we connect with the words, the identical thoughts which the writers meant them to signify, we fully comprehend their meaning; and whenever we perspicuously exhibit these thoughts, we interpret their writings. This is truly to understand and to expound. All other modes of proceeding must be defective. No theory of our own can be safely joined with the diction of the sacred writers. No philosophical or theological system can be engrafted on it, before examining in the first instance, whether it be really set forth by the writers. We must lay aside all notions of what they should have written, until we discover what they did mean. All our theological opinions must be deduced from, not introduced into, Scripture. The question to which regard must always be had is, What ideas did the Holy Spirit intend to convey by such and such words? This is the object of all investigation, embracing a singleness of aim, far removed from the ends which the Bible is so often compelled to subserve. The science of interpretation will never advance, if it be not prosecuted with a simple desire to ascertain the very meaning which the words were designed to express. When selfish and secular ends shall be absorbed in the honest endeavour to know the precise ideas connected with the words by the sacred writers themselves, we may expect Hermeneutics to take a commanding place among the sciences; itself a regular science, where the wanderings of imagination find no fitting scope. How often has wanton speculation defaced the beauty of Scripture! How often has false philosophy interwoven it with mazy threads! Prejudice and intellectual pride, heedless of truth, but intent upon the promotion of their own purposes, have substituted their creations for the sense of the original text. While such conduct continues, it is vain to augur instantaneous success for simple, scriptural exegesis. Established maxims must first fall before the ark of truth; and the influence of names be divested of its perniciousness. The spirit of fearless, but faithful investigation must first go abroad, dispelling the phantoms conjured up by cunning men, and walking forth in moral grandeur unappalled by the disastrous forms it meets. The Bible must be exalted to that rightful supremacy from which it is frequently dethroned by its professed friends. It must be followed as the only standard of eternal truth, in preference, and in opposition to human articles of belief. To the omnipotence of its claims, all self-sustained, independent systems must yield; and take as their basis the principles of immutable

truth. When their foundation shall have been laid in the everlasting rock, in place of the shifting sands, the winds of public opinion may expend their unavailing force upon the indestructible battlements of divine faith.

Thirdly, Literary Qualifications.— 1st, A knowledge of various subjects and sciences is demanded:-(a) History civil and sacred; (b) Geography; (c) Chronology; (d) Antiquities; (e) mental Philosophy; (f) Rhetoric; (g) the Natural Sciences, as Astronomy, Geology, Meteorology, &c. &c. The professional interpreter is supposed to enter upon his task, after passing through a course of extended training. Furnished with an adequate knowledge of the branches usually taught in a University, he comes to the science of Theology with a disciplined mind. Habituated to investigations of various kinds, which are not only fitted to expand the powers, but to impart real utility in his inquiries, he comes to the business of actual exegesis with a stock of knowledge for which he finds abundant scope. This apparatus serves two purposes. It braces the mental faculties, giving them a tone of firmness and independence; and it is also an instrument by which the meaning of Scripture is better evolved, and more vividly presented to others. Such information, therefore, is not to be regarded as cumbrous lumber piled up in the mind, and incapable of application to exegetical purposes; but as truly adapted to sacred uses, influencing, directing, pervading, and consolidating all states of mind, especially such as are most concerned with the science of interpretation. It has been properly arranged, that in the course of education marked out for candidates for the ministry, the attention should be previously directed to other studies, all of them interesting to the student, calculated to open up the workmanship of Jehovah, to illustrate his perfections, and to excite a reverential regard to his name. It is well to range over the field of literature, and to take a general survey of its varied products, before coming into close contact with the field of the written word. It is well to know the operations of the human mind-its moods and complex feelings -most of which are graphically described in the sacred scriptures. The science of mind sheds a light upon the delineations of inspiration; whilst the latter illustrate and verify the teachings of the true metaphysician.

2d. Among the literary qualifications of an interpreter may

be mentioned in the next place, an adequate acquaintance with the original languages of the Old and New Testaments. This is a requirement without which no true progress can be made. We do not mean simply a superficial knowledge of them, with which the majority of commentators are satisfied; but a fundamental acquaintance with their nature and genius, including a perception of the changes they underwent, and the idiomatic peculiarities of their phraseology. Languages are proverbially mutable. Exposed to incessant fluctuations, they present a different aspect in successive periods of their history. The varying relations of the people by whom they are spoken, produce many modifications of structure and terminology.

Ut sylvæ foliis pronos mutantur in annos:

Prima cadunt, ita verborum vetus interit ætas,

Et juvenum ritu florent modo nata, vigentque.-Horace.

