href="@public@vhost@g@gutenberg@html@files@13229@[email protected]#chap22-1" class="pginternal" tag="{http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml}a">River and Tree of Life, verses 1-5
Christ's Coming and Eternity, verses 6-21

Nature of Symbolic Language.

Before proceeding with the interpretation of this wonderful book, it will be necessary for us to pause and make inquiry concerning the nature of the language employed in its prophecies and concerning the mode of its interpretation. It will be seen at a glance that it is wholly unlike the common language of life; and it will be useless for us to undertake to ascertain its signification unless we understand perfectly the principles upon which it is founded.

The question may be asked, "Is the language intelligible at all?" Considering the variety of interpretations placed upon it by expositors and the opinions generally held respecting it, we might conclude that it is not. The majority of the people look upon these prophecies as "a mass of unintelligible enigmas," and are ready to tell the student of Revelation that this book "either finds or leaves a man mad." But are we to look upon its language as being applied at a venture, without any definite rule, capable of every variety of meaning, so that we can never be quite sure that we have its correct interpretation?

Commentators generally unite in attaching a definite meaning to certain symbols, and they tell us that these can not be applied otherwise without violating their nature. They may not give us their reasons for thus applying them (in fact, they generally do not), yet it is evidently assumed that such reasons do exist. Now, if reasons actually exist why a definite signification must be applied to the symbol in the one case, why do they not exist in another case, and in all cases? If any law exists in the case at all, it is a uniform one, for a law that does not possess uniformity is no law; otherwise, it would be an unintelligible revelation, and the only possible thing left for us to do would be to attempt to solve it like a riddle—guess it out. It would be as if the writer were to use words with every variety of meaning peculiarly his own attached, without informing the reader what signification to give them in a given instance. No man has a right thus to abuse written or spoken language; and we may take it for granted that the God of heaven would not make such an indiscriminate use of symbolical language when making a revelation to men. There is no other book the wide world around in which language is as carefully employed as in the Bible; and we can rest assured that when God gave this Revelation to Jesus Christ "to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass," he made choice of proper symbols whose meaning can be definitely evolved, provided we can but ascertain the great underlying principles upon which their original selection was based.

In the ordinary communication of our thoughts we employ arbitrary signs and sounds to which we have universally agreed to fix a definite meaning. Thus, our entire spoken language is made up of a great variety of sounds or words with which by long practise we have become familiar. We call a certain object a horse, not because there is any similarity between the sound and the animal designated, but because we have agreed that that sound shall represent that object. So, also, we have agreed that the characters h-o-r-s-e shall represent the same thing; and by the use of twenty-six characters, called the alphabet, placed together in various combinations, we are able to write our entire spoken language.

The incidents connected with the introduction of written language among a barbarous people are worthy of remark in this connection. That thought can be conveyed to persons at a distance by the use of certain cabalistic characters seems to them incredible, and when compelled to believe it, they look upon the person that can accomplish such wonders as embodying something supernatural. These things I mention merely to call attention to the fact that spoken and written language is a curious and wonderfully complicated affair. This is brought forcibly to our minds when we hear persons conversing in a foreign tongue, or when we pick up a book the characters of which are wholly unlike those of our own language. To us an English book is full of instinctive beauty, every letter or mark possessing a definite meaning that is instantly conveyed to our minds, because we have become familiar with them by diligent study and practise.

There are other ways of transferring thought besides the complicated system just mentioned—ways which are much more natural and simple. Thus, a simpler way to represent a certain object would be to draw a picture of it; or, better still, to represent a certain character or quality by exhibiting, not the object itself, but an analagous one whose peculiar character that property is; for examples: the quiet, peaceful, gentle disposition of a child, by a lamb; a man of cunning, artful, deceptive disposition, by a fox; or a cruel, bloodthirsty, vindictive tyrant, by a tiger, etc. This is hieroglyphical or symbolic language. This language takes precedence over every other for naturalness and simplicity, being common to a greater or less extent among all nations and intelligible to all.

Spoken language was undoubtedly a gift from God originally, while written language is probably a mere human invention. We are not to suppose that the first attempts to convey thought in writing would be by an alphabetical system, but by the symbolic, it being, as before stated, the most natural and within reach of the ordinary ingenuity of man. This is proved by the fact that the inscriptions on the ancient monuments of Egypt and the inscriptions of other nations of antiquity are of this character. It is also a fact worthy of notice that, four thousand years later, men of other countries and of other languages have, by much study and a careful comparison of the symbols, been able to decipher with accuracy those hierographical representations.¹ This of itself is sufficient to establish the point that definiteness can be attached to the use and the interpretation of carefully-selected symbols, when the principles that governed their original selection are discovered.

Footnote 1: (return)

The systems of hieroglyphical writing employed by various nations have, for the most part, remained unintelligible until a key of their interpretation was discovered. In 1799 M. Bouchard, a French captain of engineers, while digging intrenchments on the site of an old temple near the Rosetta mouth of the Nile, unearthed a black stone containing a trilingual inscription in hieroglyphics, demotic characters, and Greek. The last paragraph of the Greek inscription stated that two translations, one in the sacred and the other in the popular Egyptian language, would be found adjacent; hence this celebrated stone has afforded European scholars a key to the language and writing of the ancient Egyptians. The cuneiform writing of the Babylonians and Persians remained a mystery also until modern times, but great progress has now been made in the deciphering of thousands of inscribed clay tablets, cylinders, prisms,