FOOTNOTE:
[656] Rev. xix. 13.
APPENDIX G.
(p. 112.)
[The volume of the Old Testament Scriptures, indivisible.]
"In regard of the Old Testament, it will be observed that the whole volume stands or falls altogether. In whatever sense we understand the falling or standing, the volume stands or falls together. Each page of it is committed to the credit of the rest, and the whole book or collection of books is committed to the credit of each page. For this plain reason, that the book as we have it, is the book which, being known in the Jewish Church as the volume of her authentic and sacred Scriptures, our blessed Saviour accepted and referred to as such. By whatever marks the canonicity of the several books was in the first instance attested,—marks which were sufficient for God's purpose, and which did His work,—there is the volume. 'It is written,' said our Saviour; that is, in a book which all His nation knew of, and understood to be inspired. The scrupulous care which the Jews shewed in preserving their sacred writings intact, is one of the most remarkable facts in history; it is a fact of which the Christian student can give perhaps the right account, seeing it to have been so ordered in the good providence of God, that we might have firm ground in calling the book, as we have it, the Word of God. The volume stands or falls then together; which we may with advantage bear in mind, because it makes an argument which is available for any portion of the volume, available for the whole; and no one can now say, 'You do not surely hold the genealogies in the books of Chronicles, to be inspired: Isaiah and the Psalms may be inspired; but do you mean the same of the long extracts from mere annals?' No man, I say, can take this freedom, until he can extract and remove those chapters from the book which our blessed Saviour unquestionably referred to as the canonical Scriptures of the Church. If a verse stands, the Old Testament stands."—Sermons, by the Rev. C. P. Eden, pp. 152-3.
APPENDIX H.
(p. 115.)
(Some remarks had been partially prepared for insertion in this place, on Theories of Inspiration: but my volume has already been delayed too long, and has extended to a greater length than was originally contemplated. The paper in question is therefore reserved for the present.)
APPENDIX I.
(p. 117.)
[Remarks on Theories of Inspiration.—The 'Human Element.']
"It will be allowed by all persons accustomed to a calm and charitable view of Theological differences, that in those differences there is generally on each side some great truth wrongly held, because taken out of its due place, and wrongly set. Applying this topic to the subject before us, we are led to consider whether a mistake has not been made in bringing forward the Human Element of Inspiration, instead of permitting the eye to rest upon that which God presents to us,—the Divine. The Human Element no doubt is there; no doubt our Maker acts through our faculties in every respect; no doubt He is acting through laws when He seems to suspend laws; and even in Miracles, employs the powers of Nature instead of thwarting them; but then this is His machinery, which He has not explained to us. He presents Himself to us, acting sometimes supernaturally; i.e. in a way above nature as we understand nature. He made the Sun to stand still for Joshua; what refractive cloud came in and held the daylight that it should not go down is not made known to us; God said that it should stay, and it stayed; there was the miracle. To have set the Creation going two thousand years before in such a way and train that in that hour a cloud should rise to refract the sun's rays for a time, because in that hour the Lord's armies would need the interference, the prolonging of the daylight,—that was miracle enough. We say not that God interrupts His own laws; nay, rather we believe that He hath them always in smooth and orderly operation. Similarly of Inspiration; we know not the way in which God acts on human minds, the Spirit on the spirit; for He hath not told us. But, as I said in the beginning, in an age like the present, where analysis of process is the work of men's minds, the way in which man is feeling his strength in every direction, it is not very unnatural that the operations of this philosophy should have been carried beyond their due line; into the subject, namely, of the secret communication between the Divine Spirit, and the spirit and apprehensions of Men, i.e. the Work of Inspiration. To accept the Bible as the word of God, just as a cottager or a child in a village school accepts it, is an inglorious thing. He whose intellect is his instrument, that which he is to work with, wishes to feel his intellect operating on any subject which he has to meet. He feels a desire, in apprehending a thing as done, to have as part of his apprehension, a view of how it is done, more or less. It is natural to him to take what he feels to be an intelligent view of a subject. In accepting the Bible therefore as the Word of God, he must have a view as to how it is the Word of God; the nature of the illapse which the Spirit from on high makes on the spirit and faculties of the man. In a word, he would get between the