unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion, the kingdom also shall come to the daughter of Zion;" as it is also in Isa. xi. 9, where the temple-mount, the ideal dwelling-place of God with his people is viewed as comprehensive of the whole divine kingdom, and this again as co-extensive with the entire habitable globe. Comp. also Dan. ix. 16, 20; also ch. ii. 35, where the stone which represents the Lord's kingdom appears growing into a huge mountain, and filling the whole earth. In Ps. lxxvi., the greater heathen kingdoms are denoted, not only mountains, but "prey-mountains," as being apparently raised to the gigantic height they attained for the purpose only of laying waste and destroying others. Babylon, in particular, is called by Jeremiah, chap. li. 25, "a destroying mountain, that destroyed all the the earth"-not as Bishop Newton interprets, vol. i., chap. 10, "on account of the great height of its walls and towers, its palaces and temples," but from its lofty and domineering altitude among the political eminences of the world. And hence, quite naturally, in the Apocalypse, which gathers up and applies the symbolical imagery of the earlier prophets, mountains are used in a whole series of passages as the familiar designation of kingdoms, chap. vi. 14, viii. 8, xvi. 20,

etc.

APPENDIX F, PAGE 100.

PROPHETICAL LITERALISM ESSENTIALLY JEWISH.

THE essential coincidence between the Jewish mode of interpreting prophecy, and that of the extreme literalists among Christians, will force itself on any one who compares for a moment what has been written by the respective parties on the prophetical future. For the most part he will find the same passages quoted by both, and the same principle of the historical sense applied to them-only, with this difference, that while both apply it to establish the necessity of a future restoration of the Jews to Palestine, and the re-institution of the Mosaic polity and worship, the Jew also applies it, and with perfect consistence, to the rejection of Jesus Christ as the Messiah. We say with perfect consistence, for the principle is as fairly applicable to the one point as to the other, and by that principle, the evidence of prophecy in favour of the Messiahship of Jesus is not impaired merely, but annihilated. The argument from prophecy as between Christians and Jews is gone; that only remains which may serve the Jew against infidels and heathens. If, for example, the literalist school of interpreters among Christians are right in maintaining, as they do, that Christ has not yet appeared as King of Zion, or as the possessor of David's throne and kingdom, why should not Rabbi Crool (in his "Restoration of Israel,"

a work replied to by Thomas Scott), and other Jewish writers, be equally right in contending, that Jesus of Nazareth cannot be the Messiah? The passages which both parties appeal to-such as Zech. ix. 9; Isa. ix. 6, 7; Micah v. 2-though they are expressly declared by the evangelists to have been fulfilled in Christ, yet speak of the Messiah under the very character and relations, which, it is alleged, have not yet been assumed by him: they represent him as going to appear among men, to be born at Bethlehem, to ride on an ass into Jerusalem, etc., in the character of the king of the Jews, and to the great joy of his subjects. Therefore, says Crool, and with manifest right on this principle, your Jesus cannot be the Messiah; for He did not sit upon David's throne, He set up no Jewish kingdom, and instead of finding joy and peace and union from His presence, the Jewish people only then began to experience their greatest troubles and their widest dispersions. So, of the greater proportion of prophetical passages applied in New Testament Scripture to Christ; and with equal justice on the principle of historical literalism, for they generally connect the appearance and work of Christ on earth with His destiny as the Son of David, or His relation to Zion and the covenant-people. And if certain characteristics are associated in prophecy with Messiah's birth and appearance—if certain results are described as flowing simply from His coming, not from His coming a second time to Zion or Jerusalem, and if these are not found in the person and history of Jesus of Nazareth, the plain and obvious inference is, that the promised Messiah is yet to come. In a word, the apologetic value of prophecy as regards the truth of Christianity is gone, and instead of a means of defence we find a weapon of assault. So much is this felt to be the natural tendency of the line of interpretation referred to, that those who adopt it have, of late years, been withdrawing prophecy after prophecy from the number of those which the inspired penmen and all truly Christian writers hitherto have understood of Christ. As in regard to the first great promise to fallen man, so also here, the principle of a prophetical literalism has led to the same result as its apparent opposite-a subtilizing rationalism: the one needs as much the doctrine of accommodation as the other, in explaining the New Testament applications of prophecy to Jesus. See this proved in "Typology of Scripture," Book I. ch. i., against an American Literalist; See also Dr Brown's "Second Advent," chap. vii. for proof of the successive abandonment of prophecies in reference to Christ, and for some able and acute remarks respecting the essentially Jewish position of the interpreters in question. Indeed, the list there given might be greatly increased. In chap. i., sec. 3, of our Second Part, when treating of the Apologetic value of Prophecy, the subject necessarily recurs again, and it is there shewn, that the literalism sought for in respect to Christ's throne and kingdom was in the nature of things impossible, and that if He be really the Son of God, the differences between the

