the passage in Numbers xxiii. 19? We reply, it
also asserts a fact respecting the Divine nature, viz.
— its immutability. With Jehovah there is of a
truth no variableness, nor shadow of turning, such
as is common to man. And yet grief in the Divine
mind, when sin occurs, is a fact not to be denied.
But this feehng of grief and His immutabihty are

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 229
entirely compatible. He is angry with the wicked
every day; and He is of one mind, and repenteth
not. His purposes are the same from eternity to
eternity. This results from the nature of God, and
hence the language is enthely consistent and truth
ful. It describes facts and states in the Divine
mind, as they are, in a manner perfectly intelhgible ;
and all just objection is thus removed.
It yet remains that we consider the alleged contra
dictions of the Bible to natural science ; but this we
defer to the next chapter.
rv. ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS OP THE NATUEE OF THINGS,
OE OF THE NATUEAL SCIENCES, IN THE BIBLE.
It has been the rash affirmation of infidels, that
the Bible and modern science are totally irreconcila
ble. Their argument has been very brief, and, in
their view, very effective : " natural science, so-called,
is aU true ; the Bible contradicts natural science ;
therefore, the Bible is not true, and not true, it is
not from God."
But one thing is certain ; to go no further back
than the last twenty-five years, those who have ad
vanced this syllogism have not increased, but mar
vellously diminished, in number; so that at the
present moment, the noblest names of science pub-

230 INTEEPEETATION.
licly avow their behef, that not one scientific error
of any kind is found in all the Bible. Yea, the
majority of scientific men are committed to this
position ; and the minority may dispose of this fact
as they can. Will they dispose of it by denying
the competency of their associates in science ?
The supposed contradictions are said to refer
chiefly to the natural science' — astronomy and
geology. Alas ! that any friend of the Bible should
wish to have these contradictions proven. Nothing
is more certain than the fact, that the Word of God
is, and ever must be, in perfect harmony with all
true natural science. An inspired book, and that
the Bible is such, is a point proved, cannot contra
dict existing facts in the natural world. Was there
any mystery of science too deep for the Divine
Spirit, or, could there be any motive for His failing
to direct the sacred penmen infallibly, in things
which lay infinitely more clear in his mind, than
they ever did, or can lie, in the minds of all the
scientific and mortal men that ever hved, or that
ever will live upftn earth ?
ASTEONOMY.
As respects astronomy, it has been objected that
the writers of the Bible did not entertaia the modem

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 231
views of this science ; that they regarded the heavens
as moving round the earth, and the earth as a vast
extended plain. We admit such were their senti
ments. They were wholly ignorant of modern
astronomy. But the question is not as to their igno
rance or their knowledge. It is, do they in their
writings contradict any of the facts of this science ?
And we reply, it has never been proved that they
do. They wrote according to the knowledge they
had ; they knew just what they saw of natural phe
nomena ; and they never pretended to know more than
they actually did know. Yet there is not in all their
writing a solitary sentence at variance with the facts
of modern astronomy. Ps. civ. 6 is quoted, as one pas
sage in which they absolutely contradict this science :
" God hath laid the foundations of the earth, that it
should not be removed forever." Now it is admitted
that the foolish priests, who threatened Galileo, the
astronomer, with death for his discoveries, did think
this text contrary to modern astronomy. But when
we correctly interpret the passage, we find it simply
a description of a fact, viz., the felt stabihty of the
world. David expresses what he feels ; just as any
poet of our day might have done, without being sus
pected for a moment of teaching things opposed to
the true science of the heavens. To say, popularly,
that the earth is steadfast and immovable, that the

232 INTEEPEETATION.
sun rises and sets, that the stars go down in the west,
is not to oppose science. It is to describe events as
they are seen by the eye ; and this is all the contra
diction the Bible can be charged with. Astrono
mers themselves speak of " fixed stars ;" when they
profess to know that they are not fixed, but
moving, like all the other starry bodies of the
heavens. There is no other passage in the Bible, save that
above referred to, and its equivalents, that was ever
supposed to be at variance with astronomy ; or if
there be more, we know them not. For lack of
material in this department, an argument against
the Bible has been framed from astronomy, as
though these two must if possible be set in array
against each other. The argument is put in this
form : seeing there is such an immensity of worlds,
and this world is positively so small, compared with
many others, and as nothing compared with the
great whole, the Bible cannot be divine, because
this world must be beneath the notice of God, it is
so amazingly small.
Let it be remembered, in this instance, that
science so called is the aggressor, and is responsible
for the aggression. The Bible itself teaches the
exceeding littleness of this world and of all its
inhabitants ; but it also teaches that God created

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 233
them all ; that He cares for them with fatherly ten-
dei-ness ; yea, that the Son of God, God manifest in
the flesh, suffered death as a sacriflce for sin, so that
the penitent might be saved. Now if science con
tradicts aU this, let it produce its authority or be
silent. Eeason certainly teaches that God created
the world, and men of science generally confess as
much ; but if He created it. He can care for it. Its
amazing littleness can be no hindrance in His way.
It is small — ^very small, as the dust of His chariot
wheels ; yet this does not disprove His care and con
descension towards it ; and it does not prove that He
cannot give a revelation of His will to its inhabi
tants. The science that would reject the Bible on such
grounds, seems to proceed on the principle that
mind is of no peculiar importance, hardly worth the
Divine recognition ; and that matter is aU impor
tant, if there be only enough of it. Is this science ?
Is not one mind, one soul, though it cannot be
weighed or measured, of more value than a thou
sand such material globes as this? This superior
worth or dignity of the soul is the basis of all the
dignity, as well as the certainty, which belongs to
science. What were science without the soul?
They imply each other ; and whatever of glory, or
of shame, falls to the one, falls also to the other. So

234 INTEEPEETATION.
that of aU unseemly acts of suicide, the most un
seemly is that of a man of science seeking to cut off
the soul from the voice and consolations of its
Creator and friend, as expressed in the Scriptures.
All such acts are without excuse. But true science
never attempts any such acts. What nobler name
in astronomy can be named, than Isaac Newton ;
and yet his great genius consecrated itself to an
abiding faith in the Scriptures as divine ; so that
having scaled the heavens and pointed out the true
philosophy of the stars, thenceforth he gave himself
to the exposition of the Word of God, drinking out
of its fountains all the way to the end of his hfe, and
leaving behind him the testimony that the beginning
of all science was the fear of God and faith in
His inspired Word. Out of the depths of the
starry heavens, he brought forth clearer evidence of
the being and attributes of Jehovah, believing with
the Psalmist, that " the heavens declare the glory of
God, and the firmament showeth His handiwork."
A wise astronomer will be the last man to call in
question these sentiments ; the objections of an
undevout astronomer are not worthy of any very
great regard.
But very little interest does this alleged contradic
tion between' the Bible and astronomy now excite.
The faith of Christendom is calmly resting in the

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 235
fact, that this science and the Word of God are
at one.

GEOLOGY.
It is geology, which, at this moment, is only
emerging into something like order, that many sup
pose to be so irreconcilable with revelation. Some
friends of the Bible vainly labor to establish the fact,
unconscious of the mischief they are producing.
Let ps first of aU ascertain the weU substantiated
facts of geology ; that we may compare therewith
the simple historical statements of the Bible. If
there is any palpable contradiction between the two,
it will certainly appear.
In grouping together, at one view, the principal
facts in geology, we avail ourselves of the labors of
one, whose name is a sufficient guarantee of correct
ness and candor ; Edward Hitchcock, D.D. In
his original and deeply-interesting work — " The
Eeligion of Geology " — ^he states the cardinal facts
of this science, briefly as follows :
I. The rocks forming the crust of our globe
appear to have been the result of second causes.
H. The same general laws seem always to have
prevailed on our globe, and to have controUed its
changes.

236 INTEEPEETATION.
HI. The changes which the earth has undergone,
appear to have been the result of the same agencies,
heat and water.
lY. The present continents have for a long period
formed the bottom of the ocean.
Y. The internal parts of the earth are in fusion,
and possess a very high degree of heat.
YI. The rocks which contain animals and plants,
are not less than six or seven miles in thickness, and
are composed of many layers of different kinds ; and
must have occupied in their formation an immense
period of time.
YH. The remains of animals and plants are not
found in confusion, but for the most part in very
regular order, as though they had lived and died
where they are found.
YIH. About flve different distinct races of these
animals and plants seem to have existed and passed
away before the creation of the races which now
occupy the earth.
IX. In the earliest times in which animals and
plants lived, the climate over the whole globe seems
to have been warm, warmer than it is now between
the tropics.
X. There is good reason to suppose that the earth
underwent many changes before the existence of
animals and plants.

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 237
XI. The present condition of the earth seems of
recent origin.
xn. Among the 30,000 species of animals and
plants found in the rocks, very few hving species
have been observed; and these few, in the most
recent rocks. In the secondary rocks, not a single
species now existing has been discovered.
XHI. The surface of the earth has undergone an
enormous amount of erosion by the action of the
ocean, rivers, and the atmosphere.
XIY. Northern regions as well as Southern have
been swept over and abrased by ice and water ; the
force in general being towards the equator.
XY. Since this last period, the ocean has been
some thousands of feet above its present level in
many countries.
XYI. Some parts of the world are now being
changed, some places are sinking, and others rising.
XYH. Every change of importance seems to have
been an improvement, fitting it for beings of a higher
organization. Finally, the present races of animals and plants
are disposed in groups in districts, beyond whose
limits they usually droop and die.
Here then we have a fuU and intelligible exposi
tion of the main facts in the science of geology, the
result of long study and enlightened observation.

238 INTEEPEETATION.
No doubts can be raised as to its general correct
ness. We accept it, as one of the most reliable
statements of the science, and are not unwilling to
confront with it the records of inspiration. If such
be the history of the framework of the earth, written
in the process of ages, on the surface of the earth,
sure are we that the history given in the Bible,
under the guidance of the Spirit of God, wiU not in
any case contradict it. He, by whom the Bible
was written, directed and completed every change
through which the globe has passed from the first
hour of its existence ; and, therefore, he was compe
tent to secure a record in every respect true to the
facts in the case.
The general conclusions, then, to which the above
facts conduct us, are, that long before man existed,
and long before the animals now found on our globe
were created, the sohd framework of our planet was
in existence ; and after a long succession of periods
and ages, the various classes of living creatures,
whose remains have been discovered, were created
and occupied the earth in their, turn ; till by the
depression of the seas and other causes, they perished
and were imbedded in the places where we now find
them. Thus the earth was prepared for man ; and
he, and the other animals and plants now existing,
were created, and all things arranged in their

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 239
present order. This is geology, and we beheve it
.aU. But what is the Bible's account of creation, and
how does it differ from that of geology ?
The first announcement of Scripture is, "In the
beginning, God created the heavens, and the earth."
This certifies to the fact of creation. The universe
is not an accident, nor a growth, nor a development
of any kind — in its elements, it is a creation, called
into being by the voice of the Almighty. Against
this, geology has nothing to say, but to assent. The
second general statement of Scripture is, that after the
event of creation, the earth was " without form and
void," by which we understand it was not in the con
dition of order and beauty, in which we now find it.
Here also, geology is agreed. According to its
teachings, there was a vast period, or succession of
periods, in which desolation reigned over the globe ;
and this we regard as a most singular confirmation
of Scripture.
The third step in the inspired record, is the break
ing up of this chaos, or desolation, through the
agency of the Spirit. How long it was before this
was accomplished, or by what physical processes, is
not in the Bible affirmed. But geology admits the
fact of this breaking up, and places no precise limits

240 INTEEPEETATION.
to the times in which it was achieved. Thus far,
therefore, the two authorities are fully agreed.
In due time, however, the present order of things
began in our world ; at a date, in round numbers,
from the present time, about six thousand of our
years. And such, also, is the definitive decision of
geology ; and here again is a remarkable confirma
tion of the Scriptures. As we interpret the record,
during the first day of the present world, or order
of the world, the dense atmosphere of vapor that
surrounded the globe, became rarified, and the face
of the sky partially cleared; the light of the sun
could have been perceived by the human eye. On
the second day, the waters were gathered chiefly into
their present positions ; and the dry land appeared,
as we now flnd it ; and the seeds and plants peculiar
to it were created; all this was on the third day.
On the fourth day, the sky was wholly clear, reveal
ing the sun and stars, as we now see them, appointed
from the flrst, to be for hghts upon earth. Next
came the various fishes, and fowls, and creeping
things, now existing. On the sixth day, came man,
the crowning work of Creation, made in the image
of God, to have dominion over aU the earth, and to
have fellowship with his heavenly Father. All this
work of ordering, and peophng our world, as it is

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 241
now, according to the Bible, was accomphshed in the
space of six days. So we interpret the first chapter
of Genesis, whose language faithfuUy describes the
events of the period, as these events would have
seemed to occur to a human spectator. Such a
description, the inspired writer meant to give, we
fii-mly believe ; and such is the impression left on the
unbiased reader of aU ages, seeking to know the
meaning of the Word of God. It was designed for
aU generations to come ; and a truthful history it is.
God would not mock the world with a myth, or a
fable, at the very outset of His Inspired Yolume.
They, who labor in this nineteenth century, for the
first time, to show that Moses meant by the six days
a long series of periods, of thousands of years, and
that the seventh day is not an ordinary day, but the
present seven thousand years since the ceasing of
creation, have undertaken an enterprise that will
prove too much for them. Moses, in the fourth
commandment, affirms the seventh day to be a day
of the ordinary length, hke all the six ; and this he
affirms of the first Sabbath. This affirmation is final,
both as to the theory we have adopted, and the
errors of that theory of which we now speak. Cer
tainly every principle of correct interpretation
obliges us to receive the account in Genesis as the
account of events occurring during seven days.

