of Jesus. The Bible is like an oasis in a desert. Eternal vigilance and unceasing activity are necessary to prevent the sands from encroaching upon it and overwhelming its fertile soil and springs of water.

The Bible was given to us in the forms of the world's literature, and its meaning is to be determined by the reader as he determines the meaning of other literature by the same principles of exegesis. It is a Protestant principle that the Word of God should be given to the people in their own familiar tongue with the right of private judgment in its interpretation. It is a corollary of this principle that they be taught that it is to be understood in a natural sense, as other writings are understood. The right of private judgment is debased when partisanship determines that judgment and when sectarianism perverts it. The Bible was not given to sustain the partisan or to uphold the sect; but to teach the Truth of God and to guide in the holy life. The right of private judgment implies the right to seek the Truth in the Bible and the duty to teach that Truth without fear or favour. Any unnatural and artificial interpretation of the Bible bears its own condemnation in itself. The saving truths of Scripture can be "savingly understood" only through the illumination of the Spirit of God, but this is not for the reason that they are not sufficiently plain and intelligible, or that some special principles of interpretation are needed of a bibliolatrous, scholastic, or cabalistic sort; it is owing to the fact that in order to salvation they must be applied to the soul of man by a divine agent, and appropriated by the faith of the heart and the practice of the life.

3. The Study of the Bible has been greatly hindered by the use of it as an obstruction to progress in knowledge and in life. The craving for place and power is felt by self-willed men in all ages and in all callings. The Church has not been able to keep itself free from such ambitions. Ecclesiastical domination is the worst kind of domination, because it is so contrary to the ideal of the Church and the example of Christ. And yet in every generation men arise who claim to be the cham

1 Westminster Confession, I. 6. See pp. 485 seq.

pions of orthodoxy and the guardians of ecclesiastical authority. They assert the authority of the Church and hold up texts from the Bible as the supreme test of every new thing that is proposed for the improvement of mankind. They presume to oppose the discoveries of science, the researches of philosophy, the unfolding of theology into fresher and better statements, the improvement of religious life and work, and even the deeper and more thorough study of the Bible, by holding up isolated texts and insisting on antiquated interpretations. Nearly every profound thinker, since the days of Socrates, has been obliged to pause in his work and defend himself, like the apostle Paul, against these "dogs" and "evil workers." 1 Galileo was silenced by the quoting of the Bible against the Copernican theory of the revolution of the earth around the sun.2 Descartes had to defend his orthodoxy. The enemies of the critical philosophy of Kant charged that no critic who followed out the consequences of his positions could be a good man, a good citizen, or a good Christian.3

The results of Geology have been opposed by those who insist that the world was made in six days of twenty-four hours. Biology has to fight its way against those who affirm that the doctrine of development is against the Scriptures. Such use of the Bible has too often the effect of driving scholars away from it, and especially from the Old Testament, the most abused part of it.4

Every advance in the study of the Bible has been confronted by these enemies of the truth. The investigation of the Canon, Textual Criticism, the Higher Criticism, Historical Criticism, Biblical Theology, all these departments had to fight for exist

1 Phil. 32.

2 White, History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom. N. Y. 1896. Vol. I. pp. 130 seq.

3 These points are discussed by Krug, Ueber das Verhältniss der Kritischen Philosophie zur moralischen, politischen und religiösen Kultur der Menschen. Jena, 1798.

"The fact is therefore indisputable, that theologians have handled Scripture on such faulty principles, that they have laid down as truths indisputably divine a number of dogmas which have brought revelation into direct collision with some of the greatest discoveries of modern science, and that after having, on their first enunciation, denounced them as inconsistent with the belief that Scripture contains the record of a divine revelation, they have been compelled to

ence, and then, after they had won their right to exist, have the still more difficult battle to wage against those hypocritical and traitorous companions who make a show of using the principles and methods of the scientific study of the Bible, either for the purpose of discrediting them, or else as advocates and partisans of traditional and sectarian opinions. The history of all these combats is the same. The theological Bourbons never learn anything from past defeats. They repeat the same obstructive methods, and, when defeated, make the same insincere apologies. The race of time-servers continues to propagate itself from age to age. They always take the via media and lean to the traditional side. They always encourage the traditionalists, and obstruct faithful biblical scholars. And so the combat goes on. The Divine Spirit leads into all the truth in spite of every obstacle erected by Christian dogmaticians and ecclesiastical assemblies. The later theologians correct the earlier theologians, and later ecclesiastical assemblies always eventually give their voice on the side of the Truth of God.

