heir or possessor of the world, was literally the thing promised of God, and expected by Abraham,-the heavenly city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God, for which he looked, and of which Paul speaks, the New Jerusalem, the holy city, which John in vision saw coming down from God out of heaven, as a bride adorned for her husband.

To make the promise refer to the spread and prevalence of the gospel, under the evangelical dispensation, and to say that Abraham becomes "heir of the world," by the diffusion and triumph of the gospel, is to allegorise and to accommodate the language of the Spirit, to contradict the grammatical import, and not grammatically to interpret. For, to dwell a moment longer here

Paul says explicitly, Abraham and all the fathers looked for a heavenly city, as one great and glorious thing held forth in " the covenant of promise." That heavenly city, allegorically interpreted, must mean either the invisible state, i. e. the state of happiness into which the saints now enter, when they die, and pass into the heavenly paradise, or it must mean the church of God, enlarged, extended, and universally established-what the Spiritualists call the kingdom of God, etc., especially towards the close of the gospel dispensation, i. e. during the millenial glory. That it means the paradisiacal heaven, or the heavenly state, on which all the Fathers entered after death, Paul expressly denies, for he says, "These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims upon the earth; for they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they

came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. But now they desire a better country, that is an heavenly; wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for He hath prepared for them a city." At their death they did not enter into that heavenly city for which they hoped, neither did the prophets, who succeeded the patriarchal fathers, such as Moses, David, Samuel, Isaiah, and many others; for Paul says of them also, that "having in this life obtained a good report through faith, they received not the promise, God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect," i. e. be consummated in bliss.

The literal or grammatical meaning of this is, that the patriarchs and prophets were not to enter into the promised glory without, and consequently before, we Christians. But, lest it be said, that a change took place, after the death and ascension of Christ, in the heavenly state, and that Abraham and the prophets passed into the glory into which Christians now enter when they die-whatever may or may not be the truth of this, it is not, and cannot be, what the apostle understands by the thing promised. That, he uniformly speaks of as being the glory accruing to the saints, when Christ shall return to earth, raise their dead bodies, and establish His kingdom for ever and

ever.

Of that inheritance, Peter says explicitly, they have not yet obtained possession, whether patriarchs, prophets, apostles, or any now with Christ, for it is "reserved in heaven," and "ready to be revealed in the last time." The grace for which patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and Christians in all ages hope, is the

* Heb. 11. 13-16. † Heb. 11. 39-40. 1 Peter, 1. 4, 5.

grace that is to be brought unto us at the revelation of Jesus Christ, i. e. at his second coming. But if the heavenly city, the inheritance for which Abraham and all the fathers hoped, and for which Christians are yet hoping, be not the state immediately after death, and the allegorical interpretation fails here, much more must it, when it is alleged that it is the gospel state of the church on earth, especially in a millenium to be enjoyed before the return of Christ. In that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the dead saints have no part for which they now wait, the heavenly city is not to be entered until the resurrection, and the return of Christ to this world. It is explicitly said that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are to enter at that day into the kingdom, and “ many from the East and from the West, from the North and from the South, are to come, not before, but at the day of Christ's appearing, and to sit down with them in the kingdom of heaven." The allegorical interpretation makes utter confusion of all this, but the grammatical interpretation sets it before us as clear and intelligible as it is transcendent in glory.

CHAPTER III.

THE SYSTEM OF INTERPRETATION.

Two very opposite systems of Scriptural interpretation have been brought into view; the one denominated THE LITERAL or GRAMMATICAL, and the other the ALLEGORICAL or SPIRITUAL. The general nature of each has been defined, and to some extent illustrated; the literal or grammatical having been shown to be the method commonly adopted by men in their attempts to understand each other's language, according to which, the words, grammatically understood, are taken as the proper guide to the meaning of the writer or the nature of the thing expressed ;-the allegorical or spiritual being an attempt to explain the meaning of the words according to some assumed or preconceived notions of the nature of the thing.

We have affirmed the literal system to be the true and proper one for the interpretation of the prophetical Scriptures; because it is the most natural, consistent, and satisfactory mode of interpretation, commending itself to the common sense of mankind; because it is more definite and certain, and far less liable to the charge of vagueness and to the vagaries of men's imaginations, than the spiritual or allegorical; and because it is sanctioned by the example of the patriarchs, the prophets, and the apostles, in their study and exposition of the prophecies. We add another reason.

IV. THE ENTIRE SYSTEM OF PROPHECY CONTAINED IN THE SCRIPTURES, AS FAR AS IT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED AND EXPOUNDED BY THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD, RECOGNIZES

AND ESTABLISHES THE LITERAL OR GRAMMATICAL AS ITS APPROPRIATE METHOD OF INTERPRETATION.

In order to understand the force of this argument, it will be necessary to notice more particularly than we have done, the nature and character of prophecy. On this point there has been much confusion, which has not been much relieved by treatises designed expressly to give us philosophical explanations of the manner in which the minds of the prophets were affected. It has been taken for granted, that there is something essentially difficult to be understood in prophecy; not only from the necessary obscurity in every attempt to describe future events, but especially from the mode in which the minds of the prophets were acted on and affected by the Spirit of God, who made to the prophets his revelations. Peter says, that prophecy is not the result of human excogitation. "It came not in old time by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."*

As to the precise amount of meaning in this word "MOVED," there has been much disagreement among those who have written on the nature of prophecy. This diversity of sentiment has ranged from those satisfied with a general knowledge of the fact that God acted on them in some miraculous way, and who attempted not even to form an idea as to the mode, believing that Peter intended to intimate no notion whatever on this subject to those, who, supposing that he did, have allowed themselves to class the phrenzy of the