New and Old form of things could not be otherwise than they are. It is therefore justly said by Hengstenberg ("Christology," 2nd Edition, App. vi.), that the strictly literal style of prophetical interpretation is essentially the very same as that which the Jewish commentators adopt; that its value may also be understood from the countenance given to it by many Rationalists on the continent; but that its strongest condemnation consists in its being the very method of interpretation which led to the crucifixion of Christ.

APPENDIX G, PAGE 116.

INTERPRETATION OF 2 PETER I. 21.

THE rendering given in the text of 2 Peter i. 21, is the strictly literal one: and as so rendered the passage exhibits more distinctly the contrast between the human and the divine in prophecy, denying it to be of the one, and affirming it to be of the other; at the same time, representing the mental state of those to whom and through whom it came, to have been of a quite supernatural description. The statement contained in the passage is given as a reason for the more general declaration which immediately precedes, that "Scripture prophecy is not of private interpretation," or, as it should rather be, "no Scripture prophecy comes of one's own solution"-literally, loosing out, ἐπιλύσεως. The word is peculiar, but its use here is to be accounted for by prophecy being contemplated according to its fundamental character, as an unravelling, or opening out of the secret counsels of heaven. As such it comes, the apostle tells us, from no private solving of the hidden mystery, on the part of those who uttered it; it was not of one's own (viz., the prophet's) unfolding. This seems to us by far the most natural sense of the passage; as it is also the one which fits most suitably in to what follows. It is only thus, too, that we preserve the force of the verb yivera, which is comparatively lost in our common version; for the real import of the apostle's statement is, not that no Scripture prophecy is, but that none comes in the manner specified; it does not so take its being and form. The question is not, as it is put by Bishop Horsley and many others, how the meaning of prophecy is to be made out or interpreted, but how prophecy itself came into existence, whence it drew its origin. And besides, to say of all prophecy alike, as such persons understand the declaration, that it is not of self-interpretation, but can only be understood as to its proper bearing when the events it contemplates have actually occurred, is not true as regards some prophecies (for example, 1 Tim. iv. 1, "The Spirit speaketh expressly"), and would virtually contradict what the apostle had said of prophecy immediately before,

when he represented it as "a light shining in a dark place." With what propriety could it be designated a shining light, if itself necessarily remained without any sure interpretation, till outwardly shone upon by the events of Providence!

APPENDIX H, PAGE 124.

THE SYMBOLIC ACTIONS OF THE PROPHETS.

