,transcribed from the #ahfb ,wertheim1  
,macintosh and ,hunt edition by ,david  
,price1 email ccx#jgdpglaf4org          
,,thoughts                              
,,on                                ,a  
,,revelation4                           
,,by                             ,s4 ,j4
 ,,jerram1 ,m4,a41                      
,,vicar ,,of ,,chobham1 ,,surrey4       
99 99 99 99 99                          
,,london3                               
,,wertheim1 ,,macintosh ,,and ,,hunt1   
#bd1 ,,paternoster ,,row1               
,,and #bc1 ,,holles ,,street1           
,,cavendish ,,square4                   
#ahfb4          ,,abstract ,,of         
,,contents4                             
,,page4    ,introductory3 proposed mode 
of treating the subject                 
#a-d  #a4--,knowledge of ,god needful   
#d     11 11 11 cannot be obtained by   
direct perception of               #e   
,god     11 11 11 cannot be obtained1 to
 a sufficient extent1              #f   
by exercise of natural faculties     11 

11 11 cannot be obtained by any         
implanted idea                 #f     11
 11 11 therefore must be revealed       
#h     ,objection arising from          
non-universality of a                   
#h        ,revelation answered          
#b4--;,conditions under which a         
,revelation may be expected             
#i        to be given     ,revelation   
must have a distinctive character       
#i     11 11 11 must be authenticated to
 original recipients            #aj     
11 11 11 cannot convey a perfect        
knowledge of ,god                #ab    
11 11 11 must be limited by the object  
designed                  #ab     11 11 
11 must be limited also by the state of 
#ad        knowledge existing at the    
time when made     11 11 11 must be1 in 
some degree1 phenomenal                 
#ae     ,such a ,revelation appears to  
be the only one in                  #af 
accordance with man's position1 and also
 adequate     ,words as a medium of     
,revelation must be limited by          

#ah        ideas already existing1 which
 ideas are also limited by              
experience     ,anthropomorphic notions 
of ,god2 the ,infinite and              
#ai        ,absolute     ,ideas as a    
medium of ,revelation2 ideas and        
perceptions           #bj               
distinguished1 etc4     ,perception as a
 medium of ,revelation2 not in itself   
#bb        adequate  #c4--;,conditions  
under which a ,revelation may be        
expected             #bf        to be   
recorded1 etc4     ,exact verbal record 
considered2 difference of               
#bf        languages1 etc4              
,distinction drawn as to meaning of     
exact verbal                 #bi        
record     ,divine and human elements in
 a ,revelation2 variety of              
#bi        style1 etc4                  
,considerations as to the precise manner
 of recording a           #ca           
,revelation  #d4--;,conditions under    
which a ,revelation may be expected     
#cb        to be transmitted  #e4--,some

 considerations as to the conditions    
under which            #cd        a     
professed ,revelation may be properly   
accepted     ,evidence to               
contemporaries3 miracles1 doctrines1    
etc4            #cd     ,evidence to    
others                                  
#cg     ,observations as to believing3  
aid derived from others1           #cg  
rapidity of mental processes1 intuitions
  #f4--,some considerations as to the   
,bible1 as a professed             #da  
,revelation     ,its pure morality1 hold
 on public opinion1 etc41 mark          
#dc        it out as different from     
other books     ,why a candid spirit is 
especially needful for the              
#dc        study of it     ,its offer of
 supernatural aid considered            
#de     ,its offer of supernatural aid  
is in accordance with              #df  
the general beliefs as to ,providence1  
and prayer      ,,thoughts ,,on ,a      
,,revelation4      ,few persons can have
 observed attentively the various phases

 of public  opinion on religious        
subjects during the last twenty years or
 more1  without noticing a growing      
tendency to the accumulation of         
difficulties  on the subject of         
,revelation4  ,geology1 ethnology1      
mythical  interpretation1 critical      
investigation1 and inquiries of other   
kinds1  have raised their several       
difficulties2 and1 in consequence1      
infidels  have rejoiced1 candid         
inquirers have been perplexed1 and even 
those who  have held with firmness      
decided views on the distinctive        
character of the  inspiration of the    
,bible1 have sometimes found it         
difficult to satisfy  their minds       
entirely1 and to see clearly the grounds
 of their  conclusions4    ,the writer  
of these pages does not propose to      
attempt a detailed reply to  the various
 difficulties which have been raised4   
,answers to objections  arising from the
 pursuit of particular sciences are most
 effectually  given by those1 who have  

made those sciences their study2 nor can
 there  be any doubt that1 if the book  
of nature and the ,bible spring from the
  same source1 an increasing            
acquaintance with both will tend to show
 their  harmony with each other1 and to 
dispel the perplexities which have      
arisen  from an imperfect acquaintance  
with either of them4  ,it may be        
observed1  too1 that1 as it requires    
special knowledge on the part of a      
writer to  cope with special            
difficulties2 so also does it demand    
acquirements1 but  rarely found1 on the 
part of the reader1 to appreciate the   
real value1  both of the objections and 
answers which may be made on geological1
  critical1 or other special grounds4   
,the writer thinks that there is another
 method of reply--a method which        
consists in giving as clear a view as   
can be had of the real character of  the
 subject against which the objections   
are made2 and this is the kind  of      
answer which he proposes to attempt4    

,the man who has a distinct and  well   
defined knowledge of chemical1          
mathematical1 or any other science1     
will not be greatly perplexed with      
difficulties which may be brought from  
other sciences1 touching upon that with 
which he is acquainted4  ,the  knowledge
 which he possesses of his own          
particular science will enable  him1 in 
some instances1 to perceive at once the 
weakness of the  objections which are   
alleged2 and1 even when this is not the 
case1 he  will see such an harmonious   
proportion subsisting between the       
various  parts of that branch of        
knowledge which he has been pursuing1   
and be so  strongly convinced of the    
certainty of it1 that he will be justly 
disposed to attribute to his own        
ignorance his inability to give         
satisfactory replies to those           
difficulties which he cannot dispose of4
  ,real knowledge cannot of course be   
overthrown2 and1 although it is  often  
difficult to decide what knowledge is of

 this description1 the task  of arriving
 at a tolerably correct conclusion with 
regard to such  subjects as fall within 
the range of our faculties1 must not be 
regarded  as an hopeless one4    ,when  
clear definitions have been given1      
disputants have often found that  there 
is no further room for discussion2 and1 
even when this is not the  case1 the    
force of objections can1 under such     
circumstances1 be more  accurately      
weighed1 and the real points of attack  
and defence more  clearly perceived4    
,if a man were to say1 in a mixed       
company1 that there  was no taste in an 
apple1 many sensible men1 unacquainted  
with his exact  meaning1 might be       
inclined to dispute the assertion1 and  
to say that the  statement was contrary 
to common experience2 but1 if he        
explained his  meaning to be1 that taste
 is a quality of a sentient being1 and  
that  there is nothing in the apple of  
this kind1 or corresponding to it1      
everybody then would see the truth of   

his assertion1 and all ground of        
dispute would be removed4  ,we will take
 another case4  ,those who hold  strong 
,protestant views frequently say1 that  
the religion of the ,bible  is the      
religion of ,protestants4 ,this1 for    
most purposes1 expresses their  meaning 
forcibly and well1 and the mind1 in     
practice1 usually supplies  the         
necessary limitations4  ,it does not1   
however1 always happen that  these      
limitations are consciously present to  
the mind1 or that the person  who       
practically receives the right          
impression might not be greatly  puzzled
 by the subtle reasonings of objectors4 
,the dictum1 quoted  above1 does not    
mean1 as might at first sight appear1   
that we are to make  use of no other    
means than the ,bible in the            
investigation of ,divine  truth1 and    
that the wisdom of the present and past 
ages is to go for  nothing4  ,no one    
could thus isolate himself from other   
influences2 and1  if he could1 it would 

not be desirable4  ,what is really meant
 is1 that  all truth necessary for      
salvation is contained in the ,bible1 so
 that  whatsoever is not read therein1  
nor may be proved thereby1 is not to be 
required of any man that it should be   
believed as an article of faith1  etc42 
in other words1 that the ,bible is the  
ultimate and sole standard of  appeal4  
,this of course may be1 and is disputed2
 but1 when the statement  is put in a   
clear and well defined shape1 many      
apparent objections vanish  at once1 and
 the real points of attack and defence  
are made evident4  ,if1  then1 we can   
obtain ideas1 on the subject of         
revelation1 which shall be1  upon the   
whole1 distinct1 and worthy of being    
received as true1 much will  be done to 
remove objections1 and to satisfy a     
reasonable mind4    ,the proposed       
investigation will necessarily be1 in   
some degree1 of an a  priori character2 
not1 however1 as we trust1 so much so as
 to render it  vague and without        

practical value4  ,it will be a priori1 
inasmuch as it  will not assume the     
existence of a revelation1 and then     
proceed to  examine its character4      
,this would be to beg the question at   
issue4  ,it  will not be a priori1 so   
far as it consists in instituting an    
inquiry  into the faculties of the human
 mind1 and their capacity to receive a  
revelation2 and into this it will be    
found that the investigation will       
mainly resolve itself4                  
99 99 99 99 99    #a4  ,we may commence 
our inquiry into the subject by         
noticing1 that a  knowledge of ,god1 to 
be obtained in some way or other1 seems 
almost  essential to the well-being of  
man4  ,if it be granted1 that there is  
such a ,being--and few1 it is presumed1 
would go so far as to deny  this--it    
must be of great importance for us to   
know the relationship in  which that    
,being stands to us1 and we to ,him4    
,we can hardly suppose it  possible that
 an ,infinite ,being1 in some sense1 as 

we suppose will be  generally allowed1  
the ,governor of the world1 should not  
have an  important relation to all other
 existences2 much less1 that the        
relation which ,he bears to man1 the    
most noble existence of which we  have  
any actual experience1 should be of an  
insignificant character4  ,looking1 too1
 upon man as a free and moral agent1    
accountable1 as  conscience declares1   
for his actions to his fellow-men1 it   
seems almost  certain that he must be   
also responsible for his acts in        
relation to the  ,deity4  ,the general  
belief of mankind1 in all ages and in   
all places1  tends to the same          
conclusion2 and1 if it be admitted that 
there is an  eternal world into which   
the consequences of our actions follow  
us1 a  knowledge of the relationship in 
which we stand to ,god becomes of still 
greater importance4  ,but if this       
knowledge probably may be1 and1 should  
the general belief of the world have a  
foundation in fact1 certainly is1  of   

