may be said to constitute a large portion of the science of Scripture.
But in applying them it is often difficult to decide, respecting a
particular passage, whether it is to be {89} taken literally or
allegorically; and again, after deciding that the passage must be
allegorical, there is generally the still greater difficulty of
discovering what the true sense is. In illustration of the second of
the above principles Burnet cites, apart from the context, _vermem
nunquam moriturum_, and admits that these words have an allegorical
signification. This plainly follows from the single consideration that
the worm (_skolex_) here spoken of is literally that which is seen to
feed on dead bodies, and to say of it that it does not die is
contradictory to experience. When, however, the same author goes on to
give as the allegorical sense nothing more definite than "_extremam
miseriam_," it may well be asked, By what kind of induction has this
conclusion been reached? The feeble worm which feeds on mortal remains
presents to our sight nothing capable of causing pain or misery.
Rather it may, I think, be asserted that Scripture here adverts to this
natural fact for the purpose of indicating by a distinct and visible
emblem that there is a living principle which destroys mortality, and
which for that reason alone is not itself subject to death. If we be
guided solely by what _we see with our eyes_, this appears to be the
only allegorical sense that can be attributed to the first clause of
Mark ix. 44.[3] We have next to inquire as to the {90} interpretation
of the other clause, and what is the mutual relation between the two
clauses.

Although the worm which devours dead bodies is not emblematic of
anything that causes pain, the case is quite otherwise with respect to
the emblematic meaning of _fire_. It is evident that fire which is
"unquenchable" is not natural fire, and consequently may be taken to
be, as has already been assumed, the devouring fire of judgment and of
condemnation consequent upon violation of the law of righteousness (see
p. 88). The destruction of the impenitent unrighteous by the operation
of this law (which is their second death), is attended with pain and
woe such as will not have been before, nor will be after. It was
inferred (p. 84) from our Lord's teaching in Matt. xviii. 6, that any
form of _death_ of which the body is susceptible in this world is
rather to be endured than falling under condemna