242 INTEEPEETATION.
And geology has no data to contravert the fact. It
cannot prove that the present order of things could
not have been arranged within that period. It says
the sohd crust of the earth must have been in exis
tence for a very long period before man was created.
So let it be ; the Bible contains not one word to the
contrary. It says there must have been many dis
tinct races of animals and plants in existence, pre
vious to those we now behold. So let it be; the
Bible contains not one word to the contrary. It
says these various races must have been destroyed
by the breaking up of the earth's crust, by depres
sions of the seas, and earthquakes, and similiar
causes. So let it be ; the Bible saith not one word to
the contrary, and silence is not contradiction. Any
former state of things on this globe may have con
sumed thousands of years in completing itself ; there
is certainly nothing to hinder us from believing this,
so far as the Bible is concerned. But what is any
fact of that sort, to the question in hand? What
force is there in it, to impeach the veracity of the
Bible, as it stands? None, whatever. The Bible
affirms that all things in heaven and earth were not
developed, but created ; that they are not a growth,
nor an accident in any sense ; and that after their
creation, chaos reigned ; but how long it reigned is
not said, because it is really of no practical impor-

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 243
tance for any man to know. In due time, however,
chaos and aU its changes gave place to the system
and order we now behold ; and at this point, Moses
begins his history. It was the right point for all
practical purposes. We must be careful to note that
Moses does not affirm that- all things were created
expressly in the period of six days, just six thousand
years ago. It was in the beginning, that all things
in their elements were created ; but the creation of
man, and the earth's present inhabitants, both
according to the Bible and geology, took place about
that period. In this, therefore, both revelation and
science are agreed. But let the age of the crust of
the world be what it may, and suppose as many
races of plants and animals differing from those now
existing, as you please, to live and die, before man
was created, geology, and the Bible also, teaches
that God created and directed all. And if the Bible
begins not with the history of the fishes, and ser
pents, and monsters of the land and sea, such as
geology reveals in the various deposits, what then !
It begins with the history of the world that now is ;
it narrates that history, as it actually occurred, and
there is not one fact in all the annals and discoveries
of geology to contradict it. Had the Bible denied
the existence of the globe previous to the six days ;
had any other place been assigned to existing ani-

244 INTEEPEETATION.
mals than that they actually occupy ; or, had the
existence of these immense creatures, whose remains
are found in the rocks, and in the alluvial deposits,
been positively denied, there had been good reason
to say that the Bible contradicts geology. In any
of these cases it had affirmed that which is demon
strably false. But as the fact is. Scripture is in per
fect harmony with all the discoveries of geology. If
we have conjectured the opposite, it is our own mis
take ; and we ought to correct it, just as we have
done in respect to astronomy.
Modern discoveries have changed the views of all
Christendom respecting the Bible and the science
of the heavens. Hear what Luther said, in his
"Table-Talk," on this subject : — " I am informed that
a new astrologer is risen, who presumes to prove that
the earth moveth and goeth about, not the firma
ment, the sun, moon, and stars ; hke as when one,
who sits in a coach, or a ship, and is moved, thinks
he sitteth still and rests, but the earth and trees go,
run, and move themselves. Therefore, so it is, when
we give ourselves up to our own foolish fancies.
This fool -will turn the whole art of asti-onomy up
side down, but Scripture showeth and teacheth him
another lesson, when Joshua commanded the sun
and moon to stand still, and not the earth." And
later theologians have held the same sentiments ; but

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 245
who does not smile at such sentiments now ? Tlie
whole art of astronomy, as the ancients understood
it, is indeed turned up-side down, and that for ever !
But has the Bible been turned up-side down? It
has been most remarkably confirmed. And we con
fidently look for the same result in respect to the
science of geology.
The change has already begun. For ten, who a
few years ago, looked on that science with distrust,
there is not now found one. The most distinguished
men of science regard the Bible, rightly interpreted,
as, in every respect, at agreement with geology.
Those even who maintain the idea, that Moses means
long periods of ages, by the words " day and night,"
in Genesis, profess to find the Bible on their side,
confirming the docti-ine of their favorite science. It
is then a settled point, that there is no contradiction
between the Scriptures and geology. But on this
we buUd a conclusion. Neither Moses nor any of
the sacred writers knew what we now know of
astronomy and geology. The fact may seem to be a
confession of their ignorance. Be it so. It redounds
very much to the honor of the Bible. For how
came it to pass, that neither Moses, nor any other
inspired penman, totally ignorant though they were
of these sciences, did not wi-ite one sentence at vari
ance with them ? There is nothing so rash as igno-

246 INTEEPEETATION.
ranee, nothing so ready and eager to rush into error,
desperate in its very bhndness. Why then was not
their ignorance a snare to them ? Why were they
preserved from the palpable blunders of every other
class of writers pretending to inspiration? The
answer is as certain and infalhble as demonstration
can make it — they wrote as they were moved by the
Holy Spirit of God. Therefore the Bible is in har
mony both with astronomy and geology ; and so far,
the evidence is incontrovertible that its origin is
Divine. This much may therefore suffice to show, in what
manner the supposed contradictions of the Bible
are to be disposed of. If it be an imperfect view,
it is at least a bird's-eye view of the subject, and
the reader must improve upon it for himself.
These four things we note in conclusion :
1. Fewer objections are urged against the Bible,
in proportion as a true knowledge of the world and
its history advances. It has been said, ignorance is
the mother of devotion ; say rather, the mother of
unfounded objections to the Word of God. Both
ignorance and opposition to the Sacred Oracles, are
passing rapidly away; and none will mourn their
departure. The Bible was made for the highest
state of knowledge to which it is possible for man
to reach; and every increase of knowledge only

ALLEGED CONTEADICTIONS. 247
assists in hastening the glorious victory which awaits
the Bible in the future. That future will be as full
of joy and peace, as the past has been full of doubt
and conflict.
2. The present state of science confirms the veracity
of the Bible, in all its statements, both as touching
the origin of our world, and the various changes
through which it has passed. No thanks to the
enemies of the Bible for this. It is a result achieved,
despite the wishes even of some of the friends of
the Bible; but it is all too well established ever
to be reversed. Science and inspiration cannot
differ. 3. All objections against the Bible, from natm-al
science, dcreprimd facie -without foundation. Because
the Bible, written under the superintendence of the
Spirit of God, cannot err in that department of know
ledge, confessedly the inferior and the least necessary
for man to possess. Science and revelation contra
dicting each other! rather let him who harbors
any such thought, be told, he knows not what he
affirms. 4. The principles of religion, having their origin
in the nature of God, and in the relations which
man sustains to God, are absolutely independent of
all facts connected with the physical condition and
history of this world, and of the universe. With

248 INTEEPEETATION.
the principles of rehgion the Bible has chiefly to
do. Hence astronomy and geology, and all natural
science whatever, can have no antagonistic attitude
towards the Bible. TTiese sciences can never refute,
nor overthrow, one of the Bible's doctrines; for
though the earth and the material universe were
burned up, the principles and doctrines of the Bible
would remain just what they are, in themselves,
eternally holy, just, good, and true, indestructible as
the attributes of God, by the inspiration of whose
Spirit they have been recorded on the imperishable
pages of the Bible.

OEIGIN OP rrs DIFFICULTIES. 249

CHAPTEE xn.
ON THE OEIGIN OF DIFFICULTIES IN INTEEPEETATION.
It wUl directly subserve the main design of this
treatise, to point out here, very briefly, some of the
chief sources whence difficulties most generally arise
in respect to the meaning of the Bible. The dis
covery of the origin of a difficulty, is often the best
clue to the removal of it ; and that there are diffi
culties in the interpretation of the Bible, none wiU
deny, although many can discover these difficulties,
who have not patience to seek for them a satisfactory
explanation. That they can be solved, and the
whole volume commended to the head and heart of
every honest man, is as certain, as that the volume
itself has been sent forth into the world under the
inspiration of the Almighty. At least, more can
be achieved in this direction than is generaUy
believed. The sources of some of the chief difficulties in
interpretation are the following :
11»

260 INTEEPEETATION.
I. The character of the Book. It is a revelation
of mysteries, and of many doctrines in themselves
beyond the power of the human mind to discover.
In such a case, even where the language is as trans
parent as the light, there is the transcendent nature
of the subject to perplex the mind. The only
remedy for difficulties from this source, is a child
like confldence in the veracity of God, who can
not lie.
H. The mode of its publication. It was given at
intervals ; by men of very different degrees of know
ledge, of distinct peculiarities, writing for the men
immediately around them, and in some measure
acquainted with the events and sentiments recorded.
Hence we approach it at a disadvantage. The
country of its origin is far distant ; its customs very
diverse from our own ; the language dissimilar ; and
the genius of its institutions very different from any
thing with which we are acquainted. Difficulties
arising from these sources must not be pressed
beyond reason ; they are such as do not in any
sense affect the foundations of religion.
in. The antiquity of the Bible is one source of its
obscurities. It is the oldest book in existence. Its
earliest histories run back to the creation ; and
traverse a period which no other writings have
described ; while its latest records are two thousand

OEIGIN OP ITS DIFFICULTIES. 261
years old. What changes have overtaken the world,
since that day! What revolution in language, in
nations, in science ! How the mind of man has
enlarged the sphere of its knowledge since the Sacred
Eecord was closed. But let not the Bible be pre
judged on that account. Let candor and patience
have their perfect work.
lY. Its unscientific method of narration gives rise
to many perplexities ! It is not the work of minds
trained in the schools. It has no art but that of
simplicity, thrown off its guard. With no guile in
their hearts, the writers often seem not to know that
guile exists. They are so anxious to deliver their
message, that they seldom regard unbelief, or objec
tion as at all possible. And yet this simplicity is a
stone of stumbling and a rock of offence. John, one
of the most artless and transparent of all the writers,
is often most in need of a wise and wary interpreter.
But here candor should meet with candor ; and soon
the simphcity of the sacred writers will protect
them from the charge of all evil intentions.
Y. The controversial character of some of the
books has created difficulties. This is true in refer
ence to many passages in Job, and the Epistles of
Paul. The language of controversy is guarded ;
aimed at some one point ; and easily perverted when
taken out of its connection. It is from this source

252 INTEEPEETATION.
that the differences between Paul and James have
arisen. The removal of all such difficulties is best
achieved by mastering the point of controversy and
then interpreting the language accordingly.
YI. False interpretations have given rise to diffi
culties which otherwise never could have arisen.
Passages have first been misinterpreted ; then these
misinterpretations have been set in array against
other portions of the Bible, as though they were
wholly irreconcilable, and the Scriptures have been
made inconsistent with themselves. The remedy in
such a case is to interpret right, then the Bible wUl
need no self-reconciliation.
YII. TTie progressive nature of Eevelation has
been one great source of perplexity. This involved
a change of dispensation from the simple patriarch
ate, to the mysterious economy of sacrifices, and the
more glorious dispensation of the Gospel ; and these
changes wrought others in the use of terms, and
introduced new ideas under old terms, which stiU
haunt the mind in their old significations, creating
confusion in our thoughts as a matter of course.
But we must endeavor to keep up with the light of
revelation, and allow our minds to expand as its
hght expands, foUowing the Divine manifestation as
it goes forward, -without fear or doubting.
YHI. Imperfections in our translations have given

OEIGESr OF ITS DIFPIOULTrEg. 263
rise to many things hard to be explained. The
Enghsh translation now in use, is probably the best
ever made ; yet there are imperfections in it, where
the frue sense of the original has not been conveyed,
or conveyed only in part. The foUowing are exam
ples : Matt. vi. 26, " Take no thought for your hfe."
Phil. iv. 6, " Be careful for nothing." The original
is — " Be not over anxious." Col. i. 15, " The first
born of every creature." It should have been
" Pre-eminent over every creature." Acts ii. 27,
" Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell." The Greek
is : " In the state of the dead." 1 Sam. h. 25, " Be
cause the Lord would slay them." The Hebrew is :
" Therefore the Lord would slay them." Mark ix.
24, " I beheve, help thou my unbelief." The
original for " help " is an idiom very difficult to
render into English. Its meaning is : " Come to
my help that my unbehef may be changed into
faith." IX. Modes of speech have been the occasion of
many perplexities ; some of these modes are com
mon to Hebrew, some to Greek, and others to aU
languages. (1.) Thus a part is used for the whole, and the
whole for a part. Gal. v. 14, " For aU the law is
fulfilled in one word." Matt. iv. 8, "Showeth
him all the kingdoms of the world." James v. 17,

254 INTEEPEETATION.
" It rained not on the earth." In both instances
Palestine alone is meant.
(2.) The thing, or person to which another is com
pared is spoken of as the thing, or person himself.
Jas. iii. 6, " The tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity."
Matt. xxvi. 26, " Take, eat, this is my body." Jas.
iv. 14, " What is your life ? it is a vapor." Matt.
xvii. 12, " I say unto you Elias is come."
(3.) The instrument, or means, or mere occasion
of an event is spoken of as though it were the abso
lute and efficient cause of that event. Jas. v. 20,
" Let him know, that he that converteth a sinner,
shall save a soul from death." 1 Pet. i. 22, " Seeing
ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth."
" Go thy way, thy faith hath made thee whole."
Luke viii. 48.
(4.) An incidental result is often spoken of as
though it were the decreed result preordained by
the will of God. Matt. x. 34, "I came not to send
peace, but a sword." Jno. xvu. 12, " None of them
is lost, but the son of perdition ; that the Scriptm-e
might be fulfiUed." 1 Pet. ii. 8, " 'Whereunto also,
they were appointed." This is repeated in Acts
xxviii. 26, 27, in somewhat different language ; and
it is one of the most frequent occasions of objection.
But the difficulty is removed at once when we remem
ber, it is only a mode of speech, and nothing more.

