4.  I feel myself growing dizzy with all this, and wonder whether, in obeying you, I have not been obeying God, nor walking in the footsteps of the saints, unless it be that my too great love to you, and my unwillingness to cause you any pain, has led me astray and caused me to think of all these excuses.  We started from the words of the preacher, where he says:  “My son, beware of making many books.”  With this I compare a saying from the Proverbs of the same Solomon,^47914791    x. 19. “In the multitude of words thou shalt not escape sin; but in sparing thy lips thou shalt be wise.”  Here I ask whether speaking many words of whatever kind is a multitude of words (in the sense of the preacher), even if the many words a man speaks are sacred and connected with salvation.  If this be the case, and if he who makes use of many salutary words is guilty of “multitude of words,” then Solomon himself did not escape this sin, for “he spoke^47924792    1 Kings iv. 32. three thousand proverbs, and five thousand songs, and he spoke of trees from the cedar that is in Lebanon even unto the hyssop that springeth out of the wall, he spoke also of beasts and of fowl, and of creeping things and of fishes.”  How, I may ask, can any one give any course of instruction, without a multitude of words, using the phrase in its simplest sense?  Does not Wisdom herself say to those who are perishing,^47934793    Prov. i. 24. “I stretched out my words, and ye heeded not”?  Do we not find Paul, too, extending his discourse from morning to midnight,^47944794    Acts xx. 7–9. when Eutychus was borne down with sleep and fell down, to the dismay of the hearers, who thought he was killed?  If, then, the words are true, “In much speaking thou wilt not escape sin,” and if Solomon was yet not guilty of great sin when he discoursed on the subjects above mentioned, nor Paul when he prolonged his discourse till midnight, then the question arises, What is that much speaking which is referred to? and then we may pass on to consider what are the many books.  Now the entire Word of God, who was in the beginning with God, is not much speaking, is not words; for the Word is one, being composed of the many speculations (theoremata), each of which is a part of the Word in its entirety.  Whatever words there be outside of this one, which promise to give any description and exposition, even though they be words about truth, none of these, to put it in a somewhat paradoxical way, is Word or Reason, they are all words or reasons.  They are not the monad, far from it; they are not that which agrees and is one in itself, by their inner divisions and conflicts unity has departed from them, they have become numbers, perhaps infinite numbers.  We are obliged, therefore, to say that whoever speaks that which is foreign to religion is using many words, while he who speaks the words of truth, even should he go over the whole field and omit nothing, is always speaking the one word.  Nor are the saints guilty of much speaking, since they always have the aim in view which is connected with the one word.  It appears, then, that the much speaking which is condemned is judged to be so rather from the nature of the views propounded, than from the number of the words pronounced.  Let us see if we cannot conclude in the same way that all the sacred books are one book, but that those outside are the “many books” of the preacher.  The proof of this must be drawn from Holy Scripture, and it will be most satisfactorily established if I am able to show that it is not only one book, taking the word now in its commoner meaning, that we find to be written about Christ.  Christ is written about even in the Pentateuch; He is spoken of in each of the Prophets, and in the Psalms, and, in a word, as the Saviour Himself says, in all the Scriptures.  He refers us to them all, when He says:^47954795    John v. 39.  “Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and these are they which testify of Me.”  And if He refers us to the Scriptures as testifying of Him, it is not to one that He sends us, to the exclusion of another, but to all that speak of Him, those which, in the Psalms, He calls the chapter of the book, saying,^47964796    xl. 7. “In the chapter of the book it is written of Me.”  If any one proposes to take these words, “In the chapter of the book it is written of Me,” literally, and to apply them to this or that special passage where Christ is spoken of, let him tell us on what principle he warrants his preference for one 348book over another.  If any one supposes that we are doing something of this kind ourselves, and applying the words in question to the book of Psalms, we deny that we do so, and we would urge that in that case the words should have been, “In this book it is written of Me.”  But He speaks of all the books as one chapter, thus summing up in one all that is spoken of Christ for our instruction.  