in 2 Tim. iii. 16, "All Scripture is inspired by God," or breathed into the writers by God, It is, therefore, of the writing that the inspiration is asserted. The Greek compound word, corresponding to our phrase, inspired by God, was applied among the heathens to such dreams as were supposed to be breathed into men by any of the gods. This inspiration, which, without any exception, gradation, or variation, is claimed by the writers of the Scripture, and which entitles the whole of it to be entitled "the Word of God," is of the highest kind, by which they were "led into all truth." It consists in that communication, made to their minds by the Spirit of God, of the ideas and words which they have recorded in that sacred book. Paul expressly calls the Old Testament Scriptures the "Oracles of God" (Rom. iii. 2).

Verbal inspiration is clearly implied in the words already quoted, All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.' Paul does not say,

All revelation,' meaning the doctrines or ideas, but 'all Scripture,' meaning the writing, is given by inspiration of God. If the writing be inspired, then the words are inspired; for what is the writing but the words? To the same purposes the Apostle Peter affirms,

The prophecy came not of old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost' (2 Pet. i. 21). 'Spake as they were moved' is a phrase which implies that the words were suggested to them. So, on the day of Pentecost, the disciples were filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.'

The claim of verbal inspiration is made in the Scriptures in a great variety of forms, and in passages too numerous to quote. See, for example, Heb. i. 1. Acts i. 16; iii. 21; xi. 14; xvii. 10, 11; xxvi. 22; xxviii. 25. John v. 39, 46; x. 35; xii. 47, 48; xvii. 17. 2 Sam. xxiii. 2. Psalm cxix. iii. Luke x. 10-16; xii. 47, 48; xvi. 29-32. 1 Peter i. 10-12. Prov. xxx. 5, 6. 1 Cor. ii. 10-16. Phil. iii. 16. 1 John iv. 1-6. Isa. viii. 20. Gal. i. 10-12. Rev. xxii. 18, 19. In this last passage excision from the book of life is threatened against the man who shall add to or take away from the words of the prophecy of this book.'

Our space does not allow us to enter on the objections which have been urged against the theory of verbal inspiration. These are of small weight compared with the force of the arguments and proofs by which that theory is supported. They mostly resolve themselves into our ignorance of the way in which a supernatural agency acts through a human instrumentality. It has been affirmed that this theory reduces man to a mere machine; and that the sacred writers had no more will, choice, or rational freedom, in recording the truths they communicated, than the pens

with which they wrote. This by no means follows. We cannot explain how God and man co-operated in working out this result, the agency of each being free and plenary. The thing is a mystery, but not an impossibility. We can no more explain how the Divine and human agencies co-operated; each acting freely within its own sphere, and each discharging the part of the work proper to itself, in the matter of the revelation of truth-God presenting and man receiving the truth. Nevertheless, we admit a revelation. But if we admit the miracle of revelation, why reject the miracle of inspiration? If ideas or doctrines may be presented by God, and conceived by man without constraint or violence to his faculties, why may not words be suggested by God and freely used by man? The proof that they were so is seen in the Bible itself, in that free-play of style, conception, and feeling, which so beautifully diversifies its pages, giving it a true human-like look, and making it so effectual in addressing human hearts.J. A. W.

INSURRECTION (L. in, against, and surgo, I rise'), a rising, that is, against established rule or authority (Ezra iv. 19).

INSTRUCTION (L. in, intens., and struo, I form,' 'build,' or 'furnish'), the communication of knowledge or information (Ps. 1. 17. Prov. i. 2), represents a Hebrew word which, from a root meaning 'to bind,' or restrain,' is also rendered chastisement' (Deut. xi. 2) and correction' (Prov. vii. 22); the idea being, that the communication of knowledge (of God) restrains the natural tendencies to excess and wrong, keeps the conduct within proper bounds, and so guards against the transgression of God's laws.

