and of the prophets, mentioned in the holy Word, does not necessarily infer the inspiration of the Word itself; since an uninspired person might write down what he had heard, and his writing would be no more than a common history. Had any of us lived in the time of Moses, Joshua, David, or the prophets, and been in the habit of noting their actions, and hearing their discourses, we might have written down their sayings, and recorded their actions, without any special influence from the Lord, and our record, in consesequence, would not have the smallest particle of inspiration. The divinity of the Scriptures, therefore, arises neither from their truth as a history, nor from that history recording the actions and words of inspired men; for all this may be true, and yet the Word be no more divine, than a volume of practical or experimental sermons.

Nor does the divinity of the Scriptures arise from the prophecies they contain, since the same observation holds good here, as in the remarks already made. Those who heard the prophets might write down their predictions, without any supernatural influence. The history of the Jewish war contains a prophecy of Josephus to the elder Vespasian, yet that history is not inspired. A book may, therefore, contain a relation of prophecies, and those prophecies may be fulfilled; and yet that book may not be inspired. The bible is full of prophecies, yet these prophecies do not in themselves prove the inspiration of the Scriptures. The divinity of the Scriptures, therefore, does not arise from their containing predictions which were afterwards fulfilled.

Nor does the inspiration of the Scriptures spring from the fact, that they contain information of the primitive condition of man, his present state, and promised future happiness.

But if the divinity of the Scriptures arises neither from the truth of their history, the inspiration of the characters mentioned in them, the fulfilment of their prophecies, the events recorded, nor the excellence of the precepts which they taught, it will be asked, IN WHAT DOES THEIR DIVINITY CONSIST?

This question will be best answered by considering how far any work resembles its author.

1. When a writer sits down to treat upon any subject,

he infuses into his subject the knowledge he himself possesses. His writing is, in fact, a transcript of his mind at the time he makes it, and contains within it the intelligence he possesses upon the subject treated of. In reading such a treatise, we read the mind which indited it.

2. Every human work must also resemble its author. If the author be wise, his wisdom will be transmitted to his pages. If he be of a deep and thoughtful mind, his work will be profound. If his knowledge be superficial, his work will be of no greater depth than his intellect.

3. When an author commences a work, he adapts his style to the persons for whom it is intended. If he is writing for the unlearned, his style will be plain, and his illustrations simple and easy of comprehension: while, if he is writing for the learned, it will abound in deeper arguments and more profound illustrations. Divinity has one style, earnest, persuasive, and solemn. The style of history is distinct from that of divinity, being plain and open. every case, a reflecting writer will adapt his manner to his subject, and elevate or simplify his reasoning according to the receptive powers of those he is called upon to address.

In

4. If such be the case,-if every work contains the wisdom of its author, it is inspired by his knowledge, and resembles him in character; and if the style of every work is adapted to the subject, and to the readers, then let us enquire what must be the character of a work which has GOD for its author, the CHURCH AND REDEMPTION for its subject, and angels and men for its readers. An answer to these questions will at once place before us the peculiar title of the Scriptures to the character of an inspired work.

If any work contain the wisdom of its author, then a work of which God is the author, must contain the wisdom of God; and as that wisdom is infinite, the wisdom contained in the Scriptures must be infinite also; and that it is so, nothing more unequivocally proves than the Scripture itself. David prays that he may behold the wonderful things in God's law. Now the only Scripture which David had, was the law or books of Moses, containing a history from Abraham to Joshua, and the books of Joshua and Judges, carrying down the history to his own time; it would be difficult, however, to find any such wonders here, if the

B

books are nothing but an historical record. Yet there were such wonders; not the wonders which were wrought in Egypt, for these David could see through the written history, but wonders, which, to behold, it was necessary for other than the natural eyes to be opened. Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law," is David's prayer.

66

If, again, every work resembles its author, then a work by an author, infinite in wisdom, goodness, and power, must, like himself, contain in its every portion, an infinity of knowledge beyond the power of the wisest man, or the most exalted angel, fully to exhaust, or even to fathom: in short, there must be portions past finding out, and yet it must be couched in language which the simplest may be instructed by. The Scriptures, therefore, as they resemble their author, must contain within them a wisdom as much above the comprehension of the highest angel, as God himself is incapable of being fully comprehended by angelic intelligence. Again, if every author adapts his style to his subject and his readers, then as the Scripture has the church, redemption, salvation, regeneration, and the soul of man for its subject, and for its readers, angels and men, it must be adapted to the peculiar wants of angels in heaven, and men upon earth. Heaven itself is governed by the Word, as a transcript of God's wisdom. Every part of it must then refer to the soul of man, and must be applicable to his state both here and hereafter.