Creator, and man to whom the Creator speaks; and there would make his observations. But how little encouragement have we to do this in the Word of God! When God sent prophets to speak to men, to convey a message to them from their Maker, or when He tells Apostles to speak to us, doth He invite us to come within the veil with our philosophy, and examine? I shall offend the piety of those who hear me by pursuing the thought. But I cannot but think that something of this kind has been done by those who have presented us with theories of Inspiration, setting forth to us that which it cannot be shewn that God hath set forth to them, or to any one. Yes, they are right; our Creator makes use of our faculties; and when He hath given to one man faculties different from those given to another, faculties of whatever kind, of intellectual power or of moral temperament, He employs them all. Hath He a message of Love? He employs a St. John to utter it, and to prolong the delightful note. Hath He a message of freedom, that liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free? He hath a Paul ready to accept and to fulfil the congenial errand. But God speaks, not man; and they who would have us be dwelling on the Human Element, when God invites us to be lost in the Divine, are doing not well. Yes, God employs all our faculties: He hath made us different, as He made the flowers of the field different, and Christianity shews us why He hath so made us; because He hath a work for each of us to do,—a work which none else could do so well. Doubtless He employs all our faculties, doing violence to none. This doubtless is His glory, that He can bring about His results by the means which He Himself hath made. Who has not felt, in reading some sacred narrative, the history, e.g. of Joseph, that the wonderful part of it was this, how naturally all came about,—all by natural operation of human motives and man's free will? So in Inspiration. No doubt God's instruments which He hath made are enough for His work; no doubt He employs men as they are; not their tongues only, but their minds and spirits, acting on them and employing them as they are. Only in that great process, the point which I call attention to is this,—God speaks of it as divine, and fixes the thought of those who hear Him on the divine element: we, dropping our view on the human, are not wise. He shews us providence; He condescends to shew us His work: we do not well when we shew an interest rather in lower parts of the scheme, especially when in those we may so greatly err, having so little information."—Sermons, by the Rev. C. P. Eden, pp. 164-170.
APPENDIX J.
(p. 145.)
[How the Inspired authors of the New Testament handle the writings of the Inspired authors of the Old.]
"Let me repeat:—The question is, how we should address ourselves to the study of the sacred page? For example, how am I to regard, and how to deal with, the great diversities there are between the several sacred writers? For there is the greatest diversity of mind appearing between them. St. Paul is no more the same with St. John, than any two good men now are perfectly alike in their constitution of mind. Nay, the diversity seems especially great in the case of the sacred writers: as if to forbid us to adopt any theory which should ignore or neglect that diversity. It is striking. How shall I deal with these and like circumstances?... Can it be suggested to me what a good and wise man would do in this matter?
"In answer; it can apparently be suggested; and through that which is the best and safest of arguments, the argument from analogy. For there has been a parallel case; the case of the inspired writers of the New Testament dealing with the Scriptures of the Old. To this parallel I now invite your attention. If we can observe how and upon what great principles, piety and wisdom, guided by Inspiration, dealt with the volume of the Holy Scriptures which were then its whole volume, namely the Old Testament; we have so far forth a parallel case to the case of Christians now. The first Christians looked back on the Old Testament as their sacred Scriptures. If we can discern how they regarded their sacred volume, and how they proceeded in interpreting it, we have a pattern to guide us in regard of the question, how we shall regard the sacred volume, and how proceed in the study and interpretation of it; they with the Bible that they had,—we with the Bible that we have, the completed volume.—In this point of view I cannot but regard it as most distinctly providential that there are introduced in the pages of the New Testament so many quotations from the pages of the Old. For they furnish us with an answer applicable in every age of the Church to the question, How shall piety and wisdom deal with a sacred volume; that volume being from the pen of many writers; but with this aggravated difficulty in the former case, that the writers there were widely separated from one another in point of time, were in contact therefore with most difficult forms of life and stages of society? How in approaching a volume so originated, did the New Testament writers regard and deal with its contents?"—Sermons, by the Rev. C. P. Eden, pp. 183-5.