OEIGIN OF ITS DIFFICULTIES. 265
(6.) Physical terms are applied to the soul and its
states, as though the soul were itself a material
object, and governed by material laws admitting of
no power to the contrary. This ought never to be
forgotten. Eph. v. 14, " Awake thou that sleepest,
and arise from the dead, and Christ will give thee
hfe." Eph. u. 1, " And you hath he quickened,
who were dead in trespasses and sin." Col. iv. 6,
" Walk in -wisdom toward them that are without."
Col. ii. 12, " Buried with him in baptism, wherein
also ye are risen with him." 1 Cor. x. 12, " Where
fore let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed
lest he faU."
(6.) Universal terms are employed, and are left to
be hmited by the context, by other texts, or by the
nature of the subject. Here the artlessness of the
Bible shines forth conspicuous, on every page.
Phil. iv. 13, " I can do aU things through Christ,"
*. e., "I can endure aU sorts of adversity." Eph.
V. 24, " Therefore as the Church is subject unto
Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in
everything ;" i. e., in what is right. So Col. iu. 22.
2 Cor. V. 17, " Behold all things are become new ;"
i. e.. Your heart is renewed in its affections. 1 Jno.
hi. 9, " Whosoever is born of God doth not commit
sin ;" *. e., does not habituaUy disobey God.
(7.) Things are said to be done, and events to

256 INTEEPEETATION
transpire, when the meaning is, they were attempted
to be done, or, it seemed as though they were done.
Exod. vii. 11, " The magicians of Egypt, they also
did in like manner with their enchantments." Eev.
XX. 1-6, &c. This last passage is a symbolical
description of events to transpire in the history of
the world ; and the writer describes them as though
he saw them. But how foolish to regard him as
foretelling the descent of a literal angel, with a key
and chain, the binding of Satan and his literal
imprisonment in a bottomless pit ! the raising of the
dead and the coming of Christ to reign in person at
Jerusalem for a thousand years !
(8.) Hyperboles, or exaggerated comparisons, are a
fruitful source of perplexity. They are the most
common in the Psalms and prophets ; and very
general in all oriental -writings. But they are to be
explained, by a reference to the subject of which
they speak. Common sense is the remedy for all
such difficulties. " He hath broken my teeth with
gravel stones," Lam. iii. 16. "The wicked are
estranged from the womb ; they go astray as soon as
they be born, speaking lies," Ps. Iviii. 3. " Put on
the whole armor of God," Eph. vi. 11 ; i. e., arm
yourselves with every Divine resource against
evil. (9.) Things contingently, or morally impossible,

OEIGDSr OF ITS DIFFICULTIES. 257
are spoken of as absolutely and purely impossible.
Gen. xxxvii. 4, "They hated him, and could not
speak peaceably to him." There was no want of
ability in the case. Jno. xii. 39, "Therefore they
could not believe." 1 Jno. iii. 9, " He cannot sin,
because he is born of God." 2 Pet. u. 14, "Eyes
that cannot cease from sin." Gal. v. 17, " Ye can
not do the things that ye would." In this last case,
there is, as in all the rest, no want of ability, but of
opportunity, through the strife of the two opposing
principles. As in the declaration of Joshua, "Ye
cannot serve God ;" that is, they could not serve then-
idols and God at the same time. The same was the
saying of our Lord: "Ye cannot serve God and
Mammon." These forms of speech are among the
most common in our language ; yet out of no deeper
sources than these have sprung many of the bitterest
controversies between Christians, and many of the
most profoimd objections against the Bible 1
(10.) Things inconsistent with the character and
will of God, are said to be impossible, when there is
no absolute impossibility in the case. Mark vi. 6,
" And he could do there no mighty works." Tit. i.
2, " Which God, that cannot he, promised before the
world began."
X. But, finally, the grand fountain of difficulties,
in respect to the meaning of the Bible, is in the

258 mTEEPEETATION.
heart of man. By sin it is naturally ignorant,
stupid, and incapable (so to speak) of all spiritual
knowledge. The want of a willing mind throws
an eclipse over the entire sacred volume ; objec
tions a thousand times answered, are a thousand
times brought up and insisted on; and it would
verily seem as though it were easy to understand
all other books ; they being plain, consistent, and
true; while the Bible is held to be precisely the
opposite, dark, unreasonable, subtle, and hard to be
understood. But not without forethought has the Bible been
sent on its mission. Divine wisdom has imparted
to its pages that holy simphcity, that purity and
truth, which is without stain, and whereby human
duplicity is put to shame. By its own inherent
resources, it is slowly rising over all objections, like
the sun over the mists of the morning. Every
passing year throws clearer light on its path. Its
truthfulness is being daily vindicated against all
the world. The highest names of science rejoice
in its spotless integrity. Perpetual success attends
it. Its path is toward glory and immortality. No
old age overtakes it. Not a blush of conscious
dishonesty ever reddens on its cheek. Descendino-
from the earliest dawn of literature, it will survive
to regenerate all literature, and to infuse new vigor,

OEIGIN OP ITS DIFFIOULTrES. 259
for long generations, into all the powers of the
human mind. Weakness in the Bible there is none.
Contradictions ? Ther^ are spots on the sun, but no
contradictions in the Bible. "The words of the
Lord are pure words ; as silver in a furnace of earth,
purified seven times."

260 THE BIBLE.

CHAPTEE Xm.
ON THE MOEAL POWEE OF THE BIBLE, WITH EEFEEENCE
TO ITS SOUECES.
The moral power of the Bible, that is, its influence
over the hearts and actions of men and nations,
is a phenomenon which its enemies have never
attempted to deny. We well remember, after the
lapse of nearly half a century, the time, manner,
and language in which this peculiarity of the Bible
was first made known to us. It was on the afternoon
of a bright Sabbath, and from the lips of a Scottish
patriarch ; said he : " The Bible is the best book in
the world." It sounded something grand, yes, sub
lime, in our youthful thoughts, that one particular
book should have this pre-eminence ; and the saying
has lost none of its truth, or sublimity, since that
day, in om- view. We like its comprehensiveness.
It expresses aU that can be said of the Bible, in one
brief Saxon sentence. It implies that the Bible
wields over the world by far a greater amount of

SOUECES OF ITS POWEE. 261
moral and intellectual power, than all other books ;
and this fact the history of the world certainly
demonstrates. The Bible of a truth is the best
book in the world. It is the primate of all books,
and will never have a successor.
It is the fountain-head of our purest and most
infiuential hterature. In the arts and sciences, it is
the source of all progress. Poetry is ever ready to
confess its obligations to this Book of books. There
is no oratory in the halls of learning, of legislation,
or of justice, but ever seeks to refresh itself from
the pages of the Bible. Painting has hence derived
its sublimest conceptions. All genius rekindles at
its divine touch. What a storehouse of thought, of
mental impulse, there is in this one familiar volume !
Men of the loftiest mental endowments find in it
themes of investigation, illimitable. The entire reh-
gious life of our world, so expansive and joyous, has
its springs in the Word of God. Time itself will
end, before the magic stimulus of this one book wiU
cease to be felt in the minds of men.
It is certain the world is never weary with its
study ; for there is more patient study expended
upon it every day, than upon all other books put
together. There are more books traceable to the
Bible, than to any and all books in existence. It
furnishes themes for the pulpits of Christendom,

262 THE BIBLE.
and spiritual food for miUions of the best disciplined
minds in aU lands. It is read in all Christian fami
lies daily. It is the grand book of reference and
final appeal in all schools of theology. The mis
sionary carries it beyond the seas, into the midst of
heathenism, not doubting but, by its aid, he will
soon lay all the idols prostrate. It is brought to the
bedside of the dying, as the only balm of the weary
heart, in the valley and shadow of death. The anxious
inquirer, seeing behind him the wrath to come, and
constrained to cry, "What must I do to be saved?"
comes to the Bible for an answer ; and there he
finds a Saviour. And what is wonderful, in the ceU
of the maniac, its words of truth and soberness
mysteriously awe the children of wretchedness into
attention, and bring even over their troubled coun
tenances, the sunshine of the love of God.
It has been more signally preserved, during a
longer succession of ages, than any other book.
It has outlived more intense criticism ; it has been
oftener copied and printed; it has been oftener
interdicted by kings than any other book. Tyrants
have hated it with unquenchable hatred ; for it has
done more than any other agency to confound their
counsels, and mar their ambition. In the hands of
patriots, it is the sacred standard of liberty and
right. Kings are sworn to the duties of their office

SOUECES OP ITS POWEE. 263
on the holy Bible. In courts of justice it is the
guardian angel of truth and equity, and to kiss that
book is to stand in the very presence of the King
of kings. Against infidehty, atheism, and delusion
it is the only successful champion, that never sur
renders ; these giant evils cower and stand abashed
in its presence, as guilt and shame in the presence
of innocence. The Bible is translated into more
languages, and is actually read by a greater propor
tion of the world, and is also more revered and
loved than any other book. There is everywhere a
more ready deference to its sentiments, on all the
great questions that perplex men, than there is, or
ever was accorded to any other volume. It is
esteemed as worthy of the faith of all men, and the
enterprise is on foot, to place it as soon as possible
in every family on the globe.
What book, we ask, obtains such universal honor
as this ? There is none worthy of such honor, hut
itself. He, to whom was given more wisdom, than
usuaUy faUs to the lot of men, said, in the olden
time, " where the word of a king is, there is power."
This is true of the Bible, with an emphasis ; for it is
the word of a King — even the King of kings, the
King eternal, immortal, and invisible, the only wise
God ; and through aU lands, and through all time,
there has gone with it, a power as wonderful as it

264 THE BIBLE.
has been blessed. During these last three hundred
years especially, has this power been felt on a large
scale. See its effect, first on Luther ; then on Ger
many, and then on England. This last, indeed, owes
all its greatness, political, intellectual, and moral,
more directly to the Bible, than to all other causes
under God. Her rise dates only back to her recep
tion of the Bible. When she bade it welcome, in
spite of her kings and bishops, from the hands of the
heroic William Tyndale, a martyr of noble memory,
she was but a third rate kingdom, inferior «ven to
Portugal on the sea. But as soon as the Bible was
read in her homes, and preached in her pulpits, and
believed by her people, a new glory burst on her
path. The commerce of the world fell into her
hands. Science was born, and grew in such prosper
ity as the world had never seen before. The whole
face of England was changed. Wealth flowed into
all her ports; the colonies of other nations, the
sources of luxury and power, yielded to her arms,
almost without a blow. In a very short time, they
said, she swayed the sceptre of an empire, on which
the sun never set !
But, in the meanwhile, the nations which banished
the Scriptures, and put in their pl^ce the traditions
of the Eoman Church, were struck with decay.
The wealth of Mexico and Peru, and the jewels of

SOUECES OF ITS POWEE. 266
the distant East, could not preserve their dominions.
As there is no rising from political and social degra
dation, without the Bible, so there is no permanency
in civihzation, or power, without it. Euin immedi
ately overtakes every people that rejects the Word
of God. All this does the history of the world
prove ; and if so, then it is manifest, that the power
of this divine book is, as yet, only in its infancy,
slowly expanding into its fuU and ripe maturity.
What will it be, when, in the course of ages, it has
reached, enlightened, and purified, the great heart
of universal humanity ?
What then, is the secret of this power ? what are
the elem/5nts of which it consists ? We answer, the
secret of its power is in the fact, that it is from God,
and in its adaptation to aU the manifold wants of
man's dependent, spiritual nature.
I. Thus, in the first place, of aU books claiming
a Divine origin, the Bible alone sets forth the right
law of moral conduct.
Men have wearied themselves to this hour, with
their attempts to settle the first principles of right
and -wrong. Nor is there any prospect of a speedy
agreement among philosophers, as to what these first
principles are. On the other hand, how authorita
tive, and consistent, have been the teachings of the
12

