THE PROPHETS AND THE PSALMS," and in the New Testament, the FOUR GOSPELS,' which relate to the history of our Lord's incarnation, ministry, and glorification, and record his very words; together with the book of REVELATION, which the Apostle John calls "the revelation and testimony of Jesus Christ," and which he says was "signified" to him, or as the original word tonμavev means, symbolically shown to him. These Scriptures, then, are contradistinguished from all human compositions whatsoever; and while the histories recorded are all, in the general sense, literally true,10 yet the whole is capable of being interpreted by the known, determinable, harmonious, universal, and unerring law on which they rest, and according to which they were written.

11

That the term Gospel (or "glad tidings," or "news that is well") is taken to mean the Four Gospels, and that these were always regarded as, in some sense, more holy than the Epistles, is evident

both the historical and ceremonial parts of Holy Ghost 'parted, and became into four his five books."-Porta Mosis, p. 164.

"The entire Old Testament is a connected series of mysteries, relating to Christ, who, though one, is represented by various types and emblems."-De amor et Cult. in Spir. et Ver., p. 31.

8 The Son of Sirach seems to allude to this threefold division of the Scriptures, in the preface to the book of Ecclesiasticus, written about 130 years before the Christian era, where he mentions "The Law, the prophets, and the other books of our Fathers."-WOLF, Bib. Heb., vol. i., p. 255.

"Tatian, a little after the middle of the second century, composed a Harmony of the Gospels; the first of the kind which had been attempted, which he called Diatesseron [of the four], which demonstrates that at that time there were four gospels, and no more, of established authority in the Church. Irenæus, not long after, mentions all the Evangelists by name, arranging them according to the order wherein they wrote, which is the same as that universally given them throughout the Christian world to this day, assigning reasons why the gospels can be neither fewer nor more. Early in the third century, Ammonius also wrote a harmony of the four gospels." - Campbell's Prelim. Diss. to the Four Gospels, vol. i., p. 134. See also Westcott's Canon of the New Test., p.

355.

"The gospel writers were four-but the gospel is one" (Origen, Cont. Marcion, sec. i., p. 9). "Like that river which went out of Eden to water the garden, it was by the

heads.'"—Burgon's Sermons, p. 62. [Cyprian uses the same figure.]

Origen, as quoted by Eusebius, presbyter of Alexandria, also says "The four evangelists alone are received without dispute by the whole Church of God."-Hist. Eccl., lib. vi., cat. 25. Augustine, who flourished A. D. 398, writes that "The four gospels have the highest authority."-Lardner's Gospel Hist., vol. xii., p. 302.

10 By finding a spiritual sense in the Word of God, Hilary will not allow that historical truth is weakened or betrayed.—“In the beginning of our treatise we warned others against supposing that we detracted from the belief in transactions by teaching that the things themselves contained within them the outgoings of subsequent realities."

Comm. in Matt. vii., i., p. 640.

Cyril of Alexandria also says, "Although the spiritual sense be good and fruitful, yet what is historical should be taken as [true] history."-Comm. in Isa., lib. i., Orat. 4, vol. ii., pp. 113, 114.

"Remember," Tertullian remarks, "that when we admit of spiritual allegories, the true literal sense of the Scripture is not altered."

11"The Greek word for Gospel means glad tidings, good or joyful news. Our English word 'Gospel,' which is compounded of the Saxon word God-good, and spell-a history. narrative, or message, very accurately expresses the sense of the original Greek."— (See Junii Etym. Ang. and Parkhurst.)

12

first, from the circumstance that oaths from a period antecedent, at least, to the time of Justinian (A. D. 527), have been administered in the four Gospels; secondly, from the ancient form universally prevailing in the Christian Church so early as the third century, of ordaining Bishops to their sacred functions in which the book of the Four Evangelists was held open over the candidate's head; and, lastly, from the practice of the Church, in which a custom has long existed, and is even now retained, which, if it has any meaning, was designed to mark a greater degree of reverence for the Gospels in comparison with the Apostolic Epistles; for, the congregation is directed, in the rubric of the Church of England communion service, to stand while the holy Gospel is read, but to sit during the reading of the Epistles.13

Bishop Tomline thus writes on the inspiration of the entire Bible, in his Elements of Christian Theology:-" When it is said that the Sacred Scriptures are divinely inspired, we are not to understand that God suggested every word, or dictated every expression, nor is it to be supposed that they were inspired in every fact which they related, or in every precept which they delivered." "It is sufficient to believe that by the general superintendence of the Holy Spirit, they were directed in the choice of their materials, and prevented from recording any material error."

