To establish the principle of analogy here laid down, it will be necessary to refer only to a few of the numerous examples of divinely interpreted symbols in the Scriptures.  Any one can readily perceive the analogy between the seven fat kine of Pharaoh’s dream and as many years of plenty; so, also, with the seven full, healthy ears that grew up on seven stalks.  Likewise, the analogy between the seven thin kine and as many years of famine, and the seven thin, blasted ears that represented the same thing, is apparent.  One fat kine or one full ear would symbolize one year of plenty, when crops were abundant; while seven would represent as many distinct seasons of prosperity, etc.  Kine do not represent kine, but something analagous.  The beasts of Daniel’s visions do not represent animals like themselves, or a multitude of such animals, but something of analagous disposition.  The analogy between a wild, ferocious beast, stamping upon or devouring everything within its reach, and a cruel, persecuting, tyrannical government is apparent.  A horn does not signify a horn, but some great power, such as a dynasty of kings or rulers; and what the horn is to the animal in manifesting its desolating disposition, kings and rulers are to an empire in executing the persecuting or oppressive principles of the body politic.  A pure, chaste virgin is used to symbolize the true church of God; whereas a corrupt harlot is chosen to represent an apostate church, and fornication her idolatrous worship.

Although this principle is worthy of further elucidation, yet enough has been said to firmly establish the point that symbolic language is founded upon analogy.  It is also clear that, whenever we attach a literal signification to a symbolic object, we immediately destroy entirely its use as a symbol.  So we may accept it as one established landmark in the interpretation of the Apocalypse, that every symbol, regardless of the department from which it is taken—­whether from the material universe, the animal kingdom, human life or the heavenly realm—­stands as the representative, not of itself, but of some other object of analagous character not found in the same department from which it is drawn.

This develops another important fact worthy of attention.  If the great law of symbolic language is based upon analogy, it is clear to a demonstration that the symbols employed must be definitely applied.  They can not be arbitrary, as the words composing our spoken language are.  There is nothing in the nature of the thing to prevent our calling a horse an elephant, provided we had only agreed universally to adopt that designation of the animal referred to (arbitrary sounds can be arbitrarily applied); but we violate nature when we attempt to make a ferocious tiger the symbol of an innocent child, or represent a blood-thirsty tyrant by the symbol of a lamb.  A disgusting, polluted harlot may be the proper symbol of an apostate church, but of the pure, holy church of God—­never.  A proper correspondence must be kept up.  We must follow nature strictly.