IT will require but a brief space in which to lay down the principles of special classification. The only difficulty to be apprehended in this, lies in the fact that such classifications are characterized by an apparent want of fixedness, the precise nature of which should be clearly understood [231] by every one who would employ with profit the method of induction.

      There is no independent fact in the universe. Everything that exists, and everything that occurs, is connected with something else--nay, in some sense, with everything else, by ties more or less numerous, and in associations more or less immediate. And hence, begin where we may, we can trace those cords of connection up to something higher, and down to something lower, as well as to the objects immediately by the side of that we are examining. Suppose we begin at the highest point, and trace this connection downward. Here we regard the whole creation as one class, nature, bound into a unit by a great cable, as it were, held by the hand of Omnipotence: Tracing this down from its point of suspension, it is presently perceived to be divided into two strands--one of which runs through, and binds into one everything that is organic, and the other everything that is inorganic. These again are respectively subdivided. We will follow the strand that represents the organic division of nature. This is divided immediately into two smaller cords, one of which binds to itself all vegetable organization, and the other all animal. These now subdivide in order to bind into classes the various kinds of vegetables and of animals. And thus we descend from a single point to every individual in the universe, and see, to begin with the individuals, how each one is bound to, or classed with, first, others most like itself; next, others which are like it in a less number of respects; and then, others still less; and finally with all [232] things, in some of which the likeness is confined to a single aspect.

      Or we might, in making our classifications, ascend the scale. Beginning with the individuals of the animal creation, we might form them into the various classes of animals, and then elevate all these into the one class, animal. In the same way we might bring up all the classes of vegetables to the one class, vegetable; and then uniting these two, we should have the one class, organic nature. Pausing here till we had brought up the various classes of the other department, to the most general class of that department, inorganic nature, we could unite these two into the great GENUS GENERALISSIMUM, or highest class, nature, or creation.

      It will be perceived that every class except the highest and the lowest--which are called by logicians genus generalissimum, and species specialissima--is at the same time both a genus and a species; a genus with respect to classes below it, and a species with respect to that or those above it; and all of them together are called the intermediate genera and species, i. e. each one is a genus generalius, or a species specialior, according as we consider it in the ascending or descending series.

      All this is strictly true of the facts of the Bible. In one point the Scriptures are a unit--the word of God. But they are divided, as we have seen, into three grand divisions, denominated dispensations; and now each of these is divided again into other classes, and these into others, and so on, till all the facts are arranged into a series of genera [233] and species, from any single one of which we can ascend to a genus generalius, or higher class.

      Upon what principle, now, are we authorized to make these classifications of Scripture texts or facts? We answer, upon that one precisely which prevails in natural classification--the principle of their constitutional agreement or natural likeness. We group into families things which are akin to each other. Here are half a dozen texts, for example, which agree perfectly in several essential particulars, while each has some peculiarity which distinguishes it from all the others. They are, for instance, on the same subject--addressed to mew who are in substantially the same condition--for the purpose of inculcating the same truth and effecting the same object. With reference, then, to all the points of natural likeness or agreement, we class them together, while the points of dissimilarity are left out or disregarded.

      But we are not to suppose that the respective peculiarities, which find no place in this classification, are therefore redundant and useless; for there may exist numerous other facts which agree with those in the first class only in the points which are therein disregarded. And thus the same fact may enter into two or more classes, with reference now to one of its aspects, and now to another. All parables, for example, may be classed together in one family, because they are all naturally alike in one respect, namely, that they are parables. Again, the laws of language require that poetic compositions shall be construed in a manner differing in some important particulars from plain narrative. [234] Now, for the purpose of eliminating the highly-colored imagery and bold hyperboles, with all that extravagance of diction which is proper to poetry, but which would mislead if taken as plain prose and used in our inductions; and for the purpose of ascertaining what would be the real facts and unadorned doctrine regaining as residual phenomena after those things are excluded,--we may class all such Scriptures together, as involving the laws applicable to poetry in their interpretation. But now, all those things which we have designated the residual phenomena of such Scriptures--what remains after the poetic element has been eliminated--must be classed again, upon the principle of the likeness of their subject matter. Thus, too, of all the forms of figurative expression--before they can enter into the process of legitimate induction, i. e. before they can be placed upon a par or in a class with simple facts, they must themselves be rendered simple, by being divested of those accidents which might otherwise be taken as essential phenomena, and thus vitiate the conclusion.