In fact the book was seen by John,^47974797    Apoc. v. 1–5. “written within and without, and sealed; and no one could open it to read it, and to loose the seals thereof, but the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the root of David, who has the key of David,^47984798    Apoc. iii. 7. he that openeth and none shall shut, and that shutteth and none shall open.”  For the book here spoken of means the whole of Scripture; and it is written within (lit. in front), on account of the meaning which is obvious, and on the back, on account of its remoter and spiritual sense.  Observe, in addition to this, if a proof that the sacred writings are one book, and those of an opposite character many, may not be found in the fact that there is one book of the living from which those who have proved unworthy to be in it are blotted out, as it is written:^47994799    Ps. lxix. 28.  “Let them be blotted out of the book of the living,” while of those who are to undergo the judgment, there are books in the plural, as Daniel says:^48004800    Dan. vii. 10.  “The judgment was set, and the books were opened.”  But Moses also bears witness to the unity of the sacred book, when he says:^48014801    Exod. xxxii. 32.  “If Thou forgive the people their sins, forgive, but if not, then wipe me out of the book which Thou hast written.”  The passage in Isaiah,^48024802    xxix. 11, 12. too, I read in the same way.  It is not peculiar to his prophecy that the words of the book should be sealed, and should neither be read by him who does not know letters, because he is ignorant of letters, nor by him who is learned, because the book is sealed.  This is true of every writing, for every written work needs the reason (Logos) which closed it to open it.  “He shall shut, and none shall open,”^48034803    Isa. xxii. 22. and when He opens no one can cast doubt on the interpretation He brings.  Hence it is said that He shall open and no man shall shut.  I infer a similar lesson from the book spoken of in Ezekiel,^48044804    ii. 10. in which was written lamentation, and a song, and woe.  For the whole book is full of the woe of the lost, and the song of the saved, and the lamentation of those between these two.  And John, too, when he speaks of his eating the one roll,^48054805    Apoc. x. 9, 10. in which both front and back were written on, means the whole of Scripture, one book which is, at first, most sweet when one begins, as it were, to chew it, but bitter in the revelation of himself which it makes to the conscience of each one who knows it.  I will add to the proof of this an apostolic saying which has been quite misunderstood by the disciples of Marcion, who, therefore, set the Gospels at naught.  The Apostle says:^48064806    Rom. ii. 16.  “According to my Gospel in Christ Jesus;” he does not speak of Gospels in the plural, and, hence, they argue that as the Apostle only speaks of one Gospel in the singular, there was only one in existence.  But they fail to see that, as He is one of whom all the evangelists write, so the Gospel, though written by several hands, is, in effect, one.  And, in fact, the Gospel, though written by four, is one.  From these considerations, then, we learn what the one book is, and what the many books, and what I am now concerned about is, not the quantity I may write, but the effect of what I say, lest, if I fail in this point, and set forth anything against the truth itself, even in one of my writings, I should prove to have transgressed the commandment, and to be a writer of “many books.”  Yet I see the heterodox assailing the holy Church of God in these days, under the pretence of higher wisdom, and bringing forward works in many volumes in which they offer expositions of the evangelical and apostolic writings, and I fear that if I should be silent and should not put before our members the saving and true doctrines, these teachers might get a hold of curious souls, which, in the absence of wholesome nourishment, might go after food that is forbidden, and, in fact, unclean and horrible.  It appears to me, therefore, to be necessary that one who is able to represent in a genuine manner the doctrine of the Church, and to refute those dealers in knowledge, falsely so-called, should take his stand against historical fictions, and oppose to them the true and lofty evangelical message in which the agreement of the doctrines, found both in the so-called Old Testament and in the so-called New, appears so plainly and fully.  You yourself felt at one time the lack of good representatives of the better cause, and were impatient of a faith which was at issue with reason and absurd, and you then, for the love you bore to the Lord, gave yourself to composition from which, however, in 349the exercise of the judgment with which you are endowed, you afterwards desisted.  This is the defence which I think admits of being made for those who have the faculty of speaking and writing.  But I am also pleading my own cause, as I now devote myself with what boldness I may to the work of exposition; for it may be that I am not endowed with that habit and disposition which he ought to have who is fitted by God to be a minister of the New Covenant, not of the letter but of the spirit.

————————————