It is to be feared that many who _read the Bible_ do not _digest the Word_. The two things are widely different. One may read chapter after chapter, book after book, and not digest so much as a single line. We may read the Bible as part of a dull and profitless routine, but, through lack of the ruminating powers--the digestive organs, we derive no profit whatsoever. This should be carefully looked into. The cattle that browse on the green may teach us a wholesome lesson. They first diligently gather up the refreshing pasture, and then calmly lie down to chew the cud. Striking and beautiful picture of a Christian feeding upon and inwardly digesting the precious contents of the volume of inspiration! Would that there were more of this amongst us! Were we more accustomed to betake ourselves to the Word as the necessary pasture of our souls, we should assuredly be in a more vigorous and healthy condition. Let us beware of reading the Bible as a dead form--a cold duty--a piece of religious routine.
The same caution is needful in reference to the public exposition of the Word. Let those who expound Scripture to their fellows first feed and digest for themselves,--let them read and ruminate in private, not merely for others, but for themselves. It is a poor thing for a man to be continually occupied in procuring food for other people, and he himself dying of starvation. Then, again, let those who attend upon the public ministry of the Word see that they are not doing so mechanically, as by the force of mere religious habit, but with an earnest desire to "read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest" what they hear. Then will both teachers and taught be well-conditioned, the spiritual life nourished and sustained, and the true character of outward walk exhibited.
But be it remembered that the chewing of the cud must never be separated from the divided hoof. If one but partially acquainted with the priest's guide-book--unpracticed in the divine ceremonial happened to see an animal chewing the cud, he might hastily pronounce him clean. This would have been a serious error. A more careful reference to the divine directory would at once show that he must mark the animal's _walk_--that he must note the impression made by each movement--that he must look for the result of the divided hoof. "Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof; as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof, he is unclean unto you," etc., etc. (Ver. 4-6.)
In like manner the divided hoof was insufficient if not accompanied by the chewing of the cud.--"The swine, though he divide the hoof and be cloven-footed, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you." (Ver. 7.) In a word, then, the two things were inseparable in the case of every clean animal; and as to the spiritual application, it is of the very last importance, in a practical point of view. The inward life and the outward walk must go together. A man may profess to love and feed upon--to study and ruminate over the Word of God--the pasture of the soul; but if his footprints along the pathway of life are not such as the Word requires, he is not clean. And on the other hand, a man may seem to walk with pharisaic blamelessness; but if his walk be not the result of the hidden life, it is worse than worthless. There must be the divine principle within, which feeds upon and digests the rich pasture of God's Word, else the impression of the footstep will be of no avail. The value of each depends upon its inseparable connection with the other.