was his pupil. Plato taught Aristotle; and he it was who taught the Pope. By faith we know that the things that are made were not made of things that do appear, that is, nature did not create itself, ex nihilo nihil fit.

IMAGINATION.

This is the mind's creative power, and marvellous are the things it doth invent. Superstitions are, as Bacon said, those idols which in its darkened den it first creates, and next worshippeth with its whole heart. Ezekiel saw those images within God's holy temple portrayed upon the inner wall, and there he saw the worshippers with their faces turned towards the rising sun. They had turned their backs to the ark, how could they possibly have seen the mercy-seat of love? The eastern nations worshipped two gods; the one evil, the other good. The sun was a symbol of the good, or rather, their true god. This seems to have been the reason which led Moses by inspiration to place the altar on the east side of the temple, in order that the Israelites might worship looking westward where the holy of holies stood. Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up, said Christ. This be said prophetically of his own resurrection. The temple, with its priesthood and all its holy services, was only a physical type by which God had revealed his just, yet loving character to man. Christ was the sum and substance of God's revealed will. His perfect moral law was perfectly fulfilled in all he did. He went about continually doing good. The ceremonial law in all its typical forms was also fulfilled in all Christ's sufferings. He was the bleeding lamb. Hence Paul "determined not to know anything among the Corinthians but Christ and him crucified." He contemned all secular wisdom, not because it was mathematically incorrect, but because it was theologically as false as it was impure, see 1 Cor. vi. 2. Almost all divine revelations have been made to man through physical types. They were peculiarly suited to man's physical constitution. Memory is often deceitful. An immoveable type changes not. Hence Daniel's four successive monarchies were represented by a metallic image, whose head was gold. The silver, brass, and iron, foretold three kingdoms. The last was that of Rome. These were so correctly described that sceptics say the prophecy was written by some learned Jew after the events had been fulfilled; so be it, but this just confirms the argument I am about to state. lived in the days of Christ, but he never saw our Lord. He often quoted Daniel, hence Daniel's book was then extant. The Roman Empire was then the empire of the world, and yet it, like Babylon, fell. The ten-toed kingdoms still exist, and two wicked

с

Philo

powers arose, Mahomet in the east, the Papacy in the west. The first was to be a scourge, the last was to be called the man of sin. The latter power was to subdue three kingdoms, and reign as very God. Even the exact number of his years, as well as all his wicked deeds, is stated in Daniel's record. The accomplishment of this prophecy is so notoriously true, that one might say it certainly had been written only yesterday. Dare any sceptic now deny that Daniel spoke the veritable word of God? I declare things which happened in the beginning; I also declare things which shall be to the end of time; I do this lest men should say their lying oracles knew it all, and that their idols are true gods." Thus said the Lord." Isaiah xlviii. contains a direct reproof to every sceptical mind. If any man will do the will of God, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God. This is a better test of truth than that which Liebnitz knew. It is by the native force of truth that all error may be easily assailed. As I have referred to Mahomet and the Pope, I may here simply refer to my refutation of "Bishop Gillis's Defence of Popery" which is now nearly out of print.

THE LAW OF SACRIFICE.

The universality of this custom among all nations, and among all savage tribes, is an infallible proof that its origin was divine. Hence the word religion, from ligo, to bind or unite, and re, again. Hence also the word atonement, which means at-onement. If it be not divine, whence came it? Who decreed it so that all should thus agree? No man nor angel could have devised this religious rite; God alone had the right to institute it. Man had sinned; "There is none good," said Seneca. "Man is prepossessed. He is evil before he becomes good," but how to become good man knoweth not. Hence Seneca pardoned himself before he went to sleep. This, said he, "every honest man can do for himself;" and in this manner men, as Combe said, think that they may find peace. Even Lord John Russell has said the self-same thing: "The partition of Poland was a disgrace to Europe, but we have condoned it," said Lord John; hence his recording angel, called the Czar, has, without one tear, blotted it out for ever. It is not so with God! But some foolish Colenso, or as foolish a Renan, has said we have no account of the origin of sacrifice in Genesis. True. But Abel sacrificed the fattest of his flock, and by faith in the promised "woman's seed" he offered a better sacrifice than that of Cain. Cain offered his first fruits as a thanksgiving. He was the first sceptic. He knew not what "substitution" meant,"blood for blood." Sacrifice was connected with God's first promise. It explained it. The lamb was a type of Christ,

