REVELATION'S, BOOK <>K. 



ItKVERSION. 



' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 



u oaBt uestion of ecelesWir.1 tradition grneralfy. We 



with saying thai, in thU ca*e at lout, we 



creatir doubt, for many rsseooi. th sufficiency of the witness, an.l are 

 Dot tuAed. even whew it Mia to the ]..ir| ,.w. that iU word* have 

 toys heen rightly underatood. However thU may be. It U plain that 

 ihi. mode of proof tlto support* the question of the <livine origin of 

 the Christian religion to be Independent and to have precedence of the 







We thall elate thi. article with a brief notice of the three inert 

 popular theories of uwpintion, which are diitinguiahcd from each 

 other more in reepect of the extent to which they attribute Inspiration, 

 than in mfwct of any difference in the meaning assigned to the 



That l.i. h U called Terbal inspiration suppose* each word in tho 

 Bib)*, a* we now bar* it, with due allowance made for mistake* of 

 transcriber*, to hare beta iirnistibly dictated by the Spirit of Ood, 

 the writer, bung only whit-leg of wordi and thoughts not their own. 

 Thi. nation of inspiration ha* undoubtedly (till iU advocates ; but < 

 are act aware that it is at present maintained by any divine of repute. 

 Aoounling to another theory, somewhat modifying the former, tho 

 wriUn were allowed to exercise their own judgment in tho choice of 

 their words; but in the meaning of each sentence, from the first verse 

 of Genesis down to the last of the Revelations, they have been secured 

 by supernatural interference from the least particle of error. This 

 theory, which U not without support- from well-known theologians, 

 represent* perhaps more nearly than any other the popular creed. 

 Lastly, there are many, and amongst them divine* of great eminence 

 and repuUd orthodoxy, and not a few distinguished prelates of the 

 Endisb church, who limit " 



the extent of inspiration as commonly 



received, and suppose that parts of Scripture mar hare been written 

 with the liability to error incident to ordinary histories ; those for 

 rnr*f*** which are purely historical, and contain no religious truth. 

 A* to the degree in which this limitation is to be admitted, and the 

 number and length of psnesflis to be cxcepted from the sanction of 

 inspiration, there i* of course room for diversity of opinions, which 

 affords apparent ground for objection to the theory itself. The 

 advocate* of the two former theories contend that a latitude for choice 

 i* allowed which is capable of a dangerous abuse. The truth of the 

 allegation cannot be disputed ; but perhaps it is not possible by any 

 device to exclude the danger which alarms them. The canon of 

 Scripture has not been ascertained to us by an authoritative revelation, 

 nor has the purity of the text been absolutely secxired by providential 

 interference. A liberty i* thus left, which in these cases also may 

 become dangerous to those who are willing to abuse it. Some however 

 may think that the test of sincerity and right intention, and the means 

 of probationary discipline which the allowance of such a measure of 

 discretion affords, i* apparently in harmony with what we have been 

 taught of God's moral government of tho world. On the other hand it 

 is objected to the advocates of the more rigid theories, that the faith 

 of the believer is exposed to still greater danger by the forced con- 

 structions and violent treatment of the text which their systems have 

 often induced them to employ. 



It might perhaps have been expected that we should notice a 

 certain clarification of the phenomena of inspiration of which many 

 theologians are fond, certain distinctions in kind, under the titles of 

 impulsive, suggestive, superintending, and many others. The truth is, 

 we think them to be of v.-ry little value on any view of the subject. 

 They seem to have been adopted by theologians who hold the theory 

 of plenary but not verbal inspiration, from a wish to remove the 

 necessity of supposing a greater quantity or degree of miraculous 

 agency than the occasion required. 



We have drawn none of our material* from the writings of a clan of 

 theologians who, regarding the Scriptures as in some sense, n< 

 clearly defined, vehicles of religious truth, exclude all notion of 

 revelation which is not equally applicable to discoveries mode by 

 human intelligence, and who give no credit to assertions of miraculous 

 interposition, whether in conveying knowledge or attesting fact*. 

 Whatever consideration may be due to the writers, some of whom are 

 men of ingenuity and research, their speculations could hardly have an 

 appropriate place in treating of the subject* to which this article is 

 oosjftned. [RATIONALISM.] 



REVELATIONS. BOOK "F. [APOCALTWK.] 



HEVKLS. MASTKU n|-' THE, an officer in noblemen's and other 

 peat house*, appointed pro Import to manage the Christmas diversions 

 from AH-hallow-ere to Candlemas-day ; more ordinarily called the 

 LurA of Morale. In the royal household however the master of the 

 revel, was a permanent officer, and was called Master of the Tent* and 

 Revels or M**ks and Revel*, whose business it was to keep the tent* 

 and pavilions belonging to the king, which were often, if not always, 

 owned with the king upon removes and progresses. This officer had 

 also the keeping of the dree*** and mask* which were used in enter- 

 tainment* given at court, and be wa* to provide such new ones as 



The permanent office of master of the revel* was first institute! in 

 the reign of Henry VIII. Queen Elizabeth divided the mastership of 

 the revel* into (event office*, which, as vacated by death, were to be 

 mowed. In IMS we find two masters of the toil*, tent*, hayle*, 



(that U, halls or temporary buildings), and pavilions, who again occur 

 in 1074. 