INTEGRITY (L. integer, 'whole,' 'entire :' in and tango, untouched,'' uninjured'?), entireness; as applied to conduct, uprightness, freedom from fault (Genesis xx. 5, 6). The original is rendered 'plain' (xxv. 27), 'perfect' (Job i. 1), 'upright' (Prov. xxix. 10), 'undefiled' (Cant. vi. 9), 'simplicity' (2 Sam. xv. 11).

INTERCESSION (L. inter, 'between,' and cedo, I go'), going between two parties with a view to effect a reconciliation, as Abraham interceded with God to save Sodom (Gen. xviii. 23, seq.). The corresponding Hebrew term signifies to 'co.ne' (Josh. xvi. 7), 'meet' (Is. lxiv. 5), 'fall' (Judges vii. 21), 'lay' (Is. liii. 6), 'come betwixt' (Job xxx i. 32), and entreat' (Gen. xxiii. 8; comp. Jer. xxxvi. 25. Is. liii. 12; lix. 16). The Greek of the New Testament, in words of similar import, conveys the idea that Jesus intercedes with God for the saints (Romans viii. 27, 34; xi. 2) and all who come unto him (Heb. vii. 25; comp. Acts xxv. 24. Rom. viii. 26, and 1 Tim. ii. 1; iv. 5).

INTERMEDDLE (L. inter,' among,' and medium, middle;' F. mesler, ' mêler'), 'to

take part in,' as in the affairs of others; hence to interfere, is used in Prov. xviii. 1 in a good sense, for 'have to do with,' but in a bad sense in xx. 3; comp. xvii. 14, being equivalent to thrusting into that with which we have no concern. A word signifying to 'mix,' or 'mingle,' is in the original used in Prov. xiv. 10; comp. Ps. cvi. 25. INTERMISSION (L. inter, 'between,' and mitto, 'I send'), cessation, stopping, ceasing for a while (Lam. iii. 49).

INTERPRETATION, derived from the Latin interpres, denoting one who is between two others—a means, or intermediary, for conveying the thoughts of the one to the other, signifies the process, the art, or the science, which conveys from a book or writing its import to the reader. This communication may be made by transferring the idea from one language into another, and is then called 'translation,' by the substitution of which term for interpretation the force of some passages becomes clearer (1 Cor. xii. 10; xiv. 26. John i. 38; ix. 7. Heb. vii. 2); or the communication may be by expressing the thought of the writer in another word of the same language (a gloss), or by several explanatory terms of the same language (paraphrase), both which means come under the general head of explanation, or, to use the school term, exegesis; that is, leading out or unfolding (the sense). The word used in the New Testament, hermeneia(from Hermes, the Greek name for Mercury, the Pagan mediator, or messenger, between the gods and men), like interpretation, has for its base the idea of some middle party who acts as a medium of communication. Hence interpretation is the process by which the thoughts of one mind are communicated to the mind of another, and the interpretation of the Scriptures is that process by which the meaning of the sacred writings is made known. The existence of such a process or art denotes its necessity; in other words, that there is in the bible something dark needing illustration, something hidden to be revealed, something difficult to be explained. Nor will the existence of obscurities surprise any one who duly considers that the Bible, written partly in Hebrew, partly in Greek, was produced at different times, by different writers, under very different circumstances, in a state of society most dissimilar to our own, and completed at the earliest, some eighteen centuries since. Nor, whatever its actual obscurity, is it greater or more difficult to remove than that which hangs over ancient books in general, whose very antiquity is attested by this (as in coins) rust of age.

