tion is one concerning facts and views altogether out of the ordinary course of nature and of human affairs; and the conclusions we arrive at must of course present some few revolting difficulties to a mind that has been thus partially and irregularly trained; a mind that has been accustomed to dwell, either exclusively or immoderately, on natural causes and effects. "The natural man" (as Paul declares) "receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerneda." And this remark of the apostle does not rest merely on his authority: even one who should deny him any, nay one who should deny Revelation, must admit, that if there were things of the Spirit of God, the natural man was not qualified to receive and know them. To provide such arguments, therefore, or to place the subject in such a point of view, as should secure it a fair examination from all, notwithstanding such impediments, is perhaps impracticable; and has certainly not been contemplated in the present undertaking. At the same time, there are many persons, on whom the a 1 Cor. ii. 14. reasoning commonly employed in treating of inspiration, and the display of its claims, would make their due impression; but for the want of certain links to connect these theological disquisitions with their ordinary habits of thinking and of satisfying their minds on other subjects. To obviate this difficulty has been my aim; and I have accordingly endeavoured rather to give a survey of the mode in which the subject may be investigated, and of the light in which it should be considered, than a detail of all the arguments and views which it involves. The leading questions respecting Inspiration are those which relate, first, to the proofs by which it is, in any case, to be established; secondly, to the nature and extent of its operation; and thirdly, to the authority which is claimed for it. In this order these several points will be examined. PART I. PROOFS OF INSPIRATION. §. 1. Proofs requisite for establishing an inspiration of persons. IN the case of a person claiming to be commissioned with a message from God, the only proof which ought to be admitted, is miraculous attestation of some sort. It should be required that either the person himself should work a miracle, or that a miracle should be so wrought in connection with his ministry, as to remove all doubt of its reference to him and his message. The miracle, in these cases, is, in fact, a specimen of that violation of the ordinary course of nature, which the person inspired is asserting to have taken place in his appointment and ministry; and corresponds to the exhibition of specimens and experiments, which we should require of a geologist, mineralogist, or chemist, if he as serted his discovery of any natural phænomena— especially of any at variance with received theo ries. In this latter case it would be not only reasonable to require such sensible proof, but it would be unreasonable to admit the assertion without it—without seeing the experiment or specimen ourselves, or, satisfying ourselves, on the testimony of credible witnesses, that it had been seen by others. Equally unreasonable would it be to admit any person's claim to inspiration, or extraordinary communion with God, without the appropriate test-the " earnest of the Spirit"." Accordingly, a careful inspection of the records of Revelation will satisfy the inquirer, that God has never, in any age, required credence for his messengers, without first investing them with miraculous credentials-providing them with specimens, as it were, of that extraordinary divine agency, concerning which they were commissioned to make report to mankind. Moses, the a 2 Cor. i. 22. The expression, which signifies part of a sum of money paid down as a pledge that the rest is forthcoming; is repeated in chap. v. 5. and in the Epistle to the Ephesians, i. 14. : Prophets, our Saviour and his Apostles, all rested their claim to a heavenly commission on the miracles which they performed. "I have greater witness," said our Lord to the Jews, "than that of John; for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me';" and again, on another occasion, "the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me;" "if I do not the works of my Father, believe me not but if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works that ye may know and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in himd:" and lastly, when speaking of their guilt in rejecting his claim, "if I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin." St. Paul accordingly represents him as "declared to be the Son of God with power'," and always appeals for the reality of his own apostleship to the "demonstration of the Spirit and of power." The same remark applies to Moses, and to those whom God raised b John v. 36. John x. 25. e John xv. 24. f Rom. i. 4. d John x. 37, 38. |