essential to the discovery of truth in natural science, is the searching for dissimilitudes. If, then, the inductive system is indeed the right road to science, and if its excellence. consists solely in enforcing compliance with the principles endeavored to be explained in this article and the one formerly referred to, may it not be truly said that the full understanding of these principles, of the function, and of the distinct parts of the function of reflection, may be considered as a light and a guide, forcing the right road to be always kept in sight and always closely followed?

A word more, in general, on the head of natural science; -and it is to the principles explained, as applied to natural science alone, that we have here confined ourselves. may, however, be equally applied to moral science.

They

From what has been said it appears, that nature opens her stores of knowledge freely to those who will approach them by the one right road, but that the approach must be made with care: that it is no trifling thing to attempt to read aright her wondrous volume: that she requires close and watchful labor of her votaries-labor, however, which will be well rewarded. Let none absurdly cry that exalted science is anti-religious,-apt to withdraw the mind from the Creator of all nature, and to puff it up with vain conceits. Exalted science must, in every well regulated mind, have an effect precisely the opposite. It must cause the votary to feel, at every step, more profound awe, and more reverential admiration, for the greatness of that Being who is the author of all the wonders which his study of the book of nature unfolds to his astonished gaze. Between God's written word and his created work there can be no contradiction and no opposition; and, if we would raise the mind to adore God's greatness and his excellence, let us consider his revelations by his works as not less worthy of our study than his revelation by his Word. "It is fitting," to use the words of a European contemporary, "that, in due season, the soul should prostrate itself before the throne of its Maker; should teach itself, with all humility, to feel the littleness of its own powers and the utter inadequacy of its faculties, compared with the magnitude and complexity of the machinery, moral and physical, with which it is surrounded and intimately connected.".

* British and Foreign Review, Vol. III, p. 363.

ARTICLE IV.

BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION.

QUALIFICATIONS OF AN INTERPRETER.

To the inquiry, What qualifications are necessary to an interpreter of the Bible? we may obtain an answer, by considering a kindred question;-What qualifications are necessary to one who would interpret the works of Cicero? Plainly, he must understand the language in which Cicero's works are written; he must be acquainted with the history, geography and condition of the Roman empire and of the nations with which Rome was connected; he must be acquainted with the manners and customs of the Romans, and with the local and personal circumstances which originated, or which were connected with, the particular production he is examining. Let him possess this knowledge, and then, in the exercise of sober common sense, and of patient reflection, let him study the works of Cicero. Let him place himself in the circumstances of a contemporary Roman, and endeavor to peruse the works as such a man, unbiassed and impartial, possessing good common sense, would have perused them. We may believe, that he would then rightly understand and explain his author's works. Nor need he wait to obtain all this information to the fullest extent, before he begins to read Cicero. On the contrary, much of this knowledge is to be obtained from Cicero himself; and the habitual studying of an author is requisite to a right apprehension of his sentiments. The knowledge which the student has, of history, geography and philosophy, may not be complete; yet so far as his knowledge extends, it may enable him rightly to understand his author, though he will more thoroughly understand him the more extensive is his knowledge of those subjects, and the greater is his native ability judiciously to explain intelligible language.

Apply this illustration to the case of one who seeks to interpret, that is, to explain, the Holy Scriptures. His learning must be adapted to the work which he desires to accomplish. He must have a knowledge of the languages in which the Scriptures were written. No translation, however good, of any work, can supersede the necessity, to one who would adequately explain that work, of reading it as it came from its author's hands. An acquaintance with the original languages of the Scriptures is held as necessary to the interpretation of the Scriptures, on the ground, that no translation of any book can be presumed to be as correct and as perfect an exhibition of its author's thoughts, as his own original work. So far as a translation is a perfect representation of the original, so far it may be relied on as implicitly as the original itself. Who can doubt, that a reader of Cicero's translated works, provided they are perfectly translated, may obtain as correct a view of Cicero's meaning, as one who reads the works in Latin? Who can, however, for a moment presume, that each, or any, translation of Cicero is, in all respects, a perfect exhibition of Cicero's thoughts-such an exhibition, as he himself would have made, had he spoken the language into which his works are translated? And however good a version of the Scriptures our common English Bible, or any one of the numerous translations, may be, who will venture to think that it is throughout a perfect representation of the original? No translation, then, can be made throughout the basis of interpretation; it is only the original, to which this honor can fairly be accorded. Yet, so far as a version is a perfect representation of the original, so far it is as good as the original. There is no charm in a knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, that can transform a person into a good interpreter; and, doubtless, a student of the English version, if pious, devout and diligent, may attain a better understanding of the Scriptures, than some attain who read the original languages; because he may apply to the study of the sacred volume that good sense, and that habit of attention and of prayer, without which the knowledge of Greek and Hebrew can be of little avail.