But it is ever necessary for the friends of truth and of progaccept them as unquestionable verities. Moreover, the general distrust arising from failures of this kind has been intensified by the pertinacity with which theologians have clung to various unsound positions which they have only abandoned when further resistance had become impossible. The history of the conflict between Science and Revelation is full of such instances, and the consequences have been disastrous in the extreme."- C. A. Row, Revelation and Modern Theology Contrasted. London, 1883. p. 7.

1The newer thought moved steadily on. As already in Protestant Europe, so now in the Protestant churches of America, it took strong hold on the foremost minds in many of the churches known as orthodox: Toy, Briggs, Francis Brown, Evans, Preserved Smith, Moore, Haupt, Harper, Peters, and Bacon developed it, and, though most of them were opposed bitterly by synods, councils, and other authorities of their respective churches, they were manfully supported by the more intellectual clergy and laity. The greater universities of the country ranged themselves on the side of these men; persecution but intrenched them more firmly in the hearts of all intelligent well-wishers of Christianity. The triumphs won by their opponents in assemblies, synods, conventions, and conferences were really victories for the nominally defeated, since they revealed to the world the fact that in each of these bodies the strong and fruitful thought of the Church, the thought which alone can have any hold on the future, was with the new race of thinkers; no theological triumphs more surely fatal to the victors have been won since the Vatican defeated Copernicus and Galileo." -WHITE, History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom Vol. II. p. 370.

ress in the Church to oppose and to overcome obstructionists. It is the duty of all lovers of the Bible to break up the superstitions that cluster about it, to expose the false polemic use of its texts, to prevent dogmaticians from using it as an obstacle to progress in civilization, and to show that it favours all truth and every form of scholarly investigation. The Bible is an honest book in all its parts, it is the Word of God, and every sincere disciple of wisdom will find in its pages not only the real and the highest truth, but will be stimulated and encouraged to press forward under the guidance of the Holy Spirit unto all truth.1

The design of this book is to set forth the principles and methods of the Study of Holy Scripture, to describe its departments, and to give sketches of their history. It is proposed, first of all, to survey the whole field, and then to examine in more detail the several departments. We shall aim to explain the true uses of the Bible and show throughout that Biblical Study is, as we have claimed, the most important, extensive, profound, and attractive of all studies.

1 John 1613.

CHAPTER II

THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

THE general term for the various departments of the Study of Holy Scripture as given in most Theological Encyclopædias is Exegetical Theology. Exegetical Theology is one of the four grand divisions of Theological Science. It is related to the other divisions, as the primary and fundamental discipline upon which they depend, and from which they derive their chief materials. Exegetical Theology is not an appropriate term for the study of the Bible, especially as that study is now understood. For the exegetical study of the Bible, although an important section of Biblical Study, is far from being the whole of it. And the work of exegesis is just as important in the study of the sources of Church History, or the sources of any other study. No one can study the Bible thoroughly and completely without the use of the historical method and without also the systematic organization of his material, and the practical use of it. We shall use for our purpose, therefore, the simpler term Study of Holy Scripture.

This study is limited to the Holy Scripture itself and to those auxiliary departments, which are in essential relation to it. It has to do with the Sacred Scriptures, their origin, history, character, exposition, doctrines, and guidance in life. It is true that the other branches of theology have likewise to do with the sacred writings, in that their chief material is derived therefrom, but they differ from the study we now have in view, not only in their methods of using this material, but likewise in the fact, that they do not themselves search out and gather this material directly from the holy writings, but depend upon the more particular Study of Holy Scripture therefor. Church