person, he had sufficient care of himself to beg that his arm might be restored, which was accordingly done,' and then from mere human gratitude Jeroboam asks the Prophet, as was most natural, "Come home with me, and refresh thyself, and I will give thee a reward. And the Man of GoD said unto the king, If thou wilt give me half thine house, I will not go in with thee, neither will I eat bread nor drink water in this place: for so was it charged me by the word of the LORD, saying, Eat no bread, nor drink water, nor turn again by the same way that thou camest. So he went another way, and returned not by the way that he came to Beth-el."2

Now this prohibition on GoD's part for His servant to partake of the gifts of the ungodly is very significant. It is the gospel rule, "If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat." And again in another place, which applies exactly to Jeroboam's separation in Church and State,-" Mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have heard, and avoid them." And again, "We command you, brethren, in the Name of our LORD JESUS CHRIST, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly and not after the tradition which ye received of us," which tradition is the Apostolic faith. So St. John, in direct reference to the charge given by God to the Prophet,—" If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him GoD speed." And in another place, "If any love not the LORD JESUS CHRIST, let him be Anathema Maran-atha." So Vers. 7-10.

1 Ver. 6.

fearful are the woes denounced upon being "unequally yoked together with unbelievers," so plainly does GOD both in the first Church and under the Gospel, bid His true servants "neither to go in with them and to eat no bread, and to drink no water with them."

And the Prophet's obedience at first was complete. Though solicited by the King himself to partake of his hospitality and gifts, he refused nobly-and this must have been at very considerable cost. Not only are temptations doubly tempting when they are offered by royal hands, but the Prophet must have been sorely distressed. The way was long and weary—the occasion exciting and exhausting, and as it would seem but a little thing merely to refresh the animal nature,—it might have been argued and that plausibly enough,

Surely some moderate refreshment at the hands of Jeroboam were a slight thing to take this-to accept , the merest civility, to attend only to the common necessities of humanity, this can compromise no principle, to do this were not to approve of Jeroboam's position and standing-what harm can there be in sitting down at his table? GoD cannot be so strict and rigid and punctilious. And then that other direction about returning by another road, how unmeaning and ridiculous-what can the choice of so indifferent a thing as the way home have to do with my mission? I have discharged it fearlessly and honestly: and it would be very unnecessarily rigid and bigoted to be so strict in my obedience to such trifles, which can be of no consequence, such as eating and drinking and returning. I have executed my main commission; and all the rest must be very immaterial whether I am so exact or not." This is what the Prophet might have said; at least this is what too many of us would have said under similar

circumstances: it is what we are saying, and, much worse, what we are doing, every day when we compromise plain duty and frank obedience by pleasing our own tastes and inclinations: but this is not what the Prophet said, or did. He withstood the King's temptations, and, as I have already said, nobly.

But a worse trial awaited the Prophet's faith and constancy of endurance. Wearied and worn out he was found by the old Prophet of Beth-el, sitting under an oak his faith had been shaken: "The spirit was willing, but the flesh was weak." But still he held out." It was only to a very peculiar temptation that he at last yielded by the old Prophet announcing himself also as a man of GoD and as having received an express revelation from GOD to bring him back. "He said unto him, I am a prophet also as thou art; and an angel spake unto me by the word of the LORD, saying, Bring him back with thee into thine house, that he may eat bread and drink water. But he lied unto him."3

Now I own that here is the real difficulty of the narrative: a difficulty which is twofold. First, what the real character of this old prophet was, and next, what could have been his motive? though this last inquiry resolves itself into the other, and if we could discover what his real standing was, we should have no perplexity in assigning a cause for his lying conduct.

And here again I would speak with caution and reserve, not pretending to be wise above what is written.

It might be imagined that he was not really and truly God's Prophet, only a pretender to the office of And this conjecture would be strengthened by

seer.

1 Ver. 14.

2 Vers. 16, 17.

3 Ver. 18.

the fact, that he was dwelling where no prophet should be, in the tents of ungodliness, in close communion with the apostate altar of Jeroboam at Beth-el, and that the subsequent prophecy was no objection to his assumed character, but rather that it was forced upon him, like the unconscious prophecy of Caiaphas in the Gospel, or like the witch of Endor, doing in some strange and awful sense the work of God's servants. Or again, it may be that the gift of prophecy was committed to the ungodly, as in the (in some respects parallel,) case of Balaam. Or, again it may be, though this does not seem probable, that the temptation and lying was only a mysterious economy on GOD's part committed to the prophet, in which he was not personally guilty. But on the whole, it is better to assume that he had actually this gift of the SPIRIT, and yet retained it in unrighteousness, especially remembering his desire to be buried with the disobedient prophet, which is the same as Balaam's prayer,-" Let me die the death of the righteous." If so, this view reads us the deep and subduing lesson that it is not the possession of great gifts which renders the possessor holy. We are to "covet earnestly the best gifts"; even "prophecy and tongues, speaking with the tongues of men and angels," are nothing worth when weighed against charity. Illumination proves nothing when a little simple ignorant obedience far exceeds it. GIFTS are as sounding brass and a tinkling symbal to GRACES. He could neither really fear GOD, nor love his neighbour, who from envy at superior holiness and steadier obedience sought to destroy his brother's soul. To do the tempter's office is no mark either of GoD's favour, or of personal holiness.

It is better then to be satisfied with this view of the old Prophet's character, that he was selfish and envious that from malice he sought to ruin one better than himself-that his lie was his own invention-that he was an alien from God, except in so far as he was permitted to possess a gift which in itself tells for nothing,―for even the idolatrous Egyptians had the gift of miracles, and Balaam the gift of prophecy. And this view is the rather confirmed, viz., that he was a godless man, because his sons were present at the apostate sacrifice offered by Jeroboam in Beth-el-and his character is therefore clear.

I need not detail the success of his temptation, as we have so recently heard it.' Let us now turn to the prophet who had resisted the King's temptation, and now fell under that of the old Prophet. Doubtless he was severely tried-doubtless our human sympathies go with him, and it may be right that they should do so. Doubtless it may be right and pious to believe that though he were disobedient in this matter, his former right-minded earnestness and zeal outweighed his weakness, and, as it seems, that a solitary weakness. It were at least charitable, if not warranted by the very words of Holy Scripture, to believe that he was only punished in this life, and that the lion's jaws saved his soul. And this more especially, as the destroyer only killed him and had no power over his lifeless body. As has been well said by Bishop Hall, "I cannot but think that this Prophet died in the favour of GOD-as if GOD had said, 'I will only take thy breath. from thee as the penalty of disobedience,-I owe thee no further revenge than may be satisfied with thy blood.'-Violent events do not always argue the anger * Vers. 24, 25.

1 Ver. 19.