To the epistolary parts of the New Testament this rule is more especially applicable, and in the study of those letters it should never be dispensed with. They should be read, and re-read, from beginning to end; and it is preferable to use a copy where the text is not divided into chapters and verses. It should be read as we would peruse an epistle from a friend, and that three or four times over, without interruption, until we have fully apprehended the meaning, and the subject of the whole letter becomes clear. From this perusal, reperusal, and repetition of the document, we shall obtain a right knowledge of the scope the author had in writing it, and an acquaintance with the general argument of the epistle.* For, as it has been well remarked, the composition of every such work, however loose and imperfect, cannot have been fortuitous; we know that by some exertion of mind it has been put together, and we discover in its connections, such as they are, indications of the purpose for which the exertion was made. According to the tendency of the composition, may the inference be safely made to its purpose.† Nor should this examination be restricted to separate books of the Old or New Testament: it should be extended to embrace all the separate parts of those books as a whole. As every part of the Divine revelation has an ultimate reference to one great subject which is carefully pursued throughout, it is obvious that the continuous reading which has been recommended for the several books should be carried throughout the whole; and that conclusions as to that revelation should not be drawn, till the joint amount of the whole can * Franck's Guide to the Study of the Scriptures, p. 62. The following observations of Mr. Locke, on the advantages derivable from the practice here recommended, deserve attention. After having been convinced by long experience, that the ordinary mode of reading a chapter, and then consulting a commentator thereon, failed in giving him a just conception of the sense of an epistle, he says, "I saw plainly, after I begun once to reflect upon it, that if any one should now write me a letter, as long as St. Paul's to the Romans, concerning such a matter as that is, in a style as foreign, and expressions as dubious, as his seem to be; if I should divide it into fifteen or sixteen chapters, and read one of them to-day, and another to-morrow, and so on, it was ten to one that I should never come to a clear comprehension of it. The way to understand the mind of him that wrote it, every one would agree, was to read the whole letter through from one end to the other, all at once, to see what was the main subject and tendency of it; or, if it had several parts or purposes in it, not dependent one of another, nor in a subordination to one chief aim and end, to discover what those different matters were, and where the author concluded one and began another; and if there were any necessity of dividing the epistle into parts, to mark the boundaries of them." In the prosecution of this idea, Mr. Locke determined upon reading each of the epistles of Paul through at one sitting, and to mark as well as he was able the drift and design of the writer. By persevering in this plan, he at length obtained a good general view of the Apostle's main purpose in writing the several epistles, the chief branches of his discourse, and arguments used, and the disposition of the whole. See his preface to the epistles of St. Paul. + Cook's Inquiry into the books of the New Testament, p. 204. be thus collected. Not thus to gather, from all the different books, what each has said of their common subject, must be to narrow the grounds on which it was designed, that our opinion of the revelation should be formed.* 4. Remember that the whole scope of the Scriptures refers to Christ in his mediatorial capacity. He is the sum and substance--the very soul-of Scripture, and almost every part thereof has some reference to him and his mediatorial kingdom. Some passages treat expressly of him, and inculcate faith in his promise, and obedience to his will; some contain prophecies concerning him, fulfilled, or remaining to be fulfilled; others exhibit types and figures; while others are to be referred to him by the analogy of faith, which, as to all the articles of faith, is entirely founded on him. Hence the necessity of keeping the eye of faith constantly fixed upon the Redeemer, in reading every part of Scripture. "In him all the promises of God are yea and Amen," 2 Cor. i. 20. To him all the genealogies refer; all the times relate; all the ceremonies point;-and as the sun imparts his light to all the heavenly bodies, so Christ," the Sun of righteousness," gives light and meaning to every part of Scripture. In the interpretation of Scripture, from an investigation of the scope or design of the writer, the following cautionary rules should be regarded: 1. A proposition occurring in the course of an argument, is not necessarily to be taken in the widest sense which the words will bear. A proposition, used merely as a link in a chain of reasoning, is often expressed in more general terms than would be required to establish the conclusion which the writer is proving; in this case, the proposition is not necessarily to be taken in the widest sense of which the words would admit: it may be subject to various limitations, which the writer did not think it necessary to express, because they did not affect the course of the argument; and we should ever bear in mind that our Saviour and his apostles adapted, for the most part, their instructions to the occasion, without attempting to treat religion in a systematic order. The following passages will at once illustrate and confirm the rule. In Luke ix. 50, our Saviour says, "He that is not against us is for us," but in Matthew xv. 30, it is," He that is not with me is against me." How are these propositions to be reconciled? By taking one of them * Cook's Inquiry, p. 84. + See Franck's Guide, p. 108, et seq. 66 in some limited sense; and the occasion on which the first was delivered, evidently points out the limitation which it requires. John having seen one, who was not associated with them, casting out devils in the name of Christ, had forbidden him to do so. Jesus said to him, "Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us." Forbid him not"-that is the precept-forbid him not to do good in my name-and the reason follows-" for he that is not against us is for us:" he who does not oppose me, promotes my cause: let my Gospel be preached, even though of strife and contention. Here our Saviour inculcates forbearance towards those who, from whatever motives, promote the progress of his kingdom: but in the place in Matthew he teaches us, that mere indifference will not avail to our salvation; that they who would obtain the reward, must profess the character of his disciples; that they who do not confess him before men, and espouse his cause in this world, will be treated as his enemies at the day of judgment. The manner in which Paul and James have treated the doctrine of justification, will furnish another illustration of this canon of criticism. St. James says, "Ye see