It will doubtless be admitted, that Dr. Whitby has here proved, with perfect clearness, that the New Testament has its Hagiographa as well as the Old. Thus he has proved, that the Apostolical Epistles are not writings of plenary inspiration, and that the personal inspiration of the first teachers of Christianity consisted in a general illumination and divine direction, but did not extend to their very words. I will only add a few remarks upon a passage in their writings, which, while it plainly declares that their inspiration was not in general more immediate than this, has mistakenly been supposed to imply also, that on some occasions what they delivered was the absolute Word of the Lord. (2.) The Apostle Paul, when giving his advice on certain questions relating to the marriage state, says, "But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment."* Presently he says, " And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: And let not the husband put away his wife. But to the rest speak I, NOT the Lord." Again he says, "Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful." Again, respecting a widow's remaining single, he says, “She is happier if she so abide, after my judgment; and I think also that I have the Spirit of God."§ Here he expressly gives his own judgment, as something distinct from, and inferior to, the positive command of the Lord, and not even infallible; and yet as the result of a certain inspiration,—of his possessing the Spirit of God. He plainly teaches then, that his own personal inspiration consisted in a certain general illumination of the understanding : but what is the commandment of the Lord, which he considers so superior ? Authors tell us," that the subject of which the Apostle here delivers his opinion, was a matter of Christian prudence,-not a part of religious sentiment or practice." "But," they say, "the Apostle's declaration, that as to this particular matter, he spoke by permission and not of commandment, strongly implies, that in other things, in things really of a religious nature, he did speak by commandment from the Lord. Accordingly, in the same chapter, when he had occasion to speak of what was matter of moral duty, he immediately claimed to be under divine direction in what he wrote: And unto the married I command, yet not I but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband." But the distinction between points of duty and of prudence here laid down, will not hold through: for the advice which the Apostle introduces with, "But unto the rest speak I, not the Lord," does relate to a question of moral duty it is no less than this: Whether the reception of Christianity is a justificatory plea for putting away a wife or deserting a husband: and the Apostle decides it thus: "If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away "¶ &c. The de 1 Cor. vii. 6. + Ver. 10, 11, 12. + Ver. 25. § Ver. 40. || Parry on the Inspiration of the Apostles, &c. apud Horne, vol. 1. p. 563. Ver. 12 to 15. cision is worthy of a judgment enlightened, as the Apostle affirms of his, by "the Spirit of God:" again then we ask, What is that commandment of the Lord which he considers so superior? Evidently, it is the express decision of the Lord himself, pronounced while in the world, and recorded in the books of plenary inspiration: and we find the very commandment, which Paul says is not his but the Lord's in Matt. xix. 9, Mark x. 11, 12, and Luke xvi. 8: and the first Gospel was certainly written, and the others very probably, before this Epistle to the Corinthians: But if it can be proved that he had not learned the fact in this way, then it will follow, that, as he seems to intimate in Gal. i. 12, he had received by immediate revelation a knowledge of the chief passages of the Lord's life and discourses in the world and this may afford countenance to the opinion which many have entertained, that he was the real author of the third of the Gospels, and that it was only written by Luke as his amanuensis. However' he became acquainted with it, certain it is that he knew that the Lord had delivered such a commandment, and that he speaks of this as a different thing from his own customary and personal inspiration. Just in the same manner he distinguishes, on other occasions, between his own sentiments and the authoritative declarations of THE Scriptures themselves; as when he says in the next chapter but one, "Say I these things as a man? or saith not the Law the same also?"* and quotes a passage from Deuteronomy. Plainly then does this Apostle avow, what Peter affirms of him, that he wrote according to the wisdom given unto him; and fairly does he acknowledge that this inspiration is different from that, the subjects of which spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Altogether it appears perfectly evident, that the Epistles are doctrinal writings, given through eminently illuminated men, to afford a clew to the doctrinal interpretation of the plenarily inspired Scriptures; respecting which they testify, among other things, that they are written by a more immediate inspiration, and, differently from themselves, contain a spiritual sense within the covering of the Letter; some of their testimony to which effect is given in our second Lecture.t Without the slightest wish then to depreciate either the Apostolic writings or the Hagiographa of the Old Testament, it must, we think, be conceded, that the Gospels and Apocalypse, the Law and the Prophets, are compositions of a very different order. All that is said, by modern definers of Inspiration, of the sacred books in general, we readily concede to be true of the writings which we have now been considering these we leave where the critics have placed them but we would fain elevate the others far higher. Respecting the character of the Apostolic writings in particular, I fully accept the definitions of the generally approved Author last quoted : "When they acted as writers, recording Christianity for the instruction of the church in all succeeding times, I apprehend, that they were under the guidance of the Spirit as to Ch. ix. 8. : † P. 38, &c. and p. 53 to 61. the subject of which they treated; that they wrote under his influence and direction; that they were preserved from all error and mistake in the religious sentiments they expressed; and that, if any thing were inserted in their writings, not contained in that complete knowledge of Christianity of which they were previously possessed, (as prophecies for instance,) this was immediately communicated to them by revelation from the Spirit. But with respect to the choice of words, I know not but they might be left," says our author, who might safely have omitted the words of hesitation,-" to the free and rational exercise of their own minds, to express themselves in the manner that was natural and familiar to them, while at the same time they were preserved from error in the ideas they conveyed."