As Scriptural interpretation is the transfer of the thoughts of one mind to another mind, its first business is to ascertain what the thoughts to be so transferred are, and hence to seck out the mind the sense of the writer,

what he believed he did say, what he meant to say. But before this can be done, the interpreter must satisfy himself that he has before him the very words of his author, for it is from his words only that he can now elicit his sense. Accordingly, the interpreter first inquires into the history of the scripture that is under his eye, in order to ascertain when, where, by whom, and under what circumstances, it was produced? how it has been preserved? are there more copies of it than one? do they agree or differ? if they differ, what are the diversities?-so that he may be enabled to judge whether the writing is authentic or unauthentic (written by the person to whom it is ascribed), genuine or spurious (that is, the writing which he wrote, and not another, or the actual production of the alleged time and circumstances); whether it is pure as the author left it, or corrupted through mistake, or interpolated by fraud; whether it is entire as it was when it proceeded from its writer, or mutilated or augmented? These inquiries, embracing a vast variety of important topics, in the study of which learning, skill, and diligence are of great moment, have been diligently prosecuted by professed theological scholars, and led to the general conclusion that the sacred scriptures of the Old and New Testament are of such a character as to deserve the most careful and exact attention on the part of the interpreter. Before, however, the latter can enter on his task, he must know in what language is the document which lies before him. Is it an original or a translation? If the latter, is it trustworthy? And here, although in general the authorised English version may be trusted, yet is it by no means faultless; and a familiarity with the original languages and their cognate dialects is a most desirable qualification in one who undertakes to interpret the Scriptures. Such an one, however, if he wishes to perform his office properly, must, as an interpreter, exclude from his sphere that which properly does not belong to it. For instance, he has nothing to do with the credibility or with the practical application of the subject-matter. Whether true or false, momentous or trivial, divine or human, his sole business is to elicit the meaning, to bring out and communicate the import of his text, to discover and set forth the sense of his author. In that sense there may be a reproach to Astarte, or a rebuke to David, or a reproof to Peter, or a solace to the repentant sinner; it may relate to the tributemoney, or 'justification by faith :' no matter, the expositor's sole duty is to conceive and express the mind of his original in such a way as may best put the reader into possession of what the sacred penman intended to say. But as the interpreter should aim to get his author's exact meaning, the very

'form and pressure' of his thought—all that he intended, but not any thing elseso is there nothing beyond this after which he should make inquiry. For if the mind of the original author is not all that we have to look for, then is our record incomplete, and men in setting about to supply its deficiencies, will each bring his own notion, and so hay, wood, and stubble' of all kinds will be aggregated to the pure grain of the word. If, therefore, the mind or intention of the Holy Spirit has to be ascertained, that can be known, and should be inquired into, only as conveyed in the mind of the writer and expressed in the ordinary vehicle of human language. Dissever the mind of the Spirit from the mind of the writer, and, making the latter into a machine, you destroy his value as an attesting party and a witness, while you give full scope to all the vagaries of unbridled fancy, and all the arbitrary falsities of opinions spun from selfreliance; so that in straining after a shadow, you lose the substance, and make the Bible as variable as the changeful aspects of the human mind, thereby bringing it down to a level with the heathen oracles, which admitted of numerous applications.

The first thing to be done by the interpreter is, to ascertain the meaning of particular words; then, connecting these words into sentences, to deduce their import, so that by combining the sentences into the text, he may view the subject-matter as a whole, and form a full and exact conception of its drift and import. Having thus transcribed the mind of his author on his own mind, he is now prepared to fulfil the precise office of an interpreter, and be by translation a medium of communication between himself and the reader.

The functions which the interpreter has to perform are thus set forth in a few words, but their due execution requires many qualifications, aids, and resources. Of these we have space here to speak only in brief.

An essential assistance is an acquaintance with the history of the times in which a book was composed; the days which preceded and followed; the manners, usages, and institutions, civil and religious, of the people; their literature; their position relatively to the world around them; the exact condition, internal and external, of the author, his aims and qualifications, his position in the general world of thought and in the mental sphere of his own country.