how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” (ii. 24); and St. Paul says, "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law :" and it is a little singular, that each of the apostles illustrates his position by the instance of Abraham. But the apparent discrepancy will be removed, if we examine the course of their reasoning. St. James is labouring to prove, that faith without works is a dead faith, a faith which will not avail to salvation. "What doth it profit though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith-can such a faith- -save him?" "If a brother or sister be naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you say unto them, depart in peace: be ye warmed and filled: notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?" What sincerity, what worth is there in such professions of kindness? What benefit do they confer on those who are the objects of them? "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone;" all professions of faith, which do not evidence their truth by a holy life and conversation, are false, vain, and unprofitable. "Yea, a man may say," to such a professor, "Thou hast faith, or pretendest to have it-" and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works;" give me, if thou canst, some other proof of it; " and I will show thee my faith by my works. Thou believest there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe and tremble." Wherein doth thy faith differ from theirs, if it produce not the fruits of righteousness and holiness?" But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead," wholly unprofitable to salvation? "Was not Abraham, our father, justified?" Did he not shew forth a living faith unto justification "by works, when he had offered Isaac, his son, upon the altar?" Did he not, by that act of holy obedience, prove and display that living faith in the truth, and power, and promises of God, which "was imputed to him for righteousness?" "Seest thou, how faith wrought with his works," producing obedience to the commands of God, however apparently severe and irreconcileable with his promises; " and by works was faith made perfect," brought forth into action, and shewn to be a lively and efficacious principle in the soul?" And the Scripture was fulfilled,” which saith," Abraham believed God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness:" and he was called the friend of God. "Ye see then, how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." Ye see that by works a man is justifiedproves his title to be acquitted before God, by works evidencing that faith which is imputed to the believer for righteousness; by such works a man is justified, and not by faith only, not by a mere barren profession, or even a mere speculative belief, which does not influence the life and conduct. Such appears to be the course of St. James's reasoning. St. Paul, on the other hand, is proving to the Jews, that they, as well as the Gentiles, must be saved by faith: and his argument is this: "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God;" all have broken the moral law of God; no one, therefore, can be saved by that law, which exacts a perfect obedience; and thence he concludes, "that a man is justified by faith, without," apart from, distinct from," the deeds of the law." In order to be justified before God, he must have that faith which God will impute to him for righteousness; a faith, however, which worketh by love, and maketh those who are influenced by it zealous of good works. This passage will furnish us with another rule. 2. A proposition must be understood in a sense sufficiently large. to bear out the conclusion which it is intended to prove. Thus, in the first part of the epistle to the Romans, Paul's object is to shew, that the Jews, as well as the Gentiles, need the salvation which is by Jesus Christ; and his argument is this-" All have sinned and come short of the glory of God;" therefore all, both Jews and Gentiles, must be "justified freely through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus," Rom. iii. 23, 24. This conclusion will not follow from the premises, unless we understand the Apostle to lay it down as an universal proposition that "all have sinned."* IV. LET PARTICULAR REGARD BE HAD TO THE CONTEXT, AS THIS IS IN MANY CASES CONDUCIVE TO THE ELUCI- We have partly anticipated this remark, in the preceding paragraph: it demands, however, a more specific consideration. It is certain that a want of attention to this necessary rule, in the interpretation of Scripture, has given rise to much of the controversy with which the Christian church has been for so long agitated. Every theological doctrine, however monstrous its character, has been surrounded and supported by a multiplicity of texts, which, by being forcibly abscinded from their respective contexts, have seemed to countenance the opinion in support of which they were adduced.† But if things which are contrary cannot in the same sense be true, so it is certain that neither can the variety of conflicting opinions which have been set forth as the pure and unsophisticated deductions of God's word be rationally considered or received as such. It is for the purpose of guarding against such perversions of the Scripture, that the rule above laid down merits particular attention. The design of the writer being ascertained, by the rules mentioned under the preceding head, let the entire passage relating to the particular subject in hand be carefully considered, and let each particular part be so interpreted, as forming an integral part of the whole. In some cases the context will only embrace a few verses, in others, an entire chapter, or even a whole book. But whichever may be the case, the canon remains in force, and the necessity is unalterable. Thus, to acertain the genuine meaning of Matt. x. 9, 10, 19, &c. regard must be Christian Observer, Vol. xi. p. 12, &c. Since the above was written, I have met with the following judicious remarks, of which I gladly avail myself, and earnestly recommend the entire discourse to the attention of all who wish to attain to a correct understanding of the Bible: "How untair, how irrational, how arbitrary, is the mode of interpretation which many apply to the word of God! They insulate a passage, they fix on a sentence, they detach it from the paragraph to which it belongs; and explain it in a sense dictated only by the combination of the syllables or words, in themselves considered. If the word of God be thus dissected or tortured, what language may it not seem to speak, what sentiments may it not appear to countenance, what fancy may it not be made to gratify! But would such a mode of interpretation be tolerated by any living author? Would such a method be endured in commenting on any of the admired productions of classical antiquity? Yet in this case it would be comparatively harmless, although utterly indefensible: but who can calculate the amount of injury which may be sustained by the cause of revealed truth, if its pure streams be thus defiled, and if it be contaminated at the very fountain head? Rev. H. F. Burder, on ascertaining the genuine sense of Scripture, p. 21. |