"And it is impossible for us to imagine,—I say the thoughtful reader of the Holy Scriptures will find it impossible to imagine,—an Evangelist or Apostle, evoking out of its grave the Human Element of the ancient prophetic communications; disinterring it once more as if to gaze upon it. I am sure the impression left on the mind by the passages in the New Testament where the Old is referred to, is in accordance with what I say. In other words,—(for it is but in other words the same,)—these divinely instructed students,—these inspired readers of the sacred page,—are aware of that which they read, being inspired; God its author, and not Man. And they shew this consciousness, putting off their shoes from their feet, as if on holy ground. A divinely instructed mind, interprets a divinely indited Scripture; the Spirit His own interpreter; and we are taught,—not by man but by the Author of Inspiration,—how Inspiration is to be dealt with.—Let him who would deal aright with the sacred pages of the New Covenant, observe in due seriousness what instruction he may gain from the consideration now suggested to his thoughts. Let him learn from the sacred page, how to deal with the sacred page. And if he has observed these things; if he has seen how the writers of the New Testament, discern in lines and words of the Old Testament, that which speaks to them,—(for it speaks to Christ, and in Him to His Church, i.e. to them:) ... how these utterers of inspired sounds are found, when their words receive at length an authentic interpretation, to have been speaking of the Christian Church, its terms of Salvation, its spiritual gifts;—a reader of the Holy Scriptures practised in these observations will have learned in some measure how to approach the sacred volume; with a sense not only of its unfathomed depth, but also of its unity of scope; and a conscious interest rather in its universal truths,—its ever present truths,—than in those transitory imports which some of its pages can be shewn to have had, over and above their Evangelical meaning."—(Ibid., pp. 186-9.)
APPENDIX K.
(p. 199.)
[Bishop Bull on Deut. xxx.]
"Jam hic etiam quæstionem unam et alteram solvendam exhibebimus.—Quæritur, An nullum omnino extet in lege Mosis Spiritus Sancti promissum? Resp. Legem, si per eam intelligas pactum in monte Sinai factum, et mediatore Mose populo Israelitico datum, (quæ, ut modo diximus, est maxime propria ac genuina ipsius in Paulinis Epistolis notio atque acceptio,) nullum Spiritus Sancti promissum continere, manifestum est. Si, inquam, per eam intelligas pactum in Sinai factum; quia in hagiographis et Scriptis Propheticis, (quæ nomine legis et Veteris Test. laxius sumpto non raro veniunt,) de Spiritu Sancto, tum ex gratiâ Divinâ promisso, tum precibus hominum impetrato, passim legimus. Imo et in Mosaicis scriptis, licet non in ipso Mosaico f[oe]dere, promissum (ni fallor) satis clarum de gratia Spiritus Sancti Israelitis a Deo danda reperire est.