266 THE BIBLE.
Bible, on this subject, from the first. "Thou shalt
love the Lord thy God, with all thy heart, and thy
neighbor as thyself" No other book ever announced
such a form of words, embracing with such match
less brevity, and yet with such infinite amplitude,
the entire rudiments and essentials of all law; sim
ple enough to be understood by a child, and deep
enough to task all the energies of the wisest of men.
Wherever these words are pronounced, men recognize
in them a divine power over the conscience, at once
peculiar and impressive ; and this recognition is the
ready response of the soul, to the voice of its Crea
tor. AU was uncertainty, till these words were
announced. With a calmness, and a clearness, that
is di-raie, they settle for ever the great law of morals
for every creature, placing it on none of the shifting
foundations of hiunan expediency, but on the sohd
immovable basis of the sovereignty of God ;
thus commending it to the universal conscience of
the world, and binding aU men to the duty of obedi
ence, by the most august of aU sanctions, the holy
and unchangeable wiU of God. Here lies the
strength of the law on the hearts of men, its right-
ness, and its righteous sanctions; not its rightness
only, but the just and solemn penalties by which it is
guarded. Such is the law of moral conduct in the

SOUECES OF ITS POWEE. 267
Bible ; and such is one element of its wonderful
power over men. It goes down into the conscience,
and directs the very first motions of action in the
soul. It places you in the very presence of the eter
nal Jehovah ; and gives you His wiU to obey, on the
authority wherewith He is invested.
n. In the next place, the view which the Bible
presents of man's condition, contributes to its sin
gular influence over him.
The condition of man, as a child of sin and sorrow,
has been a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence,
from the beginning; causing one to plunge into
Atheism, another into Fatalism, a third into sensual
ity, and a fourth into despair. The question has
been, not simply why is sin in the world ? but what
is man's relation to the first sin, of the first man ?
Many of the devoutest and deepest thinkers have
maintained that, since the first sin of the first man,
sin has descended in human nature, by the laws of
generation, the child from the moment of its exis
tence being, in actual character, what Adam was
after he had voluntarily broken the divine law.
According to this view, our relation to the first sin,
is the relation of a necessary effect, to its antecedent
and necessary cause. But the results of this view,
have been to perplex the whole subject of moral

268 THE BIBLE.
government, and along with it, the whole character
of God Himself. An awful obstinacy has been
engendered in the minds of thousands ; they have
cast off all fear of God, and regarded religion as a
thing overwhelmed in self-contradictions. Others,
professing indeed to hold this view, have governed
their hearts rather by the practical demands of the
divine law, to the neglect of their false theory ; in
happy inconsistency, refusing to walk according to
their own faith.
To the question, why sin is in the world, various
have been the answers. Some have said, it is here
because men existed in another world, sinned there,
and were sent here into a state of sin, as into a house
of correction. Others have viewed it as an essen
tial thing to the display of the divine glory ; decreed
as the means of greater good. But it may be truly
affirmed, that man has not improved in his moral
condition under ^any of these theories. They have
not met the rational demands of his moral nature.
They have thrown no light upon his path ; they
have afforded no sanitary influence to his heart.
What then is the Scriptural view of man's present
condition? The Bible teUs how the flrst sin took
place ; it defines sin, always with strict precision, to
be transgression of law ; it affirms every man's per
sonal responsibility, his perfect freedom, and indefea-

SOUECES OP ITS POWEE. 269
Bible obligation to keep the whole law of God, in aU
its requirements ; and it declares that every man
shall answer for his sins, as deeds, voluntarily done
in his body, contrary to the wiU of his rightful
sovereign. The relation, therefore, which every
man holds to sin, according to the Bible, is that of
an independent and adequate cause to its appro
priate effect ; and consequently, the relation of every
man to the first sin, is that he voluntarily re-enacts
it in his own person. Left to the freedom of his
wiU, and to those constitutional tendencies inherited
in his descent from Adam, he sins, as did Adam,
and inherits the curse. Such, as we gather it, is the
doctrine of the Bible. Nowhere is sin said to be a
quahty, or property, or bias of nature ; it is always
an act, a thing of choice, against which all nature
protests. You wUl search the Bible in vain, for any
legal, or moral, or personal conglomeration of all
mankind into one hteral representative person,
responsible for aU, acting, and sinning for aU ; and
in whom aU hved, died, and were condemned. Nor
in the Bible vsdll you find any evidence of man's
pre-existence ; nor indeed one sentence of mystery
in reference to this whole subject. It maintains
fearlessly the doctrine of man's probation, the right
eous moral government of God, administered in an
economy of grace, and in due time to be vindicated

270 THE BIBLE.
from all charges of injustice. It calmly assures
every man, that as he sows now, so shall he reap
hereafter ; and that for his own deeds, every man
shall give account unto God. This is one element
of its mighty power over the world. " What is the
most solemn thought " — said one to the great Web
ster — " that ever passed through your mind ?" Af
ter some moments of profound silence, the statesman
answered, with a countenance clothed in solemnity :
" The most solemn thought that ever passed through
my mind, is the thought of man's responsibility to
God." It is just so; and the Bible confirms it.
That holy book, speaking to the world in God's
stead, assures every man, high and low, rich and
poor, bond and free, that he is accountable to God
for his conduct ; it puts every man on his good
behavior, for time and eternity ; and human nature
being what it is, men must take heed to their ways,
with such a system before them, sanctioned as it is
by all the solemnities of the Godhead. The Bible
aUows no man to merge himself into any other per
son, or to palm off his transgressions as things bom
with him, as his hands or his eyes. It performs the
office of Nathan, and with uplifted hand, and finger
direct, it declares to every sinner chargeable with
sin, " thou art the man."

SOUECES OF ITS POWEE. 271
HI. Another element of power in the Bible is, the
view there given of the character of God.
This is a point of the most vital importance. If
the Bible had failed here, it had failed altogether.
For it is a law, as inexorable as the law of gravita
tion, that the individual and nation wiU be in moral
character according to the character of the deity
they worship. The condition of all heathen nations
i^s proof of this. The attributes they ascribe to their
idols, they copy in their daily conduct ; and these
attributes are the offspring of their benighted and
selfish hearts. So that they are hteraUy gods to
themselves ; and hence they wUl never rise, by their
own resources, out of the fearful pit into which their
sins have plunged them. We do not mean to say,
that the heathen have no powers of mind to know
the attributes of the true God, nor, that they cannot
discover these attributes from the world around
them. This is our position : that copying as they
ever do, in their own conduct, the attributes of their
idols, which have previously been suggested out of
their own hearts, they never will, in this process,
arrive at the knowledge of God as he is, and so wiU
never rise from the depths of sin into which they
have fallen. They must first be taught out of the
Bible, the character of God.
But in vain do we search the wide world, for just

272 THE BIBLE.
conceptions ot God, until we open the Scriptures.
Ask the wisest of ancient philosophers, the man
whose opinions governed the schools even do-wn to
the time of Bacon, ask him, who, or what is God ?
His answer is — " The universe is God." Or, his
great rival, whose fame is scarcely at all inferior,
and whose philosophy tinged all Christian theology
for a thousand years, ask Plato, and he says — " God
is an extremely subtle matter, such as air." Now if
these are the loftiest conceptions of the wisest of
men, what must be the conceptions of the ignorant
common people. Surely, weU did Paul say : " The
world by wisdom knew not God."
But open the Bible, and your soul is immediately
fiUed with awe, as though you were suddenly brought
into the presence of the King of kings, a glorious
Being like to no mere imagination of the wicked
human heart. Here is the true God revealed in his
true character. He is infinite in Power, Holiness,
Justice, Goodness and Truth. You are disposed to
veil your face at the sight, to tremble and adore.
"God is a Spirit, and they that worship Him
must worship Him in spirit and in truth. God that
made the world, and all that are therein, seeing He
is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples
made with hands, as though He needed anything,
seeing He giveth to aU, hfe and breath, and aU

SOUECES OF rrs powee. 273
things. Forasmuch, then, as we are the offspring of
God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like
unto gold or silver, or stone, graven by art, or man's
device. And the times of this ignorance, God
winked at; but now commandeth all men every
where, to repent ; because he hath appointed a day,
in which He will judge the world in righteousness,
whereof He hath given assurance unto all men, in
that He hath raised Him from the dead. For God so
loved the world, that He gave His only begotten
Son, that whosoever believeth in Him, should not
perish, but have everlasting hfe. God is love, and
he that dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God
in him. This is the true God, and eternal life."
Such is the view of the divine character as given
in the Scriptures ; and in the Scriptures alone. The
God of the Bible is the Creator, Proprietor, and
Judge of all ; infinitely holy, just and merciful ;
slow to anger, yet by no means wiUing to clear the
guilty and impenitent ; condescending to the lowest
of His creatures, providing a sacrifice for sin ; will
ing to forgive the penitent, but punishing the rebel-
hous with the just penalty of His eternal law. And
such precisely are the conceptions of the Divine
Being, necessary to the formation of a pure, and
stable moral character in man ; and they constitute
an important element of the power of the Bible.

274 ¦ THE BIBLE.
The man who reveres, and worships, and loves the
God of the Bible, wiU give evidence of a pure, and
holy life. With open face, beholding as in a glass
the glory of the Lord, he will be changed into the
same image, from glory to glory, even as by the
Spirit of the Lord.
lY. There is another source of this power which
belongs to the Bible : it reveals the only persuasive,
by which the human heart is ever won to the love
and pursuit of hohness, viz. : Christ crucified, as a
sacrifice for sin, and commended to the soul by the
illumination of the Holy Sphit.
In this particular, the Bible stands alone, and pre
eminent, hke some mighty mountain towering above
the plain, high above aU other pretended revelations.
The remedy, by which the dread waywardness, and
wickedness of man's heart are removed, is the Bible's
o-wn. Untaught of God, man could not so much as
have imagined such a remedy possible. If, by some
chance, he had reached that idea, then his conscience
would have represented it as wholly improbable.
Finite, and guilty, and perplexed, how could he
have arrived at any such knowledge, as that revealed
in Christ ? God manifest in the flesh ; suffering as
man ; rising from the dead ; atoning, and interceding
for the chief of sinners — impossible ! And even so

SOUECES OP ITS POWEE. 275
must sinful men have reasoned, respecting the work
of the Holy Spirit on the penitent heart. Here was
a mystery too deep for all human understanding, or
discovery. But it is through this very mystery of the Spirit,
and of God manifest in the flesh, applied to the con
victed and penitent heart, that the soul is ever puri
fied from the love of sin, and made wilhng and
stable, in the love, and service of God. This is the
only sovereign bahn for sin, the only sure method of
salvation from disobedience, and death eternal.
Neither science, nor law, nor learning, nor the voice
of nature, heard like music in the deep places of the
soul, has ever yet accomphshed the renovation of the
soul. It is Christ crucified, that is the power of God,
and the wisdom of God to this grand end. The
savage, dwelhng in habitations of horrid cruelty,
has not been able to withstand it ; though guilty of
a thousand crimes, he has found peace and hope, by
faith in the Son of God. Idolatry, and every form
of human wickedness, has yielded to the charms of
the Cross of Christ. Its victories fiU every land.
There is not a saint in heaven, but owes his blessed
ness to the mystery of the cross ; for such is the pro
found death to aU hohness, superinduced upon the
heart, by transgression, that no means short of the

276 THE BIBLE.
blood of Christ, has ever sufficed to raise one poor
sinner from its wretched embrace. The sinner has
withstood all the convictions of his reason, all the
terrors of his conscience, aU the bounties of nature,
all the miseries of sin long endured ; but this — the
death of Jesus, an atonement for his sins, a pledge
of God's willingness to pardon and save him — this,
he has not been able to withstand. Oh ! the divine
power of the cross of Christ I It has wrought mira
cles, and alone can work the miracle of subduing,
and saving the soul, to the love and service of God.
And because this is the great theme of the Bible,
therefore it possesses a power over the world, at once
pecuhar, and pre-eminent. It is, in this respect, the
best Book in all the world.
Y. And summing up all its characteristics in one,
and in one sentence pointing to the grand source,
whence all its peculiar characteristics proceed, it is
the inspired Word of God.
Though good men -wrote it, and though it bears all
the marks of their mental peculiarities, so that it
really conveys the personal behef, and extended
reasonings of Job, Moses, Samuel, David, Ezra,
Isaiah, Daniel, Paul, and John ; yet, nevertheless,
there is in it, over and above all, the divine infaUi-

.SOUECES OF ITS POWEE. 277
bUity and energy of the Spirit of God, of Him who
made the soul, and at whose voice the soul is wont
to awake, as a harp at the touch of the minstrel.
The Bible is the Word of God, therefore it goeth
forth conquering, and to conquer among the nations ;
often attacked, but never defeated; outhving aU
opposition ; disarming prejudice ; converting its ene
mies ; claiming, because it is worthy of, universal
regard ; in courts of justice, in senates, in halls of
legislation, in the chamber of the dying, in semina
ries of learning, and at the family altar, everywhere,
the mightiest among the mighty ; pulling down the
strongest holds of Satan; giving strength to the
weak; hope to the oppressed, and joy to those in
sorrow ; not like any other book ; its powers for good
to man increasing, as the centuries sweep onward ;
guiding the nations as truly as individuals into the
paths of peace ; overthrowing the dominion of sin,
and imparting to aU who receive it, a blessed fore
taste of eternal life with God in glory. In the lan
guage of one who imitated with rare felicity, the
pious George Herbert, we say :
The Bible ! that's the Book, the Book indeed,
The Booli of books ;
On wMcb -who looks.
As he should do, aright, shall never need

278 THE BIBLE.
"Wish for a better Hght,
To guide him in the night ;
Or when he hungry is, for better food.
To feed upon,
Than this alone.
A Book, to which none may be compared
For excellence ;
Pre-eminence
Is proper to it, and cannot be shared.
Di-^inity alone
Belongs to it, or none.