great importance1 it can hardly be      
supposed that a ,god of love would      
allow us to remain in ignorance of it2  
and the question arises1 how it  is to  
be obtained4    ,it may be observed1    
first of all1 that the ,deity does not1 
like other  objects1 come within the    
direct cognizance of our perceptive     
faculties4  ,we have an organization1 by
 means of which we are enabled to       
perceive various objects around us2 and1
 by travelling to other lands1 we  can  
obtain a knowledge of many things of    
which we had before been  ignorant4  ,we
 perceive also what is going on within  
us4  ,the telescope  and the microscope 
reveal to us wonders which1 without     
their  intervention1 we could never have
 discovered4  ,but we cannot through the
  instrumentality of any of our         
faculties perceive ,god4  ,travel where 
we  will we cannot find ,him out4  ,no  
appliance of art has availed to disclose
  ,him to us4  ,if any philosophers     
conceive that they can intuitively gaze 

upon ,god1 other philosophers declare   
their ignorance of any intuition of     
this kind1 and assuredly the common     
people1 who most stand in need of  clear
 notions on the subject1 and who would  
hardly be neglected by a  beneficent    
,god1 are altogether unconscious of it4 
,the knowledge of ,him1  therefore1 if  
obtained at all1 must be had in some    
other way4    ,but may not an adequate  
knowledge of ,god be obtained by the    
exercise of  the faculties of the human 
mind upon external nature1 or in some   
other  way8  ,the ,apostle ,st4 ,paul   
says something which rather favours this
  view1 when he declares that the       
invisible things of ,him from the       
creation of the world are clearly seen1 
being understood by the things  that are
 made1 even ,his eternal power and      
,godhead2 so that they are  without     
excuse 7,rom4 i4 #bj73 and we believe   
that a considerable insight  into the   
nature of ,god1 and the probable        
character of ,his dealings with  us may 

be obtained in the manner to which we   
have referred4  ,still we  have only to 
look at the ever varying and degrading  
notions which have1  at all times1      
prevailed in many parts of the world    
respecting the ,divine  ,being1 to      
perceive that a more clear method of    
obtaining knowledge about  ,him would1  
to say the least of it1 be a most       
valuable boon4  ,the method  under      
consideration has not practically issued
 as we might have hoped  that it would2 
and therefore there is reason to expect1
 that ,god might  make use of some more 
direct way of communicating to us a     
knowledge of  ,himself4    ,another     
possible mode of communicating a        
knowledge of ,god would be1 by          
implanting in the mind of man1 an idea  
corresponding1 so far as might  be      
needful1 to the nature of ,god4  ,but a 
belief in the existence of  anything of 
this kind is open to several objections4
  ,if such an idea  existed1 it must1 to
 answer the required end1 be            

sufficiently clear and  well defined to 
give at least a tolerably accurate      
notion of the ,deity1  and must also    
bring with it a well-grounded conviction
 of its  correspondence to the reality4 
,but the variety of opinions which have 
been entertained on the subject forbid  
us to believe that any such idea  as    
this exists4  ,search as far as we can  
into our own minds1 we are  unable to   
discover anything approaching to such a 
notion of the ,divinity4  ,it appears   
too1 that1 notwithstanding some         
speculations as to time and  space1     
which1 in the opinion of some1 bear a   
slightly exceptional  character1 there  
is no good reason to believe that we    
acquire other kinds  of knowledge in the
 manner under consideration2 and1 if    
this be so1 there  is a strong          
presumption against a knowledge of the  
,deity being obtained  in this way4     
,as however some confusion of mind not  
uncommonly prevails on this  subject1 we
 will endeavour to explain our meaning  

more fully4  ,we  possess1 as it appears
 to us1 certain capacities for obtaining
 knowledge1  and for retaining1 and     
disposing our knowledge1 when obtained1 
in  different ways2 but we are not born 
with the actual possession of           
knowledge2 nor1 so far as we can see1 is
 knowledge1 at any subsequent  time1    
obtained by us1 except by means of the  
capabilities to which we  have referred4
  ,we have by nature powers of knowing  
objects1 both  external to our          
organization1 and internal2 but the     
objects themselves1  and not the        
representations of them1 are presented  
to us before we know  them4  ,we are    
conscious of seeing1 and smelling1 and  
tasting1 and  feeling1 etc42 but they   
are the things themselves which we see1 
and  smell1 and taste1 and feel1 in the 
first instance1 although afterwards we  
are able to contemplate the             
representations of them which are formed
 in  the mind4  ,there is within us1 no 
doubt1 a capability of apprehending1 in 

a sufficient degree1 the perfections of 
,god1 when they are declared to  us2 but
 a knowledge of these perfections does  
not naturally exist within  us4  ,we    
conclude1 then1 that1 as the ,deity is  
not directly perceived by  us1 has not  
in practice been adequately discerned by
 any process of the  mind1 and is not   
made known to us by any connate1 or     
subsequently  implanted idea1 we must be
 indebted to revelation1 in the main1   
for any  knowledge we may obtain        
respecting ,him4  ,we do not consider it
 necessary  to enter into a discussion  
of ,pantheistic views1 inasmuch as we   
have yet  to learn that ,pantheism has  
ever furnished any definite ideas       
respecting  the nature of ,god which    
will bear the test of a close           
examination as to  their reality4  ,we  
think1 too1 that it is destructive of   
the personality  of either ,god1 or man1
 or both1 and thus does away with all   
real relation  between the two4         
,before proceeding to the investigation 

of what we mean by a revelation1  we    
will endeavour to answer an objection   
which may be raised4  ,it may be        
alleged that1 if a true knowledge of    
,god is of such great consequence to    
man1 it appears strange that such       
differing opinions should have been     
held on the subject1 and that ,god's    
revelation--on the supposition that     
there is one--should not have been more 
extensively promulgated1 and  declared  
with more irresistible evidence4  ,there
 is no doubt a difficulty  here4  ,it   
does not however attach especially to   
the subject of a  revelation2 but meets 
us at all points1 when we consider the  
unequal  distribution of the blessings  
of nature4  ,why many persons should be 
destitute of the advantages which others
 enjoy1 and why some should pass  a life
 of suffering1 while others are         
surrounded with every comfort1 are      
questions which naturally arise in the  
minds of reflecting men1 but which  have
 hitherto remained without full and     

satisfactory answers4  ,he who  would   
give a complete reply must have clearer 
views1 than have yet been  obtained1    
with regard to the origin of evil4  ,it 
may be observed too  that1 on the       
supposition that the ,bible is a real   
revelation from ,god1  and bearing in   
mind the vast number of the human race  
to whom it has  already been given1 and 
its capability of future communication1 
it far  more nearly meets the           
difficulty1 than abstruse speculations  
respecting  the ,deity1 which can       
scarcely be apprehended even by         
philosophers1 and  which are to the mass
 wholly unintelligible4                 
99 99 99 99 99    #b4  ,let us now      
examine the conditions under which a    
revelation may be  expected to be given 
to the original recipients4    ,it may  
be observed in the first place that a   
revelation must possess  some           
distinctive character4  ,even1 if it    
should turn out that there is  no such  
thing in reality at all1 at least the   

notion which we form in our  minds must 
possess such points of difference as to 
distinguish it from  all other notions4 
,it appears needful to bear this in     
mind1 obvious  though it is1 because    
there are not a few1 in the present day1
 who  deprive the word1 revelation1 of  
nearly all the distinguishing features  
which have commonly been supposed to    
attach to it1 and so extend the  meaning
 of the word inspiration as sometimes to
 believe it in poets1  legislators1     
philosophers1 and others gifted with    
high genius1 7,essays  and ,reviews1 p4 
#adj74  ,what this means it is hard to  
say4  ,shakespeare1  ,milton1 ,newton1  
and others certainly did not imagine    
that they had direct  communication with
 ,god2 that they revealed to us ,his    
nature1 and the  relation in which ,he  
stands to us2 predicted future events1  
etc41 in the  same sense that ,moses1   
,david1 ,isaiah1 and the other writers  
of the ,bible  are supposed to have     
done4  ,if they actually did anything of

 this kind1  they were assuredly wholly 
unconscious of their power2 nor1 we may 
add1  has common opinion held that they 
afforded information on the same        
subjects as those which the writers of  
the ,bible handled4  ,admirers of  our  
poets1 and philosophers1 have not       
considered it necessary to  promulgate  
what they have found in their writings1 
as matters in which  the spiritual1 and1
 possibly1 eternal interests of man are 
vitally  concerned2 although believers  
in the ,bible1 and even in ,mahomet1    
have  done so4  ,the word inspiration1  
in fact1 as used in the passage above   
quoted1 involves a confusion of ideas   
which we should hardly have  expected to
 find in the writings of any one who    
professed to speak  accurately1 and     
appears scarcely pardonable1 or even    
honest1 in the case  of so acute a      
thinker1 as the late ,mr4 ,baden        
,powell4  ,we are not now  saying that  
the ,bible is a revelation from ,god1 or
 even that there is  such a thing as a  

distinctive revelation at all4  ,all we 
assert is1 that  the idea of such a     
thing is a very common one1 and that it 
is very  different from that which is   
usually held with regard to the works of
  ,newton1 ,milton1 and other gifted    
sages and philosophers4  ,we might add1 
in passing1 that1 unless the ,bible be  
an imposture--in which case it  ought to
 be regarded as far inferior to the     
works of genuine and truthful  poets and
 philosophers--it does correspond1 as we
 trust will be seen1 on  an examination 
of its contents1 to the idea referred   
to4    ,still further1 revelation must  
not only have some distinctive          
character2  but1 in order to be         
effectual for its purpose1 it should    
carry along  with it1 to the original   
recipients1 a reasonable conviction of  
its  authenticity4  ,the ,bible speaks  
of several professed modes of           
communication1 and accepting them       
according to the ordinary meaning of    
words1 and not in any mythical1 or      