"Ejusmodi certe est illud Deut. xxx. 6: 'Circumcidet Jehova Deus tuus animam tuam et animam seminis tui, ad diligendum Jehovam Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo,' &c. Etenim circumcisionem cordis, præsertim ejusmodi quâ ad Deum toto corde diligendum homines præparentur, non sine magna Spiritus Sancti vi atque efficacia fieri posse, apud omnes, qui a Pelagio diversum sentiunt, in confesso est. Sed hoc etiam ad Evangelicam Justitiam pertinebat, quam sub cortice externorum rituum et ceremoniarum latitantem primum Moses ipse, dein prophetæ alii, digito quasi commonstrarunt. Justitia enim Fidei, quæ in evangelio πεφανέρωται olim erat ὑπὸ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν προφητῶν μαρτυρουμένη,—ut diserte affirmat Apostolus. (Rom. iii. 21.) Dixi autem, exerte hanc Spiritus Sancti promissionem in ipso Mosaico f[oe]dere non haberi. Addam aliquid amplius,—partem eam fuisse Novi Testamenti, ab ipso Mose promulgati. Nam f[oe]dus cum Judæis sancitum, (Deut. xxix., et seq., in quo hæc verba reperiuntur,) plane diversum fuisse a f[oe]dere in monto Sinai facto, adeoque renovationem continuisse pacti cum Abrahamo initi, h. e. f[oe]deris Evangelici tum temporis obscurius revelati,—multis argumentis demonstrari potest. (1º) Diserte dicitur, (cap. xxix. 1.) verba, quæ ibidem sequuntur, fuisse 'verba f[oe]deris quod Deus præcepit Mosi, ut pangeret cum Israelitis, præter f[oe]dus illud, quod pepigerat cum illis in Chorebo.' Qui renovationem tantum hic intelligunt f[oe]deris in monte Sinai facti, nugas agunt, quin et textûs ipsius apertissimis verbis contradicunt. Neque enim verba f[oe]deris in Sinai facti repetita ac renovata ullo sensu dici possunt verba f[oe]deris, quod Deus sancivit præter illud, quod in monte Sinai pepigerat. (2º) Diserte dicitur, hoc f[oe]dus idem prorsus fuisse cum eo, quod Deus juramento sanciverat cum Israelitici populi majoribus, Abrahamo puta, Isaaco et Jacobo, (ejusdem cap. ver. 12, 13,)—quod f[oe]dus ipsum Evangelicum fuit, obscurius revelatum, ipso apostolo Paulo interprete, Gal. iii. 16, 17. (3º) Nonnulla hujus f[oe]deris verba citat Paulus, ut verba f[oe]deris Evangelici, quæ fidei justitiam manifesto præ se ferant. (Vide Rom. x. 6. et seq. Coll. Deut. xxx. 11, et seq.) Haud me fugit esse nonnullos, qui statuunt, hæc Mosis verba ab Apostolo ad fidei justitiam per allusionem tantum accommodari: sed fidem non faciunt, cum Paulus verba ista manifesto alleget ut ipsissima verba justitiæ fidei, h. e. f[oe]deris Evangelici, in quo justitia ista revelatur. Atque, ut verum fatear, semper existimavi, allusiones istas (ad quas confugiunt quidam tanquam ad sacrum suæ ignorantiæ asylum,) plerumque aliud nihil esse, quam sacræ Scripturæ abusiones manifestas. Sed non necesse erat, hoc saltem in loco, ut tali κρησφυγέτῳ uterentur. Nam, (4º) quæcunque in hoc f[oe]dere continentur, in Evangelium mire quadrant. (i.) Quod ad præcepta attinet, præscribuntur hic ea tantum, quæ ad mores pertinent, et per se honesta sunt; illorum rituum, qui, si verba spectes, pueriles videri possent, quorumque totum f[oe]dus legale fere plenum est, nulla facta mentione. Addas, totam illam obedientiam, quæ hic requiritur, ad sincerum sedulumque studium Deo in omnibus obediendi referri. (Vid. cap. xxx., 10, 16, 20.) (ii.) Ad