to give by a perpetual miracle, when consulted by ephod and breastplate." ("Commentary," as above.)

Philo says, "De Creat. Principum," 728, ó πρòs åλýðeiav iepeùs evoús éσTI Tроpητηs. The notion, probably, is based on the ancient endowment of Urim and Thummim. And the actual use of Urim and Thummim by the High Priest was not always necessary to prophecy. John xi. 51 :— "And this spake he not of himself; but being High Priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation."

(4) bip na This kind of Revelation, the Jews say, was given after the return from the captivity. At our Saviour's Baptism, there was 'a Voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." (Matt. iii. 17.) So when He was transfigured there was a Voice from the cloud, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased; hear ye Him." (Matt. xvii. 5.) Lastly, in answer to our Lord's words, "Father, glorify thy name," there came a Voice from heaven, "I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again. The people, therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to Him. Jesus answered and said, This Voice came not because of me, but for your sakes." (John xii. 28-30.)

With regard to the certainty of Revelation, we may cite Abarbanel, as reported by John Smith, in his "Discourse on Prophecy," chap. iv. :-"A prophet, when he is asleep, may distinguish between a prophetical dream and that which is not such, by the vigour and liveliness of the perception whereby he apprehends the thing propounded, or else by the imbecility and weakness thereof. And, therefore, Maimonides hath said well, 'All prophecy makes itself known to the prophet that it is prophecy indeed; that is, it makes itself known to the prophet by the strength and vigour of the perception, so that his mind is freed from all scruple whatever about it."

In Jerem. xxiii. 28 there is a remarkable passage:"The prophet that hath a dream (pin), let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word (27 ó λóyos μov), let him speak my word faithfully (or of truth, Arnheim and Sachs render it, mein Wort der Wahrheit). What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD." This is not intended to disparage dreams which were really prophetic, for such were a standard and settled means of communicating the

Aóyos. Numb. xii. 6:-"If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream" (in Dibņa). But it was intended to distinguish between mere dreams and those which were the media of the Word. Verse 29: "Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?"

John Smith, in his tenth chapter, thinks that S. Peter is referring to the inferiority of the ip na to d λóyos πроÓητIкós, when he says, 2 Epist. i. 19, "We have also a more sure word of prophecy” (καὶ ἔχομεν βεβαιότερον τὸν πро¶ηtɩKòv λóyov). The Voice from heaven of John xii. 28 was not recognised by all as the Voice of God, and some even mistook it for thunder. Of course S. Peter had no doubt concerning the Voice in the holy mount. But he alludes to the acknowledged greater certitude of prophecy, which was an irresistible inspiration.

APPENDIX B.

There is a remarkable article in the Lexicon of Suidas, who lived about the eleventh century, of which Küster, one of his editors, says, "I wonder whence Suidas drew this; doubtless from some writer not now extant." It is interesting, not only as an instance of agreement between

Moses and an ancient heathen concerning the order of creation, but also as seeming to show that the theory that Moses uses the word "day" for a long period of time is far from being a modern expedient. It must be premised that the Etruscans were called Tyrrheni by the Greeks, and Tuscans by the later Romans. Their origin is prehistorical.

"Tyrrhenia: a country; and the Tyrrhenians were the so-called Tuscans. Now a person of experience among them composed a history. He said that God, the Maker of all things, thought proper to assign twelve thousands of years to all His works, and made these (thousands) coextensive [διατεῖναι ; some MSS. read διαθείναι] with the said twelve houses.* So in the first thousand, He made heaven and earth. In the second, He made this visible firmament, calling it heaven. In the third, the sea and all the waters which are in the earth. In the fourth, the great luminaries, the sun, and the moon, and the stars. In the fifth, every race of birds, and of reptiles, and quadrupeds, in the air, and in the earth, and in the waters. In the sixth, man. It seems, then, that the first six thousands passed away before the formation of man, but that the race of men will continue for the remaining six thousands. So that all the time until the consummation is twelve thousand."

APPENDIX C.

"From the fact that in the case of the prophets, the intelligent consciousness did not predominate at the time of their prophesying, as at ordinary times, but that they were

* τοῖς ιβ' λεγομένοις οἴκοις: This seems to refer to something in the unknown context.

in a state of KσTaσis, we deduce the following important conclusion. All the Divine revelations were discerned by the prophets by immediate perception. The impressions were made upon their inward sense, which was roused into action by the Spirit of the Lord, whilst the outward senses were quiescent and the power of reflection was for a time suspended.

"I. If this be the nature of prophecy, no one, who has carefully considered the subject, would expect that the prophets should always describe the events referred to in a connected form, or with all their bearings. It is to this peculiar feature in prophecy that the Apostle Paul appears to allude when he says, in 1 Cor. xiii. 9, 'We know in part and we prophesy in part: èk μépovs.'

"II. If the medium through which the prophets received their revelations was the inward sense, the whole must of necessity have appeared to them as occurring at the time. There are many peculiarities of which this will furnish an explanation. 1. In this case it will not surprise us, when we find the prophets speaking of coming events and persons, and even such as belong to the remote future, as if they saw them, and could point to them as standing before them.... 2. The fact that the prophets are seers, seems to explain the frequency with which they make use of the preterite, when speaking of the future. The preterite represents an event as having already taken place, and, according to the rules of grammar, can only be applied to the present or the past... 3. For the same reason, the length of the interval must, as a rule, have been unknown to the prophets, unless they received a special revelation, as in Is. vii., Jer. xxv., and Dan. ix. They were not chronological historians so much as describers of pictures. When they saw the Messiah, for example, standing before them, how could they possibly know the length of time that

would intervene previous to His appearing? As Crusius (Theol. Proph. i. p. 622) has very forcibly observed, 'the prophets looked upon future events, with the divine light with which they were illuminated, for the most part in the same way in which we look upon the starry heavens. We see the stars above us, but do not perceive how far they are off, nor even which are the nearer and which the more remote.'

"It not infrequently happens that, instead of being placed side by side, the events enfold each other; just as in a distant prospect the objects melt away the one into the other, and things which in reality are far removed from one another, appear to be closely connected. This remark will throw light upon the second part of Isaiah particularly, where we often find the deliverance from captivity and the redemption by Christ placed side by side, whilst at other times they pass before the eye of the prophet, here with the one more prominent, and there with the other. In like manner, all the judgments of the future are frequently embraced in one view; the foreground and the background passing the one into the other.

"III. If the prophets received their revelations in a vision, it follows that imagery would necessarily be very extensively employed in prophecy.... The figures under which the future was presented to the prophets, were necessarily such as lay within the circle of their ideas, and were taken from the circumstances amidst which they lived.... It could not be otherwise therefore than that the kingdom of Christ should be represented in the Messianic prophecies by figures borrowed from the earlier form of the kingdom of God, and that the names of the various things and persons, connected with the latter, should be directly applied to the things and persons belonging to the