so that the symbols of the Apocalypse are to be read from the Jewish and not from the Heathen stand-point.
But to say that these symbols jar upon the esthetic sense, is not to detract from their value as symbols, nor to decry them as violations of the fitness of things. It may be fairly asked if, with all their apparent incongruity, and even monstrousness, they may not, after all, be true to a higher canon of congruity. Certain it is that the great visible divine economy, both of nat- ure and of man, distinctly includes the grotesque, the mon- strous, the ridiculous (or what we style such). We recognize the fact in the phrase “freaks of Nature.” But are they freaks ? Are they incongruous? Until we shall have grasped in mind the whole Xosmos, it will not be safe for us to answer that question too positively. The apparent incongruity, viewed from a higher plane, may merge into beautiful congruity. Tested by a more subtile sense; brought into connection and relation with the whole region of mental and spiritual phenomena; regarded as a factor of that larger realm which embraces ideas and spir- itual verities along with external phenomena; the outwardly grotesque may resolve itself into the spiritually beautiful; the superficial incongruity into essential and profound harmony.
This possibility emerges into fact in certain utterances of our Lord, notably in His parables. Long since, the absurdity has been recognized of attempting to make a parable “go on all fours;” in other words, to insist on a hard and literal corre- spondence between the minutest details of the symbol and the thing symbolized. Sound exposition has advanced to a broader, freer, yet deeper and more spiritual treatment of these utter- ances, grasping below mere correspondences of detail to that deeper, “fundamental harmony and parallelism between the two grand spheres of cosmic being—that of Nature and that of Spirit; between the three kingdoms of Nature, History, and Revelation. The selection of symbols and parables in Script- ure, therefore, is not arbitrary, but is based on an insight into the essence of things” (Milligan).
Thus then, in this picture of the Son of Man, the attempt to portray to the eye the girded figure, with snow-white hair, flaming eyes, and a sword proceeding out of His mouth,—with