promissa quod spectat, plenam hic omnium peccatorum, etiam gravissimorum, remissionem post peractam p[oe]nitentiam repromittit Deus; (cap. xxx., 1-4.) quæ gratia in f[oe]dere legali nuspiam concessa est, ut supra fusius ostendimus. Deinde, gratia Spiritus Sancti, qua corda hominum circumcidantur, ut Jehovam diligant ex toto corde atque ex tota anima, hoc in loco, de quo agimus, (nempe prædicti capitis ver 6.) clare promittitur. Hui! quam procul ab usitata Mosaicorum scriptorum vena!... (5º) F[oe]dus illud, de quo prædixit Jeremias, (xxxi. 31. et seq.) f[oe]dus esse Evangelicum, negavit Christianus nemo; cum Divinus auctor Epistolæ ad Hebræos idipsum expresse doceat, (viii. 8, et seq.) Jam quæ de pacto isto prænuntiat propheta, omnia huic f[oe]deri Moabitico ad amussim respondent. Appellat suum f[oe]dus Jeremias 'f[oe]dus novum; ab eo, quod cum majoribus populi Israelitici Ægypto exeuntibus pepigerat Deus, omnino diversum.' Idem etiam de Moabitico f[oe]dere dicit Moses. Causam reddit Jeremias cur novum Deus pactum, Sinaiticum aboliturus, molitus fuerit; nempe, quod Israelitæ, præpotentiore gratia destituti, Sinaiticum illud irritum fecissent, præceptis ejusdem non obtemperando, (ver. 32.) Eandem causam et Moses manifesto designat; 'Nondum,' inquit, 'dederat vobis Jehova mentem ad cognoscendum, et oculos ad videndum, et aures ad audiendum, usque ad diem hunc:' (Deut. xxix. 4.) h. d. Pactum prius vobiscum pepigerat Deus, in quo voluntatem suam præceptis, tum promissis tum minis, tum denique miraculis omne genus satis superque communitis, vobis ipsis patefecerat. Sed vidit f[oe]dus illud parum vobis profuisse; vidit vobis opus esse efficaciore adhuc gratia, qua nempe corda vestra circumcidantur, &c. ideoque novum f[oe]dus meditatur, in quo gratiam illam efficacissimam vobis adstipulaturus sit. Eandem autem cordis circumcisionem procul dubio designant verba Jeremiæ, v. 33, præd. cap.; 'Indam legem meam menti eorum, et cordi eorum inscribam eam.' Porro remissio ista omnium peccatorum, quæ p[oe]nitentibus promittitur a Mose, (Deut. xxx. 1. et seq.) a Jeremiâ etiam clare exprimitur prædicti cap. ver 34. 'Ero propitius iniquitatibus eorum, et peccatorum ipsorum et transgressionum ipsorum non recordabor amplius.' Denique Jeremias claritatem ostendit adeoque facilitatem præceptorum, quæ in novo suo f[oe]dere continebantur, ob quam Dei populo non opus esset laboriosa disquisitione, aut exactiori disciplina, ut præcepta istius f[oe]deris cognoscerent implerentque, (Ejusdem capitis, ver. 34.) Idem Mosen quoque voluisse manifestum erit, (si verba ejus Deut. xxx. 11, et seq. cum iis, quæ Apostolus ad eundem locum disserit Rom. x. 6, et seq. accuratius perpenderis.) Mihi certe clara videntur omnia. (6º) Ac postremo, ut res hæc tota extra omnem controversiæ aleam ponatur, ipsi Hebræorum magistri ea, quæ Deut. xxix. et deinceps continentur, ad Messiæ tempus omnino referenda censuerunt. Testem advoco fide dignissimum P. Fagium, qui (ad Deut. xxx. 11,) hæc annotat; 'Diligentur observandum est, ex consensu Hebræorum caput hoc ad regnum Christi pertinere. Unde etiam Bachai dicit, hoc loco promissionem esse, quod sub Rege Messiah omnibus, qui de f[oe]dere sunt, circumcisio cordis contingat, citans Joelem, ii. 28.' Fagio consentit Grotius in ejusdem capitis ver. 6.