* All this is true: but it is greatly to be lamented, that what is true of a part of the writings contained in the Bible, of the hagiographical compositions, only,-should inadvertently have been extended to the whole. As it is obvious to every student and believer of the Bible that some of its writers were under the influence of a secondary and personal inspiration, it has been concluded that this was the case with them all and as it is evident that writings thus produced can have none but the plain grammatical sense; whilst the radical difference between compositions of this character and those which are the result of an immediate divine afflatus has been overlooked; many have at length concluded, that there is no real sense but the grammatical one throughout the Word of God. No. III. (Page 178.) THE GREAT OBJECTS AND PHENOMENA OF THE MUNDANE SYSTEM CONSIDERED, AS THEY ARE REFERRED TO IN THE LANGUAGE OF PROPHECY AND OF THE SCRIPTURES IN GENERAL. THE significations by Analogy offered in the Lecture, of the great objects of what Sir Isaac Newton calls "the world natural;"-of heaven, earth, and earthquakes; of the sun, moon, and stars; and of the darkening of the sun, turning of the moon into blood, and falling of the stars; must, it is presumed, be readily perceived to be well founded. Not much argument then will be required to establish them. It may, however, be useful to add a few remarks upon them, and to shew, by some examples, that such is actually the meaning borne by these magnificent symbols in the language of prophecy, and of the Holy Word in general. I. When the earth or world, in a most general sense, including the whole "world natural," is mentioned in Scripture for the church universal,—the * Parry apud Horne, vol. i. p. 561. church considered in the most general manner; it is only by a modification of a mode of expression frequent in common discourse. We constantly speak of various countries, not with any allusion to the mere soil, but as a metonymy for the nations that inhabit them,—for the government and people. It is in this sense that we speak of the distress or prosperity of our own country; of the policy of France, Austria, or Russia; of the general aspect of the continent; and of the growing power of America, or of the new world. Just so it is when particular countries, or when the earth in general, are mentioned in the Word of God: the continent is put for the contents; the land for the inhabitants. This then seems to support Sir Isaac Newton's application of "the world natural" to "the world politic." But we are to remember, that, in the Word of God, he who uses the figure is the Divine Being himself: and in what respect can the inhabitants of the earth be supposed to be regarded by the Divine Mind, but as to their reception or otherwise of the principles which constitute the church? It is not, we may be certain, as to their political, but as to their spiritual relations, that the inhabitants of the world are regarded by God. They are considered as belonging either to the church properly so called, consisting of that portion of the inhabitants of the earth who stand in a nearer relation to the Author of their existence, in consequence of possessing a knowledge of him by revelation ;-or to the church universal, which includes the whole of mankind considered in their relation to God. As then, when the earth is mentioned in Scripture, the inhabitants of it are meant; and as the inhabitants are only regarded in their relation to God, that is, as connected with his church; it is perfectly agreeable to the use of a well-known figure of speech, to name the earth to signify the church. It is also well known, that when the earth is mentioned, it is frequently only the land of Canaan that is referred to; and this is an acknowledged symbol of the church and the meaning is similar, but more universal, when the earth is named for the whole "world natural." Now that this use of the term is frequent with the prophets, might be shewn by numerous examples. Thus, in that beautiful prediction so evidently referring to a future glorious state of the church, when it is declared that "the wolf shall dwell with the lamb," and when it is said of various noxious animals, "they shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain;" the reason assigned for it is this; "For the earth shall be fall of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea."* So in that awful denunciation of judgments upon the earth, in the twenty-fourth chapter of the same prophet, where the word earth or land is repeated almost in every verse; although some of the calamities enumerated might seem to relate to the earth, literally, yet there is much which shews that the subject really treated of is the church. To what else can these words be applied: "The windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake: the earth is utterly broken down; the earth is clean dissolved;' the earth is moved exceedingly : the earth shall reef * Is. xi. 9. to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it; and it shall fall and not rise again” ?* The last clause, in particular, is by no means predicable of the earth; but the whole is most accurately descriptive, in the language of Analogy, of the utter destruction of the Jewish church: and to this alone, and to the substitution of pure Christianity for corrupt Judaism, can be applied what is said of the sun and moon at the conclusion of the prophecy: "Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the Lord of Hosts shall reign in Mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously."t II. Without then further extending our quotations, it must, we may presume, be readily seen, that the earth, when mentioned generally, is used as a symbol of the church. But heaven is spoken of in the Scriptures as frequently as the earth; and it often happens, that heaven and earth are mentioned together: and then it may be seen with equal clearness, that by heaven is meant the internal of the church, or, with respect to individuals, the internal man, and by earth the external of the church, or the external man. Two states of the church,-the church militant and the church triumphant, -are usually recognised by divines; all who are members of the church on earth constituting the former, and all who are enjoying the reward of victory in heaven, constituting the latter: thus the church militant is that which is usually called simply the church, and the church triumphant is but another name for heaven. Now it is certainly a very remarkable circumstance, that in so many languages the name for the state and habitation of the blest is the same as that for the visible heavens or sky; or rather, the name properly belonging to the latter is transferred to mean the former. In the English language indeed, which has two words that signify the expanse above or around the earth, we now more frequently apply the term heaven to the seats of the blest, and the term sky to the visible firmament; though we still frequently use the former word in its primitive signification: "As from the face of heaven the scattered clouds Tumultuous rove." and we are apt to transfer the latter to the figurative sense; thus, the soul "Breathes hopes immortal, and affects the skies." Now whence came this application, by consent of nations, of the name of the visible heavens to express the invisible, but from a perception that they properly answer to each other by analogy, and that the lower heavens are a proper type and symbol of the higher? Hence in the Word of God, the one is constantly described by the name of the other. But further: As, in addition to the analogies of each taken separately, there is a similar relation between the visible heaven and earth as between the heavenly state, or the church in heaven, and the church on earth; therefore, also, these are described by the combined phrase heaven and earth: As, like |