perfectly glass himself, for it shall tell of nothing but the marvels of his wisdom, and power, and love.'-p. 18. The miracles of our Lord are yet more indicative of the Divine dealings with the world of nature. On this point a single page of Dr. Cumming's Essay is worth volumes :- In the miracles of Jesus, which are recorded in the Gospels, we have the same idea indicated again and again. For instance, when he multiplied the bread--when he stilled the seas-when he hushed the winds when he healed the sick-he gave, I think, not only specimens but instalments of what will be. I believe these miracles of Jesus were not mere displays of power, nor mere credentials of his Messiahship. Such they were, but more than this they also were; I believe they were earnest and prophetic auguries of that coming and blesssed day, when creation, recovered from its bondage, shall be introduced into the glorious liberty of the children of God.'—p. 147. We are reluctant to leave this interesting topic. We will only express our regret that Dr. Cumming has not given himself more scope. We admit that his special calling is to popularise hard subjects. In this he is altogether without a rival. We feel, nevertheless, that he would enjoy writing to theologians, and upon a topic like this giving to those who could appreciate it the result of his varied reading and well-weighed thoughts. We shall look for an Appendix in his second edition, wherein the critical portion of the subject shall have a full development. Some of his opponents are men of classical learning. We hope he will meet them on their own ground, and if they have the disposition to understand his arguments we shall marvel if they remain unconvinced; if they hear no groans from the created world; if they discern no discords, and look forward to no future deliverance from the bondage of corruption. CD LITERAL LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF PROPHECY. Isaiah as it is. By the Rev. A. Keith. Whyte & Co., Edinburgh. IF a subject might be said to be cultivated in proportion as it is written upon, we might well congratulate ourselves on the study of prophecy in this country, for many a volume has of late years issued from the press in connection with it. Yet so far has the work of interpretation been from thereby growing into a more firm and settled condition, that it never has presented a more confused and heterogeneous appearance than at present. It is not that some particular departments require to be more fully investigated, or certain dark and disputed passages have still to be successfully cleared up. We should feel thankful if this were all that had now to be done. But the first principles of the science have yet to be conclusively fixed; the whole field has to be rescued from the war of contradictory elements, and the appearance of inextricable confusion. At a period not very distant it seemed as if to a certain extent solid footing had been obtained, and a general consent established. The great proportion of protestant interpreters appeared to be of one mind, as to the leading characteristics of the prophetic style, and the fundamental principles on which the meaning of the prophetic Scriptures was to be sought. The particular conclusions at which Newton, Hurd, and other writers of the same class had arrived, might not in every case be acquiesced in; but there was scarcely any diversity of opinion as to the legitimate nature of the method they followed in endeavouring to establish them. This is no longer the case now. What they held as first principles of interpretation are scouted as vain imaginations of men; predictions which they thought could be triumphantly appealed to as already verified have been handed over to the future, as still waiting their fulfilment ; and excepting a few circumstances in the history of our Lord, hardly anything in Old Testament prophecy is allowed to have met with its accomplishment; it is all one huge gap, still needing to be filled up. Nor do we very well know how many even of the class referred to are likely to be left to us; for a process of exhaustion seems to be constantly going on, which is transferring one prediction after another from the region of the fulfilled to that of the unfulfilled. We owe this new, and, in one sense at least, retrograding phase in prophetical study to the prosecution of what is called the VOL. VI.NO. XII. 2 D literal literal style of interpretation. Prophecy, it is alleged, must be read entirely as we read history; for what is it but history anticipated? Every word, therefore, must here also have its simple and literal meaning attached to it; that, and no more. And as this view seemed to betoken a high regard for the perfect truthfulness of the prophetic record, so by pressing the literality it appeared for a time to gain in value, and to furnish new weapons for the confutation of the adversary. Hence the wonderful popularity of Dr. Keith's Evidence of Prophecy, which is considered to have rendered such service to the cause of revelation, from the striking confirmations it supplies out of the past and present, to the ipsissima verba of ancient prophecy. Without laying down any formal principles of interpretation, the work is throughout constructed on the ground of prophecy being in its style just as prosaic and literal as history, and requiring as minute and palpable a verification. And from the wideness of the field traversed, and the immense range of topies capable of being brought under review, the argument from prophecy did appear to gain by the method pursued, and that just in proportion to the number of coincidences which were found to exist between the announcements of prophecy and the credible reports of history. It is a considerable time since we began to feel very doubtful of this apparent advantage; the conviction forced itself upon us, that false views and expectations regarding the nature of prophecy were sure to be fostered by the particular course pursued, and that the immediate gain was likely to be counterbalanced by an ultimate loss. This principle, we said, of treating prophecy like history, will plainly not square with what we find in New Testament scripture of some of the fulfilments there referred to. It obliges us to regard these as merely fanciful or arbitrary accommodations; and even in respect to many others it is but a partial fulfilment that is presented to us in the Gospels, if