"the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Christ crucified was "the burden" of every prophet's song. They all foretold the sufferings of Christ, Isaiah liii.; and the glories (plural) which were to follow, Isaiah lxiii. Hence the glory of Messiah's personal peaceful reign, Psalm lxxii. Isaiah, in vision, saw Christ as a mighty conqueror crushing to death the wicked serpent's seed. St John, in vision, saw God's promise absolutely fulfilled, Rev. xix. The millennium next follows, Rev. xx. This was the sure hope of Paul, Rom. viii. 24. He even held that it possibly might be fulfilled in his own day, Rom. xiii. 11, 12; Heb. xi. 40; 1 Thess. ii. 19; iv. 15. Paul corrected this view, having received a fuller revelation, 2 Thess. ii. 2. He said an apostasy must intervene; the man of sin must continue until Christ comes to destroy him with the brightness of his coming. The Epiphany means the personal appearance of his person. Christ's command was watch and pray, for ye know not the day nor the hour! Hence, said Paul, hold fast the profession of your hope (not faith, as in our version, Heb. x. 23). Faith is subjective in the heart; hope is objective. It is the thing which faith perceives, and for which it patiently waits, Rom. viii. 25. Yea, hold fast this hope; why so? "For he is faithful who promised," Heb. x. 23. God's word and oath are two immutable things by which faith consoles the doubting mind when it fails to "lay hold of this hope" which is set before it "in the promise." Cast not away, therefore, your confidence which hath great recompence of reward; for ye have need of patience (see Rom. viii. 25), that after ye shall have done the will of God (in the world Christ's legacy is, "ye shall have tribulation," a strange reward this unless our hope is sure), ye might receive the promise. What promise? "For yet a little while" (Haggai ii. 6–9, also 21; see also Rom. xi. 1 and 26, still future, a quotation from Isaiah lix. 20; and particularly 2 Peter iii. 8), and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry." Now, meanwhile, the justified in Christ's blood shall live by faith in what? In this sure hope. For if like Colenso, Renan, or even Brown, once a disciple of Irvine, draw back, it is written, "my soul shall have no pleasure in him," verse 38. Read now Paul's discourse on faith, Heb. xi., marking well verse 40. 2 Peter iii. 15 proves that the Epistle to the Hebrews was dictated by Paul. Its style is that of Luke. Paul spoke of the scoffers of our last days, so did Peter, and so did Jude. "When I come, shall I find faith on the earth?" said Christ. We certainly live in these last days, hence "the coming of the Lord draweth nigh;" but who shall abide at his coming? Mal. iv. If my young reader will extend the passages I have mentioned, he will, in one hour, be able to refute the far-famed work of Dr David Brown. I keep it as a literary

any man

curiosity, because of its bad logic. The secularists call him their divine. The Scotsman was his best critic. I deprecate all dogmatism. When we enter a temple, said Aristotle, we compose our minds as well as arrange our attire; so also it becomes us to be humble and modest when we meditate on the mysteries of God's unfulfilled word. I have only given a few passages (out of the many) in their natural connection, and I think they clearly shew that our commentators are generally in the wrong. Dr Brown generally uses words expressive of contempt for his opponents; I call this bad logic as well as very bad taste.