ideological sense1 they appear to be    
such as might answer for the purpose of 
authentication4  ,the ,lord talked  with
 ,abraham4  ,he appeared in a burning   
bush to ,moses1 spake to him and  the   
children of ,israel on ,mount ,sinai1   
and conversed with him afterwards  on   
the top of that mountain1 during a      
period of forty days4  ,he spake in  the
 night to ,samuel4  ,he appeared in a   
vision to ,isaiah and others4  ,to  some
 ,he made ,himself known in dreams4     
,christ spake to ,his disciples4  ,all  
these are evidently ways in which ,god  
might communicate with man2 and  there  
is no difficulty in supposing that the  
attendant circumstances1  such for      
instance as some of those recorded in   
the ,bible1 might be of  such a kind as 
to authenticate the communication4  ,it 
would be idle to  argue that1 because   
,god does not make ,himself known in any
 of these ways  now1 ,he has never done 
so2 for1 to omit other considerations1  
we may  observe that1 in accordance with

 the economy which prevails in the works
  of ,god1 we have no reason to suppose 
that ,he would make special  revelations
 to more persons than might be necessary
 for the purpose ,he  had in view4  ,if 
,he revealed ,himself to them1 the      
promulgation of the  revelation would be
 naturally and safely left to more      
ordinary  instrumentality4  ,at the     
present time1 so far as ,christians are 
concerned1 they do not expect a special 
revelation to themselves1  because1 as  
they believe1 ,god has already          
communicated all that ,he  desires them 
to know4    ,but supposing a revelation 
to be sufficiently authenticated1--,what
 may be  reasonably expected as to the  
extent of it8  ,it is1 we think1 clear  
in  the first place that no perfect     
knowledge of ,god and ,his relation to  
us  could be communicated4  ,even if a  
direct presentation of the ,infinite    
were given1 the capacity of man could   
not grasp it1 and therefore the  result 
would be a finite conception2 and1 if   

the revelation were made by  words or   
other signs1 it is plain that these can 
only express the finite  ideas of which 
they are the symbols4    ,nor is there  
anything in this which need excite our  
surprise2 for the  limited nature of our
 knowledge with regard to ,god would be 
analogous to  that which we have about  
other things4  ,there is nothing with   
regard to  which our knowledge is not   
limited4  ,some may be ready to affirm  
that we  do not know things in          
themselves at all1 but only the effects 
produced  upon us1 or their relation to 
us4  ,we are not about to maintain this 
proposition2 but it is at any rate plain
 that the most familiar objects1  as    
science advances1 often disclose to us  
new qualities1 and that we have  no     
reason to suppose that we are fully     
acquainted with all the qualities  of   
even the simplest substances4  ,there is
 no reason to expect that the  book of  
revelation should be more explicit than 
that of nature4    ,not only1 however1  

must our knowledge1 derived from        
revelation1 be1 in  some degree1        
limited2 but it is not difficult to see1
 why it would be  probably kept even    
within the range of what it is possible 
for us to  know4  ,we can readily       
understand that the object of ,god in   
making a  revelation would be to inform 
us about those things only1 a knowledge 
of  which might be essential to our     
interests2 and here again the analogy of
  the natural world comes in to assist  
us4  ,god has given to each existence   
such qualities as are requisite for the 
position in which it is placed4         
,ascending through the various classes  
of animals1 we find1 as we advance1  the
 capacities for knowledge increasing1   
and bearing a relation to their  actual 
circumstances4  ,the mole is not endowed
 with the far-seeing vision  which is   
essential to the well-being of the      
eagle3 nor1 on the other  hand1 has the 
eagle the power of threading its way    
through the earth1  without which the   

mole could not exist4  ,viewing man in  
relation to the  natural world1 we find 
that he has the power of obtaining that 
kind of  knowledge which is necessary to
 his welfare here1 although1 in many    
respects1 he is far surpassed by the    
keener perceptions of the inferior      
animals4  ,god has in fact ordered and  
limited his knowledge with an  express  
reference to the position which he is   
called upon to occupy4  ,this throws    
light upon the subject of revelation4   
,it is reasonable to  expect that ,god  
would limit the knowledge communicated  
in that way also1  by a consideration of
 the state in which man is placed here1 
and of that  which1 upon the supposition
 of a future state1 he is to occupy     
hereafter4    ,so far as we have yet    
gone1 there does not appear to be any   
reason why  the knowledge1 although     
limited1 should not be accurate as far  
as it  goes4  ,though we do not know all
 the properties of particular objects1  
we  may know some of them1 and may also 

safely reason about those with which  we
 are acquainted1 so long as we are      
careful not to introduce into the       
reasoning anything which does not result
 from our actual knowledge2 and  so1    
turning from nature to a revelation1 we 
may learn much from it about  ,god1 as  
for instance1 that ,he is a ,god of love
 and holiness2 that ,he will  act       
towards us in a particular manner2 that 
,he will punish some actions  and       
recompense others2 and this knowledge   
also may be a true knowledge1  so far as
 it goes1 and one that we may safely act
 upon1 although we may  still be in     
ignorance of ,his exact nature and many 
points of our  relationship to ,him4    
,there is1 however1 a light in which    
revelation must be viewed1 which        
involves considerations of a somewhat   
different character from those  hitherto
 noticed1 and to this we now turn4  ,a  
revelation must not only be  limited by 
the extent of the human capacity for    
receiving it1 and by the  proposed      

object of it1 but also1 in a            
considerable degree1 by the state  of   
knowledge existing in the world at the  
time it is made4  ,in fact1  without    
some such limitation1 it would be       
unintelligible1 and1  consequently no   
revelation4  ,as this truth has         
frequently been  misapplied1 we will    
endeavour to explain1 as accurately as  
we can1 our  meaning4  ,god could1      
perhaps1 if ,he thought proper1 give in 
an ignorant  age a revelation1 as full  
and explicit1 as in a more enlightened  
period--a revelation we mean which      
should be understood--but it must be    
remembered that this could only be      
effected by altering the conditions     
under which human knowledge is acquired4
  ,for example1 to have given a  correct
 theory of the motions of the heavenly  
bodies1 before the age of  ,newton1     
would have been impossible1 without an  
entire change both in the  existing     
state of knowledge1 and also in the     
method of acquiring it4  ,down to the   

present time all history and experience 
testify to the fact  that the           
acquisition of knowledge is gradual2 but
 such a revelation1 as  that to which we
 have referred1 would require that it   
should be made per  saltum4  ,if        
knowledge were given in this way the    
usual course would be  completely       
changed2 and not only so1 but the       
knowledge communicated would  be        
altogether out of proportion to that    
possessed on other points1 and  would   
place those who had it in a false and   
unsatisfactory state with  regard to the
 world in which they lived4  ,to see    
this we have only to  picture to        
ourselves the condition of a man living 
in a savage1 or only  partially         
civilized state of society1 with his    
mind preternaturally  expanded to that  
of a ,newton1 and put into possession of
 the knowledge  which he had on some of 
those subjects which the ,bible touches 
on4  ,how  entirely out of harmony would
 he be with his fellow-men1 and         

everything  around him6 and1 how unable 
would he be even to pursue his studies  
for  want of those instruments1 books1  
and appliances which a more advanced    
state of society alone can produce6  ,a 
revelation of this kind would  clearly  
not be a boon1 but an injury to him4    
,it may be observed1  moreover1 that a  
revelation1 adapted to the knowledge    
even of a ,newton1  would neither       
exactly correspond with facts1 nor      
obviate all the  difficulties which a   
more enlightened age might discover4    
,we do not stop  to dwell upon the      
obvious fact1 that such a revelation1 as
 that which we  have been noticing1     
would require not only a preternatural  
expansion of  faculties in the person to
 whom it was made1 but also a similar   
expansion1 or1 if not1 a long           
educational process in the case of all  
those who should receive it4  ,we       
conclude1 then1 that a revelation must  
be adapted to1 and in a great degree    
limited by1 the state of knowledge      

existing in the world at the time when  
such revelation is made4    ,this leads 
us to a consideration of the necessarily
 phenomenal character  of some portions 
of a revelation1 respecting which       
objections against  the ,bible have been
 frequently raised4  ,we will1 to       
explain our views1  take as an example1 
the familiar instance of the sun and    
earth4  ,according to appearance the sun
 moves1 and the earth is stationary3 but
  science has demonstrated that the     
opposite to this is the real state of   
the case4  ,what line might it be       
expected that a revelation would take1  
when it had to deal with a case of this 
kind8  ,should it speak according  to   
appearances1 or realities8  ,this1 we   
believe1 is the exact point to be       
considered1 and we do not think1 when   
fairly put1 that it is one about  which 
there is much difficulty4  ,if a        
revelation were given to an  ignorant   
people1 in accordance with the reality1 
it is quite clear that  they would not  

be in a condition to receive it1 and    
would therefore1  probably1 reject it as
 absurd2 but if the description were    
given  according to the appearance      
presented1 then no difficulty would be  
felt4  ,the question1 however1 is       
pressed--whether such a mode of         
representation  is consistent with the  
truthfulness which may be expected in a 
revelation4    ,it might1 we think1 be a
 sufficient reply to say that1 as1      
according to  our former reasoning1 it  
is1 in many cases1 the only possible    
mode of  revelation consistent with the 
established order of things1 we may well
  be content with it2 but we will pursue
 the subject a little further1 with  the
 view of making clear how the matter    
stands4  ,it may be observed that1  if  
absolute truth on a particular subject  
cannot be communicated1 the  nearest    
approximation to it is1 not only all    
that can be expected1 but is  in itself 
highly desirable4  ,if a man is unable  
to receive as full an  apprehension of a

 thing as we have ourselves1 we must    
endeavour to give  him the most perfect 
information which he is capable of      
receiving4  ,we do  not injure him by   
doing this1 but we should injure him if 
we omitted to  do it4  ,if a man1 who   
had lived all his life in the ,arctic   
regions1 and  had never heard of any    
other country1 were to be brought to    
,england1 it  would not be necessary to 
tell him1 with a view to his comfort    
here1 the  motion of the earth with     
regard to the sun1 and the causes of the
 length  of our days and nights1 and of 
the variation of the seasons4  ,to enter
  into these matters would confuse his  
mind1 and the man1 if he had to earn    
his living1 would starve while he was   
acquiring the knowledge of them4  ,by   
such a course of proceeding we should1  
in reality1 do him a great  injustice4  
,instead of attempting anything of the  
kind1 we should  naturally give him such
 information as might be requisite for  
his  practical guidance1 in a popular   

