Page images
PDF
EPUB

performs not the duty it was designed to fulfil. It sets itself in reality above its Author, and virtually refuses to receive such a plan of mercy as he has proposed. Thus frail worms rise up in rebellion against the God of heaven; and instead of bowing before him in the dust, turn away with aversion. Let none imagine from this, that I would for a moment afford the least ground for supposing that our reason must be entirely laid aside, or that we must not follow its direction. Far be it from me to depreciate any gift of God, much less one of his noblest. I would neither attempt to lessen its value, nor to lower its dignity. Reason must be followed as well as Scripture; but both must be kept in the spheres where they were designed to move. By means of reason we judge, whether the Almighty has propounded a certain doctrine for belief; and if it be ascertained that he has done so, the doctrine should be unhesitatingly received. We must not bring to the Scriptures a mind charged with such ideas of religion as it imagines the Almighty ought to follow. The revelation graciously given to men should not be approached and sifted by a reason impregnated with opinions apparently most rational; but men should judge and see what it really contains. If the Deity has given a revelation of his will to mankind, they must have been in need of the communication, and it must be exactly suited to their condition. Should any think that He ought to have plainly inculcated a precept or a doctrine which is but obscurely set forth in his word, they declare hereby that they are wiser than He. Let reason, then, judge fairly respecting the things contained in the sacred volume, and if it discover that they are promulgated, they should be forthwith received as coming from the High and Holy One. If such be the office of reason, surely it is easy to discover our duty. He that runs may read. How, then, comes it to pass, that there are innumerable diversities in the religious opinions of professing Christians? The thousand varieties of complexion and outward form find a counterpart in the thousand creeds. To enumerate all the causes of such variations would be difficult, if not impossible. But some are so obvious, that they cannot escape the most superficial thinker. The improper use of reason leads to many erroneous systems. Because it is frequently set up as the judge of what Jehovah should reveal, not of what he has revealed, men do therefore fall into great and grievous mistakes. It has been applied to determine what he should have said, instead of being directed to the ascer

[ocr errors]

tainment of what he has said. It has not been confined to the simple judging of the meaning of what is set forth; it has been allowed to lose itself in fruitless attempts to discover why this thing and that have been promulgated. Hence the most unscriptural creeds have been framed by men in the pride of their hearts. Whatever causes of procedure are not explained in the Bible itself; whatever reasons of administration in the spiritual and moral world have been kept secret, man should not attempt to explore, else his reason is not kept in proper submission. When employed to dissect every truth and doctrine of the Bible with anatomical precision, it necessarily leads to the most pernicious heresies. It is a noble gift, for which we should ever be grateful; but it is a most dangerous weapon in the hands of those who do not know its right use. And there are many such, who plume themselves on their high intellects, and their pure theories regarding the meaning of the Bible; while they scruple not to denounce all others as though they cast aside their judgments. Men of colossal minds like themselves are applauded, as if wisdom were their rightful monopoly; whilst the secret of their fancied greatness is the abuse of the rational faculties given them by God. Not contented with arrogating to themselves the power of thinking correctly, they stamp all who presume not to give unwonted license to speculation in religion, as slaves to bigotry, or enemies to liberality. But they are guilty of slander in the accusations they bring against the reverent students of the word of God. In examining the meaning of revelation we do employ our reason, but we do not set it above God himself. We will not allow it to dictate to the Almighty; nor suffer the thing formed to say to Him that formed it, why hast thou taught this and not that? It savours of impiety to be thus forward and fearless. Reason is good if a man use it reasonably, just as the law is declared to be good, if one use it lawfully; but if either be placed in an orbit where it was not intended to move, it becomes unsafe.

I have thus endeavoured, with conciseness, to explain the use of reason in connexion with the Bible. In the first place, it judges whether this book contain a communication from Heaven, or whether the evidences be such as to prove its emanation from God. When it has ascertained that the Scriptures have come from the Sovereign Lord of all, it sets about the discovery of the import of the words and phrases, by means of the usual laws of interpretation, which all acknowledge and profess to adopt. Thus

we become acquainted with the truths propounded for our instruction in righteousness. These laws having been legitimately applied to discover the mind of the Spirit, as manifested in the phraseology employed, reason should receive and concur in all their recommendations. It has simply to acquiesce in the things inculcated in the Bible, not rejecting what it may not relish, or discarding what it cannot fathom. The non-reception of unpalatable notions and unwelcome sentiments, is its abuse and not its use; its pride, not its province. I cannot but think that every one who exercises his rational powers in the manner I have shewn, and attempted to maintain, will be conducted to that religious truth which is most intimately connected with his highest interests.