༩༢

In employing for the elucidation of an author the aids of grammar and history, you will do well to form to yourself a distinct conception of the general manner of thought and expression peculiar to him; to familiarise yourself with his trains of ideas and phraseology; to trace his feelings back to their sources and onward to their conse

quences; to descend to his first principles, and follow them out in their applications; and, in individual passages, to discover and enter into the assemblage of mental images, the group of associations, the flow of emotion, under which he wrote; for thus will you be able to make your author's mind his own expositor, and be saved from the grave but common error of importing your opin. ions into his matter. And if in any case these means should fail to remove all difficuity, you should first search the writings of your author in order, if possible, to discover ancther passage (or more) in penning which his mind was in the same or a similar state; so that, by comparing his words together, you may expound the obscure by the clear, supply defects, correct errors, and exhibit the exact and full train of thought to which he intended to give utterance. Aid sometimes may be found in other writers, whether Biblical or not; but in using that aid, you must take special care to ascertain that the writers meant to speak on the same subject and convey the same ideas, otherwise you will employ their language in a sense which was foreign to their minds.

Most carefully, too, must you guard your self against all assumptions-those plentiful, and alas! perennial, sources of theological and religious error. In general, you are to assume nothing, but prove every thing. Accordingly, you are not to assume that all the Scriptural writers agree on the same subject, or that they disagree; you are not to assume that there is a certain fixed form of opinion and doctrine running from Genesis to Revelation; you are not to take any general form of belief, and seek to bring all things into accordance with it. You are to inquire into these writings; you are to search after facts; you are to learn what each writer says; and when you have ascertained the burden of each, you are to lay the whole together and judge whether the parts are harmonious or not, whether there is a common doctrine discoverable or not; if there is, what does it comprise, and how far may it be used in expounding parts which may yet be dark. This general comparison of the results of your inquiries is necessary to make you an interpreter of the Bible, for without it you can be no more than an expounder of a gospel, an epistle, a history. When, however, you have done your best to discover and declare the meaning of each and every writer in the collection, you have discharged your duty as au interpreter, and may hand the results of your studies over to the religious teacher, whose office it is to ascertain the application of the modes of thought and clusters of facts supplied by you to actual states of mind; and, should the general credibility of the books be esta blished, severing the accidental from the

essential, the temporary from the everlasting, to deduce and expound the great prin ciples, eternal truths, and undying sympa thies which those materials may contain, in such a manner as to gain for them acceptance in the mind and observance in the life of his contemporaries. Such are the rules which are to be followed by the professional interpreter. It is to be borne in mind, however, that the great Interpreter of the Bible is the Holy Spirit, who dictated it. One may be learned in its letter, and yet lack a spiritual insight into it. The latter only can purify the heart and save the soul. With the reading of the Scriptures, therefore, the Christian ought to join earnest prayer to the Spirit, who has been promised to unfold their meaning to him.

INTREAT (L. in, intens., and traeto, F traiter, I handle '), signifies to manage, CoLduct business, as with a superior; hence to make an arrangement or treaty, and so to implore, as being a chief means employed (Gen. xxv. 21; comp. Job xxxiii. 26).

I

INVASION (L. in, into,' and vado, go'), a hostile going or incursion into the country of other people (1 Sam. xxx. 14). INVENTION (L. in, on,' and venio, I come'), finding out by devising or constructing, that is, making something new; while discovery' is uncovering, bringing to light what exists, but is hidden. See Eccles. vii. 29, and comp. 2 Chron. xxvi. 15; alsc. Prov. viii. 12, comp. with xii. 2. Jer. xxiii. 20; xxx. 24.

·

IRON (T., eisen in German), as the most valuable of metals, may be made the occasion of some remarks on metals in general; since, with that avoidance of abstract terms for which in its simplicity the Hebrew language is remarkable, the Bible, while it mentions gold, silver, &c., does not contain the general term metal. We have termed iron the most valuable of metals. Gold is of use chiefly from its being, on account of its rarity, a suitable medium of exchange. The same may be said of silver. But iron, from the abundance of its ore and its applicability to the practical arts of life, is not only of very high value, but so essential to social pro gress, that without it individuals and tribes could hardly have risen into nations. Iron is at the present day found in Syria. There als may it have been found of old (Deut. viii. 9). It was used at an early period (Numb. xxxv. 16). The Hebrews appear also to have been acquainted with steel, since mention is made in the Bible of instruments that could hardly have been made of any other metal; and according to some, the word itself occurs in Nahum ii. 3, where they render, chariots of sparkling steel.' Comp. Jer. xv. 12. Iron in part came from the neighbourhood of the Black Sea.