Hence it becomes necessary for the interpreter to attend to the changing aspect of the Hebrew language, and to mark the distinctive peculiarities of each period. The phases of diction which distinguish one author from another, and even the peculiar genius of contemporary writers should be carefully noted; since the early life, the education, the habits, influence their modes of thought, and consequently their diction. Thus it is befitting both to compare the characteristics of the Hebrew tongue as they appear in the writings of Moses, with such as it exhibited in the time of David and Solomon; and also to observe the styles of contemporary writers as Isaiah and Micah. We readily admit, that it requires no slight acquaintance with a language minutely to separate its words and phrases. It is not the tyro who is fitted to understand, much less to perceive of himself, the delicate shadings which serve to individualise the styles of Hebrew writers. Years of patient study and laborious research must precede and produce the ability for such a task. It demands long practice, and considerable sagacity. It is rather the province of the great masters of Hebrew literature than of the inferior men that never rise above mediocrity. Hitherto, the privilege has chiefly pertained to the German school of philologists, not to the feebler race who are contented to follow the footsteps of their advanced brethren. It is impossible to bestow the praise of an extended and radical acquaintance with the language upon one who has not so studied it. He may possess a general knowledge of it; but to an eminent advancement he can lay no claim.

The Greek writings of the New Testament differ from the Hebrew in this, that having been composed within the interval of a few years, they cannot be assigned to different ages. They all belong to one and the same period. But the phraseology of one New Testament writer differs notwithstanding from that of another. The language of Matthew can be distinguished from that of Luke; and Paul's from that of John. Though the Hebrew-Greek be common to all, each has his own mode of expression. This is what Origen and Eusebius point to, when they speak of a χαρακτὴς τῆς λέξεως or φράσεως belonging to single New Testament writings; though they mistake it in regard to the Epistle to the Hebrews. We would therefore urge upon the professed interpreter the necessity of acquaintance with the diction of the Bible, not merely in its general but special characteristics. Thus will he be prepared to enter with advantage upon his arduous work, and to reap at every step the benefit of his acquirements. To show the importance of such knowledge, it may suffice to refer to the fact, that the character of the language has been employed to undermine the authenticity of entire books. Thus the nature of the Pentateuchal diction has been supposed by many to point to a period coincident with the Babylonish captivity. The books attributed to Moses are said to have received their present form at the time of the exile. It is easy to see how this theory detracts from their authority. It virtually discards their inspiration, and degrades them to the level of human compositions. And when they cease to be regarded as divine, they call for no laborious efforts of exegesis. The educement of their meaning no longer appears a matter of high concernment, or extended effort, but an object scarce deserving attention. In the same manner the latter part of Isaiah has been attributed to some other writer than the prophet himself, and reduced in the eyes of the right-minded theologian to such a position as to dissuade any serious effort towards its right interpretation. The diction is thought to consign it to a much later period than Isaiah.

These instances are adduced to show the necessity of a minute acquaintance with the languages of the Bible, and the characteristic style of the various writers. By them the friends of truth are exhorted to greater vigilance, that they may be able to detect the failure of all processes instituted apparently on the foundation of the language, but in reality from doctrinal prejudices.

C

It is painful to reflect upon the slow progress which this qualification has made in public estimation. Judging from the conduct of many, they appear to deem it wholly unnecessary to aim at such an acquisition. And yet without it, they must acquiesce in received modes of interpretation or trite elucidations, without the ability to assign any reason except that they are held by a favourite commentator, or found in a certain system. It needs no argument to prove, that the theology of the man who cannot test all opinions by the Scriptures themselves, is built on a slender basis. It leans upon a reed which every wind of controversy shakes. The force of prejudice or education may indeed retain him in the belief which circumstances at first induced him to adopt; but assuredly the expoundings to which he has been accustomed will not withstand the philological critic who undertakes to subvert current expositions. A man may, indeed, be a popular theologian, without any knowledge of the original languages of Scripture; but he has no claim to be considered a learned one; nor can he presume to expound the Scriptures with a consciousness of truth which is highly desirable.

We would gladly bring back those who have departed from the true method of proceeding, or at least stir up the student who has the office of the ministry in view, to commence it with alacrity and perseverance. We are bold to aver, that not a few passages of Scripture are inexplicable to the man who is ignorant of the original languages. Our excellent and admirable version has frequently failed to give the true sense. Since the birth of enlightened philology, a great accession of materials has been brought to the aid of the interpreter, and similar treasures are being daily amassed. The light thus thrown on many dark places of the divine word is cheering. Let it be welcomed by every lover of truth as tending to exalt the written revelation so deeply interesting to every Christian. The professed guides of the religious belief of others should be competent to derive their elucidations of Scripture from the word itself; to defend it against the plausible objections of learned sceptics; and to shew forth its excellence in all the fulness of its intrinsic merit. This cannot be done without a goodly acquaintance with the originals. Thus the right sequence of biblical arguments;-the coherence of different parts; and subtle trains of thought will present themselves all the more readily to him who thoroughly understands the connecting words which usually link propositions and sentences to