I shall conclude with observing, that in our inquiries after truth, sincerity will not suffice. A man may be most sincere in error. It is therefore a matter of no small moment how we employ our reason. The Romanist, we doubt not, is most sincere, when he walks barefoot on a pilgrimage to do penance for his sins; but he commits a fatal mistake in detracting from the perfect righteousness of Christ. The Hindoo and the Brahmin are, doubtless, most sincere in all their superstitions; so that were sincerity the only requisite, men are as sincere in idolatry as in the practice of the true religion. Away, then, with all such notions of sincerity, which lead to the preposterous opinion that Saul of Tarsus was as acceptable to God when he persecuted the Church before his conversion, as he was afterwards, when he preached Christ crucified, the power of God, and the wisdom of God, for in the midst of his blood-thirsty zeal he verily thought he was doing God service. The sentiment is equally false and dangerous. Actions good and upright in the sight of Jehovah, can flow only from right principles; as we believe, so do we act. If the fountain be impure, the streams cannot be otherwise if the tree be corrupt, how can the fruit be good? Accountability for the use of our reason should be impressed on the minds of all. Solemn is the thought of the reckoning which we must give at the great day. Let us, therefore, earnestly seek to serve God acceptably with our bodies and spirits, which are His; and we shall be counted worthy, hereafter, to join in the pure and spiritual employments of the heavenly sanctuary, where boundless scope will be given to the exercise of our reason, and the activities of our renovated nature.

CHAPTER III.

LIMITATIONS OF THE SENTIMENT, THAT THE LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE SHOULD BE INTERPRETED LIKE THAT OF OTHER BOOKS.

We have said above, that the Bible is to be explained on the same principles as other books. To this remark there are some exceptions. There is a peculiarity belonging to most of the prophetic parts which should be taken into account. It arises from the manner in which occurrences were presented to the internal view of the prophets. They saw things together; not in a regular succession of smaller pictures, but delineated in one group. Hence the use of the present tense, even when they speak of remote objects. Individuals stand before them, to whom they point as present. So in Isaiah, "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given" (chap. ix. 6); and again, "Thus saith Jehovah to his anointed, to Cyrus, whom I hold by the right hand; to subdue nations before him, and ungird the loins of kings; to open before him the folding doors, and the gates shall not be shut." (xlv. 1.) Distinctions of time were thus annihilated to the prophets. They viewed things not in time but in space, and so painted in perspective, as Olshausen aptly denominates it. They exhibit neither the remoteness of the objects they behold, nor the intervals of time between them. On the contrary, events are adduced just as they are seen, in juxta-position, or continuous succession, as though they all pertained to the same period.

But not only are objects and events presented by the prophets in juxta-position, but also in a state of commixture. So when we look at distant objects, those which are in reality apart seem to be joined. "Quemadmodum simili fallaciâ opticâ longissime distans turris domus propinquæ tecto incumbere, aut lunæ discus montibus nemoribusque contiguus videtur.”* Events flow together and appear coincident, which are separated in reality by "The object of prophecy was never wholly manifest

centuries.

* Velthusen, de optica rerum futurarum descriptione, p. 89.

to them (the prophets), partly because they viewed the future only in the remote distance (perspectively), and partly because every prediction first receives its complete elucidation from the fulfilment. Such perspective or optical viewing implies, not only that they see the near future alone in clear sketches, and the more remote with obscuration always increasing, and, so to speak, with diminished features; but also, that they put together in the manner of the painter the nearest and the most remote under one point of view, with constant reference to its highest limit, viz. the complete fulness of the kingdom of God, which always makes out the background of the picture. This perspective peculiarity is particularly observable in the predictions of Balaam; of Micah, 2d chap.; and of Isaiah, 5th and 6th." The same characteristic is apparent in many predictions of the New Testament, shewing that it is founded in the nature of prophecy. Several parts of the gospels and the Apocalypse exhibit it.

The following are examples of juxta-position and of commingling.

Jeremiah, 50th and 51st chapters. The city of Babylon was besieged and taken by Cyrus, from which time its importance declined. It did not, however, become utterly desolate till more than a thousand years after. In the time of Pausanias, i. e. the first half of the second century, the walls alone remained. But in these chapters, its conquest by Cyrus and its total ruin are connected together, although they took place successively.

Again, in Isaiah, 11th chapter, the universal diffusion of knowledge and holiness characteristic of millennial times, is annexed to the appearance of Christ in the flesh; although the occurrences are separated by a wide interval.

In Zechariah, 9th chapter, ninth and tenth verses, a description of the glorious completion of Christ's kingdom immediately follows the appearance of Jesus in his humiliation. In Isaiah, 61st chapter, first verse, the same thing is observable; for, after a description of Christ's entrance upon the prophetic office, the full blessings of his reign in the latter days follow in continuous succession. See also Jeremiah xxiii. 5, 6; xxxi. 31, &c.; xxxiii. 15, 16, &c.; Ezekiel xxxiv. 23, &c.; Isaiah ix. 6, 7. In the

* Köster, die Propheten des Alten und Neuen Testaments nach ihrem Wesen und Wirken dargestellt, Leipzig 1838, pp. 249, 250. See also Hengstenberg's Christologie, vol. i. p. 305.

« EelmineJätka »