      Enough has now been said on this subject, it is presumed, to snake evident the following propositions: 1. That for any classification to be useful, it must be formed upon the basis of the real connection or homology which exists naturally between the objects classified, and not merely upon the fortuitous similarity of their accidents. 2. That the same fact may be connected in its different aspects with more classes than one, just as a man is related by consanguinity to more families than one. 3. And finally, that a generalization from any class of facts must be of the same [235] grade with that class. The violation of this last principle which is about equivalent to Bacon's inductio per enumerationem simplicem--has been the occasion of much mischief in those so-called inductions which have been made from revelation. It would seem to require no argument to prove that, before we can rise to an induction of a higher grade than the class of facts from which it is drawn, chose facts themselves mast be elevated to such grade; but in that case they will be united, of course, with other facts and classes, which will enter into the final generalization; and hence, if such generalization had been made previously, it would have sprung from a partial and insufficient number of facts, i. e. it would have been an induction by simple enumeration.

      All this may be illustrated by an example. Let it be given to investigate the subject of conversion, taken in its most comprehensive sense, as embracing the whole change from the state of sin to that of justification.¹ We find, by observation and comparison, that there are various classes of texts bearing upon this subject, which, for the sake of convenience, we may number. Leaving out some classes concerning the predictions relating to conversion, the obligations to turn, and the blessings that will follow, it will be sufficient fur our illustration to note the following:--

      1. We may place in the first class all that God has [236] already done for the world in respect to their conversion. And this, it will be perceived at once, will embrace a large number of texts, which, besides their bearings on the subject in question, teach also many things on other subjects, and would be included in other classes if those subjects were to be investigated.

      2. In our second class we may place all those tents which teach what the Holy Spirit does in the conversion of men. In this class we should be careful to include only those texts which describe his work in conversion, while we exclude from it, as belonging to a different inquiry, such as tell what he does for Christians, or those who have already been converted. And this we do upon the principle we have been insisting upon, that there should be a natural bond of connection to hold together the individuals of a class.

      3. We may next place in a class those Scriptures which make known the office of the word of God in effecting conversion.

      4. In a fourth class we may collect the general and specific laws of conversion, such, for example, as the commission given by the Saviour to the disciples when he seat them out to convert men.

      5. And in a fifth class we may include all the cases of actual conversion recorded in the Scriptures. But it will be perceived that this class, from its very nature, embraces all the others. It stands upon a higher grade, including everything in each of the lower.

      Leaving this last class, then, for our final generalization, [237] we begin with the others, and from each of them make an induction appropriate to itself. Suppose we take class No. 2. Now, from a careful comparison of all its individuals, viewed in the light of their various circumstances, we are able to learn the general truth which they teach. But what is that truth? and what degree of generality are we to assign to it? It is not the final conclusion, for that belongs to a higher genus; but it is one element that enters into the constituency of the final generalization. That is all that this class teaches, all we expected it to teach, all that it is necessary for it to teach--the office or work of the Holy Spirit in conversion. But instead of assigning this truth to its proper place, men have frequently inferred that the whole of conversion was the work of the Spirit; and have thus, by a false induction, set aside the necessity and merit of Christ's death and blood, have made the word of God useless, and have divested the minds of men of the sense of individual responsibility. Such men, and they are consistent in doing so, preach the Spirit, instead of preaching Christ, his word, and his requirements, and leaving the Spirit to do his own work. All this evil results from making a generalization of a higher grade than the class of facts which is held to justify it. And a similar evil, equally destructive of the symmetry of Christianity, would result if either of the other classes were thus unwarrantably generalized. No man, therefore, can be said to declare the whole counsel of God, on the subject of conversion, who does not tell what Christ has done, what the Spirit is doing or seeking to do, what the province of the [238] word of God is, and the effect of studying, listening to, and heeding it; what the laws or requirements of Christ are, or, in other words, what men must themselves do before they are actually and fully converted. All these elements enter into that generalization which we name conversion; and all these will be found in our fifth class of facts--the cases of actual conversion, as recorded in the New Testament, and more particularly in the Acts of the Apostles. They may not all be specifically mentioned and developed in each case, but if we interpret then; inductively we will carefully compare all the cases. And it is our judgment that, if laying aside all philosophies and theories and prejudices, and studying those cases in the light of the principles herein taught, with a perfect willingness to receive what the Scriptures teach, every human being who has capacity to enable him to appreciate the force and meaning of ordinary language, will reach precisely the same conclusion as to what is scriptural conversion, in the general sense in which we are using that term.

      If the reader desire a fuller examination of the principles of special classification, he will find the subject ably treated in the works from which we quoted so freely in the previous chapters, and to which we expect to be greatly indebted for much of what remains to be done. We trust that what we have said will serve at least to show the importance of carefully observing those principles in biblical classification, while we are not without hope that our familiar explanations and illustrations have contributed something to the elucidation of a subject not popularly [239] understood, and which has not been hitherto sufficiently regarded. We are now prepared to pass to the consideration of the rules to be observed in making inductions from facts thus collected and classified. [240]

[TOOS 231-240]