termine what is really figurative, lest we take that to be literal which is figurative, as the disciples of our Lord and the Jews frequently did, or lest we pervert the literal meaning of words by a figurative interpretation; and secondly, when we have ascertained what is really figurative, to interpret it correctly, and deliver its true sense. For this purpose the following hints will be found useful in addition to a consideration of historical circumstances, parallel passages, and the context.

1. The literal meaning of words must be retained, more in the historical books of Scripture, than in those which are poetical

We are not, therefore, to look for a figurative style in the historical books and still less are historical narratives to be changed into allegories and parables, unless these are obviously apparent. Those expositors, therefore, violate this rule, who allegorize the history of the fall of man, and that of the prophet Jonah.

2. The literal meaning of words is to be given up, if it be either improper, or involve an impossibility, or where words, properly taken, contain any thing contrary to the doctrinal or moral precepts delivered in other parts of Scripture. Thus,

(1.) The expressions in Jer. i. 18, are therefore necessarily to be understood figuratively. So, the literal sense of Isa. i. 25, is equally inapplicable; but in the following verse the prophet explains it in the proper words.

(2.) In Psal. xviii. 2, God is termed, a rock, a fortress, a deliverer, a buckler, a horn of salvation, and a high tower; it is obvious that these predicates are metaphorically spoken of the Almighty.

(3.) Matt. viii. 22-"Let the dead bury their dead, cannot possibly be applied to those who are really and naturally dead; and consequently must be understood figuratively. "Leave those who are spiritually dead to perform the rites of burial for such as are naturally dead."

(4.) The command of Jesus Christ, related in Matt. xviii. 8, 9, if interpreted literally, is directly at variance with the sixth commandment, (Exod. xx. 13,) and must consequently be understood figuratively.

(5.) Whatever is repugnant to natural reason, cannot be the true meaning of the Scriptures; for God is the original of natural truth, as well as of that which comes by particular revelation. No proposition, therefore, which is repugnant to the fundamental principles of reason, can be the sense of any part of the word of God; hence the words of Christ, This is my body, and, This is my blood, (Matt. xxvi. 26, 28,) are not to be understood in that sense which makes for the doctrine of transubstantiation; because it is impossible that contradictions should be true; and we cannot be more certain that any thing is true, than we are that that doctrine is false.

(6.) To change day into night (Job xvii. 12,) is a moral impossibility, contrary to common sense, and must be a figurative expression. In Isa. 1. 5, 6, the Jewish nation are described as being sorely stricken, or chastised, like a man mortally wounded, and destitute both of medicine as well as of the means of cure. That this description is figurative, is evident from the context; for in the two following verses the prophet delineatcs the condition of the Jews in literal terms.

It is not, however, sufficient to know whether an expression be figurative or not, but, when this point is ascertained, another

of equal importance presents itself; namely, to interpret metaphorical expressions, by corresponding and appropriate terms. In order to accomplish this object, it is necessary,

3. That we inquire in what respects the thing compared, and that with which it is compared, respectively agree, and also in what respects they have any affinity or resemblance.

For, as a similitude is concealed in every metaphor, it is only by dili gent study that it can be elicited, by carefully observing the points of agreement between the proper, or literal, and the figurative meaning. For instance, the prophetic writers, and particularly Ezekiel, very frequently charge the Israelites with having committed adultery, and played the harlot, and with deserting Jehovah, their husband. From the slightest inspection of these passages, it is evident that spiritual adultery, or idolatry, is intended. Now the origin of this metaphor is to be sought from one and the same notion, in which there is an agreement between adultery and the worship paid by the Israelites to strange gods. That notion, or idea, is unfaithfulness; by which, as a wife deceives her husband, so they are represented as deceiving God, and as violating their fidelity in forsaking him.

4. Lastly, in explaining the figurative language of Scripture, care must be taken that we do not judge of the application of characters from modern usage; because the inhabitants of the East have very frequently attached a character to the idea expressed, widely different from that which usually presents itself to our views.