The interpretation, or rather the illustration, of the Scriptures requires an acquaintance with the ancient history and civil condition of the Jews, and of the nations

with which they were at different periods connected. It is obvious, that so particular a knowledge of the history of those nations as of that of the Jews themselves, is not required. A general view of their history and condition at particular times, however, is indispensable. Of equal, if not superior, importance, is an acquaintance with the geography of the country of the Hebrews and of neighboring nations. The names of countries, mountains, seas, rivers, &c., are perpetually occurring in the Bible; and without a knowledge of biblical geography, some of the most familiar portions of the Scriptures will fail to be correctly and vividly apprehended. We may, indeed, without such knowledge, be betrayed into mistakes. It need scarcely be added, that a full explanation of the Bible requires a knowledge of the manners and customs which prevailed among the Hebrews and the neighboring nations.

It is also desirable to know the character and circumstances of the writers, and of the people to, or for, whom they wrote. Many of the books in the Bible were written on special occasions and for specific objects; the more, then, we know of the personal and local circumstances, the more prepared shall we be to understand and appreciate those books. It is from the books themselves that we must acquire much of this information; and the statements of writers concerning such circumstances, and the design of any particular book, are valuable in proportion as the information has been condensed from the book itself. Not merely, however, must the individual book be read and analyzed, in order to discover its design and allusions to circumstances, but other portions of the Bible may also give needed historical or other information.

In the work of interpretation, both at its commencement and in its more advanced stages, it is of importance to enjoy the assistance of those who have already toiled in this department of labor. In the early stage of critical study of the Scriptures, the instructions of a living guide are to be preferred. These will prepare the way for a proper use of written commentaries. Judicious commentaries furnish the results of much and varied study, pertaining to the very line of employment in which the biblical student is occupied. And while he does not allow himself to cherish a slavish dependence on any human

help, he ought not, on the other hand, to underrate those whose studies have been of such a nature as to impart a value to their opinions.

The preceding sketch gives a brief view of the kind of learning requisite to the interpretation of the Scriptures. In the use of these helps, let a person honestly and patiently apply himself to the study of the Scriptures, without the palsying impression that he is approaching a totally mysterious book, and entering into a region of shadows; let him regard the Scriptures as a book having a definite meaning, like other books, and whose meaning is to be discovered in the same way substantially as is the meaning of other books; let him thus, with good common sense, endeavor to ascertain the thoughts of the sacred writers, and he will acquire a satisfactory understanding of the Bible; at least, so far as to have definite views of its principal parts, and to be able with confidence to lead his fellow-men as their spiritual guide.

But here it may be asked, Is there not a particular science of biblical interpretation, which it is necessary to study? We hear of principles, or canons, of interpretation, or rules which must guide in the interpretation of the sacred volume. Can we proceed to the study of the Bible, without attending to the science of biblical interpretation?

In reply, let it be asked, Does a man need to study the science of interpretation, before he can understand the works of Cicero, or any ancient author? Is there a set of scientific principles and canons with which we must become familiar, and which we must learnedly apply, before we can understand the writings of Franklin? If a man understands the English language, and will read attentively, with desire to understand, we never doubt that he can ascertain Franklin's meaning. His Creator has already implanted within him the principles which secure to him a right result. The necessity, if there be any, for special scientific canons of biblical interpretation, results from the fact that the Scriptures have been regarded as so peculiarly different from other books, that words and phrases occurring in them must have different meanings from those which they have in other books. Hence all sorts of mystical and allegorical explanations have been attached to them, such as no human author would for a moment allow to be ascribed to his book. But discard