APPENDIX.

APPENDIX.

ON MAXIMS.
In the chapter on Maxims we have said, that
every science has its maxims, or first principles.
This is true even of the science of law, supposed to
be one of the most shifting and uncertain of aU
departments of human knowledge ; and it may be
not out of place, to record some of these maxims, on
these pages, seeing they throw a strong light on the
subject of interpretation. From this record, it will
appear that whatever the science of law may be in
its practice, it is certainly well and deeply founded
in its principles. They bear on their face the im
press of sound sense, and are as self-evident as any
decisions of the human mind need be, to secure them 281

282 APPENDLX.
all due reverence. There has been a latent con
tempt for lawyers perhaps in the schools of theology ;
and perhaps it has been mutual, the disciples of one
science despising the peculiar pursuits of the disci
ples of the other. Now, while we defer to none in
our respect for men, whose chief business in life has
been the study of theology, we must be permitted to
say, that weighing well these maxims in the science
of law, we would most heartily rejoice were there no
other theories, or doctrines propounded from the
pulpit, but such as are consistent with them. Our
theology would suffer no damage, by letting go its
antique and somewhat infirm method of constructing
its systems, and taking instead, the system presented
in these fundamental truths of a much despised
science. In the case of theologians, the mind has apparently
wrought out a theory of religion, often under the
embarrassing infiuences of a vitious tradition, or with
a written instrument in view, many parts of which
have been misunderstood, and others most grievously
perverted. But in the case of teachers of law, the
mind has had in view simply its own innate sense of
right and wrong, the clear, honest decisions of an
impartial judgment, guided by a desire to enact that
which is just and equal, between man and man.
'The consequence has been, that while theologians.

ON MAXIMS. 283
in the name of religion and the Bible, have an
nounced and often adopted principles at manifest
war with common sense, and common justice, and
directly subversive of all equity even in the Divine
government, lawyers have stood firm as the advo-
vates of principles, which the understandings and
consciences of all men must receive at once as disin
terested, just, and true, calculated to work no injury,
and representing justice even in God, the Supreme
Lawgiver and Judge, as pure, incorruptible, and
jealous for the rights and happiness of the meanest
of His creatures.
We have not attempted to follow any distinct
method in the selection and arrangement of these
maxims. The Latin form has in some instances been
retained, with a translation. LEGAL MAXIMS.
1. Summa ratio est quse pro rehgione facit. If
in any case the laws of God and man are at variance,
the former are to be regarded as the higher law.
2. The law consists not in particular instances and
precedents, but in the reason of the law ; for reason
is the life of the law — 'Uay, the common law itself is
nothing else but reason.
3. The sense of the words of a law is to be inter-

284 APPENDIX.
preted according to their fair and ordinary meaning,
at the time of its enactment.
4. Optimus interpres legum consuetude. Custom
is the best interpreter of laws.
5. General words shall be aptly restrained accord
ing to the subject matter, or person to which they
refer. 6. Where a statute vnll bear two interpretations,
one contrary to plain sense, the other agreeable
thereto, the latter shall have the preference.
7. No statute shall be construed in such a maimer
as to be inconvenient, or against reason. A latent
ambiguity may be removed by evidence. In the
absence of ambiguity, no exposition shall be made,
which is opposed to the express words of the instru
ment. It is not allowed to interpret where there is
no need of interpretation.
8. The law will judge of a deed by looking at the
whole. 9. He, who considers merely the letter of an
instrument, goes but skin deep into its meaning.
10. Nothing is so consonant with equity, as that
every contract should be dissolved by the same
means which rendered it binding.
11. No man shall take advantage of his own wrong.
12. He, who does an act through the medium of
another, is in law considered as doing it himself.

ON MAXIMS. 285
13. Necessity is no law. Where the act is com
pulsory and not voluntary, and where there is not a
consent and election on the part of the doer, the law
charges no man with guilt.
14. The law cannot confer a favor on one to the
loss and injury of another. An act in law shaU
prejudice no man.
15. The law shaU not, through the medium of its
executive capacity, work a wrong.
16. The practice of the court, is the law of the
court. 17. When the court cannot take judicial notice of
a fact, it is the same as if the fact had not existed.
Quod non apparet, non est.
18. Lex semper dabit remedium. There is no
wrong in law without a remedy.
19. It were infinite for the law to consider the
causes of causes and their impulsions, one of another;
therefore it contenteth itself with the immediate
cause, and judgeth of acts by that, without looking
further. 20. The act of God injures no man.
21. The law does not seek to compel a man to do
that which he cannot possibly perform.
22^ Ignorance of the law does not excuse.
23. The law, in some cases, judges of a man's
previous intentions by his subsequent acts.

286 APPENDIX.
24. It is a principle of natural justice that the
intent and the act must both concm- to constitute the
crime. 25. Whosoever grants a thing, is supposed, also,
tacitly to grant that without which the grant itself
would be of no effect.
26. Nemo punietur sine injuria. Punishment
follows crime only ; the innocent go free.
27. Hsereditas nunquam ascendit. Heirship does
not ascend but descend.
28. That which cannot be done directly, cannot
be done indirectly.
29. The presumption of innocence shaU stand
until guilt is proved.
30. Ubi eadem est ratio, eadem est lex. Like
reasons make hke laws.
31. The express mention of one thing, implies the
exclusion of all others. Eom. xiv., 12. " So then,
every man shall give account of himself unto God."
32. Nemo debet bis puniri pro uno delicto. No
man ought to be punished twice for the same
offence. 33. Dolus circuitu non purgatur. However long
a fraud may run, it is still a fraud.
How admirably many of these legal maxims apply
to the science of sacred interpretation, and to the
whole groundwork of rehgion! How clear the

ON MAXIMS. 287
vein of sound common sense and justice running
through them ! As axioms they spring naturally
from the primary conceptions and decisions of the
human mind ; and, therefore, they cannot but touch
the soul of aU truth. Framed in distinct view of
the relations existing between man and man, they
throw a strong and steady hght on many of the
deepest problems of the divine moral government,
and on the relations of man universally with his
Creator and Judge. Eeason is stamped upon them,
and that stamp gives them value and currency over
the whole domain of truth. Would theologians but
acquaint themselves thoroughly -with these maxims,
they would assuredly be saved from adopting some
of the absurdities into which they faU, in reference
to the higher science of Eeligion. For, although
there is no Gospel in mere law, yet, the moral law
of the Bible and its principles constitute the sub
stantial and immovable basis on which the Gospel
stands. There is no comprehending the need of the
Gospel, but through a knowledge of that law. " By
the law is the knowledge of sin ;" and the know
ledge of sin brings with it, the knowledge of the
need of a Saviour. Hence, to go astray in our potions
of the law, is to necessitate our going astray in
respect to the Gospel. The interpretation of the
the law, and of man's abilities under the law,

288 APPENDIX.
of the penalties by which it is sustained, and
of the grounds on which the guilt of its violation
is charged on man, are points of fundamental impor
tance. To fail to discover the meaning of the Bible,
on any of these matters, is a grievous error in a
minister of the Gospel ; to present precisely the
meaning of the word of God, on these various
topics, is to possess the sword of the word of God,
and to wield it for the conviction and conversion of
the souls of men.
We cannot refrain from the refiection how plainly
these first principles in the science of law, refute
that absurd dogma in which some theologians take
such strange delight, viz., that the race of mankind
existed, sinned, and was condemned in the sin and
person of Adam. It would be a new thing under the
sun for such ideas to be uttered in courts of justice.
Nor can their utterance in class-rooms be accounted
for on any other ground than that of theologians
claiming for themselves privileges granted to no
other class of men ; among which is the privilege
of saying what is intrinsically at variance with
reason, without the inconvenience of having their
sayings doubted.

HOW TO PEOVB A DOCTEINE. 289

n.
WHAT IS rr TO PEOVE A DOCTEINE FEOM SCEIPTUEB ?
This is an important and practical question ; and
we shall proceed here to give it an answer, because
of its direct bearing on our main subject of inter
pretation. 1. To prove a doctrine from Scripture, it is not
enough that we quote a text, or texts, which sound
like the doctrine. The sound of Scripture may be
the very opposite of the sense of Scripture. It
would not profit a doctrine to have the mere sound
of a text in its favor, while the sense of the same
text condemned it. Acts viii. 38, "They went
both down into the water," soimds as if baptism was
by immersion ; but it does not prove it. Matt. xxvi.
26, " This is my body," sounds as though transub-
stantiation were taught in Scripture ; but it does not
prove it. Heb. vi. 6, " If they shaU fall away,"
sounds as if the doctrine of Christians faUing from
grace and perishing in heU, were iildeed true ; but
13

290 APPENDIX.
it does not prove it. Eom. viu., 7, " Because the
carnal mind is enmity to God," sounds as though the
mind itself were sinful, and essentially hatred
towards God ; but it merely proves that the actions
of the mind, in the case of the sinner, are opposed
to God. Matt, xvi., 18, " Thou art Peter, and on
this rock I will build my church," is often quoted to
prove that the church is founded on Peter. Alas !
if it had been, it had long since perished. " As in
Adam all die " — 1 Cor. xv., 22, sounds as though aU
mankind were seminally, legaUy, personally alive in
Adam, and died in his death ; but no train of ideas
was so infinitely distant from the thoughts of the
Apostle. According to his meaning, transparent oiji
the very face of his words, in their proper connec
tion, no such absurd transcendentahsms can be got
out of them. Something more than sound is
required to prove a doctrine from Scriptm-e.
2. It is not enough to quote passages quoted by
others. This is blindly trusting to authority ; but if
we may judge from some conspicuous examples,
authority in such matters is very like a broken reed.
The Westminster theologians quote James iii, 2,
" in many things we offend all," to prove that no man
can keep the commandments of God; it proves,
simply that aU men sin ; but is wholly silent as to
their inability. By the same theologians, 1 John

how to PEOVE A DOCTEINE. 291
v., 7, is quoted to prove the doctrine of the Trinity ;
and yet that passage, it is well known, does not
belong to John's Epistle at aU. Jas. v., 16, "Con
fess your faults one to another," is quoted to prove
the doctrine of the confessional ; but it actuaUy dis
proves it, by proving that Christians are to acknow
ledge their faults to one another, without reference
to priests. Eom. u., 11, "There is no respect of
persons with God," is quoted to prove the salvation
of all men ; it simply means that God does not pre
fer Jews to Gentiles, but is equally just to all.
1 Tim. ii, 6, " There is one God and one Mediator
between God and men, the man Christ Jesus," is
quoted to disprove the divinity of our Lord ; it
proves only his humanity, and says nothing about
his divinity. So it requires something more than
the mere repetition of oft quoted texts to prove a
doctrine from the word of God.
3. Neither is it sufficient to quote a text proving
only something implied in the doctrine. A thing
implied in a doctrine is not the doctrine.
There lies before us the examination sermon of
the Eev. Naph. Daggett, D.D., professor of divi
nity in Yale College, in 1766 ; and also his Latin
exegesis, written out legibly and very neatly in his
own hand-writing, and now more than one hundred
years old. The latter is on the question, " Did the

292 APPENDIX.
human soul of Christ exist previous to the incarna
tion ?" The author takes the affirmative, and quotes
Col. i, 15, " The first bom of every creatm-e ;" John
xvii., 5, " 0, Father, glorify thou me with thine
own self with the glory which I had with thee
before the world was ;" John vi, 62, " What and if
ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was
before," to prove his doctrine. But though these
texts do indeed prove certain things implied in the
pre-existence of Christ, previous to the incarnation,
they by no means prove the pre-existence of his
human soul.
The same imperfect logic is very common. For
instance, to prove that the sin of our first parents is
laid to the charge of all their posterity, a text is
quoted to prove all men sinners. But all men may
be sinners, in many ways, without its being true
that God charges them all with the guUt of the first
sin. Again. To prove that Christians actuaUy faU
away in many cases, and perish in heU, texts are
quoted (we suppose because no others can be found)
proving that Christians may possibly faU away and
perish. You have not proved any man a thief, by
proving his ability to steal. So of the divinity of
our Lord ; you have not disproved it, by quoting
one, or any number of texts proving that he was
man. For one text, and there are many such,