In Deut. xxxiii. 17, the glory of the tribe of Joseph is compared to the firstling of a bullock; in like manner Amos (iv. 1.) compares the noble women of Israel to the kine of Bashan, and Hosea compares the Israelites to refractory kine that shake off the yoke. If we take these metaphors according to their present sense, we shall greatly err. The ox-tribe of animals, whose greatest beauty and strength lie in their horns, was held in very high honour among the ancient nations, and was much esteemed on account of its aptitude for agricultural labour: hence, in the East, it is not reckoned disgraceful to be compared with these animals. In the comparison of the tribe of Joseph to the firstling of a bullock, the point of resemblance is strength and power. In the comparison of the matrons of Samaria to the kine of Bashan, the point of resemblance is luxury and wantonness, flowing from their abundance,

SECTION II.-On the Interpretation of the Metonymies occurring in

Scripture.

A metonymy is a trope, by which we substitute one appellation for another, as the cause for the effect, the effect for the cause, the subject for the adjunct or the adjunct for the subject.

A Metonymy of the cause is used in Scripture, when the person acting is put for the thing done, or the instrument by which a thing is done is put for the thing effected, or when a thing or action is put for the effect produced by that action.

A Metonymy of the effect occurs, when the effect is put for the efficient

cause.

A Metonymy of the subject is, when the subject is put for the adjunct,

that is, for some circumstance or appendage belonging to the subject; when the thing or place containing is put for the thing contained or placed; when the possessor is put for the thing possessed; when the object is put for the thing conversant about it; or when the thing signified is put for its sign.

A Metonymy of the adjunct is, when that which belongs to any thing serves to represent the thing itself.

$1.-Metonymy of the Cause.

I. Frequently the person acting is put for the thing done. Thus,

1. CHRIST is put for his doctrine in Rom. xvi. 9.

2. The HOLY SPIRIT for his Effects and Operations, in 2 Cor. iii, 6. Psalm li. 10; Influences, in Luke xi. 13, and 1 Thess. v. 19; a Divine Power, reigning in the soul of the renewed man, in Luke i. 46, 47, compared with 1 Thess. v. 23; the Extraordinary Gifts of the Spirit, in 2 Kings ii. 9. Dan. v. 12; and for revelations, visions, or ecstacies, whether really from the Holy Spirit, or pretended to be so, in Ezek. xxxvi. 1, 2 Thess. ii, 2, and Rev. i. 10.

3. Parents, or Ancestors, are put for their Posterity; as in Gen, ix, 27. Exod. v. 2, and very many other passages of holy writ

4. The Writer, or Author, is put for his Book or Work: as in Luke xvi. 29. xxiv. 27. Acts xv. 21, xxi. 21, and 2 Cor. iii. 15, in which passages Moses and the Prophets respectively mean the Mosaic and Prophetic writings.

II. Sometimes the cause or instrument is put for the thing effected by it. Thus,

1. The mouth, the lips, and the tongue, are respectively put for the speech, in Deut. xvii. 6, xix. 15. Matt, xviii. 16, &c.

2. The mouth is also put for commandment in Gen. xlv, 21. (marginal rendering) (Heb. mouth.) Numb. iii, 16. 39, xx. 24, xxvii. 14. Deut. i. 26. 43. and in Prov. v. 3. the palate (marginal rendering) is also put for speech.

3. The throat is also put for loud speaking, in Isa, lviii. 1. Cry aloud, (Heb. with the throat.)

4. The hand is ordinarily put for its writing, 1 Cor. xvi. 21. Col. iv. 18. 5. The sword, famine, and pestilence, likewise respectively denote the effects of those scourges, as in Ezek. vii. 15.

$ 2.-Metonymy of the Effect.

III. Sometimes, on the contrary, the effect is put for the

cause.

Thus God is called Salvation, that is, the Author of it, Exod. xv. 2, our life and the length of our days, Deut. xxx. 20, our strength, Psalm xviii. 1. So Christ is termed Salvation, Isa. xlix. 6. Luke ii, 30. Life, John xi, 25. and the Resurrection in the same place.

§ 3.-Metonymy of the Subject.

IV. Sometimes the subject is put for the adjunct, that is, for some circumstance or appendage belonging to, or depending upon the subject. Thus,

The heart is frequently used for the will and affection, Deut. iv. 29, vi. 5, &c. and for the understanding, Deut, iv. 39, vi. 6. Luke ii. 51, &c. V. Sometimes the place or thing denotes that which is contained in such place or thing.

The earth and the world are frequently put for the men that dwell therein, as in Gen, vi, 11. Psalm xcvi. 13, &c. The Houses of Israel and Levi denote their several families, in Exod. ii. 1, and Ezek. iii, 1.

