But there are those who somewhat modify this objection, and say, that our doctrine is too “technical” to be worthy of a Divine Revelation. That is to say, it is unworthy of the spirituality and dignity of CHRIST’S religion to be thus necessarily allied to outward and sensible forms. But surely this is as pure an _assumption_, as all the _other_ objections which have been considered. At least, it remains to be _proved_; and so far as the analogy of GOD’S previous dealing with mankind may guide us, we should be inclined perhaps to a very different conclusion. What, for instance, could be more “technical” than the Scriptural account of the sin of Adam? The moral aspect of the offence is _not_ dwelt on; it is simply presented to us as a disobedience of a set injunction, a failure in formal allegiance.—What, again, could be more “technical” than the acceptable sacrifice of Abel?—Or the trial of Abraham’s faith?—And might we not point in a similar way to the whole system established by GOD among the Jews?—Or let the more Spiritual institute of “Prophecy” be considered. There was much in it that would now be thought very “technical.” The prophet Balaam, {93a} though an unholy man, had power to “bless and curse;” there was a potency in his word. And then we read of the “_schools_ of the prophets.” And the Spirit of Prophecy seemed poured out in so technical and systematic a way, that there were certain places, and hours, and modes, {93b} in which the Spirit was in active energy, in such wise that strangers who came near were affected by it. So we read, that king Saul and his messengers, when they came to the company of prophets at Ramah, all began likewise to prophesy; (1 Sam. xix. 23.) just as Saul himself had done on another occasion, previous to his anointing (ch. x. 10). Or, to come to a later period, how “technical” does the Ministry of the Baptist appear throughout! And yet our Lord submitted to his “technical” Baptism, saying, “_Thus_ it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.” And surely we might make the same kind of remarks on the whole life of our LORD Himself. Look at the formal Genealogies at the beginning.—Is it not a strangely “technical” appointment, that a grace so divine as that which redeemed mankind must needs flow through the line of David? And be recorded so scrupulously, as though each link of the chain were important?—And in all that CHRIST did, is there not much that might by some be called “technicality?” His conformity to the Jewish ritual: His temptation, His replies to the Jews, His difficulties, questions, and dark sayings, and many of His miracles, might surely by many be so esteemed. {94} And then again, His Church and Sacraments: and His injunctions to the Apostles; as that, to “begin at Jerusalem” in their preaching, which they technically obeyed to the letter. (Acts xiii. 46.) But enough is plain, surely, from all this to show us that the technical nature of an institution _may_ be no objection