HOW TO PEOVE A DOCTEINE. 293
asserting that he was God, settles the question. To
prove some shred, or fragment of a doctrine is not
enough. When the ostrich hides its head in the
sand, it is not quite covered, from the sight, nor safe
from the arrow of the hunter. Alas ! how often men
play the ostrich, with their doctrines and the Bible.
4. To prove a doctrine from Scripture, you must
find the sense of Scripture, asserting the whole doc
trine, in the same, or eqiuvalent terms, in all its
length and breadth, clearly and not in such a way
as to require any labored efforts to make the proof
appear. The doctrine and the Scripture must be
one and the same proposition, in sense, and not in
words only. This perfect agreement, or coincidence
between the proof and the thing to be proved, is the
only solid foundation on which aU doctrines must
rest. It may indeed turn out that you wiU find it neces
sary to remove some ambiguity from the text, or some
objection alleged on the strength of its authority ;
but, if there are texts plainly and unequivocally
asserting the doctrine, to be foimd, these are always
to be taken in preference to any others. For any
process of interpretation, however well conducted,
¦wiU throw a shade of doubt on the point to be
proved. There is a natural and strong conviction
in the minds of most men, that perspicuity and

294 APPENDIX.
directness belong to the Word of God, dispensing
with aU elaborate efforts to explain it.
If the doctrine to be proved passes by a name not
known in the Bible, a name perhaps, that has arisen
in controversy, or through convenience, then it may
be necessary to state it in its simplest elements, so
that the quotations from Scripture may exactly
cover it. Thus the doctrine of the Trinity is not
known by that name in the Bible, but when we
state it in its simplest form, it is precisely covered
and proved by Matt, xxviu., 19, " In the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." So
also, of the doctrine of total depravity. It is not
found in Scripture under that name ; but it is estab
hshed fully by the words — " There is not a just man
upon earth, that doeth good and sinneth not ;"
" There is none righteous, no not one."
To prove a doctrine then, from the Bible, we must
establish a manifest oneness of meaning between the
Scripture and the doctrine. Unless this is done,
nothing is done. Nor can we refrain from saying,
that aU our investigations into confessions of faith,
have deeply impressed us with the conviction, that
in this respect, they are remarkably deficient. They
often quote passages constituting no proof of their
doctrines whatever. Much of the quotation in the
pulpit is also of the same character. It is a standing

HOW TO PEOVE A DOCTEINE. 295
complaint that candidates for the ministi-y are defi
cient in this particular ; and the occasion of it, pro
bably is, the purely metaphysical method pursued
in theh instruction.
This is a subject deser-ving the special attention
of all Sabbath school teachers and. students of the
Bible. No attainment is so earnestly to be desired,
as that of being able to quote directly and pointedly
the proof texts of all our doctrines, from the Scrip
tures. It is an indispensable qualification of every
religious teacher. How much evil is done, how
many good opportunities are lost, for lack of it !
With what power does the sermon appeal to the
hearer's heart, when the perfect harmony between
it and the Bible is made cleai-ly and undeniably to
appear.

296 APPENDIX.

m.

OTHEE SYSTEMS.

It formed no part of our original design to speak
of the labors of others, only in the most general
terms ; yet it may serve as some apology for what
we have attempted, in this treatise, and as a criterion
of our correctness, to notice somewhat briefiy, the
rules laid down by some recent writers on this
science. In our sketch of the history of Interpreta
tion, it .was manifest, the importance of having a
general system of principles was very early under
stood. All indeed, who have made any serious
attempt to study the Bible, have confessed the value
of such a system.
It was only after we had completed our list of
Axioms and Eulea, in this treatise, that the desire
arose in our mind to know what principles had been
proposed by interpreters in Great Britain and this
country, from the revival of Biblical study in the
last century, to our own times. This would bring

OTHEE SYSTEMS. 297
the progress of the science more directly under our
eye ; and enable the student and reader to judge of
the various principles which have been, from time
to time, employed, by the leading expositors of the
Word of God.
Our chapter must not run to an unreasonable
length, and therefore we shaU select only a few
names, as a specimen of others, more or less known
in the religious and hterary world.
DE. JOHN BEOWN.
He was the cotemporary of Doddridge, and Dod
dridge immediately succeeded Matthew Henry,
deservedly known as the " Great Commentator."
Brown, in his self-interpreting Bible, a work which
keeps its place yet in the hands of thousands, has
given a series of rules for the work of interpretation.
He was probably led, both to the idea of a self -inter
preting Bible, and to that of arranging a series of
exegetical laws, from the fact that neither Henry
nor Doddridge had condescended to any such under
taking. He was proverbially a sagacious and good
man ; whose sound common sense and cool judg
ment raised him to a level with the best critics and
expounders of the Bible. The foUowing are his
Eules, somewhat abbreviated.

298 APPENDIX.
1. Let us pray for the influence of the Holy Spirit.
2. Being renewed in our minds, we ought to
search the Bible.
3. We must earnestly study to reduce aU our
Scriptural knowledge to practice.
4. We must begin in an orderly manner, proceed
ing from the plain, to the obscure.
5. We must form in our minds a brief coUection
of the most plain histories, doctrines, laws, &c., that
they may serve as a criterion for our understanding
the others.
6. Not only must every passage be understood,
in harmony with the analogy of the faith, but
with the scope and tendency of the book, or chap
ter, where it is found.
7. Yarious texts must be compared.
8. We ought not to content ourselves with any
general view of any text, but search out what it
intends. 9. Christ being the great subject and end of
Scripture, we ought everywhere to search, if we can
find him.
10. As to the infinite mind of the Holy Spirit,
every subject and every event are at oncQ perfectly
in view, His words ought always to be understood in
the fullest latitude of signification, that the analogy
of the faith, and of the context, can admit.

OTHEE SYSTEMS. 299
11. It is necessary to have the principles of poe
try, and of prophecy, and of figurative language,
fixed on our minds.
12. Where the writers contradict each other, we
must labor to discover their harmony.
13. To obtain an exact knowledge of the Scripture,
it is necessary to know the geography of the country,
and the chronology, and history of the nation.
14. We must peruse the original Scripture, in
humility of mind.
On a review of these rules, we are disposed to
infer that their author had not entertained very dis
tinctly before his mind, the essential nature of a
rule of interpretation. A rule is something diverse
from a direction how to use it, or, a good advice how
to prepare our minds for the work of exegesis. It
must be a proposition, compelling our assent, as appro
priate to, and worthy of its object. It must have an
axiomatic force, so as to confirm our decisions, when
they are right, and reprove, and restrain us, when
they are wrong. Some of the above rules are cer
tainly not at aU fitted for a safe interpretation.
DE. SAMUEL DAVmSON.
Our limits compel us to pass to the notice of a liv
ing writer, Dr. Samuel Davidson, of England; who

300 APPENDIX.
has however given more attention to this science,
than any other individual in his denomination. He
is a thorough scholar, and deeply skilled in the
higher criticisms of the Bible. But it is quite doubt
ful, whether his heavy volume will commend itself
to the popular mind, as a satisfactory and useful help
to the interpretation of the Scriptm-es. Only one
section of 95 pages, out of 760, has been devoted to
the most important topic of the book — the statement
and illustration of the principles of interpretation.
And what is even more remarkable, when we come
to discover what these principles are, we find he has
but one ; expressed in one short sentence : " the
usus loquendi, or usage of the writers, must be ascer
tained." But without controversy, this must be a wonder
ful principle, if through its aid alone, the whole
Bible is to be explained. It must have an omnipo
tent effect, to accomphsh that, on which huge fohos
have been expended.
It is in truth but sending us to the study of the
usage of the Bible, before attempting to ascertain
what the Bible means. We must first be sure of the
usage, then we can proceed to interpretation. But
this is introducing us to a new science, in place of
instructing us in one that we desire to understand.
He was fully aware of this, and he has therefore

OTHEE SYSTEMS. 301
occupied by far the greater part of the section, in show
ing how the usage is to be ascertained. Doubtless it is
of very great importance to know the usus loquendi,'
but the practical question arises, would a person, for
instance, acquainted with the usage of the English
language, be, ipso facto, qualified for the interpreta
tion of any book, say on English jurisprudence?
We think not. There are many things, besides mere
roots, and uses of words, which enter into the science
of int-erpretation. There is the relation of one car
dinal truth to another, the relation of one argument
to another; and the primary meaning of words, a
thing in itself distinct from usage — and are all these
to be disregarded ? Who can make himself believe
that mere usage exhausts the whole science of inter
pretation ? when in truth it is only a mere accessory.
The merits of this treatise by Dr. Davidson, do
not lie in its presenting a safe and comprehensive
system of ultimate principles, such as must serve to
guide us in our attempts to understand the Sacred
Yolume. Its sketch of the history of the science, is
learned and interesting; and its quotations of the
Old Testament, in the New, are full and instructive ;
but the volume itself wiU not serve to popularize the
science of interpretation. Men of the schools should
lead the popular mind, and not be dead weights on
its progress ; they should make it fal; \n love with

302 APPENDIX.
the science, and not be for ever studying to remove
it out of the way of their comprehension.

G. J. PLANCK.
It may be weU to select one German system of
modern times, as a specimen, at least, of a class
of interpreters in that country, greatly on the
increase, and in whose success we feel the deepest
fraternal interest. We select that of Prof. G. J.
Planck, translated by Dr. Turner, of New York.
His principles are :
1. Seek the hteral sense of every passage, as it
must be afforded, either by the general usage, or by
one peculiar to the writer.
2. That is always the true sense of the sacred
writer, which, either alone, or at least, as the most
natural sense, could be suggested by his expressions
to the men for whom he wrote.
3. Constant reference must be had to the character
and views, and known principles of the writer.
" These three general laws, comprise almost all that
can be prescribed to interpreters."
Such a system is too general to be useful. It dis
poses of the whole subject in too summary a manner,
to be satisfactory. It leaves us whoUy in the dai-k

OTHEE SYSTEMS. 303
on a multitude of points, where we most deeply feel
the need of some practical principles to guide us.
It is as though we were inquiring of this author, the
way to a certain place within a few miles, and he
should gravely give us direction to foUow the sun,
or keep the North pole in our eye.
B. B. EDWAEDS.
We retum to our own country ; and here, the first
name that should with propriety meet us, is that of
the true hearted chieftain, Moses Stuart. But apart
from his translation of Ernesti's dry and duU trea
tise, we are not aware, that he has left anything of
his ovm, in the shape of a series of rules in this
science. He was wont to say, "the interpretation
of language, is as natural to man, as the use of it,
and that the laws of interpretation are the practical
principles, by which men have always been guided,
in interpreting each other's lang-uage." Now the
coUecting and arranging of these principles, we
regard as a thing very much to be desired. It would
prove a guide to the inexperienced, and a check on
the unruly. Above aU, it would dehver us, after so
long a time, from the deadly influence of a mere tra
ditionary interpretation. For the principles of such
a system are fundamental, and independent of all

3C4 APPENDIX.
human authority ; they existed before the Fathers ;
and if the Fathers have interpreted the Bible con
trary to these principles, then we forsake the Fathers,
and cleave to the principles. Tliey only can guide
us right ; and by their help, we shall be able to give
a reason for the faith that is in us.
We are only sorry that the first of American Bib
hcal students, did not himself leave us such a sys
tem. His successor, B. B. Edwards, in an article on
the subject, gives us the following :
1. All true interpretation, is founded on grammar
and lexicography.
2. Biblical science recognizes the fundamental
importance of historical interpretation.
3. Another principle relates to the harmony of
the Scriptures, with the discoveries of natural science,
4. The Bible is to be interpreted in perfect consis
tency with the laws of the human constitution.
5. The interpreter must feel real sympathy with
the truths he is studying. '
As a logical apparatus, having in view the science
of Biblical interpretation, these principles are cer
tainly defective. As propositions, they are not suffi
ciently defined, to be of much practical value ; they
should have a sharper edge, to do good service in.
this work.

OTHEE SYSTEMS. 305

PEOF. A . NOETON.