In what, then, does the difference consist between the view now propounded, and that which was held by this orthodox prelate of the Establishment, whose opinion on this topic has been echoed on all sides, and would, it is presumed, be admitted as a precise exposition of what is generally believed on the subject of inspiration throughout the Christian world? It consists in this: the Bishop's mode of interpretation, like ours, is strictly applicable to the Epistles, and such portions of the Word as are not included by the Lord in the text just noticed; but we believe, from evidence apparently irresistible,

12 Cyril, in his apologetical discourse to Theodosius, describing the Council of Ephesus, says: "The sacred synod being assembled in Mary's Church, had Christ himself for their head; for the Holy Gospel was as a solemn throne, preaching, as it were, to the venerable prelates, 'Judge ye righteous judgment!'"-Labbe, Concil. iii., p. 1044. Cited by Dr. Wordsworth.

13 In the Eastern churches, lights were carried before them when they were going to be read.

culty [viz., that of reconciling purely physical truths and scientific facts with the Bible]? I believe, by simply adopting a doctrine which is laid down in a passage from Reason and Knowledge, a book recently issued by Dr. Candlish: 'All that is in Scripture is not revelation. To a large extent the Bible is a record of human affairs-the sayings and doings of men; not a record of divine doctrine or of communications from God.'"— Speech of Duke of Argyle, delivered at a meeting of the National Bible Society of

14 "How do we get from under that diffi- Scotland, held at Glasgow, 1864.

that by far the greater part is of an incomparably more exalted character than such a standard of interpretation is calculated to establish,-for we believe that these latter books contain, in the origi nal at least, truth without the admixture of error, and that they were inspired both as to materials and sense, as to phraseology and words, as to precepts and facts,-every particular expression therein being holy and divine. And that, thus, the oracles of God (Rom. iii. 2; Heb. v. 12; 1 Pet. iv. 11; lively oracles, Acts i. 35), like a casket enclosing brilliant pearls and gems, contain a lucid heavenly meaning, distinct from, but within, the letter.

Indeed, to the pious mind, it is a truly lamentable reflection that the inspiration of the Word of God has been reduced to so low a test by modern expositors. Nothing, certainly, can tend more to the support and encouragement of the most rank infidelity. Dr. Palfrey, for instance, late Professor of Biblical Literature in the University of Cambridge, Mass., speaking of the Pentateuch, says that "We are not debarred from supposing that it had its origin in the imperfect wisdom of Moses.”—(Acad. Lect. on the Jewish Scrip. and Antiq., vol. i., lect. iv., pp. 85, 86.)

Professor McLellan, in his Manual of Sacred Interpretation, designed to aid theological students in Biblical exegesis, among others lays these maxims down as a canon of direction for the expositor: "The object of Interpretation is to give the precise thoughts which the sacred writer intended to express. No other meaning is to be sought but that which lies in the words themselves. Scripture is to be interpreted by the same method which we employ in discovering the meaning of any other book;" and Dr. Davidson, in his Sacred Hermeneutics, speaking of the true principles of interpretation, says that "The grammatical meaning [of the Scriptures] is the same with the historical; and both constitute all the meaning intended by the Holy Spirit. When the grammatical or historical meaning of a passage is ascertained, all the theology of the passage is also known" (p. 227).

To the same purport, Dr. Thirlwall, the sired to know, our treasures of Christian Bishop of St. David's, in his charge, 1863, doctrine would have remained whole and affirms that "a great part of the events re- unimpaired. The numbers, migrations, lated in the Old Testament have no more wars, battles, conquests, and reverses of apparent connection with our religion than Israel have nothing in common with the those of Greece and Rome. . . . The history, teachings of Christ, with the way of salvaso far as it is a narrative of civil and politi- tion, with the fruits of the Spirit. They becal transactions, has no essential connection long to a totally different order of subjects." with any religious truth, and, if it had been-P. 123. "Our Church has never attempted lost, though we should have been left in ig- to determine the nature of the inspiration norance of much which we should have de- of the Holy Scriptures."-Ib., p. 107.