In

"I am

2. Abel's sacrifice is our only proof of the piety of our first parents. They had taught their children to fear the Lord. Again, the omission in Genesis is one of the strongest proofs we have to shew that Moses was its inspired author. Exodus was certainly the first written book. În it we have God's sacred name first made known by a voice proceeding from a burning bush, and yet the bush was not consumed. This was a symbol of God's power, and also of his love. The voice thus spake to Moses, "I am the God of thy father." Thus did God authenticate the teaching of this poor but pious slave. the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob." That is, I AM is not three, but one. What is thy name? said Moses. God said, "I am that I AM," the one God in relation to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as before declared. Hence said Jehovah, "Thou shalt say to the people, I AM hath sent me unto you." That is, this name, in its foresaid relation, "is my name for ever, and my memorial unto all generations." How unspeakably sublime! Thus Jehovah was that almighty one who had entered into a covenanted relation with Abraham for all time, as well as for all eternity. First, it gave the Land of Canaan to Abraham and his seed (Christ), Gal. iii. 16, 17, for an "everlasting" possession. Hence (walk and see its length and its breadth), being a joint pro indiviso and de futuro inheritance, it cannot possibly be bestowed until Abraham shall have risen from his grave, and until Christ shall have come to reign. Then only shall Abraham's seed enjoy this "eternal inheritance," Heb. ix. 15. He never, in his mortal state, got as much of it as he could set his foot on, Acts vií. 5. Yet said Stephen, "God promised it to him." When Christ shall come, the place even of the soles of his feet shall be made glorious, and the feet of him who once agonised in the garden shall yet stand on the Mount of Olives, as he did at his transfiguration. "As I live, said the Lord, all the earth shall be filled with my glory." The converted Jews are to be the missionaries to the heathen, Isa. lxvi. 9. The gift to Abraham's legal seed was granted by a codicil, a separate covenant in the flesh, hence they were only tenants at will. Canaan must be

viewed in its temporal, and also in its spiritual aspect. Had Joshua given all the promised rest, God would not have spoken of another day. "There remaineth therefore a rest for the people of God," in that kingdom and city which is yet to come, see Jer. xxxi. Jerusalem shall remain while sun and moon endure. But space will not allow me to extend my remarks. I must therefore refer to another work which is in preparation for the press. All I need say at present is, that Moses by tradition only knew that portion of the covenant to which circumcision had been annexed. Hence we find the nature of sacrifice clearly defined in Lev. xvii. 11, "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that maketh atonement for the soul." Therefore thou shalt not eat any blood of any living thing. This was also God's command to Noah, and it was again so decreed by the apostles, Acts xv. 20, hence no blood should be eaten. The nature of sacrifice and its divine origin having been so clearly established, Moses purposely omitted to repeat it in his book called Genesis. He left it to be inferred from the fact of Abel's offering. Thus it is clear that if the book of Genesis be not a revelation from God, we must necessarily conclude that we have no revelation at all. Genesis is the foundation-stone on which the whole of the Jewish history, including the moral and ceremonial law, not only rests, but on which its whole superstructure is methodically erected. It stands to this day before us a monument of divine wisdom, as well as of almighty power. What man but the prophet Moses could have heard and reduced to writing things so marvellous-things that no angel could have conceived things which God alone could possibly have knownthings which God's Spirit alone could possibly have uttered, and which, in absolute faithfulness, Moses did infallibly record? Let Bishop Colenso and Renan veil their shameless faces with their unhallowed wings, yea, let them, like devils, tremble when they, like Peter, falsely swear. "We know not the very word of truth, we know not even Him who was and is not only Lord, but God." And Peter went out and wept bitterly. 3. As Seneca said, We know so little, that we know not even the meaning of our religious rites. We observe our customs as traditions handed down to us by our progenitors. They must have once lived the nearest to the gods." Tradition had thus become corrupted. The heathen had long retained the externals of ancient piety. Their ceremonials had in them only a likeness, but not the very image of the truth. They feasted on their sacrifices, and invited the gods to commune with them, as if they could enjoy a very rich repast. They even sometimes drank the blood. It is only a few centuries