manner1 and leave to himself the        
acquisition of such scientific truth as 
he might be desirous of becoming        
acquainted with4  ,in a word1 we should 
describe to him things as they  appear  
to be1 and in this respect our          
description would be1 in a certain      
sense1 true2 we should not describe them
 as they really are1 and so far  our    
description would not be in strict      
accordance with the facts of the  case4 
,we were about to say that it is a      
choice of difficulties2 but1 is  there  
any real difficulty in the case8  ,does 
not the common sense of  mankind declare
 that the mode of proceeding which we   
have described is  the only proper one1 
and that there is no real untruthfulness
 in it8  ,it  may be noticed too that   
even scientific men continually make use
 of it  amongst themselves1 and in their
 intercourse with others1 and this      
without any charge of untruthfulness    
being brought against them4  ,what      
objection then can possibly lie against 

the adoption of the same method  in a   
revelation8 #ag  ,the supposed object of
 a revelation is to save the  soul1 or1 
at least1 to advance in a material      
degree our spiritual  interests4  ,is   
that to be put aside till the world has 
learnt scientific  truth1 and is able to
 converse in scientific language8  ,we  
feel no  difficulty in leaving the      
answer to this question to the common   
sense of  mankind in general4  ,we      
conclude1 then1 that as phenomenal truth
 is in  many cases the only truth which 
can possibly be afforded1 and the       
imparting of it is a boon1 and not an   
injury1 there is no reason why the      
,deity should not1 when ,he sees fit1   
make use of this mode of  communication 
in revelation4    ,we will now notice1  
distinctly1 words as a medium of        
revelation4  ,it is  plain1 that in     
communicating knowledge1 they are only  
effectual by  calling up in the mind of 
the hearer ideas already existing4  ,to 
speak  to a man who has been blind from 

his birth1 of colours would be useless1 
because he has had no experience of     
them1 and consequently no ideas         
corresponding to them4  ,words may bring
 up ideas in a different  combination   
from any which had previously existed in
 the mind of the  person spoken to2 but 
they cannot create ideas4  ,they may    
make the  hearer acquainted with        
something which he has never actually   
perceived2  may cause him to reason in a
 new manner2 to see a familiar object in
 a  fresh light1 or1 in some other way1 
bring the faculties of the mind into    
play2 but still the mind1 so far as     
instruction by words is concerned1  can 
only act upon its previous stores1 and  
analyze or combine them into  new forms4
  ,this being the case1 it is clear that
 a revelation1 so far as  it is made by 
words1 must be limited by the ideas     
previously existing in  the mind of the 
person to whom it is made4  ,these      
ideas1 too1 however  numerous and       
refined they may be1 are limited by the 

experience which a  man has had of the  
external world1 and of himself4  ,he    
cannot get beyond  these4  ,if1 then1   
,god should think fit to reveal1 in     
words1 a knowledge  of ,himself1 or any 
other object which does not come within 
the direct  cognizance of our perceptive
 faculties1 this can only be effected by
  calling up in the mind1 through the   
words1 some new combination of ideas    
already possessed4  ,this may not       
correspond precisely with the object1   
respecting which the revelation is made2
 but1 as it is the only way in  which a 
revelation by words can be effected1 we 
have no just reason to  find fault with 
it4  ,all we have a right to expect1 is 
that the words  should call up in the   
mind those ideas which best represent   
the object  designed to be revealed4    
,this may tend to throw some light upon 
what are called anthropomorphic  ideas  
of ,god4  ,these have sometimes been    
spoken of as inadequate1 and  degrading4
  ,inadequate they certainly are1 as    

every notion which we can  have of the  
,deity must be2 but we are unable to see
 in what way they are  degrading4       
,almost every nation1 following         
apparently the necessity of  our nature1
 has clothed its gods in the objective  
form of some familiar  animal1 or other 
existence1 and endowed them with        
qualities of which they  had experience4
  ,what wonder then if ,god1 seeing that
 ,he must1 unless the  conditions of our
 nature were altered1 make use of ideas 
with which we  are already familiar1    
should adopt an anthropomorphic         
representation of  ,himself1 purified1  
exalted1 and adapted1 as far as         
possible1 to ,his own  infinite         
perfections8  ,in fact1 we know not how 
,god could declare ,himself  as just1   
righteous1 pure1 and loving1 or reveal  
our responsibility to  ,himself1 without
 a reference to man1 inasmuch as he is  
the only being1 of  which we have any   
actual experience1 who possesses1 even  
in a limited  degree1 qualities of such 

a description4  ,assuredly then it      
cannot be a  degrading notion of the    
,deity to regard ,him as invested with  
the highest  attributes of which we have
 a conception4  ,we are aware that some 
philosophers talk much of the ,infinite1
 and the ,absolute1 as conveying  more  
exalted notions of the ,divine ,being4  
,what the exact meaning of  those terms 
is philosophers find it difficult to    
declare1 and the common  people are     
almost wholly unable to understand4     
,certainly such highly  abstract terms  
convey little distinct meaning4  ,it    
will be found upon  examination1 that   
the word ,infinite1 to stir in any      
degree the depths  of our nature1 must  
be combined with some quality with which
 we are  familiar4  ,infinite love1     
infinite justice1 infinite purity1 are  
things  which we can in some degree     
understand and appreciate2 but the point
  which we understand best is not the   
,infinite1 but the finite1--the         
love1--the justice1--the purity2 and    

these are ideas taken from what we  find
 in some imperfect degree in ourselves4 
,to those who believe that  man was made
 in the image of ,god1 and that the     
,word1 being ,god1 became  also man1 the
 train of thought here indicated will   
come home with  additional force4       
,what has been said with regard to a    
revelation1 made by words1 applies1  in 
its main points1 to a revelation made   
directly to the mind through  ideas1    
without the intervention of words4  ,to 
see this clearly1 let us  bear in mind  
the distinction between a perception and
 an idea4  ,an idea  is the result of a 
perception4  ,we perceive a rose when it
 is presented  to our senses1 and we    
see1 smell1 or touch it4  ,we have an   
idea of it1  when1 not being any longer 
presented1 we think of it1 and call to  
mind  its qualities4  ,we are said to   
have a perception of anger1 or love1 or 
any other emotion1 when those feelings  
are present to the mind4  ,we have      
ideas of them1 when we think about them4

  ,it is not our object to enter  upon  
any abstruse discussion as to the origin
 of ideas4  ,what has been  just        
advanced will be generally admitted by  
metaphysicians1 and readily  understood 
by others4  ,hoping1 then1 that the     
distinction between an idea  and a      
perception will be carried in the mind1 
we will proceed with our  argument4     
,there is no difficulty in              
supposing--and this1 we believe1        
corresponds very closely to an opinion  
commonly entertained respecting         
inspiration--that ,god could1 without   
the intervention of words1 call up  in  
the mind such ideas as ,he might think  
fit4  ,for instance1 instead of         
speaking the words1 ,thou shalt do no   
murder1 ,he might1 in a  preternatural  
manner1 excite in the mind the ideas    
corresponding to them4  ,still1 however1
 unless we suppose the conditions of    
human thought to be  altered in a manner
 for which we have no analogy1 the ideas
 of a man1  killing1 etc41 must         

previously exist in the mind1 or the    
revelation would  be unintelligible4    
,whether1 then1 the ideas are called up1
 through the  instrumentality of words1 
or in some other way1 is immaterial to  
our  present argument4  ,the point we   
insist on is that1 except in the case of
  actual perception1 the communication  
of knowledge1 by revelation1 or         
otherwise1 must be limited by the ideas 
previously existing in the mind  of the 
person to whom the communication is     
made4  ,these ideas may be  combined    
into new forms1 and new relations may be
 discovered between  them1 or they may  
be analyzed into their constituent      
parts1 but we cannot  transcend the     
ideas themselves1 except by new         
perceptions4    ,let it not1 however1 be
 imagined that a revelation1 conveyed   
through the  instrumentality of ideas   
previously existing1 must be so narrow  
as to  convey little or no new          
information1 or instruction4  ,we have  
only to  look at the works of ,milton1  

,newton1 ,shakespeare1 and other great  
men1 to  see the almost endless variety 
with which ideas1 and the relations in  
which they stand to each other1 may be  
so combined and disposed1 as to         
minister to the imagination1 or enrich  
the mind with fresh stores of           
knowledge4  ,all the information which  
we derive from books1 or  conversation1 
is obtained in this way1 and to it we   
must probably  attribute by far the     
largest portion of our mental           
acquisitions1 after  the period of      
childhood4  ,so far1 indeed1 as the     
promulgation of a  revelation by its    
original recipients is concerned1 it    
appears plain that  it must be made1    
almost necessarily1 through the         
instrumentality of  words1 inasmuch as  
they are the best signs which can be    
made use of in  the communication of    
knowledge4    ,before1 however1         
proceeding to this portion of the       
subject1 it appears  desirable to make a
 few additional observations with regard

 to a  revelation by perception4  ,we   
have already had occasion to notice that
  the ,deity does not1 like other       
objects1 come within the direct         
cognizance of our perceptive faculties  
7p4 #e71 and that1 even if a  direct    
presentation of the ,infinite were given
 4 4 4 the result would be  a finite    
conception 7p4 #ab74  ,it may1 however1 
be imagined that a direct  presentation1
 even though issuing in a finite        
conception1 or a  representation either 
addressed ab extra to our perceptive    
faculties1  or brought before us in a   
vision1 or a dream1 or otherwise1 would 
convey  to the mind a more correct      
apprehension of ,god's nature than could
 be  obtained in any other way4  ,these 
cases1 though differing in some         
particulars1 may1 for our present       
purpose1 be regarded as identical1 and  
treated as perceptions4  ,now there can 
be no doubt that a perception  conveys a
 more vivid impression to the mind than 
a description2 and we  may1 therefore1  

reasonably suppose that1 in a           
revelation1 ,god might use  this method 
of communicating knowledge in those     
cases to which it might  be specially   
adapted4  ,thus1 for instance1 if ,god  
designed to give an  idea of some place 
or being which we had never seen1 ,he   
might effect  this1 in a very perfect   
manner1 by bringing such a place or     
being1 either  in reality1 or by        
representation1 within the range of our 
perceptive  faculties4  ,the appearance 
vouchsafed by ,god to ,moses 7,exod4    
xxxiii4  #ai-bc71 the vision of ,ezekiel
 7,ezek4 xxxvii4 #a-aj71 and the        
description  given by ,st4 ,paul 7#b    
,cor4 xii4 #a-d71 will serve as         
illustrations of our  meaning4    ,it   
must not1 however1 be taken for granted 
that such a mode of revelation  would1  
in every case1 be possible2 or that1 if 
possible1 it would always  be the best  
method of communication4  ,so far as we 
can see1 no mere  presentation1 or      
representation of the ,deity1 could1 in 