He was a leader in his sect ; a man of polite learn
ing, and of some depth in the literature of criticism,
though not without some signs of being superficial,
and narrow in his views. Although the difference
between the foUowers of his creed, and the great
body of evangelical interpreters, are by Unitarians
sometimes said to arise in the very nature of truth
itself; yet on their own admission, many of these
differences are owing to the interpretations forced
on the Sacred Scriptures. The science of hermeneu
tics therefore, has not escaped their notice ; and they
have said, that by this means, they can successfully
overthrow the orthodox faith. Prof. Norton, in his
statement of reasons, for rejecting the orthodox
views of christian doctrine, presents us with the fol
lowing rules, by which we are to be guided, in
ascertaining the sense of the Scriptures :
1. Where the words are capable of more than one
meaning, the true meaning is to be determined,
solely by a reference to extrinsic considerations.
2. The words themselves can afford us no assistance
in determining the meaning intended by the
writers. 3. We may reject the hteral meaning of a passage,

S06 APPENDIX.
when we cannot pronounce with confidence, what is
its true meaning.
These are Unitarian principles of interpretation.
The first thought that arises in our mind, when
reflecting on them, is, with such a system of rules,
what must have been the author's creed ? Nay, with
such rules, could he have had any settled creed at
all ? His last principle puts the literal meaning in
every case, at the mercy of all who are unwilling to
receive it. If we are not confldent of its true mean
ing, we may reject it. Who, with any remaining
reverence for the Bible, would embrace such a prin
ciple of exegesis, as that ?
The second principle, is a denial of one of the
plainest of all facts, in respect to a revelation, viz. :
" the sufficiency of words, to convey the meaning of
an inspired writer." It was on this very principle,
unfortunately, but inevitably, that the author of
" God in Christ," alighted, when on his brief jour
ney from the faith of his fathers. His introduction
is an elaboration of the principles of Norton. Did it
not grow out of a kindred fact in both minds ? — the
'fact, that both refused to receive simpliciter the
inspiration of the record? If the words are of no
sufficient aid in respect to the meaning, where is the
meaning to be ascertained? In all honesty, to inter
pret the Bible on such principles, is practically to

OTHEE SYSTEMS. 307
renounce all candor, and affirm our purpose of inter
preting it according to our caprice only. Socinus
said of our Lord's divinity, " seeing the thing itself
cannot be, I take the least inconvenient interpreta
tion of the words ;" and this is an honest confession
of the cardinal principle of aU such errors as the
denial of the Godhead of the Saviour. They are
obliged to adopt it, or receive the doctrine they hate.
They say, "the thing cannot be," and revelation
itself is silenced. But we submit, is this reverential ?
Can faith in the Word of God consist with such
principles ? It were altogether more consistent with
the principles- of honesty for those who seriously
adopt such principles, to say at once, " the authority
of the Bible, we do not admit ;" for in that case, the
world would know where they stood. But this pro
fessing to submit to the Bible, and at the same
moment rebelling against its authority, is unworthy
of any sincere mind. Either the Bible is the stan
dard of faith, or it is not. If it is not, then there is
an end to all discussion on such points as those above
mentioned. But if it is, then in all its clear and unam
biguous statements, whether they be such as reason
can discover, or such as lie beyond the limits of its
powers, we are bound to the simple course of accept
ing them without a moment's hesitation. The very
highest honor and reverence belongs to the Bible ;

308 APPENDIX.
and we have yet to know the man, willing to accept
the supremacy and inspiration of the Bible, who did
not stand immeasurably removed from the creed of
Unitarianism. A chUd-like disposition in reference
to the reception of the plain and obvious sense of
the Scriptures, is a strait gate, through which no
Unitarian can enter, without casting away his beset
ting sin.

PEOF. MCLELLAND.
The latest book, in a systematic form, on this
science which we notice, is from the pen of Prof.
M'Clelland, of New Brunswick Seminary, N. J.
It has been adopted in one or two theological schools ;
although Dr. Davidson, of England, says of it, " It
need scarcely be said that it will not advance the
the science of hermeneutics, nor be very acceptable
to theologians. A great part of the subject, has
been left untouched." Sac. Her. p. 711.
There is an attempt at wit, in this book, which
strikes us as very much out of place. But we are
astonished, that out of 236 pages, only 146 are
devoted to the subject of interpretation ! A glance
at the maxims and rules, is all that our limits allow.
His maxims are four. 1. The object of interpreta
tion is to give the precise sense of the writers.

OTHEE SYSTEMS. 309
2. The method of interpreting the Bible, must be the
same which we apply to any other book. 3. The
sense of Scripture is (in general) one ; we must not
assign many meanings to a passage. 4. Interpreta
tion of Scripture requires suitable preparation.
His " special rules " are eleven. 1. Carefully
investigate the usus loquendi. 2. Examine the par
aUel passages. 3. The consideration of the author's
scope helps interpretation. 4. Examine the context.
5. We must know the character, age, sect, and other
peculiarities of the writer. 6. Let there be a con
stant appeal to common sense. 7. Study the tropes
and figures. 8. Attend to the Hebrew idioms.
9. Much of Scripture being prophetical, we should
acquaint ourselves with the nature and laws of that
kind of composition. 10. AUow no interpretation,
that wiU cast a shade of doubt over the perfect
purity of our Lord's teachings, or those of his
apostles. 11. We must study and apply the art of
criticism. It does not become us to say, all that might be
said, of these maxims and special rules. We leave
them, rather, to the judgment of our readers. But
we cannot dismiss this portion of our book, without
an expression of a conviction already uttered, that
many who have written on this important subject,
have not settled in their own minds, what is the true

310 APPENDIX.
nature and form of a law in this science. Proposi
tions, in the above instance, are placed among the
maxims, which have no relation to the science, what
ever ; and mere advice is set down among the
special rules, as though it were a first truth, or a
decision of universal common sense, to which all
must submit I Surely this is not what the science of
interpretation demands. Neither the nature of the
case, nor the laws of sound logic, require any such
course as this. From the above imperfect treatise,
as well as from some other facts, we strongly incline
to the belief, that this cardinal science, on which so
much depends, in reference to the spread of the
Gospel, and the victory of the kingdom of God, over
the ignorance and perverseness of men, is but very
httle understood ; there is certainly very much to be
done, even in this country, before it is made to
occupy the pre-eminence which belongs to it, both
in the pulpit, and in the theological seminary. The
blessings of a grateful Church, will follow the man,
who wins for the science of interpretation, its proper
place, and becoming honor, in the minds of those
who love the Bible, and who receive it with all
joy, as the infallible Word of God.

PEESENT STATE OP EXEGESIS. gll

lY.

THOUGHTS ON THE PEESENT STATE OF EXEGETICAL IN-
STEUCTION IN OUE THEOLOGICAL SEMENAEIES.
The relation of the instruction given in our theo
logical seminaries, to correct interpretation of the
Scriptures, cannot but be very close. It is aU but
mathematically certain, that the student will carry
with him into the sacred desk, the principles and
spirit of his instructor in this science ; so that for all
the purposes of a high moral infiuence on the minis
try, and on the people, whom the ministry serve in
the Gospel, there is no station so full of responsi
bihty, none so important, in its influences for good,
or for evil, as the station of the professor of sacred
hermeneutics. He gives currency to whatever laws
of intei-pretation he may adopt ; and they find their
way speedily, into every Christian congregation in
the land. K he inspires his pupils with right prin
ciples ; if he infuses into their minds a right enthu-

312 APPENDIX.
siasm for the science itself; it is well, he has dis
charged his duty. But if, on the other hand, the
professor fails to kindle in the student's mind a pro
per zeal for this subject, if he wastes his time on
points of but little practical importance, if he pro
ceed in his instructions with more regard to details,
and the mere preliminaries of the science, and thus
leaves his scholars really ignorant of its grand and
fundamental principles, to begin the preaching of
the Gospel, without a familiar knowledge of the laws
by which the sense of the Word of God is to be
ascertained, he is altogether at fault, his influence is
injurious. We hold that, to the student of theology, this
science is decidedly the most important of aU. It is
the basis of all sound doctrine. There is no authority
for any doctrine from the pulpit, if it be not found
in the records of inspiration. To know that it is
there, is the student's only passport to the sacred
desk. He ascends that desk to preach the preach
ing that the Bible bids him. But how shaU he do
this, if he does not first understand the art of inter
preting the Bible ? If he fails in this respect, we
see not what authority he can have to opens his hps,
as an ambassador of Christ.
Here then arises, therefore, an important inquiry,
which we suggest with all deference : How, or by

PEESENT STATE OF EXEGESIS. 313
what methods, are our young men taught to inter
pret the Holy Scriptures ? This is not the question,
who are the instructors, and what are their quahfi-
cations ? If pressed to answer such an inquiry as
this last, we would say without hesitation, that some
of the profoundest scholars of the age occupy the
chairs of Biblical exegesis and literature, in our
theological seminaries. We can say more. At no
previous period have the subsidiary helps to Scrip
tural interpretation been so complete, nor so perfectly
within the" reach of aU interested in this noble study.
Never have the libraries of exegetical hterature
been so ample, as they are now. The grammars and
lexicons of the original languages of the Bible, have
arrived at a state of perfectness, such as no age of
the world has ever vtdtnessed. And never has the
importance of Biblical science been so universaUy
felt, and acknowledged by all classes.
The question, therefore, is not an irrelevant one.
It connects itself very closely with the subject of this
book, and with the interests of true and undefiled
religion. It is: by what methods are our young
men instructed in the important, and fundamental
science of ascertaining the meaning of the Word of
God? We desire that two things may be taken for
granted, in this inquiry : that there is a science,

314 APPENDIX.
strictly and properly called the science of interpreta
tion, with its axioms and laws, ascertained and
classified, or capable of being ascertained and classi
fied, like the axioms and laws of any other science ;
and that there is a class of men professedly engaged
in teaching this science. Our inquh-y is, as to the
methods these instructors pursue in the course of
their profession ? What are the facts in this case ?
In rejily, it may be stated, that the first thing in the
way of instruction in this science, to which the stu
dent's attention is directed, is the acquisition of the
Hebrew language. But the acquisition of the
Hebrew language is not necessarily connected with
the science of interpretation, in our view of the
matter, any more than the acquisition of any other
language whatever. It enables the student to read
the Scriptures in Hebrew, that is all ; or, we might
add, it enables him to judge of the correctness of
the common translations of the Bible, and perhaps
a better appreciation of the rhetorical force and
beauty of the Scriptures generally. But it certainly
does not impart to him the first maxim, or law of the
science of interpretation. With a perfect knowledge
of the Hebrew, equal to that of his mother tongue,
he is yet a stranger to the first elements of this
science. Do aU Jews, who, by their education,
speak and write Hebrew, as we speak and write

PEESENT STATE OF EXEGESIS. 315
English, understand the prmciples of interpretation,
just in vh-tue of their knowing the language in
which the Old Testament was written? Yerily no
one wiU pretend that they do. The acquisition of the
Hebrew is very weU in its place; but it is not
essentially necessary in the study of the particular
science before us ; at least, no more so, than is the
acquisition of the English itself.
But when some little progress is made by the stu
dent, in the rudiments of this ancient language, he
is then introduced, either to the reading of extracts,
or of the Hebrew Bible itself, as the second step in
his course. Of course, this is all well ; but even in
this exercise, the chief point is not the unfolding of
the principles of exegesis, in an orderly and logical
manner. The object is to perfect the pupil in the
grammar of the Hebrew language, to impart a
greater facUity in his pronunciation, and the correc
tion, it may be, of some loose phrase in our common
English translation. Up to this moment, there has
been no positive approach to the science itself. AU
this training, and it generally occupies many months,
the student might have received in the common
school, without the least suspicion, that he was
receiving instruction in the science of interpretation.
The meanwhile, the same course has been pro
gressing in reference to the New Testament in

316 APPENDIX.
Greek ; with this difference, that the student is sup
posed to be already master of this language. He is
therefore called on, at the outset, to translate cer
tain passages, of a particular book in course ; and
having a lexicon of the New Testament, he is ques
tioned as to the different meanings there given, of
the most important words occurring in the text. As
a part also of this exercise, extemporaneous remarks
are made by the professor, and in latitudes, where lib
erty of speech is freer than in others, questions are put
by the student, in respect to the meaning of the pas
sage, or of the more prominent difficulties it contains.
The same course is pursued, though if memory
serves, not so frequently, nor with such minute
ness, in the case of the Hebrew Bible. For in this
latter instance, the pupils rarely attain to the same
facility, which they exhibit in regard to the Greek.
The Hebrew language is more fugitive, and difficult
of acquisition ; and students have less disposition to
discuss difficulties, where a thorough knowledge of
the language is wanting. To get through a tolerably
ready translation, and showing the construction of
the chief words, is usually the extent of their
anxiety. Now, it is admitted, that these exercises and
extemporaneous criticisms, by the professor, are all
necessary and proper enough. In their nature and

PEESENT STATE OF EXEGESIS. 317
tendency, they verge towards the science ; but that
is alL We cannot be in error, when we say, that
with all this preparation, the teaching of the science
has not yet begun. This method is not that of the
chair of Christian doctrine. Its incumbent would
first of all, divide his subject into its natural
divisions. He would confine himself and his pupils
to the proof of the particular doctrine, which it
might be his design to establish ; and thus he would
proceed, until he had gone over the whole system in
all its parts ; presenting each and all its divisions, as
skillfully, and with as much power of argument and
iUustration, as he could command. He surely would
not direct his pupils, Bible in hand, to read certain
portions of the Scriptures, the discourses of our
Lord, for example, expatiate on some of their doc
trinal bearings, and then dismiss his class, as fully
instructed in the science of systematic theology.
And yet it might be, that in this way, the entire
systematic platform of doctrines might be surveyed,
and much useful instruction imparted. But if any
professor of systematic divinity should pursue this
method, and none other, he would certainly faU in
estabhshing his reputation, as a skillful teacher of
Christian doctrine.
Since this treatise has been in process of composi
tion, we have taken care to inquire of several, who