Palestine has no gold mines. Hence the

Hebrews must have obtained their gold by commerce. According to some ancient writers, it was obtained in the sand of certain rivers of Southern Arabia. But the real gold-waters of Southern Arabia' was the Indian Ocean, on which enterprise conducted great commercial operations, bringing wesward, among other merchandise, gold. Southern Arabia was a depôt whence gold was brought to Palestine (1 Kings ix. 28; x. 1, seq. 2 Chron. viii. 18. Ezekiel xxvii. 22). In 1 Maccab. viii. 3, mention is made of mines of silver and gold in Spain, the products of which were carried to the Asiatic markets by the Tyrians, who thus enriched themselves. Comp. Jer. x. 9.

Could we think that Job in xxviii. speaks of Palestine, we might infer that the Hebrews carried on mining to a considerable extent; for here are mentioned mines of silver, gold, iron, and brass, while allusion is made to processes of metallurgy (i. 2, 5, 6). In Deut. viii. 9, the fact is made probable by the description there given of it as a 'land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills thou mayest dig brass.' Dan also is mentioned, in Ezekiel xxvii. 19, among those who supplied the market of Tyre with wrought or polished iron; but whether or not they obtained the ore from their own country, the passage does not make clear. A coal mine has in recent times been wrought in Lebanon, and Edrisi mentions a very productive mine near Beiroot. From Tarshish, probably Spain, came to Tyre silver, iron, tin, lead. From the north and west came vessels of brass (Ezekiel xxvii. 12, 13). Yet this does not prove that mines were not wrought in Palestine itself. That metallurgy was well known, if not practised, may be inferred from many figures of speech taken from the art (Ps. lxvi. 10. Is. i. 22; xlviii. 10. Zech. xiii. 9. Ezekiel xxii. 18. Mal. iii. 3). For gold and the other metals Tyre was the great mart which, directly or indirectly, supplied at least a large portion of what Palestine required.

That the Hebrews in their earliest condition were well acquainted with metals, and possessed skill in working them, so as to be able to construct the articles required in their worship and in ordinary life, may with safety be inferred from the existence of the metals and the practice of metallurgy in Egypt. The metals required for the service of the sanctuary were gold, silver, and brass, which were well known to the ancient Egyp tians. Objects made of them are found among the ruins of temples. The representations of such objects are common in paintings and reliefs, and the hieroglyphic groups which express their names are ascer tained. To execute the work enjoined for the tabernacle, it was necessary that the several processes of overlaying (Exodus xxv.

11, 24), casting, and beating with the hammer, should be performed with skill and dexterity. These processes may still be seen as if in the performance. We give first a view of washing gold ore, taken from an edifice whose date has been fixed at 200 years before the exodus.

IRO

7

beat of a furnace in order, as the hieroglyphs in the original import, to purify the gold from the dross (Exod. xxv. 11. Is. i. 25. Ezek. xxii. 18, 20).

There is in the British Museum a small figure of the god Amoun, or Amun, in silver, having the head-dress and the attire of the lower part of the body represented by thin plates of gold laid over the silver. A few years ago, a mummy was found in the necropolis of Thebes entirely wrapped in plates of gold.

This interesting group is blowing the fur

many earthen funnels at the top, into all of which the fused metal is poured in succession. Another man supplies fuel to kindle a fire round the mould, in order to keep it at a high temperature, for some time after it has received the metal.

In the same manner we could present pictures of other operations (Is. xli. 7; xliv. 12. 1 Kings vii. 45), but prefer setting be