itself1 give any  deep insight into ,his
 moral character1 or the relation in    
which ,he stands  to us4  ,even if the  
,deity were constantly present1 we know 
not how we  could obtain any accurate   
knowledge of ,his attributes1 except by 
observation of ,his words and acts4  ,if
 we had been introduced to the          
philanthropist1 ,howard1 we could not   
have become acquainted with his         
excellence by merely gazing at his      
countenance4  ,we must have listened to 
his words1 and followed him to those    
scenes of misery which he was in the    
habit of visiting1 if we would obtain a 
clear understanding of his  benevolence4
  ,so too1 the holiness1 love1 and other
 moral perfections of  the ,deity1 are  
not matters which can be apprehended    
from any mere  intuition of the ,divine 
nature4  ,a glorious exhibition of the  
,divine  presence1 such1 for instance1  
as that described in ,exodus1 as having 
occurred on ,mount ,sinai1 might inspire
 feelings of awe1 and enable those  who 

witnessed it to apprehend more clearly1 
perhaps1 than could have been  effected 
in any other way1 the dignity and       
majesty of ,god2 but1 for a  revelation 
of ,his moral nature1 and the relation  
in which ,he stands to  man1 we must    
look more to words--such words1 for     
instance1 as ,he is said  to have spoken
 to the children of ,israel at that     
time1 and afterwards1  during forty     
days1 to ,moses4  ,while1 then1 we think
 that a revelation by  perception1 with 
regard to some things1 might be         
expected1 we do not  consider that it   
would convey a large amount of          
information1 unless it  were combined   
with a revelation through words4  ,words
 are1 in fact1 the  most natural and    
effectual mode of imparting most kinds  
of knowledge1 and  we may1 therefore1   
reasonably expect that1 in any          
revelation which the  ,divine ,being    
might think fit to make to man1 they    
would form a chief  method of           
communication4  ,when we thus speak of  

words in connection with  a revelation1 
we do not mean only words addressed     
actually to the ear1  but also such1 as 
in a dream or vision1 may appear to be  
spoken4  ,we  desire also that it should
 be remembered that1 for the main       
purpose of  our argument1 it is not so  
much words as ideas which we wish to    
keep in  view4  ,what we chiefly wish to
 leave on the mind is1 that a           
revelation1  except so far as a new     
perception may be given1 must be limited
 by the  ideas previously existing in   
the mind of the person to whom it is    
made4  ,it may be reasonably expected   
that ,god would make use of those ideas 
which were best adapted to ,his purpose1
 but not that ,he should transcend  the 
ideas themselves4  ,if1 too1 we suppose 
that a new perception is  given1 that   
perception could not be explained to    
others1 except through  the             
instrumentality of such ideas as those  
to which we have referred4    ,our      
object hitherto has been to explain the 

conditions under which a  direct        
revelation from ,god may be expected to 
be given4  ,if we have  been able to    
remove from the minds of our readers    
vague and indefinite  notions on the    
subject1 and to put1 in their place1    
something clearer and  more distinct1   
our object thus far will have been      
answered4    ,it is1 perhaps1 hardly    
necessary to state that1 by what has    
been said  above1 we do not intend to   
intimate that the recipient of a direct 
revelation must1 necessarily1 always    
understand the exact meaning of such  a 
revelation4  ,it may contain a hidden   
meaning1 to be evident at some  future  
time4  ,thus1 for instance1 on the      
supposition that the first  chapter of  
,ezekiel is a revelation from ,god1 it  
is probable that the  meaning of it was 
as unintelligible to ,ezekiel1 as it is 
generally  considered to be at the      
present time4  ,but the meaning of the  
words  themselves1 and their connection 
with each other are clear4  ,it is in   

the  application that the difficulty    
arises4  ,so1 too1 as advances are made 
in  knowledge1 words1 and the ideas     
belonging to them1 acquire a more       
extended and fuller meaning4  ,the ideas
 involved in the word1 sun1 are  very   
different to the philosopher and the    
peasant2 and some ideas  contained in a 
revelation may be of such a kind as not 
to be fully  understood till more       
knowledge has been acquired1 than       
existed at the  time when the revelation
 was made4  ,but to suppose that the    
words convey  no meaning to the original
 recipient of the revelation1 is to say 
that no  revelation is made to him at   
all1 and it certainly hardly appears    
probable that the ,divine ,being should 
make a communication which could  answer
 no end to the person to whom it was    
addressed4                              
99 99 99 99 99    #c4  ,we now proceed  
to an examination of the conditions     
under which a  revelation may be        
recorded1 or otherwise made known by the

 person who  has received it4  ,here we 
see at once that1 for all practical     
purposes1  the method of communication  
must be words2 for it is not necessary  
to  take into account such visual       
representations as might be made to the 
eye  by painting or otherwise4  ,words  
may be oral1 or written4  ,as the latter
  are more likely to be well weighed and
 definite than the former1 and are1     
moreover1 better calculated to hand down
 a truth from age to age1 we  shall     
confine our attention to them1 although 
what we have to say is1 in  a great     
degree1 applicable to spoken words also4
  ,we start with the  supposition that  
,god has already made known to some     
particular person1 as  perfectly as ,he 
has thought fit1 and1 it may be1 as     
perfectly as the  nature of the subject 
admitted1 or the capability of the      
person to whom  the communication has   
been made would allow1 some truth which 
is to be  recorded for the benefit of   
the present1 and future generations4    

,the  question we have to answer        
is1--how this may be most effectually   
accomplished4    ,it is obvious that1 in
 the case of a revelation1 made by      
words1 the  words might be recorded     
exactly as they were delivered4  ,the   
words which  ,god is said to have spoken
 on ,mount ,sinai1 and to have written  
afterwards1 on two tables of stone1 may 
serve as an exemplification of  our     
meaning4  ,in this case ,god is         
described as writing them with ,his own 
hand3 but they might have been written1 
with equal truthfulness1 by any  of     
those who had heard them4  ,if future   
generations had convincing  evidence    
that they possessed a faithful record of
 what ,god said1 and the  meaning of the
 words had not changed during the lapse 
of time1 the  revelation would be as    
perfect to them as it was to the        
original  recipients4  ,so1 too1 if     
,god1 instead of speaking the words of  
the ten  commandments1 had1 in some way 
which should authenticate the reality of

  the revelation1 called up in the mind 
of ,moses the ideas corresponding to    
the words1 and he had faithfully written
 them down2 those words would  convey as
 full a revelation to those who read    
them1 as that which ,moses  himself had 
experienced4  ,both these would be      
verbal revelations in the  strict sense 
of the word4  ,they would be1 in fact1  
the very words of ,god  ,himself4  ,if  
any book1 professing to be a revelation 
from ,god1 could be  proved to be       
entirely of this description1 there     
would be little or no  room for         
discussion about it4  ,the only things  
which could give rise to  dispute would 
be such as attach to the interpretation 
of all records4  ,questions might be    
asked as to the exact meaning of the    
words1 and  inquiries might be raised as
 to whether they retained the same      
meaning  which they had when they were  
originally written down3 but any dispute
  which might arise on these points     
would be confined within very narrow    

limits1 and would moreover be of such a 
character1 as could not be  avoided1    
unless ,god were to make a revelation   
afresh in every age1 and we  may add1   
perhaps1 to every individual1--a        
supposition which would be  contrary to 
analogy1 and in the highest degree      
improbable4  ,thus far  there is no     
practical difficulty4    ,is it1        
however1 necessary to the idea of a     
recorded revelation that the  exact     
words1 neither more nor less1 as spoken 
by ,god1 or as expressing  ideas which  
,he has called up in the mind of the    
person to whom ,he has  revealed        
,himself1 should be written down8  ,a   
recorded revelation1 we must  remember1 
is designed chiefly for the benefit of  
future generations1 and  it may         
therefore very properly leave out much  
which was only of passing  interest4    
,god might have revealed many things to 
,abraham1 which were  highly important  
for him to know1 but in which we may    
have no interest4  ,we can easily see   

then that1 in any record which ,god     
might authorize1  such things would very
 probably be omitted4  ,thus far again  
there is no  practical difficulty4      
,to proceed a step further4  ,is there  
any reason to expect that1 in a  record 
of a revelation1 the original words1    
either as spoken by ,god1 or  as        
expressive of the ideas which ,he had   
called up in the mind of the  recipient1
 might be in any decree altered8--and1  
would every alteration  necessarily make
 the record less a revelation from ,god 
than it was  before8  ,these are        
questions which we shall endeavour to   
answer4    ,it may be observed1 in the  
first place1 that the same train of     
thought  which applies to an original   
revelation from ,god1 applies also1 in  
its  main points1 to the record of it4  
,both in the one case1 and the other1   
it appears reasonable to expect that    
,god would not1 to a greater extent     
than was absolutely necessary1 transcend
 or interfere with those natural  powers

 in man which ,he had ,himself          
implanted4  ,as the giving of a         
revelation would1 as already shewn1 be  
conformed in a great degree to the      
usual conditions under which knowledge  
is imparted1 so also1 it seems          
reasonable to expect that the record of 
a revelation would as far as  possible  
be conformed to the usual conditions    
under which knowledge is  recorded4     
,in looking at the conditions under     
which a revelation must be recorded1  it
 is obvious that the difference of      
languages1 which prevails in this       
world1 presents an insuperable obstacle 
to an exact record of words being       
continued4  ,it may indeed be alleged   
that ,god could cause a revelation to   
be recorded1 in its exact words1 in each
 distinct language4  ,we hardly  think  
however that such a view as this will be
 seriously entertained by  any one4     
,not to mention how completely contrary 
this would be to what  analogy would    
lead us to expect1 we may observe that1 

as languages are  continually undergoing
 changes1 such a method of recording    
must be  continually renewed2 and1      
moreover1 as language does not convey   
precisely  the same ideas to any two    
individuals1 it would be almost needful 
that a  separate record1 or rather a    
separate revelation1 should be made for 
each  person4  ,such views as these     
require only to be stated to shew that  
they  are untenable2 but1 if they are   
untenable1 it is plain that the         
continuance of an exact record of words 
cannot be expected4    ,but may it not  
be expected that1 at least1 one exact   
record would be  made of any revelation 
which ,god might think fit to give1 and 
that this  would afford the best        
guarantee which could be had for future 
truthfulness8  ,in answering this       
question it is very important to draw a 
distinction4  ,the words of the record  
may be exactly such words as ,god       
approves of1 although they may not be   
the precise words in which the  original