318 APPENDIX.
had passed the usual term of study, under the very
best instructors, as to the methods pursued, and have
been uniformly answered, either that they pursued
no particular system, or that they did not distinctly
recollect, whether they had studied the science at
all ! The science, as such, had not been impressed
on their attention. Here is the secret, we beheve,
of the fact, that so many preachers fail in the point
of connecting their sermons, distinctly and clearly
with the text, which they announce. And in this
very particular also, it appears to us, lies another
secret, viz. :' the inefficiency of the great majority
of discourses, delivered from the pulpit. The power
of any discourse, for the purposes of convincing and
converting the soul, hes, more than anywhere else, in
the clear and undeniable foundation of the discourse
on the authoritative Word of God. If the sermon
rest on the text, and cannot be disjoined from it,
then it will both interest and impress the hearer.
But is it any wonder, that this is not the case; with
a vast majority of discourses, when the art of deter
mining the meaning of the text is but imperfectly
understood ? because not adequately elaborated, and
set forth to their comprehension.
It has been often noticed, as a matter of complaint,
that theological students, in many instances, are not
apt at the quotation of proof texts from the Scrip-

PEESENT STATE OF EXEGESIS. 319
tures. But important as the abihty and aptness to
quote proof texts undoubtedly is — that they should
understand the science of interpretation, is vastly
more important. What other qualification in a min
ister, can take the place of this ? And to us, nothing
is more plain, than the mere knowledge of Greek
and Hebrew, however perfect, can never impart this
one indispensable attainment. The knowledge of all
the languages on earth, could not impart it. It is to
be taught scientificaUy, and studied apart, as a thing
of the first importance, toward which, the mind is to
be directed in aU its disciplined energy.
The want of logical method is what we deplore.
It is against a fragmentary, and merely rudimental
system, that we protest. The details of verbal criti
cisms, in our view, are wholly out of place, as a
substitute for the statement, defence, and Ulustration
of the fundamental laws of this precious science.
But lectures are also given to the classes. This is
a step in the right direction ; yet, if in these lectures,
the whole subject is discussed, it is more than any
thing our experience has afforded. If they attempt
an exposition of the science in a comprehensive and
logical form, independently of the mere grammar
of the Scriptures, and exhibithig the essential facts
and laws, on which all men must consistently pro
ceed, in their attempts to reach the sense of the

320 APPENDIX.
Word of God — it would be perfectly satisfactory ; it
would meet every demand of reason, in the case.
In reply, we heard it once said : " We confess, there
is no regular system of rules taught, yet the science
of interpretation is taught." But if this were true,
here then would be an exception by itself; for in
respect to no other branch of knowledge, can the
same thing be said. Who would think of teaching
logic, or natural philosophy, or mathematics, or any
other science whatever, without a system ? without
regular laws, fixing the boundaries of the various
particulars, and laying down principles for the
s;overnment of the learner.
To impart sound and orthodox explanations of cer
tain passages of Scripture, to pass under review all
the difficult passages of the Bible, to guide the stu
dent to a thorough acquaintance with the original
language in which the Bible was written, may all be
well enough ; but it is not teaching the science
of exegesis. When scholars pass through just such
a training, and then come to the actual duties of
the sacred desk, they have the art of interpreting
the Scriptm-es yet to learn. If a vigorous mind
carry them forward to a thorough acquisition of this
science, in its useful and practical form, it is well ;
they make useful, progressive, and faithful ministers
of the glorious Gospel ; if indifference in regard to

PEESENT STATE OF EXEGESIS. 321
the matter take possession of them, they must lack
one of the most effective qualifications of the sacred
office. But it does stand to all reason, that, giv-
ipg up, as they do, three whole years, to the work
of fitting themselves to be expounders of the Bible,
" workmen not needing to be ashamed," they should
be called upon to look this science of interpretation
directly in the face. It should be insisted on, that
the acquisition of the original languages is merely
preliminary, and in no sense a substitute for the
study and acquisition of the axioms and laws, of a
profound and fundamental hermeneutics.
Neither should students be permitted to suppose,
that any degree of proficiency in the knowledge of
languages, will be regarded as equivalent for the
knowledge of this science. They should be held
strictly to the fact, that it is a science, having all its
axioms and laws, as determinate, and as sharply dis
tinct, as those of any other science whatever. Even
systematic divinity itself, however well understood,
does not dispense with the logical pursuit and
thorough acquisition of this science. Hermeneutics
is the first, and altogether the most necessary of the
sciences, connected with the Christian ministry ; and
no terms can be found, in which its importance can
be properly set forth. On the soundness of the
principles laid down as its fundamental laws,
14*

322 APPENDIX.
depends, all the purity, consistency, and effectiveness
of those expositions, which proceed from the pulpit ;
and our heart can pray for no greater blessing to our
country and the world, than a wise, well-ordered,
and Scriptural system of interpretation, inaugurated
in our theological schools, and urged upon the
awakened attention, of all candidates for the sacred
office of the ministry. May divine wisdom be
poured into the lips of our instructors, and grace
from the eternal throne guide them, in the responsi
ble duties which devolve upon them, as teachers of
the mysteries of God, to those who go out from
them, as the teachers of a wayward, and erring gen
eration. Amen.

THE END,

BOOKS PUBLISHED BV CHAS. SCRIBNER.

4 J^ew Edition He-vised and Enlarged^ with a Sc^^ptural Index ri-nd Pur<iUel Tables,
WEST'S ANALYSIS OF TH.£; HOLY BIBLE.
BY BEY. NATHANIEL WEST, D.D.
& Complete Analysis of the Holy Bible, containing the whole of the New
and Old Testaments, collected and arranged systematically in thirty
books (based on the work of the learned Talbot), together with an In
troduction, setting forth the character of the work, and the immense
facility this method affords for understanding the Word of God. Also,
three different Tables of Contents prefixed, and a General Index sub
joined, so elaborated and arranged in alphabetical order, as to direct at
once to any subject required. 1 vol., royal 8vo., about 1000 pages.
Price, $5 00 ; iu half calf, $6 50 ; in morocco, extra, $0 00.
A single glance at the Table of Contents and Index exhibits at once the great value and
availability of the work. In the arrangement, besides the Alphabetical Index, there are
thirty Books — two hundred and eighty-iive chapters, and altogether four thousand one
hundred and forty-four sections, and the whole so complete as to render every portion of j
the work — and thus of the whole Bible — at the perfect command of the inquirer. Nu other
work but a complete analysis of the Bible can do this, as it respects every subject taught
in the Book of God, and hitherto no such analysis has appeared in tliis country.
Circulars containing testimonials from the following clergymen, can be had on applica
tion: Eev. Gardiner Spring, D.D., Eev. John M. Kreba, D.D., Eev. E. W. Dickinson, D.D., Eev,
Joseph McEboy, D.D., Eev. N. Murray, D.D., Eev. .Tames M. Macdonald, Kev. James W
Alexander, D.D., Kev. W, "W. Philips, D.D., Rev. David EUiot, D.D., Rev. M. W. Jacobus,
D.D., Eev. H. A. Boardman, D.D., Eev. J. N. MoLeod, D.D., Rev. John Knox, D.D., Rev.
C. C. Van Arsdale, D.D., Kev. George W. Bethune, D.D., Rev. Thomas De Witt, D.D., Rev.
N. J. Marselus, D.D., Eev. A. T. McGill, D.D., Eev. E. P. Swift, D.D., Rev. Wm. Paxton,
Eev. 0. H. Miner, 3ev. Wm. M. Engles, D.D., Eev. Joseph H. Jones, D.D., Rev. Wm. Neil,
D.D., Eev. G. W. Musgrave, D.D., Rev. David McKinney, D.D., Rev. Lewis Cheeseman,
D.D., Eev. Wm. D. Schenck, Rev. Francis^ D. LaJd, Eev. Daniel Gaston, Eev. John Ley
bum, D.D., Eev. C. C. Jones, D.D., Eev. Daniel McKinley, D.D., Eev. C. Van Eensselaer,D.n
From the commendatory notices given by the above clergymen, the foUowing extracts
have been selected
The Eev. David Elliot, D.D. L.L.D., of Western Theological Seminary, in an extended
notice, says :
"I feel great freedom in recommending it to the patronage of the Christian public as a
work ot no common merit. Its comprehensive plan, embracing the whole Bible ; its admi
rable arrangement reducmg it to its elementary principles ; its exact and scientiSo adj ust
ment of topics, assigning to each its proposition ; its lucid exhibition of God's unaduller.
atei truth, connecting its related parts in one distinct point of vision, combine to render the
work of one incalculable value to the careful student of the Word of God. With this volume m
his hand, the unlettered Christian, as well as the instructed Theologian, can learn at once,
and in a very brief space of time, what the Word of God says in reierenoe to any subject
«* either Faith or Practice."
Ihe Eev. M. W. Jacobus, D.D., Western Theological Seminary :
"It is a plain, a sincere, and most hitelligent effort to reduce the entire teachings of the
Holy Scriptures in a methodical form, with no party or theory to promote by the under
taking. It is that kind of help to Bible study which the merchant adopts in the I«dger.'
It posts up all the things of all the Inspired Books, and all who deal in Scripture truth wiU
and this volume an auxiliary to their daily studies. It 'gathers tlie fragments that notli-
toK be lost.' •'

west's analysis ot THE HOLY BIBLE.

NOTICES OF WEST'S ANALYSIS OF THE HOLY BIBLE.
«ie Rev. Alex. T. McGill, D.D. --
" This book is just a broad margin for us, profoundly elaborated, and for the most pan
iudiciou--^ly fiUed ; the best of the kind perhaps ever pubhshed in any language. Its great
eonvenience will make it welcome. But the best benefit it brings is the compreheusive
manner in which it indicates the meamng of God's Word at once, by the topic under which
the text is arranged, and the collation with which it is illuminated by the parallel passages
fully written out for the reader."
The Rev. Wm. M. Paxton :
"He presents the Bible as a complete armory, with each weapon of warfare so con-
reniently classified, and so distizhstly labeled, that any one can arm himself at will for aoj
conflict." The Rev. Gardiner Spring, D.D. :
"I have no doubt that this 'Complete Analysis of the Holy Bible 'Is the best thing of the
kind now extant, or likely to be produced."
"This work needs no commendation. The most cursory glance at its general struc
ture, will show ministers especially, that they cannot afford to dispense with it. It ifl
nothing less than the entire Word of God, classified into books, sections, chapters, and
80 arranged, that under each topic may be found all that the Scriptures say on the sub
ject. The entire passages are given, so that they need not be looked out, as where a con
cordance is used. Such a book will therefore save time, and enrich more thoroughly with
the treasures of the Bible the preacher's discipurses. Sabbath School Teachers will also
find it an invaluable aid, as indeed, will all who wish to have the Word of God interpret
itself for their instruction and edification." — Presbyteritm.
"It will be invaluable to the Clergyman or Sabbath School Teacher, and full of interest
and instruction to all who desire to master the contents of this blessed volume. Thft
Indexes are exceedingly full and accurate, and greatly enhance the value of the book."—
N, y. Evangelist.
"This very valuable volume is a work of immense labor and love. It is only necessary
to look over the indexes of this large and important volume, and to become possessed of
the plan and its execution on any one subject, to be convinced that the whole work is of
great merit and value. — N. T. iTidependent."
"This is oie of the most important works which has ever appeared in Ulustration of the
Holy Scriptures. The compiler deserves, and will doubtless receive the thanks of the
whole of Christendom for his important work, as its arrangement is applicable to the Bible
in any language and any version." — Literary World.
"The whole of the Bible is classified and divided under appropriate headings, so that
this work is not only an analysis but a concordance and reference Bible of the fullest order.
We feel that we cannot commend it +00 warmly. It is the best of pulpit assistants, and a
hook for every family that delights to search the Scriptures. " — Chrisiia/n IiUeUigencer.
"It is the Bible itself— the entire Bible, arranged according to subjects. The arrange
ment is simple, and one great advantage is, that the passages cited are printed entire, ob
viating the necessity of turning to the Bible. It fills an important space which was not
occupied before by any work sufficiently accurate and comprehensive." — ^. T. ObseT'ver.
"The successful extension of the plan on which this work is constructed, could have
only proceeded from Herculean labor and painstaldng. It will aid the religious reader u
weU as the professional student." — N. Y. TrSmne.
" The work seems to us to be next to the Bible itself — ^the most valuable of all books to
ilergymen, and almost equally indispensable to jurists and all others who ever have occa-
¦ion to fortify an argument by Scriptural authority. Dr. West has produced a work wbioc
will fona an essential part of every library."— iV. Y. Commercial.

3 9002 00488 7452

Mm