Again, it has been said, could an inspired person possibly fall into such a complication of evil? Miraculous inspiration, we answer, was not given to the sacred pen-men, as a certain preservative from the corruption of sin, but to enable them to reveal the will of God; to guard them, in this respect, from error; and to “guide them into all truth:” their carnal appetites and passions were not supernaturally overruled; they still had their choice between good and evil; though revealing to mankind the holy law of God, they might themselves neglect the duties which it injoined: many instances are recorded of the abuse of spiritual gifts, many examples of their consisting with unholiness and transgression. The very chief of the apostles intimates to us the personal care and watchfulness and labour which were necessary, “lest, having preached to others, he himself should be a castaway.” {179} Not but that David’s guilt was most deplorably inconsistent with his high character and office, and was a dishonour to religion itself; I am only shewing, that it was not incompatible with the appellation which he had received, and the high and holy functions which he was called to discharge. And be it remembered, to David’s honour, that though his sin was aggravated, his confession of it was full and unreserved; that he most humbly and religiously submitted to the penal retribution of his offended God; that his repentance was bitter and sincere: it was “a repentance indeed never afterwards repented of:” continually was his harp attuned to the bewailing of his own depravity; continually was he descending from the lofty strains of thanksgiving and joy, and pouring forth in the abasement of his soul, the doleful notes of mourning and lamentation.