 revelation was made4  ,in some         
particular instances ,god might         
determine that the precise words of the 
revelation should be used1 while  in    
others ,he might think fit that it      
should be otherwise4  ,in either case   
the record would be a true one1 and each
 method of recording might have  its own
 peculiar advantages4  ,under some      
circumstances it might be  desirable    
that not the slightest deviation from   
the precise mode of  expression which   
,god had communicated should be made2   
while under others1  the human view--by 
which we here mean the view of the      
particular person  to whom the          
revelation is made--might be recorded1  
and add to it a force  which could      
hardly be had in any other way4  ,so    
long as the record is  such as ,god     
approves of1 every requisite to a true  
record is complied  with4  ,if a        
minister of state were commissioned to  
make a communication  to a foreign      
court1 he might write down the whole or 

a part of it in his  own words1 and1 if 
his own court approved of the words1    
contained in the  writing1 the object in
 view would be answered4  ,we can even  
understand  that1 in some respects1 the 
communication might gain force by this  
mode  of proceeding4  ,the ,greek text  
of the writer would be manifested1 and  
carry with it a certain degree of       
weight4  ,there would be the weight     
which attached to the document as       
emanating from the government1 and      
there might be an additional weight from
 the character of the person who  had   
been entrusted to write1 and1 perhaps1  
carry out1 in some degree1 the          
requirements of1 the dispatch4  ,in the 
case of a recorded revelation1 it       
appears then probable that ,god would   
permit those feelings and powers  which 
,he has implanted in man1 and which     
exert such a strong influence on        
others1 to do their work1 subject1      
however1 to ,his own control and        
guidance4  ,in this way there would be a

 ,divine and a human aspect of the      
record2 a ,divine and a human power in  
it4  ,all of it would be the truth  of  
,god1 and it would be presented to us in
 a manner peculiarly adapted to  our    
condition1 and likely to ensure our     
acceptance of it4  ,at the very  least  
such a method of recording would be     
exactly consistent with  truthfulness4  
,we may go a step further1 and say that 
it would be difficult1 if not           
impossible1 to conceive any             
circumstances under which the record    
should  not bear a human aspect4  ,if   
the views propounded in the former part 
of  these ,thoughts1 with regard to the 
conditions under which a revelation     
must be made1 and especially with       
respect to anthropomorphic views of     
,god1 be correct1 a revelation must     
assume1 in some measure1 a human        
aspect4  ,but if the human aspect must  
exist in the presentation1 it must  also
 in the record4  ,the only question     
which is really open to discussion  is1 

whether there should be the same human  
aspect in the record1 as in  the        
original revelation2 in other words1    
whether it may be expected that  ,god   
would always present that particular    
human aspect in the original  revelation
 which ,he considered best adapted for  
the record4  ,for the  reasons already  
assigned it does not seem probable that 
this would be the  case4    ,it must be 
remembered1 moreover1 that in the case  
of a revelation1 made  at different     
times1 and to different persons1 either 
the character of  each individual writer
 must be manifested in the record1 or   
some other  character1 alien perhaps to 
that of the writer1 and certainly not   
equally  adapted to that of all the     
readers1 must be adopted4  ,which method
 of  record appears the most probable1  
and the most calculated to promote the  
object of a revelation--namely1 to      
instruct and influence mankind--it  does
 not appear very difficult to determine4
  ,it seems1 then1 that a  variety of   

style may be expected in the records    
written by different  persons of the    
revelations which they have received4   
,as has been before  observed1 all that 
is essential to the truthfulness of the 
record is that  ,god should approve of  
it4    ,a question may possibly arise   
here as to the precise manner in which  
the words may be so recorded1 as to     
convey a true account of ,god's         
revelation4  ,in endeavouring to supply 
an answer1 it should be  remembered1 in 
the first place1 that in the ordinary   
affairs of life no  great difficulty    
occurs with regard to the transmission  
of a message4  ,if  the person who has  
been selected to convey it1 has         
sufficient  intelligence to understand  
it1 and is1 moreover1 desirous to       
deliver it  faithfully1 he is1 in most  
cases1 able either to speak1 or write   
it1 in  his own words1 in such a manner 
as to convey the right meaning to       
others4  ,so1 too1 with regard to a     
revelation2 if the person to whom it has

 been  made rightly apprehends it1 and  
endeavours to record it honestly1 the   
probability is great that the record    
which he makes will be a true one4  ,if1
 too1 we are prepared1 in accordance    
with the common belief in all  ages1 to 
admit that ,god can1 and at times does1 
exercise a control over  the minds of   
men1 it is reasonable to believe that   
,he would do this1 when  the object was 
to furnish a correct record for the     
benefit of future  ages4  ,this control 
might be exercised either consciously1  
or  unconsciously to the writer4  ,all  
that would be needful for the           
truthfulness of the record is1 that it  
should be exercised in some way4        
99 99 99 99 99    #d4  ,we will now     
proceed to offer some remarks as to the 
conditions under  which a revelation may
 be expected to be transmitted4  ,much  
of what has  been said1 with regard to  
the recording of a revelation1 by the   
person to  whom it was originally made1 
applies to the transmission of such a   

record  to future generations1 and its  
translation into other languages4  ,if a
  belief 7in what way originated we do  
not now stop to enquire7 in the  reality
 of the recorded revelation existed1 the
 greatest care would  naturally be taken
 in making copies from it1 and also in  
translating it4  ,well-known examples of
 this are to be found in the care which 
the ,jews of  old used in making new    
copies of their sacred books1 and also  
in the fact  that1 in our own country1  
no printers1 but those appointed by the 
,queen1  are permitted to publish the   
authorized version of the ,bible4  ,it  
can  hardly be considered possible that 
those who believed in the reality of a  
recorded revelation1 and valued it1     
would not take care to hand it down  in 
a correct form to others2 and1 although 
incorrect1 mutilated1 and  interpolated 
copies1 might1 in some instances1 be    
made by other persons1  it does not seem
 likely that these would prevail to such
 an extent1 as to  prevent the true     

record from maintaining its ground4     
,such dishonest  copies would hardly be 
made at all1 till considerable interest 
had been  manifested in the revelation2 
and then any variations from the correct
  copies would scarcely pass without    
challenge1 and correction4    ,it       
appears then1 that1 as the ordinary mode
 of recording1 copying1 and  translating
 important communications are usually   
found sufficiently  adequate for their  
several purposes1 such methods might be 
employed with  success in regard to a   
revelation3 and it also seems probable  
that ,god  would not interfere with such
 methods more than was absolutely       
necessary  for the purpose ,he had in   
view4  ,if we suppose that ,god         
exercised1  throughout the whole process
 of transmission1 that controlling power
 to  which reference has been made2 then
 there would be a correct record in     
each age4  ,that ,god should exercise   
that power to such an extent as to      
prevent every possibility of error1 in  

the transmission of the record1 or  of  
mistake as to its meaning in the minds  
of those who read it1 would be  contrary
 to the analogy of ,his dealings with us
 in other things4  ,we  possess         
faculties1 by the due exercise of which 
we are enabled to arrive  at a          
sufficiently accurate knowledge of those
 things which are essential  to our     
wellbeing1 but we are not1 by infallible
 guidance1 preserved from  error4  ,if  
we were1 our responsibility would to a  
great extent cease4  ,all that can be   
reasonably expected1 in the case under  
consideration1 is  that the record      
should be transmitted with such         
exactness1 as that an  honest inquirer  
should be able to ascertain its         
authenticity1 and  understand its       
meaning1 so far as ,god designed that he
 should know it4  ,we say--so far as    
,god designed that he should know       
it1--because it is  quite conceivable   
that there might be mysteries in a      
revelation1 the  meaning of which would 

not be made clear till the time         
determined  beforehand by ,god should   
arrive4                                 
99 99 99 99 99    #e4  ,to enter into a 
full examination1 as to what would      
constitute  sufficient grounds for      
accepting a professed revelation1 would 
open too  wide a field of enquiry for   
our present purpose1 and would          
necessitate a  discussion of that very  
difficult branch of metaphysics which   
relates to  the laws which regulate our 
belief4  ,without1 however1 attempting  
to  discuss the subject fully1 a few    
points may be indicated for             
consideration4    ,it is clear that the 
evidence1 with regard to the record of a
 professed  revelation1 will vary in its
 character at different times4  ,the    
evidence will be more direct1 and1 in   
this respect1 more clear1 at an  earlier
 period of the record1 than at a later3 
while1 on the other hand1  a record     
which has been translated into different
 languages1 and has  exercised a widely 

spread influence1 will possess a        
peculiar force of its  own4  ,on the    
supposition that ,god made a revelation 
to ,moses1 it is not  difficult to      
suppose that convincing evidence1 as to 
the truthfulness of  what he might say1 
or write about it1 might readily be     
afforded to those  who lived in his     
times4  ,if such miracles1 as those     
recorded in the  ,pentateuch really     
occurred--and certainly if ,god so far  
transcended the  usual course of nature 
as to give a revelation1 it does not    
seem hard to  believe that ,he might    
also so far transcend it1 as to         
authenticate it in  some special        
manner--the evidence would be of a very 
strong kind4  ,to  say1 however1 that no
 reasonable conviction of the reality of
 a  revelation could be afforded1       
without the aid of miracles1 is an      
assertion which we are not prepared to  
hazard2 though we certainly think  that1
 as calculated to excite attention1 and 
implying a power superior to  that of   

man1 they would serve as excellent      
credentials4  ,to human view1  in fact1 
a miracle does not necessarily imply the
 agency of the one ,god4  ,it might1 for
 anything that can be proved to the     
contrary1 be the work of  some power1   
inferior to that ,god whom we are bound 
to obey1 and yet  superior to man4  ,the
 various circumstances therefore1       
connected with the  miracle1 would be   
properly taken into account by the      
person who was  investigating a         
professed revelation4  ,he would not    
only examine with  care the evidence as 
to the reality of the miracle itself1   
but also the  circumstances under which 
it was worked1 and its aspect4  ,the    
character  of the person who professed  
to have received the revelation would   
very  fairly come under consideration4  
,inquiries would be made as to whether  
he was one whose word could be safely   
trusted1 and whether he possessed       
sufficient intelligence1 to render it   
probable that he would arrive at a      