See the ' Archicologia,' vol. xviii. p. 818, &c., and ' The Loaeley 

 Manuscript*,' edited by A. J. Kcmpe, Esq., 8vo., Lond., 1836. No 

 mention of thi* office has been found subsequently to the reign of 

 kingCharlw II. 



UK V KliSIoX. By a reversion, in the widest sense, is meant a right 

 of property the enjoyment of which is to commence at some future 

 pc/iod, fixed or depending on contingencies, and is to continue either 

 forever or during a term either fixed or depending on a contingency : 

 anything in fact which is to bo entered on, or which may be entered 

 on, at a future time, is a reversion in books which treat on tho 

 value of property. The legal sense of the word U more restricted. 



Thus on assurance of IftO/., or a contract to pay 1007. at the death 

 of a given individual, is 10ft/. in reversion to the executors of that 

 individual. Our object in this article is to treat of this most common 

 specie* of reversionary contract, life insurance or assurance. 



The value of a reversion depends in a very easy manner upon the 

 value of the corresponding annuity ; that w, any given sum, nay 100/., 

 to be received vhn a given event arrives, depends for it* value ii]>ou 

 that of 100/. a-year to be received till the event arrives. Suppose, for 

 example, that money makes five per cent., and that on annuity, say 

 upon a life, is worth fourteen years' purchase, upon the method of 

 calculation explained in A srsr ITT. That is, 100/. paid a year hence, 

 and again two years hence, and so on a* long a* the life lost*, is now 

 worth 14001. Required the value of 100/. to be paid at the end of the 

 y. IT' iu which the life drops. Wo must now reason as follows : 

 Suppose a perpetual annuity of 100/. a-year is to be enjoyed by A 

 during his fife, and. by his legatees after him. By hypothesis A's por- 

 tion is now worth 1400/., and ( money making five per cent.) the 

 annuity for ever is worth 20 years' purchase, or 2000/ ; consequently 

 the legatees' interest is now worth 20001400, or 6002. But at the 

 end of the year of death the legatee will come into 100/. current 

 payment, and a perpetual annuity worth 2000/. ; for the re- 

 mainder of a perpetual annuity U also a perpetual annuity : his 

 interest will then be worth 21001. Hence we hajre ascertained that 

 2100/. at tho end of the year of death 'a now worth 600/. ; and the 

 rule of three then gives the value of any other sum : thus lOOt. at the 

 end of the year of death is now worth ^'/., or 28/. 11. 5\d. Hence 

 the following easy 



RCLE. To find the value of a given reversion, subtract the value of 

 the same annuity from that of a perpetual annuity, and divide the 

 difference by one more than the number of years' purchase in a per- 

 I't-ttml annuity: or multiply the excess of the number of 

 purchase in a perpetual annuity of I/, over that in the life annuity by 

 the reversionary sum, and divide as before. 



Next, to find what premium should be paid for the reversion. A 

 premium differs from an annuity in that a sum is paid down, and also 

 at the end of every year : consequently it is worth one year's purchase 

 more than an annuity. In the preceding question, the annuity was 

 worth 14 years' purchase; consequently the premium now is worth 

 1 5 years' purchase. But the present value of all the premiums is to 

 be also the present value of the reversion, or 2&. 1 1>. 5\d., whence 

 the premium should be the 15th port of this, or It 1 8. Irf. Hence to 

 find the premium, divide the present value of the reversion by one 

 more than the number of years' purchase in the life annuity. But 

 when, as most commonly happens, the premium is wanted without the 

 present value, the following is on easier 



.Divide the reversionary sum separately by one more than 

 the number of years' purchase in the perpetual annuity, and one more 

 than the number of years' purchase in the lift; annuity : the difference 

 of the quotient* is tho premium required. Thus if in the preceding 

 example we divide 100/. by 20 + 1 and by 14 + 1, or by 21 and 15, we 

 find il. 15*. !W. and 61. 13. 4</., which differ by I/. 1S. If/., the same 

 as before. 



Tho life we have been tacitly considering, when we talked of an 

 annuity being worth 14 years' purchase at five per cent., is one of 

 ;fi years of age. The first impression must be, that the pro- 

 posed premium is ridiculously small. Make it up to 21., and it will 

 be SO years before the premiums reach 100/. Some such considera- 

 tion must have moved the law officers of the crown, in 1760, when 

 they refused a charter to the Equitable Society, then charging a pre- 

 mium of about 41. at the age of 36, on account of the lowness of their 

 terms. But it is to be remembered that those who receive the 

 premiums ore to invest them immediately at five per cent., and arc to 

 invest the interest, thus, making compound interest ; persons aged 36 

 live, one with another, about 30 years, which is sufficient tune for the 

 premiums, with their interest, to realize 100/. for each person, one 

 with another. 



\\. u.iw*liow the manner in which a simple result of calculation 

 it* end. To simplify the case, suppose an office starts with 5642 



* Asrarancc companies usually pay in a few months after proof of death 

 hleh gtre a trifling advantage to the assured, not worth considering in a vcrv 

 rlomrntarjr statement of the question. 