regard be had to the strictly-literal meaning of the words. Nor should we find any difficulty in selecting from the very prophecies, which in Dr. Keith's work are prized only for the number of points they contain literally corresponding to facts in history, various passages from which an antagonist work might be constructed, bearing the title of Proofs of the Nonfulfilment of Ancient Prophecy. So we thought and reasoned with ourselves; and with what truth we may now appeal to Dr. Keith himself. This Isaiah as it is, though the production of the son, comes forth with the full imprimatur of the father's authority, and is introduced by a long preliminary essay from the pen of the latter, containing Scriptural Directions for understanding the Prophecies.' The style of interpretation interpretation pursued is entirely in accordance with these directions; but sometimes too much so to be in harmony with the Evidence of Prophecy; for the views that were but partially adopted there are here more systematically wrought out, and the son now writes unfulfilled over predictions which the father had exhibited as proofs of Divine foresight, on account of the manifest fulfilments they have already received. We deem it a duty to present our readers with a few specimens of this, which we take leave to call, downward progress; as it is fraught with instruction and warning to those who may be directing their minds to the study of the prophetic Scriptures. In the Evidence of Prophecy, we find at p. 26 (the references are to the thirteenth edition) the passage, Isa. ix. 1, 2, ‘In the land of Zabulon and Naphthali, by the way of the sea,' produced as one that had met its completion in Christ,' having predicted that the region in which he began his ministry was remote from the place of his birth.' In the Commentary it is still spoken of as 'meeting a partial application in Christ' (we presume a partial completion, or fulfilment, is meant). But the writer evidently holds that the chief thing, or what the prophet properly pointed to, is yet to come; for he says, "The light shone there, but the darkness comprehended it not; it cannot be said that the people have seen a great light. Of course, then, it cannot be said that the word of the prophet has in any proper sense been fulfilled by what took place at the commencement of our Lord's ministry. The statement of the evangelist, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet,' expresses a great deal too much. In the Evidence, p. 35, we have, Isa. ix. 6, 7, 'Unto us a child is born; unto us a son is given,' etc., adduced as one of the predictions which made promise of Messiah as going to reveal the will of God to man, and establish a new and perfect religion.' But the Commentary, referring to the mistaken simplicity of former times, says, "the verses are usually understood of our Lord's appearing in the flesh; but their contextual connection places them in another light. The Jewish nation never did take into their lips the language here ascribed to them, but it will be their song at the period indicated. If so, what is it but to play into a common delusion to retain the passage among such as have already received their fulfilment in the institution of Christ's religion and kingdom? Again, Isa. ii. 2-4, which speaks of the mountain of the Lord's house being exalted in the last days, the law of the Lord going forth out of Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, etc., is cited in the Evidence, pp. 40, 43, among a series of prophecies connected with the Gospel of Christ, of which 2 D 2 every "every Christian is a witness, and to the fulfilment of which the testimony even of infidels must be borne.' But when we turn to the more recent, as well as more ripened development of the principles of interpretation in the Commentary, we find the whole passage unhesitatingly referred to 'events not yet accomplished.' The clause indicates that from Jerusalem as a centre the knowledge of the true God is at last to emanate, until it spread over the whole earth.' And the only partial fulfilment which the author seems to find in the past, is in the flowing to Judea,' which took place in the times of the crusades. But it will probably be thought that in the portion of the work, which explains the predictions respecting ancient states and kingdoms, and in reference to which the Evidence of Prophecy has accumulated so many proofs of literal fulfilment, that there at least there will be a perfect agreement between the father and the son. This, however, is by no means the case. For example, in the Evidence, proof upon proof is brought forward to show that the description in Isa. xiii., and other collateral prophecies, has been fulfilled to the letter in the past and present desolations of Babylon. But in the Commentary we find but a qualified assent given to this, nay, a substantial admission, that the fulfilment has not yet taken place to the letter, and that a great part still remains to be established. 'Waste as Chaldea is as a whole, there are districts comparatively unscathed, on which judgment may have yet to fall.' And though a kind of feeble attempt is made to represent Babylon as an example of fulfilled prophecy, yet of what is written in v. 6-9, he says, 'As some things cannot be literally applied to the past, it appears better to understand the whole as having a reference to a period still future.' more every reader of the Evidence knows at what length the predictions regarding Edom are dwelt upon, and how prominent a place the xxxivth of Isaiah holds among those which are there asserted to bear a literal interpretation, however hyperbolical they may appear.' But in the Commentary the manifestation of judgment, which in the prophecy begins the whole series of calamities and desolations that were pronounced against the land and people of Edom, is thrown forward to a period yet to come, to the final national judgments that yet await the earth.' If so, we cannot understand how any part of the desolations which are described as subsequent, and which in truth are nothing more than the carrying out of the preceding act of judgment should be looked for before the still future period referred to arrives. The author, however, so far forgets his logic as to speak of some of the things predicted as having already come to pass; yet only 'in part,' while in other portions of the prophecy, v. 9, 10, he finds Once words, |