right conclusion4  ,a man of known      
truthfulness and intelligence would     
justly meet with more ready credence1   
than a person of an opposite  character4
    ,the revelation itself1 too1 would  
be closely scrutinized4  ,in some cases 
it is conceivable that the revelation   
would go far to prove itself4  ,it      
might make known things which1 though   
not perhaps discoverable by man's       
reason1 were nevertheless so agreeable  
to it1 as to carry with them an  almost 
irresistible conviction4  ,as1 too1 a   
revelation would be given for  the      
practical guidance of man1 it would     
probably be attended with  threatenings 
and promises1 or other predictions2 and 
when the things  which had been foretold
 actually took place1 the reality of the
  revelation would be1 to a great       
extent1 established4  ,if1 for instance1
  the remarkable occurrences which      
,moses1 on various occasions1 foretold1 
as about to take place in the land of   
,egypt1 really occurred1 it would1  we  

think1 be very difficult to avoid the   
conclusion that he had received  a      
revelation from ,god1 and that what he  
said1 or wrote1 was to be  depended     
upon4  ,a candid inquirer would also    
examine1 in a reverent  spirit1 whether 
the professed revelation was likely to  
promote a pure  morality1 and to further
 the best interests of mankind4  ,he    
would not1  indeed1 enter upon such an  
examination1 with the feeling that he   
was  competent to decide1 in every      
respect1 as to the justice and          
excellence  of the statements which     
professed to be revealed2 for his       
reason1 if  consulted1 would tell him   
that many circumstances might be hidden 
from  him1 without which a correct      
judgment could not be formed1 and that1 
possibly1 his capacity might not be able
 to grasp them in all their  relations1 
even if they were put before him4       
,still1 such an examination  as that    
which we have just referred to1 would   
properly form an element in  leading to 

a conclusion1 and1 when combined with   
others1 would give as  reasonable       
grounds for arriving at a decision with 
respect to a professed  revelation1 as  
we should be willing to act on in the   
usual business of  life1 and would1     
therefore1 be suited to the conditions  
of our being4  ,the decision arrived at 
would commonly be the result1 not of a  
single  proof1 but of many concurrent   
circumstances4    ,what has been said in
 reference to an examination1 instituted
 by persons  living at the time when a  
professed revelation was made1 is       
obviously  applicable1 in many respects1
 to those who should live in later      
times1  and also to the original        
recipients themselves4  ,with regard to 
evidence  in later times1 it may be     
added that the original believers in the
  record1 and their followers in each   
succeeding age1 would naturally be      
subjected to an examination1 as to their
 truthfulness and intelligence1  and    
thus a chain of evidence would be       

continually kept up4  ,the larger1  too1
 the number1 and the more intelligent   
the character of those who  believed in 
it1 the greater would be the presumption
 in its favour4  ,if  the record were   
received generally by any nation1 the   
onus probandi  would in that case lie   
with those who impugned it4  ,the record
 itself  also would1 from time to time1 
be submitted to such fair rules of      
criticism as apply to other documents1  
the fact however being remembered1  that
 it professed to be the word of ,god1   
and1 therefore1 that evidence of  its   
authenticity1 rather than of its exact  
coincidence with human reason1  was to  
be mainly looked for4    ,we have now   
indicated1 although very briefly and    
imperfectly1 a few  points for          
consideration1 as to the transmission of
 a recorded  revelation1 and what might 
constitute sufficient grounds for       
accepting it  as true2 and we trust that
 what has been said will suffice to show
 that  there would be no great          

difficulty in so handing it down1 as    
that it  should convey to the candid    
inquirer1 in each succeeding age1       
reasonable  evidence of its reality4    
,it may1 however1 be argued1 that1      
although such evidence1 as has been     
indicated1 might well convince those who
 had time and ability to  institute a   
searching examination1 the case is      
different with regard to  others2 and   
that1 as a revelation may be presumed to
 have a most  important bearing upon the
 interests of all1 there should be some 
more  easy method by which it may be    
tested4  ,now1 we are quite prepared to 
admit that every one should have        
sufficient grounds afforded him for     
arriving at a decision2 but1 at the same
 time1 we do not conceive that a        
thorough examination of the evidence1   
made by each person for himself1 is  the
 only1 or even principal1 method by     
which a safe conclusion may be  reached4
  ,each individual has commonly some    
peculiar talent1 in the  exercise of    

which he reaches an excellence1 which   
others1 whose abilities  and pursuits   
are of a different character1 do not    
attain to4  ,the  astronomer works out  
conclusions1 which1 those1 whose        
attention has been  directed to other   
subjects1 could never have reached1 but 
which they may  nevertheless1 with      
propriety1 accept as true4  ,it is not  
every one who  has time or ability to   
sift evidence on theological subjects1  
or to  criticise manuscripts2 but the   
labours of those who have given their   
attention to such things may1 it is     
evident1 justly be available for the    
benefit of others4  ,even the wisest    
person accepts as true much on the      
testimony of others1 and that often on  
subjects with which he is  conversant4  
,when his judgment is most independent  
he will find1 if he  analyzes it1 that  
much is borrowed4  ,there is nothing    
contrary to sound  reason in all this4  
,without it1 little progress could be   
made in  anything4  ,without it1 each   

succeeding age1 instead of standing on  
the  platform which had been raised by  
that which preceded it1 would have the  
weary task of commencing afresh1 and    
could thus make few accessions to       
knowledge4  ,trustfulness is as much a  
part of man's constitution1 as          
reasoning or any other intellectual     
process4  ,should it be said that men   
often trust wrongly2 it may be replied  
with equal force that they as           
frequently reason wrongly4  ,probably   
there is less difficulty in             
ascertaining where we may safely trust1 
than in weighing evidence  properly1 or 
carrying out correctly a train of       
reasoning4  ,certainly  people have     
little difficulty1 if they use their    
faculties aright1 in  selecting a fit   
adviser in law or medicine4  ,why should
 there be a  greater difficulty with    
regard to religion8  ,we do not mean    
that anyone  would be justified in so   
placing himself under the guidance of   
another1  as to give up the exercise of 

his own judgment altogether2 but1 that  
he  may properly make use of the counsel
 of others1 and that often to such an   
extent as to overrule his own views in  
forming his judgment4    ,there is      
another consideration1 connected with   
this portion of the  subject1 which well
 deserves attention4  ,a conclusion may 
be a very  correct one1 and may have    
been reached by a very satisfactory     
process1  although the person who has   
made it1 may be unable to state the     
grounds  upon which it rests1 or meet   
the objections which may be made against
 it4  ,this applies not only to those   
cases1 where the conclusion mainly rests
  upon trust1 but also to others4  ,an  
eminent statesman recommended a  person 
going out in an official capacity1 to   
give his decisions  confidently1 but not
 to venture to declare the reasons4     
,the decisions  would probably be right1
 but the reasons1 as stated by him1     
might not  be4  ,it need not be inferred
 from this that the reasons upon which  

he  would really act were wrong1 but    
rather that from want of practice1 or   
power of analysis1 or some other cause1 
he would be unable to bring them  out   
correctly4  ,the processes of thought   
pass so rapidly through the  mind1 that 
even the most practised thinkers often  
find it difficult to  arrest them in    
their progress1 and state the various   
steps by which they  have arrived at    
their conclusions4  ,the simplest and   
most certain grounds  of our conclusions
 are1 in fact1 not unfrequently those   
which it is most  difficult to bring out
 into distinct view4  ,they have so     
often passed  through the mind that we  
have ceased to notice them1 although1   
all the  while1 they contribute         
essentially to the judgment which is    
formed2 or  they lie so far back1 in the
 depths of our consciousness1 that it is
  almost impossible to recover them4    
,necessarily1 nothing can be so  simple1
 or so certain1 in one sense1 as        
intuitions1 that is1 those things  which

 we know or believe without any         
intermediate process of thought1 and    
yet1 down to the present time1 those who
 have most deeply studied the  subject  
hesitate to decide exactly as to what   
are intuitions1 and what  are not4  ,we 
conclude then that1 while1 on the one   
hand1 we should not  discredit the      
rational powers of men1 as if they were 
unequal to perform  the task allotted to
 them2 we must not1 on the other1 be    
easily shaken  with regard to           
conclusions which have been made with   
care and  consideration1 because we may 
be unable to trace out accurately the   
arguments by which they are supported1  
or answer the objections which are  made
 against them4    ,we have now          
considered revelation with regard to the
 conditions under  which it may be      
expected to be given1 recorded1 and     
transmitted1  with a view to its being  
accepted and believed4  ,we do not for a
 moment  suppose that we have removed   
every difficulty2 but if we have upon   

the  whole1 made clear to our readers   
the nature of these conditions1 or1     
where this has not been done1 indicated 
the points at which difficulties  exist1
 our chief purpose will have been       
answered4                               
99 99 99 99 99    #f4  ,here we might   
leave the subject1 but we cannot forbear
 adding some  further observations in   
reference to that professed revelation  
of ,god's  will which is to be found in 
the ,bible4  ,it is not our intention to
  attempt a summary of the various      
evidences which exist to show that it is
  a real one2 nor is it our design to   
reply at length to the objections  which
 have been made to invalidate it4       
,there are however some obvious  facts  
which meet us on the threshold of the   
inquiry1 and which can be  estimated at 
their just value by any candid inquirer1
 to which we would  direct attention4   
,we find for instance that the ,bible   
contains a purer system of morality1    
and conveys a clearer insight into the  

unity and nature of ,god1 than is  to be
 found in any other book2 and that1     
although it is the composition  of men1 
many of them ignorant and unlearned1 who
 have lived at different  times1 and    
occupied very dissimilar positions in   
life1 there is1  nevertheless1 a        
wonderful similarity in the main        
outlines of religious  truth1 as        
delivered by all the writers4  ,we know1
 however1 still further1  that the      
morality and precepts of the ,bible1    
although confessedly of a  pure and holy
 character1 are1 nevertheless1 not of   
such a kind as to fall  in with the     
wishes and passions of mankind4  ,to    
believe that morality  must extend to   
thoughts as well as actions1 and that an
 all-seeing ,god  notices1 and will one 
day call all men to a strict account1 is
 not a  matter which1 if we may judge   
from what we see around us1 is agreeable
 to  the feelings of most men4  ,nor1 if
 we look to the great remedy proposed   
for the sin of man1 such1 we mean1 as it