Dr. Orville Dewey, one of the most distinguished theologians of the Unitarian school, writes on this subject as follows:

'If any one thinks it necessary to a reception of the Bible as a revelation from God, that the inspired penmen should have written by immediate dictation; if he thinks that the writers were mere amanuenses, and that word after word was put down by instant suggestion from above; that the very style is divine and not human; that the style, we say, and the matters of style-the figures, the metaphors, the illustrations, came from the Divine mind, and not from human minds; we say, at once and plainly, that we do not regard the Scriptures as setting forth any claims to such supernatural perfection, or accuracy of style. It is not a kind of distinction that would add anything to the authority, much less to the dignity, of a communication from heaven. Nay, it would detract from its power, to deprive it, by any hypothesis, of those touches of nature, of that natural pathos, simplicity, and imagination, and of that solemn grandeur of thought, disregarding style, of which the Bible is full. Enough is it for us, that the matter is divine, the doctrines true, the history authentic, the miracles real, the promises glorious, the threatenings fearful. Enough, that all is gloriously and fearfully true,— true to the Divine will, true to human nature, true to its wants, anxieties, sorrows, sins, and solemn destinies. Enough, that the seal of a Divine and miraculous communication is set upon that Holy Book."-(Works, English Ed., p. 465.)

And in a Tract (Belief and Unbelief), published in 1839, with the avowed purpose of defending the Bible from the objections of infidelity, he says, "The Scriptures are not the actual communication made to the minds inspired from above. They are not the actual Word of God, but they are the record of the Word of God." "If there ever were productions which show the free and fervent workings of human thought and feeling, they are our sacred records. But the things [in them] which we have to deal with are words; they are not divine symbols of thought." Again, he says, "If we open almost any book, especially any book written in a fervent and popular style, we can perceive, on accurate analysis, that some things were hastily written, some things negligently, some things not in the exact logical order of thought; that some things are beautiful in style, and others inelegant; that some things are clear, and others obscure and hard to be understood." "And do we not," adds the same writer, "find all these things in the Scriptures?"

Speaking of the twenty-fifth and following chapters of Exodus, Andrews Norton, Professor of Sacred History in Harvard University, Mass., says: "Seven chapters are filled with trivial directions [respecting the ark, the tabernacle, and its utensils]. So wholly unconnected are they with any moral or religious sentiment, or any truth, important or unimportant, except the melancholy fact of their having been regarded as a divine communication,-that it requires a strong effort to read through with attention these pretended words of the Infinite Being. The natural tendency of a belief that such words proceeded from Him, whenever such belief prevailed, must have been to draw away the regard of the Jews from all that is worthy of man, and to fix it upon the humblest object of superstition."-Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, add. notes, cxxvii.

In these divinely inspired chapters, Swedenborg in his Arcana Celestia shows the importance and explains the spiritual meaning of every sentence and every word, as teaching countless lessons of instruction, and as having in each particular an important representative meaning, and a practical application, in which the celestial and spiritual order and realities of heaven and the divine presence and blessing in sacred worship are presented to the contemplation and acceptance of the prepared mind. They describe the very sanctuary in which the Lord can dwell with man, and of which he says: "For the Lord hath chosen Zion; He hath desired it for his habitation. This is my rest forever: here will I dwell, for I have desired it. I will abundantly bless her provision; I will satisfy her poor with bread. I will also clothe her priests with salvation, and her saints shall sing aloud for joy" (Ps. cxxxii. 13-16). And again, "Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God" (Rev. xxi. 3). And it was with precisely such a precept on the interpretation of these very chapters, that the Apostle Paul thus addresses the Christian Church at Corinth: "Ye are the people of the living God; as God hath said [Ex. xxix. 45; Lev. xxvi. 12], I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people" (2 Cor. vi. 16).

Surely, less reverent ideas of inspiration than these quoted above cannot possibly be held by such as profess to believe in its existence at all. They must appear to every devout mind as little less than a disavowal of inspiration altogether, and instead of a defence, to be a