VI. Sometimes the possessor of a thing is put for the thing possessed.

Thus, Deut. ix. 1. To possess nations greater and mightier than thyself, means to possess the countries of the Gentiles. See also Psalm lxxix. 7, where Jacob means the land of the Israelites.

VII. Frequently the object is put for that which is conversant about it.

Thus glory and strength are put for the celebration of the divine glory and strength, in Psalm viii. 2; explained by Matt, xxi. 16; see also Psalm xcvi. 7, 8.

VIII. Sometimes the thing signified is put for its sign.

So, the strength of God, in 1 Chron. xvi. 11, and Psalm cv. 4, is the ark, which was a sign and symbol of the divine presence and strength.

IX. When an action is said to be done, the meaning frequently is, that it is declared, or permitted, or foretold, to be done: as in Gen. xli. 3. Jer. iv. 10. Matt. xvi. 9, &c.

X. An action is said to be done, when the giving of an occasion for it is only intended.

1 Kings xiv. 6. Jeroboam made Israel to sin, i. e. occasioned it by his example and command. See Acts i. 18, Rom. xiv. 15, and 1 Cor. vii. 16.

§ 4.-Metonymy of the Adjunct, in which the Adjunct is put for the Subject.

XI. Sometimes the accident, or that which is additional to a thing, is put for its subject in kind.

The abstract is put for the concrete. So gray hairs (Heb. hoariness or gray-headedness) in Gen. xlii, 38, denote me, who am now an old man and gray-headed; abomination for an abominable thing, in Gen, xlvi. 34, and Luke xvi, 15.

XII. Sometimes the thing contained is put for the thing containing it, and a thing deposited in a place, for the place itself.

Thus Gen. xxviii. 22, means, this place where I have erected a pillar of stone, shall be God's house. Josh, xv. 19. Springs of water denote some portion of land, where there may be springs. Matt. ii. 11. Treasures are the cabinets or other vessels containing them.

XIII. Time is likewise put for the things which are done or happen in time, as in 1 Chron. xii. 32. John xii. 27.

XIV. In the Scriptures, things are sometimes named or described according to appearances, or to the opinion formed of them by men, and not as they are in their own nature.

Thus Hananiah, the opponent of Jeremiah, is called a prophet, not because he was truly one, but was reputed to be one, Jer. xxviil. 1. 5. 10. In Ezek. xxi. 3, the righteous mean those who had the semblance of piety, but really were not righteous. And in Luke ii. 48, Joseph is called the Father of Christ, because he was reputed so to be.

XV. Sometimes the action or affection, which is conversant about any object, or placed upon it, is put for the object itself.

Thus, the senses are put for the objects perceived by them, as hearing for doctrine or speech, in Isa, xxviii. 9, (marg. rend.) and liii. 1, (Heb.) In John xii, 38, and Rom. x. 16, the Greek word akon, translated report, literally means hearing, and so it is rendered in Gal. iii. 2. 5. Hearing is also put for fame or rumour in Psalm cxii. 7. (Heb.) Ezek. vii. 26 Obad. 1. Hab. iii. 2. (Heb.) Matt. iv. 24, xiv. 1, and xxiv. 6. Mark i. 28, and xiii, 7, &c.

The eye, in the original of Numb, xi. 7. Lev. xiii. 55. Prov. xxiii, 31. Ezek. i. 4, viii. 2, and x. 9, is put for colours which are seen by the eye. XVI. Sometimes the sign is put for the thing signified as in Gen. xlix. 10. Isa. xxii. 22. Matt. x. 34.

XVII. Lastly, the names of things are often put for the things themselves, as in Psalm xx. 1, cxv. 1. Acts ii. 21. Rom. x. 13, &c.

SECTION III.-On the Interpretation of Scripture Metaphors and
Allegories.

I. Nature and sources of METAPHORS.

A metaphor is a trope, by which a word is diverted from its proper and genuine signification to another meaning, for the sake of comparison, or because there is some analogy between the similitude, and the thing signified. Of all the figures of rhetoric, the metaphor is that which is most frequently employed, not only in the Scriptures, but likewise in every language: for, independently of the pleasure which it affords, it enriches the mind with two ideas at the same time, the truth and the similitude. To illustrate this definition :-In Deut. xxxii. 42, we read, I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh. Here, the first metaphor is borrowed from excessive and intemperate drinking, to intimate the very great effusion of blood, and the exceeding greatness of the ruin and destruction which would befall the disobedient Israelites: the second metaphor is drawn from