 is supposed to be1 by the great        
majority of professing ,christians1     
namely1 the atoning sacrifice made by   
the ,son of ,god1 do we find here again 
a matter which either the reason or  the
 feelings of men generally are ready to 
lead them to adopt4  ,we see  too1 that 
in all ages unbelief has1 more or less1 
existed1 and objections  have been1 from
 time to time1 brought forward which    
appeared likely to  have considerable   
power in undermining the existing belief
 in the ,bible4  ,persecution also has  
exercised its influence1 and1 it might  
frequently  have been supposed1         
according to human calculations1 that it
 would have  availed to destroy all     
credence in it4  ,and yet1              
notwithstanding all  these              
circumstances1 to which we have         
referred1 it is an incontrovertible     
fact that a professed belief in the     
,bible1 as a revelation from ,god1      
exists most widely4  ,it is1 we may add1
 not a little worthy of being  remarked 

that the nomenclature of the ,bible has 
obtained such a strong  hold on the     
public mind1 in our own day1 that many  
who deny inspiration  in any distinctive
 sense1 still retain the use of this and
 other words1  as if afraid to make it  
plain how far they differ from those    
opinions  which are commonly received4  
,the present age is certainly more      
enlightened than any which has preceded 
it2 but1 hitherto at least1 a professed 
belief in the orthodox doctrines  of    
religion has increased rather than      
diminished4  ,we find moreover that     
persons of all ranks1 and every kind of 
mental calibre1 have declared  that they
 find something in the ,bible which they
 do not find in any other  book2        
something1 in fact1 which1 when duly    
received1 comes home to their  hearts as
 men1 and seems admirably adapted to the
 deepest wants of human  nature4  ,we   
see too that those who appear to have   
accepted the ,bible most  fully1 and to 
hold it most firmly1 have been so much  

impressed with a  sense of its          
importance to the world at large1 as to 
have endeavoured1  often at considerable
 risk and expense1 to communicate to    
others1 both  at-home and abroad1 the   
knowledge of those things which they    
have  received as truths--a method of   
proceeding which has not been adopted1  
and1 in fact1 could not have been1      
without a manifest absurdity1 by those  
who profess to believe in the           
inspiration of ,plato1 ,milton1         
,shakespeare1  and other great1 but1    
according to common opinion1 uninspired 
men4  ,all  these and various other     
considerations which might be adduced   
seem to  mark out the ,bible1 as being a
 book at least different from all other 
books1 and to lead to the presumption   
that it may contain that knowledge  of  
,god which1 as has been remarked in the 
earlier part of these  ,thoughts1 it    
appears most important for men to be    
acquainted with1 and  a revelation of   
which1 in some way or other1 has been   

very commonly  believed in4  ,assuredly 
there is a strong presumption in its    
favour1 and  the onus probandi1 in our  
own day1 lies with those who deny its   
claims  to acceptance4  ,whether however
 the ,bible actually is1 or contains a  
revelation from ,god is still a fair    
subject for reverent examination4       
,without attempting to enter upon such  
an examination here1 we may1  without   
impropriety1 offer a suggestion as to   
the spirit in which it  should be       
conducted4  ,it must be remembered that 
the examination of a  theological1 or   
any other subject which bears upon the  
interests of our  daily lives1 involves 
principles of a very different character
 from those  which are connected with an
 investigation of the science of number1
 or  any other abstract science4        
,mathematical and numerical             
investigations  advance from principles 
which are clearly defined1 and almost   
universally  acknowledged to be         
self-evident2 the reasoning also is of  

such a kind as  to preclude the         
admission of error4  ,in theology the   
case is different4  ,there1 it is       
difficult to define with accuracy the   
points from which the  reasoning        
commences1 and also to exclude1 with    
certainty1 the possibility  of error in 
the reasoning itself4  ,there is1 too1  
another essential  difference between   
abstract sciences and other subjects of 
inquiry4  ,it  is not only self-evident 
that two straight lines cannot enclose a
 space1  but the judgment which the mind
 gives on the subject is not in any     
danger  of being disturbed by the       
feelings4  ,in theology1 however1 the   
matters  which come under consideration 
are so mixed up with our nearest and    
dearest interests1 that the feelings are
 called into play at every step  of the 
investigation1 and a just balance of the
 judgment cannot be  preserved without  
the exercise of much care4  ,hence the  
necessity of  endeavouring to preserve a
 candid and unruffled spirit in all     

enquiries  connected with religion4  ,no
 doubt those feelings which a beneficent
 ,god  has implanted with a view to     
assist us in deciding1 are to have their
 due  weight2 but certainly there is    
need of caution1 lest they influence us 
unduly4  ,if the judge thinks it needful
 to charge the jury to dismiss  from    
their minds everything which might tend 
to influence their judgments  in an     
improper manner1 and attend only to the 
evidence1 even though the  matter about 
which they have to decide is usually one
 in which they have  no personal        
interest2 it certainly does not appear  
unnecessary to give a  similar caution  
on a subject1 with regard to which      
feeling has assumed so  strong a form as
 to give rise to the name1 odium        
theologicum4  ,we  deceive ourselves1 if
 we imagine that we approach the subject
 without any  danger of judging it      
unfairly4  ,this caution1 undoubtedly   
applies to  all who discuss theological 
questions2 but we think that we shall   

not  be making an unwarranted assertion1
 if we say that it applies in a  special
 manner to those who impugn the ,bible  
revelation1 when it is  remembered that 
the doctrines contained in it1 as they  
have generally  been received by those  
who are called orthodox ,christians1 are
 of such a  kind as very commonly to    
excite1 in the first instance at least1 
a strong  feeling of opposition4  ,the  
,bible itself intimates this1 and common
  experience bears witness to it as     
being a fact4  ,we are not now saying   
that the doctrines of the purity and    
holiness of ,god1 the dreadful nature   
of sin1 the need of an atonement1 the   
inability of man to present himself     
before ,god in merits of his own1 and   
others of a similar kind are true2  but 
we may properly say that1 whether true  
or false1 they are such as  frequently  
raise a strong feeling of opposition2   
and therefore that those  who examine   
them1 with the view of ascertaining     
their character1 stand in  special need 

of the caution to preserve a calm and   
candid spirit4    ,it will not be out of
 place to introduce here another        
consideration which  has a bearing upon 
this part of the subject1 namely1 the   
supernatural  aid which the ,bible      
offers towards the understanding and    
acceptance of  its doctrines4  ,it is   
quite conceivable that a state of things
 might  exist in which such aid would be
 wholly unnecessary4  ,we might suppose 
a  case in which the nature of man was  
so entirely in harmony with itself1  and
 so exactly attuned to the truths of a  
,divine revelation1 as readily  to      
accept it1 when it was presented2 but   
the question we have to decide  is1     
whether man's nature is actually in this
 state or not4  ,observation  leads us  
to believe that it is not4  ,whether we 
accept the scripture  statement of the  
fall or not1 we must not shut our eyes  
to the fact that  it is difficult for   
virtue to force its way1 while vice has 
many  votaries4  ,however convincing1   

abstractedly1 the reasons may be to     
enforce the claims of virtue1 it is     
evident that they possess but little    
power to lead the large majority of     
mankind4  ,history and experience       
testify to this4  ,scarce any deny the  
evidence in favour of virtue1  although 
few are content to be governed by it4   
,now it may be fairly  presumed that any
 revelation which the ,divine ,being    
might make would be  in the interests of
 virtue2 it may be reasonably expected  
too that it  would be supported by      
strong evidence3 but1 if1 as actual     
observation  makes it clear is the case1
 the feelings of mankind are more       
inclined to  reject than accept the     
claims of virtue1 the evidence1 however 
strong1  will not produce the effect    
which it would1 if the mind were more   
justly  balanced1 and thus the          
revelation will be in danger of being   
rejected4  ,such rejection1 be it       
remembered1 need not result from any    
deficiency of  evidence1 but may arise  

from an indisposition to receive it4    
,for our own  part we believe that the  
evidence in favour of the orthodox views
 of  scripture statements is far        
stronger than can be found in support of
 any  other subject of a like kind3 but1
 at the same time1 taking into          
consideration the actual tendencies of  
human nature1 we are not surprised  that
 it does not produce the effect which it
 should do2 and therefore it  appears to
 us not unreasonable to suppose that    
,god might exercise some  such          
supernatural power upon the mind1 as the
 ,bible speaks of1 with the  view of    
disposing it to the reception of a      
revelation4    ,that ,god does at times 
interfere in a manner1 out of the usual 
course of  ,his ,providence1 with regard
 to other matters1 especially in answer 
to  prayer1 is believed almost          
universally4  ,we cannot enter here into
 a  discussion as to the foundation of  
the belief2 but1 certainly so long as   
the records of mankind go back1 and so  

far as the experience of the  present   
day conducts us1 the belief has been    
entertained1 and prayer  seems to be the
 natural expression of man's heart in   
all cases of  difficulty4  ,men will    
believe in1 and appeal to1 a            
supernatural power1  and it is hard to  
suppose that a tendency so universal and
 deeply seated1  should have no solid   
foundation4  ,but if prayer1 for aid and
 direction  from above1 is the natural  
outpouring of man's heart with regard to
 the  more ordinary affairs of life1    
there appears to be no reason why prayer
  should not be offered up for counsel  
and guidance with regard to a  professed
 revelation1 and that an answer should  
be expected4  ,at least1  it can hardly 
be said that those have fairly tested   
the claims of  scripture to be received 
as a revelation from ,god1 who have not 
complied  with the conditions which it  
has laid down as to the manner in which 
it  should be studied4    ,we now leave 
the subject1 drawing the attention of   

our readers to the  prayer of one of our
 greatest poets1 and earnestly hoping   
that his prayer  may be theirs3--       
4 4 4 ,what in me is dark1              
,illumine2 what is low1 raise and       
support2      ,that to the height of    
this great argument      ,i may assert  
,eternal ,providence1      ,and justify 
the ways of ,god to man4                
,paradise ,lost4                        
99 99 99 99 99                          
,,london3 ,,wertheim1 ,,macintosh1 ,,and
 ,,hunt4                                
,by the same ,author1                   
,,thoughts ,,on ,,miracles4             
,,price ,,sixpence4          ,footnotes3
      #ag  ,on the subject of the       
,mosaic cosmogony1 see a very           
interesting  ,letter from ,sir ,isaac   
,newton to ,dr4 ,thomas ,burnet1 in ,sir
 ,david  ,brewster's ,life of ,newton1  
pp4 #dej-dec4