If, then, the bible is the Word of God, written under his influence, and filled with his wisdom, it is his wisdom which constitutes it divine. It encloses within it the wisdom of its author, and must be like himself in infinity, and in every part be adapted both to every state of man on earth, and the holy communion of angels in heaven.. For ever, O Lord, thy Word is settled in heaven.”

66

It is very certain, however, that the divine quality of infinite wisdom is not discernible in the letter of Scripture alone; and as we fully admit this, we must search for that wisdom deeper than the surface. There must be an internal or spiritual meaning; and the natural objects and events described, are the symbols of spiritual and eternal things. To prove this, we must premise that there is a correspon

dence between every thing on earth, and everything in the spiritual world, arising from the dependence which the former has upon the latter; for as the body is the visible form of the spirit, so are the things in the natural world the visible forms of those in the spiritual; this is alluded to by an apostle, when he says, "For the invisible things of God, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made." (Rom. i. 20.) If, then, the earth, with its natural and sensual objects, is a material representation of things in heaven, they must depend upon heaven for their existence, as the shadow depends upon the substance. The earthly things therefore, mentioned in the Word of God, must image forth. the spiritual things, whose manifestation they are, and consequently there must be under the literal meaning, a spiritual sense, of which the literal is but the symbol.

66

While it is necessary that the objects of external nature should mean the same things to all minds-which they do by virtue of the law of correspondence-it follows, that as they are the sole source of language, they must not only mean the same things to all men, but the same things to man and to God. Accordingly, the Scriptures are written entirely in correspondences, this being not only the most admirable, but in point of fact, the only intelligible medium. For, that God should communicate his will to man in a verbal form, it is absolutely necessary that the materials of the language to be employed, should have the same significance substantially to both. How sublime and striking an illustration, that man is indeed made in the image and likeness of God.

66

Another and a most elegant testimony to the intimateness of the relations which subsist between the human mind and the external world, is yielded in the philosophy of that deep love, which all men feel for what is called nature. Were it not for these relations, men would have no affection, either for the sublimities of the sea, or of the swelling mountains: none for the solemn and silent woods filled with solitude as with a presence: none for the beguiling beauty of the shaded pathway by the river: none even for such simple things as pure air and the green fields. But the love of these things is universal. With different

individuals it may fill the soul as a yearning passion, or may exist but as one among many feelings; still it is inseparably and beautifully bound up with man's whole being, and is continually productive of new and refreshing enjoyments. And while it thus varies in degree with different individuals, it varies also in the direction which it takes. One mind is more charmed by flowers, another by birds one delights most in the view of a well ordered farm, another in rocks and waterfalls: one most loves sweet sounds, another the stars, another trees, another the human form, and so on infinitely. Why should this be? Whence arises so endless a variety of taste, always resembling in essence, never identically in kind? Is it not that every one of the countless elements of our inner being has its own specific and independent relationship with one or other of the shapes and embellishments of the world outside, and that we love those things best whose spiritual counterparts in our souls are developed in the highest activity and perfection? There can be no other reason,

'How can the beauty of material things

So win the heart and work upon the mind,
Unless like natured with them?' Festus.

If the love of nature were excited by the allurements of beauty in nature, it would follow, that beauty lies in objects as an abstract property. But we know that this cannot be, because, if it were so, the same things would not seem beautiful to one mind, and unattractive to another, but would be equally beautiful in all. And, on the other hand, if the love of nature in her details were an independent mental aptitude or taste, men's affections would fix themselves upon all things equally, they would be unswayed by preference, and would look on all things with equal pleasure. But this we know to be no less far from fact than the preceding. It follows, therefore, that the love of natural objects can only arise from peculiar harmonies between our mental elements or essences in their detail, and the objects of the external world in theirs. There exists between them a reciprocal action and re-action. In a word, by the virtue of the correspondences we are referring to, the universe is to man one vast mirror, in which, whenever he raises himself from the occupations of his merely animal