THE rule laid down in the text, founded on the distinction between the record of God's communications to the prophet, and that of the prophet's communications to the people, we have said, will generally be found sufficient to guide us in determining, whether the actions described belong to the ideal region, or to the territory of actual life. It will be so at least, if it is coupled with the considerations previously advanced respecting the essential nature of the actions themselves. This may, perhaps, be rendered more palpable, by a brief examination of the view that is presented of some of the prophetical actions noticed or referred to in the text, by writers who understand them in a realistic manner. We shall take it on the showing of one of the most sensible and judicious of the class-the Rev. Dr Turner of America. In a little work, published in 1852, "Thoughts on the Origin, Character, and Interpretation of Scriptural Prophecy," after mentioning some instances of revelation by symbolic vision, he says:-" But the symbolic method was often employed by means of real actions openly performed. That ideas may be conveyed in this way distinctly and with perfect clearness, we know with certainty. Observation and experience have proved this beyond all doubt. In adopting this method, therefore, divine wisdom did but choose one from among various means, any of which is sufficiently well adapted to assure men of the meaning of His will. And the method chosen is sometimes the most impressive and startling that can possibly be imagined. When it is said of the prophet Isaiah, that, in obedience to the divine command, to 'loose the sackcloth from off his loins,' and to 'put off the shoe from his foot,' he did so, walking naked (i.e., stript of a part of his clothing) and barefoot, three years, a sign and a wonder '-in other words, a remarkable indication of God's judgment upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia;' it is hardly possible to conceive of a more direct prediction of overthrow and captivity, and of the contumely and shame to which Egypt, the world-renowned, the world-scorning, and in its own estimation all but celestial, Egypt should be exposed. And when Ezekiel is set for a sign unto the house of Israel,' and at the command of God 'removes his furniture in the sight' of the people, 'bearing it upon his shoulders and covering his face;' it would seem

that the act itself spoke out its own meaning, and certified the miserable inhabitants, that they 'should remove and go into captivity,' that the prince should be degraded to a servile condition, carrying the most necessary articles, and hiding his face through shame for the ignominy to which he should be subjected.— Let us look at the symbolical actions of Jeremiah. On one occasion God orders him to get a potter's earthen bottle, and after a public proclamation addressed to king and people, of terrible judgments impending, and of their iniquities which occasioned them, to break the bottle in pieces in their presence, as a symbol of their utter destruction. Such preaching, one might think, could hardly need the oral comment accompanying it, which begins in these words, 'Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, even so will I break this people and this city, as one breaketh a potter's vessel that it cannot be made whole again.' At another time, he is directed to send yokes to certain kings in the neighbourhood of Judea, indicating that the Creator and owner of all had resolved to subjugate them to the Babylonian power, announcing at the same time, that Zedekiah, the reigning king of Judah, should also be compelled to submit to the same degradation. To select another illustration from the same prophet: Whilst the armies of Nebuchadnezzar are besieging Jerusalem, and its conquest by the Chaldeans is generally expected; when the death, destruction, or captivity of the inhabitants is almost morally certain, and consequently no value can be attached to property, the enjoyment or possession of which had become wholly precarious; Jeremiah, at the divine direction, buys a field within the city, pays down the purchase-money, requires a deed properly attested, has the trans action witnessed according to law and with remarkable circumstantiality, and adopts measures to secure the legal documents, that they may neither be lost nor injured. No doubt, the ungodly portion of the inhabitants, who had abandoned themselves to the despair of infidelity, must have imagined that the prophet had become insane. But all this was done to show his faith in the divine promise of a future restoration, and resettlement of the people in their own land; which took place long afterwards under the decree of Cyrus. And to adduce one more instance: On occasion of the birth of a son, Isaiah is directed to give him a symbolical name, indicative of the fact, that the Assyrians should plunder Israel and Syria, powers which were then in hostile combination against Judah. In order to give publicity to the prediction, he is required to write the name of the child on a broad roll or tablet. He does so, and has the whole matter attested by unimpeachable witnesses of high standing and character. In due time

the fact takes place, and the prophecy is verified." Pp. 75–78.

We have admitted, that the action recorded in the nineteenth chapter of Jeremiah in respect to his going to the potter is so related, as to leave us in some doubt, whether it took place only in vision, or on the territory of real life. We shall, therefore, allow it to pass