are rast becoming convinced of e madequacy of any of these attempts; and the honest acknowledgment of the learned Schott in the extract which follows, will, we imagine, convey the real sentiments of a large number of this class of writers: 66 Although," says this critic, "we would gladly allow any conjecture of this kind, by the aid of which, whatever the conclusions arrived at, we might be able to decide fully as between these and those more correct parallels of the canonical gospels, yet it cannot easily be ever advanced."

(2) With respect to the Latitudinarian view, and the opinion announced by Mr. Jowett that "a principle of progressive revelation," or, as it is expressed by Mr. Wilson, in the passage cited in our last chapter, "acknowledging freely the human element in the sacred books,"2 will account for all the difficulties and peculiarities in the Gospels, we find the same objections as lay against this theory in reference to the Old Testament. Not only can we not agree with the former writer in his assertion that for any of the higher or supernatural views of inspiration there is no foundation in the Gospels or Epistles,3 but we also find it impossible to understand how Mr. Wilson's idea of the acknowledgment of the human element in the Gospels will remove the difficulty. If by the human element is meant the existence of human ideas and modes of conceiving Divine things, and the description and accounts of human actions and character, we freely admit

1 See the original of this remarkable passage in Kitto, Art. 'Gospel.' 2 See chap. ii. § 2, 3 (2, ad fin).

3 Of the Epistles of the New Testament we need not here speak; but it seems plain, from numerous expressions contained in them, that they must have been composed under some higher impulse than the power of preaching or teaching, which,' as Mr. Jowett says, the Apostles daily exercised, unless these were, in like manner, inspired.

s. That the Apostles and others mentioned in the els are described as being only men, and as holding gether human and imperfect views of our Lord's charis beyond dispute; but how the acknowledgment of fact can affect our view of the discrepancies in the alogies of St. Matthew and St. Luke, or our underling of the question of our Lord's descent on the her's side, we fail to perceive. If, on the other hand, the human element in the sacred books,' is meant rfections and errors in style, language and historical gical statement, such as are common in other and ly human compositions, then, we would ask, how he recognition of these account for the existence of erous other peculiarities, universally recognized in books, which are found in no other writings that the contains? How, for example, upon this principle, we explain the words, "Arise, let us go hence" xiv. 31,) interpolated so singularly and abruptly found, as it would appear, in all the Manuscripts in same position) in the middle of one of our Lord's est and most touching discourses? or the phrase, entered into a ship and sat in the sea," (Mark iv. 1), ad of, "and He went into a ship and sat," as it is exed by Matthew, or, "He sat down and taught the le out of the ship," according to Luke's version? ve to suppose that Mark was less capable of expressimself correctly than the other two Evangelists? Or will the acknowledgment of the human element lead the recognition of the Divine element in a passage this in Luke x. 21, "In that hour Jesus rejoiced in , and said, I thank thee, O Father," and the rest? r ourselves, although we are prepared to recognize to ullest extent the thoroughly human character of these

fact that the writers were men, and wrote as other men write, would seem to us, had we no higher principle from which to regard the Scriptures, to preclude the possibility of such passages as these (and the hundreds of a similar kind which are to be found in the historical Scriptures of both Testaments) being written by men to whom their literary reputation, or their character for common veracity, (in cases where they relate wonderful and supernatural events,) was a matter of regard. Some other view, therefore, must be adopted, which shall really reconcile the Divine and the human elements in these writings, and fully harmonize their contradictions and clear up their many difficulties; and what this view, in our opinion, is, we shall endeavour to point out in the following pages.

We have thus, in the preceding part of this work, gone over the principal theories and hypotheses advanced by Modern Criticism to account for the form and style of the Old and New Testament histories, and have, we think, satisfactorily shewn, chiefly from the criticisms of each school by the others respectively, the untenability of them all, and their common inadequacy to explain the peculiarities of the Biblical narratives, and to satisfy the requirements of an impartial and unprejudiced inquirer. In our next and concluding Part, we propose to present, at considerable length, the views propounded in the writings of Swedenborg and the New Church in reference to these Scriptures, and to submit them to an enlightened and discerning public as in our belief the only true theory of the origin and inspiration of the Word of God, whether in its historical or in its prophetical writings.

PART II.

TEACHINGS OF SWEDENBORG AND THE NEW

CHURCH.

CHAPTER I.

WEDENBORG AS A BIBLICAL CRITIC--HIS RELATIONS TO THE
VARIOUS MODERN THEORIES.

efore entering upon the proper subject of this Part, the presenting of the views of Swedenborg and other ers of the New Church respecting the Historical ptures, we propose, in this chapter, to consider denborg in his relations to Modern Criticism, and to various theories propounded by recent writers, and ady examined in the first Part of this work, in explaon of the sacred history. In other words, we propose iew him as a Biblical Critic. And, in saying this, we of course, mindful of the age in which he lived, and he state of critical science in his day. Historical cism, and especially the application of the historicocai exegesis to the Scriptures of the Old and New aments, may be said to be the growth of the present ury. For, although, so early as in the latter part of seventeenth century, such writers as Hobbes and oza had made some approaches to the critical spirit reference to Biblical studies, and the celebrated of Richard Simon' had already appeared, to be fol

Histoire Critique du Vieux Testament. Paris, 1678.

of a restricted and desultory character, so far as respects the critical treatment of the Historical Scriptures of the Old Testament, and not until a new impulse was given to historical studies generally by the researches of Heyne, Niebuhr, Ottfried Müller, and their cöadjutors, towards the close of the last and in the beginning of the present century, did Biblical Criticism begin to assume a definite and tangible form. Swedenborg's career as a theologian, however, dates from a few years previous to the middle of the last century,-his Divine call to the important office of herald of a New Dispensation of religious truth to mankind, having taken place, as he informs us, in the year 1745, from which time he began to write and publish the theological works which bear his name. Biblical criticism was, therefore, in his day, as yet in its infancy, or rather may be said to have scarcely come into being. Accordingly, whatever evidences his writings may afford, and they are, as we shall see, neither few nor unimportant, of critical ability and acumen, may, we think, be fairly attributed to something more than the mere reflection of the age and of the literature of his time, and may be regarded as due, in some degree at least, to the wonderful industry and remarkable sagacity and clearness of mental vision of the man. Some of the evidences of these qualities, and of the recognition and employment of the critical faculty, in the theological writings of this extraordinary man, we intend, therefore, to lay before our readers in the present chapter; in the hope that they may be the means of leading some who may perchance have been accustomed hitherto to look upon Swedenborg simply in the light of a mystic and a visionary, to review 1 Vide Bleek, vol. i. § 6.