"In his ideo prolixius immorati sumus, tum, ut vel hinc manifestum fieret, omnia, quæ in Mosaicis scriptis continentur, ad f[oe]dus Mosaicum, proprie sic dictum, nequaquam pertinere; adeoque quam vera ac prorsus necessaria sit distinctio Augustini, (de qua aliquoties jam dictum est,) legem veterem κυρίως sumptam ad solum pactum in monte Sinai factum restringentis; tum imprimis ut exinde etiam clare eluceret optima ac sapientissima Dei οἰκονομία, quam in dispensando gratiæ suæ f[oe]dere usurpare visum ipsi fuerit. Pepigerat Deus cum Abrahamo f[oe]dus illud gratiosum multis ante latam legem annis; cui postea placuit ipsi superaddere pactum aliud, multis, iisque operosis, ritibus ac ceremoniis conflatum, quibus rudem et carnalem Abrahami posteritatem, recens ex Ægypto eductam, adeoque paganicis ritibus ac superstitionibus nimis addictam, in officio contineret, i.e. ab ethnicorum idololatrico cultu arceret. Quod optime expressit Tertullianus (adversus Marcion. 2.) his verbis: 'Sacrificiorum onera, et operationum et oblationum negotiosas scrupulositates nemo rcprehendat, quasi Deus talia proprie sibi desideraverit, qui tam manifeste exclamat, "Quo mihi multitudinem sacrificiorum vestrorum?" et, "Quis exquisivit ista de manibus vestris?" sed illam Dei industriam sentiat, qua populum pronum in idololatriam et transgressionem ejusmodi officiis religioni suæ voluit adstringere, quibus superstitio sæculi agebatur, ut ab ea avocaret illos, sibi jubens fieri quasi desideranti, ne simulacris faciendis delinqueret.' (Conf. Gal. iii. 19.) Sed prævidens sapientissimus Deus, fore, ut hoc ipsius propositum populus obtusi pectoris non intelligeret, post latam istam carnalem legem, præcepit Mosi, ut Israelitis novum f[oe]dus promulgaret, seu potius ut vetus illud, cum Abrahamo ante multos annos initum, (quod spiritualem imprimis justitiam exigebat, et gratia ac misericordia plenum erat,) renovaret: ut hinc tandem cognoscerent Judæi, pactum Abrahamiticum etiam post latam legem ritualem adhuc viguisse, adeoque pro f[oe]dere habendum fuisse, cui unice salus ipsorum inniteretur. (Conf. Gal. iii. 17.) ... Quis hic cum Apostolo non exclamet, Ὦ βάθος πλούτου καὶ σοφίας καὶ γνώσεως Θεοῦ (Rom. xi. 33.) Sed hæc obiter, etsi haudquaquam frustra. Pergo."—From Bp. Bull's Harmonia Apostolica, cap. xi., sect. 3.—Works, vol. iii. pp. 197-201.
APPENDIX L.
(p. 218.)
[Opinions of Commentators concerning Accommodation.]
Cornelius à Lapide, on this place, writes us follows:— "Licet Cajetanus, Adamus, Pererius, Toletus, putent Mosem ad litteram loqui de Christo et Christi justitiâ, referunt enim hæc ejus verba ad p[oe]nitentiam, de qua eodem capite egerat Moses, ver. 1; (P[oe]nitentia enim et dilectio Dei, ac consequenter peccatorum venia, ipsaque justitia sine fide Christi haberi non potest;) tamen longe planius est, ut non litteraliter, sed allegorice tantum alludat Apostolus ad Mosem. Moses enim ad litteram, sive in sensu litterati loquitur, non de Christo ejusque Evangelio, sed de lege data Judæis, ut patet eum intuenti. Ita Chrysostomus, Theodoretus, Theophylactus, [OE]cumenius, Abulensis, Soto.... Hæc, inquam verba, Mosem ad suos Judæos literaliter loqui planè certum, evidens, et manifestum est; ita tamen ut eadem hæc ejus verba allegorice Evangelio ejusque catechumenis et fidelibus optime conveniant. Æque enim, immo magis, ad manum est omnibus jam Evangelium et fides Christi, quam olim fuerit lex Mosis: ita ut fidem hanc omnes facillime corde, id est mente, complecti: et ore proloqui, itaque justificari et salvari possint."
