Let us however,--passing by the many crooked remarks and unsound inferences with which the Reverend writer, (_more suo_,) delights to perplex a plain question[221],--invite him to abide by the test which he himself proposes. For 1700 years, (he says,) the Interpretation of Scripture has been obscured and encumbered by successive Schools of Interpretation. The Interpreter's concern (he says) is _with the Bible itself_. "The simple words of that book he tries to preserve absolutely pure from the refinements of later times.... The greater part of his learning is a knowledge of the text itself." [He is evidently the very man who _sweeps the house to discover the pearl of great price_. (p. 414.)] "He has no delight in the voluminous literature which has overgrown it. He has no theory of Interpretation. A few rules guarding against common errors are enough for him.... He wants to be able to open his eyes, and see or imagine things as they truly are." (p. 338.) [How crooked by the way is all this! "He has no _theory_ of Interpretation[222]?" Why, no; for the best of all reasons. He _denies Inspiration altogether!_ His "theory" is that _the Bible is an uninspired Book!_ ... How peculiar too, and how plaintive is the "want" of the supposed Interpreter, "_to he able to open his eyes_;"--glued up, as they no doubt are, by the superstitious tendencies of the nineteenth century, and the tyranny of an intolerant age!] But we may perhaps state the matter more intelligibly and simply, thus:--In order to ascertain the _true_ principle of Scriptural Interpretation, let us,--divesting ourselves of the complicated and voluminous lore of 1700 years,--_resort to the Bible itself_. Let us go for our views to the fountain-head; and abide by what we shall discover _there_. A fairer proposal (as I think) never was made. It exactly describes the method which I have humbly endeavoured myself to pursue in the ensuing Sermons. The inquiry will be found elaborated from p. 141 to p. 160 of the present volume; and the result is to be read on the last-named page, in the following words:--"that it may be regarded as a fundamental rule, that the Bible _is not to be interpreted like a common book_. This I gather infallibly from the plain fact, that _the inspired writers themselves_ habitually interpret it _as no other book either is, or can be interpreted_.--Next, I assert without fear of contradiction that inspired Interpretation, whatever varieties of method it may exhibit, is yet uniform and unequivocal in this one result; namely, that it proves Holy Scripture to be of far deeper significancy than at first sight appears. By no imaginable artifice of Rhetoric or sophistry of evasion,--by no possible vehemence of denial or plausibility of counter assertion,--can it be rendered probable that Scripture has invariably one only meaning; and _that_ meaning, the most obvious and easy."