and eloquence of some great "multitude of preachers:" but, indubitably,
if God willed to bless the universal race, and drop the honey of his
words distilling down the hour-glass of Time from generation to
generation even to the latter days, there was no plan more probable,
none more feasible, than the pen of a ready writer.

Further: and which concerns our argument: what were likely to be the
characteristic marks of such a revelation? Exclusively of a pervading
holiness, and wisdom, and sublimity, which could not be dispensed with,
and in some sort should be worthy of the God; there would be, it was
probable, frequent evidences of man's infirmity, corrupting all he
toucheth. The Almighty works no miracles for little cause: one miracle
alone need be current throughout Scripture: to wit, that which preserves
it clean and safe from every perilous error. But, in the succession of a
thousand scribes each copying from the other, needs must that the tired
hand and misty eye would occasionally misplace a letter: this was no
nodus worthy of a God's descent to dissipate by miracle.

Again: the original prophets themselves were men of various characters
and times and tribes. God addresses men through their reason; he bound
not down a seer "with bit and bridle, like the horse that has no
understanding"--but spoke as to a rational being--"What seest thou?"
"Hear my words;"--"Give ear unto my speech." Was it not then likely that
the previous mode of thought and providential education in each holy man
of God should mingle irresistibly with his inspired teaching? Should not
the herdsman of Tehoa plead in pastoral phrase, and the royal son of
Amoz denounce with strong authority? Should not David whilst a shepherd
praise God among his flocks, and when a king, cry "Give the King thy
judgments?" The Bible is full of this human individuality; and nothing
could be thought as humanly more probable: but we must, with this