Our own learned Hammond writes as follows:—"The two phrases of 'going up into Heaven,' or 'descending into the deep,' are proverbial phrases to signify the doing or attempting to do some hard, impossible thing.... These phrases had been of old used by Moses in this sense, Deut. xxx. 12." [And then, the place follows.] "Which words being used by Moses to express the easiness and readiness of the way which the Jews had to know their duty and to perform it, are here by the Apostle accommodated to express the easiness of the Gospel condition, above that of the Mosaical Law."—So far Dr. Hammond; whose notion that there was any accommodation here, I altogether deny. As for his belief that the paraphrase in the Targum of Jerusalem, ["Utinam esset nobis aliquis Propheta, Jonæ similis, qui in profundum maris magni descenderet,">[ is the "ground of St. Paul's application" of the place to the Death and Resurrection of Christ, I can but feel surprised to find such a view advocated by so learned a man, and so excellent a Divine. But it is not Hammond's way to write thus. In his "Practical Catechism," he often expounds similar Scripture, (e.g. St. Luke i. 72-5,) after a very lofty fashion.
Again:—"Hunc locum accommodavit ad causam suam B. Paulus, Rom. x. Nam cum proprie hic locus pertineat ad Decalogum, transfertur eleganter et erudite a Paulo ad fidem quæ os requirit ut promulgetur, et cor ut corde credamus."—Fagius, ad Deut. xxx. 11, apud Criticos Sacros.
Occasionally, however, we meet with a directly different gloss:—
"Locum hunc divinus Paulus divine de Evangelica prædicatione ac sermone fidei est interpretatus, tametsi sensum magis, ut æquum est, quam textum ad verbum expresserit; ut illius etiam alibi est mos. Satis enim fuit, atque adeo magis consentaneum viris Spiritu Dei plenis significare quid idem Spiritus in Scriptura intelligi vellet."—Clavius, ad Deut. xxx. 14, apud Criticos Sacros.
Concerning the general principle of Accommodation, (as explained above, p. 188,) the following passages present themselves as valuable.
"Men have suggested that these things were accommodations of the Sacred Writers; and that the New Testament Writers, in the interpretations they gave of passages in the Old, meant to say, that the texts might be applied in such way as they applied them. But the suggestors of this view can hardly have considered carefully those conversations of our Blessed Saviour with His disciples going to Emmaus; and afterward in the evening of the same day, in which He distinctly reprehends them for their dulness of heart in not seeing in the pages of the Old Testament the predictions of His Death and of His Resurrection; though, of His Resurrection the intimations are, in those ancient Scriptures, to our view so scanty and obscure. He unfolds to them as they walk the reference of the Old Testament Scriptures to Himself. Then in a later interview He resumes the instruction and 'opens their understanding,' (it is said,) to discover the same; the relation of the Old Testament Scriptures (namely) to Himself.—He is a bold Commentator who having seen the Disciples thus instructed,—having witnessed this scene,—then, when he meets with these same Disciples' interpretations of the ancient Scriptures in relation to Christ, calls them 'Accommodations,' and gives them to a human original. But I ask leave to turn from this theory."—Sermons by the Rev. C. P. Eden, pp. 189—190.
"If we believe that the Apostles were inspired, then all idea of accommodation must be renounced.... The theory of Accommodation, i.e. of erroneous interpretation of the Scripture, cannot be thought of without imputing error to the Spirit of Truth and Holiness; or to Him who sent the Spirit to recal to the minds of the Apostles all things which He had said to them, and to guide them into all Truth."—From a Sermon by Dr. M'Caul, The Hope of the Gospel the Hope of the Old Testament Saints, (1854,)—p. 8.
ΔΙΑ ΤΟΝ ΛΟΓΟΝ ΤΟΥ ΘΗΟΥ.
By the same Author
A PLAIN COMMENTARY ON THE FOUR HOLY GOSPELS. 7 vols. Fcap. 8vo.
NINETY SHORT SERMONS FOR FAMILY READING. 2 vols. Fcap. 8vo.
THE PORTRAIT OF A CHRISTIAN GENTLEMAN: A MEMOIR OF P. F. TYTLER, ESQ. (2nd. Ed.) 1859. Crown 8vo.