LECTURE VI. THE WHOLE FABRIC OF INFIDEL OBJECTIONS SHEWN TO BE I. General View of the System and Arguments of the preceding Lectures: Important additional Testimony. II. The four classes of Infidel Objections stated in the first Lecture resumed, and examined by the view which has been developed of the nature of the Holy Word, and of the means of decyphering its true signification. 1. Imputed Inconsistencies with Reason and Science considered: Style of Writing in the first part of the book of Genesis. 2. Imputed Contradictions considered : Why four Gospels were written. 3. Imputed Violations of Morality considered: David not a pattern, but a type. 4. Imputed Insignificance considered. General Reply confirmed; -That all such Objections arise from taking a merely superficial view of the Sacred Scriptures, and from an utter Ignorance of their true Nature. III. Address to Christians, cn the Necessity of taking higher ground in their Controversy with Deists. IV. Address to Deists, on the internal causes of Scepticism. Conclusion. IT has been the object of our preceding Lectures to shew, that the Holy Scriptures are written according to the laws of the Analogy or Mutual Relation established by creation between things natural and spiritual that they thus contain a spiritual sense distinct from the literal expression, which they could not convey, in an orderly series, unless they were divinely inspired throughout; that there is ample evidence that they are thus written, and of course that they are divinely inspired; and thus that they are, what they profess to be, the Word of God. I. The line of argument by which we arrive at this conclusion has consisted of four stages, which, now that we are about to close the whole discussion, we will state in one view. 1. We have seen in the first place, in our first Lecture, that a Revelation which is indeed from God, must contain, in every part of it, the treasures of infinite Wisdom: but we have seen also, that this wisdom does not every where appear in the Scriptures on the face of the letter;-so far from it, that infidels have deduced from the appearances of the letter, and in ignorance of their containing any thing further, various plausible arguments for denying them to have proceeded from any superior intelligence. But the fair inference from those appearances is, not that they are not divinely inspired, but that, if they are, they must contain that superior wisdom which is the criterion of inspiration, in an interior sense distinct from the literal expression. This the deistical objections appear to me decidedly to prove that if the Scriptures actually do not contain any thing beyond what appears on the surface, they are not the Word of God: but they by no means prove the negation which they aim at,-that they are not the Word of God:-they only prove, that, to be such, they must contain more than appears on the surface,-that they must include a spiritual sense within the letter, in which all difficulties vanish, and the wisdom every way worthy of God opens to the view. So far, then, the objections of Deists may clearly be retorted against themselves. We may say to them, "After all your industry in seeking for difficulties in the letter of Scripture; and admitting the difficulties you have brought forward to be ever so great, so long as the literal expression alone is attended to; you have not produced any thing that can convince a reflecting mind that the Scriptures are not the Word of God; you only elevate our conceptions to higher views respecting what the Word of God must really be. We find in the Scriptures numerous intimations, leading us to look for something beyond the letter the difficulties you have started are calculated to turn attention the same way: Let us then examine the Scriptures in this new and more exalted point of view; in which, if you will accompany us, you will probably see reason to change your opinion, and to acknowledge that your objections to the inspiration of the Scriptures have all proceeded upon a very partial and entirely inadequate view of the case. 2. This being precisely the situation in which the Christian advocate is placed by the Deistical objector, we proceeded, in the second branch of our argument, contained in our second Lecture, to examine the question thus opened for consideration. Here then we gave proofs, from rational and philosophical considerations, that a composition which is really the Word of God, must not only be generally replete with divine wisdom, but must contain the chief stores of such wisdom in its interior recesses,-in a spiritual sense included within the letter ;-just as, in all the works of God, and especially in his noblest work, man, are contained innumerable forms and wonderful organs, both corporeal and mental, within the outward form, which alone is visible to the eye. This branch of the argument then stands thus: "A composition which has God for its Author, must contain within it stores of hidden wis dom, beyond that which appears on the surface: On the supposition, then, that the Scriptures are the Word of God, they actually must be replete with such hidden wisdom." And thus the same conclusion is pressed upon us by considerations grounded in the very nature of things, which we before found was pointed out to us by the infidel objections. It is true that this argument does not prove that the Scriptures positively are the Word of God, but only what their nature must be if they are: But as they likewise affirm the same of themselves, and had that affirmation believed, without reserve, in the days of primitive and pure Christianity, (both which points are also proved in our second Lecture,) a full coincidence is established between what a divine revelation must be, and what the Scriptures pretend to be; and thus is raised a strong presumption, that this, on due examination, is what they will actually be found to be. Before then the Deist rejects them on account of some things which offend him in the letter, it behoves him to be very certain, that the literal sense is all that is intended and if he is assured that a further meaning is intended, (and I wish my voice or pen could carry this assurance to every one that ever saw a Bible, whether Deist or Christian !) then ought he, as a candid inquirer, to pause awhile, and examine the evidence upon which this statement rests and sure I am, that whoever would candidly do this, and would take the pains to understand it, must be convinced of its truth, and must learn to prize the Scriptures as his highest treasure, as containing indeed the pure Word of God. 3. But to determine this point with certainty, it is necessary that we should be acquainted with the Law or Rule by which every divine composition must be composed, and by which of course it alone can be decyphered: wherefore, as the third branch of our argument, we pro ceeded to shew, in our third Lecture, that there must be, from the very nature of creation, an unalterable relation between natural things and spiritual, insomuch that all things in nature, being outward productions from inward essences, must be natural, sensible, and material types, of moral, intellectual, and spiritual antetypes, and finally of their prototypes in God. I then availed myself of several testimonies in favour of this great principle: but I will here mention one which was not before the public at the time of the delivery of my former Lecture, but which is so striking and beautiful, that I am sure every lover of truth will be glad to be put in possession of it now. It is contained in an address delivered by the Rev. W. Kirby, M.A., F.R. and L.S., the Chairman of the Zoological Club of the Linnæan Society, at a late meeting of that body. He offers his views of the existence of fixed analogies among the various orders of being; of the importance of the recognition of the principle to the higher interests of Science; and of its applicability to the construction of a highly significant language; in these terms: "When we are engaged in the study of animals, and more especially of groups of them, it is of the first importance, if we would avoid mistakes, that our attention should be kept alive to what the friend lately alluded to has said on the subject of affinity and ANALOGY.* By his judicious observations on this subject he has opened a new door into the temple of nature, and taught us to explore her mystic labyrinths, guided by a safer clew than we were wont to follow. And whoever casts even a cursory glance over her three kingdoms, will every where be struck by resemblances between objects which have no real relation to each other. He will see on one side dendritic minerals; on another, zoomorphous plants; on a third, phytomorphous animals; and The gentleman alluded to is Mr. Macleay, who has demonstrated the existence of a remarkable analogy between insects and fungi: See our third Lecture, p. 106 and 107 (notes.) |